Template talk:Teddy bears

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Toys This template is within the scope of WikiProject Toys, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of toys on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ToysWikipedia:WikiProject ToysTemplate:WikiProject ToysToys WikiProject Toys To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Barbie Queen of the Prom, Eve The Second Genesis CCG, More... Assess : Rate the Unassessed Toys articles and Unknown-importance Toys articles. Expand : Expand the doll pages, Expand Larami article Infobox : Toys articles needing infoboxes Photo : Request images that are needed from Wikipedia requested photographs of toys to included in each articles. Stubs : work on stubs in Category:Toy stubs Other : * Tag the talk pages of Toys-related articles with the {{WikiProject Toys}} banner. Help out with articles placed in Category:Toys articles needing attention

This template was considered for deletion on 2012 August 15. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

Can the likes of Yogi and Paddington really be classed as a teddy bear? They are supposed to be a real bears and could perhaps be be better described as anthropomorphic bears, unlike examples such as Superted, Lotso and Winnie the Pooh who are clearly based on toy teddies or are supposed to be toys come to life. Dunarc (talk) 18:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware that is an extremely belated reply, but yes... I agree. Yogi etc. should be weeded out. Will try to do so soon. Jellyman (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand this purported distinction, which was executed in here in March as "Removal of "non-teddy bear" bears." The lede of Paddington Bear says, "Michael Bond based Paddington Bear on a lone teddy bear he noticed on a shelf in a London store near Paddington Station on Christmas Eve 1956," which makes Paddington seem like a teddy bear, yet he was removed. And Winnie-the-Pooh#Origin tells us he was ultimately derivred from a real-life bear, Winnipeg (bear), so there is a real bear origin. The edit seems inconsistent with both of these.

And more problematically, these removed bears still invoke this template, even though they do not appear in it.

But really, I think this template probably appropriately includes both "anthropmorphic bears" (whatever that means) as well as real bears (whatever that means) as well as fictional bears. I know I was puzzled when reading the Pooh article that I could not find a link to Paddington, so that argues for over-inclusivity.

It is my intention to revert the above edit and restore these bears. jhawkinson (talk) 22:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. jhawkinson (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should Grizzly, Panda, and Ice Bear from We Bare Bears be listed under Fictional teddies? YSG (talk) 03:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]