Talk:Freddy the Pig

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Children's literature Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature 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.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Tasks you can do: edit history watch purge Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks. Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles. Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}} Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project. Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject. References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs. Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature Stubs: Improve a stub-class article edit Fictional characters This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

The description of Freddy is very similar to his description on the back cover of the books published by Overlook Press. ςפקιДИτς 01:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone put some photos up? Arthritix (talk) 00:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a section on the Bean farm location. It's likely to be helpful to readers unfamiliar with the area to recognize that Brooks isn't entirely fictionalizing the landscape. There is other evidence, but rather than get involved in original research, I stuck with basics about the existence or non-existence of towns mentioned, and the direction to them. The Bean farm is within 30 miles southwest of Syracuse, or alternatively not just east -- using less concrete evidence -- but southeast about the same distance. (On Cheers, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 22:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is original research.

The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction says simply, "The basic setting is the Bean Farm in upstate New York, probably close to Syracuse." [1] --now [ref name=SFE], used on another point and more generally useful. --P64 (talk) 17:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've now spent some days of quality time creating articles for individual books. I'd appreciate feedback, particularly because I'm at the point now where I'd also like to rewrite the main article. It isn't so much that the language tends toward the lyrical rather than the formal (which it does), but rather that it misrepresents the series. It didn't (before I started making incremental changes) seem to be largely written by editors who know the whole series.

Examples of problematic phrases are "plaintive requests from Freddy fans", "highly developed life", "though only momentarily", and "Much of the humor in the books derives from the self-referential way in which the author acknowledges the unreality of talking animals".

Although the Freddy books were republished by Overlook Press on the chance request of a fan to the publisher, Freddy books have never been out of the eye of librarians. They sell now better than ever. It's incorrect to see Freddy's publication as a grass roots movement. The notion that much humor is "self-referential" is (perhaps unavoidably, because there's so little scholarship) original research. In many cases the Bean animals are simply people with cosmetic animal attributes. (I.e., they reason, argue and joke as humans would.) That they are not capable of driving a car or wearing human clothes convincingly are less central. One of the intriguing things for young readers must be that, because the animal have no school and no regular jobs, the characters have no specially fixed age. (Is Freddy 10 or 25? Is Old Whibley 18 or 70?)

A rewrite needs to summarize the whole series. The main roles need to be succinctly described, and the minor ones largely omitted. (Placed in an article listing characters.)

Many librarians were quite hostile to the informal and slang language. (Similar to what the Oz books experienced.) Yet some reviewers praise the accuracy of Brooks' local dialect. There must be something more to say about this.

Wiese was a highly accomplished and award-winning author and artist. Why did he continue to illustrate Freddy books after becoming famous?

What is frustratingly missing and difficult to research is comments by Brooks and Wiese on their own process.

Thoughts, anyone, please? Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 07:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My use of "self-referential" admittedly may have been a bit pretentious, but my point was that the characters are not just people who look like animals, but are actual talking animals coexisting with people, in the same way Mister Ed is. Perhaps the statement should be toned down, but I don't think it amounts to research. Richard K. Carson (talk) 21:23, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Freddy the Pig. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://overlookpress.com/book-detail.php?book_isbn=1-58567-226-2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050320092308/http://www.overlookpress.com/freddy.php to http://www.overlookpress.com/freddy.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:51, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does including a link to the literary group associated with these books violate WP:ELNO? After the link I added was removed, I checked similar Wikipedia pages: Thornton Burgess has a link to the Thornton W. Burgess Society. Sherlock Holmes has a link to the Sherlock Holmes Society of London. L. Frank Baum has a link to the International Wizard of Oz Club. The Adventures of Tintin has a link to the Tintin fan site. Betsy-Tacy has links to both the Betsy-Tacy Society and the Maud Hart Lovelace Society. What is the proper standard here? Kevinwparker (talk) 01:41, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About the Third Opinion request: The Third Opinion requested for this dispute has been removed (i.e. declined). Like all other moderated content dispute resolution venues at Wikipedia, Third Opinion requires thorough talk page discussion before seeking assistance. If an editor will not discuss, consider the recommendations which are made here. — TransporterMan (TALK) 02:46, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My fellow editor rightfully notes that this link needs to qualify under WP:ELNO point 11 while (erroneously in my opinion) claiming it does not. I would like to make two points here. First, this isn't just a fansite ("a website created and maintained by a fan"), this is the official website of the Friends of Freddy, an incorporated nonprofit and the only organization devoted to the Freddy the Pig series. Second, an exemption is specifically noted for sites "written by a recognized authority." A significant part of the website content (an overview of the Freddy books, a biography of Walter R. Brooks, and a biography of illustrator Kurt Wiese) is written by newsletter editor and governing member Michael Cart, a leading authority on children's literature and - as Walter R. Brooks' biographer - the leading authority on the Freddy the Pig books. I believe this more than qualifies us as an appropriate external link. Kevinwparker (talk) 16:52, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining your reasoning. I agree that Cart should be considered a recognized authority in this case, so WP:ELNO does not apply. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]