To discuss article changes, please use:


If you see comments on this page, they remain for archive purposes.


Groups vs. Types

It seems to me that lately this category has become a bit cluttered, and to me it's worth discussing the differences between a character "type" and what I think of as character groups. A character type is a recurring species or collective term (as with the Whatnots or Anything Muppets) which appears in different productions or multiple episodes of a single show, with clear variants and including a variety of individuals as well as generic types. If characters appear in multiples in only one scene or one production, essentially act as a group with little or no individualization, or are part of an organization/colelctive (like the bands), they're a group. Frogs is a character type. Frog Scouts is only a character group. Honkers, though only a few are named, are a type, appearing in different colors, shapes, across a span of years and shows, and though Twiddlebugs refers mainly to one family, it encompasses a species which shows up in different multiples in books an dmerchandise. In contrast, I'd argue that Alien Gonzos are not a type. They're a single group entity, none named save Ubergonzo, who appeared only once. If anything, they should go under Aliens as an index of different alien species, which would then be a type. As with all categories, there's gray areas and exceptions, but I think this standard makes sense. Cashboxes and Locks are a character group. Board of Birds is an organization, a character group consisting of the character type birds. Wedding Cakes are a character group, *but* if combined with Birthday Cake, Japanese Cake, etc, would then form a clear character group. Thoughts? Should we start a "Character Groups" category (which would also include things like The Fraggle Volunteer Fire Department and so on). Andrew Leal (talk) 02:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I think Character Groups would be a good idea. We have Muppet Bands for musical groups, and there are a aot of the "Character" pages that are more for groups of characters not specific individuals. -- Brad D. (talk) 02:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Thinking about it some more, I think the biggest differences aren't necessarily recurrance (though I think by definition a type has to have appeared at least more than once), but also whethere there's any individual appearances. The Elvises have appeared in multiple productions, but always as a collective, whereas we have seen single Honkers. Also, should the new category be "Muppet Character Groups" or just "Character Groups"? The latter could thus allow for inclusion of The Birdketeers, The Kids, Dog City Police Department, and The Devils. Andrew Leal (talk) 02:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The question

A few of the character type pages are prefaced by "The". Do we need that? Is "The Honkers" better then just "Honkers"? And then why do we have Doozers and not "The Doozers"? I say we drop the "The" from these articles to make it more uniform:

The only one I would let slide is "The Babies" as it deals with a specific group and type of Babies rather than just all babies (such as Baby Kermit or Baby Big Bird). Thoughts? -- Brad D. (talk) 01:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. -- Scott (talk) 01:43, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
So do I. As long as we're looking at our collective naming conventions, the use of the definite article "the" as a prefix deserves examination as well. Should we start bring it up on current events, or start another list? Andrew Leal (talk) 02:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.