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

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

Please participate here: Talk:Hollywood_Walk_of_Fame#big_bird_is_not_a_Muppets_character.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:45, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Update --------- Where is this discussion gone? Big bird is not a muppet, neither is elmo or cookie monster, yet it is the first line of their descriptions. Plz explain If they were indeed muppets, then surely they would appear in List of Muppets 86.25.177.237 (talk) 22:26, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 04:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems to be vandalized a lot. (Narkstraws 20:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

It does. I recently requested it for page protection, but one admin didn't think it was being vandalized enough. Go Wikipedia policy. —scarecroe 20:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The actor who originally portrayed the Big Bird character has been involved in several indecent exposure cases since 1980, though he has never been convicted.

Not sure if this was vandalism or not. I was unable to find any outside sources. --130.108.237.126 23:11, 11 June 2007

Yeah, that's vandalism. —scarecroe 16:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Big Bird took center stage on Sesame Street in the early 1980s, when the show dealt with the death of stripper Mr. Hooper (necessitated by the death of Will Lee, the actor who played the role).

Is this vandalism too, or is this some other use for the word stripper? Thibbs (talk) 08:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

isnt he a cockatiel--75.82.16.153 04:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• No, a canary: [1]. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 21:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's a puppet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.119.210 (talk) 14:20, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the breed section explains this better. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 03:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Image:Tv sesame street journey to ernie.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Carol channing and big bird.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image Image:Follow that bird theatrical poster.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --08:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is Big Bird's teddy bear really significant enough to merit half the introduction? --98.165.68.71 (talk) 06:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   -No. --98.165.68.71 (talk) 06:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't the "bear sentences" then be removed? Although I am not a constant Sesame Street viewer, I have never even seen the bear, so I certainly can't imagine it should be in the intro paragraph. Lizmichael (talk) 16:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC) I vaguely remember the teddy bear. VAGUELY... still don't think it warrants half the intro. MickeyMouseItalia (talk) 19:04, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed only two of the people who voiced Big Bird are listed in the credits on the right margin. Should not the others be listed as well? Often this is something I will take the initiative on myself, but since this is a locked page, I thought I should ask. Lizmichael (talk) 16:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed, as the section has been tagged for cleanup and trivia for around a year. Per WP:BOLD. DP76764 (Talk) 14:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been protected.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 03:35, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was riding the It's A Small World ride in Disneyland, California back in March and in the Mexican section of the ride, there are a number of birds to the left side of the boat and one of them was bright yellow with purple eyes and looked an awful lot like this character, is it possible they would put this in as a spoof or is it entirely coincidential? trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Heh, interesting observation. Unless it looked an awful lot like Big Bird, I would think that it's just a coincidence, but of course, I'm not sure and I don't know what it looks like. You may want to try to bring this up at Wikipedia:Reference desk; that's the place to ask questions like this that aren't related to the article itself. You're much more likely to get a response that answers your question. Good luck, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I agree with that because I think Disney would have probably needed major permission if they had meant to put this in. I will try and find an image of it. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:33, 6 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]

As we have mentioned on the Haneda airport page, it seems as though the domestic terminal seems to go by this exact same name as seen here (it's at the top of the frame) (although I have no idea how the 2 are related). If they had meant to refer to this character, it should probably be included somewhere in this article. trainfan01 20:34, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

I think the disambiguation page answers it.trainfan01 talk 9:15, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

I think this article should redirect to Sesame Street. What do you think? Please , if you have an opinion, answer below. [[User:Slayer2448|Slayer2448] —Preceding undated comment added 16:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC).

Any Sesame Street character (especially famous ones like Big Bird) is notable enough for a seperate article (as you can see). trainfan01 talk 21:06, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, Bird is notable. The current state of his article, however, is pretty dismal. Oscar would like it, I'm sure. You'd be surprised how much material there is out about Big Bird--his development, his characterization by Spinney, how he's performed, his impact on popular culture. A major source would be Spinney's book. Someone really should improve this article to reflect that. It may be me, but I have loads of other stuff on my plate right now. Christine (talk) 11:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly notable. Big Bird, Oscar the Grouch and a few other characters transcend Sesame Street and have been a part of the cultural dialogue in their own right for years. That's probably why the Library of Congress recognized the Bird as a stand alone character - not merely as part of the Sesame Street television program. X4n6 (talk) 03:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A passing reference made by Mitt Romney is a non-notable event and should not be included in "Cultural References", aka pop culture. Becoming a trending topic on twitter is hardly a noteworthy event. It fails WP:EVENT and WP:POPCULTURE, at least for now. "However, passing mentions in books, television or film dialogue, or song lyrics should be included only when that mention's significance is itself demonstrated with secondary sources." -- MacAddct1984 ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The event was referenced by several news outlets, and discussed in the post debate analysis. Furthermore reference to the coverage of the incident is properly referenced in the article(Eugenistoc (talk) 03:11, 4 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

• Bullshit. It's not news. It's nothing--it's only an opportunity for social media overusers to indulge. We're writing an encyclopedia here, not a list of trivialities. Even if it was trending it means nothing--it's not trending now, and it won't be tomorrow. You got a dozen edits here; Macaddct1984 and I have a couple more and I think we might have a better idea of what it is that we do. Drmies (talk) 03:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A statement by the Republican Party nominee for the 2012 President of the United States election is pop culture? I guess

PBS publicly acknowledged the comment, saying, "For more than 40 years, Big Bird has embodied the public broadcasting mission - harnessing the power of media for the good of every citizen, regardless of where they live or their ability to pay." That quote should be in the article even if Romney's isn't. This isn't the first time Romney has made this remark. It is part of his platform to de-fund PBS and a common analogy of his is Big Bird.[2]. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 07:13, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a different story. If you can write it up properly, as a pattern of attacks in which that one line can find a place, sure--but what we had, Marcus, was "Romney mentioned Big Bird." Drmies (talk) 00:38, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think, if it deserves any mention, it would be more appropriate at PBS, Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012, or even Political positions of Mitt Romney. The fact that Big Bird was referenced by Romney isn't the relevant issue. The funding of PBS is the issue. All Romney said was "I like Big Bird". If Romney said "I like Big Bird, Elmo, and Bert", does each Wikipedia page require a mention? -- MacAddct1984 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above. Romney also mentioned Jim Lehrer and the PBS NewsHour; does that mean this gets mentioned in those articles as well? I wonder if the move to include it here is POV-pushing. As the resident expert on Sesame Street in Wikipedia, let me set the record straight: the federal government pulling its funding of PBS will have very little effect on The Show. It will not result in Big Bird losing his job. It will not result in Sesame Workshop having to put ads on it. (Actually, there are already ads, both before and after each episode, in the form of corporate sponsorships.) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:38, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care what effects the statement(s) may have.

I really only see one issue here.

That this was more than an isolated mention. It resulted in a huge response by individual people (apparently record-setting on twitter and elsewhere online)

And the mention (beyond being a mere mention) appears to have become more than even merely a "talking point" by pundits concerning the presidential debate. Major news outlets are reporting on this. And this has started to not only be part of the president's stump speech, but also has apparently been tied to federal funding of PBS.

So with that in mind, I think that it should be noted, but only with proper grounding in fact and context. - jc37 17:59, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

+1 Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 03:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Gotta be mentioned: This has been an important issue for the last three-four days, and has been parleyed into an SNL appearance pbp 04:54, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Here we go. Finally something solid. [3]. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:04, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WHERE IS THE MENTION OF BIG BIRD'S APPEARANCE ON SNL'S WEEKEND UPDATE OCTOBER 6, 2012? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.88.175.106 (talk) 07:22, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is that particular appearance more important than his many other appearances on other programs that are not mentioned here? Powers ^T 02:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Big Bird recently came out as transgendered, so shouldn't a note of this be made? 209.121.225.132 (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Big Bird. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081208220303/http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/03/smbusiness/birds_feathers.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2008040415 to http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/03/smbusiness/Birds_feathers.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2008040415
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080620234803/http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hMcWtG5WTmu3Hj4tkvUoAxKiBN0AD91B4PVO0 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hMcWtG5WTmu3Hj4tkvUoAxKiBN0AD91B4PVO0

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) 03:13, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Big Bird Holding Stop Sign.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Serinus Maximus. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 04:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Serinus maximus. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 04:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Nomination withdrawn and nominator  Self-trouts himself for misunderstanding what anthropomorphic was, which was odd, since he knows what that word means.

---

In this RfD discussion, ミラ observed that the infobox for Big Bird describes the character's gender as "male"; however, as I pointed out, the Lede describes Big Bird as an anthropomorphic canary. So, which is correct?

I feel that broad community participation is warranted here, so I'm going to start an RfC. Doug Mehus T·C 16:03, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers,
Doug Mehus T·C 16:03, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Male - Big Bird self-identifies as a boy in this article, where he answered questions from New York Times readers, so apparently he is a male. Isaidnoway (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. So, for clarity, we should just say that he is a canary in the lede, correct? I'll leave this RfC open longer, to developer broader consensus, but someone non-involved can close early per WP:SNOW. Doug Mehus T·C 16:55, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Isaidnoway, Oops, I think I misunderstood what anthropomorphic meant. I was thinking of non-binary gender, I guess. Withdrawing early. Doug Mehus T·C 16:59, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It's not mentioned, but I remember Big Bird being a guest star on the Susan Anton show. And of course, there needs to be some write-up of his appearance at Jim Henson's funeral in-character.70.122.214.126 (talk) 03:48, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to [4], Big Bird is portrayed as female in Israel, due to the gender of the verbs used in relation to the character. I wonder if anyone could confirm this. (BTW, the story about Big Bird being transgender (referenced above) was a hoax.) Nosferattus (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

a list of notable appearances of the character to add to the page. (taken from Muppet Wiki)

• Sesame Street (1969-present)
• Julie on Sesame Street (1973)
• Out to Lunch (1974, crossover with The Electric Company)
• Christmas Eve on Sesame Street (1978)
• A Special Sesame Street Christmas (1978)
• A Walking Tour of Sesame Street (1979)
• The Muppet Show (1979, episode #318; crossover with The Muppets)
• The Muppet Movie (1979, cameo; crossover with The Muppets)
• I Love Liberty (1982)
• Don't Eat the Pictures (1983)
• Big Bird in China (1983)
• Henson's Place (1984)
• The Muppets Take Manhattan (1984, non-speaking cameo; crossover with The Muppets)
• Sesame Street Presents: Follow That Bird (1985)
• The Muppets: A Celebration of 30 Years (1986, crossover with The Muppets)
• Various Sesame Street Video releases (1986-2007)
• A Muppet Family Christmas (1987, crossover with The Muppets)
• Sesame Street, Special (1988)
• Big Bird in Japan (1988)
• Sesame Street: 20 and Still Counting (1989)
• The Muppets Celebrate Jim Henson (1990, crossover with The Muppets)
• Big Bird's Birthday or Let Me Eat Cake (1991)
• Sesame Street Stays Up Late (1993)
• Sesame Street All-Star 25th Birthday: Stars and Street Forever! (1994)
• Elmo Saves Christmas (1996)
• Elmopalooza (1998)
• Cinderelmo (1999)
• The Adventures of Elmo in Grouchland (1999)
• The Street We Live On (2004)
• Elmo's Christmas Countdown (2007)
• The Furchester Hotel (2016-2017, episodes #201 and #216)
• Once Upon a Sesame Street Christmas (2016)
• The Magical Wand Chase (2017)
• When You Wish Upon a Pickle (2018)
• Sesame Street's 50th Anniversary Celebration (2019)
• Elmo's Playdate (2020)
• Elmo's Playdate: Scavenger Hunt (2020)
• The Not-Too-Late Show with Elmo (2020-2021, appears in episodes #112, #202, #208, #215)
• Elmo's Mindfulness Spectacular (2023)

IHaveThreeRibs (talk) 22:37, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I used Ctrl-F to search for "Challenger", "NASA", and "Space shuttle" and nothing came up. How does everyone feel about adding that Big Bird almost flew on the Challenger disaster? I wanted to bring it to the talk page first since I dunno if that should be included. Where would this information even go in the article? Maybe its own section?

I'll also note that Big Bird isn't mentioned on the Challenger disaster article or on the STS-51-L article.

Sources:

• Vice [5]
• Business insider [6]
• NBC [7]
• History.com [8]
• Britannica [9]

Esb5415 (talk) (C) 15:17, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was an idea that was floated and quickly dismissed, as those sources say. It has since become some kind of myth that it was seriously considered. Since it was not, it's not in the article, despite enthusiasts' attempts to insert it. It wasn't even close to "almost flew." Acroterion (talk) 16:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See also the discussion here Talk:STS-51-L#Big Bird. There is no basis for assuming that STS-51L or any other specific flight or shuttle would have been postulated. Acroterion (talk) 16:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool thanks. Figured it had been discussed before! Esb5415 (talk) (C) 19:46, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]