Talk:Peppa Pig/Archive 1

Archive 1

Episode Listings

Is there a reason the episode listings were removed? I' gave up looking through the history to find when they were removed, to see if a reason was given.

I found these very useful, and whilst I know me finding them useful isn't a good reason to keep them in, I also believe it is not at all uncommon for Wikipedia articles about TV shows to include episode listings (often split out into separate articles).

I'd put them back, but can't be bothered putting in the effort if they would just be removed again.

Lukens (talk) 09:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

They were moved to List of Peppa Pig episodes at the end of January. There is a link in the Infobox, but it's not very obvious. Nick Cooper (talk) 15:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

New Series?

Has a new series started?

There was an episode on Milkshake! on Five this morning titled "Work and Play". I don't recall having seen this episode before, and it is not included in any of the episode listings. Is this a new series? The official Peppa Pig site states, in the news section, that a new series is due in Autumn 2009. Has autumn come early?

Lukens (talk) 10:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, looking at the episode descriptions for the rest of this week, none of these sound familiar:

- Peppa and her family spot a rainbow when they go for a drive

- Pedro gets a cough at playschool, and the other children soon catch it

- Daddy pig has a book from the library that he has kept for too long

- Peppa and her family go on holiday in a special van

Lukens (talk) 11:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

From the credits, it seems there are also some other changes in Series 3. Another new voice artist, Harley Bird, is providing the voice for Peppa and there are some new characters listed in the credits, Edmond Elephant and Dr Hamster the Vet. Lukens (talk) 12:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Episodes Produced?

87.114.165.198 (talk) 10:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Have the episodes "Peppa's Funny Trip" and "Drink Diving" actually been produced, because the episodes are not listed in the article List of Peppa Pig episodes. 87.114.165.198 (talk) 10:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

New DVD - Oct 2010

Looks like there's a new Peppa DVD due later this year (25 Oct 2010, per Amazon uk). Will it pick up the 6 episodes broadcast that have not yet been released on DVD? Also, will it contain any episodes not yet broadcast, as the dvd's currently seem to contain 10 episodes? Will need to look out for any new episodes on tv. Kwerty (talk) 01:53, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The first two series were 52 episodes each, while series 3 began screening with one block of 13 episodes in May 2009, and another 13 in November 2009. Presumably we will get another 13 fairly soon, and then 13 more by the end of the year. Nick Cooper (talk) 08:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Deedee Dog and the new rabbits

Where did these characters appear from? I saw Deedee Dog mentioned on Have I Got News For You, but have never heard of Rhianna or Rhea Rabbit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonybourtonville (talk • contribs) 15:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It's a very persistent vandal with shifting IPs. Nick Cooper (talk) 08:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Character jobs

When were all the character's jobs taken out? I've just noticed, via reversion, that only Daddy Pig is left?

It looks odd having only one character with a job description, and I think the rest should be put back, but I've only had time for a quick skim through the hsitory to see when they were removed. certainly there's no discussion about it on here.

a_man_alone (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit Request - Peppa Pig World Theme Park Information

{{Edit semi-protected}}

We we would like to update the Peppa Pig World section with factual information on the theme park. Is anyone able to edit this into the article? The information is outline below:

Peppa Pig World Theme Park will open on 9 April 2011 at Paultons Park, Hampshire, UK. It will be a fully themed land with 7 rides and attractions:

Miss Rabbit's Helicopter Flight, Peppa's Big Balloon Ride, Grandpa Pig's Little Train, George's Dinosaur Adventure, Daddy Pig's Car Ride, Grandpa Pig's Boat Trip, Windy Castle.

Covering 3 acres, Peppa Pig World will also include a large Peppa Pig themed indoor play area, a junior water splash area (Muddy Puddles) an outdoor play area (Mr Potato's Playground) and a gift shop and cafe. Additional themed attractions in the world will include: Peppa Pig's House with animated characters, The Duck Pond, The School House, The Camper Van and Grandpa Pig's House. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paultonspark (talk • contribs) 12:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

There is already a mention of Peppa Pig World in the article. Including much more might be hard to justify for a venue which does not exist yet - could be seen as advertising. Not sure what anyone else thinks? Bonusballs (talk) 22:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Bonusballs is correct--per WP:CRYSTAL, we cannot include this info until the park is actually open, as details could change between now and opening. But even then, we wouldn't actually list all of the different rides and activities--just an overview of the park. If the park itself were notable enough for its own article, then perhaps some of those details could be listed there. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Too early to include any more detail, and we're better waiting for independent coverage, anyway. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Parents of whom?

In 'General' it claims it is unclear as to whether Granny Pig and Grandpa pig are Mummy Pig or Daddy's pig's parents. However, in 'Other' it claims they are Mummy Pig's. Is there a source for this information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LT3 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 18 June 2007

I don't think there's been an explicit statement to this effect, but in one episode (might be Mr Scarecrow) Granny Pig finds one of Mummy Pig's "old dresses," while in Granny and Grandpa's Attic, amongst the things in the attic there is a record said to have been Mummy Pig's favourite when she was little. Circumstantially, I think everything points to them being her parents. Nick Cooper 13:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

This suggests that either Daddy took on Mummy's surname on marriage, or they happened to have the same surnames to begin with. Though I am made to wonder how they managed as children being named Mummy and Daddy. :) -- Smjg (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Also when Peppa and George stay at Granny and Grandpa pigs house they stay in Mummy Pig's old room. Granny Pig has also described what Mummy Pig was like when she was littleCarlwev (talk) 13:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, in one episode (I'll find it if you wish), Mummy Pig climbs up - and falls into - a blackberry bush she "used to climb...as a little girl." Leegee23 (talk) 10:43, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Referencing

I am concerned that the above confusion about the distinction of characters is symptomatic of a wider problem. The whole article is written from interpretation of viewing the episodes rather than from secondary sources. This is a big problem when disagreements occur over the interpretations (this is an WP:OR/WP:SYN issue) and also when it is not clear which elements are notable and which are not. This has lead to the introduction of a lot of trivia that the article would be better without. Lets focus on verifiability and let any unverifiable material fall by the wayside as non-notable. I know the trivia is fun, but it doesn't really belong in a serious encyclopaedia. --DanielRigal (talk) 12:17, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Observations with citations (series number/episode number/time point, and text) would solve the problem, wouldn't it? Leegee23 (talk) 10:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Cast Listing

The table of international versions has a 'cast' column that states the cast is 'listed above,' but I can't find it. Could that statement be hyperlinked to the text in question, if it does exist? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leegee23 (talk • contribs) 10:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

International Day DVD

I'm reinstating Kwerty's addition of this, given that both Play and Amazon show this on pre-order, with the number of episodes. Nick Cooper (talk) 10:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Please cite sources for future releases. Otherwise, its appearance in the article is unsourced. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:14, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I've now added a source! What is your opinion about what to do when the dvd becomes generally available - is it necessary to then delete or amend the reference as the item itself is then available to anyone who wants to check the veracity of the information? Kwerty (talk) 20:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Leave it or take it off. It doesn't really matter. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:23, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Verifiability

User:John is bizarrely insisting that the character section needs to be referenced. Anyone fancy going through all 156 episode to work out exactly which characters are in each one? In the case of Peppa, presuambly we'd be looking at 156 citations, almost as many for the rest of the faimily, etc. Preposterous. Nick Cooper (talk) 08:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Agree - not necessary, and should be removed. a_man_alone (talk) 08:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I too agree this section is not necessary and should be removed; per our verifiability policy, any material for which valid third party sources cannot be found does not belong here. Should we just take it out rather than tagging as unsourced? --John (talk) 14:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I assume good faith here, but I was refering to your tagging the section with an unsourced template as being unnecessary, not the section itself. a_man_alone (talk) 15:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Why would it be unnecessary? --John (talk) 16:15, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Also, incidentally, you are incorrect in your statement that "any material for which valid third party sources cannot be found does not belong here" - primary sources are acceptable, with the following caveat: "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source."[1][2] And finally, let's not forget common sense - how about a bit? a_man_alone (talk) 16:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Articles should be based largely on reliable secondary sources. While primary sources are normally welcome, there are dangers in relying on them. Let's see your sources and then we can talk. Until then. --John (talk) 16:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The article so far has a single primary source - a mention of the peppapig tour, so this addition can hardly be said to be "largely based". Do you agree or disagree? Please clarify your concerns with:

• A: using a primary source of the Peppa Pig TV/DVD episodes as evidence of the characters and their existence.
• B: Using a bit of common sense and not listing every single occurance during the show life to clarify which character appeared where.

Thanks. a_man_alone (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

• My concern can best be summarized as follows. Because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, we should definitely not have long lists of characters or episodes without evidence of third party notability. This can best be demonstrated by providing third party sources. If it is not possible to do this, we should definitely not use the material. I believe this is in line with Wikipedia policy and practice. Incidentally, arguments based on "common sense" are best avoided as this term means different things to different people. --John (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Your concerns are noted, as is the fact that two editors disgree with you on interpretation of wikipedia policy. a_man_alone (talk) 17:35, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Unfortunately, local consensus (such as the opinions of two editors here) cannot override site policies like verifiability. If you need some time to find sources we can let the content stand with a tag for a week or two. If we know right now that no proper sources can ever be found, we need to remove the content. Either way is fine for me. --John (talk) 17:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes it can. I have provided a primary source, not that I've added it yet, but under the circumstances, that source - the TV & DVD episodes are acceptable. You haven't actually clarified why you object to a usage of the TV episodes as a primary source for the characters, so please do so - it's difficult to create counter-arguments when one isn't sure what to counter or argue against. You can't just claim "verifiability" carte blanche, because I've already countered that. what part of primary source verifiability are you against? a_man_alone (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

An item cannot be a source for itself. We need to restrict coverage here to that which has been discussed by third party sources. Anything which fails this criterion doesn't belong here. See WP:N (although this relates to articles rather than the content of articles it might give you the idea). As for IAR, that is something to be used with great caution, not a catch-all to excuse long unverifiable trivia lists in articles. Being bold is fine; the person who initially added this list was being bold and did nothing wrong. But now the material has been challenged it needs to be supported by references or else removed. --John (talk) 18:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes it can. Under these circumstances a primary source is acceptable. We do not need to restrict this section to third party only sources. See Primary sources, although this relates to articles rather than the content of articles it might give you the idea. a_man_alone (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree. More to the point, there are plenty of TV-related pages that list characters (e.g. List of Bob the Builder characters, Fifi and the Flowertots, Pingu, List of EastEnders characters, List of Coronation Street characters, , etc.) that nobody seems to have objected to previously. Nick Cooper (talk) 21:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good justification for leaving non-compliant material on an article though. If these other articles you mention are out of compliance (I haven't looked yet), that is something we can look at, but it shouldn't really affect the argument here. At this point I am thinking of seeking other input to help us move forward. --John (talk) 22:00, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The above-mentioned articles were the first five programme that came to mind, rather than being the "only" five to be found. That my brain "randomly" selected programmes that all have character lists/pages that do not follow your interpretation of the rules suggests that it's you that is out of step, rather than everyone else. The basic fact is that it is the subject itself - i.e. the programme in question - that is the source for the characters actually being in it. It is preposterous to suggest otherwise, and indeed it will be "interesting" to see the reaction if attempt to impose your interpretations on the likes of the Coronation Street and EastEnders pages... Nick Cooper (talk) 12:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I have reinstated the character section deleted John last month. Quite frankly, it is preposterous to have page about a narrative TV series without any sort of character listing at all. Furthermore, for John to maintain his above claim that the section isd "unreferenced" is equally unconvincing. Most of the characters listed appear in multiple episodes, and we do not to cited secondary sources thast they do, because in the context of a TV series the primary source of the episodes themselves is perfectly acceptable. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:23, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

New Characters in Credits

I watched the new episode 'Kylie Kangeroo' on November 9th 2011 and afterwards updated the characters accordingly: Mr Kangeroo, Mrs Kangeroo and their children Kylie and Joey. In a subsequent edit, the Tiger and Raccon (sic) families have been added as well as Mrs Parrot. Having watched the latest episodes there is no mention of any of these characters. I have removed them from the list.

I have however added some new characters that were listed in the credits of the latest episode although they have not yet been seen on screen: the Goat family, The Queen & Captain Emergency. If this is inappropriate, feel free to remove them. Jazzatola (talk) 19:21, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, so someone did remove the new characters I added. That's ok, I can see how hard it is to verify that they were real characters especially when some people are deliberately adding non-existant characters at the same time. How confusing. Jazzatola (talk) 16:10, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

In case you hadn't noticed, the episode with The Queen is coming up on June 4th (and on the new DVD being released in a week or so!) - see the notes I've added to the episodes talk page. Kwerty (talk) 01:52, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Daddy Pig's job

Thanks to the 'New House' episode, we can verifiably prove that Daddy Pig is an architect. Should we take out the ambiguity from his section now - he's definitely an architect. 217.33.149.234 (talk) 10:29, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Recent tags

I've added a few tags just now and thought I would explain myself. The general problem is that the article reads like the work of fans; there is too much unreferenced information sourced from the series itself. Wikipedia articles generally only discuss that which already been discussed by reliable secondary sources of which the article has almost none. There is undoubtedly a place on the web for some of this fannish material but I am afraid this article is not it. --John (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Utter nonsense. If information cannot be sourced from the programmes themselves, then that would undermine pretty much every page on Wikipedia detailing or programme plots, title sequences, etc. Nick Cooper (talk) 16:31, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Uh huh. If you disagree with the existence of WP:V, the onus would be on you to have it rescinded or to start another project with different rules. There are plenty of free web hosts, fan forums etc out there for material like this, but Wikipedia is not one of them; we insist on verifiability and reliable sources here. --John (talk) 16:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Meantime, for this article on this project, you may find this guideline and this essay to be of interest. --John (talk) 16:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

No, I disagree with the root of your contention that we somehow cannot accurately describe the content of the episodes themselves. When first broadcast and released on DVD, the characters in the episode Bicycles did not wear cycle helmets; in the version of the episode now used for broadcast, they do. That is a fact, proven by the grabs of the exact same frame (it is actually the last before a change of view) from the two versions of the episode. We do not need a third party source to confirm this. Nick Cooper (talk) 17:09, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

We absolutely do, though that is a very small subset of what is wrong with this article. Please see, if you haven't already, WP:NOR. --John (talk) 17:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

So we have two screen-grabs from the exact same point in two different broadcast versions of an episode, one without cycle helmets, one with them. And you say we cannot say that that's what they show? Yeah, right. Surely you're not denying that these two versions of the episode exist? If you are not, then it is entirely legitimate to highlight that they exist, in the same way that numerous pages on Wikipedia document different edits/versions/cuts of film and TV programmes. Nick Cooper (talk) 18:08, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

This is getting a bit silly. I know I've had content removed by 'deletionist' editors in the past as well, who make the point that a "self-sourced" image can't be used to verify a claim - it's necessary to cite a reference for any claim, images are just window-dressing. Happily in this case there's a decent reference which explicitly references the addition of cycle helmets to the series, which I've added. Does that help any? Bonusballs (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Problem solved. Nick Cooper (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Very nice work, Bonusballs. Just the other 95% of the article to go now! --John (talk) 09:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

• As some months have now passed without improvement I've removed some of the worst unsourced and in-universe material from the article. Could anyine thinking of restoring it please make sure to add sources. Thanks. --John (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

2013

I'm not a child myself but I have a young boy who loves the show which gives me the excuse to download them all off Youtube! Many previously unloaded episodes have come on in the past weeks and are labelled with 2013. Do I take it there is a 2013 season or set of shows? Please don't tell me it's been cancelled though!! :) The Big Hoof! (talk) 19:43, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

It is over

Is Peppa Pig over? I do not want it to be over if you ask me I thank it should end with Series 5 with a 1 hour episode. but I heard Series 4 was the end but the last episode of series 4 was not that good. If series 5 is made it should air in the USA I mean the series 4 episode did not air in the USA to July only some aired. - Stormisstar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stormisstar (talk • contribs) 23:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Why do they call Santa "Father Christmas"?

I was watching a episode of Peppa Pig and they called Santa "Father Christmas". Why do they call him that?WWEUndertakerfan (talk) 14:11, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

You must be an American. Like me. It's the British term for Santa. This show is made 100% in the United Kingdom, which explains why Santa is called Father Christmas. --67.85.241.84 (talk) 01:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC) Ok thanks. WWEUndertakerfan (talk) 03:48, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Safety revisionism

Obviously the "seatbelt controversy" is already covered, but I realised today that the version of Bicycles currently being shown by Channel 5 has also been re-edited to add cycle helmets to the childrens' heads, which aren't there on the original version, as included on the Muddy Puddles DVD. I presume we can claim fair-use on two low-res comparative screen-grabs of the same frame to illustrate this? It may also be useful to do the same with a "seatbelt episode," such as The New Car, although from that it's clear that the changes are a little more radical, in that when the Pigs' red car breaks down in the original version, Peppa and George are clearly thrown high in the air, before landing back in their seats. This obviously doesn't happen in the revised version, because... well, they're wearing seatbelts! Nick Cooper (talk) 11:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I think that we could use fair use for one set of images, but not for two. The two sets are effectively doing the same thing - showing how a safety issue led to alteration of the show. Showing before and after for both sets is pushing non-free imagery a bit. IMO, of course, but otherwise, yeah, I think it's a good idea. a_man_alone (talk) 11:47, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

In that case, it'll probably be best to do it for the cycle helmets, as we already have enough sources for the seatbelt. I'll see about doing the screen-grabs later today, if possible. Nick Cooper (talk) 16:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Finally got round to doing the above, although I'm not to happy about the current page formatting. I think the main info box should probably be scaled back by reducing the cast to the leads, and putting a proper cast list in the main body of the page. Nick Cooper (talk) 16:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Only just noticed this, and you're right - the formatting now looks a bit funny, but otherwise it's a good job. a_man_alone (talk) 15:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Please note that these revisions may not be universally visible (especially not in foreign networks). The current broadcasts in Germany show the bicycle helmets, but not the seat belts.Mkilby (talk) 08:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Mummy Pig

Topic unlikely to have distinct coverage that is separate from Peppa Pig. --Animalparty-- (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Redirect here: It is just a stub that adds nothing to our coverage. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:58, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

• Redirect There are no sources cited and as noted above it adds nothing to content already here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

I can't see why this needs to be discussed any further. Mummy (and Daddy) Pig have no separate identity, and do not need individual pages. Merge any content that is not covered here, and use a redirect to guide readers to the Peppa Pig page. I'd do it myself, if I knew how.Mkilby (talk) 08:42, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Daddy Pig

Topic unlikely to have reliable, independent coverage that is distinct from Peppa Pig. References are currently solely in-universe, not enough to establish notability. Possibly merge all characters to List of Peppa Pig characters. --Animalparty-- (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Merge here: It is written largely in-universe, which is unencyclopaedic. It is unreferenced to anything other than episodes. There probably is something so be said about Daddy Pig as a representation of the modern fatherhood, which can be referenced to reliable sources, but I certainly don't see a whole article in it. It can easily be accommodated in the main article, which is better as that allows more scope to describe the way the characters interact with eachother.

A "list of characters" article might be OK but I am not really convinced. It is not like there are so many characters that we need a separate list. These things tend to get unmanageable. Within the main article only regular characters are mentioned, which can be referenced properly. Once we get a list article, people want to add characters with single appearances and no RS coverage. Then you get the hoaxers move in who start adding stuff they made up and it is hard to keep track of which minor character is real and which isn't due to not having references.

--DanielRigal (talk) 13:58, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

• Done. That was easy: there really was no content to speak of. That list of characters is huge and bothersome; maybe there is some way to hide it, clickably? Drmies (talk) 16:01, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Alleged bus incident

As noted by Snopes, what actually took place is disputed, and anyway like the fuss-over-nothing supposed "rude words" in one episode discussed above, the actions of individuals isn't in the same league as the things we already have in the Controversy and politics section. I'm therefore removing the claim. Nick Cooper (talk) 18:54, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

That is disputed, but it could be mentioned that since at least 2011, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/8513876/The-A-Z-of-political-correctness.html right-wing media in the UK including the broadsheet Telegraph have claimed that Peppa Pig offends Muslims '''tAD''' (talk) 00:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Just because it's mentioned, doesn't mean it's true, or isn't just the actions/interpretations of a very small number of individuals. In any case, the Telegraph mention is as a two-word adjective, when the main focus in the seatbelt issue, which is already covered (with good sourcing). It goes without saying that there are lot of exaggerations and misrepresentations in the Telegraph piece as a whole, notwithstanding that it's clearly not 100% serious.

In general, saying Peppa Pig offends Muslims is just a reinterpretation of the vastly exaggerated/urban myths about similar offence supposedly being taken at pig-related fairy tales and nursery rhymes. Nick Cooper (talk) 12:24, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Removed related programmes

I've removed several programmes from the "related" section of the infobox, because it was not clear how they were related other than being aimed at preschool children. The programmes I removed were Fimbles, Handy Manny, Sooty and Tayo the Little Bus. I've also removed an oddly worded section saying that Peppa Pig was related to Fimbles because they both liked finding things (a similarity which seems to me utterly trivial; that's not even a particularly common theme in Peppa). The comments had been added by an anonymous user back in August. If there is a common thread between these programmes which is not immediately apparent, someone should articulate it and ideally find a source supporting it. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:47, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

The Queen

The article states that Father Chrismas is the only human character, but the Queen is also human.82.34.8.160 (talk) 01:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)DamianLoki

Claimed currency change

IP 86.174.146.145 added the following text in the "Controversy" section:

Following an American distribution deal[3] the currency used in more recent episodes changed from pounds (eg in 'The Funfair', 2011, where rides cost one pound) to dollars (eg in 'George's Balloon', 2013, where the balloon costs ten dollars).

However, checking both these episodes shows that the UK transmission for both and the DVD for Funfair shows that the soundtracks have the value in pounds, not dollars. The quoted reference mentions only the distribution deal, and says nothing about editorial changes to the episodes. It may well be the case that US broadcasters got versions with slightly different soundtracks, but the UK versions are the primary ones. I have therefore deleted the text. Nick Cooper (talk) 10:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

In numerous episodes, the currency is actually called kregnik. Why isn't this mentioned anywhere? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.116.58 (talk) 09:21, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

George

As seen in George's birhday he is two years old. But before that episode he is one. I find it very odd that a one/to year old could jump in muddy puddles and say dinasoursa and all that. I don't know maybe I am just thinking too hard. -----Squidwardfsn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squidwardfan (talk • contribs) 22:14, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

They are pigs. They could maybe... INSAR (talk) 08:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Miss/Mrs Mummy Rabbit

This is so frustrating to read. They are two separate characters. There's an episode where Miss Rabbit breaks her leg so she has to stay home and look after her niece and nephew, Richard and Rebecca, whilst Mummy Rabbit (her sister) takes on all of Miss Rabbits jobs (supermarket etc). In the end, Mummy Rabbit agrees that she could never do all the jobs that Miss Rabbit does, and Miss Rabbit admits she could never look after children like Mummy Rabbit does. There. All cleared up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.169.250 (talk) 15:03, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

There seems to be confusion over an adult female Rabbit character, in some episodes described by the dialogue as "Miss Rabbit" (e.g. The Museum and Shopping), and in others as "Mrs Mummy Rabbit" (e.g. Swimming). It may be that these are actually two separate characters, perhaps with Miss Rabbit being Rebecca and Richard's older sister. Nick Cooper 13:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I've re-rechecked the relevant episodes, and it's clear that "Miss Rabbit" and "Mummy Rabbit" are two separate characters. In the various epsiodes that "Miss Rabbit" appears doing her multiple jobs, she never has any interaction with Rebecca and/or Richard that suggests she is their mother. It is only in episodes like Rebecca Rabbit and Swimming that "Mummy Rabbit" appears with Rebecca and/or Richard and is clearly their mother, and is never shown working as per Miss Rabbit. Although both characters are voiced by the same actress, her delivery is noticably more "shouty" as Miss Rabbit than Mummy Rabbit. Nick Cooper (talk) 08:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps if the article was better referenced then this sort of confusion would not arise. Rather than make our own judgements based on watching the episodes, we should be using reliable sources. As it stands it would be very easy for somebody to put incorrect information in, either accidentally or deliberately, and most Wikipedians would be none the wiser. We need to have verifiability. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, the epsiodes themselves are valid sources, and the simple fact is that there is no episode in which the "Miss Rabbit" appears that she is also referred to as "Mummy" by the narrator in relation to Rebecca & Richard, nor by the latter characters themselves. This is not "original research" but a commonsense observation of what is actually in the episodes. Nick Cooper (talk) 12:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

There is no Mrs Rabbit. We have every episode and have rechecked it all. Miss Rabbit and Mummy Rabbit are the same person. Same voice, same person. End credits have never shown anyone called Mrs Rabbit. Miss Rabbit is Miss Rabbit. Both wear yellow dress, have same voice etc. Something about her being "shouty" seems silly really, as she has the same voice all the time. Some episodes have called Mummy Sheep by Mrs Sheep, so what has been said previously can't necessarily be assumed accurate. Are we then to believe there is another adult sheep? I still believe Mummy Rabbit is the same as Miss Rabbit. I doubt the makers of the show would be 'lazy' and not bother making a separate rabbit with a different colour dress and even if the same actress provided the voice, would at least change it. Other parents I have spoken to believe this is to be true too. As for the. 'generic' credits, I don't think it makes a difference, as they will still add the other characters details if they aren't usually on them. Foggy Day shows Rebecca to call her 'Mummy' but end credits show 'Miss Rabbit' and not a separate name at the end on the credits. My mind is still totally unchanged. I won't change anymore as it's petty, but I still think they are the same.(Britgirl19 (talk) 09:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)Britgirl19Britgirl19 (talk) 09:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC))

I too have and have watched every episode, and simply cannot agree with you. There is no episode in which "Miss Rabbit" is introduced as such and she and/or Rebecca and/or Richard say anything that indicates they are related (e.g. Jumble Sale or School Camp). There is no episode in which "Mummy Rabbit" is introduced where she is also referred to as "Miss Rabbit," neither is she seen doing any of the multiple jobs the running joke has Miss Rabbit doing. If you think otherwise, then please suggest an episode or epsiodes that demonstrate it. In the absence of this, the best we can do is say that there appear to be two adult female rabbits, as the name "Miss Rabbit" and "Mummy Rabbit" are never used together in a single episode.

Contrary to your recent edit, the credits cannot be relied upon in this respect, as the epsiodes in which "Mummy Rabbit" appears - i.e. Rebecca Rabbit and Swimming - are both from the second series. Each episode of the first series does have credits that only list the voices/characters that appear, but for the second there are only generic credits listing multiple characters, even when they do not appear in the episode, and "Miss Rabbit" is one of these. The fact that "Miss Rabbit" is credited in Rebecca Rabbit and Swimming means nothing in relation to "Mummy Rabbit" actually being in the episodes, because "Miss Rabbit" is credited on the episodes such as Tiny Creatures and Bedtime, in which no rabbits at all appear.

The two characters have the "same voice" because they are both done by the same actor (there are, of course, other actors who do multiple voices in the series), but the delivery is noticably different. Characters get called "Mrs"/"Mummy" (and "Mr"/"Daddy") depending on context. Peppa and George have an "Uncle" and "Auntie" but clearly Chloé wouldn't call them that, would she? Some people seem keen to claim "Miss Rabbit" as a "single mother," but the presence of "Mr Rabbit" equally contradicts it. Nick Cooper (talk) 12:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

In 'Emily Elephant' Rebecca is seen getting out of "Miss Rabbit's" car but end credits says she is Miss Rabbit. I am still adament Miss Rabbit is also Mummy Rabbit. It's the same for Mr Rabbit, who's usually credited as Mr Rabbit, but the same character is Daddy Rabbit in the Rebecca Rabbit end credits. They don't need to be married to be parents. They may just live together. Besides, Mrs Sheep has been credited as Mummy Sheep too, unless there are more than one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Britgirl19 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 11 March 2009

Emily Elephant is a second series episode, so what I said above applies to it as much as it does to Rebecca Rabbit and Swimming. All series 2 episodes credit Miss Rabbit (and most of the child characters) at the end, regardless of whether any of the rabbit characters appear in it at all. It seems that many people are keen to "claim" Miss Rabbit as a single or unmarried mother, but if that were the intention, why in the numerous appearances where the adult female rabbit is introduced by the narrator as "Miss Rabbit" does she not get called "Mummy" by Rebecca and/or Richard? The latter only happens in the small number of episodes where the narrator specifically describes the adult rabbit character that is seen as "Mummy Rabbit." In every episode where an adult female rabbit is introduced as "Miss Rabbit," she is seen working (e.g. in the museum, recyclng centre, supermarket, etc.), but this is not the case in any episode where an adult female rabbit is introduced as "Mummy Rabbit." Nick Cooper (talk) 16:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Having checked a few specific episodes, it's clear that in fact most of the second series episodes have the same generic credits that list most of the regular characters, inclduing Miss Rabbit, even if only a few of them appear in them (e.g. George Catches a Cold, The Eye Test, Cold Winter Day,Bedtime etc.). Swimming has these same "standard" credits, but like a few other second series episodes that list "guest" characters after the "regular" ones, it has "Mummy Rabbit" and "Daddy Rabbit". Nick Cooper (talk) 08:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

There is a definitive answer to this although it beggars belief that anyone could get worked up about it. Go and watch the 4 episode set that includes Shopping and School Play. In Shopping, Miss Rabbit is working the counter. She has a yellow dress and the colour of the blush on each cheek is pink on one side and orange on the other. She is called Miss Rabbit. In School Play, we see Rebecca Rabbit rehearsing for the play with her mother. Her mother wears an identical yellow dress, is expressly referred to as Miss Rabbit and again her cheeks are pink on one side and orange on the other. In both episodes, the credits ONLY list the characters that ACTUALLY appear in those episodes and for both Shopping and School Play, only Miss Rabbit is listed. It is therefore clear that Miss Rabbit and Rebecca's mother are one and the same. Had the makers of the program intended that the characters were different, presumably they would have used a different animal or at the very least given her different clothing. The fact that Miss Rabbit in her role as odd job woman does not converse with Rebecca Rabbit is neither here nor there. This is not Sophocles. I suspect her role is something of an in joke for the producers of the program but without asking them, we won't know. The weight of evidence is clear however that Miss Rabbit is Rebecca's mother and the School Play episode is conclusive proof of the same. I would urge Nick Cooper to review those specific episodes to see for himself.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.168.43.250 (talk • contribs) 09:51, 25 March 2009

It's also surprising me that some people are prepared to overlook the majority of indicators that there are actually two adult female rabbits in favour of an apparent idoleogical stance that wants to "claim" Miss Rabbit as a de facto single/unmarried mother. However, clearly the colour on your TV set (which, given various linguistic hints on you post, is no doubt NTSC) is as questionable as your perception, given that the rabbit characters do not have an "orange" cheek and a "pink" one, since they are respectively light pink and their noses! Nick Cooper (talk) 07:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I really so see little evidence of Miss Rabbit and Mummy Rabbit being different characters. Also, the presence of a Mr Rabbit does not at all suggest that Mummy and Mr rabbit are married, and even if it does, this is no reason why Miss Rabbit should not continue to be called Miss Rabbit - many working women choose to continue to use their pre-marriage name at work, for many reasons, and I think given the number of jobs that Miss Rabbit works, it would seem a lot of effort to change her name with all her employers, especially for a change as trivial as from Miss Rabbit to Mrs Rabbit.

Slightly more seriously though, I do think there would be much more obvious differences made between the characters if Miss and Mummy Rabbit were indeed different people. The fact that they look and sound so identical that you are seemingly the only person to come up with the theory of them being different would suggest to me that it is most likely that they are the same person. With my two year old being a massive Peppa Pig fan I end up watching hours of it on TV, playing with many of the toys, and reading many of the books, and never for a minute did the though cross my mind that they were different characters. There are also examples of other characters being called 'Mummy' sometimes and 'Mrs' other times, yet there is no suggestion that these are in fact two different characters.

Finally, the fact that Rebecca and Richard don't particularly acknowledge 'Miss' Rabbit is neither here nor there. I've known children who's parents have worked at the school they attended, and they'd always happily ignore each other whilst in the school environment.

I do think it's an interesting theory though, so I am going to go to extra effort to find evidence to back either theory.

Lukens (talk) 09:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Just to set the cat among the pigeons again, have a look at the fire engine episode. The one when the Daddy's set fire to the BBQ. Miss Rabbit is clearly refered to as Miss Rabbit multiple times, and is a member (possibly leader of) "The Mummy's Fire Service". If Miss Rabbit is not a Mummy, what is she doing in The Mummy's Fire Service? I would say that pretty much confirms Miss Rabbit and Mummy Rabbit as one and the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hal1but (talk • contribs) 15:17, 15 March 2010

Think i can pretty much solve this one. In the episode when miss rabbit hurts her leg and everyone has to do her jobs, her sister who introduces herself as 'mummy rabbit' (miss rabbits sister) goes to do one of her jobs. she is wearing the same dress and is voiced by the same person. at the end of the episode mummy rabbit says, 'its not easy doing your jobs miss rabbit' and miss rabbit says, 'its not easy looking after your little ones'. which proves there are 2 different characters, mummy rabbit and miss rabbit. The fact they look and sound identical would suggest that they are twins. - Lizi Hempstock 1st October 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.21.203.55 (talk) 07:27, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, Miss Rabbit's Day Off has now been screened and proves the point conclusively:

<Doorbell>

Mrs Rabbit: That'll be my sister.

Miss Rabbit: Hello.

Peppa: Hello, Miss Rabbit.

Rebecca: Auntie!

Miss Rabbit: I can't stop long, I've got lots of work to do. I've got the supermarket checkout, the ice cream stall, and the bus to drive. See you later, then, sister!

Mrs Rabbit: Bye, sister!

I mean, really! It's so hilariously over-emphasised, you'd think the writers had read this page.... Nick Cooper (talk)

Just saw 'Miss Rabbit's Day Off', mystery solved, fantastic stuff! Lukens (talk) 17:49, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Of course, with that mystery solved, potentially another one has been opened. Who is the male adult rabbit sometimes seen working with Miss rabbit (in 'Train Ride' and 'Trip to the Moon')? Is it Richard and Rebecca's father? Miss Rabbit's partner? Someone else? Is he the Mr Rabbit who works with Daddy Pig? Lukens (talk) 07:55, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, it finally seems as if this issue has been definitively resolved - possibly as a result of the script-writers reading this page! In the episode Mummy Rabbit's Bump", both Miss Rabbit and Mummy Rabbit appear IN THE SAME SCENE, and actually converse with each other, clearly showing once and for all that they are indeed two separate entities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.217.182 (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Who is Gerald?

So the USA is finally airing the halloween special that aired last year in the UK. They are airing it with reruns of Castle, Night Animals, and Gerald Giraffe? Who and what is Gerald Giraffe? Is it a new character? Has the episode aired in the UK? The episodes are airing this Sunday at 7 est/6cst in the USA on Nick JR. --Squidwardfan (talk) 18:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)Squidwardfan

He is a new character who has a longer neck than the rest of the kids, because he is a giraffe.

--Pachisu124 (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

American dub of Peppa Pig

From 2005 to 2006, Peppa aired in the United States on Cartoon Network with an American redub. So far I have not been able to find anything about the actors whatsoever, because the dub Is completely lost except for a promotional video. If anyone manages to recognize Peppa's voice in this video, I would thank you deeply. Mewtwowimmer (talk) 23:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2017

179.32.97.197 (talk) 23:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, you need to explain what you would like changed, what you would like it changed to, and why. MPS1992 (talk) 23:46, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Captain Dog

Captain Dog is listed in the credits of the latest episode, 'Kylie Kangeroo' although he doesn't appear. I don't believe we have ever met Danny Dog's father in any of the episodes although Mr Dog is listed in the character list on this page. Can anyone confirm the existence of Mr Dog? Are Mr Dog and Captain Dog one in the same or are they district characters? Jazzatola (talk) 19:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Mr Dog (Danny's father) appears in the episode 'Spring' as he drops Danny off for the egg hunt at Grandpa Pig's house with a cheery "I used to love egg hunts when I was little". 217.33.149.234 (talk) 10:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The last comment is wrong - he doesn't. That was Mr. Fox, Freddy Fox's dad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.217.182 (talk) 15:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Luisanderson961 (talk) 08:53, 5 August 2017 (UTC) He was introduced later in the series

Infobox

When ever I try to add a company to the infobox, it goes all weird and to the top of the page. How do I fix this/stop this from happening? -- Logosncompanies (talk) 22:23, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean this edit? diff

If so, I think the problem there is that you have put a Plainlist inside a Plainlist but only closed one of the two leaving the second one open to take up the rest of the page. Doing a Plainlist inside a Plainlist is a bit tricky and I am wonering whether that was even what you intended to do in the first place? Anyway, my advice is to use the Preview button to see if your edit is working as you intend before saving and also to maybe to use the sandbox if you want to try out getting some tricky formatting right before putting it in the article. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, that worked. -- Logosncompanies (talk) 23:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2018

95.146.137.214 (talk) 08:54, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Peppa Pig Original run May 31, 2004 - 2012, October 24, 2016-present.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Peppa Pig banned from Chinese internet site as "subversive" icon for slackers and anti-social young people

A Chinese internet platform has given the British cartoon “Peppa Pig” the chop as state media lamented that the series had become a “subversive” icon for slackers and anti-social young people.

At least 30,000 clips of “Peppa Pig”, whose heroine is a playful bright pink pig, were removed from the popular Douyin video-sharing platform, while the #PeppaPig hashtag was banned from the site, the Global Times reported on Monday.

Source: AFP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.182.0.120 (talk) 04:34, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Fake news about Peppa Pig causing autism in children

Apparently there are some fake news stories circulating on social media in Latin America stating that watching Peppa Pig causes autism in children: https://larepublica.pe/mundo/1307655-peppa-pig-malo-ninos-produce-autismo. Kaldari (talk) 04:31, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

MMA non-controversy

Upon closer examination, this claimed controversy isn't really anything to do with the series. Legally Channel 5 could not have continued transmitting the 15-rated MMA event (which was not even originally scheduled to be shown live by them in the first place) past the 06:00 OFCOM watershed. Milkshake had to go ahead as scheduled, regardless, and the fact that the first/earliest programme shown was Peppa Pig is really just coincidental. Nick Cooper (talk) 22:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2019

186.112.102.128 (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done No actionable request has been made here. If you want to request a change then please try again, writing your request in the form "please change X to Y", so we can tell exactly what you want changed and can make a decision on whether it is a good idea to change it. --DanielRigal (talk) 11:43, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2019

A new Peppa Pig movie came out, so i want to edit the page to talk about it. 2001:8003:8C8F:3A01:E964:85D5:BD5A:DFA (talk) 01:20, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. Edit requests are requests to make specific, precise changes that others can implement, not for general requests to edit the article. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 04:12, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2019

Rename the Software section to Video Games as it only talks about video games and not about other software 64.222.180.90 (talk) 14:35, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done Danski454 (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Peppa Pig Celebrates Chinese New Year

It looks like the Peppa Pig Celebrates Chinese New Year film has slipped under the radar a bit. It's clear that it follows the pattern of the earlier My First Cinema Experience in being a mixture of live-action and regular Peppa episodes, presumably at least The Panda Twins and Chinese New Year. It would be incredibly useful if editors in China and/or those fluent in Mandarin could clarify the other included episodes, especially whether they are the other 11 from Series 6, as per the List of Peppa Pig episodes page. Nick Cooper (talk) 10:40, 26 February 2019 (UTC) peppa has made friends with two panda girls. peppa is displayed with a red gown(which is correct) but she has a flower in her hair (people do NOT wear that anymore). peppa is also a complete savage. for more information visit buzzfeed "17 times peppa pig was an absolute savage". yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetttttttttttttt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:160E:C728:5959:3104:2B8F:4D48 (talk) 05:13, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Needed

PP is dubbed (or re-done?) in many languages. The current article, at least if skimmed through, gives the imprecision that PP is only in English. This should be cleared up. 213.109.221.9 (talk) 06:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I believe it is produced only in English. That it is translated and dubbed isn't really related to its production. We expect any show to be dubbed. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:13, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Peppa Pig Discography into Peppa Pig

There does not appear to be enough in the way of references to sustain a separate article on Peppa Pig's discography. ... discospinster _talk 02:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

That is ridiculous. If you’re not happy with the class, then fix it. I can’t do it because I’m using an iPad. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 05:36, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I merged it. Completely unnecessary. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:05, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Harley Bird stepping down

Peppas current actor is no longer going to do the job anymore. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51318539 We should change '2007-present' to '2020-present'. Discuss SonnikuSan (talk) 02:01, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 April 2020

The total number of episodes so far is 303, not 420. Please fix it as promise. 213.162.103.34 (talk) 01:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done. El_C 01:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Peppa the Pig Height Controversy

So... are we going to discuss this? It's just a big meme at the moment and will probably be forgotten in say a couple of weeks, but there are many jokes about google returning the divine height of 7'11" (241.3cm). Maybe it's worth noting? Maybe not? I just wanted to make a section regarding its existence. Sources are easy to find by searching for something like "Peppa pig height."

We'd only consider including it if it was covered by reliable sources. Even then, though, it seems trivial IMHO EvergreenFir (talk) 04:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, it seems fair. It might do the page justice to protect or semi-protect it from vandalism; this sudden inundation in popularity regarding this very specific subject may expose this page to heavy trolling in the meantime. Also, being a meme, "reliable sources" might be hard to find. lol, There are probably news articles mentioning it such as Daily Dot. ZackaryCW (talk) 04:58, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The story is clearly bollocksing. Someone supposedly Googled Peppa's height, Tweeted a supposed image of the result (that anyone could fake), and people are "terrified." Seriously?

The bottom line is that, even if the Google result wasn't faked, it will have been an algorithm error, and nothing more. It has no reasonable basis in fact and no official standing. How people react to something that isn't real is their own business, but it's not relevant to this page. Nick Cooper (talk) 15:05, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

The height of people and or things can be manually changed via Google itself so someone probably changed it for a laugh and the guy reviewing that edit probably thought it was legit (or didn't look at all),

Anyway IMHO the height shouldn't be included because it's not relevant (whereas on model articles the height is relevant). –Dave | Davey2010^Talk 15:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

The Google listing was 7'1 and not 7'11. I don't think Peppa Pig has a canonical height. As this was a viral phenomena covered by multiple reputable sources I think there is justification to include it as part of the show's cultural impact, maybe in the "influences" section? Sources: [4] [5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.73.129 (talk) 15:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2020

Peppa pig is an anime. Siriusblackisthebest (talk) 09:52, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. At the very least - Peppa Pig isn't anime. Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:10, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 November 2020

Gender: Female Chickennuggies44 (talk) 10:18, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

This article is about the show rather than the character. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Pig or piglet

Currently, it says in the second sentence of the first paragraph (also in the first paragraph of the background section) that she is an anthropomorphic female pig. Should we change this to piglet? Otherwise, the first indication that she is not adult would be in the statement that she attends playgroup, which only comes after the statement that her friends are her age. Clearly, it is relevant that she is not adult, as the converse case would make it presumably much harder for the children viewers to identify with her. Seattle Jörg (talk) 09:49, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2020

I need to edit the page, Peppa Pig, because there is something missing in, Original Network. Thanks! 2603:6080:E01:0:FDF6:51B4:BC5B:106C (talk) 17:17, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. RudolfRed (talk) 17:23, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Lost 2005 U.S. Dub

The U.S. dub aired as part of a preschool block called Tickle U on Cartoon Network. There is a image of a poster which told you about Peppa Pig on Tickle U and when it would air and information about it.

File:Peppa Pig Tickle U Poster.jpeg

You can also hear audio of the laughs of the Peppa Pig U.S. dub in the Peppa pig Tickle U website game, Swirlygig.

The dub was produced in Miami, Florida at Chrom Studios.

According to a Youtube Poop Called "Peppa Pig Goes on a Trip Into Insanity" created by Paperking99, "Tea Time" was replaced with "Snack Time".

Sydney Patrick voiced Peppa Pig, Elaine Torres was the voice of Suzy Sheep, while Chloe Dolandis voiced Rebecca Rabbit and Emily Elephant. Other cast members include Barry Tarallo, Lissa Grossman, Christine DiMattel, Oscar Cheda, Heath Kells, Antonio Amadeo, Amy London, Brooks Haydn, Heather Rolff, Brandon Morris and Monique Gheridan (side note: these are taken from the credits of the episodes, apologies if the names are wrong)

The majority of this cast worked on another English dubbed show, Noah's Ark.

UPDATE: Half of the episode Mummy Pig's Birthday has been found and uploaded to Twitter. Someone has restored it though. Clips of the episode "Daddy Puts Up A Picture" have been found too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C7:4400:9980:A45D:F63E:C7ED:C462 (talk) 04:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2021

I eat caydens for lunch with pickles on it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brohamplayz67 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Pippa Peg and Baby Vandalism March 22 2021

I've noticed things that I thought were strange when reading the first sentence of the article that includes calling a British-made children's show a "netherlandish baby" animation, with it shortly going into how "Pippa" is a male "peg". I think someone vandalized the page and replaced a lot of the "Peppa Pig" phrases into "Pippa Peg". I can spot those things despite not having too much knowledge of the show, but other things may be harder to discern. Could someone look back into the history of the page and change all "Pippa Peg" s into "Peppa Pig" s. Sometimes her name is referred to correctly, some it was a bit easy to trip over while reading in terms of mentally correcting. I think someone just vandalized it as a joke, though I don't have editor's privileges so I can't change them.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Singsongerd (talk • contribs) 20:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Episode count ahoy!

It looks like there are now 329 episodes and I think eight of then has already been aired on Channel 5. Can you please put that number down in the info box for the number of episodes. Thank you!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.51.152.226 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Should we add the fact that Peppa Pig was actually BANNED FULLY from china?

Peppa Pig was actually fully banned from China for "promoting gangster behavior". Should you add that to the 'Peppa Pig in China' section of the article? A turtle from something (talk) 18:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

No, because the show was not “actually fully banned” at all - all that happened was that a video-sharing site briefly banned the character because memers were making their own unsuitable versions and there was a concern that children would see them by mistake. Neither the TV show nor any characters were ever banned from legitimate TV broadcasts. Bonusballs (talk) 20:03, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2021

Hi, in the "Background" section, could you please edit it so that it adds "jumps up in down in muddy puddles" in addition to "wear clothes, live in houses, and drive cars"? Thanks! 2603:6010:3205:B6FE:3566:218E:DC7F:F699 (talk) 03:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: I think the purpose of that section is to give a general overview of the show's setting. I'm not in agreement that this would improve upon that. If you would like, you can open up a separate discussion from this request to add it, and if there is WP:CON for it, then another editor can fulfill it. Cheers! ––Sirdog9002 (talk) 04:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 September 2021

Change "witht" to "with" in the following line under 'Criticism, controversy, concerns and influence':

"This phenomenon was not an issue for many parents; it trended witht the hashtag "#PeppaEffect"." Nr397 (talk) 06:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

 Already done Pamzeis (talk) 08:00, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2019 and 20 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lovejourdan93.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:22, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2022

I want to edit this because of the lawsuit against a cartoon astley-baker-davies is sueing 207.140.192.23 (talk) 19:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:32, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Peppa pigs Weight

Peppa pig is known for entertaining preschoolers, but did you know that peppa pig actually weighs 10,567 pounds, just kidding. Peppa pig is 7 feet and 1 inch, and her mom is 12ft which is CRAZY 1pl70 (talk) 08:17, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Origin of theme music

The origin of theme music is Big Ben's bell song. 89.134.2.164 (talk) 21:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2022

e get better e getbetter 107.131.38.105 (talk) 03:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 03:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2023

File:Peppa Pig logo.svg

97.99.128.223 (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 07:53, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

"Peppa Pig TM" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Peppa Pig TM has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 25 § Peppa Pig TM until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)