This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Very Hungry Caterpillar article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'd like to see more on the distinctive illustrations found in this book. The "real" look of the pictures was a big reason this book clicked with me as a child. 99.239.0.20 ( talk) 20:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Is it really necessary that spoiler tags be placed on such a book? The target audience will never likely find this page.
This article reads like some sort of joke. Film rights being sold for £1 million? Who the hell would make a film like this!? Is the book really this popular? PureLegend 21:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Could we perhaps not have the day dividers? Its not really important to have them. Reignbow 21:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Horseplay following on: ( Kathybramley ( talk) 10:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC))
Back to historical 'Synopsis' talk: ( Kathybramley ( talk) 10:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC))
I know it's not suitable for an encyclopedia, but I thought that I might say that when I first read this article, when it had the interesting commentary on feasibility and philosophy on the story, it was a gripping read. It's a pity that it can't be kept as the current article, but i'm glad I can access it in the history. Kudos to that author. Wunderbear 14:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
This book is awesome, and I recommend it to all children who are interested in caterpillars! Diego Bank ( talk) 17:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I recently added an awards section to the article. The link might appear to belong to a local library but it actually takes you to a subsite of the University of Connecticut, and while state universities are generally agreed to be reliable sources, the information itself is actually provided by The Gale Group which supplies such information to schools and libraries across North America (also, while the awards list on that site may initially seem confusing once you read it you'll notice that it is indeed sorted by book). Aurum ore ( talk) 10:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
It's protected so I can't edit it. Please could someone remove "(representing a human rather than true caterpillar diet)" from the introduction, as this is just plain silly. THanks you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.6.202 ( talk) 22:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed the following paragraph from the Accolades and awards section:
"Also in 2009, the essayist Todd Kalvin Washington brilliantly wrote about the symbolic references mentioned in this truly spectacular novel. The book is a metaphor for the proliferating United States, starting from its origin and until present day. In addition, an obesity connection was also created in this essay in that it is saying that the caterpillar transformed from a gluttonous creature to a beautiful butterfly. This not only shows that he can change, but he sets an example for all people around the globe. Carle was truly ahead of his time as demonstrated in this essay."
It doesn't site sources, it's badly written (as if the content is actually encyclopedic), it uses weasel-like words, etc. Not to mention the essay (if it exists) seems more like a joke, judging the above, than anything serious. Jalwikip ( talk) 07:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I think it's notable that the book has holes punched in most of the pages. The article says the book was inspired by a hole punch, but otherwise doesn't mention this at all. The holes were one of the reasons I liked the book as a kid, and why my kids like it today.-- Rehcsif ( talk) 15:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
The synopsis is longer than the actual book. Something about that needs to be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Braniac294 ( talk • contribs) 21:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This used to be my favourite article on wiki. Now it is sadly dry and boring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.53.1 ( talk) 23:54, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
When we reference articles which mention "a copy sold every 30 seconds worldwide", i wonder where the fact first appeared. I hope it didnt appear here first, and then get mirrored by journalists. I would like better sourcing for some somewhat promotional facts. Mercurywoodrose ( talk) 06:49, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Diet police mug the very hungry caterpillar. -- Surturz ( talk) 21:06, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
I've actually seen a big caterpillar with a green body and a brown (or was it orange?) face before, but I don't know what species that is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.233.55 ( talk) 22:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
A lot of sources list this book as being banned in Herefordshire, England due to promoting unhealthy eating habits, however no primary or secondary sources seem to exist for this. Would it be worth mentioning somewhere (perhaps in the pop culture section?) that this anecdote exists? -- zandperl ( talk) 04:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Googling "very hungry caterpillar banned book" returns over 11,000 hits, though I don't know if there's a limit on what's considered "a lot" of sources and thus worth mentioning. -- zandperl ( talk) 04:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure this is true. I've found no sources to say this is the case, and being from Herefordshire myself I have never heard of such a ban. None of the local media ever seem to have reported on it, and indeed the book continues to be promoted by the council. Tootsiesclaw ( talk) 22:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Very Hungry Caterpillar. 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:
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
In 2015, Paris Review published a parody issue for April Fool's Day, which included a parody interview with TVHC author Eric Carle. Unfortunately, this parody interview was taken seriously by Clare Pollard, who included it in her 2019 history of children's books, and from there it was cited by other sources including Smithsonian.
Please do not add to the article any statements about Carle's publisher having insisted that the caterpillar experience a stomachache as punishment for gluttony. Thank you. DS ( talk) 00:44, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to add a citation needed tag to this one. A cursory Google turns up quite a few results, but all very brief and echoing the language used by Wikipedia, which makes me fear there's some citogenesis going on here. The closest I can find to an actual reference is this blogpost: the post briefly mentions the book in (IMO) ambivalent light, and the author states at the end that they gave "a very condensed version of this talk at The Royal Entomological Society's annual meeting, ENTO18 last month". Could a talk at the RES AGM which possibly said that The Very Hungry Caterpillar "gives a positive view of insects" have become "an endorsement by the Royal Entomological Society" through the magic of Internet telephone, or can someone find a credible original source? -- IslandHopper 973 03:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2022 and 14 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ellekiko ( article contribs).
I am planning on making some changes to this article in the coming weeks. First, I plan on rewriting the lead, synopsis, development, UK releases, and ancillary products sections to eliminate irrelevant information and rewrite wordy and confusing information; this will make the article more concise and clearer. I will also be revising the reception section to include awards, endorsement, and bans to help bring the article in line with Wikipedia’s neutrality standards, as well as provide up-to-date information. I will also be adding a section on educational usage and influence separate from cultural influence; I have found a lot of research regarding the educational usage of the book and I believe the Wikipedia article should share the scholarly information available. I also plan on adding a section on publication history; this will bring the article closer to Wikipedia’s recommendations for articles about books. Ellekiko ( talk) 18:21, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
"Male dominated narratives, like The Very Hungry Caterpillar, reinforce negative gender stereotypes; girls do not see themselves reflected in the book hurting their self perception." It's true that the caterpillar and most of the other animals in Carle's books happen to be male, so I don't think the sentence is THAT ridiculous. Were there a source specifically referring to Very Hungry Caterpillar as a male-dominated narrative, it would make sense to have that in the article. However, the cited sources appear to be talking about books with male human protagonists. 2603:8081:2600:400:ACDA:810E:B679:23F0 ( talk) 00:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
It looks as if there have been several edits back and forth recently as to whether the plot summary says the caterpillar entered a chrysalis or entered a cocoon. The book says cocoon, but several edits to 'cocoon' by different users have been reverted back to 'chrysalis'. Yes, the book is wrong: A butterfly comes from a chrysalis. But surely it isn't our place to revise the book's content in a summary of the plot. After all, no-one has edited the list of foods to say that the caterpillar only ate leaves.
I have changed it to cocoon, but also added a small new Cocoon vs. Chrysalis section, with a citation to an article on the book's factual error. My hope is that, even if that section gets moved or changed, it can act as a new focal point for the chrysalis/cocoon debate instead of the plot summary itself, which should reflect the content of the book. Nition1 ( talk) 01:24, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Very Hungry Caterpillar article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'd like to see more on the distinctive illustrations found in this book. The "real" look of the pictures was a big reason this book clicked with me as a child. 99.239.0.20 ( talk) 20:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Is it really necessary that spoiler tags be placed on such a book? The target audience will never likely find this page.
This article reads like some sort of joke. Film rights being sold for £1 million? Who the hell would make a film like this!? Is the book really this popular? PureLegend 21:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Could we perhaps not have the day dividers? Its not really important to have them. Reignbow 21:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Horseplay following on: ( Kathybramley ( talk) 10:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC))
Back to historical 'Synopsis' talk: ( Kathybramley ( talk) 10:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC))
I know it's not suitable for an encyclopedia, but I thought that I might say that when I first read this article, when it had the interesting commentary on feasibility and philosophy on the story, it was a gripping read. It's a pity that it can't be kept as the current article, but i'm glad I can access it in the history. Kudos to that author. Wunderbear 14:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
This book is awesome, and I recommend it to all children who are interested in caterpillars! Diego Bank ( talk) 17:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I recently added an awards section to the article. The link might appear to belong to a local library but it actually takes you to a subsite of the University of Connecticut, and while state universities are generally agreed to be reliable sources, the information itself is actually provided by The Gale Group which supplies such information to schools and libraries across North America (also, while the awards list on that site may initially seem confusing once you read it you'll notice that it is indeed sorted by book). Aurum ore ( talk) 10:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
It's protected so I can't edit it. Please could someone remove "(representing a human rather than true caterpillar diet)" from the introduction, as this is just plain silly. THanks you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.6.202 ( talk) 22:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed the following paragraph from the Accolades and awards section:
"Also in 2009, the essayist Todd Kalvin Washington brilliantly wrote about the symbolic references mentioned in this truly spectacular novel. The book is a metaphor for the proliferating United States, starting from its origin and until present day. In addition, an obesity connection was also created in this essay in that it is saying that the caterpillar transformed from a gluttonous creature to a beautiful butterfly. This not only shows that he can change, but he sets an example for all people around the globe. Carle was truly ahead of his time as demonstrated in this essay."
It doesn't site sources, it's badly written (as if the content is actually encyclopedic), it uses weasel-like words, etc. Not to mention the essay (if it exists) seems more like a joke, judging the above, than anything serious. Jalwikip ( talk) 07:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I think it's notable that the book has holes punched in most of the pages. The article says the book was inspired by a hole punch, but otherwise doesn't mention this at all. The holes were one of the reasons I liked the book as a kid, and why my kids like it today.-- Rehcsif ( talk) 15:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
The synopsis is longer than the actual book. Something about that needs to be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Braniac294 ( talk • contribs) 21:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This used to be my favourite article on wiki. Now it is sadly dry and boring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.53.1 ( talk) 23:54, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
When we reference articles which mention "a copy sold every 30 seconds worldwide", i wonder where the fact first appeared. I hope it didnt appear here first, and then get mirrored by journalists. I would like better sourcing for some somewhat promotional facts. Mercurywoodrose ( talk) 06:49, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Diet police mug the very hungry caterpillar. -- Surturz ( talk) 21:06, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
I've actually seen a big caterpillar with a green body and a brown (or was it orange?) face before, but I don't know what species that is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.233.55 ( talk) 22:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
A lot of sources list this book as being banned in Herefordshire, England due to promoting unhealthy eating habits, however no primary or secondary sources seem to exist for this. Would it be worth mentioning somewhere (perhaps in the pop culture section?) that this anecdote exists? -- zandperl ( talk) 04:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Googling "very hungry caterpillar banned book" returns over 11,000 hits, though I don't know if there's a limit on what's considered "a lot" of sources and thus worth mentioning. -- zandperl ( talk) 04:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure this is true. I've found no sources to say this is the case, and being from Herefordshire myself I have never heard of such a ban. None of the local media ever seem to have reported on it, and indeed the book continues to be promoted by the council. Tootsiesclaw ( talk) 22:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Very Hungry Caterpillar. 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:
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
In 2015, Paris Review published a parody issue for April Fool's Day, which included a parody interview with TVHC author Eric Carle. Unfortunately, this parody interview was taken seriously by Clare Pollard, who included it in her 2019 history of children's books, and from there it was cited by other sources including Smithsonian.
Please do not add to the article any statements about Carle's publisher having insisted that the caterpillar experience a stomachache as punishment for gluttony. Thank you. DS ( talk) 00:44, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to add a citation needed tag to this one. A cursory Google turns up quite a few results, but all very brief and echoing the language used by Wikipedia, which makes me fear there's some citogenesis going on here. The closest I can find to an actual reference is this blogpost: the post briefly mentions the book in (IMO) ambivalent light, and the author states at the end that they gave "a very condensed version of this talk at The Royal Entomological Society's annual meeting, ENTO18 last month". Could a talk at the RES AGM which possibly said that The Very Hungry Caterpillar "gives a positive view of insects" have become "an endorsement by the Royal Entomological Society" through the magic of Internet telephone, or can someone find a credible original source? -- IslandHopper 973 03:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2022 and 14 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ellekiko ( article contribs).
I am planning on making some changes to this article in the coming weeks. First, I plan on rewriting the lead, synopsis, development, UK releases, and ancillary products sections to eliminate irrelevant information and rewrite wordy and confusing information; this will make the article more concise and clearer. I will also be revising the reception section to include awards, endorsement, and bans to help bring the article in line with Wikipedia’s neutrality standards, as well as provide up-to-date information. I will also be adding a section on educational usage and influence separate from cultural influence; I have found a lot of research regarding the educational usage of the book and I believe the Wikipedia article should share the scholarly information available. I also plan on adding a section on publication history; this will bring the article closer to Wikipedia’s recommendations for articles about books. Ellekiko ( talk) 18:21, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
"Male dominated narratives, like The Very Hungry Caterpillar, reinforce negative gender stereotypes; girls do not see themselves reflected in the book hurting their self perception." It's true that the caterpillar and most of the other animals in Carle's books happen to be male, so I don't think the sentence is THAT ridiculous. Were there a source specifically referring to Very Hungry Caterpillar as a male-dominated narrative, it would make sense to have that in the article. However, the cited sources appear to be talking about books with male human protagonists. 2603:8081:2600:400:ACDA:810E:B679:23F0 ( talk) 00:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
It looks as if there have been several edits back and forth recently as to whether the plot summary says the caterpillar entered a chrysalis or entered a cocoon. The book says cocoon, but several edits to 'cocoon' by different users have been reverted back to 'chrysalis'. Yes, the book is wrong: A butterfly comes from a chrysalis. But surely it isn't our place to revise the book's content in a summary of the plot. After all, no-one has edited the list of foods to say that the caterpillar only ate leaves.
I have changed it to cocoon, but also added a small new Cocoon vs. Chrysalis section, with a citation to an article on the book's factual error. My hope is that, even if that section gets moved or changed, it can act as a new focal point for the chrysalis/cocoon debate instead of the plot summary itself, which should reflect the content of the book. Nition1 ( talk) 01:24, 21 July 2022 (UTC)