Talk:Bugs Bunny

Making Fun of Race / Disabilities

Should the fact that many BB cartoons are not seen anymore due to their stereotypes against races and the disabled be mentioned (e.g. the ones with black characters having giant lips and speaking in stereotyped black "dialect" or the one with "Fruitcake Sanitorium - "We are full of nuts!)

It wasn't just Bugs. Lots of cartoons had that stuff. On the other hand, Bugs is always dressing up in women's clothing. Ortolan88

I suppose we can hope that temporal/regional taboos against racial humour, sexual-orientation humour, violence, bad grammar, etc, will eventually themselves just be footnotes in the Wikipedia and that classic art will prevail in the end. I'm sure Michelangelo's David is taboo in many places/times too. But putting our own (US, 2002) bias on the record is just that: bias on the record. Steverapaport

---

Derogatory humour is the kind that has seen things like some Loony Tunes cartoons banned - are you advocating that kind of humour?

It isn't a matter of advocacy, but of discussion from an NPOV. "Coal Black and de Sebbin Dwarfs" is a brilliant cartoon, one of the greatest shorts ever filmed, but it is not acceptable to mass audiences today because of the racial stereotyping, although still available on compilations. Much humor (some of the best) is derogatory, unpleasant, grating, and appeals to prejudices. In our "enlightened" times, only blondes and white southerners can be made fun of. Since I am the latter and married to the former, I notice this, but in truly enlightened times, we could make fun of everybody. Ortolan88

_______________

sorry folks, but my first time out. no time to post a name - but i believe bugs was the first recorded victim of alien abduction, buy martian. can anyone clarify? /name:tresroque/

It's hard to think of a joke that isn't at _somebody's_ expense. Those who cannot laugh at themselves ought not to leave the house. (Okay, now tell me the one about the Jewish Moonie with the Polish wife... ;-) --Ed Poor

i apologise - i am physically disabled and as such have been treated quite badly by ignorant people - coloured my view of what is acceptable - it is hard to be NPOV in my situation

-- Paul Melville Austin

No need to apologize. Bugs Bunny was not a particularly nice character. He might have been funny, but he was never a model for my behavior. I think of him as a relic of World War II. He displayed a kind of bravado that may have been useful in the face of the enemy, but no one should act like that in civilian life. --Ed Poor

It's a tough question, so I won't give a flip answer. I agree with Ortolan that everyone has to be able to laugh at themselves, and it seems to be a fact of life that most humour is at someone's expense, so "advocating" banning all humour that is derogatory to someone is just not gonna work, and tends to be counterproductive since we end up with political-correctness police.

On the other hand, if some group is truly being continuously persecuted by people who don't even realize they're doing it, and humour is a large part of that, then we need to sit up and notice. This happened, for example, in Victorian England, where it was perfectly acceptable to make fun of 'wogs' and 'niggers' (and later 'suffragettes').

Usually offensive humour is the effect, rather than the cause, of social injustice. But in the Victorian England a good case could be made for the reverse. The problem was that it was possible to laugh off any attempts for these groups to be taken seriously. If we're similarly really hurting some people, we should be forced to notice it. But banning all offensive humour isn't the way. Perhaps just noticing it and wondering publicly if it's harmful to someone is the middle path... --Steve Rapaport

Food for thought, Steve. Thanks. --Ed Poor

Firstly a personal note so that you might contextualise my highly personal comments: I experience pejudice on a regular basis because of my personal apperance. This is in Toronto, Canada (the most successful enthicly diverse city in North America. It could easily be about race and sometimes has; its about something different.

It is important to realize that Bugs Bunny is a working actor whose greatest body of work occured during the Studio System years. Many of the most popular entertainment are an embarassment to watch. I think of Public Enemy and their pointed commentary in Burn, Hollywood,Burn.

Many of the racisms so flagrantly shown in Warner Brothers films continue to exist. Do you know what social class and ethnic group Elmer Fudd played early in his career? He wasn't always "Elmer Fudd, millionaire: I own a mansion and a yachat." He's not a walking talking racial slur anymore but it is little more than a stereotype (yes I know its a funny cartoon: Elmer becomes "shell shocked" from his war with Bugs. People with visible psycheatric disturbance receive more prejudice than any other group.) I was distained and tarred with detractions on Elmer's original Ethno-social group inprobable as it sounds here in the Wikipedia. I will provide full details in any forum that Ed Poor specifies. This occured with the full knowledge and approval of a sysop: I will provide full disclosure in forum of the wikipedia even a mailing list. I have no desire for vengance: the value of the future out weighes the value of the past. The commmunity, must however prove itself a community, by restoring adherance to the Wikipedian Ethos and NPOV. To find directed ethnic slurs spewwedin cyberspace is completely repugnant.

I took Bugs as one role model and am damn proud of the person I became. (even if it might be unbecoming :-]. I find inspiration in Bugs' genius. Lockdown Sv Rule.

User:Two16

I too am from Toronto, and would be happy to claim Bugs as a role model. And I see little or no racism in Bugs himself! (Although he's pretty contemptuous of stupid folks.)

I'm curious what social class and ethnic group Elmer stereotypes, though... I don't see many height-challenged, mentally-challenged, speech-impaired white guys with guns wandering around in Toronto "hunting wabbits"...  :-)

I'm also curious what you mean by "Elmer's original Ethno-social group" and the implications that he once was a "walking talking racial slur". Elmer Fudd has always been caucasian. Elmer Fudd evolved out of a lesser-known (but still caucasian!) Tex Avery character called "Egghead" in the 30s. His first few cartoons as the Elmer Fudd we know today were as a hunter and as a nature photographer. Are you sure you're not confusing Bugs' antagonist (the Stepin Fetchitt caricature) in "All This And Rabbit Stew" with Elmer Fudd? Jeff schiller 06:52, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

Steve Rapaport

---

Might mention surrealist interest in Bugs Bunny, Gallery Bugs Bunny, &c. --Daniel C. Boyer 21:55, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

• Is it really the case that these cartoons are being banned, or is it rather that noone wants to show them? There are different degrees of suppression. I doubt that homes are being raided to burn copies of old bugs bunnies shows. I don't think its really a problem if networks have decided that they don't want to portray extreme biased stereotypes, whos creation was often influenced heavily by political circumstances, as is mentioined on the article page, eg anti-japanese cartoons around the time of WWII. Yes, archival copies should be preserved and available where cost is reasonable, but no, these shouldn't be being shown to kids today, who have no interest, and who do have an interest in getting along well with the groups stereotyped in the cartoons. The world has changed, and is much more closely knit across cultures, today modern communication and transport allows movement and communication much more swiftly across cultural boundaries, and it is natural that our cultures have changed to reflect this. -- Sdfijiuefh (talk) 00:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Gremlins, Little Red Riding Hood

I don't think the sections (BTW: how about section headers) about Gremlins or the Little Red Hood don't belong into this article, but in the article about those two topics. andy 12:26, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Bug's Wife

Okey, I remember in the toons that bugs would often mention his wife, whom was basically never seen or had various designs. In the 90s, coloring books & some merchandising had Bugs ocassionally with a girl rabbit named Hunny Bunny. Then years latter Lola came out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.122.193 (talk) 10:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Mascot

To the anonymous user who keeps adding some variation of this paragraph:

For many years, Bugs Bunny was the cartoon mascot for Warner Bros. Studios, appearing in the opening WB logo sequence to every movie and TV show produced by the studio.

Please stop. This is not true, and if you continue to add it, it will continue to be deleted. —tregoweth 01:35, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

You may wish to include in the article that he does appear on the Warner Bros. logo. Watch out for him on certain episodes of Friends! 18:58, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Bugs Bunny's Character

I, personally, view Bugs as the embodiment of the American soul. Blaque Jacque Shellaque being the Frenchman. --anon.

I always thought of Blaque Jacque Shellaque as French-Canadian. His accent sounded that way to me, anyway, but it's been a while. Anyone else remember him?Steverapaport 11:28, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Blaque Jacque is, indeed, French Canadian. See Bonanza Bunny and Wet Hare.

Buzz Bunny

I deleted the reference to Buzz Bunny. Sorry, but he looks so unlike Bugs that no mention of him is warranted in the article IMHO, even if he is being presented as a descendant.Angilbas

I have reinserted mentioned of Buzz Bunny. Please remember this is an encyclopedia for everyone not just for you :-P Although I would agree Buzz Bunny looks nothing like Bugs Bunny the fact remains he was the 'inspiration' for Buzz Bunny as stated by the creators and Warner Bros and is also called by them the successor of Bugs Bunny therefore mention of this needs to remain. Feel free to move it someother place if you feel the location is unsuitable or reword it or even add a bit of discussion about how little Buzz Bunny looks like Bugs Bunny but please DO NO remove Buzz Bunny altogether. Whether you (and I) like it or not, the Buzz Bunny is related to Bugs Bunny and given their connection needs to be mentioned. I came to this article in fact to find out the name of the new character since I couldnt remember and Í had to search the chat to find out which is not good!

Comment by User:68.39.241.199

Someone please fix this article, it says bugs was born on 1940 but later it says he first appeared in 1938. I dont have the information so someone else do it.

1940 is considered his "year of birth" because that is the year A Wild Hare, which was the first short to feature the actual fully-developed Bugs Bunny character, was released. THe rabbits in the 1938-39 shorts are considered prototypes of Bugs. All of this information is already present in the article.--FuriousFreddy 01:09, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Rabbit or hare?

Bugs Bunny is a fictional street-smart gray rabbit appearing...

Isn't he a hare?

He looks more like a hare, I suppose, but hte Warners staff always referred to him as a rabbit. Both belong to the same scientific family anyways (see the articles at rabbit and hare). --FuriousFreddy 13:41, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

The article hare proclaims him to be a jackrabbit, but from behind he looks more like an Eastern Cottontail to me. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 14:56, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I remember read somewhere: "There are many veriaties of different types of animals in real life, but even more-so in animation;" thus, Bugs could be a type of rabbit that doesn't even exist outside of cartoons and still be a rabbit. So long as he's funny, what does it matter?

Since cartoons are often caricatures it is likely features such as ears and tail are exaggerated, so telling the actual species would be impossible. Still i would say he's a jackrabbit because that way both rabbit and hare would be correct.

The first appearance is listed as 'A Wild Hare', although there are also episode titles using rabbit. Elmer Fudd is always "hunting wabbit" but we can't really expect him to get anything right. Personally I prefer hare... someone must know! 88.107.7.168 05:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Why does it matter? As long as he's funny right?--Klaus 20:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Err, he stands on his hind feet, speaks English and is irresistable whenever he dresses in drag. What's this "*could* be a type of rabbit that doesn't exist outside of cartoons" nonsense? Who cares?

Bugs Bunny is typically referred to as either a rabbit OR a hare. For purposes of the gag, he can switch species, even in the same film (i.e. in Rebel Rabbit -- Bugs is upset rabbits only command a $0.02 bounty. A Senator addressing Congress said "that hare must die" and Bugs cracks a joke..."hare - die - Hair Dye! That's a joke, son.") It's a CARTOON -- animation has no rules. 209.254.200.110 (talk) 16:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Technically, he's a toon. What he is, in essence, is a human dressed in a rabbit/hare costume. Anthropomorphized animals are as old as literature itself. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Since

Bugs Bunny and Surrealism

Should be discussed or mentioned briefly. --Daniel C. Boyer 23:22, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Bugs Bunny as a manifestation of LGBT issues in closeted Hollywood

I remember as a kid Bugs crossdressing as a female bunny rabbit and sometimes getting involved with Elmer Fudd. Maybe I'm reading into this a bit too much but could this be a manifestation of a complex issue of LGBT issues in a repressed closeted America in the 1940-1960's era?

I'm not the first to argue this and I remember being exposed to this argument as a kid when watching Rush Limbaugh saying that this theme was hogwash. I tend to disagree...I think that they just don't want to tarnish (or concede LGBT influences) in the creation of an important piece of Americana.

What do you fellow Wikipedians tend to think of the matter? Bugs in drag innocent or something more Freudian underneath (genderbending/bestiality)?

You're reading just a bit too much into it. Crossdressing was a typical comedy stand-by during the first half of the twentieth century. Bugs' crossdressing isn't meant to do anything but make people laugh; he's not representing the suppressed sexualities of Hollywood (because if he did, so would Groucho Marx, Stan Laurel, and several other classic comedians well-known for dressing in drag). --FuriousFreddy 12:04, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm gay, and I tend to agree. Bugs cross-dressing has to be seen in its historical context, which is akin to Some Like It Hot and its drag scene. I imagine that to its juvenile fans, Bugs would probably be seen as playing 'dress up,' without the connotations that adults attach to it. As for current connotations, he is still a he, and never sustains his cross-dressing, which suggests that he is not transgendered per se. User Calibanu 14:09, 11 June 2006.

Suggested influence?

I'm sorry, but that whole paragraph is a bit off. It isn't just animation historians saying that Bugs was influenced from Max Hare; Tex Avery said the same thing in an interview to Michael Barrier [1] and I remember reading that same thing in Chuck Jones's memoirs, Chuck Amuck. I'll look through that and tell you... -JPBlo

I'm sure I remember seeing on a prog somewhere that BB's character was based on Clark Gable. Can't source it yet but if I see it again I'll pop back and provide a reference Miamomimi 07:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Top 50 characters

TV Guide also did a list of all characters; wasn't Bugs hi on it, too? Trekphiler 16:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Ace Bunny

Ace Bunny has a section here, why don't Buster and Baby Bugs Bunny? --Wack'd About Wiki 12:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Buster is a separate character. tregoweth 01:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

New Versions To Bugs Bunny

Bugs bunny is my idol. There isn't another cartoon that even matches up to bugs bunny. What i find completely revulting is the fact that people think they can bring bugsy back to life with new CRAPY versions. It is a disgrace to the bugs bunny name. Some people might like the new “movies”, but if they truly new bugs bunny they would say “ OH MY GOD WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!?” The back in action movie … crap . Space Jam I’ll be a little nicer but everything else should be ripped up, stepped on, and be throne into a fire!

Star Wars spoof

'Can anyone remember the name of the Bugs Bunny/WB characters movie-length feature, aired sometime in the 1980s, that opened Star Wars style?

The opening titles started out:

"A long, long, long, long,

long, long, long, long,"

(there were 48 "long"s)

" time ago, in a galaxy

far, far, far, far, far,

far, far, far, far, far,"

(there were 50 "far"s)

"away"

GBC 07:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Mark Farinas?

What’s the significance of Mark Farinas drawing of bugs? There are plenty of images on bugs in the article without having to resort to poorly drawn ‘fanart’

First True Appearance

User:Mrsanitazier insists that Elmer's Pet Rabbit is the first true appearance of Bugs Bunny. I'm not sure why he insists this is the case, since A Wild Hare contains ALL the elements of Bugs' character: appearance, mannerisms, voice, catch-phrase and is well-recognized in the animation historian community as his first true appearance. Elmer's Pet Rabbit may be the first to formally name the character but that's the only thing it did. Bugs actually reverts to a prototype voice and mannerisms in this short (essentially the same character from the earlier Chuck Jones' Elmer's Candid Camera with an updated visual appearance). I'm not going to undo the edit until we resolve this mini-edit war here. Jeff schiller 15:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, after waiting for four days with nothing from Mrsanitazier, I'm reverting his edits. Jeff schiller 04:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

More on Bugs' First Appearance

This is ridiculous. User:Mrsanitazier made his edits again without discussion or even providing arguments. I'm reverting again. He then removed information about the Bugs prototypes. There is documented (bugs bunny has a skanky wife named Lola bunny, which is why he was banned in some countries -- WHITE POWER!) evidence that Animation historians accept A Wild Hare as the first true appearance of Bugs Bunny. What do you have?

Daffy Duck, Sylvester (Looney Tunes) and Tweety Bird didn't get their names until a few shorts in, should we ignore their universally accepted first appearances? And what about the Goofy Gophers, Marvin The Martian, Michigan J Frog? They NEVER formally received names in the original theatrical shorts, so do they not have a first appearance?!?

Please clear up why you keep insisting that Elmer's Pet Rabbit is the first appearance of Bugs. Jeff schiller 21:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with User:Mrsanitazier that Elmer's Pet Rabbit is the first true apperance of Bugs because it looked and sounded so much like him. So what if "Eh.. What's up doc?" wasn't in it and he had yellow gloves on insted of white? Listen, as soon as I saw Elmer's Pet Rabbit, I said to my dog "Oh my god, that's Bugs!" This is like arguing about how many eyes a person has? Elmer's Pet Rabbit is Bugs' first apperance and that should be final.--Klaus 20:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Is Elmer's Candid Camera the first apperance of Bugs Bunny because Happy Rabbit is just like Bugs Bunny except for the laugh so I'm asking is it or is it not and I'm been changing it to stating the Elmer's Candind Camera is Bugs Bunny's debut. So answer this puzzle. -User: Mrsanitazier

• The books on the subject, as well as the DVD series, consider Wild Hare to be the first true Bugs Bunny cartoon. Elmer's Candid Camera is almost there. Elmer is very similar. Bugs has a different voice and face (like a stereotypical rube), along with that Woody-Woodpecker-like laugh. Baseball Bugs 20:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting theory Baseball Bugs but apparently according to the Warner Bros. Alumni Bugs Bunny first appeared (evolved or not) in Porky's Hare Hunt despite the thory of having a prototype it is no prototype the hare is indeed Bugs . i'm using the quote from the 50th anniversary special where Friz Freleng states that Bugs orignally was screwy leading to a clip of Porky's Hare Hunt.

MrJanitor1 1:06 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Not my theory, but that of the authors on the subject. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy Rabbit removal

I am the one who put forth the suggestion that the article "Happy Rabbit" be removed, but part and parcel of that suggestion was the revising of this article to remove all reference to "him." This character name appears to have been a long-after-the-fact creation of Mel Blanc and no more. Understand, he also contended in his later years that he took over the job of voicing Elmer Fudd when Arthur Q. Bryan died in 1959, but this is demonstrably not true. He voiced Elmer twice during Bryan's life, and not again until the creation of wraparound sequences for compilations of the vintage shorts in the 1970s, TV specials and feature films, which in turn led to a handful of all-new specials. At List of cartoons featuring Elmer Fudd, you can see that Hal Smith voiced Fudd in two shorts made just after Bryan's passing. So, given the deletion of the Happy Rabbit article, I have now removed the name completely from this article, and will do so whenever I encounter it elsewhere. Ted Watson 21:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Ugh, yes. As far as I know, no one from the studio but Blanc has ever used the name "Happy Rabbit" for the early Bugs Bunny. I thought about fighting this battle (to remove the Happy Rabbit article and the references to this so-called character) when I first encountered the article, but I unfortunately have little Wiki time these days. If there's a movement afoot to rub out the little lagomorph, though, I'm on board. Happy Rabbit = Blanc's fantasy. — Amcaja (talk) 22:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The "Happy Rabbit" article started about a year ago [2] by a red-link user which appears to be the one later named (i.e. spelled correctly) "Mr. Sanitizer"). I seem to recall having some issues with him about which cartoon was Bugsy's true debut, but I think we reached agreement. That was some months ago. Maybe you could quiz him about this issue. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I feel the same way as Amcaja, except that most of my Wiki time is spend searching for vandalism. I don't think we should recreate an article for the Bugs prototype UNLESS we at least have an official name for the character. WAVY 10 Fan 16:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should hold off on the "Happy Rabbit" removal for a little while; at least until I can get my investigation sorted out. What I'm trying to find out is whether or not anyone else can contradict Blanc's claims concerning Bugs Bunny's evolution (or any other such statements that present themselves). I'll have some enlightening information to share soon, I'm sure. — Cinemaniac 20:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem holding off. Despite what we discover, we should still at least mention that Blanc claimed in such-and-such source that the Bugs prototype was called Happy Rabbit. If this name is debunked in other sources, we should then go on to say how. This is similar to the old story that Daffy's lisp was patterned after Leon Schlesinger's voice, which I believe is now known to not be true. — Amcaja (talk) 22:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

What's your theory on Daffy's lisp? Blanc said it just made sense to him for an animal with a beak. Daffy's original lisp was not very strong, so it could have been similar to Schesinger's, if it's true that Schlesinger had one. The slobbery lisp evolved over time, it didn't start out that way. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

We've had this conversation before, at Talk:Daffy Duck . . . . :) — Amcaja (talk) 23:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I thought it sounded familiar. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

You and Amcaja both participated in the above Daffy Duck discussion with me, in my old unregistered days—when I was known simply by my initials JS (which was also intended as an in-joke, given the use of JavaScript)—and more recently, we've had a similar discussion at your talk page. I remember the former debate especially well, since it was indisputably the most intelligent and relevatory discussion I ever participated in in my early days on Wikipedia, and it's what ultimately inspired me to become an official editor.  :) — Cinemaniac 02:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Intelligent and revelatory? Wow. We won't let that happen again! But thanks. Even a blind chipmunk (such as I) finds an acorn now and then. It's good that we encouraged you. It doesn't always happen that way here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Porky's Hare Hunt or A Wild Hare?

Bugs has defiantly made his debut in Porky's hare Hunt evolved or not i don't care what all the historians are saying the prototype is defiantly Bugs and warner Brothers even says he first appeared in Porky's Hare Hunt. MrJanitor1 23:23 4, January 2008

MrJanitor1, I notice you've been making changes recently in the infobox concerning Bugsy's debut. Bugs Bunny did not make his first appearance in Porky's Hare Hunt; he debuted in A Wild Hare, which is considered his first appearance by most animation scholars and by several of the key people behind his creation. See my talk page to read a few discussions over this very topic. Thanks, and happy editing! — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 23:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

As Cinemaniac points out above, and as has been pointed out to MrJanitor1 a couple of months ago, the various books on the subject all say Bugs' debut film is A Wild Hare. Everything before that was various experimentation with rabbits, but they were not the Bugs Bunny character. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Where's the citation for what WB supposedly says? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall Warner ever endorsing Porky's Hare Hunt as Bugs's birthdate. In fact, they constantly state on almost every volume of the Looney Tunes Golden Collection DVDs that Bugs Bunny first appeared in A Wild Hare. Also, Chuck Jones and Friz Freleng, two of the key creators of the wabbit, both believe that A Wild Hare is Bugsy's debut. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 02:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You're right. That's why MrJanitor1 needs to find an appropriate citation, otherwise it can't be in the article, even as a footnote. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

In regards to citations, here's a 1970 interview with Chuck Jones, in which he states that "the Bugs Bunny personality has to be started with A Wild Hare." — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 02:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Overall, there are at least three sections that are really on the same topic. Maybe they should be combined into one, chronologically. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I could laugh for weeks but in Looney Tunes 50th Anniversary (for TV) Friz Freleng states that he did debut in Porky's hare Hunt. According to Unusing Maestros: A Directors Tribute Martha Sigil (Warner's ink painter) that after Porky's Hare Hunt Chuck Jones was assigned to direct another Rabbit pitcure and for the third one they redesigned him Charlie Thorson wrote Bugs' Bunny and after the pitcure was released they named the hare Bugs Bunny thus proving my point.

MrJanitor1 18:57 4 January 2008

Glad to see you provide a citation for your viewpoint. However, you might have to take what Freleng said with a grain of salt. After all, in a 1975 Camera Three interview (during which Chuck Jones, Bob Clampett, and Mel Blanc were also interviewed), Freleng states: "Bugs Bunny started off as a rabbit outsmarting a hunter in Tex Avery's A Wild Hare. I'm talking about the rabbit who finally ended up being the popular rabbit. There were Bugs Bunnys prior to that, but they weren't really the same character. They were like Daffy Duck in a rabbit suit."

'Nuff said. A Wild Hare is the best birthdate for Bugs. Tex Avery nailed his character in that cartoon, and the other "Bugses" before 1940 are not self-evidently sane and cool—unlike the Bugs from A Wild Hare. Also, historian Joe Adamson regards A Wild Hare as Bugsy's debut. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 22:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's what Chuck Jones had to say about the matter, in the same interview I referenced beforehand (and one of the earliest of Jones's interviews, by the way):

Jones: There were certain characters who evolved slowly, like Bugs Bunny and Porky Pig. Tex Avery, I think, must be given the basic credit for the character of Bugs Bunny, although there were a few Bugs Bunnys made before Tex's first Bugs Bunny. But Tex was the first to have him say, "What's up, doc?" and give him what you might call controlled insanity, as opposed to wild insanity. Originally, Bugs was very much like Daffy.

Barrier: I've hard that you consider the rabbit in your Prest-O Change-O (1939) the ancestor of Bugs.

Jones: That was one of them. It was made before A Wild Hare (1940), Tex's first Bugs Bunny, but A Wild Hare really set Bugs' personality.

Barrier: You had a cartoon called Elmer's Pet Rabbit (1940), which was released several months after A Wild Hare. It seems to be the first cartoon in which Bugs is identified by name. The Bugs in that cartoon is like the rabbit in your Elmer's Candid Camera, which was released early in 1940, and Hardaway and Dalton's Hare-um Scare-um, which was released in 1939. Both came before A Wild Hare.

Jones: I'm not sure of the chronology, but the Bugs Bunny personality has to be started with A Wild Hare. That and two or three Tex Avery cartoons after that really made Bugs what he was.

For more past discussion over Bugs's evolution, see this discussion at my talk page. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 23:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Headline text

84.42.171.89 a lazy trawl of the net brought up one ref: http://www.gettingit.com/article/456 re:bugs as alien abductee, but seeing as this contribution nis on-topic, i doubt you'll help me out here.

but let's talk about discrimination......

solution to off-topic issues might be to create an entry on em, dontcha think? /chews carrrot/84.42.171.89 16:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)tresroque

Hare or rabbit?

I am puzzled that the cartoons often referred to him as a hare, but surely a "bunny" is a rabbit. Can someone clarify? PatGallacher 10:00, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

It's easier to make puns with the word hare. — Amcaja 08:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Rivals

Rivals need to be visible in the box.

Vandalism

It cracks me up to see that someone would be childish enough to do that. Adults today... *shakes head* when will they ever grow up.SilentWind 01:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The Answer to A Puzzling Question

{Posted by JS on December 4, 2006}---For a good, well-research account of Bugs' evolution, see Michael Barrier's Hollywood Cartoons: American Animation in Its Golden Age. Also, I have a question. In the printed version of the article that I printed out some time ago, it said, "Chuck Jones noted that the Of course you realise this means war! line was taken from Groucho Marx in the classic Duck Soup." I have seen Duck Soup several times, and I don't recall Groucho ever exactly saying that. (He does say, "Then it's war!" several times before the famous war sequence.) In fact, I think that only the ambassador and the officer say that in the film. However, Groucho does quip the line in A Night at the Opera. Am I right about this or am I, as Daffy Duck once sang, working on a broken merry-go-round?

[UPDATE: As it turns out, my question had already been answered shortly before in a discussion on the Groucho Marx talk page. That discussion will be copied below:

No, it was not Duck Soup, actually. I believe it was Night at the Opera. He never uses those words in Duck Soup, though I remember him doing it at a later one. It could also be At The Circus, A Day At the Races, etc. J. M. 07:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

It was not Duck Soup. It was A Night At The Opera. Harpo, Chico, and the strait man (I can't remember his name) had been caught and locked in the brig for being stowaways. They climed down a rope swinging past the porthole and climed into the room of three foreign brother aviators who were sleeping. The three brothers had just flown across the Atlantic or someting like that. The guys took the brothers clothes and cut off their beards in order to sneek off the ship but there is press confrince wating for the aviators. They are asked to say a few words. Chico goes first and says the first time they got half way and ran out of gas so they to turn around and go back. On the second try they were almost ready to land and they reaized they forgot the airplane and had to go back. On the third try they decided to take a boat. Harpo went next. As we know he doesn't speak so he drinks a glass of water. And he just keeps drinking water. Finaly he turns the pitcher of water up. The water causes his beard to come loose. A cop looking for the guys says someting about it and they get upset. They start talking to Groucho in their nativ toung (witch is the audio track being played backwards.) They stom off and Groucho turns the to cop and says "Of course you know this means war."

In a Day at the Races a horn blows (From the racetrack I believe) and Groucho yells "It's war!" He does not yell the exact phrase "This means war!" in Duck soup but there are many similar statements. (Mschonert 02:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC))

In Duck Soup, as I recall, the one who actually utters the words "This means war!" is Ambassador Trentino, just before he storms out in a huff (or a minute 'n a huff). After he has left, Groucho reiterates, "Then it's war!" and several other players echo Groucho. Bugsy's frequently used comment, spoken directly to the audience, "Of course you realize this means war!" was taken from that phraseology in the Marx films, it's just not an exact quote. Kind of like "Play it again, Sam" is connected with Casablanca, although those precise words are not used. Wahkeenah 19:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The preceding discussion was moved here by JS, 70.249.83.41 20:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

"Many other voice actors have done Bugs for various one-off projects when the above were not available"

Can we at least footnote who? -- Zanimum 17:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

"Other Rivals"

Does anyone know the name of the evil scientist who had the strange East-European-like acccent but the stereotypical Asian look? He would throw a bottle of ether at Bugs to slow him down and put him to sleep. I always wondered what his name was. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trewells (talk • contribs) 20:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

He had no name, but his voice was a very good impression of actor Vincent Price, a horror actor who played many mad scientists. CastingCrowns (talk) 12:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Rabbit of Seville

Come on, it's one of my favorites. Fast moving, cross dressing, opera, what more could you ask? Yet, even though Rabbit of Seville can be found in wikipedia, it's not menttioned here.

Other voices of Bugs BUnny

Actually, Joe Alaskey has voiced Bugs Bunny on at least one other occassion after Looney Tunes: Back in Action. Alaskey voiced Bugs once more in the 4-minute short Daffy Duck for President, along with his Alaskey's usual portrayal, Daffy Duck. Daffy Duck for President was released in 2004 on The Looney Tunes Golden Collection: Volume 2, and was reportedly based on the book of the same name, and made in "loving memory of Chuck Jones", who had died in 2002. --- JS, 164.58.96.126 15:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Bugs Bunny's DEATH??

I remember reading an Internet bio over Bugs Bunny, and it stated, rather bluntly, that he "died" in January 2004. This seems plausible, if one remembers the box-office failure of Looney Tunes: Back in Action. This is odd, because I've seen Bugs in several new Flash cartoons on the Web. Furthermore, if this IS true, why isn't it mentioned in the article? --- JS, 156.110.47.73 19:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It's vandalisim that's why, Bugs is alive and well because he, much like most of the Looney Tunes, is immortal User:AKR619 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 03:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

He's as immortal as the celuloid he's painted on. As long as the cartoons exist, Bugsy exists. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you all for responding; previous attempts to get questions answered went unheeded (see above in "The Answer To A Puzzling Question"). In regards to the Internet bio's reliability, I was initially very skeptical (as is evidenced by some questions in previous posting), but, over time, I was lulled into believing its blunt statement of Bugs's death because of recollection of previous "deaths" of Warner cartoon characters like Michigan J. Frog. It's very reassuring to finally find those who help answer that niggling doubt. Thank you, again. --- JS, 156.110.47.73 19:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

There are only two things that can kill a toon: (1) "the dip"; and (2) poor ratings. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Mickey Mouse image??

Why in the world is the Mickey Mouse image in the place of Bugs Bunny's old image? Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny are clearly not alike, except the fact that they are both animated icons. Someone replace it after I delete it. --- JS, 70.250.244.158 18:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Legacy?

I just edited out the Legacy section of the article (although I did move the introductory sentences of that section up towards the top of the page). Reasons:

A) Most of the section's paragraphs were overly long.

B) Much of what was written there has already been covered in other parts of the article; there's no need of such redundancies.

C) The whole section seemed more like a person essay than a section of an encyclopedic article, what with its over-use of fragments and contractions and question marks and rhetorical questions.

D) Moreover, there was already a section over CURRENT POPULARITY, so having a section over Bugs Bunny's legacy seemed a bit unnecessary.

But if anyone disaggrees and proves I was in the wrong (although I really don't think I am), feel free to go back into the archives and put it back. -- Cinemaniac 22:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

No, you were definitely in the right - most of it was copy-pasted from http://looneytunes.warnerbros.com/stars_of_the_show/bugs_bunny/bugs_story.html# --69.181.209.245 14:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Good! I was certainly hoping I was with my first major revision! --- Cinemaniac 19:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

a cameo in a Paramount pitcure

I researched that Bugs Bunny made a cameo in a Paramount cartoon. I don't know if it's a lie but if it says it a Big Cartoon Datatbase says it then it might be true. MrJanitor1 8:27 13 January 2008 (UTC)

It's too vague. Need specific cartoon so it can be verified, especially as it seems unlikely - those were rival studeos. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

okay I read that in a picture called Jasper Goes Hunting where a character named Jasper is hunting. he finds a scarecrow they spot a rabbit hole and its indeed Bugs Bunny saying Eh, What's Up Doc and the scarecrows says Why It's Bugs Bunny and he says Hey I must be in the wrong pcture and dives in the whole MrJanitor1|Sufferin Succotash 16:41 January 13 2008 (UTC)

OK, but just where did you read that? You need to provide the source so it can be verified. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's a source [3] we can cite. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 01:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Bugs Bunny's Real Name

According to "Looney Tunes: The Ultimate Visual Guide" by Jerry Beck (from the DK picture encyclopedia series but under Warner Bros. Copyright), there appears a picture of Bugs Bunny from a 60's comic book where Bugs Bunny mentions that "bugs is only a nickname- - My real name is George Washington Bunny."

I wanted to mention this before I added it to the encyclopedia article. The book's information is here.

Looney Tunes: The Ultimate Visual Guide by Jerry Beck Copyright 2003 Warner Bros Entertainment Inc. DK Publishing Inc Reproduced by Media Development and Printing Ltd.

Can anyone tell me if this is noteworthy for inclusion in the article? Monkeytheboy (talk) 15:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not. It's a one-use joke. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Infobox

In my attempt to rectify contradictions between the "Voiced By" segment of the infobox and the "voice actors" section of the article, I inserted breaks between a lot of the names so that they wouldn't look so cluttered together. Unfortunately, it looks like that really messed up the infobox, as none of the rest of the information from below the "Voiced By" segment will show. Can somebody fix this? I would, but I think I've caused enough damage already. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 05:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

LonelyMarble helped out by cleaning up the infobox some more, as well as providing general cleanup to the article over all. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 01:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

"Bugs' Bunny" dispute

After saying for a long time that the drawing that gave the rabbit his name from the label ascribing the character's effective possession to Ben "Bugs" Hardaway was drawn by Charlie Thorsen, the article now attributes it to Ben himself. However, I just checked the two references, and while the "bugshardawayblogspot" (note 5) does say this, it doesn't strike me as a very good source. The Britannica article (note 6), on the other hand, doesn't actually say this, but is wide open to interpretation as ascribing mere ownership of the drawing per se to Hardaway, which is consistent with other accounts that Thorsen drew it for him. It does state that the note was put on it by an otherwise unidentified "fellow employee" and that it was just a sketch, not a model sheet, and that that was done by Robert McKimson. This is in direct contradiction to many good sources that say it was a model sheet, even though some of those fail to identify Thorsen as its artist. I dispute that these constitute sufficient grounds for attributing the drawing itself to Hardaway here, given the sources that back up the other version. Other opinions?

One other thing: the presence of other reference citations within a quotation strikes me as downright weird. The idea, I suppose, is to present corroboration for the statement quoted, but it is not the quoted person's claimed source, after all, and that is what is implied. Ted Watson (talk) 20:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I fixed the quotation confusion. Seattlechef had broken up a continous quotation with the information he added. I fixed it, you can check the last couple of edits in the edit history. As for whether the drawing was attributed to Hardaway or Thorsen or whoever I have no opinion on that because I have no idea, I'm not an expert on this topic. I have simply been trying to be the mediator because Seattlechef has readded this information a number of times. After looking at the Encyclopedia Brittanica source it does seem to imply it was Hardaway's "casual sketch" or drawing but I understand what you are saying as well. I was simply being a mediator and I have no opinion on the matter, hopefully Seattlechef will discuss his reasons for changing this here. LonelyMarble (talk) 21:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I now see that it wasn't intended for all of that to be part of the quote. Clear now. Ted Watson (talk) 21:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

As I said in a previous discussion, it was Charlie Thorson who drew the model sheet for Bugs Hardaway and labeled it "Bug's Bunny". How this got by me, I don't know. A brief wikibreak would probably be the best solution for me. :) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Why is Happy Rabbit back?

We had a long discussion awhile back (both right here and on Cinemaniac's talk page that culminated in the removal of an article titled "Happy Rabbit" and adding passages here and in his own article that Mel Blanc's claim in his later years that the early Bugs Bunny was a character of that name in his own right appeared to be his personal invention. That passage (the one here only, not the one in Mel B.) has been deleted and a new Happy Rabbit article posted. What should we do about this? Ted Watson (talk) 21:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Until someone messes with it again. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Good work! I apologize for not being able to participate in this latest revision; I've been rather busy in this week, and will remain so until the coming weekend. I see that you two are doing more than a fine job without my assistance, though. :-) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:38, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Possessive of Bugs is Bugs's

Not wanting to engage in a revert war with Baseball Bugs, I note that, first of all, while I included a reference to a respected style manual ("Strunk & White", proper title The Elements of Style) in my revision comments, the only thing "Baseball Bugs" had to say was the bald, unsourced assertion "(No, it's not correct. The s followed by apostrophe, with no trailing s, is correct.)".

I retort with the following reference from the WP:MOS: Apostrophe#Singular nouns ending with an "s" or "z" sound

I appeal to the broader public to decide that I'm right about this. ;-) --Davecampbell (talk) 00:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

When a word ends in s, the possessive form is s'. The extra trailing s is not proper. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Sez you - but while I provide citations for my position, you provide only the bare assertion. Not good enough. --Davecampbell (talk) 22:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, here's one citation: The official title of one of the cartoons: Bugs' Bonnets. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The wikipedia article on the subject - Apostrophe - neither vindicates nor refutes either of us. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The real solution, though, would be to replace Bugs' with Bugs Bunny's. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

As I've said before, does any of this really matter? I mean, neither "Bugs'" nor "Bugs's" is actually incorrect. I think either would work, just as long as it's used consistently. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 01:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Since the usage in English is inconsistent, the best source would be the owner of the character, which is WB. The DVDs and the cartoon titles seem to consistently exclude the trailing "s": Bugs' Bonnets, "Chuck Jones' Wabbit Season Trilogy", Gonzales' Tamales, and "Unsung Maestros: A Directors' Tribute". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Just for the record, the title of a work—expecially of such a comedy short, cartoon or otherwise—is not good support of what is and isn't proper conjugation or whatever (and certainly not in the face of what Davecampbell had already cited). For example, there was a 1950s series starring comic actor Charlie Ruggles, about his (fictional) family, titled The Ruggles. Properly, it should have been The Ruggleses! Ted Watson (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Redundant wikilinks

I was reading this interesting article (which for me, means copy-editing it as well :), and I notice that there's quite a bit of redundant wikilinking herein. Now, WP:MOS says we only link the first instance of a term, but I've got a simple head code (any schoolboy could catch it, Flotsam!) and don't feel like doing it. Maybe somebody who cares about this article might want to go through and remove all the linked terms like Chuck Jones, which seems to be linked on every single appearance (even as simply Jones). Or maybe nobody will do this. I doubt I'll ever notice. :D Nice article, btw, wtg folx. Thanks! Eaglizard (talk) 09:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, User:Baseball Bugs reverted my copy-edits for something to do with vandalism? Or was it more a sense of ownership? I don't care. Most editors seem to find my CE's an improvement, but I'll just leave your article alone, if you like. C'est la vie. Eaglizard (talk) 10:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

No, the problem is that you made changes and ignored the vandalisms from the IP address immediately before. Feel free to add back your appropriate changes. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

My fried, reverting someone's useful edits is not the proper way to deal with vandalism; it just increases the vandal's damage circumference. Telling me I'm free to fix your mistake isn't very helpful, either. Feel free to appropriately deal with the vandalism and improve the article by reincorporating my copy-editing. Or don't. I won't do it; not out of spite, but simply because I just don't feel like it. Eaglizard (talk) 10:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't make any mistake, you did. In general, you need to exercise due diligence, i.e. to check for recent vandalism in an article before adding new stuff, especially when the previous edit was made by an IP or a red-link user. If you care about your new stuff, you can add it back. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, BB, you're wrong. It's not my responsibility to 'exercise due diligence' -- at least, not of the sort you describe. You just made that up, friend. In fact, WP Policy specifically says you bear the burden of not removing valid edits made in the interregnum, whilst removing vandalism. In general, it's your responsibility to (pro)actively avoid reverting good edits (and I assume you don't argue that mine were good, since you haven't argued such). Anyways. Notice how your approach has utterly failed to improve the article one whit? No, I bet you haven't noticed. Well, it's not like I didn't try. It is like I don't care, tho. Enjoy your article, m8. Eaglizard (talk) 08:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Where you say you don't care, I do believe that. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

June Bugs

Will it be shown this year? When and why did they stop showing it? Wikifan4 (talk) 21:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Cartoon Network stopped showing Looney Tunes-related programming in early 2004 — which also caught me by suprise, I must admit. I think, until 2005, Duck Dodgers was being shown regularly, but then it was moved to CN's sister channel Boomerang — so now there's just Baby Looney Tunes. I wouldn't even suggest you take a look at Boomerang, either, since almost all of its LT programming has all but vanished, too. But Duck Dodgers still appears on that channel, though, the last time I watched it. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 00:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

The more I think about, the last time I saw the "June Bugs" marathon was in 2002, if I recall correctly. Bummer. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 00:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, perhaps you should check out Boomerang, since its Wikipedia page claims that "June Bugs" has ocassionally been featured on that channel. I would myself, but it's not a mainstream channel, and I can never seem to catch it when it is momentarily available on my TV. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 00:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Cinemaniac, an off topic comment but, the reason Wikipedia links full dates like January 1, 2008 is that if you go to "my preferences -> Date and time" you can set the way linked dates show so that it could show "1 January 2008" or "2008-01-01", etc., instead of the default way in the article. I just mention this because this is the only reason dates are linked, which is why linking singular years like you did in your replies above (which won't format for preferences) is discouraged unless context specifically warrants it. If you already knew this I apologize but I just wanted to let you know why certain dates are linked and others are not. LonelyMarble (talk) 00:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

No, I didn't know that beforehand; thanks for telling me, LM. : )

And thanks for your work on this article! d:) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 00:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Project Mammals?

Is the inclusion of this article in Project Mammals a joke/vandalism? 206.53.197.12 (talk) 14:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

It's probably just an idiot bot program, like the one that included Wrigley Field in WP:FOOD. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Joke, vandalism, or idot 'bot. I removed the tag. SlowJog (talk) 02:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits to intro

Will someone who is capable of reverting several edits at once please revert the intro? There have been several ill-advised (to put it mildly) edits there (except for Eeekster's removal of a period) that really need to be reverted, but I'd have to undo them one at a time. Please somebody! --Ted Watson (talk) 20:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Based on what I can see, it looks like that problem's already been handled effectively. Sorry I couldn't help out here, but it's been taken care of, Ted. ;-) — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 01:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, i just took a second look and I guess that saying, "...is an animated hare...." shortly followed by "...series of animated films....' was redundant. Sorry. --Ted Watson (talk) 05:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)