Talk:Loopy De Loop

Animation: American / Hanna-Barbera Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Hanna-Barbera work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Animated

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Origins of the name

The first thing I thought of when I saw this character's name is that he was named after the children's song that is variously named "Looby Loo", "Loopty Loo", "Loop de loop", or "Luby Loo" (which the US Government has helpfully created a MIDI for at http://kids.niehs.nih.gov/lyrics/looby.htm).

I found an episode of the show on YouTube and the theme music is pretty generic Hanna-Barbera with no particular callbacks to the kid's song, so I'm not sure if there's a significant tie-in here, but it seems at least as plausible as any connection to an aircraft loop-the-loop... .

I do agree the "Loopy"/lupis connection is pretty clever and surely intentional, though.--NapoliRoma (talk) 14:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Racism! Pure evil racism!!!

His exploits would normally get him chased out of town by the very people he had helped, all for no other reason than his being a wolf??? That is a discrimination! Down with all kind of discrimination!!! Everyone are equal! Workers of the world unite!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.196.176.156 (talk) 16:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Loopy De Loop. 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.

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:21, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis section removed - NPOV violation

A few weeks ago I happened upon an 'Analysis' section in the

Critical Theory to a subject not related to this field. Since Critical Theory is a decidedly non-neutral paradigm this was very much out of place in the article on a cartoon bear. I also noticed the section had been removed and re-instated several times with justifications which themselves violated NPOV by claiming that the material was relevant to the subject. I therefore added a note

to the talk page for the article and removed the section with the admonition to justify a re-instatement in some way. The section was re-instated without justification so I removed it a second time, again asking for a justification why this clear NPOV violation should be upheld. Given the strange combination of subject matter - critical theory applied to cartoon figures - I decided to check whether this NPOV violation occurred in other articles, which it turned out it does. Since Wikipedia is not a political action platform these sections have no place here. I will therefore remove the 'Analysis' section with the stated justification. If another editor wants to revert this removal he or she should justify this in some way by explaining why an expression of political activism has a place in a Wikipedia entry on a cartoon figure.

Yetanwiki (talk) 23:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]