Can the likes of Yogi and Paddington really be classed as a teddy bear? They are supposed to be a real bears and could perhaps be be better described as anthropomorphic bears, unlike examples such as Superted, Lotso and Winnie the Pooh who are clearly based on toy teddies or are supposed to be toys come to life. Dunarc (talk) 18:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

I am aware that is an extremely belated reply, but yes... I agree. Yogi etc. should be weeded out. Will try to do so soon. Jellyman (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I do not understand this purported distinction, which was executed in here in March as "Removal of "non-teddy bear" bears." The lede of Paddington Bear says, "Michael Bond based Paddington Bear on a lone teddy bear he noticed on a shelf in a London store near Paddington Station on Christmas Eve 1956," which makes Paddington seem like a teddy bear, yet he was removed. And Winnie-the-Pooh#Origin tells us he was ultimately derivred from a real-life bear, Winnipeg (bear), so there is a real bear origin. The edit seems inconsistent with both of these.

And more problematically, these removed bears still invoke this template, even though they do not appear in it.

But really, I think this template probably appropriately includes both "anthropmorphic bears" (whatever that means) as well as real bears (whatever that means) as well as fictional bears. I know I was puzzled when reading the Pooh article that I could not find a link to Paddington, so that argues for over-inclusivity.

It is my intention to revert the above edit and restore these bears. jhawkinson (talk) 22:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done. jhawkinson (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Should Grizzly, Panda, and Ice Bear from We Bare Bears be listed under Fictional teddies? YSG (talk) 03:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)