Contents

Talk:The Oregon Duck

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Oregon Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. stateofOregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical). Disney Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies 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.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mascot of the year?[edit]

Question: Didn't the Oregon Duck win mascot of the year in 2007 and 2008? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.237.45 (talk) 05:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why mention a bleacher report article? In case the author of the this page is unaware anyone can write a bleacher report article which substantially tarnishes its reputation as a legitimate news source. Remove that section of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Streetballer510 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the common (I believe misguided) belief that the Oregon Duck is actually named Puddles, someone with more definitive knowledge than I should probably add a section about this controversy-- a lot of fans will get really persnickety about it, but there is not much out there commenting one way or the other. I common hear that Puddles was a live mascot, and that it is false attributed to the current mascot, however finding legitimate sources to back up or contradict this claim is a challenge.ibleedorange14 (talk) 08:23, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an authoritative article on the topic (UO Athletics Department)

http://www.goducks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=500&ATCLID=153778

Summary, Puddles was their live mascot from the 1920s - 1940s. The current mascot is "The Duck," sometimes referred to as Donald Duck.

I'm not going to edit the main page myself however, since it would involve inserting a reference, and I have NO experience at editing.

Psychogeek (talk) 22:39, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree that the current mascot's name is not Puddles, and the bit about the real duck named Puddles is in this article. However, a lot of media and fans DO call it that colloquially. I don't see any problem with including that moniker in the list of AKAs in the lede. I have reverted the term when used in other contexts. Someone could certainly expound on it more. --Esprqii (talk) 00:31, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and removed it from the lede and bolded the name "Puddles" futher down. I swear this article is what has caused the problem... It's probably original research to state that the current duck mascot is never ever called "Puddles" officially. (To up the WP:OR ante, I'm an alum and a native Eugenian and I've never heard him called that.) But the UO is very serious about its branding so its possible there is a guideline about this somewhere that can be cited. On the other hand, I'm not sure it's necessary to reinforce the fact that the current Duck is not "Puddles" and that Puddles was the live mascot only. On the third hand, I'm sure we can come up with some examples of the term being used in the media. Being somewhat loyal to my alma mater despite recent events, however, I don't plan to do anything about this, because I think talking about it in the article will just make matters worse. Let's let sleeping ducks lie. Valfontis (talk) 18:08, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]