I noticed that our use of the word "Grouch" throughout the wiki is mixed when it comes to capitalization of the word. Is the word "grouch" a proper noun? In the sentence "Kermit is a frog", you do not capitalize the "f" in frog; and in the sentence "Telly is a monster", you don't capitalize the "m" in monster; so I would think that in the sentence "Oscar is a grouch", the "g" in grouch would also not be capitalized. Which sentence is correct:

1) "The most famous Grouch is Oscar the Grouch but many other Grouches have surfaced over the years."
2) "The most famous grouch is Oscar the Grouch but many other grouches have surfaced over the years."

Of course when the word is part of a character's name (like "Oscar the Grouch") it would be capitalized (just as the "Frog" in Kermit the Frog is or the "Monster" in Telly Monster) but when talking about the general species is it also capitalized? I just want to make sure we are consistent throughout the wiki. -- Brad D. (talk) 22:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I think I read in Unpaved that grouches are a distinct species, so I would follow what we do for anybody else (Kermit the Frog, Fozzie Bear, Rowlf the Dog, Sam the Eagle, Herry Monster, Cookie Monster, Big Bird, Little Bird, etc.): capitalize their species in their name, but use lowercase when we say "(Character) is a (blank)". -- Ken (talk) 01:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
We've generally been capitalizing them, following the precedents set by Fraggles, Doozers, Snuffleupaguses, Twiddlebugs. and other fictional species or races. In particular, Grouches are closer to an ethnic group or a nationality (Hispanics, Scots, etc., which are always capitalized) than an animal grouping like rabbits or frogs (the same could be argued for monster but in general they've had less of a distinct culture until recent years and fits more along the lines of saying "Bob is a person.") So it makes sense to me to follow that rule for all made-up races, though "grouch" as an adjective surfaces the most and I can see how that could be confusing or look strange (and unlike the others, "Grouch" was also a pre-existing word, but the Muppet world alters and expands the definition). Looking through my book collection, the print sources are equally inconsistent, which isn't too surprising since we fans tend to place more emphasis on such things than the writers, authors, and performers did at the time (though on a related note, they do seem to capitalize Fraggles, Doozers, and Snuffleupaguses).
The Sesame Street ABC Book of Words from 1988 considers Grouch to be a proper noun (on a page with other nouns like goose and gorilla), but The Sesame Street Riddle Book doesn't. Big Bird's Busy Book capitalizes it in all of Oscar's craft pages, whether used as a noun or adjective, but books like A Day in the Life of Oscar the Grouch and Oscar's New Neighbor have it in lowercase, and so on. Several potentially useful sources like How to Be a Grouch capitalize all text. It's lowercased in The Sesame Street Dictionary, but there it's accompanied by the formal definition as "someone who complains a lot," not a distinct group of living beings with their own physical and cultural differences. uses "Sesame Street's resident Grouch" in its Oscar character page (the same way one might use "visiting Frenchman" or "stereotyped Jew" and so on) and does the same in the Season 39 presskit ("a Grouch illness that causes everyone to stop sharing") and the Season 37 kit ("A cast of Grouches put on the musical 'Scramalot.' Unfortunately, their musical numbers are frequently interrupted by the Grouches' inability to rhyme.")
My own opinion, since the sources are inconsistent (but right now, Sesame's websites and press materials favor the capitalized form), would be to continue capitalizing it as we have the other fictional races/species, and which is how it already is on most pages (with lowercase uses being fixed as we find them). So, it would be "Oscar is a Grouch," "The Grouches are having a party," "Elmo looked at the Grouch painting," etc. Though per the note right below, common sense also suggests "Oscar is particularly grouchy today" (since it's an established adjective and used to denote mood more than anything, where "Grouch" as an adjective is used like Dutch, British, American, and so on). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 02:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits by GrouchMan

Some (but not all) of the recent edits by GrouchMan have not been constructive to the article, and he seems to be restoring them after I change them back. I will list some examples here and why I disagree with them.

  • If you check the history, several commas have been removed from this article, as well as in Episode 3037 and Episode 4160. I've put them back where I think they belong, and pointed this out on his talk page.
  • "... who prefer to live wherever there is trash-trash cans, ..." - a hyphen inbetween the two uses of the word, "trash-trash" makes it look like its own word. Also, the more synonyms we have for "trash," the better the article will look.
  • "A Grouch's mission in life is to be as miserable and Grouchy as possible" - there doesn't need to be a capital G on the word "grouchy" - it is an adjective, not a noun.

I am not trying to discourage anyone from editing, but I notice this has turned into an edit war of sorts, so I hope this discussion of the problem helps resolve it, and that it will help users understand how to make proper edits. --MuppetVJ 19:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

User:GrouchMan has been making a mix of helpful and strange edits all over the grid. I've opened up the door for communication with him, so I hope to have some feedback soon. In any event, I agree with your reversions and I anticipate we can take this out of timeout soon with or without his response. —Scott (talk) 21:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I've blocked the user for three days for ignoring the concerns opend up for discussion on his talk page. Feel free to take this out of timeout and revert back to the good version. —Scott (talk) 16:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I would've responded to those concerns if I knew how to edit the talk page of an article. --T.J. (talk) 13:57, February 12 2009 (UTC)
(Note, this user has gone off and started Grouches Wiki. That'll fly.) -- Zanimum 22:53, November 2, 2010 (UTC)


Grouches are such an important part of Sesame Street culture; and I think this page needs some work. This could be fun project. I can envision this being akin to Snuffleupaguses, The River, and others. I'd like to see this become an in-depth look at the Grouch culture and phenomena (more than just some lists). I'm no Grouch expert, nor do I have many good Grouchy resources, but I'm sure some of you could do it. -- Brad D. (talk) 05:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.