Editing Talk:Compé-per

== Rename ==
How about renaming this to "No Paper"? [[User:OneGyT|OneGyT]] 02:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:Nah, "Virtual Paper" is far more descriptive. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 02:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
::What about "The Papér" or "Virtual Papér?" {{User:Movie magic man/sig}} 19:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
:::Actually, what Strong Bad called the Virtual Paper in the new e-mail [[dictionary]] was "Compé-per", pronounced "Com-paper"

==Edit war==
[[Image:virtualpaper.png|thumb|400px]]
Which is better?<br>
comment on picture: Looks like Strong Bad's gone the-paperless!<br>and in the body: Strong Bad then customized Virtual Paper's pop-up noise to match The Paper's old "Preeeeow" noise, though the sound quality is significantly lower.

or 

comment on picture: Preeeeow 3.0, with Preeeeow 1.0 downgrade!<br>and in the body: Strong Bad then customized Virtual Paper's pop-up noise to match The Paper's old "Preeeeow" noise.

Opinions would be appreciated {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 03:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:I like it how it is now.  No one ever calls it 3.0, and the downgrade comment is ambiguous.  You can't tell at all it's referring to sound quality. -[[Special:Contributions/128.103.10.135|128.103.10.135]] 03:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
::The downgrade is referring to the custom sound, and the sound quality is no lower than the rest of the old paper's preeeows. The preeeeow 3.0 refers to preeeow 2.0 when SB got the new paper. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 03:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:::Okay, well, that just shows that it is indeed ambiguous in meaning.-[[Special:Contributions/128.103.10.135|128.103.10.135]] 03:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
::::Well, i thought the 3.0 caption was funnier. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 03:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::New Paper's sound was called Preeow 2.0, so VP's noise could be called Preeow 3.0. As for "downgrade", it orginally had it's own sound, but Strong Bad changed it to The Paper's Preeow (or Preeow 1.0), therefore, this could be called "Preeow 3.0, with Preeow 1.0 downgrade". I fail to see the ambiguity. {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 21:03, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::Well, I still like the other caption better. -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.140.193|132.183.140.193]] 21:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Yeah, but we already have [[car|like, a jillion]] other captions that are direct quotes from their picture's introducary cartoon. Why change it to one of these when we already have a (mildly) unique one already? {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 21:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::I personally am in support of the downgrade comment. It's funnier and more original than "Looks like Strong Bad's gone the-paperless!" While I'm all for comments that are quotes from the toons, I think we should use a funnier, more original quip if we can. {{User:Mr_Eyeball}}
:::::::::I'm fine with 3.0, though, as many have said, no one in the Homestar Runner universe has ever called it that so far. I guess it's because I haven't heard [[The Paper]] in years, but comparing a The Paper era-email ([[rough copy]]) to [[independent]], and there is no change in the quality of the Preeeow, as DeFender said. {{User:Soiled Bargains/sig}} 16:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::I still think it's just terribly unfunny, but as the edit summary that changed it back said, majority rules. -[[Special:Contributions/128.103.10.135|128.103.10.135]] 01:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::It would appear as though the "in the body" section is closed. The current phrasing seems to be winning out. I think from here we just need to work on the caption of the picture. This is why we need STUFF, that way we would know whether or not it was a majority rule. My personal opinion is that toon quotes are used so often that they could be a standard. (idk whether it actually is one or not; and yes, i know i've gone against standards before) even if it isn't, we should wait to see if they ever say "3.0" before making that the picture's caption. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 02:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::I say NO WAY to the Preeeow 3.0 thing. We called Envelope Paper Preeeow 3.0, so wouldn't this be Preeeeow 4.0? [[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan]]
::::::::::::::Seeing as the Envelope Paper wasn't a permanant paper, and made no sound at all when it came down, it really shouldn't count as "Preeow 3.0". {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 16:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Surely it's Preeow 1.1 or something... --[[User:Belthazar|Belthazar]] 03:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

==Stub?==
I think this is about as much info were gonna get about Virtual Paper, so is it safe to remove the "stub" template, or are we gonna leave it on for now? {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 21:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Keep it until we get more information about Com-paper like oddities, etc. --[[User:VmKid|VmKid]] 17:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

==Rename?==
Shouldn't this be renamed to Compé-per? Unlike Virtual Paper,it"s actually been said in an email. - [[User:CloneWarrior|CloneWarrior]] 19:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
:I somewhat doubt Strong Bad really named this paper "Comp&eacute;-per", especially since he hesitated in the middle of the [[portmanteau]], added to the fact the entire email's about portmanteaus, I strongly question the renaming, but there's really no sense in getting into an edit war over this. {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 20:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 ::::::::::::::Seeing as the Envelope Paper wasn't a permanant paper, and made no sound at all when it came down, it really shouldn't count as "Preeow 3.0". {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 16:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 :::::::::::::Surely it's Preeow 1.1 or something... --[[User:Belthazar|Belthazar]] 03:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
-:::::::::::::::Again, Preeeow 3.0 makes no sense. NO ONE EVER CALLS IT THAT, and the "Preeow 1.0 downgrade" just roons it. It's like when we called Envelope Paper Preeeow 3.0, until I changed it. Just pure speculation [[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan|Email Checkin&#39; Dan]] 20:50, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 ==Stub?==
@@ Line 39: / Line 38: @@
 Shouldn't this be renamed to Compé-per? Unlike Virtual Paper,it"s actually been said in an email. - [[User:CloneWarrior|CloneWarrior]] 19:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 :I somewhat doubt Strong Bad really named this paper "Comp&eacute;-per", especially since he hesitated in the middle of the [[portmanteau]], added to the fact the entire email's about portmanteaus, I strongly question the renaming, but there's really no sense in getting into an edit war over this. {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 20:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
-::I think Compé-per is as good as anything we've come up with, and more fun than plain-ol' Virtual Paper. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 20:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
-:::I understand that, I just think it might be a pain in the tweeze to rename it again if he calls it by a different name. Can you imagine the headaches we'dve given ourselves if we'd renamed [[The Paper]] "Old Papes'" or "The Man With the Green-and-White Stripes", or created the article [[the paper|Heunh heownh heunh heownh vvvvvt eangt clonk-a-donk]] as the second "[[Preeow]]" sound? We can't just go renaming articles based on one appearence of one nickname in one email. I'd say wait until the time it's called that to rename... but like I said- it's not worth an edit war. {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 20:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
-::::Thing is, "Old Papes" and "The Man with the Green and White Stripes" were both said long after The Paper got its official name. We have no (other) official name for this paper. Thus, the "Comp&eacute;-per" is the best we can do. It's more official than "Virtual Paper", at the very least. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 22:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
-::::PS. If we ever get a real official name for this paper other than "Comp&eacute;-per", we'll have to change and redirect everything anyway. The only extra work we'd have to do is the work we've already done. It'd be more trouble to change it back at this point, ''especially'' if it turns out that "Comp&eacute;-per" is actually the official name. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 22:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
-:::::Yes. Those names above are all clearly nicknames. Since Compé-per is not obviously a nickname, it satisfies our need for a name TBC came up with as opposed to a generic one we made up. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 22:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
-::::::Alright then, I guess we'll come back to this issue when the need arises. Don't get me wrong, it's not like I don't ''like'' this name, I just think we might be opening the possibility of a never-ending name debate much larger than this one if it's given another name- or a nickname. {{User:That_game_dude386/sig}} 14:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
-== strongbad ==
-Is it worth noting that Strong Bad isn't bugged by the Compé-per saying "strongbad", while emails he gets that say "strongbad" like that DO bug him? Maybe, in like, a "Remarks" section?