Trey56: updated link

Trey56 — Wed, 16 May 2007 03:41:37 GMT

updated link

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:41, 16 May 2007
Line 3:		Line 3:

	=== Evident STUFF ===		=== Evident STUFF ===
-	{{stufffact\|This is currently the only Email of 2007 not to mention [[DNA Evidence]].}}	+	{{stufffact\|This is currently the only Email of 2007 not to mention [[DNA Evidence (running gag)\|DNA Evidence]].}}
	{{stuffdata\|[[looking old]]\|22:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)}}		{{stuffdata\|[[looking old]]\|22:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)}}

Trey56: archived closed STUFF

Trey56 — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:40:13 GMT

archived closed STUFF

New page

{{stuffarchive}}
{{stuffbeginblue}}

=== Evident STUFF ===
{{stufffact|This is currently the only Email of 2007 not to mention [[DNA Evidence]].}}
{{stuffdata|[[looking old]]|22:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)}}

{{stuffargsfor}}

#If there ever comes another 2007 email not to mention it we can just remove it, but I find it notable for now.
#We already note that the Lappy has not DELETED any emails even though it's not dead yet. Any arguments to oppose that?

{{stuffargsagainst}}

#Coincidence. Looking old was the first one of 2007, and the joke started directly after.
#Unnecessary fact.
#It's all based on the calendar. What if 2007 started a month earlier, would we be noting all the stuff that was actually released in December?
#"Currently" facts are rarely worthwhile.
#The proposed fact is only notable with the assumption that TBC intended the DNA Evidence string to be a gag tied to 2007. It seems foolish to me that TBC would plan it that way yet 'forget' to include it in the email in question.

{{stuffcomments}}

*Re: arg for 1: If it winds up being the only email in 2007 to not mention DNA Evidence, then we note it. Not now.
**No, we don't. See arg against #1.
***We ''could'' note it then, as it would be interesting and notable (see the "DELETED!!" fact in [[huttah!]]), but it won't be noteworthy until December rolls around ''if'' it's still true.
*****I agree. Right now, as it stands, it is nothing more than a coincidence. However, if all of the other emails between now and the end of the year have some mention of DNA evidence (and I doubt that they will, because this joke is starting to get a little old), then it really almost has to be noted, because of the length of the running gag.
******Besides, it's not likely that the Brothers Chaps are actually going to follow through with this joke for the rest of the year. By the way HSR looked in [[rough copy]], it looks like the joke will end for good soon.
{{stuffaccept}}

#[[User:Bad Bad Guy|Bad Bad Guy]]
#[[User:Dangeresque, too?|Dangeresque, too?]]

{{stuffdecline}}

#[[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]]
#{{User:Loafing/sig}}
#{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}}
#{{User:Has Matt?/sig}}
#{{User:Jay/sig}}
#{{User:Sam the Man/sig}}
#{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
#{{User:Trey56/sig}}
#[[User:Mycroft.holmes|Mycroft Holmes]]
#{{User:Saddy_Dumpington/sig}}
#{{User:Qermaq/sig}}
#[[User:Flashfight|Flashfight]]
#{{User:E.L. Cool/sig}}
#{{User:Homestar-winner/sig}}
#[[User:Rocket Lobster|Rocket Lobster]]
#{{User:Jangles5150/sig}}
#[[User:ISlayedTheKerrek|ISlayedTheKerrek]]
#{{User:S 2 da B/sig}}
#{{User:Zerlock1124/sig}}
{{stuffendvotes}}

{{stuffend}}

HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/looking old - Revision history

Trey56: updated link

Trey56: archived closed STUFF