Talk:Lack of Visible Arms
From Homestar Runner Wiki
AbdiViklas (Talk | contribs) (his word against theirs) |
(→Page Title) |
||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
:Looking at my most recent list, I like "No Visible Arms." It gets the point across, it's easy to remember, and it works for both completely missing arms and arms that are just invisible. Plus, it can be worked into a fun fact: "This is another reference to Homestar's having [[Invisible Arms|no visible arms]]." — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC) | :Looking at my most recent list, I like "No Visible Arms." It gets the point across, it's easy to remember, and it works for both completely missing arms and arms that are just invisible. Plus, it can be worked into a fun fact: "This is another reference to Homestar's having [[Invisible Arms|no visible arms]]." — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC) | ||
::I'm for "No Visible Arms". {{User:Kookykman/sig}} | ::I'm for "No Visible Arms". {{User:Kookykman/sig}} | ||
- | :::Yeah, that's a good solution to all sides. —[[User:AbdiViklas|AbdiViklas]] 23:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC) | + | :::Yeah, that's a good solution to all sides. — |
+ | ::::I'm going to move it in about 5 minutes if there's no objections. {{User:Kookykman/sig}} | ||
+ | [[User:AbdiViklas|AbdiViklas]] 23:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC) | ||
== Homestar's perception == | == Homestar's perception == | ||
Note that just because clearly Strong Bad and Strong Mad are of the opinion he doesn't have arms doesn't prove it for sure; that's ''their'' opinion. Homestar seems to think he does. This could be Homestar being delusional, or one could argue that he ought to know best. Seems to me this is similar to the pants issue—he maintains he's wearing pants although others disagree. —[[User:AbdiViklas|AbdiViklas]] 23:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC) | Note that just because clearly Strong Bad and Strong Mad are of the opinion he doesn't have arms doesn't prove it for sure; that's ''their'' opinion. Homestar seems to think he does. This could be Homestar being delusional, or one could argue that he ought to know best. Seems to me this is similar to the pants issue—he maintains he's wearing pants although others disagree. —[[User:AbdiViklas|AbdiViklas]] 23:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:32, 17 October 2005
The King of Town also doesn't appear to have any visible arms (nor does the Prince of Town in flashback), but no direct reference is made to this.
Contents |
He just gave me the bird!
- Homestar flips Strong Bad off, and Strong Bad reacts as if he can see it.
I think the joke in the bird was that Homestar "flips off" Strong Bad by responding "right back at you" to Strong Bad's Single Deuce, as if he didn't even need to flip a hand. Understand? --Sam Goldfish 22:31, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- ...Actually, you're right, I think. --DorianGray
Pic?
Which do you think we should use for this article's picture? I'm for Homestar's "arms" from fingers.-Kookykman(t)(c)(r)
Page Title
Invisible Arms? I don't think that Homestar, Marzi & KOT have arms at all. I think it's some kind of force field or something. I mean, the fact about time capsule (Homestar holding three things at once) was already declined on STUFF because the majority of people here think it's not clear that Homestar has arms as such. Can we get a better name for this page? And perhaps remove that dubious fact? Homestar Coder 23:06, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- How about "Ambiguious Arms" or simply "Arms"? Kookykman
(t)(c)(r)
- I don't like just "arms" because this page is actually about lack of arms. Say, how about "Lack of Arms" ;) Homestar Coder
23:08, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- "Lack of Arms" has the same problem that "Invisible Arms" has. Namely, it assumes as fact one of the possible explanations for the situation. (I admit I chose "Invisible Arms" because that's the camp I'm in. Is there something (besides just "Arms") that is more neutral?) — It's dot com 23:10, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I did propose Ambiguous Arms earlier... - Kookykman
(t)(c)(r)
- "Ambiguous Arms" is a step in the right direction, although something about it (maybe the alliteration?) doesn't sound quite right to me. — It's dot com 23:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, the alliteration kind of threw me off, too. *looks up synonyms* "ambiguous, cryptic, dark, darkling, deep, enigmatic (also enigmatical), equivocal, inscrutable, murky, mysterious, mystic, nebulous, occult." Not a good list. - Kookykman
(t)(c)(r)
- How about "Vague"? - KieferSkunk 23:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, the alliteration kind of threw me off, too. *looks up synonyms* "ambiguous, cryptic, dark, darkling, deep, enigmatic (also enigmatical), equivocal, inscrutable, murky, mysterious, mystic, nebulous, occult." Not a good list. - Kookykman
- What about "Extremities"? Homestar uses that term in the DVD commentary in time capsule. :) - KieferSkunk 23:18, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- That has the same problem as just "Arms", though. :P - Kookykman
(t)(c)(r)
- Yeah, "Extremities" doesn't really address the adjective problem. How about "Missing or Invisible Arms"? "The Arm Situation"? "No Visible Arms"? "How the Crap Do They Pick Stuff Up"? — It's dot com 23:21, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- "Vague Extremities", then. :) - KieferSkunk 23:22, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- That has the same problem as just "Arms", though. :P - Kookykman
- "Ambiguous Arms" is a step in the right direction, although something about it (maybe the alliteration?) doesn't sound quite right to me. — It's dot com 23:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I did propose Ambiguous Arms earlier... - Kookykman
- "Lack of Arms" has the same problem that "Invisible Arms" has. Namely, it assumes as fact one of the possible explanations for the situation. (I admit I chose "Invisible Arms" because that's the camp I'm in. Is there something (besides just "Arms") that is more neutral?) — It's dot com 23:10, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't like just "arms" because this page is actually about lack of arms. Say, how about "Lack of Arms" ;) Homestar Coder
I say "Arms?"—with the question mark. —AbdiViklas 23:23, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Looking at my most recent list, I like "No Visible Arms." It gets the point across, it's easy to remember, and it works for both completely missing arms and arms that are just invisible. Plus, it can be worked into a fun fact: "This is another reference to Homestar's having no visible arms." — It's dot com 23:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
AbdiViklas 23:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Homestar's perception
Note that just because clearly Strong Bad and Strong Mad are of the opinion he doesn't have arms doesn't prove it for sure; that's their opinion. Homestar seems to think he does. This could be Homestar being delusional, or one could argue that he ought to know best. Seems to me this is similar to the pants issue—he maintains he's wearing pants although others disagree. —AbdiViklas 23:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)