Talk:History according to Strong Bad

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 15:27, 12 March 2007

History according to Strong Bad is a featured article, which means it showcases an important part of the Homestar Runner body of work and/or highlights the fine work of this wiki. We also might just think it's cool. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute.

Still Not Funny

Might old comics and The Castlefunnies fit in here, since it was supposedly a newspaper strip that ran 60+ years ago? There's even a fun fact on it being of debatable continuity... --DorianGray

Cheers! Any updates are greatly appreciated. Thatanonnywhocan'tbestuffedgettinganaccount, 6:50 WST

Unnatural

Could unnatural count because of its plothole concerning the Kashi?

Don't think so. We could actually see all this happening. The Kashi bit fits just fine on the inconsistancies page. --DorianGray 00:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The talk page for inconsistencies settled once and for all that it should only include inconsistencies that span at least two toons. Bad Bad Guy 00:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Conjecture

I think we really need a conjectural title tag for articles like this. Here are some good examples of them from Wookieepedia and Super Mario Wiki. Conjecture tags improve the professionalism and credibility of fiction wikis immensely, and users may be turned off by articles using unofficial terminology without warning. Thanks, and great article, by the way. — Darth Katana X ( ) 17:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

You're referring to the fact that the name of this article, Strong Bad Lore, is a descriptive term we invented to describe the content of the page rather than something taken directly from the original source. This is true. However, the title is not conjecture per se. Maybe something like "This page describes a phenomenon or theme within the Homestar Runner universe. The title of the page is descriptive only." — It's dot com 17:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. A conjecture tag may still prove useful for articles, though. — Darth Katana X ( ) 18:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Title change

Strong Bad Lore sounds like a fanon term and I think Strong Bad's Lore would be better grammar. Would anyone mind if I moved the page? Thanks, the evil, dead — Darth Katana X ( ) 15:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm in favor of that new title. Anyone else? kai lyn 16:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Me. ^Sam_{Fisher (Come in, Lambert.)} 14:41, 8 March 2007

I strongly oppose. It's a perfectly fine title. Loafing 20:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the title could be improved upon altogether. Based on the definition of lore, it just doesn't seem like the right word to describe this page. Granted, "Stuff Strong Bad made up that's probably not true" is a little cumbersome, but is there something along those lines that would fit better? — It's dot com 20:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

How about renaming it to something like Strong Bad Fiction or Strong Bad's Stories? Sounds simple enough. Okay so I'm still not 100% happy with those, but perhaps they are better than lore. --Stux 21:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I like Strong Bad's Stories. And what makes it "perfectly fine," misguided Loafing? Misleading readers into thinking something you made up is an official, canon Homestar Runner term is "fine"? Or are you assuming The Brothers Chaps will find the name so funny, they incorporate it into the actual show universe (don't want to get blocked by Loafing for not calling it what he calls it)? — Darth Katana X ( ) 10:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

"Lore" isn't a good title... I noticed this even while I supported featuring the article. I don't really love Strong Bad's Stories; Strong Bad('s) Fiction sounds a bit clearer and more encyclopedic to me. If I could think of some more encyclopedic term for "wild made-up tales", I would suggest that. Heimstern Läufer 18:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

How about "Strong Bad's Tall Tales"? I don't like the constant capitalization at all, though, because it makes it look like an official term when it's not (for example, saying "[random capitalized name for an occurance here] is often seen in the..."). I'm not referring to in the article title, by the way. — Darth Katana X ( ) 03:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I like fiction. It perfectly demonstrates the title in an encyclopedic way, and in my opinion, Stories, Tall Tales, and Lore are a little more... unprofessional. Bluebry 03:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

But we don't know if it's all fiction. --Trogga 03:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

True. And while it may be stories and tales (Tall tales? No. Tales? Yes. Tails? Sonic is awesome.), it's definitely not lore. However: Do we have any proof other than Strong Bad's word that it ISN'T fiction? We can't assume it's fiction, and we can't assume it's nonfiction. Anyone got any neutral, encyclopedic-sounding titles? Bluebry 04:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

"History According to Strong Bad". — It's dot com 04:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I like it. It's neutral, pretty professional sounding. Anyone object? Bluebry 04:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I like it too — it sounds professional, and it doesn't place a true or false judgment on his stories. Trey56 04:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I like that too. Really straightforward. — Darth Katana X ( ) 08:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure, good by me. Heimstern Läufer 08:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Sixth'd for History According to Strong Bad Dr. Clash 03:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

"History According to Strong Bad" — ^Sam_{Fisher (Come in, Lambert.)} 10:28, 11 March 2007

Moved. — It's dot com 02:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Good jorb. Nicely overhauled and looks like it's free of any grammatical issues like "this is a good example of history according to Strong Bad." Keep up the good work, y'alls. — Darth Katana X ( ) 14:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

looking old

Can we count the sect of monks that closely guards his secret age? Bad Bad Guy 06:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Probably. — Darth Katana X ( ) 08:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Most likely, but it seems more like a joke than a story, or tale, or a history. Plus, we can't add every single little joke we think might be untrue. Bluebry 15:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I think this may be one issue with the title "history according to Strong Bad." That sort of destroys the possibility of adding relevant possible truths presented by Strong Bad such as this one, as they do not reflect anything historical. Before the title change I would have definitely voted on the looking old thing, though Bluebry is right that adding such could cause flooding, since this is such a recurring thing. — Darth Katana X ( ) 14:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

As I wrote in the article's history page, TrogdorCon doesn't feel historical either, so I think either we keep both or we remove both. Bad Bad Guy 15:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)