HRWiki talk:Old STUFF
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(Starting to get on the wrong foot here...) |
(Comment/Formatting) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
==General Comments and Rants== | ==General Comments and Rants== | ||
| - | I'm glad that we are finally addressing the crap fun fact issue. Whenever one sees the text "this may be a reference to...." it should just be cut. Not even voted on. If we don’t know, its not a fact. Speculate elsewhere. | + | *I'm glad that we are finally addressing the crap fun fact issue. Whenever one sees the text "this may be a reference to...." it should just be cut. Not even voted on. If we don’t know, its not a fact. Speculate elsewhere. |
| - | And we shouldn’t confuse '''running gags''' with '''references'''. When [[The Cheat's Head Exploding| The Cheat's head blows up]], or there is a new game title in the [[Floppy Disk Container]], those are running gags. When Strong Bad overtly mentions the email [[tape-leg]], that’s a reference. When something appears in the background from another toon or email, that is not a "reference". Nor is the reusing of sound effects a "reference". -[[User:Drhaggis|Drhaggis]] 16:02, 21 Nov 2004 (MST) | + | :And we shouldn’t confuse '''running gags''' with '''references'''. When [[The Cheat's Head Exploding| The Cheat's head blows up]], or there is a new game title in the [[Floppy Disk Container]], those are running gags. When Strong Bad overtly mentions the email [[tape-leg]], that’s a reference. When something appears in the background from another toon or email, that is not a "reference". Nor is the reusing of sound effects a "reference". -[[User:Drhaggis|Drhaggis]] 16:02, 21 Nov 2004 (MST) |
| - | :I agree. A true classification system such as the one you present needs to be drawn up. This would help with the problem of internal Homestar Runner references. Do you think something similar would also aide us with external references to real-life things as well?[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]] -- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 16:30, 21 Nov 2004 (MST) | + | ::I agree. A true classification system such as the one you present needs to be drawn up. This would help with the problem of internal Homestar Runner references. Do you think something similar would also aide us with external references to real-life things as well?[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]] -- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 16:30, 21 Nov 2004 (MST) |
| + | |||
| + | *When does a funfact become accepted or declined? After x votes? After x voting days? This is a great start, but it lacks structure. I think we have two days of voting. Comments/Suggestions/Did I not read something?-[[User:Your Fuzzy God|Fuzzy]] | ||
== Starting to get on the wrong foot here... == | == Starting to get on the wrong foot here... == | ||
Revision as of 19:09, 22 November 2004
Things to do
- Where do rejected fun facts go?
- I think they just get deleted, gone for good. -Drhaggis 16:02, 21 Nov 2004 (MST)
General Comments and Rants
- I'm glad that we are finally addressing the crap fun fact issue. Whenever one sees the text "this may be a reference to...." it should just be cut. Not even voted on. If we don’t know, its not a fact. Speculate elsewhere.
- And we shouldn’t confuse running gags with references. When The Cheat's head blows up, or there is a new game title in the Floppy Disk Container, those are running gags. When Strong Bad overtly mentions the email tape-leg, that’s a reference. When something appears in the background from another toon or email, that is not a "reference". Nor is the reusing of sound effects a "reference". -Drhaggis 16:02, 21 Nov 2004 (MST)
- I agree. A true classification system such as the one you present needs to be drawn up. This would help with the problem of internal Homestar Runner references. Do you think something similar would also aide us with external references to real-life things as well? -- Tom 16:30, 21 Nov 2004 (MST)
- When does a funfact become accepted or declined? After x votes? After x voting days? This is a great start, but it lacks structure. I think we have two days of voting. Comments/Suggestions/Did I not read something?-Fuzzy
Starting to get on the wrong foot here...
First off, I'd like to revise the terms used for voting. Rather than "delete/keep", we should use "decline/accept" because we should mostly be voting on new fun facts, which brings me to my next point: already somebody has posted an item for little animal, which is an old e-mail with very few fun facts. I think it'd be preferable to move the disputed item to the Talk page in that case. We don't want to get more bureaucratic than necessary, that is, this page is meant to be here for pages that need it.
Of course, we don't have to do things my way. I'm just communicating my original intent. - [[User:furrykef|furrykef (Talk at me)]] 07:22, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)
