HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/Let Us Give TANKS!

Silent Ripberger

From: Let Us Give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• The first time a character speaks seems inherently noteworthy.
• This may be a more useful fact down the road after Ripberger speaks in other toons — when this toon came out, it was surprising to hear him talk because he never had before. But later on, this surprise will be missed if viewers are accustomed to hearing him talk in other toons.
• If seeing Homestar's teeth is notable, then hearing a character speak for the first time should also be noted.
• His mouth is covered, so one wouldn't expect him to speak.

Arguments against:

• This is only Ripberger's second appearance (the first was the scene where all the Commandos walked by during the commercial). This toon has the first scene in which he would have been expected to speak, and he did, so it's not notable.
• Re: Homestar's teeth: Homestar's teeth were revealed after literally hundreds of appearances by Homestar. Hearing Ripberger speak in his first featured appearance isn't even close to the same thing.
• Re: Covered mouth: A covered mouth doesn't prevent someone from speaking, nor should it be expected to. Storm Shadow (a ninja in the G.I. Joe universe) had no problem speaking, and it was only an injury to Snake-Eyes's vocal cords that prevented him from doing so. (See also: YouTube video)
  • Coach Z has no mouth. Yet he speaks. We didn't note in Coach Z's first speaking appearance that he has no mouth, nor should we have.

Additional comments:

• I don't understand the arguments for. Of course it's the first time he speaks—it's practically the first time he's been in a toon. If this were Ripberger's tenth appearance or something and yet only the first time he spoke, then that would be notable, but this is his second appearance, and his first close-up.
  • Well, maybe this fact should concentrate more on the fact that it's his first real appearance. I do feel that there's an element of surprise in seeing him in the toon that will be overlooked after he appears in future installments.
    • That's why we have filmographies. We don't need fun facts saying so, especially when this isn't even his first appearance.
      • Okay, convincing argument.
      • Even if the fact were rewritten to be "This is Ripberger's first real appearance," that's still not notable, as Blue Laser Commander's reaction to his being at the dinner makes that obvious, and a fun fact explaining it would be explaining the joke.
• We have a similar fact regarding Reinforcements in Commandos in the Classroom. Why would it be notable there but not here?
  • We should STUFF that one then as well.
    • Actually, I was planning to delete the second half of that fact depending on how this vote turned out.
      • Is the first half of that. that Commando in the Classroom, is the first toon to feature Reynold. all that noteworthy either?
        • No, but for different reasons. Commandos in the Classroom is not the first 'toon to feature Reynold. His first appearance was in Cheat Commandos (the same as all other Cheat Commandos) and his first animated/speaking with his own voice appearance was in Shopping For Danger (the first full-length Cheat Commandos 'toon anyway). I wouldn't be opposed to such a fact in SFD, however.
• Someone added the argument against: "This is Ripberger's first animated appearance", but this isn't true. Ripberger appeared in the "preview" segment in Cheat Commandos with the main Cheat Commandos (twice, actually.)

[ Back to STUFF index ]

It's that guy! That has that gun!

From: Let Us Give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• It's noteworthy that Gunhaver has finally clearly lived up to his name.

Arguments against:

• We have already seen Gunhaver's gun. The fact that BLC hasn't is not notable.
• This fact explains the joke too much — most viewers will probably infer the content of this fact from BLC's comment.

Additional comments:

• The bit about the Commander seeing the gun could be dropped. It doesn't change the overall fact too much. The fact is mostly of him being depicted with it for the first time.
• The wiki already mentions that Gunhaver holds his gun for the first time in this toon on his page, so we probably don't need to make two references.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Civvies

From: Let Us Give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• Facts in the form "first one except that other one" are not notable.
  • Yeah, but Reynold practically is a Cheat Commando.
    • It still sounds just as awkward.

Additional comments:

[ Back to STUFF index ]

First first name

From: Let Us Give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• This is not a notable first; there is no reason to expect a second instance of this same thing.

Additional comments:

[ Back to STUFF index ]

A holiday classic!

From: Let Us Give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• This is not a notable first.

Additional comments:

• Re arg against 1: It's notable, but not on the article.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

X-haver

From: Let Us Give TANKS!
Posted on: 04:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• Blue Laser Commander's use of Gunhaver's first name suggests that there was once a friendly relationship between the two of them.
• Because the X-Men movies are so well-known (and the third one came out recently), it is likely that TBC were aware of the resemblance between BLC & Gunhaver and Magneto & Xavier when they chose Gunhaver's first name to be Charles.

Arguments against:

• The only similarity is the usage of the name "Charles" by an arch-foe. Without more evidence, this is not conclusive.
• We also don't actually know that Gunhaver's first name is Charles, or, for that matter, that his last name is Gunhaver. Gunhaver may be a nickname, or "Charles" may be his last name, or it could just be an inside joke going over all our heads, or something like that.
• What if TBC were just being random and the first thing that came to their heads was "Charles"? Jumbo/LARGE was like this too and I quote: Not everything is something.

Additional comments:

• Maybe some DVD commentary someday will prove this true, but until then, there's not enough to go on.
• This is a tough call. If we keep it, it's speculation, but the question is whether it's reasonable speculation based on strong similarities. For now, I think the connection is strong enough that it's worth keeping, even if there's a chance it's not true.
• If it's not too much, can the reason (He called him Charles) be included in the proposed fact without a revision?

[ Back to STUFF index ]