HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 31-40

From Homestar Runner Wiki

This is an archive. Please do not add discussion here. Voice your opinion on upcoming featured articles on this page.

---

Contents 1 HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 31 (Jul 28-Aug 3) 2 HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 32 (Aug 4-10) 3 HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 33 (Aug 11-17) 4 HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 34 (Aug 18-24) 5 HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 35 (Aug 25-31) 6 HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 36 (Sep 1-7)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 31 (Jul 28-Aug 3)

How about Lowercase i's? That's becoming a quite large inside joke. Homestar-Winner (talk) 22:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, Lowercase i's would be good. That one has a decent amount of text anyway. MHarrington 18:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll just throw in and support Lowercase i's for this week. wbwolf (t | ed) 05:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems like a pretty good choice to me. Heimstern Läufer 00:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 32 (Aug 4-10)

Since we haven't done one in a while, how about a TGS issue? I'm thinking the first one. MHarrington 18:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I would advise against us featuring TGS 1 for this reason: It's a subset of the email comic. Therefore, it makes more sense to feature that email instead, as it helps show where TGS came from and gives us the first episode.

As an alternative, perhaps TGS 11, since it has a summer theme? Alternatively, we could wait a few weeks and do TGS 4, with its back-to-school theme. Heimstern Läufer 15:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of Teen Girl Squad Issue 11 being featured for this week. TGS as a whole has not been featured enough. wbwolf (t | ed) 05:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, let's just do comic, then, huh? I agree that TGS isn't shown more often, but let's try to save some of the post-tenth issue ones (i.e., Issue 11) for later. Besides, wouldn't it be overkill to have two summer-themed toons in a short timespan, since I proposed Summer Short Shorts at one point? MHarrington 15:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

In agreement. Let's do the email comic. It'll be just like featuring a TGS comic, but this shows where it came from. (I actually didn't know until now) DrPepper42 01:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

If we're going to do techno two weeks before, I don't think we should do another email this week. I don't see any reason we can't do two summer-themed cartoons, but if we don't want to, I still suggest delaying TGS a few weeks and doing Issue 4 (partly because we haven't featured many early TGS episodes). Heimstern Läufer 01:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I say we shouldn't do any more summer themed Featured Articles. If any school people are at all like me (and I know some are), they will be thinking "Aww man, we hafta go back to school again soon!" by August. I think comic would be a good idea. Homestar-Winner (talk) 02:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

And I still say two emails separated by only one week is too many in such a short timespan. Heimstern Läufer 03:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

(KOs colons and throws them into an active volcano) Not really... We have nearly 200 SBEmails total. I doubt that many have been featured. There are more SBEmails than anything else. It's not a big deal. DrPepper42 13:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. I'm surprised we haven't featured emails more often! So we should not complain about having emails close together. Besides, there was one time where was an entire week's worth of Tandy 400 emails, I seem to recall. MHarrington 17:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

That's still only one week, not two weeks of email with only one in between. Heimstern Läufer 04:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to burst your bubble guys, but comic was featured for week 31, 2005. How about the locker room? Hazzard4123 18:05 11 June 2008 (UTC)

But that was actually just an article on the series as a whole. I'm talking about the actual email. MHarrington 18:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

So was I. DrPepper42 00:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. With "comic", we could kill two birds with one stone: we'll do something with both the squad of teenagers of the female persuasion and an email on the part of that guy in the wrestling mask. MHarrington 18:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Since TGS is purposed for a few weeks back, how about an object? Whatsit might be an amusing article to feature... wbwolf (t | ed) 16:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

One problem: The organization of Whatsit is a bit confuzzling and needs a lot of work to be featured. Seriously. So, comic has my vote. Again, seriously. DrPepper42 20:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree on both counts. Please note that, with TGS 3 on the main page this week, comic is more or less out of the question. Whatsit is generally good already, and is a good example of how to avoid an "often appears" article. Heimstern Läufer 05:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree entirely. Whatsit (the article) does not describe whatsit (the thing), only state its apperances inn the Homestar Runner Universe. What about... mini golf! Or crazy cartoon! the first two toon I saw on H*R. DrPepper42 11:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Telling about its appearances in the H*R universe is exactly what an article here should do. That's the purpose of this wiki. We don't need a scientific explanation of its composition (leave that for Wikipedia). Heimstern Läufer 14:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

We really need some fresh opinions here, i.e., opinions from those who haven't already weighed in here, as no consensus is emerging thus far. Heimstern Läufer 00:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey, whatsit is okay with me. The only other thing that I can think of is the Double Deuce. MHarrington 02:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Whatsit it is! No pun intended. JCM 20:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 33 (Aug 11-17)

How about — Psssshhh! — the Double Deuce! MHarrington 05:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking Fonts or Fonts By Toon. Haha. Just kidding. Sadly, those pages'll never make it as a featured article, I'm afraid. Oh, Fonts! I pine for you. <sniff> OptimisticFool 08:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: the Double Deuce We look to already be doing a running gag two weeks before, so I'm thinking not such a good idea (but keep it mind for the future). Opti: Hmm, I wish there were a way to feature one of those, and if I ever think of a way, I certainly will suggest it. It's a really great amount of obscure info, but how to make it featurable I don't know. Heimstern Läufer 04:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, except the two weeks prior, the running gag is of a different variety than the Double Deuce, so no offense, but they should not be exactly comparable. MHarrington 16:48, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, they're different types, but I still argue they're too similar in type to occur so close together. Not to mention that I think it's a bad idea how we have running gags divided into several categories, anyway. Heimstern Läufer 18:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

If we can't have a running gag, how about Drive-Thru Whale? He's starting to become a fairly prominent pseudocharacter....wbwolf (t | ed) 04:55, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that would be sweet. Heimstern Läufer 18:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Go Drive Thru Whale! DrPepper42 18:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I just hope we don't run out of pseudocharacters too soon. MHarrington 17:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Since it's coming out that day, I propose we do Strong Bad's Cool Game for Attractive People. JCM 18:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that's a wonderful idea. — Defender1031*Talk 18:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

It would be very interesting and extremely different from anything we've ever done to feature an article about something completely newly released. I've often wanted to do something like that, and this might be our single best chance, since we actually have content in the article already and it's pretty much something we could feature. One possible disadvantage: if the article is greatly improved after the release, it'd be already featured. Heimstern Läufer 18:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I actually have no problem with re-featuring it in the future if it changes and expands that much. — Defender1031*Talk 18:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I think we should just stick with the Drive-Thru Whale for this week. MHarrington 18:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Any more opinions within the next couple of days so we can reach a solid consensus? Heimstern Läufer 18:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, based on what we've seen here, I think that most people unanimously agree on the Drive-Thru Whale for this week. MHarrington 22:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I would stick with Drive-Thru Whale as well. The SBCG4AP article is pretty well developed, but I think we should hold off, at least for a little bit. My main concern is some of the details currently in there are based on second-hand sources mostly, and it would be nice to clarify points through direct reports. Perhaps when the final episode is released in December...? wbwolf (t | ed) 22:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

MHarrington, I was asking for opinions from those who haven't commented yet, hence the "more" in my sentence. Furthermore, no, it is not even close to unanimous in support of the DTW. Unanimity means no disagreement. At the time I made my request, there was no solid consensus (remember, this is not a majority vote), so I requested outside input, which I'd still like before closing this. Heimstern Läufer 22:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I think we should save SBCG4AP until further updates. BBG 00:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I myself actually say we should take this one time to feature an article of a game that hasn't even come out yet. Or, really, has just come out. It would be neat doing something a bit different, and we'll never get to do it again. Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like everyone has already decided on at least one of those two, but I was thinking because of the Olympics, maybe we could feature the Strong Bad email strong badathlon? Just thrwoing the idea out there. — Acam30 02:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, maybe we could do that one next Winter Olympics, maybe? MHarrington 14:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, the DTW is good with me too. Fine that we chose that one. Homestar-Winner (talk) 17:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, all. If it's a narrow call, with no clear consensus, as in this case, please let a sysop make the decision. It just works better that way. Remember that consensus is not the same as a majority vote, so if there's clear disagreement, it's best to leave it to someone whose job is to determine consensus.

In this case, we had no clear consensus, unfortunately. Had I been the one to make this decision, I'd have had to simply count votes, which I hate doing, but which really was the only way to go. So we'd have ended up with the DTW, anyway. So, no harm no foul this time, but please, let's not call close decisions without a sysop in the future (and especially not by someone who's expressed an opinion in the discussion). Heimstern Läufer 20:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I did anything wrong. I just thought that it was time and this is what everyone wanted, that's all. And I thought there was a consensus. MHarrington 22:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I know you meant well, and the result would have been the same, anyway. But remember that "consensus" is a very strong word. It means there's widespread agreement, and very little substantial disagreement. In this case, there were some strong supports (from DeFender, Hrjcm and HomestarWinner) for something different, so consensus hadn't really materialized. Part of this had to do with the fact that the news about SBCG4AP is recent: it led to a development of new ideas, and when that happens, it's good to give it as much time as possible to see what the reactions to the new ideas are. Like I said, I would have had to go with the DTW myself in the end, so it's OK. It's just one of those things where we need to be careful where there's disagreement, and leaving the decision to those with authority is best. Heimstern Läufer 22:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I also realize now that there's a bit of a discrepancy in what I've said in the past, when I've indicated that I could really use help in making the writeups, yet here I found a problem with that. Perhaps the best solution is for me to make sure all close calls are "called" in advance so we have plenty of time to do the writeup. I welcome further input on this matter, and would suggest that we consider discussing it at this subpage, where I've been working on some guidelines for our procedures here. Heimstern Läufer 00:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 34 (Aug 18-24)

For this week, my option is the Heavy Load. I mean, Lourde. MHarrington 17:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure. That's a good one. -Peter

It's a bit on the short side, but I guess it's workable. And it is an interesting object (debuted with Homsar, after all, way back in the early days of sbemail). Heimstern Läufer 23:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I dunno about this one. Most information in the article right now is either speculations or talking about other weights that look like the weight but are not the same one. Homestar-Winner (talk) 23:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it is too much of that. I've removed what I think was the least relevant info. What's left is a bit on the short side. You reckon we could expand it? Heimstern Läufer 02:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Still, the Monty Python and bilingual labeling part of the article is still speculation. I don't think there is enough actual facts in the article to make it a FA. How about instead we do something completely different and feature the quite popular toon Where's The Cheat?. It's quite long, and it has every main character in it! Homestar-Winner (talk) 02:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:Heavy Lourde: Since no one's stepped in to fix it, I'm going to say maybe not do that one. I do kind of think it'd be nice to do an object, since we haven't featured one in a bit and we feature a lot of toons (in the generic sense; not only including big toons). Any ideas? If not, let's go ahead and do Where's The Cheat (while keeping in mind an object for a future feature). Heimstern Läufer 03:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I got an idea: if we can't do Heavy Lourde, then let's do another object, like the BMW Lighter. That's an object, too. I simply looked at the list of object running gags and I had the idea. MHarrington 18:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Already been featured, I'm afraid. Heimstern Läufer 18:33, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... okay, how about Interactive Menus? MHarrington 19:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I dunno, that one seems a bit lacking in content. Heimstern Läufer 22:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Can we do The Municipality for this week? -Peter

Maybe; seems to have enough content. Heimstern Läufer 15:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

But if we do The Municipality, we should also include somewhere down the line the On Point Kings and/or The Homestarmy. MHarrington 17:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The Homestarmy was already featured, but sure, we could do the On Point Kings sometime. -Peter17:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Let's plan on the Municipality for this week; then we can do the On Point Kings another time. Heimstern Läufer 00:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Just voice my support for The Municipality for this week. wbwolf (t | ed) 05:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 35 (Aug 25-31)

Perhaps a game? It's been a while since we last featured one: week 8 of this year was the last time. Heimstern Läufer 06:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

How about one of the games that Strong Bad dreamed up in the video games email? Any of those would work. Or we could also do Stinkoman 20X6. MHarrington 19:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

We've been delaying featuring 20X6 until level 10 comes out... though even I begin to wonder if that's worth doing anymore. On the one hand, I don't like featuring an incomplete game because the situation is a bit awkward if it ever is finished (do we ever get to showcase the complete game?) Then again, I think it's highly possible the game will never be finished, since TBC seem to have moved on to other things (such as SBCG4AP). Heimstern Läufer 23:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Then let's do the StrongBadZone game. It's one of the games that SB has dreamed up in the "video games" email. And it has a decent amount of text to boot. MHarrington 17:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I like that idea. It also begat one of the better-known H*R phrases, "YOUR HEAD A SPLODE". Heimstern Läufer 17:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest Commandos in the Classroom, as this week is close to the start of school for a lot of people, and would have tons of "OMG! BACK TO SCHOOL FRENZY!" moments. Bluebry 22:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... if we do that, which at this point I'm neutral on, let's see if we can do StrongBadZone not long later, shall we? I can see the value of a back to school article, but we should make sure our heads engsmsplode sometime. Heimstern Läufer 03:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

What about Week 37? It's after the next week. {points down} Bluebry 03:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, "Commandos In the Classroom" is a good one, too. We hardly have ever featured anything regarding the commandos of the cheating variety. MHarrington 15:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 36 (Sep 1-7)

This week would be Labor Day, and since we featured Labor Dabor last year, how about doing the "labor day" email this year? I think it fits, if only weakly. MHarrington 17:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, but I don't think we should be talking about the September featured article in July. JCM 14:16, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Why not? I don't think it's so much what date it's on that counts as how far ahead in terms of numbering thus far it is. MHarrington 14:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I think ten weeks out is OK. More than that is going a bit too far, but ten is OK. Heimstern Läufer 03:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I suppose labor day should be fine. Heimstern Läufer 23:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)