HRWiki talk:Old STUFF

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(General Comments and Rants)
(ditto with Ogog)
Line 23: Line 23:
:I disagree, if disputed fun facts are just put on the Talk page, someone will just put it back with the facts, and then someone else will put it back in Talk, and it will just go back and forth. Unless you mean to set up a voting system in the Talk page. That would be alright, but I think that Select The Usable Fun Facts is better because users will know where to go about disputed fun facts, and if they were just on Talk, they might get overlooked. STUFF seems to be the better system. --[[User:Ogog|Ogog]] 3:00, 22 Nov. 2004 (GMT)
:I disagree, if disputed fun facts are just put on the Talk page, someone will just put it back with the facts, and then someone else will put it back in Talk, and it will just go back and forth. Unless you mean to set up a voting system in the Talk page. That would be alright, but I think that Select The Usable Fun Facts is better because users will know where to go about disputed fun facts, and if they were just on Talk, they might get overlooked. STUFF seems to be the better system. --[[User:Ogog|Ogog]] 3:00, 22 Nov. 2004 (GMT)
 +
 +
 +
:I agree with Ogog.  This has happened to me a few times.  You take an irrelevant fun fact off and then 5 minutes later it is back.  I have also tried posted to the talk page to try to clear up some irrelevant fun facts, but never got a response (see [[Talk:Halloween Fairstival]]). -[[User:Your Fuzzy God|Fuzzy]]
::The talk page is intended to discuss the merits of article content. I would think a discussion is more likely to be overlooked here, outside article space, than with the article itself. -[[User:Drhaggis|[[User:Drhaggis|Dr Haggis]]]] 13:07, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)
::The talk page is intended to discuss the merits of article content. I would think a discussion is more likely to be overlooked here, outside article space, than with the article itself. -[[User:Drhaggis|[[User:Drhaggis|Dr Haggis]]]] 13:07, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)

Revision as of 20:24, 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)

I totally agree. The reason they use the same backgrounds/items/sounds is because it's easier than making a new one. And also,something should only be considered a pop culture reference if it's an exact quote or almost an exact quote. Isn't it possible that it's just a coincidence they're similar?-Miss Free Country USA

  • 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)

It seems to me that even pages like "virus" could have the fun fact voting on its talk page. -Drhaggis 12:18, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)
I disagree, if disputed fun facts are just put on the Talk page, someone will just put it back with the facts, and then someone else will put it back in Talk, and it will just go back and forth. Unless you mean to set up a voting system in the Talk page. That would be alright, but I think that Select The Usable Fun Facts is better because users will know where to go about disputed fun facts, and if they were just on Talk, they might get overlooked. STUFF seems to be the better system. --Ogog 3:00, 22 Nov. 2004 (GMT)


I agree with Ogog. This has happened to me a few times. You take an irrelevant fun fact off and then 5 minutes later it is back. I have also tried posted to the talk page to try to clear up some irrelevant fun facts, but never got a response (see Talk:Halloween Fairstival). -Fuzzy


The talk page is intended to discuss the merits of article content. I would think a discussion is more likely to be overlooked here, outside article space, than with the article itself. -[[User:Drhaggis|Dr Haggis]] 13:07, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)
Personal tools