# Talk:A Folky Tale

(Difference between revisions)
 Revision as of 22:46, 23 August 2005 (edit) (First time?...)← Older edit Revision as of 22:47, 23 August 2005 (edit) (undo) (→First time?...: Resigning that)Newer edit → Line 203: Line 203: == First time?... == == First time?... == - Is it just me or is this the first time there've been two full-length cartoons released a week between? Certainly that's notable... --[[User:Shadow Hog|Shadow Hog]] + Is it just me or is this the first time there've been two full-length cartoons released a week between? Certainly that's notable... --[[User:Shadow Hog|Shadow Hog]] 22:47, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Physics

If the laws of physics are the same in Free Country, USA as they are on the real earth, then the rope is only about 10 feet long.

If i dare to reveal my ignorance, can anyone explain/elaborate? And evidently, the rope is NOT 10 feet long as Strong Sad cannot see Homsar holding it Then again, since when does physic apply around Homsar? -Ghilz

The time it takes a pendulum to swing back and forth is the same regardless of its weight or density. It only depends on the strength of gravity and the length of the pendulum. So since the rope takes about 3.4 seconds to swing back and forth, it should be about ten feet long. But this fact keeps on being deleted, so it's probably not important. -Eman
It's really not important how long the rope is, especially since you can still see the tops of the trees. — It's dot com 05:07, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Strong Sad doesn't say he can't see homsar; He just says that he is "concerned about what that rope is attached to." Wouldn't you be concerned if Coach Z told you to climb a rope held up by homsar and nothing else?

I should point out that the rope's center of mass should be at ten feet. The rope is therefore 20 feet long (assuming uniform density). Also, by counting ten periods while looking at my clock, the rope swings every 3.7 seconds, not 3.4 seconds which means it's 22 feet long if you trust some extra significant figures. Hooray for my first contribution!

## The mayor and Dancing bros.

Where should we catagorize them? I like the Dancing bros. enough to make a page about them, but the mayor is just a guy.. with ... a job..?--Adamlw 04:20, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'm am doing the Dancing Brothers, but I don't think an article about the mayor is a good idea. User:Rogue Leader.sig 04:22, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Agreed--Adamlw 04:22, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## The Elephant Man

May I add something about the realationship with how Puppet Homestar said that he looked like the elephant man on the DVD Puppet Stuff? --Martin925 04:36, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

does it take two or three times to be mentioned as an inside joke? it depends on that i think--Adamlw 04:38, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

After research i think that the elphant man is obscure enough to be classified as an inside joke...--Adamlw 04:39, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

So, then what should I do? BTW, thanks! lol --Martin925 04:41, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

The elephant man hasn't ever really seemed obscure to me... Maybe to other people though. But all the same, in those two different contexts, it doesn't seem like an inside joke to me. If there was yet another reference to the elephant man after this, then I'd call it safe to classify it as an inside joke(or more appropriately, a running gag). --Der Pepper

So can I put it in that homestar said it too atleast?--Martin925 20:35, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to link Saddy Dumpington in the inside references section.SparkPlug 04:40, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Saddy Dumpington's already linked at the top under Characters. Crystallina 04:42, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Roger. Sorry! I'm just excited to be helping a little bit with the new toon.SparkPlug 04:44, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

^^I feel the same way. I'm trying to find something I can do!!! lol --Martin925 04:45, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Shut up. --Der Pepper

Der Pepper, comments like that will get you banned. — InterruptorJones 18:59, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Should we title the link as Saddy Dumpington (toon), or Saddy Dumpington. I prefer the latter because wherever the link is, people will be able to presue by the text that it is a cartoon.SparkPlug 04:48, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Saddy Dumpington is already an article about the character.--Adamlw 04:49, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I know that, but I talking about using the | thing in the link. I've seen it before for toons.SparkPlug 04:51, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I vote we should hold off on the desicion until it is on the toons page and then make the visible part of the link say whatever the toons page says.SparkPlug 05:05, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

And now we know, "A Folky Tale." So much for that. --Der Pepper

## Article Name

Why is this article not called "The Folky Tale of Saddy Dumpington"? That's what's on the title card. — It's dot com 04:50, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I think the page should be moved as soon as the title appears on the 'Toons page (which it hasn't yet). --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 04:53, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree. I won't be surprised if that above is the full title. — It's dot com 05:08, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
"A Folky Tale." I was close. — It's dot com
I agree with Dot com on this one. Why is the article named the way it is? -- tomstiff 19:02, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
As "A Folky Tale," this is how it appears on the Toons menu. The question was asked when this page was called "Saddy Dumpington (toon)." --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 19:11, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
D'oh! I'm not going to the main site enough! Thanks for clarifying! -- tomstiff 19:13, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I do believe it is on the Toons page now! --Thechamp 19:15, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Side issue: Should "The Folky Tale of Saddy Dumpington" be a redirect? I guess I could just make one, but... meh. — It's dot com 19:19, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## lol

I laughed my butt of at Jargle.. anyone else? Beuler?

## Folk Tale World

I created the page Folk Tale World i'm bad at writing whole articles, so anyone be my guest.

Shouldn't this be more properly called "Folky Tale World" or "Folky Tale Town"? -- tomstiff 19:22, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Ropes and Dopes

I'm not sure if the "ropes are for dopes" comment should be kept in the remarks section (at least how it is). Although when people start a story with a quote, the quote is in the story, that is not always true. Maybe it should be in trivia. -SparkPlug 05:16, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

It seems like a remark to me. I find it odd that he used the quote as a transition to tell his story and then never mentioned it in the story itself. He used "passing out for the rest of their lives" to transition back to the rope. — It's dot com 05:35, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Rope-a-Dope

All this talk of ropes and dopes makes me think of Ali's "rope-a-dope" strategy vs. George Foreman. -- tomstiff 05:32, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Homsar's line

Any idea what Homsar is saying? The best I can make out is "I dazzle men," but that's only a guess. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 06:00, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Did he say something about a "mayor?"
It's possible. I'm pretty sure I hear a "dazzle", at the very least, but it's hard to tell. I know he's saying something and don't feel right leaving it as "{muffled speech}." --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 06:31, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure he says "I'm a climbable man..."--Adamlw 06:43, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

First I heard "I'm a rectangular man" (Which is lined up cinely with his hat) But now it's more like "I'm a (something)able man". Elcool (talk)(contribs) 09:53, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Someone just suggested "I'm a powerful man!" At first, I deleted it. After listening more closely, I'm pretty sure that's it. I put it back into the transcript that way. -- tomstiff 14:08, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Maybe next week's QotW will reveal all! ;) -- tomstiff 14:10, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Sounds to me like "I'm a talented man. - Lord-Z
Either "I'm an admirable man" or "I'm a climbable man" is what I think. -Eternal
Looks like someone changed it back to "muffled". Obviously we're not hearing the same thing. Any bets that next week's QotW clears this up? -- tomstiff 15:37, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Only if TBC are going to read this talk page... Elcool (talk)(contribs) 15:43, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I personally think it's "I'm square with the man", kinda inspired by the way his hat moves. I guess we really can't say though.. Heh. -Mick

I think he says "I'm an honorable man" but climbable makes sense. - Ju Ju Master doesn't have weird squiggly things on this computer.

I think it might be something about Dazzle-Mazing, which could be a reference to Happy Fireworks.

I always heard "I'm hardly the man." -Kvb

## Martbell

Could this be some nod at Art Bell? Those weird "dancing brothers" sure fit in with that hypothesis.

Haha or maybe not. I just wanted to have this on here because that's what it made me think of. 64.164.69.221 11:36, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Old Intro?

When Saddy Dumpington walks through the field and is silhouetted by the sun, could it be a reference to Old Intro 2? Should I add this to Inside References or STUFF or what? I'm new at this. - Eternal

## Jargle=Gargle?

Another instance of "G-pronounced-J"? -- tomstiff 16:12, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. It seems to be a mutation of the word "jargon." —BazookaJoe 16:15, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Jargon? I've heard "gargle" used in the sense of "nonesense" or "gobbledygook". -- tomstiff 16:19, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Look?

I don't know if my speakers are broken or what, but I hear something different for Strong Sad's first line. It sounds ambigously explicit to me. I certainly don't hear "Look," as indicated on the transcript, and I seem to hear a bit of an F sound. Does anybody else hear what I (kinda) hear?

If you're implying what I think you're implying, then no. TBC have made it clear that any language more foul than "crap" is not to appear on homestarrunner.com. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 17:14, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
PS. Maybe you're hearing the "S" at the end of Coach Z's "times" (which is ungrammatical, but Coach Z makes the very same mistake earlier in the same line, so...) --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 17:19, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Are Infintesimally Small Imperfections Really Goofs?

I think it's a very bad idea to set the precedent that very very small color differences are somehow goofs worth noting. I'm sure if we looked hard enough, we could find numerous "goofs" of that sort in every single cartoon. It's my opinion that goofs worth noting involve continuity mistakes in either the story line or gross features of the artwork, not some miniscule color differences in a tiny 50 square pixel area of the frame. -- tomstiff 18:30, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I dunno. This one I find kinda interesting. TBC have been making toons for a while now. They're not what you would call novices. They have the tools and the talent to get it right at this stage of the game. It's not like those old Scooby-Doo cartoons. You know, where the trap door stands out because it's painted in a slightly different color of blue from the rest of the floor. In that case, the door and the floor were created using two completely different means, so it was almost impossible to get right. In the case of this toon, however, getting the color right should just have been a matter of selecting the eyedropper tool and choosing the background. I do agree with you that we have to draw a line somewhere, though. — It's dot com 18:38, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Here's a description of the alleged goof: "the green is only 1/128 different. I had to zoom WAY in to be sure of this." Apart from being a good observation, is this really this level of "perfection" that we should expect from H*R? -- tomstiff 18:40, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I don't think we expect perfection (what we expect is beside the point). The fact is that it should have been one color (#007E00), and instead it was another (#008000). That's the very definition of a goof. The difference is ever so slight, true, but once it's pointed out, it's very obvious, at least to me. This project is a complete chronicle of H*R. I think any fact should be included that is so easily verifiable. — It's dot com 18:50, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I understand what you're saying. I think we both agree that there is a limit to what should reasonably be noted. I just happen to think that this one lies outside that limit. I'm a little concerned that this'll set a precedent that'll send all the 12 year-olds off combing every frame at high-zoom looking for "goofs". ;)-- tomstiff 18:58, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Wait, can you STUFF a goof?-- Bkmlb(talk to me·stuff I did) 18:47, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Yes, goofs can be STUFF'd. But if we do, we need to be careful. We need to make it absolutely clear that the decision on this fact has the potential to set precedent, whether we accept it or decline it. Another possibility would be to have a discussion in a more central location, like HRWiki_talk:Standards, to decide just where the line on goofs should be. — It's dot com 18:54, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

This is not infintessimally small. It's not blaringly obvious, but it's clearly visible without zooming in if you know to look for it. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 19:17, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

And relating to this, I didn't even have to look. It's obvious to anyone sailing their eyes about the screen, and I know I was sure of the error without zooming in for a better look. Even if one doesn't see the green, the imperfection in the line, as well as the discolouration, is easily noticed. It's not infintesimally small, as was said, it's rather obvious that there's a discolouration in line and lawn. And relating to the Scooby-Doo point, yes, there may have been a more brightly coloured trapdoor against a darker floor, BUT both shades were not present on either object of the two, whereas here we have what should be an outright solid fill, interrupted. Suicune64 20:12, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Hay!

A new toon! Is it good, I have yet to see it? -Thechamp 18:46, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Champo.. The HR Wiki-ers were all over thsi toon like white on rice... It was up for 10 seconds before the page started to take form.. in the matter fo 3 hrs. it was done, waiting for an official title... I was amazed.. It was like a bunch a little carpenters building a skycraper in like 5 minutes...--Adamlw 18:51, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

What the bleep are you talking about? I just saw it and the statements you made make no scence? Whater you speeching aboot?

## Coach X? Coach Y?

Any thoughts on Coaches X and Y? Could they be related to Coach Z? Will we hear of them again? --Smileyface11945 19:29, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Knowing TBC, I expect to see some sketches or cameo appearances in the future. —BazookaJoe 19:27, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## Title Screen

Yes, there is one, and this is it.-- Bkmlb(talk to me·stuff I did) 19:48, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Title Screen
Is that really the toon's title screen, or the title screen of the beginning of Saddy Dumpington's toon? I think it is the latter, making it not title screen to the toon, and also making this big toon titleless.
Yes, it is. The rope climbing bit is only an intro to the Saddy Dumpington 'toon; Saddy Dumpington is the true star of this one. It's a cold open. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 20:17, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
The real debate is if it is a cold open or not. I don't believe it is, I believe the toon is Strong Sad telling the story to Coach Z, and not the story itself. I believe this because of the commentary on the story (The Dancing Brothers for example).
Even if you don't consider the cold open to be a cold open, the fact that there may be no title shown still isn't that notable. None of the last three big toons have had credits to speak of. TBC seem to have moved away from full credits for a while (probably won't be until Halloween until we see any again, if then). — It's dot com 21:54, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## The Lake

It might be just me, but when I saw the lake in this toon, it reminded me of the pebble lake from peasant's quest. I'm not sure if we should really put it in there though.--Martin925 20:38, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

## I heard him

I thought I heard Homsar say "I'm the lyrical plan" Did anyone else? -Kinsey

## new page?

Should we have a page on that girl in the beginning?

## First time?...

Is it just me or is this the first time there've been two full-length cartoons released a week between? Certainly that's notable... --Shadow Hog 22:47, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)