Talk:I'm Sad That...
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(→Rename Again: table styles, because... pretty?) |
(→Rename Again: good point) |
||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
:::Okay, so our friend "flying" is back and unchanging. Here the variable is the word "sad". That much is clear. Very close to your proposal. But I would say that this is a different kind of transformation on the original phrase. Here, the prefix is different, and only a single word at that. It's like applying a different function on our original text. But that's why it's a variation. And there's only two of these! | :::Okay, so our friend "flying" is back and unchanging. Here the variable is the word "sad". That much is clear. Very close to your proposal. But I would say that this is a different kind of transformation on the original phrase. Here, the prefix is different, and only a single word at that. It's like applying a different function on our original text. But that's why it's a variation. And there's only two of these! | ||
:::The main functions ignore the "flying" part and just go off and do their own things. So, yes, "I'm sad that I'm flying" is the original phrase that started it all, and it's mentioned as such in the intro, but the running gag itself has deviated way too much from the original to say that "flying" is still '''''the''''' primary component of the joke. It isn't. And it hasn't been since at least 2006. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 01:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC) | :::The main functions ignore the "flying" part and just go off and do their own things. So, yes, "I'm sad that I'm flying" is the original phrase that started it all, and it's mentioned as such in the intro, but the running gag itself has deviated way too much from the original to say that "flying" is still '''''the''''' primary component of the joke. It isn't. And it hasn't been since at least 2006. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 01:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::::Those are some good points. The "I'm sad that"s vastly outnumber the "I'm flying"s, are more elaborate, and have little to do with flying. I'm fine keeping the current title, and edited the intro to elaborate on the pattern I described. And maybe instead of "Appearances" and "Variations", the sections could be titled "I'm Sad That..." and "I'm X That I'm Flying" to be more specific. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig}} 18:43, 13 April 2021 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:43, 13 April 2021
Rename
How about we simply call it "I'm Sad That"? 
That'sBupkis! 01:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed, moved accordingly as he actually doesn't "pause" after the word "that," and even if he did, I'd question that still.
ColdReactive 07:58, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- The ellipsis is not meant to imply a pause here; it's meant to imply continuation. And whatever happened to waiting for consensus? Heimstern Läufer
08:01, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Bleh... move it back if you desire. I won't stop you. Not that I'd care if I got banned here either.... Being banned on UbuntuForums, ReactOS.org, Nuklearpower Forums, hrm... what else could I get banned on -_- ColdReactive 08:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Banned? Certainly not. We don't ban people for things like this. I am going to move it back, though, because we haven't achieved consensus. For the record, I oppose the move to a no-ellipsis version because it's grammatically wrong to just leave a subordinating conjunction like "that" hanging. The ellipsis tells us there's something more to come that will complete the sentence. Heimstern Läufer 08:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- What about an emdash? ColdReactive 08:11, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- {after edit conflict} Continue discussion if you wish. I think the current title is fine, but if others can think of something better, cool. Heimstern Läufer 08:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with Heimstern. This article's title needs some indication that the whole running gag isn't just mentions of Strong Sad saying "I'm sad that", but instances of him saying it, followed by indicating the reason why he is sad. Alternatively, we could move the article to I'm Sad That X to match some of our other articles, although I wouldn't choose that before I would choose the current title. Shine Sprite (complain) 14:49, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also, should we keep the current title, we may want to change the capitalization to I'm sad that..., although I'm not sure if that would be better or not. Shine Sprite (complain) 14:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'd prefer the title stay the way it is (with the elipsis instead of anything else). It's clear, it looks good, so good, what more can you ask for? It could use a more descriptive intro though (such as a little related background info on the character) --Stux 15:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- How about we call it "I'm Sad That I'm X" and put the one from helium in the variation section (Since it didn't say "I'm Sad That I'm flying). Rondleman!
Stuff I did.Talk. 01:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- How about we call it "I'm Sad That I'm X" and put the one from helium in the variation section (Since it didn't say "I'm Sad That I'm flying). Rondleman!
- I'd prefer the title stay the way it is (with the elipsis instead of anything else). It's clear, it looks good, so good, what more can you ask for? It could use a more descriptive intro though (such as a little related background info on the character) --Stux 15:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- {after edit conflict} Continue discussion if you wish. I think the current title is fine, but if others can think of something better, cool. Heimstern Läufer
- What about an emdash?
- Banned? Certainly not. We don't ban people for things like this. I am going to move it back, though, because we haven't achieved consensus. For the record, I oppose the move to a no-ellipsis version because it's grammatically wrong to just leave a subordinating conjunction like "that" hanging. The ellipsis tells us there's something more to come that will complete the sentence. Heimstern Läufer
- Bleh... move it back if you desire. I won't stop you. Not that I'd care if I got banned here either.... Being banned on UbuntuForums, ReactOS.org, Nuklearpower Forums, hrm... what else could I get banned on -_-
- The ellipsis is not meant to imply a pause here; it's meant to imply continuation. And whatever happened to waiting for consensus? Heimstern Läufer
On a T-shirt
Do we mention the Store on these pages? I don't remember. But one shirt in the Store had the tagline "I'm sad that I'm on a T-shirt". --Jay (Talk) 20:51, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Rename Again
It feels weird to me that "I'm mad/glad that I'm flying" are both listed under "Variations", when they all come from the same running gag. In my mind, they're just as much a variation as the rest of the examples on the page. Since each example here is some variation of the original phrase, I propose we move this page to I'm Sad That I'm Flying. Plus, that would solve the ellipses issue discussed above. 
Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 19:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- It doesn't make sense to rename to I'm Sad That I'm Flying since the main running gag also includes: "the item of the week", "on a T-shirt.", "a diaper", "dry-erase.", "trying", "egg whites." and "frying". The ellipsis takes care of all that (as mentioned in the previous discussion). Also note that the category has two more entries with ellipsis. The rest have "X" in them but I think the X is more apt for when the X is in the middle of the phrase or the phrase is super short. The Variations are because Strong Sad isn't sad, but instead "Mad" and "glad". It makes sense that these are variations. I have no issues with keeping the status quo for the page title. --Stux 20:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Renaming it to "I'm Sad That I'm Flying" makes perfect sense, since that's the phrase that all of these examples are referencing. In this phrase, "sad", "I'm", and "flying" are all variables that have been swapped out for different words, but the current title includes "sad" as an essential part of the phrase rather than a variable, and the appearances ("I'm sad that" and "I'm flying") are arbitrarily split up as a result. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 00:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, here's all the items to date in a table (excluding the variations):
- Renaming it to "I'm Sad That I'm Flying" makes perfect sense, since that's the phrase that all of these examples are referencing. In this phrase, "sad", "I'm", and "flying" are all variables that have been swapped out for different words, but the current title includes "sad" as an essential part of the phrase rather than a variable, and the appearances ("I'm sad that" and "I'm flying") are arbitrarily split up as a result.
Prefix suffix I'm sad that I'm flying I'm sad that he's flying I'm sad that I'm the item of the week. I'm sad that I'm on a T-shirt. I'm sad that i'm a diaper. I'm sad that I'm dry-erase. I'm sad that I'm trying. I'm sad that I'm egg whites. I'm sad that I'm frying!
- As you can tell from the example above:
- The prefix "I'm sad that" is unchanged for all examples. This also happens to be the current page title.
- If it wasn't for the second item ("he's flying"), this page's title well could've been "I'm sad that I'm..."
- Of all the items, only two use the word "flying", two rhyme with "flying" and the rest do their own thing
- So, the main variable here is "flying" and it's not just replaced with words, it's replaced with entire phrases. Phrases that have absolutely nothing to do with the original term of "flying". The second "I'm" is a very minor variable with only a single exception to the pattern.
- Now, I excluded the variations before and I did that because I think they need to be treated differently. That's because they are a deviation from the original pattern. In other words, you have a new, different kind of pattern that should be examined separately. Why? Well, let's see these in table form
- As you can tell from the example above:
Prefix suffix I'm mad that I'm flying I'm glad that I'm flying
- Okay, so our friend "flying" is back and unchanging. Here the variable is the word "sad". That much is clear. Very close to your proposal. But I would say that this is a different kind of transformation on the original phrase. Here, the prefix is different, and only a single word at that. It's like applying a different function on our original text. But that's why it's a variation. And there's only two of these!
- The main functions ignore the "flying" part and just go off and do their own things. So, yes, "I'm sad that I'm flying" is the original phrase that started it all, and it's mentioned as such in the intro, but the running gag itself has deviated way too much from the original to say that "flying" is still the primary component of the joke. It isn't. And it hasn't been since at least 2006. --Stux 01:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Those are some good points. The "I'm sad that"s vastly outnumber the "I'm flying"s, are more elaborate, and have little to do with flying. I'm fine keeping the current title, and edited the intro to elaborate on the pattern I described. And maybe instead of "Appearances" and "Variations", the sections could be titled "I'm Sad That..." and "I'm X That I'm Flying" to be more specific. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 18:43, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Those are some good points. The "I'm sad that"s vastly outnumber the "I'm flying"s, are more elaborate, and have little to do with flying. I'm fine keeping the current title, and edited the intro to elaborate on the pattern I described. And maybe instead of "Appearances" and "Variations", the sections could be titled "I'm Sad That..." and "I'm X That I'm Flying" to be more specific.
