Talk:Jibblies Painting

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 02:39, 2 November 2007 by Dementedc (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

I think that we have all we know about the painting. I think we can remove it as a stub. Rogue Leader / (my talk)

  • The stub has been removed.
  • This is both scary and funny. It kinda creeped me out to think of it, but it instantly made me laugh. Espeacialy when Strong bad got the jibblies.


The recent QotW has a file name of "rocoulm"... you suppose that signifies anything? Like, is that its name? --Shadow Hog 23:00, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I've been wondering that myself... It seems fairly random, but I bet it means something. I just can't, for the life of me, work out what. --DorianGray
That could be a scary name. Or maybe it stands for something. Hopefully we haven't seen the last of our shadowed, er, friend. — It's dot com 23:15, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Although slightly hard to pronounce, it sounds a tiny, tiny bit like 'Gollum', who bears a slight resemblance to this creature. The thing in the painting is sitting on a rock... Maybe it's a mishmash of 'rock' and 'Gollum'. Of course, this is all speculation... If we don't see more of it soon, maybe we can add it to that list of questions we'd like to ask the Brothers Chaps someday. --DorianGray
I added this question to Thunderbird's list. —THE PAPER PREEEOW 01:51, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I was gonna do that myself... I just figured I'd wait a little. Well, better to add it now than to forget to add it later. --DorianGray
Well, the XML file names this guy "Rocoulm." The same happened with 1-Up - we weren't sure if 1-Up was his name or not (since we were basing this on the XML file at the time), and bam - there, in the game, is 20x6 Homestar under the name 1-Up. I think we should trust the Weeklies XML and rename this guy "Rocoulm." —Gafaddict Image:Gafaddict sigpic.gif (Talk | Contribs.) 16:48, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Agreed. This is most certainly the painting's name- Camalex(talk) 16:54, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I agree too. But he'll always be 'The Horrible Painting' to me. --DorianGray

AGREE: Yes, it's most logical. He is now knowen as Rocoulm! H * R 7 0 0

Well, ummm, should we move the page? - Camalex(talk) 17:22, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I don't think we should move the page. I think the note It's dot com put up will suffice. We don't know whether is name is actually "Rocoulm" or if that is an abbreviation for something else (like 1-Up isn't actually "1up", and The Homestar Runner is not "oldhomestar"). Homestar Coderhomestar-coder-sig.gif 19:42, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I concur, until we get something that proves his name is Rocoulm (what we have now is just speculation) the page should still be 'Horrible Painting'.The Pardack
(P.S. He always did remind me of Gollum)
Jibblies 2: "The Rocoulm" appears on the Painting's tarot card. - 23:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Should we call the actual demon "Rocoulm" and give him his own page? Homestar is apparently in there for "eternity". Should we make this page just about the painting itself? StrongBadFan99998 03:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't think there's enough info to make separate subjects on the two. --DorianGray 03:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The painting is the painting and Rocoulm is the subject of the painting. Rocoulm has become a character in himself and therefore deserves a page as a character, and the Horrible Painting is both a significant object as a painting, and it has become a place, so clearly it deserves a page. Whether or not this can/should all be fit on the same page seems to be the question, and I vote for separate pages with an explanation at the top of each, i.e.:
This article is about the the painting itself. For the character, see Rocoulm. OptimisticFool 17:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Image Invasion

How many images do we really need on this page? Seems a little overkill to me. OptimisticFool 17:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. They overwhelm the reader. And also, the one on the bottom left has a capitalization error in the caption (I don't know how to fix that). Dementedc 02:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Personal tools