Talk:Main Page 24

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 02:19, 25 July 2007

Regular outfit

Can we really say that "this is one of only five main pages to have Homestar in his regular outfit, size, and style" if his shirt can change? — Has Matt? (talk) 14:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

We can say "this is one of only five main pages to have Homestar in his regular size, and style"?--Kanjiro talk 19:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

That applies to most main pages, though. Not just five. DEI DAT VM^┌_{datvm center}\^{super contra}_┘

Blurry shirt

When you roll over "Store" to put on the glasses, the logos on any of Homestar's shirts are still blurry.

When I put the glasses on, Homestarrunner's shirt is still blurry. Is anyone else having this "problem" 71.108.174.149

See the Goofs section. 24.147.211.129

This happens with all of his shirts, the ducky, the star, and the Peacy P.

I'm not sure this is a goof - I think this is an intentional joke. It seems a little odd that EVERYTHING else would be sharpened except for the shirt. User:Compdude

Agreed -- I laughed. 86.136.81.173 19:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

This especially makes sense when you consider that TBC blurred out the "Olympic Man" shirt in the last TGS episode, and the blurred out Peacy P shirt here also refers to that same TGS episode. Compdude

This was put into STUFF for some reason but it doesn't belong there; it's patently true, so the question is where, not whether, to note it. Seems like it would be fine just to put it in the list of buttons. — It's dot com 20:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The "Fila" shirt gives it away. It must have been intentional. Not a goof. Loafing 20:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too. Trey56 20:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be a real world reference then? 71.108.174.149

Yup, Fila's mentioned in Real World References. Trey56 22:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

What about the whole blurring-logos-to-avoid-copyright-infringement joke

nekkid?

For the Downloads button, the article currently says "Strong Bad walks through the Field", but doesn't elaborate much. Then under Remarks, it says "Strong Bad is seen with underwear". I looked at the Main Page in question before reading the article, and I'm pretty sure that Strong Bad is naked. It would make sense, since everything's blurry, it forms a sort of pre-emptive censorship that's being exploited to allow SB to wander around in the buff. I personally can't see any color difference between his chest and where his underwear should be. After all, the Remark goes on to mention that "he claims he doesn't wear them", so where's the evidence that he's wearing them now? - Ugliness Man 20:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Put the glasses on by rolling over "Store". It will then become clear. :) — Has Matt? (talk) 20:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

He's clearly naked flesh-tone when blurred, when the glasses are put on, he's wearing underwear. That's the joke - you see he's naked, but there are underpants when the glasses are on. 208.60.233.132 22:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

That would work, except for the fact that being able to use the "glasses" to see the other events unblurred is a Flash artifact, and it's hard to say whether or not it's strictly intentional. -YK 00:32, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

No, you're crazy. he has the underpants on when its blurred. someone decompile it and prove me right, but i'm still right. -JamesDean 23:49, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Cardgage

Are the glasses the same shape/size/style as Senor Cardgage's? If so we may be looking through his eyes. -- 208.60.233.132 22:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, they aren't. Would've been cool though! -- 208.60.233.132 23:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

They do appear to be similar to Mike's, though I would not note that on the article. Too "spec"ulative (pun happily intended!). - Qermaq - (^T/C)  02:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Underwear!

Strong Bad said that he does not wear underwear in New Boots. But he is clearly seen wearing underwear in this main page. I'm gonna put that as an inconsistency. ^Super!Santana^Duper!

It's currently listed in Remarks. Good memory, though! Trey56 23:04, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I did put it on the inconsistencies article if that is alright.

The Weeklies

The Weeklies do appear blurred to me. ^Super!Santana^Duper!