HRWiki:Main Page Talk Archive 22

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Main Page Talk
Archive

1 (1-20)
2 (21-40)
3 (41-60)
4 (61-80)
5 (81-100)
6 (101-120)
7 (121-140)
8 (141-160)
9 (161-180)
10 (181-200)
11 (201-220)
12 (221-240)
13 (241-260)
14 (261-280)
15 (281-300)
16 (301-320)
17 (321-340)
18 (341-360)
19 (361-380)
20 (381-400)
21 (401-420)
22 (421-440)
23 (441-460)

24 (461-480)
25 (481-500)
26 (501-520)
27 (521-540)
28 (541-560)
29 (561-580)
30 (581-600)
31 (601-620)
32 (621-640)
33 (641-660)
34 (661-680)
35 (681-700)
36 (701-720)
37 (721-740)
38 (741-760)
39 (761-780)
40 (781-800)
41 (801-820)
42 (821-840)
43 (841-860)
44 (861-880)
45 (881-900)


Contents

[edit] RC problems, sort of...

I would post this on the Recent Changes talk page, but that's nonexistent, so anyways, I run Firefox 2.0.0.5 and if I load the main page and click on Recent Changes, a window pops up saying "You have chosen to open 'Recent Changes'...which is an 'application/octet-stream' What do you want to do with this file?" And I get two options, "Save to Disc" or "Open with..." (which to that I click "Cancel ;). It's really annoying, but is this actually a fixable problem or am I just going to have to deal with it? --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 19:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot to mention, for people who use Firefox, it's a basic download screen. --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 19:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
It sounds like for some reason Firefox thinks that the PHP used with MediaWiki is a program (that's what it means when it says application/octet-stream). My first suggestion would be clear your cache (Preferences -> Advanced -> Network). If that doesn't solve the problem, you might want to see if the file association is messed up. Go to the Content tab in Preferences and click on the Manage button under File Types. If PHP is listed there, delete it. Last resort would be to locate the cache or preferences and delete them manually; the file might be corrupt and that's why it is giving you the strange result. wbwolf (t | ed) 00:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
You know what, that happened to me once. I uninstalled Firefox and reinstalled it and it seemed to work. But only do that if Wbwolf's advice doesn't work. --TheYellowDart(t/c) 04:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Clearing my cache seemed to work, but waiting is definitely the best remedy here. --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 05:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection?

I just realized. How do we protect pages from being edited? Couldn't we stop User Page vandalism if the User could just protect his/her page? --Super!SantanaDuper! 19:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I have already suggested this and been shot down. — DeFender1031*Talk 19:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Protecting those pages would be possible, but it wouldn't solve anything. There are several rare but legitimate reasons for a non-sysop to edit someone else's user page, and there's no reason to remove that functionality just because some people can't play nice. Besides, just about all vandalism is detected and removed quickly. If we protected the entire user namespace, then there would just be more vandalism in the other namespaces. — It's dot com 19:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not everyone likes the site

So could you please change the comment? 124.180.174.141 11:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Which site and which comment? Loafing 12:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

We're currently working on 2,860 articles about our favorite Internet cartoon.

(I think that's it...) DEI DAT VMdatvm center\super contra 12:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
"our" refers to the wiki community. If you don't like the site, you're not part of the community and thus the statement doesn't apply to you. — DeFender1031*Talk 16:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Seriously, if you don't like the site, just don't visit it. It's not that hard. You don't need us to fix something you can easily fix yourself. Like non-Starbucks cafes may carry a "Best coffee in town!" sign. That doesn't mean EVERYONE IN TOWN considers their coffee the best in town. The "our favorite Internet cartoon" is just like that. Everyone on the Internet does not mutually agree that homestarrunner.com is the best site on the Internet. But it is very popular (and a favorite among this site), so we keep this banner.
Also, please do not tell us to fix your problems for you. Instead, refrain from visiting the site you seem to dislike. It's not that hard, we're not extremely popular.
If you MUST have it removed, I'd suggest getting Firefox and Greasemonkey and programming a simple user script to simply remove that line. Here's a good tutorial. It should be enough.
Furthermore, if you dislike Homestar Runner, I see no reason as to HOW you found this site. I dunno about you, but I don't go googling fansites of webtoons I hate. Bluebry 18:11, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Bluebry, stop feeding the troll. — DeFender1031*Talk 18:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, I wouldn't say they are a troll, DeF. Bluebry 18:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Just like this anonny wasn't a troll? — DeFender1031*Talk 18:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
You got trolled pretty good, there, dintya, Fender Stratocaster? 76.200.147.236 04:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
No this guy's nicer. Bluebry 18:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't think so. — DeFender1031*Talk 18:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
First off: He's said two sentences, and used "please". Second off: Argument over, we're just spamming Talk:Main Page with a useless argument. Bluebry 18:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stupid DNA evi-dence

Is it necessary for us to note in every single Email of the DNA evidence running gag that its DNA scene is revisited in the DNA Evidence toon? To me it's almost like going to each of the first 124-160 Emails and noting that each email is revisited in rock opera and/or 160 Seconds. I feel like removing that note from every Email that does not receive another notable reference (or contradiction, in the case of unnatural) in the toon. Bad Bad Guy 00:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. There's a definite, purposeful connection between the DNA scenes and DNA EvidenceLoafing 01:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Seconded rootbeersoup 04:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
My problem was before I expanded each note, it felt like they were referring only to the recap at the beginning of the toon as the revisit. Bad Bad Guy 18:32, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Is it that notable that Sbemail 169 Deleted Scene is referenced in the DNA toon? Bad Bad Guy 19:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Eh, I think it is. By the way, why are we discussing this here, and not at Talk:DNA Evidence or some such page? Heimstern Läufer 20:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect?

Redirects don't seem to like the alternate-caps auto-redirect, as I discovered with No Hands on Deck. Thoughts? --Jay (Talk) 04:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Works fine for me. — DeFender1031*Talk 04:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Now wait just a durned minute. When I typed that directly, it didn't work!!! --Jay (Talk) 04:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Typing directly worked for me also. — DeFender1031*Talk 04:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
When I type it in the URL bar (with the lowercase O) it redirects me to a redirect page. I tend to type directly into the URL bar instead of the search bar. Guess it was my own fault then. --Jay (Talk) 04:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
When you type it directly into the URL, you're actually creating a double redirect, which is why you have to click through. (When you put it on a wiki page or in the search bar, it avoids the double redirect.) It has to be like that so that we can access those pages in case we ever need to turn them into real pages (for example, when we needed to make the paper after already having The Paper). — It's dot com 05:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I get it. Sorry for being out of the loop. --Jay (Talk) 08:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page Titles

Now that we have a page for every toon's page title (see the link I just gave), should we start linking where every toon says

Page title: {toon's page title}

to that page? I don't mind taking the time to link many of them, though it would take a while. What does anyone else think? Homestar-Winner (talk) 02:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

If we want to link them (and I'm not sure we should), we should have User:The Cheatbot do it. — It's dot com 15:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Wouldn't work anyway, a lot of the sbemails have the same title. — DeFender1031*Talk 15:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Filmography Pages

I'm just asking, in mini-golf, a lot of characters made appearances, and most of those characters don't have their own filmography pages. The filmographies on their character pages have 5 to 6 appearances listed. I agreed that the Drive-Thru Whale's two appearances don't warrant their own page yet, but the question is, how many appearances does a character need to have their own filmography page? — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 12:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

See HRWiki talk:Standards#Filmography Pages

[edit] Redirect Problem

I'm seriously not trying to insult anybody, but despite the consensus reached to turn Coach Z's Gender Confusion into a redirect to Coach Z#Coach Z's "more than two problems", the page was instead turned into a redirect to Cross-dressing with no visible explanation. Does anyone mind if I try to fix it? Once again, I am not trying to insult anybody. Bad Bad Guy 16:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Said consencus. Bad Bad Guy 16:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not completely clear what some people wanted, since some just put a vague "Redirect for reasons above". Naturally, someone must have got confused. Furthermore, at least 3 people wanted to redirect to Coach Z, opposed to at least 1 wanting to redirect to Cross Dressing. So, sure, go ahead and fix it. – The Chort 16:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Server problems?

I've been having trouble accesing the HRWiki for a while. It's really slow. Are there problems with the server? And please, PLEASE don't answer my question with "This is not the place to ask that" or something, because I don't have anywhere else to go. --Jnelson09 20:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

It happens from time to time, especially on Mondays. — It's dot com 20:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thanks. Why Mondays? --Jnelson09 20:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
What happens on Mondays? ;) Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 21:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
The wiki slows down, and then the Brothes Chaps get bored and put a new sbemail out? ;-) Loafing 21:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Technically the wiki slows down because the Brothers Chaps are going to put a new sbemail out. — Lapper (talk) 21:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Just a thought to be put out, they DO sometimes make toons, shorts, puppet stuff, ect. not just sbemails. (Dynamite 00:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC))

[edit] New Namespace Idea

How about we have a name space for Featured Articls, like FeatArt? It could be locked so only sysops can edit it, new FeatArts could go into it, and it would just help with organization. Howz about it? The Goblin!! 20:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting idea. I don't immediately see what the advantages are, though. I guess it would allow searching by namespace, although all the featured articles are listed at HRWiki:Featured articles and the articles that have been featured can be found at HRWiki:Featured article nominations. What other benefits were you thinking of?
Also, I don't think we'd want to protect everything in the namespace — if we did, only sysops could write the summaries, which would be a big disadvantage. Trey56 20:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I have this same thing on my wiki, and it works very well. It clears up a lot of clutter on the Main Page code, having {{FeatArt}} instead of {{#ifexist: FeatArt:{{#time: WY}}|FeatArt:{{#time:WY}}|blash blah blah}}. That would go into one article in the NS, and the rest would be a numerical code for that week. The Goblin!! 00:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
On the contrary. The ParserFunctions make it that much cleaner by updating automatically. I really don't think we need a namespace just to save a few extra characters on the Main Page or to keep it separate from our project namespace. — Lapper (talk) 14:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chapman article overhaul

I think that we need an urgent overhaul of the Brothers Chaps subpages, the writing isn't up to scratch, and we could really use some nice info boxes, also, those lists need to be intergrated into the main article, in short, they have to be biographies of everything we know and that is notable about TBC.--~ SlipStream 13:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think lists should be integrated just for the sake of integrating them. If something is easier to read in list form than prose form, then it should remain a list. (In other words, Wikipedia doesn't know what they're talking about.) Feel free to make whatever other fix-ups you see fit, but remember that everything we know is not the same as what is notable. — It's dot com 15:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, I disagree, lists are a bad thing to me, since I think pages on real people should be written biography style, like our character pages, although we don't have nearly enough information, I personally agree with Wikipedia on this one, infoboxes esc...--~ SlipStream 00:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
So fix 'em up. If the community deems the changes to be an improvement, then we'll keep them. It's hard to say which style is better without seeing both. — It's dot com 02:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] We're still Limozeen!

Discussion moved to Talk:Limozeen

[edit] Spotted on the streets of Melbourne

Here's a photo snapped on the streets of Melbourne, Australia. Figured somebody here might like to see it. Image:Trgdorcar.jpg -Pat 16:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

That's cool. Maybe we can put it on a Sightings page. —BazookaJoe 16:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion discussions

One thing that's been bugging me; how do sysnops decide how long discussions to delete articles should last? How come discussions to delete pages like Strong Bad Checking More Than One Email or Cheating go on for months while the discussion to delete Modestly Hot Homsar only lasted three weeks? Bad Bad Guy 18:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

It's kind of a judgment thing. If consensus is clear early on, it will generally be closed earlier. Sometimes it takes longer for consensus. Other times, such as for Modestly Hot Homsar, it's an issue of when it's clear there is no consensus. As for why some stay open for a while... well, sometimes we just forget, to be honest. It's clear to me that Cheating is indeed well overdue to be closed. So, the long and short is, we judge it on a case-by-case basis, and we do sometimes forget one. Heimstern Läufer 21:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Podcast

As podcasts of H*R have proven unreliable, in that they come and go with no warning, should we continue the practice of listing them in External Links of toons so podcast? Or, might we have a "See podcasts" link on every toon's page, so anyone might be able to check and see if the podcast is available or not? It's a pain for you all to be adding and removing all these podcasts from articles. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 00:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

If TBC ever put up the podcasts again, I bet they'd start with all new ones. And even if they didn't, we may as well remove them 'cause it doesn't look like they'll come back any time soon. Homestar-Winner (talk) 09:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too long, Clanky!

Is there a template/project page for articles that contain more than 32 kb? It doesn't seem like anything's being done about pages like Quote of the Week, HRWiki talk:Standards, and Secret Pages (I tried moving some Secret Pages to Site Components but Secret Pages was still too big) Bad Bad Guy 19:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

A talk page can be archived, but there's really nothing you can do with those other two. --DorianGray 19:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
We could try to divide Quote of the Week into yearly pages as was done with the other 2 weeklies. (1 page for all the Quotes featured in 2007, 1 for all the Quotes featured in 2006, etc) Bad Bad Guy 19:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Splitting pages when they hit 32kb isn't a hard rule... it's just a benchmark... if a page gets that big, a split is worth considering. I don't think QotW should be split up, because there is information gained by having it all in one big list – namely the sortable tables. phlip TC 01:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Scroll Button Mirror Glitch

I might have found a glitch with 3 of the Scroll Button Songs mirrors. Bad Bad Guy 17:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Update The Browse the Knowledge Base Box

Should Podstar Runner be removed from the box's "Features" list? Bad Bad Guy 02:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Can the next person to add a Featured Article template update the features list as well please? Bad Bad Guy 23:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
What reason is there to keep it on that box in the Main Page? Bad Bad Guy 00:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Please be patient on this sort of thing. I've gone ahead and removed the link now. About your second comment: note than when the featured article changes, we don't actually edit the main page; it updates automatically. Heimstern Läufer 00:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] main page message: email soon

Can a person whose able to put this on the main page? -141.133.160.52 07:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Server problems redux

The server was so bad Monday I couldn't access this site at all... until after midnight. I would have told you sooner, but I couldn't access the site. --Jnelson09 04:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Nobody could, I think. Shwoo 04:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Why do we even post things like this? There's no point in telling people the server was down; the odds are the developers already know this, and even if they don't, it doesn't matter now that it's back up. This talk page is not to log times the server goes down. Heimstern Läufer 05:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
In his defense, Heimi, if a number of users report a downtime, it can be of benefit to development. It may indicate a lack of bandwidth or other area of server settings that needs to be upgraded. However, I agree that Main Page Talk isn't probably the best place for the conversation... Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 07:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Personal tools