HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/Let Us Give TANKS!

[edit] Next-Generation STUFF

From: Let us give TANKS!
Posted on: 02:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• See the write-up in Talk about how the gamepad differs from current-generation controllers, and in fact all controllers except the SNES.
  • (Note: The NES "Dog-Bone" controller also shares the same general shape, but does not have shoulder buttons.)
  • Yes, there are noteable differences between the pictured controller and the SNES controller, but IMO, that should not be a reason to dismiss this version of the FF as "patently false".
• Consider that the same package for Reynold's Brother also says he is a "child of the 90s". The SNES was released in 1991 in the USA and Europe (1990 in Japan), and was the "next-gen console" of the early 90s, so this reference makes a lot of sense given the context.
  • Additionally, the SNES was popular and successful until the release of PlayStation in '95 and the N64 in '96. It and the Sega Genesis were the two consoles that defined the early 90s console market - if Reynold's Brother is a "Child of the 90s" and plays video games, he almost certainly would have grown up with the SNES.

Arguments against:

• "Child of the 90's" could also mean that he was born in the 1990's thus making him a teenager at the time of the toon's release, and thus too young for the SNES reference to make sense.
  • Generally speaking, "Child of the XX's" means that the person or character grew up during the time period referenced, and that their cultural choices are heavily influenced by the culture of that time period. There are other suggestions that Reynold's brother is influenced by 90's culture, such as his clothing and music, so playing the next-gen console of the time also makes sense.
  • While the toon's actual release date on the website is in 2006, there is nothing in the toon to suggest that its contents were intended for a 2006 audience. In fact, TBC quite frequently and intentionally make their toons appear more like the kinds of things that came out in the 80s and 90s, and sometimes the 20s and 30s (with Old-Timey). Having references to period-specific things like the SNES controller makes sense in this context.
• Although the controler is for a "next-gen console" it does not have to reference any specific console or controler that currently exists.
  • This is why the fact is worded as "most closely resembles", but not "is". Noting that it looks like a SNES controller is appropriate, saying that it IS a SNES controller would be going too far.
    • But why must it be noted that it "most closely resembles" anything? It seems like a very questionable reference, much more like a coincidence.
      • Because it is an interesting coincidence, and the fact that the gamepad is easy to recognize as being close to a SNES controller might cause some people to wonder why TBC chose that image over something that looks more modern, like a PS2/PS3 or 360 controller.
      • Also, people who are NOT "children of the 90s" might not necessarily know that the SNES was once considered "next-gen".

Additional comments:

• This version of the RWR allows us to refer to both the period-appropriate next-gen console (the SNES) AND the fact that two new consoles (PS3 and Wii) were released just days before the toon. Should make everyone happy.
  • "Period-appropriate" is debatable (see arguments against).
• As it turns out, the main picture for the SNES article on WP features a controller that has colored buttons (red, yellow, green and blue) as well as one with the light and dark purple buttons of the common US release.
  • The one with the colors was used in Europe and Japan.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Silent Ripberger

From: Let us give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• The first time a character speaks seems inherently noteworthy.
• This may be a more useful fact down the road after Ripberger speaks in other toons — when this toon came out, it was surprising to hear him talk because he never had before. But later on, this surprise will be missed if viewers are accustomed to hearing him talk in other toons.
• If seeing Homestar's teeth is notable, then hearing a character speak for the first time should also be noted.
• His mouth is covered, so one wouldn't expect him to speak.

Arguments against:

• This is only Ripberger's second appearance (the first was the scene where all the Commandos walked by during the commercial). This toon has the first scene in which he would have been expected to speak, and he did, so it's not notable.
• Re: Homestar's teeth: Homestar's teeth were revealed after literally hundreds of appearances by Homestar. Hearing Ripberger speak in his first featured appearance isn't even close to the same thing.
• Re: Covered mouth: A covered mouth doesn't prevent someone from speaking, nor should it be expected to. Storm Shadow (a ninja in the G.I. Joe universe) had no problem speaking, and it was only an injury to Snake-Eyes's vocal cords that prevented him from doing so. (See also: YouTube video)
  • Coach Z has no mouth. Yet he speaks. We didn't note in Coach Z's first speaking appearance that he has no mouth, nor should we have.

Additional comments:

• I don't understand the arguments for. Of course it's the first time he speaks—it's practically the first time he's been in a toon. If this were Ripberger's tenth appearance or something and yet only the first time he spoke, then that would be notable, but this is his second appearance, and his first close-up.
  • Well, maybe this fact should concentrate more on the fact that it's his first real appearance. I do feel that there's an element of surprise in seeing him in the toon that will be overlooked after he appears in future installments.
    • That's why we have filmographies. We don't need fun facts saying so, especially when this isn't even his first appearance.
      • Okay, convincing argument.
      • Even if the fact were rewritten to be "This is Ripberger's first real appearance," that's still not notable, as Blue Laser Commander's reaction to his being at the dinner makes that obvious, and a fun fact explaining it would be explaining the joke.
• We have a similar fact regarding Reinforcements in Commandos in the Classroom. Why would it be notable there but not here?
  • We should STUFF that one then as well.
    • Actually, I was planning to delete the second half of that fact depending on how this vote turned out.
      • Is the first half of that. that Commando in the Classroom, is the first toon to feature Reynold. all that noteworthy either?
        • No, but for different reasons. Commandos in the Classroom is not the first 'toon to feature Reynold. His first appearance was in Cheat Commandos (the same as all other Cheat Commandos) and his first animated/speaking with his own voice appearance was in Shopping for Danger (the first full-length Cheat Commandos 'toon anyway). I wouldn't be opposed to such a fact in SFD, however.
• Someone added the argument against: "This is Ripberger's first animated appearance", but this isn't true. Ripberger appeared in the "preview" segment in Cheat Commandos with the main Cheat Commandos (twice, actually.)

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] It's that guy! That has that gun!

From: Let us give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• It's noteworthy that Gunhaver has finally clearly lived up to his name.

Arguments against:

• We have already seen Gunhaver's gun. The fact that BLC hasn't is not notable.
• This fact explains the joke too much — most viewers will probably infer the content of this fact from BLC's comment.

Additional comments:

• The bit about the Commander seeing the gun could be dropped. It doesn't change the overall fact too much. The fact is mostly of him being depicted with it for the first time.
• The wiki already mentions that Gunhaver holds his gun for the first time in this toon on his page, so we probably don't need to make two references.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Civvies

From: Let us give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• Facts in the form "first one except that other one" are not notable.
  • Yeah, but Reynold practically is a Cheat Commando.
    • It still sounds just as awkward.

Additional comments:

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] First first name

From: Let us give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• This is not a notable first; there is no reason to expect a second instance of this same thing.

Additional comments:

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] A holiday classic!

From: Let us give TANKS!
Posted on: 05:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• This is not a notable first.

Additional comments:

• Re arg against 1: It's notable, but not on the article.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] X-haver

From: Let us give TANKS!
Posted on: 04:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• Blue Laser Commander's use of Gunhaver's first name suggests that there was once a friendly relationship between the two of them.
• Because the X-Men movies are so well-known (and the third one came out recently), it is likely that TBC were aware of the resemblance between BLC & Gunhaver and Magneto & Xavier when they chose Gunhaver's first name to be Charles.

Arguments against:

• The only similarity is the usage of the name "Charles" by an arch-foe. Without more evidence, this is not conclusive.
• We also don't actually know that Gunhaver's first name is Charles, or, for that matter, that his last name is Gunhaver. Gunhaver may be a nickname, or "Charles" may be his last name, or it could just be an inside joke going over all our heads, or something like that.
• What if TBC were just being random and the first thing that came to their heads was "Charles"? Jumbo/LARGE was like this too and I quote: Not everything is something.

Additional comments:

• Maybe some DVD commentary someday will prove this true, but until then, there's not enough to go on.
• This is a tough call. If we keep it, it's speculation, but the question is whether it's reasonable speculation based on strong similarities. For now, I think the connection is strong enough that it's worth keeping, even if there's a chance it's not true.
• If it's not too much, can the reason (He called him Charles) be included in the proposed fact without a revision?

[ Back to STUFF index ]