Talk:God

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
DELETED!
This is the talk page of an article that has been redirected to Religion. Please do not participate in the discussions archived here. If you can provide a reason for the existence of this page that hasn't been discussed below, you may start a new section. Please refer to the inclusion guidelines that are generally applied to judge an article's merit.

[edit] Deletion

It's a spoon thing. Nothing really notable. That, and I'm sure this page will make at least one person angry. Deleted! --Jellote wuz here 19:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I lean the same way (that is, delete). Maybe, maybe, if a loud booming voice (other than the Arrow'd Guy) descended from the 'bove, but that doesn't seem to be the sort of humor H*R goes for. --~~Sup, mortal. You can call me THE CORONAVIRUS!! Before drinking a tall glass of lelomade, I like to eat about a hundred and forty-seven of these little white things. The other day, I said this repetitive thing over and over again. (Talk) 19:41, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Since the ActRaiser ref is a real stretch, and besides that, the other two a common phrases, there's not enough to to make this page. Delete it. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 19:47, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it's a spoon thing, and I don't think it necessarily matters if at least one person is angered by the presence of this article. However, E.L. Cool expressed my sentiments exactly. Delete. OptimisticFool 00:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Somehow, I don't think it's a good idea to have an article like this on a fan-run wiki which anyone can edit anonymously. The Internet is a safe haven for jerks and morons who can be as stupid and offensive as they like, knowing full well that they won't get into serious trouble for behaving like a complete and utter crap for brains. These are the types of articles which are targeted first by these idiots and will just encourage additional trolling. Sure, we can revert those edits easily, but do we really want to tempt them into creating these edits in the first place?
Even if the above isn't an issue, this article still doesn't work out. Most of these so-called references were made unintentionally by TBC. "Thank God" is a common phrase used by religious and non-religious people alike and ActRaiser is a stretch because you play as a god, not God Almighty himself. If God actually was a proper character that appeared on the site, like in other cartoons, then of course we'd create an article for him. But since he does not, let us delete. – The Chort 18:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree exactly with what Coolio and Opti said. delete Loafing 20:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
And also, we should not avoid creating articles that might be prone to vandalism. Reverting is cheap and usually happens quickly, and vandals really aren't a problem for us. Self-censorship because of fear of vandalism would seriously lower the quality of the wiki for no good reason. We wouldn't have entertaining and useful pages like these: Peeing, Wetting the Bed, Cross-dressing, Gender ConfusionLoafing 20:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Thou shalt not create articles with naught references. delete. free 20:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I would say move to Religion, but we already have "Death" or whatever. Religion would have a reference to religious stuff, like the paper going "into the light." ColdReactive 20:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I think that a bit or research need to be done of a Religion page. It what we find is interesting enough, then we'll go right ahead and create the page. But I don't think that the references on THIS page are a good basis. But religion is intriguing nonetheless. I'll look into it. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 03:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, so maybe my fears of vandalism were a little misguided. I certainly don't want needless self-censorship and I have nothing wrong with the articles linked to by Loafing. (I can't believe you forgot whatsit, though. :P) Nevertheless, if we must have an article on a potentially controversial topic, the benefits of having said article have to outweigh the possible negatives that may arise (actually, this argument is true for most articles). All those articles mentioned above cover topics that are very relevant to the website as they feature predominantly, mainly because that's the type of humour the website goes for. H*R tends not to make explicit references to religion, let alone derive humour from it.
Which is why I also feel that articles on religion or God would simply not be suitable for this type of wiki, simply because H*R is a secular website. Excluding the phrase "Thank God" and so forth, the only times I can think of where religion came even close to being alluded to are the uses of the word "Christmas" (see Decemberween), Homsar saying "And also with you" in Pumpkin Carve-nival, Dryghost mentioning his Bar Mitzvah and maybe Anubis from Strong Badia the Free Cave Girl Squad. (The Paper went "in the night", not the light, so that doesn't count.) These aren't really connected to each other so it's going to take some feat to derive a decent article from them. Personally, I think a mention in the Explanations/Real-World References sections of the relevant articles is enough. – The Chort 10:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, phrases like "Thank God" and "Honest to God" can't really count towards a God article. A Bar Mitzvah, Anubis, and Christmas could count towards a Religion article, but I don't think it's accentuated enough to be relevant. Loafing 10:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Overlooking?

With five references, I think this could easily merit a Name running gag article. It's said more often then once, so I really think that it could just be an article that simply states that the characters have said this name. MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 00:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, this is seriously out of hand. Dan has been said multiple times, right? Right. That's a name running gag. God has been said multiple times. That's a name running gag, right? I think so. I think this article should come back. In fact, it's even been said more times than Debra has, and it still has a page. Why? MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 21:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
"God" is not really being used as a name here. It's being used as part of idiomatic and fairly common phrases such as "thank God" and "honest to God". It's not really comparable to the name Dan, which is a name that shows up repeatedly as an ordinary old name. Heimstern Läufer 22:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps even more germane to this: The idea behind a name running gag like Dan, Kevin or Debra is that a name shows up, and the repetition is in some way striking. That is to say, you're like, "Oh, they said that name again. Why that name? Why not some other name?" That can't really happen with the name "God"; no other name can substitute for it. Other name running gags exist because the name is used unusually, for example, "Dennis" as an exit alongside "North" and "South". Again, the use of the name "God" does not fit this paradigm. So, long story short, no, "God" is not a name running gag. Heimstern Läufer 22:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools