Talk:Homestar Runner universe

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Ding! Homestar Runner universe is a featured article, which means it showcases an important part of the Homestar Runner body of work and/or highlights the fine work of this wiki. We also might just think it's cool. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute.


Not to sound mean, but I think my version was more encyclopedic. Now it just says "The Homestar Runner universe is the place where Homestar lives" as opposed to my version which looked at all the possibilities of its existence from a canon perspective. Now I'm regretting writing it altogether. The new version also makes mentions of the Sketchbook look like it's just trying to justify using the term and ignores the fact that "the Homestar Runner universe" may only be applicable to Homestar and Strong Bad's world, as if it would be bad to imply that the term may not be 100% legit. Again, I'm sorry if that sounds mean, and I'm not trolling, just offering my opinion and trying to help the Wiki. No tomatoes, please. Darth Katana X (discussionitem_icon.gif user.gif mail_icon.gif) 03:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

First off, I do kinda agree with you on the image. But, pretty much ALL cartoons are in the universe, so the one that actually MENTIONS it is a little more important in my opinion. But, maybe a second image is needed. Second, it's been changed to a more encyclopedic state. Bluebry 03:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
How so? It just states the Wiki universe theory without really utilizing actual evidence of it being an applicable term, as my revision did (not to honk my own horn or sound arrogant or anything). Darth Katana X (discussionitem_icon.gif user.gif mail_icon.gif) 03:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... comparing the two, it looks to me like they're saying the same basic thing, just that it's been fleshed out more since you began it. Is your objection that the fleshed-out parts extrapolate too much? Trey56 03:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, it defines the universe, then it goes into an intro about how it's both similar and different to the existing universe. While that sounds less encyclopedic when you hear my summary, it's not. Now, I haven't seen your entry, so I guess now'd be a good time to look at it. Bluebry 03:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Now that I've seen your wording, Darth Katana, I must side with the current page. The current seems to have more information than the original copy, like a list of all sub-universes. Plus, I unfortunately find the current more encyclopedic, and professional. Bluebry 03:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I like it. It reminds me of the Multiverse. Like, the normal Free Country is Earth-One, and the storybook world is Earth-Two. (And thus, by extention, alternate universe is similar to The Flash #123, "Flash of Two Worlds".) I think it works very well. Even if not explicitly stated, they ARE presented this way (hence the "Research" category). --DorianGray 04:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of the term

I think it would be a good idea to start using the italicized Homestar Runner to refer to body of work itself, and cut down on use of "Homestar Runner universe" a little bit, as using the latter term when describing intangible gags (i.e. "X is a recurring gag within the H*R universe") may lead to grammatical issues. Also, just Homestar Runner is more relatable. Think of Pokémon: it has grown into so many different forms of media, most of which are equally important, but everyone recognizes the name, or maybe SpongeBob SquarePants. Please consider my advice and keep on tranglin'. Darth Katana X (discussionitem_icon.gif user.gif mail_icon.gif) 14:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Setting aside the issue of italics (which really is secondary here), you can't have it both ways. You can't create an article and then suggest that we not use the term (admittedly, though, your version was full of weasel words, so I'm not 100% sure that you wrote it in good faith; it doesn't make sense to me that you would vehemently oppose an idea and then suddenly turn around and write an article on it). Furthermore, the terms Homestar Runner universe and Homestar Runner body of work are not synonymous. "Grammatical"? "Relatable"? I really think you're grasping at straws and need to give up this fight. Relatable to whom? To you? No, using an unqualified term is less relatable, because it's less precise. — It's dot com 20:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
My revision wasn't full of weasel words, it was encyclopedic and had everything it said backed by the actual cartoons. The grammatical issue I meant was referring to intangible gags as "recurring elements in the Homestar Runner universe" or something like that. Anyway, I have a life and I don't have time to waste on people who reject my ideas simply because they don't like me. Darth Katana X (discussionitem_icon.gif user.gif mail_icon.gif) 23:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry. Let me rephrase. Your version was written as though by a weasel. You use unnecessary qualifiers and talk more about the phrase as a term rather than a thing: You say that "Homestar Runner universe is a term occasionally found" ... "It is also used by some fans." ... "it presumably consists of" ... "the term is only applicable to the main canon". I could be way off base here, but it reads to me like you still don't believe that "Homestar Runner universe" means anything legitimate and that it's just something we fans made up—which is not true—and thus I must consider the possibility that you wrote the article to spite us. The current version actually describes the universe and relegates the use of the term to its proper place at the end of the article. I'm not going to have the same discussion we've already had twenty times now, but I would like to point out, somewhat ironically, that we are in fact taking some of your suggestions. Really. For the first time in our history, we've really started to get a handle on just what the words "Homestar Runner" mean, and you indirectly had a hand in it. True, instead of a week of discussion it took closer to a year, due largely to the fact that, on the whole and given your history, we are predisposed to reject your proposals. I'm not gonna speculate as to whether that's fair or not, or whether it could change over time, but for the foreseeable future it simply is the way it is. I doubt that it could change so long as you think that you're always right and we're always wrong. Alas, if you feel that this site is a waste of your time, then, well, I remind you that no one's forcing you to spend your life, as you call it, here. — It's dot com 16:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you're predisposed to reject my proposals, then why am I wasting my time trying to help? Not taking anyone's constructive criticism into consideration is rather bigoted in my opinion, not that I really care. Anyway, I guess I'm leaving since my vote, for the most part, doesn't count, and I'd like to leave on good terms. So, sorry for being reckless and redundant and failing to make proposals worth your time. Best wishes to ye. Darth Katana X (discussionitem_icon.gif user.gif mail_icon.gif) 14:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I didn't say we didn't take your proposals into consideration, I just said that it happens extremely slowly. Who knows, maybe if you phrased things less antagonistically (and with fewer meta references) things would happen quicker. — It's dot com 00:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Well... just to add my two cents... when I read Darth Katana's first post I took it in like so: instead of writing "in the Homestar Runner universe" we can replace the phrase with "Homestar Runner", because it is more efficient, and Homestar Runner is a piece of literature in some... twisted way. I support the idea of replacing the phrase with something better. --TheYellowDart(t/c) 00:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
No, that wouldn't work. Homestar Runner can refer to the character or the entire body of work, but to use it to refer to the universe of the body of work would be sloppy. — It's dot com 15:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Personal tools