Talk:@strongbadactual (Instagram)

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Redirected from Talk:Instagram)
Jump to: navigation, search

[edit] Move page over redirect

Our article about the currently active Twitter account is called @StrongBadActual, but this article is just called Instagram (much like @ronginald was just called Twitter when it was first created). This article should be moved to @strongbadactual (Instagram) (which apparently is already a redirect). We should then discuss whether we want to move @StrongBadActual to @StrongBadActual (Twitter) (also currently a redirect) or leave it where it is. — It's dot com 17:11, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I agree with everything you just said. They should be consistent. I lean towards doing the same for the twitter page, but could probably be convinced otherwise as well. — Defender1031*Talk 17:27, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
DC, your suggestion makes sense :). To add to that, after both moves, @StrongBadActual can become a disambiguation page. --Stux 18:19, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Ah! But if we do that, we need to change all existing links to @StrongBadActual point to the twitter disambiguation! That's something the bot can do, right? --Stux 18:26, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
I vote renaming the Instagram page, but not renaming the Twitter page (so the pages would be called @StrongBadActual and @strongbadactual (Instagram)). After all, the Twitter account seems to be the main account, and Instagram is more of a side thing. If someone searches for "@StrongBadActual" on the wiki, chances are that they're looking for the Twitter account (and even if they aren't, there's a link at the top of the page). hegtcX1.png Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 21:48, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
I understood that the "Twitter" page was moved only because there was more than one account that "Twitter" could refer to. Right now there are three. This is not the case for "Instagram" as far as I'm aware, so I don't see a need to move "Instagram" yet. The Knights Who Say Ni 20:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Good point. But it's still good to be consistent, as discussed above. @StrongBadActual and Instagram are such different titles for such similar pages. hegtcX1.png Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 20:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
That wouldn't be unprecedented; consider Guitar and guitar being such similar titles for such different pages, and Pasta Salad and Fluffy Puff Translucent Dessert Related Substance being such different titles for two fairly similar pages. And I actually think that them being such similar pages is a reason for them to have such different titles; it would be far less confusing to differentiate between the two. It seems like this type of consistency is only important if the pages stem from the same source; like the SBCG4AP Episode Responses pages, and all the "@StrongBadActual Tweets in a certain year" pages. The Knights Who Say Ni 01:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
That Pasta Salad/Fluffy Puff Translucent Dessert Related Substance example wasn't great. Both of those foods have different names, while the social media accounts have the same name. If both of those foods have the same name (for example, "Fluffy Puff Salad"), their pages would probably be called [[Fluffy Puff Salad (pasta)]] and [[Fluffy Puff Salad (dessert)]] or something along those lines. Naming them, say, [[Fluffy Puff Salad]] and [[Fluffy Puff Dessert Food]] would be inconsistent. And in a way, these pages kind of do stem from the same source. They're practically the same account on two different websites. hegtcX1.png Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 01:42, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know it's not a good example. I said "fairly similar", in that it's a case of two pages of foods that appear in the H*R universe that are roughly the same length. Obviously you don't want two pages that are entirely similar, or they would get merged. And now that I've said that, I remember that College and School makes for a better example. And I won't be convinced with words like "in a way" and "kind of"; "two different websites" is more important. The Knights Who Say Ni 02:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

[edit] Coffee Town

How should we document this? It's not on the Instagram page. hegtcX1.png Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 06:36, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

It's official content, and 5 minutes long, so I say we give it its own page. Maybe [[Instagram Live Stream - Aug 24 2017]], or [[Coffee Town with Homestar & Mike - Episode 86]] or something like that. hegtcX1.png Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 04:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
It's official content that's been uploaded unofficially, so that blurs the line a bit; but yes, when it was live it was official content.
EDIT: That said, it seems to have been a preliminary test for their "Patreon-type deal" they mentioned on Twitter yesterday, so in the future this clip might/could cross over from the "obscure social media thing" into the "very important but no less obscure social media thing" category. -- ■■   PURPLE  WRENCH   ■■ 01:07, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
So if/when TBC do exclusive patreon type deals (if you're reading this, Matt and/or Mike, pls make exclusive stuff available to the public eventually. Like after a year or six months) do we record the transcripts of them like the DVD exclusive toons or leave them out? Guybrush20X6 13:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
The precedent here was set by TMBW when TMBG started doing something similar. The band made it clear that they wanted the exclusive content to be just that, a walled garden, and the wiki complied. Although I don't know, I must be thinking of some other band...
So I think the answer to that question is, it depends on TBCs' wishes. If they go out of their way to ask that people keep the content a secret, then we shouldn't document any of it. If they are fine with it (and the lack of concern over DVD content makes me think that is the case), then by all means we should. Now, that said, it might not be a bad idea for someone who opts in to the pay-plus dealie to keep a copy of the exclusive content offline either way if possible, but keep it to themselves unless/until TBC allows it to be made public. In case the content is otherwise lost to time.
And I also wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if they made the content available to the public weeks, days or even minutes later. Strong Bad claimed the extra content was "bonus crap like puppet video chats and livestreamed sloshy practice" and the like, which implies *here, now, and interactive*. If they release the content to YouTube immediately afterwards or use Periscope like they did last time, then it can be made available to the public but without the main perk of watching it live or being a part of it. -- ■■   PURPLE  WRENCH   ■■ 00:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Personal tools