Talk:Interrupted Conversations

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search


[edit] Page merit

It seems to me like this page is all about when a character walks on the screen and other characters' conversations end. I just think this page has no value, no offense to its editor. Bluebry 15:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Seems like an ok page to me. Let's see how much it gwors first. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 15:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
The name is confusing, I thought it was about conversations that are actually interrupted by something, and my first thought was "delete this now..." but actually reading it reveals it's actually about times where we only catch the tail-end of a conversation. I vote build it up a bit, and move it to a better name. Maybe Half-missed conversations? --phlip TC 17:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I dunno, it seems like a collection of conversation ending lines to me. I mean, a character walks into a place where two other characters are conversing. Do we need to write down those lines on two pages (the toon page and a serperate page)? I don't think so. We really don't need to catalogue every conversation ender. Bluebry 22:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I think this is an interesting topic, personally. It could use some serious work, though. — Image:kskunk_fstandby.gif KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

If any of you guys have the DVD collection, TBC did comment on this subject in crying. So maybe it is okay to keep it. -CoachD

I think if we actually got some interrupted conversations, like in bottom 10 when SB is about to say what number 1 is and then gets interrupted by Homestar, then we could actually get this article rolling. Otherwise, we should clean it up and move it to a different name. · · T2|Things 16:46, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Accept. Thatkidsam 12:08, April 22, 2006 (UTC)

I think this page is fairly interesting, at least compared to some I've seen lately. Only, as it stands, the current picture has nothing to do with the article. -YKHi. I'm Ayjo! 01:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I say change the focus solely to conversations where we missed the beginning and/or context, and then rename it. - Joshua 02:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
I completely agree. This page is a bit too specific; a more open sort of page name (and content) would help greatly. I think the page has massive potential; it just needs to change its goal around a bit. — Seriously (Talk) 22:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Keep the title. It's fine. As for the cleanup.... we have sysops, right? Maybe they can vote on what or what not should go in this. Doctorwho295 11:53 April 23, 2009 (UTC)

I am still 100% behind this page, but I really do thing it needs to be renamed to "Partial conversations" The current title seems like it means conversations that are interuppted as opposed to allready going. — (Talk | contribs) 00:38, 27 November 2009 (left unsigned)

[edit] The scope of the page

The heading implies that it only refers to conversations that the watcher only hears the last part of, but then describes truly interrupted conversations that don't fit the pattern. Which is it? I think it should be restricted only to the former, as the latter doesn't strike me as particularly running-gag-ish. --Jay (Talk) 20:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's how it should be. Things like "Yeah, you stay over there!" are exactly what we're looking for, but Homestar interrupting Strong Bad's bottom 10 aren't. I'm going to go ahead and do a little cleanup here. Heimstern Läufer 20:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah. A page about nonsensical conversation that we hear the tail end of is marginally useful; a page listing every dang time somebody gets interrupted isn't. —AbdiViklas 21:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
If we are changing the name the article, How about, "Partial Convertions" --Dacheatbot · Communicate 21:32, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
As opposed to "Partial Conversions." "I'm half saved! Glory halle-! Praise the Lo-!" Okay, I'll be good now. —AbdiViklas 21:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Err... this article still needs some severe pruning to go by these standards. Time to delete stuff? - Joshua 02:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Some conversations we do get the start of, but not the end of, are running gaggish - "Reg at the top of the tee" strikes me as one - so I would be careful how lines are drawn. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

One year later: This article is still not doing what it is intended to. So I'm going to remove all of the entries that I don't think fit the running gag and put them here.

You can now see a common theme among what is left on the article. As it has been mentioned before, "interrupted conversations" is not the best title for this gag. This is more of a "times when the viewer gets dropped into the middle of a conversation." More intriguingly, the entries that I removed are actually the speech lines that are interrupted. With that, does anybody have a technical-sounding way to describe how the viewer gets dropped into the middle of a conversation (and it usually happens after a scene cut)?

BazookaJoe 05:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reg and the Top o' the Key

Does this really have a place here? This is more or less a list of "Interrupted Conversations" that we never find out the subject of. Coach Z's reference to Reg is more like a flashback to Strong Bad's autobiography. We already know what happened when Reg had the ball at the top o' the key...Strong Bad was like "I'm open, I'm open!" but someone must slipped Reg some drugs or something before the game because he didn't see him and he passed it to the Deke instead and the Deke SLAM DUNKED IT!!! Ohhhh see my point... ~ Shadix

[edit] ...List?

I don't feel this page is a list. It's just the appearances of a running gag. Bluebry 20:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Transfer

I strongly suggest we merge this article with Interrupted Conversations. To begin with, the title "Narrated Interruption" does not actually match the appearances listed. Phones and buzzers are not narrators. A more appropriate title would be Interrupted Monologues, which would fit perfectly into Interrupted ConversationsLoafing 20:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. The buzzer and the answering machine is just time running out. If you using a recording device that has 10 seconds, and you try to record a 12 second message, you will be interupted. Nothing special with these. I R F 20:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Agree. Merge it. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 11:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Agree. Retromaniac 22:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree. It would also unorphan this page. EdgeMaster025
I concur. Bluebry 20:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where The Crap Are We

Not really a conversation, but I think that the begining of Where the Crap Are We? belongs somewhere around here. -- DongleGoblin 02:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. The viewer isn't getting dropped into the middle of a conversation, but rather it's the start of the conversation as far as the toon is concerned. And it's not happening after a scene cut in the middle of the toon as are most of these entries, so it's not obvious that any conversation is being, er, stumbled-upon. —BazookaJoe 05:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rename

To me, "Interrupted Conversations" sounds as though characters are stopping converstations we already have heard the beginning. I propose "Drop-In Converstations". Or something similar. The Goblin!! 01:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

How about calling it "Incomplete Conversations"? -Foxy

No, no rename. The conversations are interrupted right in the middle. You don't need to hear the first part to be interrupted. It's not you the article cares about, it's the characters having the conversation. --DorianGray 06:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
To me, it never really sounds the conversations are being interrupted, like thi- --Trogga 07:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
They do have a point. "Interrupted" implies that the conversation is being interfered with, rather than that we're just hearing a portion. I can't think of anything simple to call it, tho. Dagron 07:09, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Partial Conversations? Fragmented Conversations? Incomplete Conversations? — Defender1031*Talk 12:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I like Incomplete Conversations. User talk:Sam the Man Sam the Man 13:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Second (or third, or whatever) Homestar-Winner (talk) 13:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... Incomplete Conversations is pretty good... I'd go for that. Dagron 02:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
But it doesn't sound like the conversations are incomplete, just finishing. --Trogga 02:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you're right Dagron 02:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
No change. StrongBad1 22:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Why don't we rename it Conversations With Unknown Subjects? It would be an accurate name for it. Hooray4homestar 02:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The name should be, "Background Conversations"! You know? Because they just set up the background for something.

How about Conversations that, while presumably complete, we as viewers only get to hear a portion of -DAGRON 05:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
I second Conversations with Unknown Subjects. It fits much better than Interrupted Conversations. Then again, I'm just an annony and if I know your HRwiki guys you won't take my opinion seriously. -- 01:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to bump this back into RC to get it noticed. The rename discussion here is still in limbo. Comments welcome. -DAGRON 22:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that we should name it "incomplete conversations" we don't want it too big or else people won't know what to type User:hardcore_homestar_fan

What about "Conversation fragments", or another name that emphasizes the portion over the conversation?

You mean like "Tail Ends"? - Coach Z Fangirl
That sounds good too. a few of them seem to match the description of the title, like the bit from "love poems" where a conversation is interupted, but the majorty seem to be cases of the viewer only recives part of a discussion.

I prefer the TV Tropes name for it: Orphaned Punchlines. DEI DAT VMdatvm center\super contra 01:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

That's not a bad suggestion, actually. - 01:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I like it. I was thinking something like "We're in the middle of a conversation here" (loosely adapted from magic trick) but that's way better. — Defender1031*Talk 10:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I'ma gonna vote for no change. The title describes the page just fine. PAK215 22:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I think Conversations Already in Progress would do this page justice. That Game Dude 386 23:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Personally, Unfinished Conversations would be a perfect name, because the conversation is started, persumably with and end, but the charector cannot finish the conversation because of someone/something.

I'm with Incomplete Conversations, because regardless of what part of the conversation we're hearing, we never hear the whole thing. That's the gag. Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 13:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I still like orphaned punchlines. - 14:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Rename to Orphaned Punchlines. The description from tv tropes is great. Read it, then read some of the examples in the article. I love it. Good find, Mee! OptimisticFool 15:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't know, that seems more about jokes than conversations... Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 15:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

How about:

  • Interuptions
  • Discontinued Conversations
  • Interupted Conversations


  • Cut Off lines

This should simply be renamed "Partial Coversations." The fact this hasn't been proposed astounds me. — (Talk | contribs) 04:03, 14 November 2009 (left unsigned)

The topic came up again today. We need this settled, as ordinary interruptions were added to the page and we nearly got into a revert war trying to deal with them. --Jay (Talk) 20:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

If we want something completely dense and unwieldy, we can go for "Decontextualized Conversation Fragments". I agree that this needs to be renamed, but none of the proposed names strike me as being that good, except maybe "Conversations Already in Progress", and I can't think of too much. Just to throw some more out there, there's also "Context-Free Dialogue", "Stranded Punchlines", and "Nonsensical Ends of Conversation". But like I said, I don't love any of those too much. --TimMierz 21:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, this is exactly why I didn't suggest a name. It's a hard concept to get across in only a few words. --Jay (Talk) 23:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

How about Half-Heard Conversations? Religious Corn   17:36, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to put something into perspective here, before the page gets renamed. I looked up "interrupted conversations" after watching hiding. I hadn't been to the page before and I was able to find the article without much effort. It's an intuitive name. While I can appreciate the comic value in names that are notably longer than necessary (and suggestions like "Conversations already in progress"), the prospective reader will have to have read the article already to know that they need to look up something like "Tail ends", or "Orphaned punchlines" (not to mention that the latter precludes the fact that alot of the "interrupted conversations" don't include a punchline). Names like "Incomplete conversations", "Interrupted conversations", and "Partial conversations" are the only ones that I think readers will naturally try to look up. Toons 00:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Bumping this again. To refresh: The rationale for a rename is that, the conversations themselves aren't actually getting interrupted. It's just that we only hear part of it (usually the end). - 02:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Most of these aren't what I would have called "interrupted". Some of them are. With brevity in mind, most of these would more accurately belong on a page called "Ongoing Conversations" (including the one I reverted earlier tonight). The Knights Who Say Ni 03:51, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
I still do kinda like "orphaned punchlines" even if most of them aren't punchlines, strictly speaking, since "punchlines" indicates that the end of the conversation is heard with the beginning cut off, rather than the other way around. The non-punchlines thing is a valid point against it, though.

Per the two above I strongly feel the article should be renamed in any case. Plus there are some appearances listed that fit more with the "interrupted" name than with the "cutting into conversations" definition, like environment and love poems, and Homestarloween Party focuses more on the "interrupted" aspect than the "cut into" aspect that also occurs. I was going to suggest Cutting Into Conversations for an alternate rename proposal ("cutting" meaning like film), but then I realized "cut into" has the double meaning of "interrupt". Then I thought of Opening In On Conversations but that's kinda clunky and maybe not that accurate a name either.

To respond to Toons from nearly nine years ago: the hiding appearance does have interruption as well, so I can see how it can be intuitive in that specific case, but I doubt many other cases would be as intuitive with the current name.DEI DAT VMdatvm center\super contra 21:33, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

This still needs a new name some decades later - 02:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

I still like Conversations With Unknown Subjects, thanks, Hooray4homestar for bringing that one up, I vote it.... for president, of, um... this page's name. ----J∃ffJMan 17:16, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

TBC have used the wording "cut-into-the-middle-of-a-conversation situations". - 05:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

[edit] Interrupted Emails

I've noticed that there are MANY emails where SB is answering, and someone drops in mid sentence. It seems to be a running Gag... should we track those here too?

for example, in Long Pants, Homestar drops in midway through Strong bad's sentence Was it not Adam West who once said, "E— Thoughts? Javaguy78 17:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Would morning routine count towards that? Strong Bad says The morning routine is the most important routine of the day. The r in routine stands for- And then Strong Sad brings in the egg. But I don't think interrupted emails would merit a seperate section anywheres unless there are more than two instances, which I'm sure there are but I just can't think of more offa the top of my head. Acam30 00:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Revise, I Say!

Since no one else seems to have brought this up, I will. I take great issue with the opening paragraph of this article. Sure, its purpose is to illustrate the subject of the page (which, in my opinion, it doesn't really succeed in anyway), but doesn't that give the page a really informal feel? Which we in the Homestar Runner Wiki try to avoid?

I'm posting this in the talk page because I'm not sure if I could do a good revision myself, but perhaps someone else can. Thoughts/ideas, anyone? Lira (talk) 03:42, 15 February 2016

I like it the way it is. Nothing wrong with a little humor here and there on the wiki. It doesn't all have to be dry and informational. — Defender1031*Talk 09:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Personal tools