Talk:Matt Cake

From Homestar Runner Wiki

This is the talk page of an article that has been merged with Secret Pages. 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.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... how's it scary? --Jnelson09 19:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed that part, as it seems non-neutral and unnecessary. Heimstern Läufer 19:09, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PATZ or PA7Z

That doesn't look like a T to me. Awexome 18:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect

How does this deserve its own article? It's just a random hidden page. --Trogga 19:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

It deserves a page. If it doesn't, why does Super Brave have it's own page? Sam the Man 19:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Then why we don't we have an article for every secret page? --Trogga 19:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why Matt Cake should have its own page. (And, as I understand it, comparisons (to Super Brave or any other page) aren't the way progress is made. See Talk:The Spirit of St. Louis.) OptimisticFool 19:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it doesn't deserve a page. Tire cake is about the same thing and it has no page, as well as everything else in that section. This page is only four sentences long! - Saddy Dumpington 19:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why it shouldn't have it's own page. Our job is not to downgrade the wiki or make information less accessible. Only so much can be put to a table. Also, I don't really like a table output of many things. It slows up my surfing and loading, when I have to load and go through all kinds of information I don't need to access one sentence in the bottom that I do need. And it can't be good for server, either. It's like loading up the all images list to find a image that starts with a Z. If anybody's asking me, I think we should leave this as is. --Sysrq868 19:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply to Saddy Dumpington: It doesn't matter if it's 4 sentences long. Some pages are even 1 or 2 sentences long. Sam the Man 19:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

How do most users find Matt Cake? From Secret Pages, which I'm sure draws a lot of its clicks from the Main Page. And from Secret Pages, who wants to open a bunch of separate articles for descriptions that can easily fit in a table on the page they've already found? Talk about slowing down your surfing! OptimisticFool 19:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I've done some information design in my time, and big lists with a lot of irrelevant information is pretty much the exact opposite of a well-designed document structure. To find Matt Cake, I have scroll pretty much half of the darn long page down to find it! And it's not about who finds it, where, when or how. To access that page, I have to load 75 images and 32 kilobytes of data. That's a bit too much for my liking to read 4 sentences. I still feel we should keep this. --Sysrq868 20:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Then maybe we should consider splitting Secret Pages up into different pages, rather than different tables. Wouldn't that solve the problem? Is that a terrible idea? OptimisticFool 20:08, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

If you mean, that we should create like a subpage for each table, I like the idea. I'm not sure whether that's how this wiki likes to operate, but I'd do that immediately, if I knew for sure. --Sysrq868 20:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Started discussion at Talk:Secret Pages. OptimisticFool 20:20, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The only thing I find notable about this secret page is that it is the 1st appearance of Little Girl. But other than that, I believe it should be deleted. Bad Bad Guy 01:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It appears It's dot com made the executive decision that this subject is closed - no change is to be made. (See Talk:Secret Pages: "none of the pages linked from [Secret Pages] should be merged into a table; they should remain linked individual pages") What admin wants, admin gets, I guess. <sigh> That's the way this works, right, It's dot com? OptimisticFool 05:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely incorrect, this is a community, not a dictatorship. When it comes to things like this, It's Dot Com is still only one voice. — Defender1031*Talk 11:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. You'll notice I used the word should, not must or will. At any rate, I stand by my opinion that the table gives an overview of the various pages, and each page gives further information; nearly all of the individual pages are too long or too detailed to fit nicely into a table, so there's no compelling reason to combine them all. On the other hand, I was speaking generally, and perhaps was hasty when I said "none". There really isn't much to this page that wouldn't fit in a table, even if other pages would be too long to be merged. It hasn't been a separate page for that long, either. — It's dot com 02:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

we should still delete it. Slipknot6477 13:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)