From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

O.K, why did someone nominate this article for deletion? User talk:Sam the Man Sam the Man

I don't see a running gag here. The TROGDOR! instance was a direct reference to trevor the vampire, but the your funeral instance seems wholly unrelated. In other words, I think TBC are just using English words the way they're meant to be used. — It's dot com 23:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Don't delete my sentence DOT COM! And by the way, if it's not a running gag, then what is it? User talk:Sam the Man Sam the Man
Your comments were removed in an edit conflict. When I noticed that they had no purpose on the page, and shouldn't have been posted, I chose not to resolve the conflict. I'm saying this page is not a running gag and therefore should not have its own page. — It's dot com 23:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it depends on that third appearance. The first two are definitely connected, but I'm not so sure the third one is. Since three is the magic number for a running gag getting its own page, we'd have to get consensus that the your funeral appearance is a play off of trevor the vampire. Trey56 23:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Ohhh, there right. Sorry Drippingyellowmadness, but there right. User talk:Sam the Man Sam the Man

your funeral refers to trevor the vampire. As the "pine for me" seems to me to be a reference of sorts (if not directly, then directly to the sane source), keep. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 00:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

The first two appearances were both exactly "I pine for you!". The third was "...all the heartbroken private school girls that will pine-uh for me-uh." It's so different that it doesn't seem to be a running gag. Third sighting? Methinks not. However, I reluctantly agree that the page conforms with general wiki standards (The third is a reference of "pine for you/me", even if it ISN'T related to the other two. Hard to understand, I know.) However, my gut points me to delete. Bluebry 01:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
If think this is a good page and I vote to keep. Sure the phrase is said a bit differently in the third appearance, but it's still someone pining for someone else. They could have chosen a whole bunch of other phrases, but I believe TBC knew they were referring to vampire/TROGDOR! when they added it to the toon. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 09:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Additionally, throwing out the idea to rename to Pining. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 13:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Good idea. I'll do it right now! User talk:Sam the Man Sam the Man
While I'm all for renaming to "Pining", you really should wait for the people to give their opinions on it before a move. --TotalSpaceshipGirl3 15:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I'm still not convinced that the third appearance is connected. As was suggested above, I think TBC are just using a regular word in the English language with its intended meaning. Trey56 16:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I as well am not sure that third "instance" counts. --Jay (Talk) 17:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Not Delete How in the world can the third instance be related? And besides (although in a different way), The four Emails that contain DNA Evidence are related. Drippingyellowmadness CoolS.png talk 23:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
"Pining" is something that a wrestler does. I think pineing is better. Drippingyellowmadness CoolS.png talk 01:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
No it isn't. It's grammatically incorrect. A wrestler often partakes in "pinning". Remember basic English? In the event of "ing" after a consonant, two consonants are used. --TotalSpaceshipGirl3 00:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I forgot the 1-1-1 rule. Anyway, when are we going to make a decision on deleting or not? Take the "to be deleted" off and change to PINING! Drippingyellowmadness CoolS.png talk 19:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I think that this has some importance, and I think that three is a fair number of instances. Let's keep it. --Collin Diver 22:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, ut I don't see any reason not to keep it. It's a perfectly good page. TheThin 13:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah, why not? Let's keep it and rename it as Pining. When I heard Strong Bad say "pine-uh" in your funeral, I temporarily had a flash back to trevor and TROGDOR!. We've got stranger articles on this wiki anyway. – The Chort 15:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I vote that we rename to Pining. It has the required 3 references for a running gag, and they all seem perfectly valid. It's a good article, no reason to get rid of it.· · T2|Things 22:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

It may have been referenced 3 times, but that does not make it a running gag. By that standard, we could say that the word "and" is a running gag. This isn't to say that I disagree with the 3time rule, but I think we should take into consideration what exactly we're protecting before we claim something is a gag based solely on this rule.--Flytape8490 03:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, the comparison with "and" is hardly fair. "And" is a an ecxeedingly common word; by contrast, "pining" is relatively uncommon, making it substantially more reasonable as a running gag. As an aside, this conversation is over a year old. Heimstern Läufer 12:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools