Talk:Pom Pom

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Ding! Pom Pom 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.


[edit] Still disambiguous?

Hmm. Does the case fix get rid of this problem? Pom Pom is the character, pom pom is the email, right? Or is that way to confusing? Also, links to the page "Pom Pom" aren't directed here anymore. We need to fix this. Somehow. -- Tom 12:03, 28 Jul 2004 (MST)

Case seems to be adequate enough to disambiguify something to the engine, but I don't think it's good enough for readers. Case-sensitivity would/will confuse a lot of people. I think we should stick with what we've got. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 12:13, 28 Jul 2004 (MST)
Oh right, I think it was the move that I was looking for. That works... But still, ideally, nothing should link here. They should all link to either Pom Pom (character) or pom pom (email). Would it be easier to have the pages be "Pom Pom" and "pom pom"? Wait, that's still confusing. I guess... Which type of confusion do we want then? -- Tom 12:19, 28 Jul 2004 (MST)
I dunno. This case stuff is going to confuse some people, but I don't think it's unnecessarily complicated. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits)
Okay, I'm not sure anyone will ever link to "pom pom (character)", so I deleted that. Nothing linked to it, and it just redirected to "Pom Pom (character)" I think we might be out thinking ourselves. What's going to happen when someone copies a page here? What will the links say? "PomPom" or ""StrongBadEmail/pom pom", right? So they are going to have to be changed either way... Should we change them to "Pom Pom (character)" and "pom pom (email)" or simply "Pom Pom" and "pom pom" I guess that's my question. -- Tom 12:34, 28 Jul 2004 (MST)
I really think we should keep "Pom Pom (character)" and "pom pom (email)" because it will help people understand what they're looking at. If the name is exactly the same (even if the case is different) people will get confused. New links should go to one or the other, not to the disambiguation page. Links should only go to the disambiguation page when people aren't paying attention to what they're doing (something I do a lot). — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 12:49, 28 Jul 2004 (MST)
The disambiguation page is also nice when people are looking for "Pom Pom" and they type it into the search box and hit "Go". — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 12:53, 28 Jul 2004 (MST)
Yeah, that makes sense. We'll have to add that to the list of things to change when bringing something over. To try to prevent some of the confusion. And to that user guide we still have to make... -- Tom 12:55, 28 Jul 2004 (MST)

I've pointed out before this page is unnecessary. Pom Pom (character) should be moved here, and pom pom should be the e-mail, and they can each have disambiguation notices at the top, like: You might be looking for the Strong Bad Email named pom pom. It's good enough for Wikipedia and I think it's still good enough for us. - furrykef 12:35, 14 Sep 2004 (MST)

In any case, we need to standardise this. Marzipan and Homsar's pages both have "(character)" and "(email)", whereas Pom Pom is just governed by case. Either way is fine, but it seems awkward to use both. --Upsilon

I think the email should be pom pom (email), but this page being changed to pom pom (character) is ridiculous. After all, what if there was an email entitled "strong bad"? Would we have to change the Strong Bad character page to Strong Bad (character)?

[edit] Last time we've seen Pom Pom?

When was the last time we have seen Pom Pom? Homestramy20|Talk 03:48, 15 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I think it was way back in Bug In Mouth Disease, which was released on May 9th. That IS a long time for such a main character to go without an appearance. --DorianGray
Family Resemblence was more recent than that, in July, although it wasn't on the site. Last time on the site was modeling, on June 27. --Jay v.2023 (Auld lang syne) 21:32, 15 Sep 2005 (UTC)
That's still a long time, isn't it? In the early toons, you couldn't have one without Pom Pom. Although, I guess there are only so many things you can do with a big bouncy guy who speaks in bubbles, yeah? --DorianGray
'Specially since Pom Pom lacks the character flaws that plague every other member of the main cast. --Jay v.2023 (Auld lang syne) 08:13, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Pom Pom has one character flaw: lack of character. We barely know anything about him. Personally, I'd rather TBC use him more or delete him from the main cast. I don't like a "main" character being ignored like this. But that's just me. - Joshua
Things change. I think TBC ran out of gas for the Pom-ster - as it says above, he has no clearly defined character, and can't speak (except in bubbles). Not speaking hasn't seemed to have hurt The Poopsmith much, but there's only so much you can do with was still interesting to see him go from Homestar's steadfast companion, to supporting character, to a once-in-a-blue-moon kinda guy. I don't think he'll totally disappear, but his halcion days are clearly passed. THE SMOKING MONKEY 13:49, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)
"Ran out of gas." That's funny. — It's dot com
Huh? Oh...he's, like, a gas-filled balloon. Oh, man. THE SMOKING MONKEY
Truth be told, Pom Pom still has more appearances than The Poopsmith (who also hasn't appeared in anything for a while) or Homsar, but the former is catching up, and he's already been surpassed by The King of Town. --Jay v.2023 (Auld lang syne) 18:37, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)
The Poopsmith appeared in Trogdor Con, but it was just a little cameo. (but so was Pom Pom in modeling) Homsar, on the other hand, is becoming popular. - Joshua
Ah, yes, forgot about that. Pom Pom's name was at least explicitly mentioned in modeling. --Jay v.2023 (Auld lang syne) 18:52, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)
That was very insightful about Pom Pom's lack of character flaws. He gets along with most everyone, he's confident, smart, a ladies' man... no wonder he hasn't been going places! Tell him to get an anxiety disorder or a fungus or something and he might have a comeback. ;)Trelawney 00:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that Pom Pom is more of a running gag, than an actual character, at least now, the joke with him being that he is a cool ladies man with tons of girlfriends, the Mack, when he is never really seen doing anything on screen, sort of like Morn getting the reputation of being the funniest guy around on Star Trek DS9. Lord-z 14:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Note that in his last four or five toons, he hasn't done anything but stand there. I think he should have at least been seen throwing the remote in strong badathlon or making out in the movies. I still don't think he deserves to die as much as the Poopsmith does, though. Bad Bad Guy 02:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference?

Does getting Homestar out of some really tight pants count as a reference to Seinfeld?--Robert Benedicio 13:39, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. small_logo.pngUsername-talk 15:19, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I think it's a referance to homestar not wearing pants. Not to a seinfeld show. — talk Bubsty edits 21:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Ah so there's the pants reference. It all makes sense.Geshmalder 21:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Beats me.But Homestar Wore Daisy Dukes in "Long Pants".But The Cheat Ignited them.--Gir007 20:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name

I've been wondering: how many times is the name "Pom Pom" (without the hyphen) actually used on the site? I've noticed that in almost all Strong Bad Emails, Strong Bad types it as "Pom-Pom". We did this with Strong Badia, and I think we should do it with Pom(-)Pom as well. Anyone willing to do a more thorough investigation on this mystery? Has Matt? (talk) 12:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Billiard Ball

Is the orange line on Pom Pom's belly a stripe or a midriff? Curious in Kankakee, Trey56 18:07, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to say it was a stripe, based on the other picture on the page. 01:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yet ANOTHER reference?

Pomeranians are called so because they're from the Island of Pomerania. Is Pom-Pom called so because he's from the Isle(and) of Pom? (Pomeranians are also known as Poms.) 23:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I think most things are named for the island they come from. Skye terriers come from the Island of Skye, Hawaiians come from the Hawaiian Islands, and so forth. --DorianGray

[edit] Pom Pom apearances as diffferent people

Some one should add that Pom Pom also appears as baby Pom in the email highschool.

[edit] pants

should it be noted there is a reference to homestar's pants in this toon?

Sure, why not? Done. --DorianGray 21:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Polyamorous?

Is Pom Pom polyamorous? I think that where it says girlfriends on the article, it should simply say 'girls', because I don't believe something such as this would appear in a Homestar cartoon, not to mention, they have never been named as his 'girlfriends', I know only polyamorous marrage is against the law, but I don't think TBC would toe the line like that.--~ SlipStream 10:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC) Well, Yeah, he obviously is. having multiple girlfriends is something strong bad TRIES to have, and pom pom actually has.

I don't mean to sound stupid, but Polyamarous? -Espemon333
Conversation is way out of date, but "polyamorous" means that you have multiple lovers (not necessarily spouses; that's polygamy). And Pom Pom does. This is not speculation, it's been stated outright multiple times. --Jay v.2023 (Auld lang syne) 21:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
For reference, this was on the Yearbook Character Page:
Pom Pom is a pom, which means he comes from The Isle of Pom, where all 27 of his girlfriends live.
--Jay v.2023 (Auld lang syne) 21:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Gin & Juice

Homestar is quoting Snoop's song Gin & Juice when he's saying 'every single day' with that tone in the character video. Marvelrulez 11:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pom Pom noises?

Pom Pom's bubbling sound is never called "Pom Pom noises", while The Cheat's noises are called "The Cheat noises". -- 21:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC) (I am a number?)

Because Pom Pom's are identifiable as bubbles, whereas The Cheat's are a variety of high-pitched squeaks, growls, yelps, and mutters. There is a single word for Pom Pom's noises, but not for The Cheat's. At least, I'm guessing that was the reasoning used by whoever first transcribed them as such. --DorianGray 21:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kongfu?

I think we have the right to know where Pom Pom learned his kong fu skills. Why shouldn't we know? Fingerface 21:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Pager number

Ok, seriously. look at that. it's so obviously 718 655 1059. but when i change it, it gets reverted. just go look at it!theres no doubt that is a 6.

It looks more like a 6 than any of those 5's, and it looks more like a 5 than the 6 in the home number. i'm not sure which one it is. given it's being compared next to a bunch of 5's, i'll go with 6.
my question is, the first number of the cell's area code looks more like the 3 home number's area code than the 1 in the home number's area code, or the 1 in the pager's area code. 323 is the area code for Hollywood, California; do y'all think tbc (1) knew that (2) would intend such a thing for pom pom if they did know it? The Knights Who Say Ni 02:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I still think it's a 5 and a 1, respectively. It's simulating handwriting, so it's supposed to differ subtly between numbers, but I think the intent is clear. - 02:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
if you zoom in, you can see clearly that the upper and lower portions of what would be a 5 are clearly connected with an extra line. — Defender1031*Talk 03:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
i think a Hollywood cell phone number would fit pom pom's character, and i think that does look more like a 3 than a 1. and (reality about 555 #'s aside) if i had two phone numbers, one's prefix was 555 and one's was 655, i would probably get them confused. it looks to me like pom pom wrote 555 and tried to correct it to 655. ok i'm sticking with 6. and the second one's first number doesn't look like a 1 at all imo. it doesn't look much like a 3 either, but it looks more like a 3 than anything else. The Knights Who Say Ni 03:18, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I think it makes sense that his home number and cell would have the same area code, whereas the pager could be a wild card. Here's a close up of the Cell area code.
personally, i think it's a one. It Really depends on how you look at it. if you expect a one, you see a one. Same goes for three. User:MechaKingBubsGonzola
File:Pom Pom Yearbook Numbers.png
Here's a properly zoomed-in version of the numbers. — Defender1031*Talk 18:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Having looked at the zoomed in version, my opinions of the other two, that they're a 5 and a 1, haven't changed, but now I'm wondering about the 7 in 718. It doesn't seem as distinctive from the 1's as the other sevens in the image. - 19:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
To make why I think it's a five more explicit, I think it's easier to imagine a scrawled five having the two bits of the arc accidentally touch than to have a six somehow having the top part be as straight vertical and angular as a five. I think it would be rare for a persons normal manner of writing six to produce that shape even if done hastily/messily. - 20:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I see what you're saying, but that doesn't look like they're accidentally touching. if it looked like a full circle at the bottom of a capital gamma, that would make more sense. this looks like the loop part of the 5 starts in about the right place for a 5, and then later on he put in another line in attempt to change it to a 6. i do think the first thing Pom Pom wrote there was a 5. i mean, if you were to write a 5 and then try to change it to a 6, how would you do it if you didn't want to cross out anything? like i said earlier, pom pom probably just got his prefixes confused.
as for the 3/1, on the pixellated zoom, it looks like a 1, and on the ordinary zoom, the right side looks like the right side of a 3, which has to be what i was looking at earlier, and the bottom looks like it could have been trying to wrap around to the left side, about like the top of that 7. i don't trust pixellated zooms, so i'm not convinced that it's a 1. The Knights Who Say Ni 21:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
My 4 cents:
At first glance, it looks like a six, but not in very good handwriting. Or maybe it looks like a five at first glance. I am not sure. All his other fives are clearer, so his handwriting does not completely suck. But back to the five/six in question. You both have good points, The Knights Who Say Ni (cool name) and, so it could really be anything, unless you dive deep into your soul look VERY closely, and apply common sense, problem solving, and finding out the answer. Actually, it looks like an upside-down lowercase G, but that's probably not right. But back to the five/six. For those of you not asleep, there seems to be a little curve on the bottom tips of all the other fives, suggesting he draws them from up to down, like average. 5. He COULD have gotten carried away with the bottom tip, but this is unlikely. I do not really think it is likely to have a scrawled five having the two bits of the arc accidentally touch, but than again, there aren't much other options. On the issue of Pom Pom mixing up the 555 and the 655 and trying to correct it, let's remember one thing: POM POM ISN'T REAL. I doubt TBC would have included a detail as small as that on a page that probably wasn't close to being the most popular in the site, would they? No really, would they? I do not think they would. So, maybe it IS likely that the five's two bits of the arc accidentally touch. And I'm not sure I mentioned this, but no, the parts of a six would not touch like that, it is very unlikely, probably. Just my opinion. I'll get to the issue of the 3 and the one after this. Very sincerely, free 13:47, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I have a great idea. Instead of coming to a consensus, how about we just put that picture in as a substitute for the written out phone numbers? that way anyone can come to their own conclusion as to what the numbers actually are. Tcmf (if i may call you that), when tbc came up with that, i don't think they intended for there to be this much discussion on such a trivial subject matter, so this seems like an easy solution to a relatively trivial debate. The Knights Who Say Ni 20:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Um, Great idea! How exactly to do this... free 21:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Except that a bunch of the fun facts following it talk about the numbers... — Defender1031*Talk 21:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh yeah, you have a point, DeFender. it is just one fun fact, but i think it is too integral to remove, and if we were to edit it accordingly, it would look too sloppy.
on a different note, i did some research, and it looks like (718)655- is a legitimate combination in The Bronx. seeing as though the other two are definitely impossible combinations for personal numbers (regardless of 123 or 323), i'm now guessing that was also the intent of the third. The Knights Who Say Ni 21:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
It's a 5. The zoomed-in image looks very much like the results I get when I convert a bitmap into a vector shape. Here's how it was probably created: The entire page was drawn by hand by one of The Brothers Chaps (except for Marzipan's part, which Missy probably did, and of course Strong Sad's part). They then scanned the page and used an automatic tracing utility to make the vector shapes. As small as the finished product is intended to be displayed, and given that it's supposed to look messy, it wasn't important to spend a lot of time refining the shapes. This explains why the bottom of the 5 is connected. On shapes as small as this, fine detail is lost and curves that are supposed to be open often close up. Looking at the shape, it has a horizontal and vertical part that are more or less straight like a 5, not curved like a 6. At the bottom of the shape, the curved portion extends a little to the left of the vertical line. On top of the visual analysis, the practical analysis cannot be ignored: 555 is the universal "fake" prefix. 655 is not. I really don't see TBC putting a working phone number in their work, especially when the simplest explanation is that they didn't. — It's dot com 22:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
hey dot com. "Looking at the shape-->" on, thank you for explaining my point of the last thing i said exactly. as for the rest of it, i would love to see what you are talking about. The Knights Who Say Ni 23:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey TheThin 19:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Pom Pom's Body

Am I the only one who thinks that Pom Pom's 'Body' is really just a suit? His Clothes? A Giant pocket? That would explain the models and his infinate space in his body. Any supporters? Decliners? -Espemon333

Probably. But in any case, without info one way or the other, it's pure speculation. — Defender1031*Talk 21:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
You're right. Interesting idea though. DeFender, can you give me some peace of mind and visit my userpage? -Espemon333
This is not really the place for this. I'll reply on your talk page. — Defender1031*Talk 00:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Pom Pom: Boy or Girl

This is a stumper. In the Yearbook Character Page, it says, "Sup! Wish we coulda got to know each other better this year. --->You're super-cute!!<--- Gimme a call this summer. - Pom Pom"

Either Pom Pom was talking to Homestar(making Pom Pom a girl) or Marzipan(making Pom Pom a boy). TheHumstarRonner 12:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Pom Pom is referred to using masculine pronouns... everywhere—including the yearbook page about him. The autograph page is not talking to Homestar Runner or Marzipan specifically. (They both sign it themselves.) — It's dot com 13:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Science! Science again!

I was thinking about including some of this in the main page, but I wanted to put it here first. This is a detailed analysis, so any part of this or a summary could be included.

Given a height of 6 feet, 2 inches for Pom Pom, and assuming he is spherical and filled with gas, he would hold approximately 3476.9 liters (918.5 US gallons, 122.8 cubic feet) of gas. Given his weight of 4 pounds, he has a density of at most about 0.52 kilograms per cubic meter (0.033 pounds per cubic foot), depending on how much of his mass is his head, limbs, and body, and how much is the air inside. He would float in water, and is less dense than air.

If Pom Pom is filled with air at room temperature (20 degrees Celsius, 68 degrees Fahrenheit), then he has an internal pressure of about 3000 Pascals (0.030 atmospheres, 0.88 inches of mercury) or less if his head, limbs and body are heavier. His body must be made of some durable material, or else he would implode under normal conditions. Even if he is not filled with air, he is probably filled with something either naturally lightweight, depressurized, or cold.

Aaronak 23:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I think Pom Pom is beyond scientific explanation. The guy was popped five years after this question, and his body was ripped apart — into some small pieces that don't even come close to the surface area that his body had been. From that alone we can deduce that his body is very elastic, and that the gas inside was forcing quite a lot of pressure onto it.
-- ■■   PURPLE  WRENCH   ■■ 01:24, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Has Pom Pom died?

Because I never seen him in the lastest Homestar Runner cartoons and he died (and came back to life) in I killed Pom Pom. -- 17:58, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Death is pretty common in Homestar Runner, as it runs on a variant of negative continuity. Pom Pom especially is hard to pin down, because he makes few appearances in recent cartoons. Essentially, just because a character is dead doesn't mean they're necessarily going to stay dead. Except for Homeschool Winner. --DorianGray 18:06, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Okay then. Sorry I asked. R.I.P Homeschool Winner -- 15:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Personal tools