Talk:The Brothers Chaps

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Ding! The Brothers Chaps 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] Questions

what is their e-mail address???? ---MikeD

Email. -- Tom 15:14, 9 Nov 2004 (MST)
Yes, brotherschaps AT homestarrunner DOT com . -woddfellow2 19:27, 18 Nov 2004 (MST)
The "See here ( to see a collection of [edited] photographs from a football game where TBC use their superhuman abilities." from the article doesn't appear to work now - anyone know the correct link?
  • Religious Family
Where'd we learn this from? what religion? and are they still "religious" is what i'd like ta know... I've always wondered this about TBC--Kevindeed
Where: [1]. Doesn't say. And doesn't say. You could ask them though. They're nice dudes. -- Tom 08:55, 4 Jan 2005 (MST)

Hm. I can't see the football game pictures from Eric Conveys an Emotion. Where are they? I followed the link, and got the right page, but no pictures are there. --Hagurumon

Is the page not loading, or are you just not seeing the images? The link works for me. The first page displays this image. Does that help? -- Tom 19:34, 14 Jan 2005 (MST)

Well, everything loads except the pictures somehow. And my browser says "Done"., signalling that everything is loaded, but it really isn't. But thanks for the picture, now I can see them all. --Hagurumon

Hmm. What browser are you using? You might be in need of a better browser. You know, The Homestar Runner Wiki recommends Mozilla Firefox... -- Tom 13:41, 18 Jan 2005 (MST)
You might have some kind of ad-blocking software blocking it. --ED!smilde

Hey Tom, I'm the one who fixed the "As Kids" picture position, as it was causing a huge gap to appear between the "Fun Facts" title and the first fact in it, but you reverted it and so the gap is back. Am I the only one who can see this? --Tweek

Are they alcoholic or not? I just want to know if they're alcoholic or not! -- 03:44, 26 Mar 2005 (MST)

I don't think they are alcoholics, Maudi. -- Tom 22:26, 27 Mar 2005 (MST)
They never drink or smoke, Maudi. -- 18:14, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

[edit] G4 TechTV

We need a page for their recent appearance on G4. I'd like to see a transcript (if possible). What should we call it? →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]

Screen Savers Interview - 24 Jan 2005 would follow the same format as TMBG Concert - 25 Sep 2004. It's hard to name things like that. -- Tom 21:13, 24 Jan 2005 (MST)

[edit] Colleges?

Anybody know what colleges they went to? I've heard all kinds of crap and no two websites say the same thing. --mibluvr13dígame 00:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mike Chapman went to school at the University of Georgia. —FireBird|Talk 00:10, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Brothers Grimm

"They commonly refer to themselves as 'The Brothers Chaps'. Their nickname dirives from that of The Brothers Grimm, who wrote many popular fairy tales. And much like The Brothers Grimm, The Brothers Chaps have created their own very popular world of fictional characters." Is there any proof of this? I've removed it from the page until we know it's for sure. —FireBird|Talk 23:54, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I think that there isn't a reference it's just a little to much of a NBBB(Talk · Contributions) 15:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Who's who ?

Hi !

I've got a little question : how in Earth can you know who is Matt and who is Mike ? Every time I only see a name of one of the brother, I ask myself "Who's this one, again ?". Does anyone have some kind of memotechnic thing or something, to remember that ?

Thanks for the answer. (Oh, and, yeah, I know...I should register...)

It's easy. We've got a ton of media examples where they identify themselves individually. And when you've been wiki-ing for a long time like a lot of us have, it gets embedded in your brain who's who. —BazookaJoe 17:24, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Christian

"They were raised in a Christian family". Where did you get this, Trogga? —FireBird|Talk 03:07, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

See Don and Harriet Chapman. But I don't know where that came form. Were they raised in a Christian home? Technically, yes. —BazookaJoe 03:11, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Given that they live in the USA, where about 80-85% of all people call themselves Christians (IIRC), this isn't exactly shocking news. --Jay (Talk) 03:47, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

True. A more pertinent question would be if they were raised in a devout Christian family. — (Talk | contribs) 05:21, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) (left unsigned)

Religious affiliation should be left out. It's a filthy habit on Wikipedia to mention something so unimportant & utterly trivial. — (Talk | contribs) 09:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC) (left unsigned)
Opinion noted.
btw, this remark was removed from the page five and a half years ago and hasn't been seen since. Additionally, this talk section hasn't been touched in over five years either. it's generally a good idea to check and make sure a talk post is active before responding to it. The Knights Who Say Ni 17:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Article?

Shouldn't this be a featured article, because without them their would not be Homestar Runner and this Wiki? --

why not? Choco 17:46, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

This page is already listed on HRWiki:Featured article nominations. All we can do now is wait for the sysops to choose it. – The Chort 17:50, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] MMMMM..... TBC

for some reason, seeing the acryonym TBC makes me think of ice cream. is that the same for anyone else?-- Benol, aka Coach B 18:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

You sure it doesn't make you think of frozen yogurt? —AbdiViklas 19:59, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

You're probably thinking of TCBY. --TangerineDreams 01:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MySpace

Any one else skeptical on that MySpace link? -- Tom 15:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm a bit skeptical. I saw it come up last night and wondered if it was authentic, but thought I'd see what other people thought. Heimstern Läufer 16:02, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
"Religion: Bhuddist". Strikes me as odd to put... --DorianGray
Looking at the page it definitely looks very suspicious, it has much information (and pics) that are publicly available and is rather vague in its descriptions. It really could go either way, since Mike and Matt leave reasonably private lives, but lack of corroborating evidence makes this, in my book, unreliable, which is why I rv'd it. --Stux 16:22, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that the pics were pics used on other sites, I also though Bhuddist was out of place. I R F 16:40, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TBG

Could The Brothers Chaps be referance to The Brothers Gibb? I just thought of it whilst watching Rock Profile. EggBoo, 7:21 WST

It might be, but there's also The Brothers Grimm, and I'm sure that there are at least one or two other examples that I can't remember right now. That would be a good question to ask them in an interview. For now, we don't know for sure. Has Matt? (talk) 11:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Or The Brothers Marx, The Warner Brothers... It's not a referance to anything particular. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 12:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oh, if you want TBC to be possessive...

I want to bring this to an agreement (if possible) once and for all. Should we use The Brothers' Chaps or The Brothers Chaps'? Both are distributed fairly evenly across the HRWiki. But which one is more grammatical, if either? Which one should we be using? Personally, I've always been using The Brothers' Chaps, because I think it's more grammatical. The Brothers' Chaps can be switched around to The Chaps Brothers', but The Brothers Chaps' cannot be switched around to The Chaps' Brothers. What do you think? —BazookaJoe 00:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

"The Brothers Chaps'" is grammatically correct (see rule 6 at The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation).  Loafing 00:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't think rule 6 explains why it should be The Brothers Chaps'. Unless I'm missing something. —BazookaJoe 00:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
It looks like rule 5 might be the right one: Trey56 00:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Rule 5. If the compound noun is plural, form the plural first and then use the apostrophe.
Example: my two brothers-in-law's hats
I vote for the "Chapostraphy" version: "The Brothers Chaps'", when in a possesive context. It just seems clearer and right to me, the other way seems like you're refering to The Brothers' Chap...stick, or something. The focus of the possesion becomes the "Chap", in my humble opinion. Thunderbird 00:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
By the way, I laughed pretty hard when I read "chapostraphy" :) Trey56 01:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, it's rule 5 and not 6. Hehehe, chapostrophy ^_^  Loafing 01:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it "The Brothers' Strong" or "The Brothers Strong's"? Both of those look weird to me, as do both of the TBC variants. I suggest we avoid the issue altogether and use "of The Brothers Chaps" (or similar) wherever possible. — It's dot com 02:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm surprised to find that my argument isn't holding up. I would have thought that it would be The Brothers' Strong because—if you switch them around—The Strong Brothers' is correct while The Strong's Brothers is not. (And is The Brothers Strong really a compound noun similar enough to brothers-in-law, which would mean it uses rule 5?) (Then again, perhaps The Strong's Brothers isn't correct because it's supposed to be using rule 5.) So, to avoid all this, I'm OK with using "of TBC (or TBS)" in all areas. If no one else has anything further, I'm going to go editing in a few days. —BazookaJoe 21:29, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Nobody would say "brother's Strong dog" if there is only one brother. That is clearly "brother Strong's dog". In plural form, that would be "The Brothers Strong's dog". Same for "Chaps". But I'm OK with "of (TBC|TBS)".  Loafing 22:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I think I've been convinced now. All right then, we don't have to change all of them to "of TBC". TBC' is okay with me now. —BazookaJoe 22:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Legitimate Business MySpace?

Are we sure that's THEIR myspace, and not some phony imposter? --Color Printer 18:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

No, we aren't. That's why I reverted this edit, per precedent. There's already a conversation about this further up on this page, BTW. Heimstern Läufer 18:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heimdalsgate Like a Promethean Curse

Mike and Matt recently directed a video for Of Montreal. (I know Ryan has done this before, see his article.) See some Google results for more information. Any idea how we should cover this information, if at all? -- Tom 05:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe it's time for a section called "H*R-unrelated Activities" or something like that. Producing Craig's movie would go in that section as well. And we could link to the video on youtube [2], I'm sure many people would be interested (and underwhelmed :-P). Loafing 05:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Mellow Mushroom would fit in that category too... Trey56 05:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Like the side projects category. --DorianGray
Yeah, somebody should really go and creat that category. Trey56 05:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I was actually thinking of a short section on this article rather than giving bits like that music video their own article. Loafing 05:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
'S why I said like. Like the side projects category, but as a section. --DorianGray
Hm... I think that they could use their own page (into which Mellow Mushroom and others could possibly be merged)...something like The Brothers Chaps' Side Projects or sommat. I have the feeling that TBC are going to be doing more and more of expanding their horizons beyond HSR. Trey56 05:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
...which poses the question, how deep into documenting their non-H*R work do we plan to go? What if they become multi-million dollar media blitzes? What if their career eclipses their humble H*R beginnings? Do we become a TBC wiki, or do we remain true to our roots? Let's be cautious in how fully we plan to include non-H*R stuff here. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 10:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
That's true—in the meantime (until they become media moguls), I think it's fine to have a page briefly summarizing their outside projects. People are going to want to know what else TBC are up to, and we don't have to go into great detail. People have always been interested in things like Thorax Corporation, If I Ran The Camera, and Mellow Mushroom, and in the future as TBC produce films, etc., I think a great way to show our support for them is to inform people about their other projects. Trey56 14:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Qermaq. I just found this cool list, for example. It simply adds up after a while (wow, it's so cool that's he's the voice of Garu's friend! I love Pucca! :-D ) Loafing 21:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, I also agree with Trey. People (including myself) *are* interested in this. But we have to find a consensus about how much we document. For example, I find The Knowledge Hat and Respek Knuckles are totally unnessecary pages (and the link to Limozeen is highly questionable). Loafing 21:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes — those are unnecessary. For almost all of the outside projects, I would advocate listing them all on a single page, rather than giving each one a sea-pirate page. Trey56 22:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
It's like how we refuse to transcribe the Mellow Mushroom toon. Each work by TBC need only a brief explanation, a link to some sources and what references to Homestar Runner that they can throw it ("Mel's voice sound like early Strong Bad" that kind of stuff). Elcool (talk)(contribs) 04:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Decatur?

Where does it say that they are from Decatur, Georgia? --Trogga 01:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Flashforward Interview - 10 Feb 2006 and Cold Hard Flash Interview - 1 Dec 2005, for two wiki searchable references. See also the envelope Matt sent Joey. Also interesting, Mark David Chapman is a Decatur native. -- Tom 01:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
His article doesn't mention anything about it (only Atlanta), but if that's true that's very interesting indeed. — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 02:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems that this chap was born in Fort Worth, TX (and we know those people go to prison), and apparently, his family moved to Decatur shortly after his birth [3]. Now, what does this have to do with anything anyway? Loafing 03:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Me nitpicking again

I find it inappropriate to say both Matt and Mike created the whole Homestar Runner body of work. Matt had nothing do with the Original Book, I believe. --Trogga 18:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's overly nitpicky. TBC are the primary driving force behind everything on the site, regardless of the fact that they have several collaborators. And I don't see the word "whole" in the article. — It's dot com 19:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Then why can't we say they just created the site? --Trogga 19:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Because they didn't create just the site. They are responsible for what H*R is today. Others have helped, some of them a lot, but ultimately TBC made the H*R body of work. Looking at the article about Homestar Runner as a whole, I notice that it could be clarifed and expanded quite a bit, but the line in this aricle is fine. — It's dot com 19:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Youtube user

Where should we put the info about them being on youtube.Meme3 23:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like they abandoned it after uploading 2 videos.

[edit] Who's who?

On the DVD commentaries, Matt and Mike are hosts, but it's difficult to tell who is who, especially if you're doing the transcripts of the commentaries here. How do I tell the difference between them? MHarrington 00:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Mike's voice is slightly *AND I MEAN REALLY SLIGHTLY* lower than Matt's. Email Checkin' Dan 19:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
See, I tend to disagree with this. Mike's voice is slightly higher than Matt's, imo. —Zelinda 21:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Matt is also the younger/hotter one. 16:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools