Talk:Visor Robot

From Homestar Runner Wiki

The Visor Robot's name is Robbot Darren, or at least there is a robot named Robot Darren who zaps you if you try to fight him in Hallrunner, complete with the "VOIP!"

[edit] Sketchbook, 2005-04-29

this week's sketch book identifies this as the "fhqwhgads robot"; should we relabel to match?
MetaStar 15:09, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• In this case, I'm leaning towards no - because the robot predates any connection to Fhqwhgads. (see Homestarloween Party) --Jay (Talk) 15:13, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Jay. We have to remember that we take the naming of minor characters a bit more seriously than perhaps The Brothers Chaps do, since we need to put them into articles where consistency matters. I'd imagine they were probably just thinking something like, "Hey, it's that robot we used in the fhqwhgads song!" or something. -- Tom

So where does the name "Visor Robot" come from anyway? I mean, I know it has a visor, but by that logic it might as well be "Laser Robot" or something... Aurora the Homestar Coder 19:41, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This discussion is a lot like the one on Talk:Arrow'd Guy, where TBC called a character by a specific name in an obscure reference, and we responded by changing what we call the character here on the wiki. I supported calling Arrow'd Guy by that name because (1) I think it's likely TBC actually call him that, (2) the new name is less cumbersome than the old one, and (3) to me, "Arrow'd Guy" better describes what the character does than the arbitrary "The Man with the Huge Mouth."

In the case of the robot, however, I wouldn't be surprised if TBC don't call him that on a regular basis. Without more to go on, and because "Visor Robot" is just as concise as "Fhqwhgads Robot" (and because remembering how to spell "fhqwhgads" is a pain in the you-know-where), I don't support changing what we call him at this time. — It's dot com 06:57, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I know this is "waking a dead subject" or whatever Joshua called it, but I think we should relabel this article Fhqwhgads Robot because that name is more official than Visor Robot, and that name doesn't really explain the character at all, whereas with Arrow'd Guy that name just makes sense, and "The Man with the Huge Mouth" would be too much rigamarole for any of us. And with "fhqwhgads" being hard to type, it's not hard for me at all, and we'd only need to use his name a couple of times, because chances are we won't be editing anything related to him for a while, anyway. Oh, and sorry for ranting. I just can't make a point in few words, ever. — Darth Katana X ( )

I still say you shouldn't have: Homestarloween Party predates i love you. And you got no consensus before changing it. --Jay (Gobble) 20:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Fine, change it back to the completely innacurate name (not that you haven't already), and keep using the most unofficial names as possible. I'm gonna talk to The Chaps about this, or would that even make a difference? Since it looks like the goal here is to use the most innacurate name possible, then that'd just be proof that he is the Fhqwhgads Robot! — Darth Katana X ( )

So, he was Fhqwhgads Robot, before Fhqwhgads existed? TBC just made a mistake... They didn't call him Fhqwhgads Robot when they made him. Do we call Strong Bad Wrestleman (as his real name), just because he's had that name in the sketchbook? Bluebry 23:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, which is more official? The name they called him "by mistake" or some name some guy made up? And here's another question —

Where on the site is he called the Visor Robot?

Just wondering. — Darth Katana X ( )

Edit conflict. So they may have retroactively named it. There's nothing to say they can't. The last part of your argument is flawed, Bluebry, because Strong Bad has already been officially named as 'Strong Bad', and a nickname in the sketchbook isn't going to change that. But for something that has not previously been officially named like the Visor Robot, a name in the sketchbook is the closest we can come to official. I vote for page move. —BazookaJoe 23:44, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Darth Katana and BazookaJoe, I think it should be Fhqwhgads robot. When TBC picked the sketches to use in the Weekly Sketchbook, they had to ask themselves, "What is the offical name for this guy going to be?" If the used the name "Fhqwhgads Robot" in the Sketchbook, then it is more than likely the name TBC call him all the time. If a name is given anywhere on the site, that is the name we have to use, whether we like it or not. We don't just say, "Hey, Pom-Pom is a weird name, so I'ma call him Josh from now on." I think that if we want this Wiki to be as accurate as possible, we use the name TBC use and not a name some fan made up. P.S. When the creator makes a mistake and they don't correct it, it is called canon. — Has Matt? (talk) 23:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC) P.P.S. Edit conficts suck.

I unfortunatly, have to agree. I still don't want him called Fhqwhgads Robot (yes, that means I'm still for Visor Robot), but that's a hgard thing to battle. Lemme think... well... it is his official name... can we just name him both? Fhqwhgads/Visor Robot? I dunno... Bluebry 23:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with the move, but don't forget that we should give Jay, Dot com and Tom time to respond to this, since they opposed it in the past. Heimstern Läufer 23:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. Give 'em time. Bluebry 23:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

It's safe to assume that Jay and It's dot com aren't with us on changing this article's name to "Fhqwhgads Robot." I wonder what Tom thinks of this whole thing? I also totally agree with BazookaJoe and Has Matt?, especially on the part about "Josh." — Darth Katana X ( )

The concensus (or whatever) is 6 to 3, Fhqwhgads winning. Tom wouldn't help it be changed or stayed either way. might as well change it (I'm still for Visor Robot, just so you don't say I ever wasn't) Bluebry 00:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. It's more like 8 to 3. Bluebry 00:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

You might want to hold off on the page move. That's jumping the gun. —BazookaJoe 00:17, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Spoke too late. Bluebry 00:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

It's not that I like the name "Visor Robot" - it's that I don't like the name "Fhqwhgads Robot" for a character that predates fhqwhgads. That said, at least wait for a consensus before changing it (it was changed without consensus before.) --Jay (Gobble) 03:40, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Jay (although I do like the name "Visor Robot"). --DorianGray

Whatever, Jay, but you're not answering my question. Once again —

Where on the site is he called the Visor Robot?

Answer that! — Darth Katana X ( )

My answer is this: It's not that I like the name "Visor Robot" - it's that I don't like the name "Fhqwhgads Robot" for a character that predates fhqwhgads. If we could find another name (er, Valerie doesn't count) that could satisfy everyone and would still fit with all of his appearances, heck, go for it. --Jay (Gobble) 06:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, Darth, please don't get so combatative! It's really not necessary. I'm sure Jay knows that he is never called the Visor Robot on the site. But he objects to the name Fhqwhgads robot for a a character that existed prior to the name Fhqwhgads. And I respect his opinion in that respect, even though I disagree with it. I'm with you; I believe if the name Fhqwhgads Robot was good enough for TBC to use on the site, it's good enough for this wiki. But please, let's keep this discussion friendly. Heimstern Läufer 06:53, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

This is similar to the Arrow'd Guy argument; "Arrow'd" doesn't apply to every single one of the character's appearances. That said, I'll concede one thing about Mr. Arrow'd: at least his name fits his first appearance. I can't even give that one to the Robot. --Jay (Gobble) 07:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

What about "Laser Robot"? "Oh, and then the robot came and he started vaporising everybody with his laser sound!" He also has a laser effect in the Fhqwhgads song, and VOiPs off So-and-So's head with a laser (rendering her burnt, or dead). I think lasers might fit... --DorianGray

I admit that I like that one better than "Visor". --Jay (Gobble) 09:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I also concur. Heimstern Läufer 09:10, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

That's better than "Visor Robot," but not worth going through the rigamarole of changing the name just for that. Look, whether he was around before Fhqwhgads or not, that's what The Brothers Chaps called him and that's more than likely his name - unless it's Robot Darren. I asked The Chaps about it, but I haven't got any replies. So far they've been ignoring me, they probably saw me on the Wiki and I did something they didn't like and now they despise me or something. That's how my life goes and whatever.

All right, so sorry for getting mad about this. But finding all my edits changed back to a one hundred percent inaccurate name really cheesed me off, plus I'm frustrated and stressed all the time no matter what. — Darth Katana X ( )

Sorry for upsetting you, but there really was no consensus to change it at the time that you did - the only discussions on the topic were months old and mostly concluded with the agreement to leave them alone, at least for the time being. The consensus may be swinging the other way, but that only happened after you made the change. And, knowing TBC, why do I have a feeling that this week's Weeklies may address this subject? :p --Jay (Gobble) 09:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Sugg change name to "Robot" and have "fhqwhgads robot" be directed. It has never been referred to as "Visor Robot" and it's second and probably most prominent appearence was in "Everybody To The Limit". Thoughts? - Qermaq - (^T/C)  09:40, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I like it with but one flaw: The Robot. Having this separate from "Robot" (they are different characters) would be confusing in some ways. --Jay (Gobble) 09:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

NEW INFO I see now that "The Robot" is taken. As it's most well known from "ETTL" and it's described in Sketch as the "fhqwhgads Robot" perhaps that's what name it really has. As for the argument that the 1st appearance of the robot is before fhqwhgads was conceived, leave it as a back-naming, the robot had no name until "ETTL". - Qermaq - (^T/C)  09:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, Jay, I probably shouldn't have, but then again, we probably wouldn't be discussing this if I didn't. Anyway, if someone The Chaps would probably have more respect for (like Jay or It's dot com) would e-mail them and ask them, that'd end all arguements, right? — Darth Katana X ( )

Heh, if only it were that easy. But it's not very likely they'd respond to anyone's email, not even Tom's, and Tom has met them. We're probably going to have to solve this one on our own. Heimstern Läufer 04:04, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Just a comment: Didn't we get Arrow'd Guy's name from the back of Everybody Everybody Poster? How does the robot called there? — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 07:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

No, not on the back of the poster; on the Store's caption for it. No reference to this robot there. Heimstern Läufer 07:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Until the Brothers Chaps tell us his real name and settles it for us once and for all, let's stick with Visor Robot. It has a good ring to it and it's is easier to spell than Fhqwhgads Robot. – The Chort 19:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

And it's easier to alienate fans into thinking he's actually named something asanine like "The Visor Robot," send a bad idea and give the site a reputation for not being a "knowledge base" but a handful of fanwankers (bleep)ing and moaning over dumb situations just to keep false, completely fan-interpreted names in the long run? I don't think so! — Darth Katana X ( )

And that's the root of it. This is supposed to be a knowledge base, not an assumption base, or a guesswork base. Merge and rename as Robot. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  11:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

As I have said, the merge will most likely be like Prance. It will cause many confusions. See Prance's talk age. Bluebry 01:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Five people. I found it rather clear from the start. Maybe I'm different. This page would be even CLEARER because we'd start with "There are many instances of robots in the HR universe. Here are some of them" or something like that. Seriously, they all go together well, and we know too little about any to have it stand on its own. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  03:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The Wikipedia says that he is The Fhqwhgads Robot. I'm thinking that is his real name. Could it be possible that the Wikipedia uses the official name, and the HRWiki uses the more unofficial name? —2Fast2Furious 12:23 pm, 16 March 2006

It could, or it also could be possible that the editor at WP doesn't know for sure any better than us. Personally, I suspect the latter. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  17:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia just has a brain. I think that sums it up. — Darth Katana X ( )

Now that insult's just sad. >.> - Joshua 12:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the editor at WP (I'm an editor at Wikipedia as well as HRWiki) doesn't know for sure any better than us. If you want better resources, you can go to sites such as Britannica.com. They don't have anything on Homestar Runner, though. —2Fast2Furious 10:03 11 April 2006

I don't think that "fhqwhgads" is necessarily being used as a name here. Like Tom said way up there, I tend to think that it could just be being used as an adjective, as in "that robot that was in that song about fhqwhgads". — It's dot com 20:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the robot should be called the "Fqwhgads Robot". because where on the site (this one and Homestarrunner.com) is it called the Visor Robot so i think someone should switch the name to "Fqwhgads Robot." -Tothelimit66

"The Brothers Chaps revealed that although they never specifically named the robot, they now refer to it by the name Visor Robot because of the longtime usage of the name by this wiki." — Defender1031*Talk 19:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A Possible Solution

I like the idea of simply naming it "The Robot". There are two choices there, either moving "The Robot" to "The Robot (storybook)" first, or merging the two articles. Since they haven't really been used together (The original robot pretty much having been replaced by the visor robot), I think merging the two characters into one page would be the most obvious choice. And who's to say they're not supposed to be the same character? The Robot may have gone through it's fair share of evolution, like everybody else. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 07:44, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

That's a grood idea. And we could write about similar robots like Robot Darren there, too, and then we could give the Fhqwhgads Robot his own page when we know his name for sure, or if he is Robot Darren or The Robot or whatever. Hmm, it'd be funny if we found out the robot is a she, too. He/she is called Vallerie sometimes, maybe it's kind of like in Eragon with the dragon and everything. — Darth Katana X ( )

I concur. Not last place. Ding! --Jay (Gobble) 04:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Now that's talent! Good prize! - Qermaq - (^T/C)  05:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I also agree. (Might we reach consensus at last?) Heimstern Läufer 07:19, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

It rocks that we finally came to an agreement. So, who's gonna do the honors of merging them? And how come the freakin' "Watch this page" option does nothing? — Darth Katana X ( )

Not too hasty, Darth, let's give a little more time for people to weigh in. That's the way we like to do things around here. Heimstern Läufer 07:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

"Watch this page" simply makes it appear in your watchlist (look at the very top right corner of the page) when it's edited. And it boldfaces it on the "Recent changes" page. --Jay (Gobble) 08:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks, man. Anyway, I think we can just close the whole thing up and merge them now. No need for a continuation. — Darth Katana X ( )

Disagree on merge, agree on rename to "The Robot" and "The Robot" to "The Robot (Storybook)". Bluebry 02:13, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Not last place? Good prize? Woohoo! ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 02:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Having "The Robot" and "The Robot (Storybook)" is a bad idea. Can we just merge 'em? — Darth Katana X ( )

Well, they're two different things. Bluebry 03:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Who says? And besides, we wouldn't go all out and say the Fhqwhgads Robot is The Robot, we'd just note their similarity and the fact that they could be the same. — Darth Katana X ( )

The similarity that they're two legged robots? Other than that, not too much. It's like merging two people not seen together and noting the similarities. Bill Gates is a human that does stuff with computers like Steve Jobs. and they're both in a merged page together. Bluebry 18:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Yet we have one article for Prance. We have one article for Rejected Characters. The robots have not appeared so often that they need separate pages; and as we don't know the correct differentiating names, we cannot accurately have separate pages anyway. I vote Merge. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  18:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Prance has also caused MANY confusions due to the merge thing. Many. See the talk page. Seriously, people just think it's about the country. You can't stop it, really. Bluebry 18:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

We could've just got the article in a good, non-confusing place (that place being merged with The Robot) and then continue the discussion from there while we still could, but no, we had to wait. We're just gonna fight over this forever. Heck, if I'll we're going to get accomplished is fighting just to end up using a fanwank'd name and asinine statements like "The Visor Robot is not to be confused The Robot," which are so matter of fact in knowing that's his name anyway, why don't we just keep it like that? But I rest my case; dissecting Homestar Runner, gossiping over an online cartoon and basically writing fanfics on a knowledge base is not my idea of a good plan. — Darth Katana X ( )

Someone doesn't read other messages. Prance's merging has caused much confusion. Bluebry 03:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd be happy to agree if you'd link to the messages in question and show me. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  05:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Prance. Three people confused (including me) and Dot com had to correct us. Bluebry 02:19, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I saw that, and assumed you were addressing someplace else. Three people isn't much in my book, actually. The current page disambiguates pretty well, I think. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  02:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather have the two robots on seperate pages. - Joshua 12:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Just letting everyone know, we do have a page on Robots. Not that I care much either way about the storybook robot and this robot being merged or not. — Has Matt? (talk) 12:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I think there should be two pages: The Robot and The Robot (storybook), with a disambiguation at the top. They are two characters, and should each have their own page. Merging them, then, on one page would be undesirable. — It's dot com 19:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, to summarize the discussion to this point: Pretty much everyone agrees that this page should be moved to "The Robot". The question then is what to do with the material currently on that page (i.e. merge it or keep it a separate page). Two people have expressed a strong desire to merge the pages, one person has espressed a preference to merge (but not a strong desire), three people have expressed a strong desire to keep them separate, two people have not expressed a preference (or it's ambiguous), and one person is neutral. In order to clarify the situation (and maybe actually do anything about it), we need to know whether the people who want it merged can live with two pages or whether the people who want separate pages can live with just one. Given the Robots page, would a merging even be appropriate? Heimstern and Jay also need to state exactly what they're agreeing and concurring with. As I close here, I'll offer an argument for keeping them separate, from the storybook robot's page: "He is not related to the Visor Robot." — It's dot com 21:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I like the two-page solution (at the time I last wrote about agreement, I had not read about this idea). Support changing to The Robot and The Robot (storybook). The latter is of very little importance to the modern H*R universe, and therefore we shouldn't keep this robot at a non-canonical name because of it. Heimstern Läufer 21:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I would not have a fit and cry if the robots were on separate pages, but I still believe one page is enough. The topic of that page would be the various robots which appear in H*R. As there have been so few, and so little information is possible on each, it seems logical to me. Additionally, I reiterate the fact that we do not have any names for these robots, so titling would be provisional at best, a guess at worst. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  21:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

With the release of Strongest Man in the World, it seems pretty clear that these two characters are not the same at all. I have moved the pages as described above. — It's dot com 01:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

aren't there too much robots??? i think we should name each robot seperatley to tell them apart. if you name it "The Robot," you couldn't tell the difference between this robot we are currently speaking of, out of the Grape Nuts robot Bubs build for Strong Bad! -Tothelimit66

[edit] Not a robot?

Is it necessary to state that the "not a robot" disclaimer in Senor Mortgage means anything? I just assumed it was a play on the "not an actor" actors in such commercials... --Jay (Talk) 02:18, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it does. --TheThingé 13:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I do, and anyway, this discussion is outdated because what I was talking about nine months ago has since been removed. --Jay (Gobble) 20:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How?

How do we know his name's Visor Robot? He's never been called that by any of the characters...Poopsmith Z

We don't. See discussion above re: Fhqwhgads Robot. Homestar Coder 14:04, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)

How do we know his name's Fhqwhgads Robot? How 'bout just "robot"? Or something like that... Bluebry 13:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, he's the robot from Fhqwhgads. --TheThingé 13:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

No, he's the robot from Homestarloween Party. We don't even know if he is the robot from Everybody to the Limit. I say, we change the name. To what, I dunno. Bluebry 13:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

The sketchbook calls him the Fhqwhgads Robot, so we should call him that. We can't just call him "robot" because he needs to be distinguishable from The Robot.– The Chort 13:58, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

How does the Everybody Everybody Poster calls him? It have a list on the back of it. — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 14:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. --Jay (Gobble) 20:41, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Voice

"His voice seems to be very similiar to that of "Microsoft Sam" for Windows XP"

Are there different versions of MS Sam for XP? I've listened to the one I have and it sounds like they sampled some man's voice and played it back. Visor Robot sounds...well, like a robot. Absolutely nothing like Microsoft Sam. I'm adding this note (as opposed to going straight ahead to remove this line) to see if I'm the only one who's Micorsoft Sam sounds attemptedly human. --Tweek

I can see this page has changed somewhat. Before, it said that his voice seems to be very similar to that of Microsoft Sam for Windows XP. Now, it says that his voice is Mcintosh's Zarvox. His voice in Everybody to the Limit is Mcintosh's Zarvox. His voice in Senor Mortgage, however, sounds very similar to Microsoft Sam. Should I put that in the article? I remember hearing the one version of MS Sam, and it sounded a lot like the robot in Senor Mortgage. 2Fast2Furious 12:55 pm, 8 Feb 2006

[edit] Stlunko's ancestor?

I was looking on Wikipedia for Homestar, and came up to this present day/1936/20X6 chart. On it, it says that the Visor Robot is possibly the ancestor of Stlunko. Is this worth noting? I mean, we have the Sticklyman/Poopsmith connection. -Marth 99 18:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Two words, mos def. — Darth Katana X ( )

I added this possibility to the page. — Has Matt? (talk) 18:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Eh, I think this is too far-fetched. I can understand why one would see the connection, but, I mean, the Visor Robot? Why would the make a 20X6 version of such a minor character? I think this is too speculative to be considered true. —FireBird|Talk 19:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with FireBird. Also, I don't think the resemblance is that strong. Note Stlunko's much bigger head and the fact that he doesn't shoot lasers (which seems to be the Visor Robot's mode of attack). Heimstern Läufer 19:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Agree with Fireberd and Heimstern. Close, but no cigar. Bluebry 19:19, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

There is another minor character with a 20X6 counterpart. And besides, I'm not saying that it's true, just that its possible. -Marth 99 20:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's right. Besides, like you said, there's nothing wrong with it if you don't jump to conclusions. — Darth Katana X ( )

Silly knowledge base-ians. Stlunko's ancestor is obviously Stunky. ...who is a fan character I made up a while ago. Uh... yeah, I agree with Bluebry muffin here, and consequently FireBird and Heimstern. Doesn't deserve mention on this article, if you ask me. - Joshua 03:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

If you submitted Stunky to the page with stuff on Stlunko, it probably wouldn't get deleted and then I'd be everyone's least favorite user for objecting to it. Could happen. — Darth Katana X ( )

What? Stunky's just fanstuff, he doesn't belong here. - Joshua 02:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeeyah, I was just kidding. — Darth Katana X ( )

[edit] My new idea is Pure Genius!

I just had a great idea for articles like this with canon content but conjectural titles. We could have a special tag for these articles just like Wookieepedia. Check out how they ingeniously handle articles with fanon names. We could learn a lot from them! — Darth Katana X ( )

I like that idea. --Trogga 02:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't. And now that this page has been moved, it's unnecessary. — It's dot com 14:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

"The Robot" is still a unofficial name, It's dot com. --Trogga 15:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I like the idea, however, in the page, it has been stated that the Robot's name is disputed. Great (and Pure Genius) idea, though. Bluebry 18:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

It's really not that unofficial. This is the line in Homestarloween Party where he was invented: "So then the robot came and he started vaporizing everybody with his vapor-sound!" He was called "the robot" right from the start. It's not conjecture. — It's dot com 23:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Trogdor could have equally been introduced as "the dragon". Colloquial usage of a simple article and noun should not be mistaken for nominalization. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  00:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

What does that have to do with the name of this page? What Strong Bad called him as he was introduced is also the page name. — It's dot com 00:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

In that the name of the page is accepted as an official name, everything. In that the name of the page is provisionally accepted as an unofficial name, nothing. That's the essential difference. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  00:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

We have plenty of pages like that, 20X6 Marzipan for example (and until recently 20X6 The Cheat). I think it's splitting hairs, however, to obsess about whether this page is about a robot or The Robot. The R- is capitalized because that's our general naming convention. I wouldn't care if we lowercased it elsewhere, but, again, it's really not that important. Surely everyone agrees that the subject of this page actually is a robot (the assertion in Senor Mortgage notwithstanding). I therefore believe that the page title is fine, and because he was refered to as "the robot" in the first canonical reference, there's no need to label it as conjecture. — It's dot com 00:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm with Dot Com on this one. This name doesn't seem very much like "fanon" at all. Really, this whole deal is getting pretty extreme. - Joshua 04:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The extremeness is on your part, apparently, as I am not affected. I've simply poointed out how we don't know for sure what that guy is called. Any ranting on "fanon" is purely your business. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  07:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

While the robot is a 100% better name than Visor Robot, there is still room for improvement. The Brothers Chaps officially referred to the character as Fhqwhgads Robot. Therefore, the wiki should oblige. And please do not tell me that "he was named prior to his creation, and therefore, it is unofficial." Bugs Bunny was created before he was named, and I don't see Wikipedia referring to him as "The Rabbit." I was born before I was named, and my friends call me, well, my name, not "The Human." A conjecture template could be used for names that are not pure conjecture, too, as Wookieepedia did with the page on E.T.'s species. Whether we use "The Robot" or "Fhqwhgads Robot," a conjecture tag could still apply, as it isn't "written in stone" whether the character is named either. However, Fhqwhgads Robot is the closest we'll get until his name is officially announced. If you didn't know me, but saw someone refer to me as "dude" and another refer to me as "Joey," you would choose to use the name Joey when referring to me, right? As opposed to "Dude"? — Darth Katana X ( )

You're still putting way too much emphasis on that sketchbook without looking at it in proper context, and you're not even acknowledging the possibility that TBC did not name him "Fhqwhgads Robot", but instead all they did was label a drawing with those words. In other words, they used "fhqwhgads" as an adjective, as in "that robot that was in that song about fhqwhgads". Interestingly, the same may be true of Arrow'd Guy, but at least in that case TBC's throwaway name was better than The Man With The Huge Mouth and didn't contradict other established information. In the robot's case, however, calling him "Fhqwhgads Robot" as a name is speculation based on information that doesn't even fit in well with the entire body of work (just like how it's still speculation as to whether Homestar's full name is Homestar Michael Runner, even though the reference has the weight of a toon behind it). — It's dot com 14:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

C'mon, you didn't make any point there, just reaffirmed you're already well affirmed opinion and blatantly ignored my points. I did very clearly state that it isn't written in stone whether "Fhqwhgads Robot" is a proper name or not. All I know is that they referred to him as that and it would be a much better decision to use that name than "The Robot," because like Shadowy Figure, it's just fandom with poor backup. Look at how Wookieepedia handled E.T.'s species. "Children of the Green Planet" is the closest thing to an official name that they have, so they use it, as opposed to pulling a cheatday, and they still note that the name is not confirmed by an official source. Now, look away from the computer for thirty seconds and ask yourself, "Should we be legitimate and follow Wookieepedia or try to pass off our own ideas as true on a knowledge base and hope the Brothers Chaps oblige?" The answer will be obvious.

Edit: Better yet! Why not rename this article "Fhqwhgads Robot" and acknowledge that name, "Valerie," "The Robot" and "Robot Darren" all as possible names for the character and use better emphasis on the fact that his name hasn't been confirmed? Yay me! — Darth Katana X ( )

Two points: a) I don't see why we should chose either of these names over the current one. It was called "the robot" during its first appearance, so why not stick with that? and b) The opening paragraph clearly states: "Though he has never been officially named, he was referred to as "fhqwhgads robot" in the Weekly Sketchbook for April 28, 2005 and as "Valerie" by Senor Cardgage in a commercial for Senor Cardgage Mortgage", which is exactly what you want the article to have acknowledged, if I'm not mistaken. So if you want to put more emphasize on that, you could simply move that sentence up higher. It'll take you a minute or two and can be done without any fuss.  Loafing 10:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I should just edit it. I guess I'm just alienated after the whole "OMG! How dare you make an edit without first debating it for two months? It isn't like we could just revert it back if we didn't like it! Heck no!" deal. — Darth Katana X ( )

Yeah, probably. I guess it all depends what you edit, and how. And then, how receptive everybody is to each other's arguments. Making a sentence more prominent in a paragraph shouldn't start an edit war...  Loafing 23:35, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Not having read these last few comments, I moved the bit about the name ambiguity to a second paragraph. My reasoning was that it interrupted the flow of the discussion of Homestarloween Party and didn't fit in with the rest of the paragraph. That being said, there is a point to be made for trying to keep the ambiguity of the name of the character towards the top of the article. Actually, I think it reads pretty well right now, and I think that the bit about the name actually stands out more now that it has its own paragraph. Conclusion: change it back if you want to, but if so I think it should be done in a way that doesn't interrupt the train of thought in the first paragraph. Trey56 02:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I really like Trey's edit, for all of those reasons. Keep it. —BazookaJoe 02:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I like it too. It reads much better, and if someone can't be bothered to read an entire article as short as this, then they're not going to remember it anyway. — It's dot com 02:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Whoa, Dot com! Don't be so cryptic. "If someone can't be bothered to read an entire article as short as this, then they're not going to remember it anyway"? I'm lost. O_o — Darth Katana X ( )

Translation: "If someone lacks the attention span to read this short article, we need not be overly careful in the details." - Qermaq - (^T/C)  05:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Such lack of consistency is disturbing. — Darth Katana X ( )

[edit] Art imitates life

MATT: There's a lot of things that were invented from this cartoon: the goblin, the sad kids, that robot—the Visor Robot—appeared.

MIKE: The Visor Robot.

MATT: Why is it called the Visor Robot?

MIKE: Oh yeah, I think the wiki—We didn't name it the Visor Robot.

MATT: No.

MIKE: But I call it the Visor Robot, {in a funny voice} don't I, Matt?

MATT: {in a funny voice similar to Coach Z's} Yeah, you do; you gotta listen to that wiki, Mike.

By the end of this exchange in the commentary for Homestarloween Party on Everything Else, Volume 2, TBC are definitely poking fun at their relationship with us, but if you look closely at the beginning where Matt is talking, it's apparent that the name we chose really was adopted by TBC when they discuss this robot. That is, I really believe TBC call it the Visor Robot now when they discuss it, and we should therefore move the page back. Additionally, now that it's mentioned in a commentary, anonnies will be looking for it under the old name. — It's dot com 00:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it should be moved back. -- Tom 00:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

This gives me some hope that TBC do actually call that secret toon Where the Crap Are We?. Heimstern Läufer 00:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Trey56 02:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Man. On one hand I'm disappointed with the Brothers Chaps for letting a fansite name their character, and on another I'm glad that I finally know the character's real name. — Darth Katana X ( ) 00:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Why be disappointed? If we can develop and maintain a good relationship with them as we have, and they reciprocate by being friendly toward us, then we should be trilled. I know I am. — It's dot com 03:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I know, it's amazing... It's like the total opposite of the (now-defunct) Bonus Stage Wiki. Matt Wilson basically detested the wiki, and even went out of his way to make fun of them in the actual Bonus Stage cartoon. Whereas the Chaps find us very nice people, and talk about us in their commentaries and interviews, and we maintain a good relationship. In other words, our wiki rocks. And I always liked the name "Visor Robot". --DorianGray

Hold on to your hats, people. Fanon is fast becoming canon, now that TBC have started agreeing that this is a database worthy of their praise. — Lapper (talk) 04:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I guess it is sort of cool. Something like this happened with Star Wars once, but I'm too lazy to describe it right now. :D Yeah, it's always interesting when fan stuff gets leaked into the canon. — Darth Katana X ( ) 06:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh noes, now we got to be extra careful with how we tag characters with unofficial names. We're polluting the Brother Chaps' minds!!! :O But still, it's very cool that we got to name a character for once. - Joshua 03:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

...Maybe we can name more characters...QUICK! Change Homestar Runner's name to Tom Brokaw! But on a more serious note, I do think it's good that we have confirmation of the name, and a good relationship with TBC. Bluebry 20:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah! Let's keep making stuff up in hopes that the Brothers Chaps will make it official! XD — Darth Katana X ( ) 07:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Front View

I've noticed that in the first design the Visor Robot's waist it high at the back and low in the front because it's viewed from the side. But in the second design, the waist is identically shaped even though the Visor Robot is being view from the front, with the low side on the viewer's left and the high side on the viewer's right. Is this notable enough to add as a remark? 99.48.86.26 01:04, 18 March 2017 (UTC)