Talk:Strong Badman Characters

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 23:56, 8 June 2007

Merging

It looks like there's consensus at Talk:Damp Towel Man to merge most of the characters into this page, but it's a rather large move, so I wanted to make sure people are comfortable with this single page before merging everything.

If so, I think we should immediately merge Damp Towel Man, The Deutsch Master, Deutschman, and Grossman with this page. I think we should start a separate {{tbd}} discussion at Talk:Stiny before moving it, though, since there was some disagreement as to whether that one should be merged.

Any objections, now that you've had a chance to see what this page looks like? Trey56 13:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I am about to begin the process of updating the links to the above pages and then turning them into redirects. Trey56 23:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Damp Towel Man

The following discussion was moved from Talk:Damp Towel Man before it was decided to merge the content of that article with this one.

What to do?

Merge it, either with Coach Z or Strong Badman. --Jay (Gobble) 01:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Strong Badman. Loafing 01:59, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge (I don't know which one to merge it with though). Homestar-Winner (talk) 02:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

MERGE? Okay, I completely disagree. I think we should really just MENTION it. I mean, first off, this is written like fanstuff. Or something else very unencyclopedic. I think a simple "According to Coach Z, he is the "legendary" Damp Towel Man, who collects damp towels from across the universe. However, this is probably just a joke, and not canon." I vote mention, and I don't even know or care if that's an option. Bluebry 04:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree... this and Dry Ragamuffin probably deserve a sentence or two in Strong Badman, and possibly a sentence in Coach Z, but nothing more. --phlip ^T_C 04:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Leave as is. All the other Strong Badman characters have their own pages, and have nearly the same amount of info. --DorianGray 04:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree'd with DorianGray. This page needs a rewrite though. Homestar Coder 05:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Serious rewrite... (When I wrote "leave as is", I hadn't actually looked at the page yet...) --DorianGray 05:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I Don't Know Why The Guy Who Made This Article Chose To Capitalize Every Single Word In It. That's Really Silly. *ahem* Sorry. I think we should at least merge part of this article with the Coach Z one. Although, it's already mentioned in Alter Egos...hmm. Jimmy91 10:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

If this gets merged, so should Stiny, Grossman, Deutschman and The Deutsch Master. So No Merge. Sam the Man 23:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

no merge for the reasons already stated. DeFender1031 23:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I feel the Strong Badman villains should get their own spotlight, and i don't mind separate pages, including this one (keep), but how about a page called Strong Badman Villains merging all of them there? Just throwing idea around. — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 15:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

But damp towelman isn't a villian, he's a good guy. Dry ragamuffin would belong there but not this. DeFender1031 15:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

So how about Strong Badman Characters so we can include Stainy. — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 15:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with E.L. Cool, we should do a separate pago for StrongBadman's characters, but if that can't be done/made/be an option, then MERGE with Coach Z. --Darkangel 17:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the best plan is to MERGE Grossman, Deutschman, The Deutsch Master and Stiny (but not Stainy) INTO "Strong Badman Characters". If that doesn't work out, then we take no action and LEAVE IT how it is. – The Chort 19:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with EL Cool, in saying that there should be a page for the Strong Badman villans, and the SBM "heroes", if they can even be called that. --Jangles5150 19:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess a big ol' compilation page would do it. So yeah, Strong Badman Characters. Bluebry 20:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... I can go for that. Yeah, yeah, I see it now... Big ol' compliation page. Table, of course. Images down the left-most column... Without all those character pages, though, would we still need Category:Strong Badman? --DorianGray 20:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

es, if we do it this way: We place the "Main article found here: I LOVE LINKS!" think for Strong Badman (maybe Stiny), and we'd already have the two location articles in the category, with a healthy subcategory (NOTE: I don't know the current health of said subcategory; just wanted to use an adjective). Bluebry 22:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Umm, was your head attached to your body when you wrote that? I seriously have no idea what you meant, and i read it through like 4 times. — Defender1031*Talk 22:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Did you read DorianGray's question? "Without all those character pages, though, would we still need Category:Strong Badman?" Bluebry 22:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes I did. it didn't help. — Defender1031*Talk 22:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to reword it.

We'd still have the category Category:Strong Badman, if we do it this way: We include all characters on the compilation page, and in Strong Badman's (and maybe Stiny's) section we place "See main article: Strong Badman" or "See main article: Stiny" and a brief description. That way, we'd have the Strong Badman article, Stiny's article (maybe), the two location articles already in the category, and the subcategory, Category:Strong Badman Filmography. Bluebry 23:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I think Strong Badman Characters is a great idea. Strong Badman should stay a dedicated article, as Bluebry proposed, but I don't think that Stiny is relevant for enough for one. Loafing 07:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree — merge all minor characters (including Stiny) into Strong Badman Characters. Trey56 07:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Still totally see this happening. Table and all. --DorianGray 07:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. I'll get to work on this page, and if it looks good, then we can turn these other pages into redirects to the apprapriate sections. Trey56 07:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I threw together a basic version of Strong Badman Characters, but it needs a lot of trimming, formatting, etc. Once this is in a satisfactory form, we can turn these articles into redirects if we still agree that this is a good course of action. Trey56 07:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Keep Stiny. I don't picture him without his page all about himself. Sam the Man

Deutschman

The following discussion was moved from Talk:Deutschman before it was decided to merge the content of that article with this one.

Kinder-Überraschung

This is an informal name for Überraschungsei, which is better known in English as "Kinder Eggs." Kinder-Überraschung means "children's surprise," while Überraschungsei means "Surpise Egg." This is a popular "chocolate and tiny toy" treat which is popular in Germany and throughout Europe, but is banned in the USA.--Saxon the Deutschmaster 02:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

It appears you are right. I can't actually read German, but the graphics on this web site seem to prove your case. גשמלדרברגן 02:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You're wrong. "Überraschungsei" is the informal name of "Kinder-Überraschung" ;-) Anyway, I don't quite get what your point is. Did you want this information to be included in the article? Loafing 03:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I do think an edit is in order. Even if we don't write anything about the eggs. I think we should translate Kinder Überraschung as Children's Surprises. Kinder is a word in English meaning "nicer". It apparently does not mean that in German, and so our translattion leaves much to be desired.גשמלדרברגן 03:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The English name is actually "Kinder Surprise". I'll just link it. How 'bout that? Loafing 03:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I know better than trying to take initiative around here. I report things I notice in the talk page, and let others decide whether changes should be made.--Saxon the Deutschmaster 22:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

They was banned in the US cause the FDA disapproved of little plastic toys hidden inside food that kids could possibly try to swallow whole. -Mr Meister McKeister

Grossman

The following discussion was moved from Talk:Grossman before it was decided to merge the content of that article with this one.

Upon first glace, just skipping over the actual content, this appears to be a solid article. However, when you actually read through it, the entirety of the paragraph is mainly describing Grossman's clothes and the... stains... on his clothes. I don't believe that this article is necessary. — Lapper (talk) 05:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)