Talk:Mustachioed Homestar Runner

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 00:07, 3 June 2005

Do we really need this page? --Color Printer (Seriously, I can't log in!)

• Yes! Because the peoples need to know about Homestar's evil twin!! Seriously, it doesn't bother me. Kvb 20:07, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Evil twin? What is this world coming to?!? --Color Printer
• I'm surprised it hadn't been created sooner! The peoples got a right to know! -- tomstiff 20:10, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• ...sigh...fine. Whatever, but I'm against this page. --Color Printer
  • It's not a character! IT'S JUST HOMESTAR RUNNER WEARING A FREAKIN' MUSTACHE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!! --Color Printer
    • That's not true. The real homestar can be seen at the same time. Kvb 20:16, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • TBC made an effort to make the 2 Homestars different. I say leave the page here until there's some clarification -- tomstiff 20:25, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • So?!? This page really has no use. --Color Printer
      • Until we know better, it appears that a mustachioed Homestar doppelganger exists. This article documents this apparent fact. Why *not* have it here? -- tomstiff 20:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • Because it's just a joke. Having two similar people on the side of a screen throwing confetti (or wearing a swimsuit [or both]) is a commercial cliché which TBC were making fun of. Besides, "Mustachio" doesn't really exist in the toon, as we never see his face...it is only visible when you look at the swf file which no ordinary person would make an effort to do. "mustachio" does not exist, and this page should be deleted pronto. TK600 20:38, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
          • But he *does* appear in the toon. You can see bits and pieces of him! In garage sale we documented stuff that appeared only outside "the frame" as treated it as "canon". Why *not* do the same with this guy? -- tomstiff 20:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• well he did appear in a cartoon! we shoud not delete it

I strongly disagree, we should remove it, give me 10 words he said, and then i'll leave ol' mustachioe alone. --Dinoshaur 20:41, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• If speaking is a criterion, then we need to delete The Poopsmith and Prime Time and The Dregs and so on and so on and so on! -- tomstiff 20:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, well, throw away the dregs if you want, but Poopsmith! look, I just don't think this guy is important at all! --Dinoshaur 20:45, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Well, he's not very important ... yet. We don't know much about him ... yet. This article is just a placeholder until we do find out a little more. -- tomstiff 20:48, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have reworked the page, including a better picture. I think it should stay until we get more info. You know TBC will use this version of Homestar again. — It's dot com 21:37, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This could be explained fully in the Senorial Day article, until he becomes something more than an Inside joke. - Dr Haggis - Talk 04:52, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This page sould stay. It is a character variation and it is strange to have two Homestars at the same time. Whene I first saw the toon I thought it was some kind of split-screen like in Experimental Film, but now I see that it's not Homestar at all! (looks like a homestar uncle or something, but...) E.L. Cool 06:53, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I like this page, if nothing more than I find it hilarious that TBC just randomly put a mustache on the second Homestar like he's some sort of evil twin (do I smell a Space Ghost ref?) I think we should keep it. After all, TBC did go to the trouble of putting a mustache on Homestar, so it should be documented... I have a feeling that this guy is more likely to show up again than, say, Unnamed Girl or most of the Minor Teen Girl Squad characters. Aurora the Homestar Coder 08:07, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

We don't need a page for this. Get real, people. We know absolutely nothing about the mustachioed Homestar that isn't already in Senorial Day. --Jay (Gobble) 08:57, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree. What information could be found here that people can't find on the toon's page? Besides, what makes anyone thing that TBC will use this "different" Homestar ever again? It was a hidden joke for *all* those people that actually watch the swf file looking for inside jokes like this. -- Tony Stony 11:03, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"If you view the Flash file directly, then in the scene with two Homestars, you can see that the Homestar on the right has a mustache." "{Two Homestar Runners, bizzarely, can be seen flanking the stand and barely on screen. Both throw confetti.}" That's what's on the Senioral Page. Do we really need any more than that? -- Joshua 11:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't think so, at least until we get more information, should TBC decide to -- Tony Stony 11:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

We do need the page if there's a link in the cast list. Also, some people can't or don't know how to view the Flash file directly. Besides that, it's handy to just be able to click on the link. — It's dot com 18:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

But it wasn't in the cast list until relatively recently. It used to be Homestar Runner listed twice, which is exactly what we do for pizzaz. --Jay (Gobble) 21:38, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but in "pizzaz", it's supposed to be two Strong Bads somehow ("Strong Bad aims the barrel of his sawed-off journalism shotgun at his toughest interviewee yet... himself."). In this case, however, I feel like TBC wanted us to realize the Homestars were separate. On the other hand, I would be willing to do away with this page as long as the accompanying graphic (which took a little doing to get) was added somewhere else. — It's dot com 22:09, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that TBC meant for us to realize the Homestars were seperate, as it is not aparent unless you watch the swf, which very few casual fans do. After all, there are a lot of things with swf's that are not noted (such as character's missing parts of their body out of the frame). TBC just stuck a mustache on the second Homestar because it was funny to them, not because it was a new character. How do you know that the mustache is real anyway? -- Tony Stony 22:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I very much think they meant us to find it. Not the casual fans, of course, but us die-hards. In fact, I think it should be an Easter egg. I'ma gonna go fix that right now. — It's dot com 00:07, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)