File talk:HstarTimeline.png

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Current revision as of 19:19, 13 July 2008

If The Paper gets replaced with the inject printer, should we add that to this timeline. Sam the Man 21:57, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Erm, how about we talk about this after it happens. Maybe it never will. Loafing 21:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Not sure that's notable enough by this timeline. This is mostly original appearances of significant works--usually spin-off series. --DorianGray 21:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Only if it turns out to be a huge event (in both the HRWiki community and non-HRWiki community). I mean, we're talking about the replacement of a small role character, despite the fact it's been seen in almost every sbemail. Bluebry 22:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I think when we update this we should change 2002 to the Duck Pond title card (1st mention of Videlectrix) and change 2004 to the Sbemail DVD case. Bad Bad Guy 18:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Update

'07 is just about done. We need to at least add "2007" in and maybe something significant that happened this year. Uh, someone get Loafing to add on to it, since he's the one who uploaded the original in the first place... or... --TheYellowDart—(t/c) 23:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I think something like The Paper's retirement would be a good '07 event. --DorianGray 23:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I got some ideas:

• Email retirement - Tandy 400 and Compy 386 got "retired for good"
• Email alternate universe - The 150th Strong Bad
• Email the paper - The Paper got "retired". New Paper takes over
• Podstar Runner service discontinued - A Notable Event

That's it so far. Sam the Man 23:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, none of this is of the same level as the other noted events. They are all the beginnings of new franchises etc. Not milestone sbemails or toons. Adding podstar runner was already a stretch so as not to make it look too empty. I think I'll just opt for another uneventful year, just like 2005. With the new paper as the image. Loafing 23:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright. Although New Paps' should be mentioned, at least I think. Sam the Man 00:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Even he's not really at this level, though certainly he qualifies for a spot on the article this image goes with. (Note that we don't include the debuts of the Compy or the Lappy, either.) Heimstern Läufer 03:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I see the Compy's picture in 2002 and the Lappy's picture in 2004. Bad Bad Guy 03:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

The only other idea I have is DNA Evidence, the first toon even to use ideas from previous toons. An actual running plot for the first time. --DorianGray 04:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

BBG: Oh, I thought we were talking text. Didn't know we were thinking about adding images. That could be a different story, sure. Heimstern Läufer 05:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thats another email. For another time. But I don't think that New Stuff being added it a notable event. Homestar-Winner (talk) 14:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Or, adding the 10th anniversary of H*R for 2006. Also, maybe adding milestones for 100th Sbemail and the 200th one(when it arrives). Probably not any Sbemails or toons besides those 3. We pretty much just need pivotal points in the history of H*R.com. DevonM(talk·cont-ribs) 04:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

2007 should be represented by an image of Strong Bad, at the lappy, with The Paper's usurper, preferably without the ASCII butt. Podstar Runner has been continued, so we can ignore that. Personally, this timeline only needs to mention debuts, watershed moments and possibly milestones, not memorable toons and emails. But if we add alternate universe, then we'll also need to add 50 emails and flashback. – The Chort 19:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redesign?

This timeline needs to be redesigned. It looks cluttered and disorganised. I propose a landscape version of the timeline, going from left to right. Something a little like this, perhaps? – The Chort 18:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I was actually thinking of the same thing a couple days ago. It needs to be updated as well. It is '08 now. There are things like SBCG4AP and the New Paper that could be included. --TheYellowDart—(t/c) 18:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I disagree that it looks cluttered and disorganized. But I might be biased ;-) That gizmodo timeline is definitely worse, though. Whoever made that should be fired. Please don't base a redesign on it! But yes, a new version is long overdue, and I just don't have the time. If someone could make a new version, and maybe even a better looking one, that would be great. But keep two things in mind: a) do not add new events to the years before 2007 and b) constrain yourself to the most important events. It's only an overview, not a list of everything. Check out the section above to see what should be included. Loafing 22:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

You're being too harsh, Loafing. That timeline was clearly comic in nature and created by an unpaid blogger with an interest in gadgets and Futurama. Out of the millions of images I could have used, I choose a humorous example to demonstrate my suggestion and in return it gets spat back in my face. But I digress: I realised last night that a landscape version might not fit on the article if more content is added over time and would need to be shrunk. A portrait version, running from top to bottom, would avoid this issue. What we really need to do (as well as update the content) is improve on the current design. For example, when I described it as "cluttered", I felt that the images were too small and cramped together. Why not use larger images? Why isn't the image of Puppet Homestar and The Cheat directly in between Trogdor and the Lappy? What's wrong with having an extra large 2003 section if so much happened that year? I would do it if I didn't only have MS Paint. – The Chort 16:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Any chance the source file for this is still around? I tried editing the PNG but it is way too tedious to make it look acceptable (font matching, etc) without the original (PSD or XCF or what-have-you). If that isn't around anymore, I think someone will just have to reproduce it from scratch with the new additions. I strongly prefer keeping the vertical layout by the way.  Green Helmet 16:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Come to think of it, any reason not to just recreate this in HTML rather than a image? Properly styled it would look at least as good and would be more maintainable.  Green Helmet 16:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I've started a proof of concept for an HTML version of this. It still needs some tweaking, but before I spend much more time with it, what do people think of replacing the image with a table like this? If it's cleaned up more, could it work? The actual timeline is included as a template, really just to keep the messy HTML out of the page proper.  Green Helmet 21:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

That looks like some extremely impressive HTML coding right there! Great start, GreenHelmet! The Chort: think again when you call someone from Gizmodo unpaid ;-) But yeah, I'm sorry if you feel like i "spat it back in your face". That's really not what I meant to do! Sorry if you read it like that! And I don't have a problem with the gizmodo timeline being humorous. It's just all over the place. But I digress also :-p Now, bigger images are great, but I think the goal of the timeline should be to give a good overview of what happened when. If the images get so big that readers can't see the whole timeline on their screen, then that goal is missed. But I agree, the old timeline was really small. Either way, I'm glad the source is now here in HTML form instead of my old PowerPoint slide (yes, that's what it was!). Loafing 21:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm realizing now that my html-ization didn't do anything to address concerns of updating the layout — seeing as I attempted to mimic the existing timeline image as closely as possible ;) In fact, I even squished it together some from it's original state, and positioned that one picture not aligned with anything else... Anyway, the good news is it's just html and css so the look can be changed pretty easily (ok, I admit, not as easy as the Wiki markup, but easier than breaking into Loafing's hard drive to steal the PowerPoint). I'm going to lay off it for the rest of the day, if people want to play or tweak feel free to edit in my userspace. (If we go with it, of course we'll move it out of there). Oh, and I didn't put real content in for 2007-2008... so there's still that to be done.  Green Helmet 22:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeahhhh, that template is much better! To be honest, all it really needed was a colour change from black and white to a more attractive light blue and white. Even the images are a bit bigger. GreenHelmet, I salute you. The next stage is to decide whether to delete this old image, and whether to convert the template into the Wiki markup if necessary. – The Chort 18:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Unless someone knows some magic with the Wiki-way of doing tables that eluded me, I don't think it will work. But, it could be really templated (right now it's a "Template" only to keep the HTML out of the main article). I'm thinking it can be done so the end-user works with something like this:

{{Timeline|
  {{Timeline Year|2001|[[Image:something.png]]|
    {{Timeline Event|Strong Bad Email|offset=-15}}
  }}
  {{Timeline Year|2002|[[Image:anotherthing.png]]|
    {{Timeline Event|TGS|offset=5}}
  }}
  {{Timeline Year|2003|[[Image:foo.png]][[Image:bar.png]]|
    {{Timeline Event|20X6|offset=-10}}
    {{Timeline Event|Trogdor|offset=0}}
    {{Timeline Event|Puppet Stuff|offset=10}}
  }}
}}

That would give us the power of real HTML for laying everything out, and still make it accessible to everyday editors who may not be comfy with HTML. I've never done a wiki template anywhere near that involved... but I've been considering trying it out. It might take me a while though, so I thought we might as well go with the straight HTML for now.  Green Helmet 19:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)