Talk:Blood
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(→Why?: reply) |
(→Why?) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
::But what's the point, really? To have more featured article candidates when the Wiki is scraping the bottom of the barrel? Certainly not ''every'' pattern in Homestar Runner needs to be reported. There are [[Witch's Brew|worthwile]] [[Smoking|ones]] and [[Style|worthless]] [[Gold|ones]], and this one fits in the latter. {{User:Darth Katana X/sig}} 07:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC) | ::But what's the point, really? To have more featured article candidates when the Wiki is scraping the bottom of the barrel? Certainly not ''every'' pattern in Homestar Runner needs to be reported. There are [[Witch's Brew|worthwile]] [[Smoking|ones]] and [[Style|worthless]] [[Gold|ones]], and this one fits in the latter. {{User:Darth Katana X/sig}} 07:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
:::The arbiter of what is reported is '''consensus'''. Your opinion has been noted. Part of the value of the wiki is that if you're looking for a specific toon based on something you remember from the toon, you can search for "blood" (as an example) and find lots of instances of bleeding to choose from. We already know TBC use the wiki this way. I wouldn't argue that everything depicted in H*R should be documented, but I'm generally for inclusion. This might be worthless to some, but for me it's above the border between "notable" and "unnotable". To me, I'm not sure "worth" enters into it once three instances can be noted. Once you have the magic 3, then it's "is it something no one would look for?" "is it something notable on another page?" and the like. We have ample citations - at this point I suspect we should be debating its notability. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 09:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC) | :::The arbiter of what is reported is '''consensus'''. Your opinion has been noted. Part of the value of the wiki is that if you're looking for a specific toon based on something you remember from the toon, you can search for "blood" (as an example) and find lots of instances of bleeding to choose from. We already know TBC use the wiki this way. I wouldn't argue that everything depicted in H*R should be documented, but I'm generally for inclusion. This might be worthless to some, but for me it's above the border between "notable" and "unnotable". To me, I'm not sure "worth" enters into it once three instances can be noted. Once you have the magic 3, then it's "is it something no one would look for?" "is it something notable on another page?" and the like. We have ample citations - at this point I suspect we should be debating its notability. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 09:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::::I guess if the Chaps find it humorous... {{User:Darth Katana X/sig}} 11:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 11:20, 7 December 2006
blood
I think that a better title for this page would be "blood", because right now it says how some characters bleed in homestarrunner.com, but then some instances are listed which aren't characters bleeding, but just plain blood. - 
The Joe(Talk) 20:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, no one's responded, so I guess I'll try being bold for once by moving it and fixing all the links.
Why?
Homestar Runner contains depictions of blood every once in a blue moon, who cares? This article defines pointless. Delete? — Darth Katana
X (
) 07:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Since it happens so rarely, that's what makes it so interesting. --DorianGray
- But what's the point, really? To have more featured article candidates when the Wiki is scraping the bottom of the barrel? Certainly not every pattern in Homestar Runner needs to be reported. There are worthwile ones and worthless ones, and this one fits in the latter. — Darth Katana
X ( ) 07:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- The arbiter of what is reported is consensus. Your opinion has been noted. Part of the value of the wiki is that if you're looking for a specific toon based on something you remember from the toon, you can search for "blood" (as an example) and find lots of instances of bleeding to choose from. We already know TBC use the wiki this way. I wouldn't argue that everything depicted in H*R should be documented, but I'm generally for inclusion. This might be worthless to some, but for me it's above the border between "notable" and "unnotable". To me, I'm not sure "worth" enters into it once three instances can be noted. Once you have the magic 3, then it's "is it something no one would look for?" "is it something notable on another page?" and the like. We have ample citations - at this point I suspect we should be debating its notability. - Qermaq - (T/C)
09:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- I guess if the Chaps find it humorous... — Darth Katana
X ( ) 11:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- I guess if the Chaps find it humorous... — Darth Katana
X (
- The arbiter of what is reported is consensus. Your opinion has been noted. Part of the value of the wiki is that if you're looking for a specific toon based on something you remember from the toon, you can search for "blood" (as an example) and find lots of instances of bleeding to choose from. We already know TBC use the wiki this way. I wouldn't argue that everything depicted in H*R should be documented, but I'm generally for inclusion. This might be worthless to some, but for me it's above the border between "notable" and "unnotable". To me, I'm not sure "worth" enters into it once three instances can be noted. Once you have the magic 3, then it's "is it something no one would look for?" "is it something notable on another page?" and the like. We have ample citations - at this point I suspect we should be debating its notability. - Qermaq - (T/C)
- But what's the point, really? To have more featured article candidates when the Wiki is scraping the bottom of the barrel? Certainly not every pattern in Homestar Runner needs to be reported. There are worthwile ones and worthless ones, and this one fits in the latter. — Darth Katana
X (
