Talk:Places

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Working in the Rejects

Okay here's one place where we are going to have to work in some of the old Rejects. After taking a look at the listing, I'm seeing some places that are mentioned in passing for maybe three seconds. I don't really know which one's we want to keep, but it's something to think about. -- Tom 10:53, 13 Aug 2004 (MST)

Also, should rejects/misc. characters/places/things be attached to anything in particular? Or should they just be floating around the Wiki's ethereal plains, attached to us only by a category or two? I think the category thing could be enough, but with some of our younger users, that'd be really hard to police unless all the Misc. links were grouped in one place. Here we have the "Rejects" debate once again. Anyway, how about another section titled "Misc. Places"? -- AgentSeethroo

You know what, I'm thinking if it's a place, it goes on the Places page. Maybe under a heading like "So minor, you didn't even know it existed" or something. That seems to be the mentality of the people who come up with these things. I picture them sitting in front of their computer thinking to themselves "Now, what's a place that absolutely no one else would think of including?" So okay, that would work with characters and places, but what about the "objects"? What do you think we could do with them? Some thing similar? -- Tom 11:30, 13 Aug 2004 (MST)

VERY VERY inside jokes? That's about all I can think of...Unless they float, but I'm not that fond of that idea. -- AgentSeethroo

Wait a second! I just had a cool idea! For those stupid misc. characters, we could have who?/where?/what? sections! On characters, there'd be a section call "Who?", in places there'd be "Where?" and in inside jokes we could have a "What?" section. Then it'd be pretty easy to keep track of things. Oh, I'm gonna also add a section on Characters for the stupid "not around anymore" characters. -- AgentSeethroo 13:27, 13 Aug 2004 (MST)

Sure, the "who?/what?/where?/huh?" thing seems to fit the mentality I was talking about. Good idea. And it wouldn't confuse too much. And this way we can include all of the stuff, just to keep everybody happy. Nice work. -- Tom 16:50, 13 Aug 2004 (MST)