Homestar Runner Wiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:All Toons

Mghoffmann — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:22:44 GMT

Mghoffmann: /* DVD SBemails */ Fixed my previous contribution

==Format==
Wow, that was quick! How about a format like this one?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 10:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

{| border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2 style="border-collapse:collapse"
|- bgcolor=#eeeeee
! Toon !! width=120 | Release Date
|-
| [[Original Book|The Homestar Runner Enters the Strongest Man in the World Competition]] || 1996
|-
| Email [[the chair]] || December 4, 2006
|}

:I like this - also, if it's a guessed date, that could be noted. Perhaps parentheses. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 10:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
::Okay, that looks good. I'll do that, but not tonight. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 11:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

== Title ==
I think it's ok at All Toons, the only other option I would suggest is "Toons by Date" since that's how it's listed, but I don't think we have a list of all toons anywhere else together, so as with the Easter egg thing, this may be of use for more than just a cronological listing - [[User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C|Ilko Skevüld's Teh C]] 12:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

== Watch link ==

Should a column be added for "watch" links? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. That'd be so useful. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]]
::Good idea!{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm going to go ahead and do that. But I don't see the point in putting in an extra column, so I'm just putting it in the toon column. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 10:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I think it cluttered up the toon column, so I went ahead and split it off. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 06:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

== Chronological Order ==

Didn't quite a bit of research already go into the dating of toons when the [[H*R.com updates 2006|H*R.com updates]] articles were finished up? Was the "guessing" (noted at the top of the article) done independently of those articles, and if so, why? -- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 04:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:My guess is that Shwoo didn't know about those lists when she started this.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:I did compile it from from those lists, except for the early ones that didn't have precise dates. It's a lot easier. I didn't mention it on the page because I thought it was obvious. I guess I'll go add it now. Sorry. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 08:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
::No, I'm sorry I assumed you didn't know about them :-){{User:Loafing/sig}} 10:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks. I wasn't offended though. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 12:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

== formating of an estimated date ==

''This discussion originated [[Talk:The Luau|on this talk page]] and was moved here because it was more appropriate''

I came across [http://www.archive.org/web/web.php the wayback machine] a few weeks ago and have been playing with it a lot. I decided to run a search for [http://web.archive.org/web/2001*/http://www.homestarrunner.com/luau2.html this]page, which seems to suggest that the Luau was released on May 01, 2001. Is this credible enough to finally date our old stuff. At the very least we now know that it had to be release on '''or before''' this date. What do you think? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 22:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:''P.S.'' I am waiting for a "go ahead" before updating any toon pages. {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 22:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:[[User:Shwoo|Shwoo]] has already used the wayback machine to date some toons in [[All Toons]]. I think it's a great idea. A release date of "May 1, 2001, or earlier" is certainly more informative than "2001", as it reads now.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 22:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::Addendum: we should probably put more emphasize on the '''before''' part, as the wayback machine does not update a page every day, and it might take months before a new page or site is archived. [http://web.archive.org/web/2000*/http://www.homestarrunner.com/ Example].{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::I see the '''before''' part in [[All Toons]], but what about the article pages? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I meant that once we use that info on article pages, we should put emphasize on "before".{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::how's {{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=The_Luau&oldid=406143 this}}? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:Before I go making a lot of edits that will be changed later, I wanted to see if this looks alright
:'''Date:''' ''on or'' '''''before''''' May 1, 2001
:{{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::I like it. :-){{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::What's the rationale for the bold on "before"? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 23:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Because it's more likely to have been published months before the wayback machine archived it first.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::Maybe '''Date:''' ''Prior to'' May 2, 2001 is clearer and more concise. Perhaps determine the latest wayback ''without'' it and show a date range. Making this up totally: '''Date:''' ''Unknown, between'' January 7, 2001 ''and'' May 2, 2001 {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 23:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I think '''Date:''' ''on or'' '''''before''''' is better simply because it could have been updated ON the day it lists not necessarily prior to it.{{User:Bleed0range/sig}} 00:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::You'll note I upped the day by one for that very reason. Well, in reference to your self-reverted test case: You changed "2000" (we know it was 2000, apparently) to "before January something, 2001" which is less accurate. We should weigh what version yields more precision. That's why I suggested a range. Now, if the range turns out to be between sometime in 1999 and 2001, and we have "2000" already and we know that's accurate, which is better? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::I think it should say '''Circa May 01, 2001'''. It's a thought. {{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
:::::::I'd call "circa" an unnecessarily vague word myself, unless we are talking so long ago that there's absolutely no hope of getting a closer date. We have technology to be more exact in our dating. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::::It's a fitting word though. Read the definition of it. {{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
:::::::::I am well familiar with its definition. I am also aware that its usage is most commonly associated with historical events for which there is no hope in pinpointing a more precise date. Anyway, this is evolving into a meta-discussion of "how do we date things in general" which isn't really right for an individual toon's Talk. I submit we restrict talk here to dating The Luau, we discuss how to date other disputed toons on their individual article Talk pages, and we find a more appropriate Talk to discuss whatever overriding policy needs to prevail. Though at this juncture I don't think we even need a unified approach. What's the most accurate way to date this toon? That's the essential question, and whatever is the most accurate, the least ambiguous, that's what we should do. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::so moved {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 15:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
<div style="float:left; padding:1em 2em 1em 0">
{| {{standardtable}}
! Toon !! HTML last modified
|-
| [[The Luau]] || 3/25/2001
|-
| [[some kinda robot]] || 10/1/2001
|-
| [[homsar]] || 8/20/2001
|-
| [[butt IQ]] || 9/30/2001
|-
| [[homestar hair]] || 9/30/2001
|-
| [[making out]] || 10/1/2001
|-
| [[depressio]] || 10/8/2001
|-
| [[halloweener]] || 10/25/2001
|}
</div>
<div style="float:left; padding:1em 2em 1em 0">
{| {{standardtable}}
! Toon !! Released on or before
|-
| [[The Luau]] || Sun 3/25/2001
|-
| [[some kinda robot]] || Mon 8/13/2001
|-
| [[homsar]] || Mon 8/20/2001
|-
| [[butt IQ]] || Mon 8/27/2001
|-
| [[homestar hair]] || Mon 9/03/2001
|-
| [[making out]] || Mon 10/01/2001
|-
| [[depressio]] || Mon 10/08/2001
|-
| [[halloweener]] || Thu 10/25/2001
|}
</div>

Picking this discussion back up, I did some research using the Wayback Machine as well. After loading the archived HTML pages for [[The Luau]] and the first seven Strong Bad Emails, I then checked the each page's page info and got last-modified dates as shown in the first table. Obviously, [[some kinda robot]] would have to have been released in August or earlier, and I'd bet those three emails weren't released within one day of each other. I think it's reasonable that these toons were released on or before the dates shown in the second table.

This assumes that, even if they were turning out emails every week, they would have taken a break after 9/11. It's speculation, of course, and I could be off by a week here or there. The important question is, how exactly should the information in the first table be used to update the articles? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 15:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
{{clear}}

== Number of Easter eggs ==

I'm confused by the Easter egg count in the list. For [[unused emails]], it claims there are 6 while the article lists 4; for [[website]] 3 while the article lists 1; and for [[Meet Marshie]] 3, while the article lists 2. These are all the toons I've checked out so far, and every one of them seems to be off. Am I counting wrong?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:As far as I can tell, for unused emails, the list counts each stack of emails that can be clicked on as an Easter egg. The tall, medium, and short stacks, as well as the stack in Strong Mad's room, all count as individual eggs. The weekly spamvertisement and the picture in the spamvertisement count as 2 more, making 6. The list also counts the Easter eggs in [[Strong Bad's Website]] as Easter eggs for the email website (so really there should be at least 4). As for Meet Marshie, that one is just wrong. It should be 2. {{User:Has Matt?/sig}} 21:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

== Broken Table? ==

Okay, the top half looks broken to me... like the lines are missing and the information is running into itself. The bottom half is fine. Anyone else have this problem? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 19:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

== Main Page Easter Egg ==

Should we say each [[Main Pages|Main Page]] has one easter egg, the last number in {{CURRENTYEAR}}, linking to the [[Homsar Main Page]]? {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 21:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

== [[Strong Bad Clock]] ==

This is a Flash animation with extras. I don't know the date, but it should be noted here. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 03:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

== Opps. I bwoke it. ==

So I tried the add the sortable feature to the table, and it breaks when you try to sort it. I think it's because of the merged date cells for toons released on the same day. Now, we have two options: Keep it sortable (being able to see which toon have the most eggs, the length and so on) or keeping the merged cells and removing the sorting (more pretty). I think we should '''split the cells'''. Usability before appearance. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 08:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
:I agree. Having the merged cells making sorting impossible, and I'm sure people would like to sort this table. 8 October 2008
::Dunno if this has been settled or not, but i too say '''split 'n sort''' {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Is this going to happen or not? This has been here for ages. 16:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::::...and this is still a problem. Trying to use the sorting feature just causes the cells to be jumbled randomly. I'd say it might be best to kill the sort feature. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 22:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::Being able to sort the table would be an improvement. The merged cells should be split. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 22:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::Okay, merged cells are split. Now, we need to figure out how to fomat the date info so it will sort correctly. I'm thinking a YYYY-MM-DD format would be useful. Do we want to include day of the week info from [[Other days of the week]]? If so, how? {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 21:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::We just need to use the {{t|hcount}} template, similar to other tables with dates (see [[Strong Bad Email Release Dates]] for an example). We also should add a Day of Week column. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:38, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::''(edit conflict)'' You have a good point. What we could do is Column 1: Day of the week. Column 2: Date (YYYY-MM-DD). Column 3: Type (Book, Toon, Game). Column 4: Name of Toon, Game, etc. Column 5: Any notes about the content. Column 6: Link to view content. What is disorganizing the dates are the notes included in the date column. I'll go and fix it. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 21:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::Did you even read the response that conflicted you? All you need is an hcount. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::<s>Okay, I'll see what I can do... about... [[boring (really)|thaaaaaaatttttttt]]. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 21:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)</s>

== Homestar Ruiner ==
*Would SBCG4AP be considered a cartoon added on this list? Because it does have a lot of the characteristics of a toon... but it is essentially game, though. Thoughts? --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 20:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:Dang it. I hate it when this happens. Guys, '''any thoughts?''' --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 22:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
::When ''what'' happens? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:::I also hate it when we're not sure if something is a toon or not. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
::::Dot com, I mean... occasionally when you ask a question nobody replies and it gets kicked off the Recent Changes and no one reads it for a long time. --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 01:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

== Rename ==

Seeing as this article contains more than just all the toons (games, Main Pages, etc.), it should be renamed to encompass everything that's listed. Would '''Site Updates''' work? Or '''Everything'''? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 20:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:I don't like "Site Updates" since this page encompasses more than just the website. "Everything" is ''too'' broad. I'm fine with the current All Toons (even though it's a bit of a misnomer) unless something is suggested that's far and away better. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::how about "All Updates"? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::But it's not all the updates. It omits quotes of the week, news, etc. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Can we just add the quotes of the week and such? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::I think that would run too much a list. Further, the quotes and interviews and so on aren' really interactive works, like all the other bits listed here. So, since it includes toons, games, main pages, and other things, perhaps '''All Works''' or something might, well, work? --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 21:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::We have pages that list all updates. We have pages that list all quotes. This page culls out all the "real" content: toons, games, videos, and the like. "All Toons, Games, Videos, and the Like" would be more accurate but seems too wordy. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Would '''Major Updates''' work? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::How about... ooh: '''All Toons'''!! =3 --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 01:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

== Easter eggs ==

I wasn't sure how many Easter eggs to put for [[email thunder]]. Do we count every single one or just the ones that add to the time? (I went with the former.) Do the separate files for Homestar's emails need to be listed separately? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 16:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

id think so -dr savage
:I think the separate files don't count as real easter eggs, but listing them under easter eggs is as good an idea as any... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 01:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
::'''Put them on''', because the other cartoons have separate-page easter eggs listed, so why wouldn't these be?? {{User:Religious Corn/sig}} 20:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

== another add ==

Could we add a screenshot next to each toon? {{User:Religious Corn/sig}} 00:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
:This page is bulky enough as it is. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

== Items removed ==

{{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=All_Toons&diff=617238&oldid=617050 This edit}} moved several things around, and in doing so accidentally removed several items from the list (for example, [[Main Page 8]]). I don't have time right now to research and fix it all myself, and there are good parts to the edit that I don't want to just revert, so I'm posting it here so it doesn't get forgotten. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 17:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:For the record, these items were reinstated with {{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=All_Toons&diff=prev&oldid=625984 this edit}}. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

== [[April Fool 09]] ==

Should it be on here, or is there a reason not to count it? I've got confused over wiki policies before, so I wouldn't want to mess it up... [[User:Flicky1991|Flicky1991]] 18:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
:Why wouldn't it be? It's a normal toon, even listed on the toons menu. {{User:Thy Not Dennis/sig}} 18:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

== DVD SBemails ==

Greeting Cards and E-mail Birds say they were made before gimmicks. No, they were made after montage, when the dvd came out.
Accent says it was made before more armies. No, it was made when the dvd came out.
Comic Book Movie REALLY bugs me. It says it was made before SBEmail Disc 5 came out.
Who's to say the DVD Emails, or DVDmails, weren't made when the other DVD stuff was made? I'd change it, but I'm bad at editing tables. [[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan|SBE-mail Checker Dan]] 01:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
:We sort of assumed that the emails were made roughly around the time they look like they're from given Strong Bad's computer and the animation style. Now that you question that assumption I see no reason why you couldn't be entirely correct. We need proof one way or the other. This calls for a full investigation. {{User:ACupOfCoffee/sig}} 01:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
::Part of the problem is the list is inconsistent. Generally before 2005, the toons are slotted in the list approximately when they are guessed they were made, however, starting with [[strongbad_email.exe Disc 4]], it looks like all the bonus features on the DVD are given the release date of the disc. We should decide for this list which will it be: when the toons made it out into the wild, or when they were roughly made. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 15:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I think that the date should be the release of the DVD. Guesses about possibilities on when they were made belong in the Fun Facts of the email. At any rate, the table say '''Release Date''' at the top. {{User:Elcool/sig}} 17:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I agree with [[User:Elcool|Elcool]]. The table is intended to list the '''Release Date'''; I think the creation date is another item altogether.

== Postcards? ==

What exactly are the postcards? (First Postcard, Second Postcard, etc.) I've searched this wiki for and googled the names of each of them, and I can't find out what they are. Should these items be noted with an asterix and explained at the bottom of the table?

Talk:All Toons

Mghoffmann — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:19:32 GMT

Mghoffmann: /* DVD SBemails */ Contributed to the discussion on DVD SBemails

==Format==
Wow, that was quick! How about a format like this one?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 10:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

{| border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2 style="border-collapse:collapse"
|- bgcolor=#eeeeee
! Toon !! width=120 | Release Date
|-
| [[Original Book|The Homestar Runner Enters the Strongest Man in the World Competition]] || 1996
|-
| Email [[the chair]] || December 4, 2006
|}

:I like this - also, if it's a guessed date, that could be noted. Perhaps parentheses. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 10:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
::Okay, that looks good. I'll do that, but not tonight. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 11:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

== Title ==
I think it's ok at All Toons, the only other option I would suggest is "Toons by Date" since that's how it's listed, but I don't think we have a list of all toons anywhere else together, so as with the Easter egg thing, this may be of use for more than just a cronological listing - [[User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C|Ilko Skevüld's Teh C]] 12:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

== Watch link ==

Should a column be added for "watch" links? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. That'd be so useful. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]]
::Good idea!{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm going to go ahead and do that. But I don't see the point in putting in an extra column, so I'm just putting it in the toon column. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 10:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I think it cluttered up the toon column, so I went ahead and split it off. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 06:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

== Chronological Order ==

Didn't quite a bit of research already go into the dating of toons when the [[H*R.com updates 2006|H*R.com updates]] articles were finished up? Was the "guessing" (noted at the top of the article) done independently of those articles, and if so, why? -- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 04:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:My guess is that Shwoo didn't know about those lists when she started this.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:I did compile it from from those lists, except for the early ones that didn't have precise dates. It's a lot easier. I didn't mention it on the page because I thought it was obvious. I guess I'll go add it now. Sorry. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 08:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
::No, I'm sorry I assumed you didn't know about them :-){{User:Loafing/sig}} 10:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks. I wasn't offended though. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 12:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

== formating of an estimated date ==

''This discussion originated [[Talk:The Luau|on this talk page]] and was moved here because it was more appropriate''

I came across [http://www.archive.org/web/web.php the wayback machine] a few weeks ago and have been playing with it a lot. I decided to run a search for [http://web.archive.org/web/2001*/http://www.homestarrunner.com/luau2.html this]page, which seems to suggest that the Luau was released on May 01, 2001. Is this credible enough to finally date our old stuff. At the very least we now know that it had to be release on '''or before''' this date. What do you think? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 22:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:''P.S.'' I am waiting for a "go ahead" before updating any toon pages. {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 22:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:[[User:Shwoo|Shwoo]] has already used the wayback machine to date some toons in [[All Toons]]. I think it's a great idea. A release date of "May 1, 2001, or earlier" is certainly more informative than "2001", as it reads now.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 22:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::Addendum: we should probably put more emphasize on the '''before''' part, as the wayback machine does not update a page every day, and it might take months before a new page or site is archived. [http://web.archive.org/web/2000*/http://www.homestarrunner.com/ Example].{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::I see the '''before''' part in [[All Toons]], but what about the article pages? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I meant that once we use that info on article pages, we should put emphasize on "before".{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::how's {{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=The_Luau&oldid=406143 this}}? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:Before I go making a lot of edits that will be changed later, I wanted to see if this looks alright
:'''Date:''' ''on or'' '''''before''''' May 1, 2001
:{{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::I like it. :-){{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::What's the rationale for the bold on "before"? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 23:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Because it's more likely to have been published months before the wayback machine archived it first.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::Maybe '''Date:''' ''Prior to'' May 2, 2001 is clearer and more concise. Perhaps determine the latest wayback ''without'' it and show a date range. Making this up totally: '''Date:''' ''Unknown, between'' January 7, 2001 ''and'' May 2, 2001 {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 23:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I think '''Date:''' ''on or'' '''''before''''' is better simply because it could have been updated ON the day it lists not necessarily prior to it.{{User:Bleed0range/sig}} 00:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::You'll note I upped the day by one for that very reason. Well, in reference to your self-reverted test case: You changed "2000" (we know it was 2000, apparently) to "before January something, 2001" which is less accurate. We should weigh what version yields more precision. That's why I suggested a range. Now, if the range turns out to be between sometime in 1999 and 2001, and we have "2000" already and we know that's accurate, which is better? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::I think it should say '''Circa May 01, 2001'''. It's a thought. {{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
:::::::I'd call "circa" an unnecessarily vague word myself, unless we are talking so long ago that there's absolutely no hope of getting a closer date. We have technology to be more exact in our dating. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::::It's a fitting word though. Read the definition of it. {{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
:::::::::I am well familiar with its definition. I am also aware that its usage is most commonly associated with historical events for which there is no hope in pinpointing a more precise date. Anyway, this is evolving into a meta-discussion of "how do we date things in general" which isn't really right for an individual toon's Talk. I submit we restrict talk here to dating The Luau, we discuss how to date other disputed toons on their individual article Talk pages, and we find a more appropriate Talk to discuss whatever overriding policy needs to prevail. Though at this juncture I don't think we even need a unified approach. What's the most accurate way to date this toon? That's the essential question, and whatever is the most accurate, the least ambiguous, that's what we should do. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::so moved {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 15:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
<div style="float:left; padding:1em 2em 1em 0">
{| {{standardtable}}
! Toon !! HTML last modified
|-
| [[The Luau]] || 3/25/2001
|-
| [[some kinda robot]] || 10/1/2001
|-
| [[homsar]] || 8/20/2001
|-
| [[butt IQ]] || 9/30/2001
|-
| [[homestar hair]] || 9/30/2001
|-
| [[making out]] || 10/1/2001
|-
| [[depressio]] || 10/8/2001
|-
| [[halloweener]] || 10/25/2001
|}
</div>
<div style="float:left; padding:1em 2em 1em 0">
{| {{standardtable}}
! Toon !! Released on or before
|-
| [[The Luau]] || Sun 3/25/2001
|-
| [[some kinda robot]] || Mon 8/13/2001
|-
| [[homsar]] || Mon 8/20/2001
|-
| [[butt IQ]] || Mon 8/27/2001
|-
| [[homestar hair]] || Mon 9/03/2001
|-
| [[making out]] || Mon 10/01/2001
|-
| [[depressio]] || Mon 10/08/2001
|-
| [[halloweener]] || Thu 10/25/2001
|}
</div>

Picking this discussion back up, I did some research using the Wayback Machine as well. After loading the archived HTML pages for [[The Luau]] and the first seven Strong Bad Emails, I then checked the each page's page info and got last-modified dates as shown in the first table. Obviously, [[some kinda robot]] would have to have been released in August or earlier, and I'd bet those three emails weren't released within one day of each other. I think it's reasonable that these toons were released on or before the dates shown in the second table.

This assumes that, even if they were turning out emails every week, they would have taken a break after 9/11. It's speculation, of course, and I could be off by a week here or there. The important question is, how exactly should the information in the first table be used to update the articles? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 15:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
{{clear}}

== Number of Easter eggs ==

I'm confused by the Easter egg count in the list. For [[unused emails]], it claims there are 6 while the article lists 4; for [[website]] 3 while the article lists 1; and for [[Meet Marshie]] 3, while the article lists 2. These are all the toons I've checked out so far, and every one of them seems to be off. Am I counting wrong?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:As far as I can tell, for unused emails, the list counts each stack of emails that can be clicked on as an Easter egg. The tall, medium, and short stacks, as well as the stack in Strong Mad's room, all count as individual eggs. The weekly spamvertisement and the picture in the spamvertisement count as 2 more, making 6. The list also counts the Easter eggs in [[Strong Bad's Website]] as Easter eggs for the email website (so really there should be at least 4). As for Meet Marshie, that one is just wrong. It should be 2. {{User:Has Matt?/sig}} 21:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

== Broken Table? ==

Okay, the top half looks broken to me... like the lines are missing and the information is running into itself. The bottom half is fine. Anyone else have this problem? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 19:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

== Main Page Easter Egg ==

Should we say each [[Main Pages|Main Page]] has one easter egg, the last number in {{CURRENTYEAR}}, linking to the [[Homsar Main Page]]? {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 21:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

== [[Strong Bad Clock]] ==

This is a Flash animation with extras. I don't know the date, but it should be noted here. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 03:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

== Opps. I bwoke it. ==

So I tried the add the sortable feature to the table, and it breaks when you try to sort it. I think it's because of the merged date cells for toons released on the same day. Now, we have two options: Keep it sortable (being able to see which toon have the most eggs, the length and so on) or keeping the merged cells and removing the sorting (more pretty). I think we should '''split the cells'''. Usability before appearance. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 08:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
:I agree. Having the merged cells making sorting impossible, and I'm sure people would like to sort this table. 8 October 2008
::Dunno if this has been settled or not, but i too say '''split 'n sort''' {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Is this going to happen or not? This has been here for ages. 16:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::::...and this is still a problem. Trying to use the sorting feature just causes the cells to be jumbled randomly. I'd say it might be best to kill the sort feature. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 22:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::Being able to sort the table would be an improvement. The merged cells should be split. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 22:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::Okay, merged cells are split. Now, we need to figure out how to fomat the date info so it will sort correctly. I'm thinking a YYYY-MM-DD format would be useful. Do we want to include day of the week info from [[Other days of the week]]? If so, how? {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 21:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::We just need to use the {{t|hcount}} template, similar to other tables with dates (see [[Strong Bad Email Release Dates]] for an example). We also should add a Day of Week column. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:38, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::''(edit conflict)'' You have a good point. What we could do is Column 1: Day of the week. Column 2: Date (YYYY-MM-DD). Column 3: Type (Book, Toon, Game). Column 4: Name of Toon, Game, etc. Column 5: Any notes about the content. Column 6: Link to view content. What is disorganizing the dates are the notes included in the date column. I'll go and fix it. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 21:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::Did you even read the response that conflicted you? All you need is an hcount. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::<s>Okay, I'll see what I can do... about... [[boring (really)|thaaaaaaatttttttt]]. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 21:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)</s>

== Homestar Ruiner ==
*Would SBCG4AP be considered a cartoon added on this list? Because it does have a lot of the characteristics of a toon... but it is essentially game, though. Thoughts? --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 20:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:Dang it. I hate it when this happens. Guys, '''any thoughts?''' --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 22:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
::When ''what'' happens? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:::I also hate it when we're not sure if something is a toon or not. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
::::Dot com, I mean... occasionally when you ask a question nobody replies and it gets kicked off the Recent Changes and no one reads it for a long time. --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 01:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

== Rename ==

Seeing as this article contains more than just all the toons (games, Main Pages, etc.), it should be renamed to encompass everything that's listed. Would '''Site Updates''' work? Or '''Everything'''? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 20:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:I don't like "Site Updates" since this page encompasses more than just the website. "Everything" is ''too'' broad. I'm fine with the current All Toons (even though it's a bit of a misnomer) unless something is suggested that's far and away better. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::how about "All Updates"? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::But it's not all the updates. It omits quotes of the week, news, etc. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Can we just add the quotes of the week and such? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::I think that would run too much a list. Further, the quotes and interviews and so on aren' really interactive works, like all the other bits listed here. So, since it includes toons, games, main pages, and other things, perhaps '''All Works''' or something might, well, work? --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 21:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::We have pages that list all updates. We have pages that list all quotes. This page culls out all the "real" content: toons, games, videos, and the like. "All Toons, Games, Videos, and the Like" would be more accurate but seems too wordy. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Would '''Major Updates''' work? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::How about... ooh: '''All Toons'''!! =3 --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 01:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

== Easter eggs ==

I wasn't sure how many Easter eggs to put for [[email thunder]]. Do we count every single one or just the ones that add to the time? (I went with the former.) Do the separate files for Homestar's emails need to be listed separately? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 16:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

id think so -dr savage
:I think the separate files don't count as real easter eggs, but listing them under easter eggs is as good an idea as any... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 01:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
::'''Put them on''', because the other cartoons have separate-page easter eggs listed, so why wouldn't these be?? {{User:Religious Corn/sig}} 20:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

== another add ==

Could we add a screenshot next to each toon? {{User:Religious Corn/sig}} 00:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
:This page is bulky enough as it is. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

== Items removed ==

{{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=All_Toons&diff=617238&oldid=617050 This edit}} moved several things around, and in doing so accidentally removed several items from the list (for example, [[Main Page 8]]). I don't have time right now to research and fix it all myself, and there are good parts to the edit that I don't want to just revert, so I'm posting it here so it doesn't get forgotten. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 17:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:For the record, these items were reinstated with {{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=All_Toons&diff=prev&oldid=625984 this edit}}. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

== [[April Fool 09]] ==

Should it be on here, or is there a reason not to count it? I've got confused over wiki policies before, so I wouldn't want to mess it up... [[User:Flicky1991|Flicky1991]] 18:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
:Why wouldn't it be? It's a normal toon, even listed on the toons menu. {{User:Thy Not Dennis/sig}} 18:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

== DVD SBemails ==

Greeting Cards and E-mail Birds say they were made before gimmicks. No, they were made after montage, when the dvd came out.
Accent says it was made before more armies. No, it was made when the dvd came out.
Comic Book Movie REALLY bugs me. It says it was made before SBEmail Disc 5 came out.
Who's to say the DVD Emails, or DVDmails, weren't made when the other DVD stuff was made? I'd change it, but I'm bad at editing tables. [[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan|SBE-mail Checker Dan]] 01:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
:We sort of assumed that the emails were made roughly around the time they look like they're from given Strong Bad's computer and the animation style. Now that you question that assumption I see no reason why you couldn't be entirely correct. We need proof one way or the other. This calls for a full investigation. {{User:ACupOfCoffee/sig}} 01:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
::Part of the problem is the list is inconsistent. Generally before 2005, the toons are slotted in the list approximately when they are guessed they were made, however, starting with [[strongbad_email.exe Disc 4]], it looks like all the bonus features on the DVD are given the release date of the disc. We should decide for this list which will it be: when the toons made it out into the wild, or when they were roughly made. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 15:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I think that the date should be the release of the DVD. Guesses about possibilities on when they were made belong in the Fun Facts of the email. At any rate, the table say '''Release Date''' at the top. {{User:Elcool/sig}} 17:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I agree with {{User:Elcool/sig}}. The table is intended to list the '''Release Date'''; I think the creation date is another item altogether.

== Postcards? ==

What exactly are the postcards? (First Postcard, Second Postcard, etc.) I've searched this wiki for and googled the names of each of them, and I can't find out what they are. Should these items be noted with an asterix and explained at the bottom of the table?

Talk:All Toons

Mghoffmann — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:16:11 GMT

Mghoffmann: /**/Postcards?

==Format==
Wow, that was quick! How about a format like this one?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 10:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

{| border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2 style="border-collapse:collapse"
|- bgcolor=#eeeeee
! Toon !! width=120 | Release Date
|-
| [[Original Book|The Homestar Runner Enters the Strongest Man in the World Competition]] || 1996
|-
| Email [[the chair]] || December 4, 2006
|}

:I like this - also, if it's a guessed date, that could be noted. Perhaps parentheses. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 10:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
::Okay, that looks good. I'll do that, but not tonight. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 11:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

== Title ==
I think it's ok at All Toons, the only other option I would suggest is "Toons by Date" since that's how it's listed, but I don't think we have a list of all toons anywhere else together, so as with the Easter egg thing, this may be of use for more than just a cronological listing - [[User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C|Ilko Skevüld's Teh C]] 12:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

== Watch link ==

Should a column be added for "watch" links? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. That'd be so useful. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]]
::Good idea!{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm going to go ahead and do that. But I don't see the point in putting in an extra column, so I'm just putting it in the toon column. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 10:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I think it cluttered up the toon column, so I went ahead and split it off. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 06:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

== Chronological Order ==

Didn't quite a bit of research already go into the dating of toons when the [[H*R.com updates 2006|H*R.com updates]] articles were finished up? Was the "guessing" (noted at the top of the article) done independently of those articles, and if so, why? -- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 04:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:My guess is that Shwoo didn't know about those lists when she started this.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
:I did compile it from from those lists, except for the early ones that didn't have precise dates. It's a lot easier. I didn't mention it on the page because I thought it was obvious. I guess I'll go add it now. Sorry. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 08:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
::No, I'm sorry I assumed you didn't know about them :-){{User:Loafing/sig}} 10:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks. I wasn't offended though. {{User:Shwoo/sig}} 12:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

== formating of an estimated date ==

''This discussion originated [[Talk:The Luau|on this talk page]] and was moved here because it was more appropriate''

I came across [http://www.archive.org/web/web.php the wayback machine] a few weeks ago and have been playing with it a lot. I decided to run a search for [http://web.archive.org/web/2001*/http://www.homestarrunner.com/luau2.html this]page, which seems to suggest that the Luau was released on May 01, 2001. Is this credible enough to finally date our old stuff. At the very least we now know that it had to be release on '''or before''' this date. What do you think? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 22:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:''P.S.'' I am waiting for a "go ahead" before updating any toon pages. {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 22:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:[[User:Shwoo|Shwoo]] has already used the wayback machine to date some toons in [[All Toons]]. I think it's a great idea. A release date of "May 1, 2001, or earlier" is certainly more informative than "2001", as it reads now.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 22:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::Addendum: we should probably put more emphasize on the '''before''' part, as the wayback machine does not update a page every day, and it might take months before a new page or site is archived. [http://web.archive.org/web/2000*/http://www.homestarrunner.com/ Example].{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::I see the '''before''' part in [[All Toons]], but what about the article pages? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I meant that once we use that info on article pages, we should put emphasize on "before".{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::how's {{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=The_Luau&oldid=406143 this}}? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:Before I go making a lot of edits that will be changed later, I wanted to see if this looks alright
:'''Date:''' ''on or'' '''''before''''' May 1, 2001
:{{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 23:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::I like it. :-){{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::What's the rationale for the bold on "before"? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 23:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Because it's more likely to have been published months before the wayback machine archived it first.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::Maybe '''Date:''' ''Prior to'' May 2, 2001 is clearer and more concise. Perhaps determine the latest wayback ''without'' it and show a date range. Making this up totally: '''Date:''' ''Unknown, between'' January 7, 2001 ''and'' May 2, 2001 {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 23:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I think '''Date:''' ''on or'' '''''before''''' is better simply because it could have been updated ON the day it lists not necessarily prior to it.{{User:Bleed0range/sig}} 00:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::You'll note I upped the day by one for that very reason. Well, in reference to your self-reverted test case: You changed "2000" (we know it was 2000, apparently) to "before January something, 2001" which is less accurate. We should weigh what version yields more precision. That's why I suggested a range. Now, if the range turns out to be between sometime in 1999 and 2001, and we have "2000" already and we know that's accurate, which is better? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::I think it should say '''Circa May 01, 2001'''. It's a thought. {{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
:::::::I'd call "circa" an unnecessarily vague word myself, unless we are talking so long ago that there's absolutely no hope of getting a closer date. We have technology to be more exact in our dating. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::::It's a fitting word though. Read the definition of it. {{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
:::::::::I am well familiar with its definition. I am also aware that its usage is most commonly associated with historical events for which there is no hope in pinpointing a more precise date. Anyway, this is evolving into a meta-discussion of "how do we date things in general" which isn't really right for an individual toon's Talk. I submit we restrict talk here to dating The Luau, we discuss how to date other disputed toons on their individual article Talk pages, and we find a more appropriate Talk to discuss whatever overriding policy needs to prevail. Though at this juncture I don't think we even need a unified approach. What's the most accurate way to date this toon? That's the essential question, and whatever is the most accurate, the least ambiguous, that's what we should do. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::so moved {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 15:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
<div style="float:left; padding:1em 2em 1em 0">
{| {{standardtable}}
! Toon !! HTML last modified
|-
| [[The Luau]] || 3/25/2001
|-
| [[some kinda robot]] || 10/1/2001
|-
| [[homsar]] || 8/20/2001
|-
| [[butt IQ]] || 9/30/2001
|-
| [[homestar hair]] || 9/30/2001
|-
| [[making out]] || 10/1/2001
|-
| [[depressio]] || 10/8/2001
|-
| [[halloweener]] || 10/25/2001
|}
</div>
<div style="float:left; padding:1em 2em 1em 0">
{| {{standardtable}}
! Toon !! Released on or before
|-
| [[The Luau]] || Sun 3/25/2001
|-
| [[some kinda robot]] || Mon 8/13/2001
|-
| [[homsar]] || Mon 8/20/2001
|-
| [[butt IQ]] || Mon 8/27/2001
|-
| [[homestar hair]] || Mon 9/03/2001
|-
| [[making out]] || Mon 10/01/2001
|-
| [[depressio]] || Mon 10/08/2001
|-
| [[halloweener]] || Thu 10/25/2001
|}
</div>

Picking this discussion back up, I did some research using the Wayback Machine as well. After loading the archived HTML pages for [[The Luau]] and the first seven Strong Bad Emails, I then checked the each page's page info and got last-modified dates as shown in the first table. Obviously, [[some kinda robot]] would have to have been released in August or earlier, and I'd bet those three emails weren't released within one day of each other. I think it's reasonable that these toons were released on or before the dates shown in the second table.

This assumes that, even if they were turning out emails every week, they would have taken a break after 9/11. It's speculation, of course, and I could be off by a week here or there. The important question is, how exactly should the information in the first table be used to update the articles? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 15:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
{{clear}}

== Number of Easter eggs ==

I'm confused by the Easter egg count in the list. For [[unused emails]], it claims there are 6 while the article lists 4; for [[website]] 3 while the article lists 1; and for [[Meet Marshie]] 3, while the article lists 2. These are all the toons I've checked out so far, and every one of them seems to be off. Am I counting wrong?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:As far as I can tell, for unused emails, the list counts each stack of emails that can be clicked on as an Easter egg. The tall, medium, and short stacks, as well as the stack in Strong Mad's room, all count as individual eggs. The weekly spamvertisement and the picture in the spamvertisement count as 2 more, making 6. The list also counts the Easter eggs in [[Strong Bad's Website]] as Easter eggs for the email website (so really there should be at least 4). As for Meet Marshie, that one is just wrong. It should be 2. {{User:Has Matt?/sig}} 21:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

== Broken Table? ==

Okay, the top half looks broken to me... like the lines are missing and the information is running into itself. The bottom half is fine. Anyone else have this problem? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 19:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

== Main Page Easter Egg ==

Should we say each [[Main Pages|Main Page]] has one easter egg, the last number in {{CURRENTYEAR}}, linking to the [[Homsar Main Page]]? {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 21:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

== [[Strong Bad Clock]] ==

This is a Flash animation with extras. I don't know the date, but it should be noted here. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 03:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

== Opps. I bwoke it. ==

So I tried the add the sortable feature to the table, and it breaks when you try to sort it. I think it's because of the merged date cells for toons released on the same day. Now, we have two options: Keep it sortable (being able to see which toon have the most eggs, the length and so on) or keeping the merged cells and removing the sorting (more pretty). I think we should '''split the cells'''. Usability before appearance. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 08:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
:I agree. Having the merged cells making sorting impossible, and I'm sure people would like to sort this table. 8 October 2008
::Dunno if this has been settled or not, but i too say '''split 'n sort''' {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Is this going to happen or not? This has been here for ages. 16:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::::...and this is still a problem. Trying to use the sorting feature just causes the cells to be jumbled randomly. I'd say it might be best to kill the sort feature. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 22:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::Being able to sort the table would be an improvement. The merged cells should be split. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 22:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::Okay, merged cells are split. Now, we need to figure out how to fomat the date info so it will sort correctly. I'm thinking a YYYY-MM-DD format would be useful. Do we want to include day of the week info from [[Other days of the week]]? If so, how? {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 21:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::We just need to use the {{t|hcount}} template, similar to other tables with dates (see [[Strong Bad Email Release Dates]] for an example). We also should add a Day of Week column. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:38, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::''(edit conflict)'' You have a good point. What we could do is Column 1: Day of the week. Column 2: Date (YYYY-MM-DD). Column 3: Type (Book, Toon, Game). Column 4: Name of Toon, Game, etc. Column 5: Any notes about the content. Column 6: Link to view content. What is disorganizing the dates are the notes included in the date column. I'll go and fix it. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 21:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::Did you even read the response that conflicted you? All you need is an hcount. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::<s>Okay, I'll see what I can do... about... [[boring (really)|thaaaaaaatttttttt]]. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 21:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)</s>

== Homestar Ruiner ==
*Would SBCG4AP be considered a cartoon added on this list? Because it does have a lot of the characteristics of a toon... but it is essentially game, though. Thoughts? --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 20:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:Dang it. I hate it when this happens. Guys, '''any thoughts?''' --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 22:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
::When ''what'' happens? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:::I also hate it when we're not sure if something is a toon or not. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
::::Dot com, I mean... occasionally when you ask a question nobody replies and it gets kicked off the Recent Changes and no one reads it for a long time. --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 01:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

== Rename ==

Seeing as this article contains more than just all the toons (games, Main Pages, etc.), it should be renamed to encompass everything that's listed. Would '''Site Updates''' work? Or '''Everything'''? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 20:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:I don't like "Site Updates" since this page encompasses more than just the website. "Everything" is ''too'' broad. I'm fine with the current All Toons (even though it's a bit of a misnomer) unless something is suggested that's far and away better. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::how about "All Updates"? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::But it's not all the updates. It omits quotes of the week, news, etc. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Can we just add the quotes of the week and such? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::I think that would run too much a list. Further, the quotes and interviews and so on aren' really interactive works, like all the other bits listed here. So, since it includes toons, games, main pages, and other things, perhaps '''All Works''' or something might, well, work? --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 21:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::We have pages that list all updates. We have pages that list all quotes. This page culls out all the "real" content: toons, games, videos, and the like. "All Toons, Games, Videos, and the Like" would be more accurate but seems too wordy. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Would '''Major Updates''' work? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::How about... ooh: '''All Toons'''!! =3 --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}} 01:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

== Easter eggs ==

I wasn't sure how many Easter eggs to put for [[email thunder]]. Do we count every single one or just the ones that add to the time? (I went with the former.) Do the separate files for Homestar's emails need to be listed separately? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 16:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

id think so -dr savage
:I think the separate files don't count as real easter eggs, but listing them under easter eggs is as good an idea as any... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 01:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
::'''Put them on''', because the other cartoons have separate-page easter eggs listed, so why wouldn't these be?? {{User:Religious Corn/sig}} 20:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

== another add ==

Could we add a screenshot next to each toon? {{User:Religious Corn/sig}} 00:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
:This page is bulky enough as it is. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

== Items removed ==

{{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=All_Toons&diff=617238&oldid=617050 This edit}} moved several things around, and in doing so accidentally removed several items from the list (for example, [[Main Page 8]]). I don't have time right now to research and fix it all myself, and there are good parts to the edit that I don't want to just revert, so I'm posting it here so it doesn't get forgotten. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 17:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:For the record, these items were reinstated with {{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=All_Toons&diff=prev&oldid=625984 this edit}}. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

== [[April Fool 09]] ==

Should it be on here, or is there a reason not to count it? I've got confused over wiki policies before, so I wouldn't want to mess it up... [[User:Flicky1991|Flicky1991]] 18:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
:Why wouldn't it be? It's a normal toon, even listed on the toons menu. {{User:Thy Not Dennis/sig}} 18:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

== DVD SBemails ==

Greeting Cards and E-mail Birds say they were made before gimmicks. No, they were made after montage, when the dvd came out.
Accent says it was made before more armies. No, it was made when the dvd came out.
Comic Book Movie REALLY bugs me. It says it was made before SBEmail Disc 5 came out.
Who's to say the DVD Emails, or DVDmails, weren't made when the other DVD stuff was made? I'd change it, but I'm bad at editing tables. [[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan|SBE-mail Checker Dan]] 01:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
:We sort of assumed that the emails were made roughly around the time they look like they're from given Strong Bad's computer and the animation style. Now that you question that assumption I see no reason why you couldn't be entirely correct. We need proof one way or the other. This calls for a full investigation. {{User:ACupOfCoffee/sig}} 01:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
::Part of the problem is the list is inconsistent. Generally before 2005, the toons are slotted in the list approximately when they are guessed they were made, however, starting with [[strongbad_email.exe Disc 4]], it looks like all the bonus features on the DVD are given the release date of the disc. We should decide for this list which will it be: when the toons made it out into the wild, or when they were roughly made. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 15:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I think that the date should be the release of the DVD. Guesses about possibilities on when they were made belong in the Fun Facts of the email. At any rate, the table say '''Release Date''' at the top. {{User:Elcool/sig}} 17:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

== Postcards? ==

What exactly are the postcards? (First Postcard, Second Postcard, etc.) I've searched this wiki for and googled the names of each of them, and I can't find out what they are. Should these items be noted with an asterix and explained at the bottom of the table?

Grandmaw Auntpaw

Mghoffmann — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:06:55 GMT

Mghoffmann:

'''Grandmaw Auntpaw''' is mentioned in the [[Strong Bad Email]] [[Videography]], and is visible in a short [[Easter Egg]] clip at the end.

Grandmaw Auntpaw

Mghoffmann — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:05:04 GMT

Mghoffmann: Created page with ''''Grandmaw Auntpaw''' is mentioned in the Strong Bad Email Videography, and is visible in a short Easter Egg clip at the end.'

'''Grandmaw Auntpaw''' is mentioned in the [[Strong Bad Email]] Videography, and is visible in a short [[Easter Egg]] clip at the end.