HRWiki:Featured Article Selection

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 12:25, 5 October 2008

Welcome to featured article selection. Please help us choose and create write-ups for our best, most interesting, or otherwise noteworthy articles to appear on the main page. For ideas, check out the featured article nominations.

Checklist

Discussion archives

Article discussions

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40 (Sep 29-Oct 5)

I think we sorely need to do something related to Puppet Stuff. How about Everybody Knows It? MHarrington 07:28, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Everybody Knows It is a bit on the short side. I'm not sure if a writeup would be long enough or not. If not, I still think featuring something Puppet-related is a good idea. Heimstern Läufer 23:09, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, then how about the Biz Cas Fri series? MHarrington 01:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, because many of the Puppet Stuffs are short, it might be worth considering a week of Puppet Stuff dailies (not necessarily this week). The Biz Cas Fris are probably long enough for a week, though. Heimstern Läufer 02:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

That's it! We have NOT done dailies in a LONG time. The ones we could feature are: Everybody Knows It, Puppet Time, Homestar vs. Little Girl, Homestar vs. Little Girl 2, Strong Bad vs. Little Girl!, Homestar vs. Other Little Girl and Marshie vs. Little Girl. How about that? Mind you, it's just a prototype, but it should give an idea. MHarrington 05:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

My only problem with this list would be Marshie vs. Little Girl and Homestar vs. Little Girl 2 are both Halloween themed. If we do this, it would be better to move it closer to Halloween (maybe Week 43) and/or substitute some of the Biz Cas Fri shorts... which should get featured anyway. But, I would concede these are all mid-importance articles that work well for dailies. wbwolf (t | ed) 05:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I think Mr. Wolf is exactly right about the Halloween ones. Also, they're quite possibly long and involved enough for a whole week. Another thing we haven't considered are the Puppet Jam sessions, all of which are rather short and unlikely to make a good week-long feature. Heimstern Läufer 05:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm fine with this. One way or another, though, we need to include something with the puppet stuff. MHarrington 05:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, and we have plenty of time to refine the list. Heimstern Läufer 05:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

As for the Puppet Jams, we don't have to necessarily feature any of the separate ones; we could do an article on that series as a whole. MHarrington 05:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I got it. How about doing the week thus, as per the dailies-type to give you an idea. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Listed below is a list of the dailies for this week:

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40, day 1

Everybody Knows It. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40, day 2

Puppet Time. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40, day 3

Puppet Jam series. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Again, the problem is this is just a short intro and a list; articles that are featured, even as dailies, should have some content beyond what's on the front page. How about Bad Jokes as a representative of the series, instead? wbwolf (t | ed) 19:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, once again, we could do it like with Summer Short Shorts, where we describe each of the shorts in brief, with an intro to the series as a whole. MHarrington 19:38, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

No, as below, we shouldn't feature multiple articles in a single writeup. Heimstern Läufer 19:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, what if we just had said short intro, a description of the series as a whole and a description of one of the shorts (like Bad Jokes), as Wbwolf suggested? MHarrington 19:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Like featuring Bad Jokes, and as part of that, including a blurb about the series of which it's part? Yeah, we could do that. Heimstern Läufer 17:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's about the size of it. MHarrington 23:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Please note the changes made to this writeup. While some info about the series as a whole is fine, even desirable, the featured article is nonetheless Bad Jokes, not Puppet Jam, and therefore it must be the article with the bold links. Heimstern Läufer 08:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll do it like that then. MHarrington 01:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40, day 4

Homestar vs. Little Girl. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40, day 5

Strong Bad vs. Little Girl!. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I think we should put this before the Biz Cas Fri series, as this was the debut of the Strong Bad puppet on H*R.com, and that puppet plays an important role in BCF. Heimstern Läufer 17:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

All right, consider it done. MHarrington 17:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40, day 6

Biz Cas Fri series. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The problem here is Biz Cas Fri points to a disam page. Similar to the problem when trying to feature the Lappynapped! saga, we shy away from making special pages just to be featured. In order to pick one, I would lean towards Biz Cas Fri 1. wbwolf (t | ed) 19:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, then, why don't we do it like we did with Summer Short Shorts? We look at each of the parts in the series individually, but on one article. We dedicate one or two sentences a time to each of the three shorts in the series. Same goes for the Puppet Jam series. MHarrington 19:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

No, we shouldn't feature multiple articles in one writeup. It's a featured article, not featured articles. With Summer Short Shorts, we're still featuring only one article. Not three, as we would for Biz Cas Fri. Heimstern Läufer 19:38, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think it could work. What we should do is feature an intro to the series, complete with where the name for this series came from: namely, the other days email. And maybe a description of just one of the shorts featured, like Biz Cas Fri 1. MHarrington 19:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

We could feature Biz Cas Fri 1 and include a description of the series as a whole in the opening of the writeup, which is maybe kind of the sort of thing you had in mind. Heimstern Läufer 17:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's about the size of it. MHarrington 23:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

It would make much more sense if we feature a full article, namely Biz Cas Fri 1 over a simple disambiguation page (or even try to feature several articles at once). So I'd say go ahead with Biz Cas Fri 1. --Stux 08:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's the plan: Feature Biz Cas Fri 1, but include a bit of info about the series as a whole in the writeup. Heimstern Läufer 08:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 40, day 0

Homestar vs. Other Little Girl. MHarrington 16:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

It would be nice to feature one of the DVD exclusive Puppet Stuff features if we're going to do a series. Real Live E-Mails would be a likely candidate. (Puppets On The Road is long enough that could be featured on its own.) wbwolf (t | ed) 17:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

What about Strongbadia the free ? HomsarGuy 19:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

We're doing a week of Puppet Stuff-related articles this week. Plus, Strong Badia the Free is too new to new to be a Featured Article. Homestar-Winner (talk) 19:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I think Real-Live E-Mails (note the dash in the name) would a fitting treat to end the FA week (as we already have two "vs. Little Girl" articles listed). --Stux 22:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The only problem with Real-Live E-Mails (and Puppets On The Road, too) is that it's available only on DVD and not on the website. And Other Little Girl is different than Little Girl. MHarrington 23:25, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the fact that it's DVD-only is a problem for featuring it. No opinion on whether it's preferable to feature it or Other Little Girl. Heimstern Läufer 01:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, we should make a decision soon, because time is running out. I've already put up the first three days of this week. MHarrington 01:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I've given it a little thought, and I've decided that I agree with Mr. Wolf that a DVD exclusive would be desirable. It could even drum up interest in the DVDs, which would be good for TBC (OK, it's not that likely we'll make them more money, but still, it shows off an easily-neglected element of their work). Heimstern Läufer 08:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

All right, we can do a DVD-only feature, I guess. However, which one should we do: Real Live E-Mails or Puppets On The Road? Of course, it was suggested that the latter is long enough to do for a week, so maybe "E-Mails". Either way, it will be chronologically and climatically a good last feature to do for the week. MHarrington 01:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Another advantage of doing Real-Live E-Mails is we can mention the Marshie puppet, which we wouldn't be able to do elsewhere. wbwolf (t | ed) 01:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, Real-Live E-Mails it is, then. MHarrington 01:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 41 (Oct 6-12)

How about some kind of clothing, like Bowler Hats? MHarrington 06:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

May I suggest instead one of the reoccurring names in the Homestar Runner universe, A. Chimendez. We finally appeared in a short, and Bill Melendez, his name inspiration recent passed away. I think it would be a fitting tribute. wbwolf (t | ed) 00:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that would work, I guess, except the article is just a trifle short. If we could add more, that would help greatly. MHarrington 06:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we should do Chimendez right before Gunhaver: Too much Cheat Commandos. (True, Chimendez is not exclusively CC, but his only appearance as something more than a name is in a Cheat Commandos toon.) If we want to do Chimendez this week, I think we should come up with something instead of Gunhaver for next. Heimstern Läufer 06:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Then I think we should go back to Bowler Hats and save A. Chimendez for another time. MHarrington 20:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Bowler hats could use a little more content before being featured article. We haven't done a running gag in a while, though, so what about Couch Mumbling? JCM 19:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Nah, too bare-bones, and uses an unneccary graph instaed of links. How 'bout Death?

Once again, Death is too bare-bones for inclusion. We'd have to update that one greatly. MHarrington 20:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how either can have more content than they already do. JCM 20:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Fine, how about... New Paper? It's both a running gag, and a character. That Game Dude 386 00:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

The content for Bowler Hats is enough. Yes, it would be better for it to be slightly longer, but still, it's a good paragraph plus some appearances, and it's a nice explanation of one of the H*R universe's most peculiar phenomena. Heimstern Läufer 01:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Like pants (or more often, the lack thereof). MHarrington 03:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Are you serious? Death and Couch Mumbling are too short, yet Bowler Hats isn't?!? I'm keeping a firm "no" on this one. Enough fighting over Bowler Hats, and there's a two againts two ratio, so we need an idea we all agree on fast. Death and Couch Mumbling already have two ayes and 1 nay, Bowler Hats has two "nays", so it's out. Those are your 2 choices: pick one. That Game Dude 386 20:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Listen carefully, That game dude386: In an FA, there are two elements: the prose introduction, which appears as a writeup, and the subsequent content (referenced in the writeup as "more". For an article to work as an FA, it must have a reasonably long prose intro, regardless of how much it has in other sections. Couch Mumbling does not have enough prose at present. Bowler Hats does, by a hair, and it also has a bit more content thereafter. Furthermore, you are out of line in making ultimatums of this sort. Please stop. Heimstern Läufer 09:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

No, people can still vote for Bowler Hats if they want to. Bowler Hats isn't my favorite choice for a Featured Article, but it sounds like it would work better than any of the other suggested articles. New Paper would be good to feature sometime, but I feel we should wait until 2009 to feature it. Homestar-Winner (talk) 21:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I still have my bets on Couch Mumbling. If Floppy Disc Container made it, this should, too. JCM 22:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

We don't have enough time for this! I'm hearing nothing but Bowler Hats bias, however, looking at it, it woudn't fit the Featured Article square, even with it's lists, so, no. Let's go with Couch Mumbling or New Paper, or Death. C'mon, folks! Place ya bets! That Game Dude 386 23:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, in that case, I say Couch Mumbling. That one, in fact, does have a decent amount of text for an article. MHarrington 00:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, Couch Mumbling is okay. Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like we have a winner! (Yes! I single handedly (+ assist) changed the intended FA! The Grumblecakes are mine!)That Game Dude 386 01:36, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hold on, folks. This prose intro is far too short for a featured article. (Guh, I go out of town for a few days...) Someone expand this real fast, please. Bowler Hats had enough prose for an introduction. This one does not. Heimstern Läufer 09:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't see anyone making Couch Mumbling featureable. It needs to be more developed to feature, but nobody, including its proponents, has put any work into exapnding it to featureable scope. This isn't some frathouse vote, it's a selection of the articles o this wiki which best show our competence and all. As TGD386 has "single handedly changed the intended FA" (which is nothing to be proud of) leaves us at the end of a deadline with nothing to feature - that time might have been better spent developing one or more artivcles to featureable status. Ideas of where to go from here are welcome. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  10:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I just expanded the article. Now it goes beyond the picture seen. I hope this helps. MHarrington 16:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 42 (Oct 13-19)

For this week, how about Gunhaver? I sincerely believe that the Cheat Commandos body of work has been too lightly tapped for too long now. MHarrington 15:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, it'll be a bit recent after Commandos in the Classroom, but it's true, we haven't done much CC. I'm cool with it. Heimstern Läufer 17:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

And in fairness, we had So and So for Week 4 of this year, followed three weeks later by TGS Issue 12. So this is nothing compared to that. MHarrington 00:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Why not use Cheat Commandos...O's? Frankly, it's a crime that it hasn't been done yet! That Game Dude 386 20:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Because Cheat Commandos...O's doesn't have a two story hot tub! (Oh, and the last CC article we featured was a toon. And Gunhaver is a character.) — Acam30 20:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. We've never done any Cheat Commandos characters, save for Blue Laser, and even that is for the group as a whole, not any one character. I just think it's time that CC characters got their due, kinda like what is happening (slowly but surely) with the Teen Girl Squad. MHarrington 20:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh! Sorry, I meant the cereal "Cheat Commandos..O's", not the toon. Do we not have an article on that one yet? Anyways, why not do Mrs. Commanderson? Or, to a greater extent, Firebert? That Game Dude 386 00:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, That game dude386. Lemme introduce you a little to how things are done here: We discuss featured article suggestions rather than just throwing out suggestions. So, for example, since Gunhaver had already been suggested, if you wanted to suggest something else, your really need to explain why that suggestion is preferable to the original. As yet, you haven't given any reason not to go with the original suggestion (and by the way, I still think Gunhaver is the best way to go, since he's one of the most prominent CC characters). Heimstern Läufer 01:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

So we're going with Gunhaver then? Fo' shizzle? — Acam30 01:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I suppose so. MHarrington 03:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, why not? I thought having a combo-character (O's in specially marked, Commanderson in Teen Girl Squad, and Firebert in army & more armies) would be nice, but yeah, Gunhaver's the best CC character. That Game Dude 386 21:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 43 (Oct 20-26)

Well, it's starting to be getting around Halloween once again. Since we've featured two Halloween-themed items per year in the past (one for the week before Halloween; one for the week during Halloween (one of the major Halloween toons)), I think we should do something like that again. However, I have a few possibilities for this particular week: namely, The Goblin and the two Halloween-themed emails, halloweener and ghosts. Do any of those appeal to anyone? MHarrington 15:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I would like to see The Goblin featured. He doesn't get enough recognition sometimes, but it just wouldn't be a Homestar Runner Holloween without him. — Acam30 02:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Does the goblin really have enough content to make a good FA though? — Defender1031*Talk 02:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

It's doable, though more content would be great if we could add it. Heimstern Läufer 02:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's high time that The Goblin got a page. And with Halloween right around the corner, why not do it then, since he is featured in several of the Halloween toons anyway? I think that article also has enough content for it, though if we can add more, it would be even better. MHarrington 03:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

So... we've agreed on The Goblin then? — Acam30 01:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I proposed having The Goblin last year, but I think took it in some other direction. I think he's long overdue to get an FA. wbwolf (t | ed) 01:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, he is about as overdue for an FA as Nebulon was. MHarrington 03:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 44 (Oct 27-Nov 2)

Well, this week would be a time where we'd feature an actual Halloween toon. The ones that had already been featured in the past were: Halloween Potion-ma-jig (for 2006) and Homestarloween Party (for 2007). Anyway, this year, I think we ought to do Pumpkin Carve-nival. MHarrington 07:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The House That Gave Sucky Treats would also work. I don't know which is more worthy though. BBG 14:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Any of them would be worthy, but I think we've already featured a "choose-your-own"-type Halloween toon recently: namely, Halloween Potion-ma-jig. So I think we should hold off on that kind of toon until a little later and just do something regular, yet a bit older. That's one reason why I picked Pumpkin Carve-nival for the Halloween toon of the year. Plus, the King of Town is dressed as Mario in that one and I love Mario. And then there are all those twists near the end of the toon, as well. MHarrington 15:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, and Pumpkin Carve-nival also beget an interesting little catch phrase now common in the H*R universe: namely, "witches' brew". MHarrington 14:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

But, do we really need to feature a Halloween article two weeks in a row? Since it's the start of November, maybe we should feature a Thanksgiving-related article or toon. JCM 23:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, firstly, we've had two Halloween articles each in the past, and secondly, we don't usually do Thanksgiving stuff until it's actually around Thanksgiving time itself. MHarrington 04:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, we usually do two, kind of like how TBC frequently do two 'Ween-type toons: One short, one full-length. Likewise, we tend to feature one full-length toon on the week that includes Halloween itself, and a different type the week before (such as a short Halloween toon or Halloween-related running gag). Heimstern Läufer 04:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't have said that better myself. MHarrington 17:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

We've all agreed on Pumpkin Carvenival for the time being then? — Acam30 01:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

For the time being, yes. MHarrington 04:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 45 (Nov 3-9)

We should do Taranchula this week. MHarrington 00:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

With the appearance of the standee in Strong Badia The Free (and likely references in Baddest Of The Bands), this might be a fun one to do. wbwolf (t | ed) 17:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

What's a standee? MHarrington 20:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

A standee is a cardboard cutout, usually roughly life size, of a figure. Originally used for advertising movies, but they are now sold on their own. A Taranchula standee is a plot point in the Strong Mad portion of SBtF. wbwolf (t | ed) 21:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that's what it is. Unfortunately, however, there isn't much information to give on standees, though. The only standees I can think of are Cardboard Marzipan and Cardboard Homestar. MHarrington 22:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Would the numerous stand ins for Original Bubs be counted as standees? Stribbs 22:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Cardboard Marzi is probably of featureable length. No comment on whether to feature her or go with the original suggestion for the week at this point, though. Heimstern Läufer 00:04, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I think y'all are misunderstanding me. There is a Taranchula standee featured in Strong Badia The Free. That, and likely references to the band in the next game will make Taranchula a pertinent FA. wbwolf (t | ed) 01:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha. Taranchula is fine by me. Incidentally, it'd probably be good to look at Cardboard Marzi sometime. But not now. Heimstern Läufer 05:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

A few months ago, incidentally, we were considering having Cardboard Marzipan as an article, but we took a pass on it for a variety of reasons, including that it was a bit short. So no comment. MHarrington 21:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 46 (Nov 10-16)

For this week, we should have What's Her Face. MHarrington 22:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Somthing TGS-themed, yes, but I think that Teen Girl Squad Issue 1 is more deserving. Or, Arrow'd Guy. Both are truly deserving articles. That Game Dude 386 20:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

But we have not featured any of the girls themselves since Week 4 (when we had So and So). And TGS Issue 1 was also seen in the email comic. As for Arrow'd Guy, no comment. MHarrington 20:35, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The fact is, looking at the page, it just doesn't seem... special enough. It's not a highlight of TGS or HR Wiki. It's good, but it's not... deserving. But, how about a TGS running gag? If so, I'd like to put Ow! My X! and -'d on the table. That Game Dude 386 00:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I think featuring one of the girls themselves whould be better... but if you really want to do a running gag, my vote would be for -'d. — Acam30 01:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

If we're going to be doing a running gag article a few weeks from now (I'm thinking a clothing gag for the 41st week), I think a second running gag (even one entirely different) a few weeks later would be a bit superfluous. MHarrington 03:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Then why not feature What's Her Face? It's been a while since we did something TGS related, I think. — Acam30 11:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

That's what I suggested the first time, wasn't it? MHarrington 15:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm still thinking if we do a TGS character, Arrow'd Guy is WAY overdue. What's-Her-Face we can do for 2009's TGS character, and I'll root for her, but Arrow'd Guy needs to go first. That Game Dude 386 21:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

And in fairness, we had So-And-So this year, so let's not do another girl this year. That Game Dude 386 21:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

..So, we're doing Arrow'd Guy, right? That Game Dude 386 23:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I suppose so. MHarrington 00:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

But The game dude is the only one who wants Arrowed Guy. I think So and So would be better. Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

We've already done So and So, which is why I was suggesting What's Her Face. We'll do the Arrow'd Guy next time we do a TGS-themed article. MHarrington 00:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, right, I meant What's Her Face. Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:36, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Grood! What's Her Face it is then! ...right? — Acam30 01:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

And in fairness, we had So and So for Week 4 of this year, followed three weeks later by TGS Issue 12. So this is nothing compared to that. ... this battle is FAR from over. You've already agreed on Arrow'd Guy, anyway! That Game Dude 386 01:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

No she didn't. Homestar-Winner (talk) 01:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I suppose so. That sounds like a yes to me. That Game Dude 386 01:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Arrow'd Guy is the best-quality TGS main character article. Not the character himself; the articleThat Game Dude 386 01:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

First of all, that quote was said by MHarrington. Second of all, What's Her Face also has a good article, and I just don't think it seems right to feature other TGS characters before we feature all of the main ones. If we Feature What's Her Face now, we can do The Ugly One in 2009 and then be finished with all of the main TGS characters. Homestar-Winner (talk) 01:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Twice a year isn't really fair; besides, Arrow'd Guy is hardly NOT a TGS member, as he's only NOT been with them on 3 accounts. That Game Dude 386 02:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I think we need some other users' comments to help us decide. Homestar-Winner (talk) 02:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

If you hadn't stirred this whole arguement up again, we wouldn't have had this problem. Not to play the blame game, but I think I've already proved my point. What's-Her-Face we can do in March. Arrow'd Guy is overdue. If we get more opinions, I'll listen. But, if no one else comes, we're doing Arrow'd Guy. That Game Dude 386 20:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

But it sounds to me like more people would rather feature What's Her Face. Homestar-Winner (talk) 20:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

It sounds to me like no one here is willing to compare Whats-Her-Face's and Arrow'd Guy's articles. Remember: It's not the subject of the article anymore; it's the quality. That Game Dude 386 21:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it's both subject and quality. And I'm still sticking to What's Her Face, partly since it's been a while since we've done a TGS article and I want to do another one of the girls herself. We can do Arrow'd Guy sometime next year. MHarrington 05:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Really game dude, you are the only person who actually wants to feature Arrow'd Guy. I know wiki discussion are not based on majority rules, but... this is getting a little ridiculous in my opinion. So I'll say the same thing you did. If we get more opinions, I'll listen, but until then, it sounds like everyone else had pretty much agreed on What's Her Face. — Acam30 11:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

*Sigh*, very well. I can see that you guys are holding steadfast, and it's time to back off. But I want it to be known that by at least next March we can do Arrow'd Guy... before The Ugly One, OK? That Game Dude 386 23:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, we'll have the Arrow'd Guy sometime. MHarrington 01:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

That game dude386, I have to tell you in no uncertain terms that you need to lay off on this combative attitude. This area is for friendly discussion, not battles over featured articles. Your comments here, as well as the ones above about the Bowler Hats article, are over this line. You do not have the authority to say "no" about any article. Heimstern Läufer 09:40, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

The more I read this discussion, the more astounded I am at the things you've said here. After many others stated favour for What's Her Face, you said, "..So, we're doing Arrow'd Guy, right?" Where on earth would you get that idea, when you're the only one who supported it? "... this battle is FAR from over. You've already agreed on Arrow'd Guy, anyway!" People have every right to change their minds, and making a "battle" out of this is a completely unacceptable attitude here. "If we get more opinions, I'll listen. But, if no one else comes, we're doing Arrow'd Guy." There were already many opinions stated, were these not enough for you? And how can you possibly say "we're doing Arrow'd Guy" when you're the only one who supported it against several of other opinions? It seems like you were just trying to force your opinion through by refusal to concede. It wouldn't have worked, by the way, as the writeup would have been of What's Her Face, since that's where consensus was, and had you tried to write one of Arrow'd Guy, I would have deleted it as against consensus.

Now, I realize that you eventually conceded, but I want to stress this: Insisting on what you want when others don't agree with it is going to do nothing but alienate you from others and lessen your chances to influence others via discussion. We operate by consensus, not by one person's opinion, no matter how inspired he or she may find his or her own opinion. Heimstern Läufer 13:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

When I send an idea for an article, TGD, it doesn't always get used, but even when it doesn't, I still try to accept a different person's suggestion. MHarrington 16:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Same with me. Just go with the flow. Some people disagree, some people agree. Don't battle the majority, especially when it's only you. But back to the Featured Article, I support What's Her Face. But TGD, this will probably be the way it goes, probably: The Ugly One will be featured first, then Arrow'd Guy. Maybe even an TGS Issue before Arrow'd. Maybe. But for now, I support What's Her Face. Sam the Man 12:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 47 (Nov 17-23)

For this week, let's make it Don and Harriet Chapman, Mike and Matt's parents. MHarrington 19:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

To me, it looks the article is just a little short to featured. (Unfortunately, I can't think of something else to put here.) wbwolf (t | ed) 14:07, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The question is CAN it be added on to, with the available information we have? -- Lazylaces Talk 14:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's really anything else we know that's not already there. Heimstern Läufer 14:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

And I think there is a reasonable amount of text there anyway. MHarrington 05:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

This one's really borderline, especially since there's no appearances section to help fill out the end. It could be done, I think; I just wish there were more content. But as I've said, I don't think there's any more available. Heimstern Läufer 05:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, I just thought that A) we need to do more actual people in TBC's lives, and B) I think the people who actually helped to make TBC possible deserve someplace to be mentioned. MHarrington 17:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I think we should definitely feature a real live person for this week, but the question is still who, becasue there are some people saying the Don and Harriet Chapman is too short. — Acam30 01:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, having seen the article, I think that Don and Harriet Chapman is doable, partly because that one has a reasonable amount of text anyway. Mind you, a little more would be good, but we do have something reasonable. MHarrington 03:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2008, week 48 (Nov 24-30)

Thanksgiving in the US, so we might do something related to that. Toikey TV was last year's T-Day toon, and one of the only substantial toons related to that holiday we haven't featured yet. Heimstern Läufer 08:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure, we could do that, considering that where Thanksgiving toons are concerned, for the past few years, we've done an article on the previous year's Thanksgiving toon (i.e., Fall Float Parade (2005 toon) in 2006 and Let Us Give Tanks (2006 toon) in 2007). Doing it like this would carry on that little tradition (if we're doing a tradition). MHarrington 02:06, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Making a tradition out of an american tradition... me likey, me likey! Let's go for it! — Acam30 01:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

General discussion

Daily Featured Blocks (On Occasion)

In order to make daily featured articles for one week, create pages like:

• [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 1]]
• [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 2]]
• [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 3]]
• [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 4]]
• [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 5]]
• [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 6]]
• [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 0]] (redirect day 7 to this)