HRWiki:Featured Article Selection

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 19:30, 31 December 2009

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 2009, week 53 (Dec 28-Jan 3)

The Field. A place that appears in probably half the cartoons on the site. Jc iindyysgvxc 05:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

We're getting too far ahead again. I'll keep this one up, but please stay within 10 weeks in the future. Heimstern Läufer 05:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

And it's far too short, still. MHarrington 15:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if it might be expandable. It most certainly is too short (prose-wise) at this point, but it's also certainly an important place. It's something to consider, at least. Heimstern Läufer 01:54, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that if we can't get the prose we want from the field, then we should try doing the Dangeresque dailies this week. As mentioned before. Espemon333 00:40, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we should do another set of dailies so soon after the ones we did last week (as of post time). Heimstern Läufer 04:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I would like to do another set very soon, though. MHarrington 16:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Well there IS a 12 week difference... up to concensus though... Espemon333 22:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Well If concensus says no to the dailies and the field, we could do the Battle of Strong Badia. Espemon333 22:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I would like to see the Battle of Strong Badia. MHarrington 16:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

What about something appropriate for the start of the year? homestarrunner.com was dismissed for December 6th, the date the website started, but since January 1 was the date the website opened to the public, how about we do it now? Jc iindyysgvxc 23:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Great idea! homestarrunner.com! That'sBupkis! 00:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, homestarrunner.com does not have much in the way of decent text, just mostly lists here and there. MHarrington 02:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the reason it was dismissed above. Before we can make it happen, we'd have to address that issue. Heimstern Läufer 03:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Jackie Chapman is mentioned in a couple of sections below, but if she's going to be featured at all, it should be right away, before the baby break is over (since she is, after all, one-third of the reason the baby break is happening). — It's dot com 03:17, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

That is actually a pretty good idea if we can expand it. Right now it really seems a bit too short to me: it's got a fine prose intro, but very little beyond that. Heimstern Läufer 03:24, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Can we decide? It was already put up, but without consensus or anything.

Consensus was pretty lacking in this case, it's true, but we are running out of time. There was also the arguable conflict of interest here of MHarrington having selected the article he supported as the featured article. Nonetheless, as the situation stands, I would have to call this discussion for the battle of Strong Badia, too. It's the only article suggested thus far that drew no objections: all the others had the problem of being overly brief. If we want to change our minds last-minute, we could change the writeup, but as it is, this is probably the only call we can make. Heimstern Läufer 02:35, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict'd!) As it stands, we don't that much more info to expand Jackie's article. While I agree with IDC that if we to feature her, now would be a good time, I think Battle of Strong Badia should go ahead, and hopefully we can feature her in the near future. wbwolf (t | ed) 02:37, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 1 (Jan 4-10)

It's been a while since we've featured a Sweet Cuppin' Cakes character, so this week I vote that we feature an article that I hold very near and dear to me, and my new sunglasses. The Wheelchair! The Wheelchair 23:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I guess we can do The Wheelchair. MHarrington 06:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Since this week is the 6th anniversary of Stinkoman and 20X6, how about something from that universe this week? japanese cartoon, Stinkoman and 1-Up have already been featured. How about the email trading cards in which they are featured for this week instead? It'll be a while since we've done an email, and Trading Cards are an interesting running gag on the site, to boot. wbwolf (t | ed) 16:47, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It's actually the 7th anniversary, not the 6th. And Pan Pan, Under Construction and Twenty THANXty Six were featured (at least that last one will be this Thanksgiving), too, though. It's just too bad that they have still not yet completed Stinkoman 20X6 or we could do that, too. Anyway, how about doing Cheatball? That article is long enough, I would think. MHarrington 00:51, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess Cheatball could work instead. I wasn't sure at first if it'd be long enough. Another possibility could be 20X6 vs. 1936. Either one would be fine. wbwolf (t | ed) 17:04, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it should be one where Stinkoman loses, I defiantly, I mean, Definitely vote Cheatball The McArby! 02:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 2 (Jan 11-17)

This week would be Trogdor's birthday, so let's do something like that. I'm thinking The S is for Sucks Dragon. MHarrington 06:57, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it should be Trogdor related, I'd suggest Wormdingler, if we had more to go on, but Wormdingler has showed up only twice, and was only named last trogday, so Ima have to agree on The S is for sucks dragon. although we could take in a bit of a different direction... like maybe Stinkoman related. The McArby! 17:34, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Yo man, I'm down. I mean, I totally support S Is For Sucks. wbwolf (t | ed) 16:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

sounds like a good idea! the s is for sucks is a great twist to make this trogday the best yet!--safariventureman 19:30, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 3 (Jan 18-24)

Looking Old. Not only is it that email's anniversary, but featuring it this week is a reference to a line from that email. Plus, we haven't yet done any emails from 2005 or 2007, yet we've done at least two emails from every other year. Jc iindyysgvxc 10:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I've been thinking that while we should do emails from 2007, I think we should wait until they do the winter Olympics in February. I got an idea in mind for a set of dailies that follow a common theme. In the meantime, how about doing one of a live person for an article. I'm thinking Jackie Chapman. MHarrington 16:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Would you care to elaborate on your masterdly plan for Olympic emails? As it stands, we don't know why you're not keen on looking old for this week, and of course we all know it's important to explain why you're not going with someone else's suggestion. Heimstern Läufer 00:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, in terms of looking old, I was just thinking that we need to do something from 2005 before anything else, and it's been a while since we've done an article on a live person. Besides, what is the reference to the email's line, anyway? As for the Olympics plan, I was thinking of a full week of the references to DNA evidence running gag. I was thinking of doing the six emails (165-170) that reference it and close out the week with the Big Toon. MHarrington 01:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I dunno, I think the big toon would easily be worth an entire week, not just a day, and I think the same could be said of some of those emails (in particular, strong badathlon would be a good feature during the Olympics, though it would fit the Summer Olympics a lot better than the Winter). I don't really think they should be dailies. Heimstern Läufer 06:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

RE: "what is the reference to the email's line, anyway?" Surely you can guess? Okay ... it's "time to relate to some 18 to 24 year olds". And the week we are doing it is the 18th to the 24th. Get it?

Oh, that joke. Well, I still think we should do an email from 2005 before 2007, for some reason. I think we should do Jackie Chapman this week. That article has a decent amount of text anyway, and it's been a long time since we've done any articles on real-live humans. I believe the last one was on Ryan Sterritt in July 2008. MHarrington 02:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm a bit concerned that Jackie's article might be a tad short. It's got enough content for a writeup, but not much beyond that.

I also think we could use some outside opinions here. It's not clear to me why we seem to be so intent on not doing looking old, though I'm not fixed on it. Heimstern Läufer 03:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

As I mentioned in the section above, I think Jackie should be featured as soon as possible (as opposed to this week), if she's to be featured at all. — It's dot com 03:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, since it's not known when the site will be back to normal, I think we'll just use this section as a kind of placeholder until further notice. MHarrington 18:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 4 (Jan 25-31)

For this week, how about the Strong Bad Email geddup noise? I kinda picked something from 2005, and a bit out of left field, too. MHarrington 17:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 5 (Feb 1-7)

I'm very surprised that Characters, Toons, and Games haven't been done yet. Maybe we could do one of them? Jc iindyysgvxc 11:34, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Not one of those currently has a prose intro that is long enough to be a proper featured article, so far as I can see. Also, we're getting out too far once again. The latest week we discuss should be, at most, ten weeks in advance of the current week, and this is eleven weeks out. Heimstern Läufer 11:59, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes! Once and for all, let's keep this below ten articles before we add any new ones, please? MHarrington 05:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

How about one that has been suggested but passed up: the Taranchula Black Metal Detector? MHarrington 17:27, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 6 (Feb 8-14)

For this week, how about Sickly Sam's Big Outing? MHarrington 02:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a good choice of Valentine-themed FA. Heimstern Läufer 03:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 7 (Feb 15-21)

How doing another set of dailies this week? I'm thinking of characters from Dangeresque, since people wanted a set of dailies themed to that series. How about: Dangeresque, Dangeresque Too, Renaldo, Cutesy Buttons, Perducci, Killingyouguy and either Craig or Baron Darin Diamonocle. MHarrington 16:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I have three more ideas for a set of dailies: Main Pages (since we haven't done any Main Pages yet), e-mails from the second half of the Tandy era (last time we did a week of e-mails, we precisely covered the first half of the Tandy era [and that was a whiiiiile ago]), and Powered by The Cheat toons (since there are exactly 7 of them available). Jc iindyysgvxc 23:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

If we have some recent articles on emails done up, I think we should put off the Tandy-era emails until later in the year, but not necessarily give up on that one. Besides, I chose Dangeresque characters because we haven't really done much of anything related to Dangeresque at all, short of the series as a whole. MHarrington 02:58, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea of Dangeresque dailies, but I still think this is too early. We just had a set in October. I think the very maximum of dailies we should ever have is two sets a year, and that there should always be at least six months between them. Heimstern Läufer 03:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Then why don't we try for the first week of March. In the meantime, how about doing an article on the suffix -èd? MHarrington 06:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I helped expand that intro lately, but I think it needs to be rejiggered a bit. Otherwise, a decent selection. wbwolf (t | ed) 16:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 8 (Feb 22-28)

1987? (I wonder how that page has so many hits, more than some e-mails...) Jc iindyysgvxc 11:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm kinda on the fence on that one... MHarrington 16:42, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

That one might work. I don't think we've featured any of the year articles, and this one is probably the best of the bunch, since we have some clues why they refer to that year so often. wbwolf (t | ed) 16:44, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 9 (Mar 1-7)

Now that it's the third month and officially six months after October, I think we should try again to do a set of dailies for this week. Once again, I'd like to do a set on "Dangeresque" characters, since we've never really done anything here, short of the the series as a whole. Here's what I think we should do: Dangeresque (Monday), Dangeresque Too (Tuesday), Renaldo (Wednesday), Cutesy Buttons (Thursday), Perducci (Friday), Killingyouguy (Saturday) and either Craig or Baron Darin Diamonocle (Sunday). MHarrington 20:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Great idea! --SamuelGuy10 21:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Six months after October is April, not March. Heimstern Läufer 23:16, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think the time is right now to do this. MHarrington 03:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. I still think it's too early after the most recent set of dailies. It's a real pain from the sysops' perspective of making sure all our main page images are protected, and even without that factor, I'm convinced the minimum gap between sets of dailies should be six months (making twice a year the maximum we're ever going to get). Heimstern Läufer 04:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

But if we were to do this in April, then wait about six months to do this, wouldn't the next one have to wait to be available until November? Usually, we do one right around October or so. Well, anyway, how about doing something like... another character relationship! I'm thinking of Marzipan and Coach Z's Relationship. That one has a surprisingly sufficient amount of text to justify it, in my book. MHarrington 07:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

HRwiki:Featured article for 2010, week 10 (Mar 8-14)

Pi? RickTommy 08:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

The prose intro is far too short at this point. Heimstern Läufer 13:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

If we're going to use this for an article, here's a start for a write-up:

Pi is a numerical constant for the ratio between a circle's circumference and its diameter, written as π, and numerically as 3.14. This number was often used in the Homestar Runner universe, such as a price ($3.14), a time (3:14), "tt" replaced by π, and even a mini-game in Strong Badia the Free as "Pizza π". (more...)

That'sBupkis! 13:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

The article is still too short, since there is not much beyond the write up. Also, a reminder: it's not necessary to do write-ups for articles at this point, we should just stick with discussion of the merits of articles. As an alternate, would it be too soon to feature another email, such as long pants? wbwolf (t | ed) 16:14, 30 December 2009 (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)