HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/narrator

A cinematic reference of some kind

From: narrator
Posted on: 00:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• the TMBG song istanbut (not constantinople) (referenced by the dangeresque series) contains the words: turkish delight. no, its true, check it!!! (and yes, i know its way beyond tenuous on this one).

Arguments against:

• "Cinematic snack" -> "delight" -> pastry -> "movie was a delight"? That seems like quite a stretch.
• More a play on the phrase "A cimematic treat" which I've seen used in movie reviews more often than I's like to have.
• This reference would really only come up if Strong Bad was making fun of the English again. Americans don't take/eat/have mid-morning tea. At "mid-morning" many of us Yanks are just having breakfast.

Additional comments:

• As written, this FF is pretty convoluted. It should probably be re-written.
• Is this delight a well known pastry in some areas of the world?
  • Only by people that have seen or read The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis
    • Oh! Like Turkish delight, then! Now I know what we're talking about. I think it's probably a bit too obscure to be a likely reference.
• About the argument for... Not only was the TMBG/Istanbul connection STUFFed and declined, that's an extreme strrrrrrreeeeetch.
• but myths and legengs has the word delight in it. thats sure proof! (a little light smirking here)

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Revenge of the Reference

From: narrator
Posted on: 22:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• I'm pretty sure it comes directly from one of the TV spots.

Arguments against:

• This type of phrase is a common cliche in many movie trailers, and is not specific to Star Wars.

Additional comments:

• Does anyone have a link to the trailer?
  • This one's pretty close.
    • It have the "A hero will fall", but not "An empire will rise". Some kind of rewrite is needed to show the difference.
      • Still, even if it doesn't actually say that, it's pretty darn close. And the FF doesn't say they're taken DIRECTLY from the trailer.
• I also saw "A Hero Will Rise" on a poster for Chicken Little.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Questionably leet

From: narrator
Posted on: 16:08, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• This leet letter has been used twice before, in "p4wned" meaning "pawned" and "4rt b4nd1t" meaning "art bandit".

Arguments against:

• This fact just isn't very fun. Arguments like these are just frustrating and pointless.
• See Talk:Internet Slang#What the Cr4p? for a precedent.
• In Leetspeak, 4 at the beginning of a word CAN substitute for "F". I've seen it used as such many times. It has to do with how "Four" begins with an F and the corresponding phonetic sound.

Additional comments:

• Wouldn't the obvious answer be to remove the reference to l33t altogether, rather than have two facts that contradict one another?
• Click here for a list of "proper" l33t letters.
  • I just took a look at that,and noticed that "4" can also stand for "H". So doesn't that mean that this could also be "Hactor Z?"
    • Yes it could. My point was is that 4 is not listed for "f".
      • Yes it is. Take a closer look at this. (Unless someone added 4 to the list of F letters between when you wrote your comment and when I checked the article.)
        • It was added yesterday (Feb. 7) by our own User:Salty.
• If more than one person spells it this way, wouldn't that be a standard translation?
• We could always just reduce this to being a reference to l33t. Also, what if we made a section in the article here about misspellings or misuses?

Proposed revision:

Note: This is being proposed for the Inside Refs section.

Arguments for:

• This acknowledges the title as an occurrence of Leetspeak, links to our article on the subject, and also acknowledges that the use of the 4 is questionable.
• This revision does NOT attempt to say whether the 4 is used correctly or not.

Arguments against:

• Since the time this revision was proposed, the WP article we were using to justify the 4 being questionable has been updated to show that '4' is actually generally accepted as a substitute for 'F'. Therefore, this fact no longer applies.

Additional comments:

• Not only does it take care of "F vs. A" but the "A vs. H" comment as well. I'll accept it. But it would still be cool to keep the original.
• If I ran across this fact standing alone in the article, I would ask "Why is the use of the 4 questionable?" Explanation of the reason it is questionable should be included.
  • Actually, it seems that the use isn't really so questionable after all - see the WP article linked above.
    • Except that the WP article was edited by one of us. How does that erase the question?
      • Because nobody on WP has challenged the edit.
        • Then if it's not questionable, the fact as written is patently false and cannot be accepted. To solve this, I have struck out the second part of the revision. This could be problematic given the overwhelming vote total. Consequently, this item will remain open for several more days so that people, if they wish, can comment on the change, even though the vote is so lopsided.
          • Actually, striking out that last part makes this fun fact nearly identical to one already on the page (since it's now just a simple reference to Leetspeak).

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Gross! Shut up!

From: narrator
Posted on: 07:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• Strong Bad misspeaks-intentionally (sp) (not misreads) Gossman, after he reads the email.
• There are several 'gross' things in the email, including a Grossman vs STRONG BADMAN comic book easter egg, an octopus, and boogers on a napkin. (why was this moved to the against? I demand a recount!)
• In the Inkhole_Interview Matt says they DO search their emails on occasion for appropriate emails. (Search- [ctrl+f] for thousand.

Arguments against:

• The pun is entirely dependent on the sender's name, which TBC do not decide. This is probably a coincidence.
• Yeah, because Strong Bad has never made fun of anyone's name without it having some higher meaning before. This is only substantiated if it is presented as a coincidence rather than something placed there intentionally.
• It seems to be a case in which 1) Strong Bad gets to do what he is wont to do (ie, make fun of someone's name for no apparent reason), and 2) in which he gets to make a pun. It doesn't appear to be more than a happy coincidence, though. Maybe TBC just decided, "Hey, let's roll with it."
• Grossman is also a common Jewish name, at least within America.
  • Writer for Time Lev Grossman?

• Maybe Strong Bad's just insulting the sender by calling him disgusting a.k.a.: "gross".

Additional comments:

• A gross is a dozen dozen. Possibly you hadn't noticed.
• No. I did. Pretty impressive, huh? I bet you're pretty impressed.
• Quite.
• Argument against the argument against is that TBD DO choose the email to use.. (is this an argument for?)
  • I was just about to add this, when I happened to notice it was already here. That said, if it's a coincidence... it's a huge one.
    • Are you suggesting that they go through the thousands of Emails Strong Bad gets to pick one that will make a good pun? I find that unlikely.-(please see the last argument for)
      • Maybe they save some appropriate ones for special occasions (like Sick Day)... but that's just speculation
        • I won't discount it being a coincidence... but this is one of those cases where a coincidence seems too... coincidental. If you will.
• Even if it is just a coincidence, it's just too huge of coincidence not to at least mention it somewhere.
  • And it will be mentioned somewhere at least one place for sure... on the talk page once this item is archived.
• The last argument against is superfluous. (and his name is grant...)

Proposed revision:

Arguments for:

• It states that it was a coincidence but mentions it nonetheless.

Arguments against:

• A coincidence, and therefore not something that should be mentioned as a Fun Fact.

Additional comments:

• I still doubt it was a coincidence. TBC make weird, obscure jokes all the time, and on at least one occasion, someone's pointed out said weird obscure jokes, they've been STUFFed, declined, and then re-added when TBC themselves said that's what they intended. In short, just because on the surface, it may seem like coincidence, doesn't automatically mean it *is*. And for those "it's all speculation" naysayers... isn't "it's a coincidence" just as much speculation?
  • {note: inserted out of chronology} Actually, that is correct. As currently worded this makes an absolutist statement, saying that we are positive it was unintentional (in which case, as observed below, it wouldn't be noteworthy). However, we're not sure. In the above revision someone said "This is only substantiated if it is presented as a coincidence rather than something placed there intentionally." It doesn't have to be an either/or, since neither "coincidence" nor "intentional" is verifiable. A better wording would simply delete the word "Coincidentally" above, leaving two declarative sentences that leave the reader to assign significance. I'm not going to make another revision right now, but if someone agrees with me, then maybe it would be appropriate.
    • Since the revision is winning handily, I would suggest you simply strike out the word above and leave a note. Then, if someone has an objection to the change we can figure out how to proceed at that time, instead of muddying up the waters now.
      • Okay; done!
        • Yeah, I like this a lot better. True, it could be coincidence, but there's just as good of a chance that it's intentional. This leaves out the absolutes to either case, and makes the fact more interesting at the same time.
  • {chronology resumes} I believe that when it's believed to be a coincidence, it should not be mentioned until/unless something comes along that more officially proves it's a real reference. In other words, unless sometime in the future we get a QotW, an email from TBC, or something that specifically mentions a "gross of emails" or something like that, we should leave it at coincidence.
    • Yeah, that does make sense. I still doubt it's coincidence, but I guess we don't have any proof otherwise, so I can live with that.
      • meh, it just appears glaringly obvious to me, but that could be my overinflated megalomaniacal sense of correctitude.....
• We do know that TBC do stuff for special number'ed emails, ie Not_the_100th_Email!!!
  • Yes, but is 144 particularly special? #100 is a major milestone for most episodic things, but who really bothers to celebrate "Issue 144"?
    • It's not so much a milestone as it is a very easy number to base a joke on.
    • me
• NOTE: The word "coincidentally" was struck out to make the item more NPOV (see above).
  • Okay, now I want to suggest new wording, even though this version seems to be winning anyway. Reason being that, as currently written, the two sentences really don't fit well together. Here's my suggested rewrite: "...as 'Grossman'. While Strong Bad has made similar fun of people's names in the past, it is particularly notable here: A 'gross' is 144 of an item, and this is the 144th email."

[ Back to STUFF index ]

No one likes your style

From: narrator
Posted on: 19:09, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• The only reason Nebulon is sad in this toon—indeed, probably the only reason he's in the toon at all—is because it's Matt's favorite moment ever.
• New viewers won't be able to make the connection unless it's pointed out.

Arguments against:

• This fact, as it is currently written, has nothing to do with narrator. If the fact was reworded to include the first argument for, that would make slightly more sense in relation to narrator.
• This is something that belongs in Nebulon's character description or Fun Facts section. It shouldn't have to be explained every time it occurs.

Additional comments:

• Re: the first argument against: It does have to do with narrator, because sad Nebulon is in the email.

Proposed revision:

Arguments for:

• Addresses the first argument against above.
• Re: first argument against: It should be mentioned because there's no other contextual reason for him to be sad. In fact, Marzipan had just said that she liked his style, so he should be happy, but he's not.

Arguments against:

• Nice revision, but I still think this should stay in Nebulon's character page as a part of his description. We shouldn't have to mention it every time this character gets sad.

Additional comments:

• There are quite a few things in the H*R universe that don't make sense, but we don't point all of them out each time they happen.
  • That doesn't mean we shouldn't point it out in this case.
• Perhaps a Running Gag or Inside Joke would be in order, such as "Nebulon's Style." On second thought, it probably hasn't appeared enough to warrant this.

Proposed revision:

Arguments for:

• This revision has no speculation and is NPOV.

Arguments against:

• This revision has nothing specifically to do with this toon. This should go on Nebulon's page, not here.

Additional comments:

• I thought he was said because such a hideous cow mutant was the only one that liked his style. I think that'd kill my happiness.
• Do we have enough votes to consider this one settled?

[ Back to STUFF index ]