Talk:Compé-per
From Homestar Runner Wiki
Contents |
Rename
How about renaming this to "No Paper"? OneGyT 02:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Nah, "Virtual Paper" is far more descriptive. — Defender1031*Talk 02:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- What about "The Papér" or "Virtual Papér?" cash money tc 19:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, what Strong Bad called the Virtual Paper in the new e-mail dictionary was "Compé-per", pronounced "Com-paper"
- What about "The Papér" or "Virtual Papér?" cash money tc 19:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Edit war
Which is better?
comment on picture: Looks like Strong Bad's gone the-paperless!
and in the body: Strong Bad then customized Virtual Paper's pop-up noise to match The Paper's old "Preeeeow" noise, though the sound quality is significantly lower.
or
comment on picture: Preeeeow 3.0, with Preeeeow 1.0 downgrade!
and in the body: Strong Bad then customized Virtual Paper's pop-up noise to match The Paper's old "Preeeeow" noise.
Opinions would be appreciated 
The Knights Who Say Ni 
03:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- I like it how it is now. No one ever calls it 3.0, and the downgrade comment is ambiguous. You can't tell at all it's referring to sound quality. -128.103.10.135 03:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- The downgrade is referring to the custom sound, and the sound quality is no lower than the rest of the old paper's preeeows. The preeeeow 3.0 refers to preeeow 2.0 when SB got the new paper. — Defender1031*Talk 03:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, well, that just shows that it is indeed ambiguous in meaning.-128.103.10.135 03:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, i thought the 3.0 caption was funnier. — Defender1031*Talk 03:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- New Paper's sound was called Preeow 2.0, so VP's noise could be called Preeow 3.0. As for "downgrade", it orginally had it's own sound, but Strong Bad changed it to The Paper's Preeow (or Preeow 1.0), therefore, this could be called "Preeow 3.0, with Preeow 1.0 downgrade". I fail to see the ambiguity. That Game Dude 386
21:03, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I still like the other caption better. -132.183.140.193 21:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, but we already have like, a jillion other captions that are direct quotes from their picture's introducary cartoon. Why change it to one of these when we already have a (mildly) unique one already? That Game Dude 386 21:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- I personally am in support of the downgrade comment. It's funnier and more original than "Looks like Strong Bad's gone the-paperless!" While I'm all for comments that are quotes from the toons, I think we should use a funnier, more original quip if we can. User:Mr Eyeball
- I'm fine with 3.0, though, as many have said, no one in the Homestar Runner universe has ever called it that so far. I guess it's because I haven't heard The Paper in years, but comparing a The Paper era-email (rough copy) to independent, and there is no change in the quality of the Preeeow, as DeFender said. —Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 16:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- I still think it's just terribly unfunny, but as the edit summary that changed it back said, majority rules. -128.103.10.135 01:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- It would appear as though the "in the body" section is closed. The current phrasing seems to be winning out. I think from here we just need to work on the caption of the picture. This is why we need STUFF, that way we would know whether or not it was a majority rule. My personal opinion is that toon quotes are used so often that they could be a standard. (idk whether it actually is one or not; and yes, i know i've gone against standards before) even if it isn't, we should wait to see if they ever say "3.0" before making that the picture's caption.
The Knights Who Say Ni 
02:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- I say NO WAY to the Preeeow 3.0 thing. We called Envelope Paper Preeeow 3.0, so wouldn't this be Preeeeow 4.0? User:SBE-mail Checker Dan
- Seeing as the Envelope Paper wasn't a permanant paper, and made no sound at all when it came down, it really shouldn't count as "Preeow 3.0". That Game Dude 386 16:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- Seeing as the Envelope Paper wasn't a permanant paper, and made no sound at all when it came down, it really shouldn't count as "Preeow 3.0". That Game Dude 386
- Surely it's Preeow 1.1 or something... --Belthazar 03:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- Again, Preeeow 3.0 makes no sense. NO ONE EVER CALLS IT THAT, and the "Preeow 1.0 downgrade" just roons it. It's like when we called Envelope Paper Preeeow 3.0, until I changed it. Just pure speculation Email Checkin' Dan 20:50, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
- I say NO WAY to the Preeeow 3.0 thing. We called Envelope Paper Preeeow 3.0, so wouldn't this be Preeeeow 4.0? User:SBE-mail Checker Dan
- It would appear as though the "in the body" section is closed. The current phrasing seems to be winning out. I think from here we just need to work on the caption of the picture. This is why we need STUFF, that way we would know whether or not it was a majority rule. My personal opinion is that toon quotes are used so often that they could be a standard. (idk whether it actually is one or not; and yes, i know i've gone against standards before) even if it isn't, we should wait to see if they ever say "3.0" before making that the picture's caption.
- I still think it's just terribly unfunny, but as the edit summary that changed it back said, majority rules. -128.103.10.135 01:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'm fine with 3.0, though, as many have said, no one in the Homestar Runner universe has ever called it that so far. I guess it's because I haven't heard The Paper in years, but comparing a The Paper era-email (rough copy) to independent, and there is no change in the quality of the Preeeow, as DeFender said. —Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 16:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- I personally am in support of the downgrade comment. It's funnier and more original than "Looks like Strong Bad's gone the-paperless!" While I'm all for comments that are quotes from the toons, I think we should use a funnier, more original quip if we can. User:Mr Eyeball
- Yeah, but we already have like, a jillion other captions that are direct quotes from their picture's introducary cartoon. Why change it to one of these when we already have a (mildly) unique one already? That Game Dude 386
- Well, I still like the other caption better. -132.183.140.193 21:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- New Paper's sound was called Preeow 2.0, so VP's noise could be called Preeow 3.0. As for "downgrade", it orginally had it's own sound, but Strong Bad changed it to The Paper's Preeow (or Preeow 1.0), therefore, this could be called "Preeow 3.0, with Preeow 1.0 downgrade". I fail to see the ambiguity. That Game Dude 386
- Well, i thought the 3.0 caption was funnier. — Defender1031*Talk 03:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, well, that just shows that it is indeed ambiguous in meaning.-128.103.10.135 03:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- The downgrade is referring to the custom sound, and the sound quality is no lower than the rest of the old paper's preeeows. The preeeeow 3.0 refers to preeeow 2.0 when SB got the new paper. — Defender1031*Talk 03:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Stub?
I think this is about as much info were gonna get about Virtual Paper, so is it safe to remove the "stub" template, or are we gonna leave it on for now? That Game Dude 386 
21:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Keep it until we get more information about Com-paper like oddities, etc. --VmKid 17:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Rename?
Shouldn't this be renamed to Compé-per? Unlike Virtual Paper,it"s actually been said in an email. - CloneWarrior 19:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- I somewhat doubt Strong Bad really named this paper "Compé-per", especially since he hesitated in the middle of the portmanteau, added to the fact the entire email's about portmanteaus, I strongly question the renaming, but there's really no sense in getting into an edit war over this. That Game Dude 386 20:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- I think Compé-per is as good as anything we've come up with, and more fun than plain-ol' Virtual Paper. — It's dot com 20:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- I understand that, I just think it might be a pain in the tweeze to rename it again if he calls it by a different name. Can you imagine the headaches we'dve given ourselves if we'd renamed The Paper "Old Papes'" or "The Man With the Green-and-White Stripes", or created the article Heunh heownh heunh heownh vvvvvt eangt clonk-a-donk as the second "Preeow" sound? We can't just go renaming articles based on one appearence of one nickname in one email. I'd say wait until the time it's called that to rename... but like I said- it's not worth an edit war. That Game Dude 386 20:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thing is, "Old Papes" and "The Man with the Green and White Stripes" were both said long after The Paper got its official name. We have no (other) official name for this paper. Thus, the "Compé-per" is the best we can do. It's more official than "Virtual Paper", at the very least. --Jay (Talk) 22:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- PS. If we ever get a real official name for this paper other than "Compé-per", we'll have to change and redirect everything anyway. The only extra work we'd have to do is the work we've already done. It'd be more trouble to change it back at this point, especially if it turns out that "Compé-per" is actually the official name. --Jay (Talk) 22:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. Those names above are all clearly nicknames. Since Compé-per is not obviously a nickname, it satisfies our need for a name TBC came up with as opposed to a generic one we made up. — It's dot com 22:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- Alright then, I guess we'll come back to this issue when the need arises. Don't get me wrong, it's not like I don't like this name, I just think we might be opening the possibility of a never-ending name debate much larger than this one if it's given another name- or a nickname. That Game Dude 386 14:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Alright then, I guess we'll come back to this issue when the need arises. Don't get me wrong, it's not like I don't like this name, I just think we might be opening the possibility of a never-ending name debate much larger than this one if it's given another name- or a nickname. That Game Dude 386
- Yes. Those names above are all clearly nicknames. Since Compé-per is not obviously a nickname, it satisfies our need for a name TBC came up with as opposed to a generic one we made up. — It's dot com 22:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- I understand that, I just think it might be a pain in the tweeze to rename it again if he calls it by a different name. Can you imagine the headaches we'dve given ourselves if we'd renamed The Paper "Old Papes'" or "The Man With the Green-and-White Stripes", or created the article Heunh heownh heunh heownh vvvvvt eangt clonk-a-donk as the second "Preeow" sound? We can't just go renaming articles based on one appearence of one nickname in one email. I'd say wait until the time it's called that to rename... but like I said- it's not worth an edit war. That Game Dude 386
- I think Compé-per is as good as anything we've come up with, and more fun than plain-ol' Virtual Paper. — It's dot com 20:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
strongbad
Is it worth noting that Strong Bad isn't bugged by the Compé-per saying "strongbad", while emails he gets that say "strongbad" like that DO bug him? Maybe, in like, a "Remarks" section?
