Talk:Don and Harriet Chapman

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 12:41, 4 December 2008

Don and Harriet Chapman is a featured article, which means it showcases an important part of the Homestar Runner body of work and/or highlights the fine work of this wiki. We also might just think it's cool. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute.

Domains

Did anyone else notice that Don Chapman owns freecountryusa.com and strongbadia.com? Let us know if you find any others. --Steve (talk) 05:54, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

He is also the owner of homestarsrunner.com (WHOIS), via the WIPO Arbitration decision. -- Tom 06:05, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Also harmlessjunk.com. --Steve (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I've made a picture of the Chapman Family Tree. Does anybody mind if I put it up on this page? -AtionSong 22:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

You'll have to update it sometime this year, Missy's expecting. But thanks, that's pretty cool.--Jnelson09 00:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Strong Dad's Death

hey, is there anyway that we can honor Don Chapman after his recent passing? ---COLA 05:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Look at the Recent Changes Page --Dacheatbot · Communicate 05:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

We are all understandably shocked and saddened by this news, and we have heartfelt sympathy for TBC and the rest of their family, but it is not our place to do anything more than we have already done. Our contact with Mr. Chapman was indirect, and the family does not need to be pestered by overeager fans, no matter how honorable their intentions. — It's dot com 05:26, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

True, but on the other hand, I think it's important for Mike and Matt to know that their fans appreciate them as people. To know that so many people they've never met care enough to say something is a beautiful thing. Look at it this way: while h*r is their job, they don't force people who come to the site to buy anything. So they're spending their times entertaining us, potentially for free. The least we can do is show them that we appreciate them. Of course, flooding them with non-heartfelt emails is wrong, but if you really care and you really want to do something, at least sign the guestbook on the obituary page linked to on this page. -Unknownwarrior33 01:16, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Joey Day, who has had personal interaction with TBC, has already signed the guestbook on behalf of the wiki. — It's dot com 01:28, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm very dissapointed to see this. :-( He was also about to be a grandfather. How did he die? 24.151.40.232

He already was a grandfather. And it was a battle with brain cancer, God rest his soul. —BazookaJoe 02:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I am saddened by the news of the passing of Don Chapman. I will keep his family in my prayers. --Stux 21:17, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Picture

Shouldn't we have a picture of Harriet Chapman? --Dacheatbot · Communicate 01:31, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

We should, but we can't find one. — Has Matt? (talk) 01:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes we can. But we won't use it out of respect for privacy. —BazookaJoe 02:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Catholic/Methodist/Values.

This is a rather irritating, unnessisary, & personal bit of information.

It's probably a paraphrase from an interview, or similar. Feel free to not read the page. --Belthazar 06:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

As an atheist, I also don't like that sentence. But it is basically an introduction to the quote. And the quote is definitely relevant to our interests. Loafing 11:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I feel about the same way about it. I was going to say that even though we don't have a NPOV policy, it still seems out of place in the wiki -- it's a bold statement to make, and has no bearing on our usual target (Homestar Runner). And then it turns out that we do have that policy. I think a change of tone could take the edge off of it, but still provide a good transition into the quote. I'm rolling a few things around in my head, and if any of them taste alright, I'll throw it down on the page. How'd this get to be this week's featured article anyways? It's kind of short, and has this line... And yet, it's been there since December 2004. I know I've read this article before, and I have trouble believing that it's been that long... -- LGC&CS 10:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Who said mentioning their beliefs took away the neutrality in the article? --70.253.165.204 12:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)