Talk:Eternity

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Delete: agree)
(Delete)
 
Line 10: Line 10:
:::::::This seems like it has consensus for delete. -[[Special:Contributions/113.37.226.89|113.37.226.89]] 03:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::::This seems like it has consensus for delete. -[[Special:Contributions/113.37.226.89|113.37.226.89]] 03:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
:I agree with '''deletion''', this feels almost entirely mundane. Compared to "-[[type]]" or "[[style]]" where it's an irregular, Chaps-specific, vernacular, none of these "for eternity"s seem out of the ordinary. One might as well make an article about all the times something has been described as "annoying". --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 06:32, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
:I agree with '''deletion''', this feels almost entirely mundane. Compared to "-[[type]]" or "[[style]]" where it's an irregular, Chaps-specific, vernacular, none of these "for eternity"s seem out of the ordinary. One might as well make an article about all the times something has been described as "annoying". --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 06:32, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 +
:I concur. There's no reason for this to have its own page. DELETED! [[User:Abelhawk|Abelhawk]] 19:02, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
== Save ==
== Save ==

Current revision as of 19:02, 18 October 2023

[edit] Delete

Our standards for inclusion say that for something to be a running joke, it needs to be used in an unusual manner at least three times. Pretty much every use of the word "eternity" is perfectly normal, with the possible exception of Homestar not really understanding how eternity works in jibblies. Therefore, I would argue that this page does not meet our inclusion guidelines and should therefore be a-diggity-deleted. — Defender1031*Talk 05:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Normal use for the word eternity is debatable. Since it's an unmeasurable amount of time, you could argue that its uses in 3THFj and SBtF are abnormal hyperbolizations and/or sarcasm. However, I can agree that it's far too lacking in references to warrant a page. -Catjaz63 06:08, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I think that's what I was going for. 3x Halloween Funjob wasn't the last interaction between the King of Town and Strong Bad, and I don't think it's practical to say "ruler for eternity" and actually mean it. I'm pretty sure I was just trying to collect times when they chose to use the word "eternity" to express a hyperbole, which I thought was interesting. The Knights Who Say Ni 06:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
But that doesn't hold its weight well, as there are few instances where it's used as a hyperbole. In fact, half of the list is presumably literal. (jibblies, peasants quest, PQ2) -Catjaz63 06:43, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
If the Jibblies 2 reference was meant to be literal, Homestar could never have escaped. His appearances from then on would all have to take place from inside the painting. Funny thing about the word, though: if we're not talking about life after death, using it literally is a hyperbole. Other than that, I agree with what you said about Peasant's Quest. The Knights Who Say Ni 07:11, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
While he may not have stayed there for all eternity, the Horrible Painting demanded him to stay with him for eternity as part of the deal. The Horrible Painting still used it literally, even if what he said may have become untrue. Also, don't forget that continuity and canon is relatively loose in the Homestar Runner Universe. The Halloween Toons seem especially loose since especially Potion-a-ma-jig features Homestar being changed at the end and he does not remain that for the rest of the website. - Catjaz63 15:13, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
After some re-examination and thought, I have come to the conclusion that this page does not deserve its own page. For one, it's a single word that's used multiple times. There's nothing unusual about it or noteworthy; it's used in proper context and in proper meaning. There is nothing special and it does not deserve a page dedicated to it. Delete. - Catjaz63 01:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
This seems like it has consensus for delete. -113.37.226.89 03:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
I agree with deletion, this feels almost entirely mundane. Compared to "-type" or "style" where it's an irregular, Chaps-specific, vernacular, none of these "for eternity"s seem out of the ordinary. One might as well make an article about all the times something has been described as "annoying". -- Bleu Ninja 06:32, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
I concur. There's no reason for this to have its own page. DELETED! Abelhawk 19:02, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

[edit] Save

Dear other friendly wiki editors, I think this appears too much to delete and that there are more important matters to attend to, such as welcoming a new user. I would love to hear your opinion on this though!

Your fellow friendly kind wiki editor,
MeowMeow

Personal tools