Talk:The Field

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(A filmography category?)
(A filmography category?: All yours)
Line 40: Line 40:
::::1. The current list is far more unwieldy and strange. 2. What about, say, [[:Category:Strong Bad Filmography]]? Is that way too big for a wiki that has faded into obscurity? And why does the wiki's obscurity matter? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 07:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
::::1. The current list is far more unwieldy and strange. 2. What about, say, [[:Category:Strong Bad Filmography]]? Is that way too big for a wiki that has faded into obscurity? And why does the wiki's obscurity matter? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 07:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
:::::I mean the addition of the category. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
:::::I mean the addition of the category. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
::::::If [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc|Gfdgsgxgzgdrc]] is up for the challenge, I say go for it. {{User:The thing/sig}} 01:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:15, 18 April 2017

Contents

Notable appearances

Could we make reduce the list of apperances to "notable" ones. Ones where the location is mentioned or integral to the plot? This list will only get longer and less fun. - Dr Haggis - Talk 22:32, 25 Mar 2005 (MST)

I'm the one adding all the appearances, since I'm adding "Places" to all the toons. If someone whittled it down to a notable list, I'd stop adding. Aurora Szalinski 22:50, 25 Mar 2005 (MST)

I like the idea of having a list of Places each toons/emails, good jeorb on that! But for a location as ubiquitous as "The Field," having an exhaustive list is not necessary in my opinion.- Dr Haggis - Talk 21:29, 27 Mar 2005 (MST)
I agree, I've mostly been doing it for my own meager amusement. To be honest, the field doesn't really have "greatest hits" in my opinion. It's never the focus of anything (like the Stick is). Maybe we should actually just have the debut? Aurora Szalinski 22:55, 27 Mar 2005 (MST)

I'm with Homestar Coder, this is just stupid, you don't see an appearance list for Bubs' Stand do you? I think this has gone too far and should be removed. ~ SlipStream

Old-timey field

Is that picture circa 1936 really the same field as the present-day Field? — It's dot com 02:12, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Probably. For example, it's featured on the Old-Timey main page, which features fields of pretty much every other alternate reality. (20X6, Storybook, PBTC, Decemberween, etc) - Joshua

Um...

Which toon was the Present-Day Screenshot from? I need it for some important buisness. Okay? Homfrog 12:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

cartoon. Has Matt? (talk) 12:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Put the Appearences into a table

The title says it all, I don't have much knowledge of Wikis so I can't do it, but maybe someone else can---Slipstream 08:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The Thing That Needs Updating

It's been 2 months since TBC made new bushes and 6 says since I added the template and we still don't have a picture of 2007 The Field. Since I do not have a Flash decompiler I can not put the image on myself. Bad Bad Guy 15:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

You don't need a decompiler to take a screenshot... — Defender1031*Talk 15:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
We do have to get all the characters and props out of the way before we take a picture of The Field, don't we? Bad Bad Guy 16:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

halloweener

Should it be stated that the field design was changed in halloweener? --GrilledCheese RTP 00:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

A filmography category?

So i was wondering, why don't we have filmography categories for the places that appear as much as or more than the main characters? It seems like it'd be easier to maintain the lists if there was just one film template on each page and that's all that needed to be done, rather than updating the pages every time there's a new toon that features that place. Thoughts? — Defender1031*Talk 19:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I approve! The list is getting way too long and it goes all over the place. We could name it [[Category:The Field Appearances]] or something like that. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 05:05, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
I'm going to revive this old discussion to say I still like this idea. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 07:49, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Oppose. It's unwieldy, it's strange, and it's way too big for a Wiki that has faded into obscurity. RickTommy (edits) 08:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
1. The current list is far more unwieldy and strange. 2. What about, say, Category:Strong Bad Filmography? Is that way too big for a wiki that has faded into obscurity? And why does the wiki's obscurity matter? Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 07:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I mean the addition of the category. RickTommy (edits) 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
If Gfdgsgxgzgdrc is up for the challenge, I say go for it. TheThin 01:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Personal tools