User talk:DorianGray/Analysis of Homsar's Speech Patterns

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Nice project: I don't want to add anything you don't like, but here is my thoughts:

• "AaAaAaAaAaAaA!!! I'm saving the best for last!" - One scorpion goes into his mouth and I guess he likes to eat them.
• "I'm the ghost of Christmas past." - He is dressed as Ghost Dog, and mixing with another holiday.
• "And also with you." - He is insulted and tells Homestar that he doesn't get a ding in reply.
• "I do what I'm told..." - as you wrote: Strong Bad had just told him to get outta his house.

I don't have much time today to go over the transcripts you didn't add, so this is it for now. — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 08:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 I've brought my best foot flowered 2 Something I'm missing? 3 It's time for tasteball 4 Butterfly effect 5 Strong Sad's Blog And An Email 6 Cleanup 7 I'll pay you tuesday

I've brought my best foot flowered

I think "I've brought my best foot flowered" could make sense if he meant to say "I'm putting my best foot forward", i.e., he's trying to make a good impression with his character video. — It's dot com 23:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

That's possible. —  KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Something I'm missing?

This article seems unnecessary, very POV, and over-analytical, even for us. I wouldn't be sad to see it go, but, for the time being, I'm not putting a tbd notice on it. --Jay (Talk) 20:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It was created to directly refute information contained both here and at Wikipedia. It furthers the project because it systematically analyzes a central trait of a central character. It's in the main namespace because it should belong to everyone (yes, works in progress on user subpages can technically be edited by anyone, but it's just not the same); that way, it can be improved upon and maintained by the whole community. It only seems POV because it seeks to draw conclusions, but the process by which it reaches those conclusions attempts to be objective. — It's dot com 20:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

We have an NPOV policy now? — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 21:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know whether it's ever been written as such on any policy pages, but it seems like a knowledge base should be as unbiased as possible. Occasionally "NPOV" can be seen in edit summaries as reasons for changing or removing something. As for the article, I think certain phrases could be reworded to be more straightforward and less of an opinion. I'll work on that a little now. — It's dot com 21:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

This article can go to really speculative levels, with all those interpatations. How do we know that The Brothers Chaps meant all that? — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 21:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. I'm not saying there's no speculation; I'm just saying that it's based on observation and reason. We allow a certain amount of speculation in fun facts and articles as long as it's relevant and reasonable and if the article would suffer if we left it out. This research page does have a bit more latitude, but that's understandable given its scope. Although it does give an interpretation at the bottom (which, like everything else, can be edited according to consensus), by and large it just presents the facts. No one claims to be able to read TBC's minds, but as long as we don't invent wild, irrelevant theories, then we're good. — It's dot com 22:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

My point in doing this analysis was, as It's dot com mentioned, to objectively observe what Homsar is saying and relate it to the scene in which he said it. In many cases, you can clearly see the connection between his statement and what's going on, and in the cases where that connection ISN'T clear (or there doesn't appear to be one at all), interpretation is limited mainly to "There doesn't appear to be a connection, but this sentence is syntactically valid/correct on its own", etc. I removed as much POV stuff from the article as I could when I moved it to the main namespace. —  KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm taking another look at it, and... I want to say that maybe I feel stronger than before that this page is ridiculous. Half of Homsar's sentences have descriptions that say "This could make sense," frequently without describing how or by reaching for related words and twisting it a bit. Well, yeah... they could. So? They also very easily could be random nonsense. Por ejample:

"Nowowowow, this is the thrill of a lifetime."

The other characters all said some variation of "Happy T!", but Homsar's line could still be construed to make some sense.

That this says that he could make some sense makes no sense, at least to me. Could you at least explain it a little? Is it because he's "thrilled" to be part of the Happy T stuff? Because he says three words that start with the letter "T"? Perhaps it's not a word salad because it would make sense in a totally different context, but in this context, it's meaningless as far as I can easily see. This page is trying to make insanity seem sane, to feign order in chaos, and to hear dialogue in ramblings. I don't believe it has any place in this Wiki. --Jay (Talk) 19:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

It's time for tasteball

Homestar responds as though he's just informing them that they have to go do something right then. Seems pretty non-random to me. — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 21:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Excellent point. I'm going to update the article. — It's dot com 22:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It seems more to me that it's general Homsar's randomness, but Homestar's too obtuse to notice and thinks Homsar's serious... which would be in character for both of them... --phlip ^T_C 16:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Butterfly effect

What I'm about to say could easily be said on a lot of pages (and I don't intend it to be a forum-style topic), but it seems particularly appropriate here, given the amount of time and energy that have gone into the character of Homsar, both on TBC's part to create him, make him entertaining, and make merchandise about him, and on our part to enjoy it all and analyze obscure patterns in minute detail. What if Vinnie had been a better proof-reader? The world would be a vastly different place. — It's dot com 00:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Wow... Really makes you think, eh? I never thought I'd be glad for misspellings... --DorianGray

True, though if he didn't come about, Homestar would probably just be alot weirder to compensate, or something. I'm sure it would probably still be a pretty similar site. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 00:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

It would be weird. I mean, there would be no interview, Strong Sad would be even more lonesome, and there would be no regular use for that "b-b-b-b-b-b-b" sound that Homsar makes while walking. I'm sure someone would have slipped up eventually, inadvertantly creating Hoesta or Ometar or something. --Jnelson09 00:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I would doubt that Vinnie's was the only email that misspelled Homestar's name; TBC probably picked his from a handful of emails containing mispellings, like "Homstar", "Hometar", etc. (this is somewhat speculative, though) Trey56 20:40, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Strong Sad's Blog And An Email

What about in Strong Sad's Blog where Strong Sad writes that one day when he was talking to Homsar, Homsar kept saying, "When can we start the Jeffersons?" In the blog it's also mentioned that at a party Homsar told Strong Sad to hug a tree. While no quotes, it would be interesting to point out in summary that Homsar's language skills seem to let him organize a party. And finally, Strong Sad in 2 emails tells Strong Bad that Homsar called and said he was a million ladies tall. -WarthogDemon 07:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

I propose we have another look at this article for the sake of improving it. Last time people were regularly discussing it, there were some serious concerns as to its merit. I find this article to be very useful, but like some who have raised objections above, I am concerned about some sections of it. Quite simply, I think sometimes this article tries too hard to make sense of Homsar's sentences. As an example, this explanation of the phrase "I'm a million ladies tall":

Not really a word salad as Homsar's statement could be interpreted as, "I'm as tall as any of those ladies."

seems to me to be sretching it to the breaking point. I realise that part of this is because this study was originally made in order to refute the notion that Homsar speaks in word salads, but now that this point has been effectively made, I think the article needs to be reworked to a more neutral perspective. I intend to start work on this soon, and would value any help and input anyone would like to give. Heimstern Läufer 03:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, finally trying to do this. So, I made that last edit in the hopes of preserving the original analysis while changing the tone a bit so it doesn't sound as much like it's fishing for sense in Homsar's statements but rather acknowledges both what sense there is and that it still doesn't really fit the context. Heimstern Läufer 23:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll pay you tuesday

This is a rephrasing of a quote from J. Wellington Wimpy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Wellington_Wimpy) "I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today" So this puts Homsars quote into even more context. --Gerkuman 12:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)