Talk:C'mon! It's FOG!

From Homestar Runner Wiki

[edit] Really?

Umm....should this really merit its own page? I mean, it's only appeared once, why do it? - Opus the Penguin 16:37, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

It can really be summed up by this: "Some items are seen only once, but are particularly interesting." ThePizz^{√ Pick} 17:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

It's on screen for 21 frames (less than two seconds), and only during two of those frames is the full name visible. No real attention is drawn to it, and it is not "particularly interesting". This belongs in Remarks or Trivia in the bike thief article, maybe with an image. It does not deserve its own article. OptimisticFool 19:00, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

So, maybe put it in the trivia section with a picture? - Opus the Penguin 19:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Is there an echo in here? =] OptimisticFool 19:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Items do not need multiple appearances to merit articles. This article is fine as is and even helps to bring out an easily-missed element of the toon. Heimstern Läufer 03:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

For those who haven't already, it would be worth reading the discussions at Talk:Hamburger Shampoo and Talk:Fthoom-Bang. Also have a look at point 3 of the HRWiki:Inclusion guidelines. – The Chort 21:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

This article has only two sentences.

Delete it unless it shows up again. Platinum789hi

Ummm....shouldn't this be deleted...like..now? -- Still Homsar 10:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

No. Heimstern Läufer 10:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

1, it hasn't been seen anywhere else. Ever. 2, we already decided this..like, 2 friggin' years ago, and 3, you could expand on your reason. -- Still Homsar 10:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles are deleted when there is consensus to delete them and only then. None exists here, nor has any existed at any time. Heimstern Läufer 11:04, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you read the past 2008 sentences, it looks like an agreement to delete if it shows up nowhere else. I am inclined to agree, since this page, even without agreement, has appeared once, and it has two sentences. -- Still Homsar 11:12, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The level of agreement here is insufficient to constitute a consensus (please note that a consensus is not a majority vote), particularly because many of those arguing against this page gave no arguments for their views, and those who did often gave none that have any relation to existing policy and guidelines, making them effectively meaningless. There is no policy or guideline against short articles, for example, nor against one-appearance items. Heimstern Läufer 11:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC)