Talk:Crack in the Wall

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

[edit] Pseudocharacter?

Regarding categories, Crack in the Wall might qualify as a pseudocharacter. Strong Bad even tells it that it has character. And have TBC just been inconsistent with its location, or can the crack in the wall move on its own??? =] OptimisticFool 08:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redundant

I would say this page is a little redundant. There is a page for the Smoky Office which is essentially the same list - just add a short piece explaining how the Crack is important in its own right. TsuyoiWarui 22:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I merged the pages, because they really belong together. MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 03:51, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
It's a pseudocharacter and therefore warrants its own page in my opinion. In addition, merging without gaining consensus is a little too bold. I have undone the merge. — Defender1031*Talk 04:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
To throw in my comment on redunancy, I'd have to concur. The only thing that makes it a pseudocharacter is the fact that Strong Bad addresses a line to it in Dangeresque 3, but Strong Bad talks to everything in SBCG4AP. In fact, a quick search shows that one line is the only time any character has ever mentioned it at all - mostly it's just there in the background. It's more that the crack has character than is character. --Belthazar 04:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd have to agree. In fact, I think we have *way* too loose a definition of what a "pseudocharacter" *is*. Seems like "if a character talks to something, it's automatically a pseudocharacter" is the general consensus here. In my opinion, what makes something a genuine pseudocharacter is if it has an actual "personality" that extends beyond one or two lines spoken to it by a character. For instance, The Geddup Noise and the Wagon Fulla Pancakes have both been shown *acting* like characters. "Pseudocharacters" such as The Denzel and Carol seem to be borderline, as neither have actually *done* anything; one is a "stuffed animal", if you will, and another is a musical instrument, which people *are* sometimes known to name and talk to. And then there're "pseudocharacters" like this one... what makes it a "character", other than that Dangeresque talks to it in SBCG4AP? He talks to the Dangerdesque and the lamp in Dangeresque Roomisode 1, too, but that doesn't make *those* pseudocharacters... -YKHi. I'm Ayjo! 04:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
A couple points. Crack in the Wall even has a character variation of sorts ("it is done up more realistically"). Keep the article, add an image o' that. And maybe the Dangerdesque should be considered a pseudocharacter. The lamp? Dunno. 09:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Did you read what I even *said*? I don't think someone just talking to an inanimate object automatically classifies it as a pseudocharacter. Only if it exhibits some kind of personality trait, which this crack in the wall has not (nor has the Dangerdesque). -YKHi. I'm Ayjo! 05:06, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Why?

Why the heck do we have an article on a crack in the wall?!?!?

Because it appears a sufficient number of times on the website to merit its own article. In addition, it is considered a pseudocharacter because Strong Bad takes the time to talk to it during Dangeresque 3: The Criminal Projective, just like how he sometimes talks to The Stick or The Paper. – The Chort 18:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

i agree with the chort, it is, after all, a it is a pseudocharacter. --Sinderboard and plaster 14:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools