From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
This is the talk page of a deleted article. Please do not participate in the discussions archived here. If you can provide a reason for the existence of this page that hasn't been discussed below, you may start a new section. Please refer to the inclusion guidelines that are generally applied to judge an article's merit.

Although you don't see this word as much as "gonna" in real life, it is still very common. TBC certainly didn't make it up, and in fact I myself use it. It's not even close to as weird as "be's"; it does not need a page. — It's dot com 03:40, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I use it a lot myself. I agree with deletion. I've also heard it used by Mario and crew long before I even knew who Strong Bad was. --DorianGray
I agree with deletion, a fun face regarding anydangway was declined for the same reasons, and that was just a fun fact. small_logo.pngUsername-talk 04:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree with deleting it. I have seen it used quite a lot. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 04:06, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Agree. Delete. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 05:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
To be fair, I had never heard this term before H*R. But if this many people have, I guess the article's not worth keeping. (Maybe it's uncommon here in the West?) Heimstern Läufer 16:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
As mentioned by DorianGray, Super Mario used the phrase before Homestar, therefor it's not unique to the Homestar world. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 17:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Although that could be explained by their pseudo-Italian accents, I still think it's a good place to start. Example: In Mario Kart 64, Wario was known for "I'm-a Wario. I'm-a gonna win!" --DorianGray
Hmm, I don't think the Wario example is the same as this. "I'ma" is a contraction of "I am going to" (I am going to → I'm gonna → I'm'onna → I'ma). That said, my position above is unchanged. — It's dot com 19:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Umm... Why delete it? We still got be's, and this is no different. If you want to delete it because you've seen one of your own pages go up in smoke, I don't see your logic. I entirely disagree with this deletion. Who knows? Maybe it will pop up again! If you must, you must, but I'ma go away. Omegalord 00:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Everybody who has voiced an opinion here is an upstanding member of this community and is not out for "revenge" for a personal page loss. If you took the time to read the reasons listed above carefully, you would see how this differs from be's. small_logo.pngUsername-talk 00:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I use it often and I see it used often. I think it should be deleted. SaltyTalk! 01:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Undeleted. I don't hear this very often outside of H*R, and the way that it is used seems to be a running gag or at least a commonly repeated joke. Trey56 02:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I'ma is a very common expression, both in and out of H* As said above, TBC did not make it up. It holds no sort of significance. Something this insignificant does not need its own page and therefore needs to be deleted. CheetSpeek 01:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I'ma go ahead and vote to delete. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 09:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Let's just make sure we're clear on something: there are two separate questions, which may or may not in some people's mind influence each other. There's the question of the origin of the phrase, and the question of whether it qualifies as a running gag. As some above have mentioned, and as Darth Katana tried abortively to include in the article, it does predate TBC's use. I'm afraid I can't provide an example either, but I'm sure I've heard it outside H*R. Please note that that isn't the real question, though; the question is should this qualify as a running gag and get its own article. On the one hand, there are a lot of other running gags and inside jokes that TBC didn't invent—Crap, Dump, Mashing Go, etc., so maybe the lack of TBC-authorship shouldn't matter. On the other hand, one could make the argument that there are tons of colloquial figures of speech that they use far more often and we wouldn't document all those. I'm not voting. I just wanted to make sure the distinction between origin of the phrase/validity of the article is clear. —AbdiViklas 17:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

This article is crap. We don't need articles on "I'ma," "crap," "dump," "mash play," "Homestar's mental issues," "Homestar's hat," "Homestar's left eye," "Strong Bad's foot that had tape on it one time," et cetera. In fact, we don't need the "put your weight on it" crap I wrote out of severe boredom either. I think this site's main problem is that it's polluted in useless articles filled with theories and absoultely no valuable information like this one. They should all be DELETED! so that this wiki can still be useable without alienating Homestar fans looking for, y'know, knowledge, not constant repeating of the obvious and baseless assumptions. If people on here get bored, they should go hang out at the mall if they have enough freedom over their life to do so, as opposed to writing articles like this and putting the wiki WAY below Wikipedia's standards. And I don't mean to insult anyone with these words; as y'all know, I'm guilty of writing bad articles out of boredom myself. ;) Darth Katana X (discussionitem_icon.gif user.gif mail_icon.gif)

[edit] Deletion

I think the above discussion is still valid, and the article should be deleted again. Loafing 01:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry! I saw it wasn't an article and figured it had never been made. Then the talk page came back and I tagged it for deletion. Ah well...
Speaking of, is there any way to make sure this doesn't happen again? Is there a category of deleted pages or something?--Bobo the King 01:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey, no need to be sorry for putting some work into the wiki ;-) Loafing 01:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
We want this sort of thing to happen. Just because a page was deleted once does not necessarily mean it is never going to be a page. It's great to revisit these from time to time, if only to be sure the consensus at that time is still the consensus of now. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand the reason this was deleted before. Just because The Brothers Chaps didn't make up the phrase, doesn't mean it's not a running gag. They didn't make up the words "crap" or "seriously" either. Is there a better reason that I missed? (Is dead from edit conflicts) Shwoo 01:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I think it was deleted just because it's too common in "everyday life", whatever that implies. It's just phonetically easier/faster to say "I'ma" than "I'm going to". This case is the opposite of "be's", which is actually phonetically harder than the standard "be", (which is why it's harder to come across in "everday life"), making be's an acceptable inside joke, (just in case you were wondering why we kept that page but want to delete this one). Sorry if that didn't really answer your question.... I guess I mostly posted this here to confirm this assumption for myself, (any takers concerning my theory?).... All in all, good try, Bobo! but I think this page should be deleted again. kai lyn 02:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I think it shoud be DELETED!. — (Talk | contribs) 03:35, 15 January 2007 (left unsigned)

i don't think it should be deleted. it's something that shows up alot in, so why should it be deleted?--Jangles5150 21:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Not all words said on HR deserve articles; it's not really encyclopedic. This is why we're in the process of drafting a new deletion policy to accomodate articles that simply shouldn't be made. It looks like we've got a near-unanimous vote for deletion here, but we can give it a bit longer if you have another point to make. — Lapper (talk) 06:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Personal tools