Talk:Mustachioed Homestar Runner

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] This page as an article

Do we really need this page? --Color Printer (Seriously, I can't log in!)

  • Yes! Because the peoples need to know about Homestar's evil twin!! Seriously, it doesn't bother me. Kvb 20:07, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Evil twin? What is this world coming to?!? --Color Printer
  • I'm surprised it hadn't been created sooner! The peoples got a right to know! -- tomstiff 20:10, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • ...sigh...fine. Whatever, but I'm against this page. --Color Printer
    • It's not a character! IT'S JUST HOMESTAR RUNNER WEARING A FREAKIN' MUSTACHE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!! --Color Printer
      • That's not true. The real homestar can be seen at the same time. Kvb 20:16, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • TBC made an effort to make the 2 Homestars different. I say leave the page here until there's some clarification -- tomstiff 20:25, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • So?!? This page really has no use. --Color Printer
        • Until we know better, it appears that a mustachioed Homestar doppelganger exists. This article documents this apparent fact. Why *not* have it here? -- tomstiff 20:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
          • Because it's just a joke. Having two similar people on the side of a screen throwing confetti (or wearing a swimsuit [or both]) is a commercial cliché which TBC were making fun of. Besides, "Mustachio" doesn't really exist in the toon, as we never see his face...it is only visible when you look at the swf file which no ordinary person would make an effort to do. "mustachio" does not exist, and this page should be deleted pronto. TK600 20:38, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
            • But he *does* appear in the toon. You can see bits and pieces of him! In garage sale we documented stuff that appeared only outside "the frame" as treated it as "canon". Why *not* do the same with this guy? -- tomstiff 20:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • well he did appear in a cartoon! we shoud not delete it

I strongly disagree, we should remove it, give me 10 words he said, and then i'll leave ol' mustachioe alone. --Dinoshaur 20:41, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, well, throw away the dregs if you want, but Poopsmith! look, I just don't think this guy is important at all! --Dinoshaur 20:45, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, he's not very important ... yet. We don't know much about him ... yet. This article is just a placeholder until we do find out a little more. -- tomstiff 20:48, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have reworked the page, including a better picture. I think it should stay until we get more info. You know TBC will use this version of Homestar again. — It's dot com 21:37, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)


This could be explained fully in the Senorial Day article, until he becomes something more than an Inside joke. - Dr Haggis - Talk 04:52, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)


This page sould stay. It is a character variation and it is strange to have two Homestars at the same time. Whene I first saw the toon I thought it was some kind of split-screen like in Experimental Film, but now I see that it's not Homestar at all! (looks like a homestar uncle or something, but...) E.L. Cool 06:53, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)


I like this page, if nothing more than I find it hilarious that TBC just randomly put a mustache on the second Homestar like he's some sort of evil twin (do I smell a Space Ghost ref?) I think we should keep it. After all, TBC did go to the trouble of putting a mustache on Homestar, so it should be documented... I have a feeling that this guy is more likely to show up again than, say, Unnamed Girl or most of the Minor Teen Girl Squad characters. Aurora the Homestar Coder 08:07, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

We don't need a page for this. Get real, people. We know absolutely nothing about the mustachioed Homestar that isn't already in Senorial Day. --Jay (Talk) 08:57, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree. What information could be found here that people can't find on the toon's page? Besides, what makes anyone thing that TBC will use this "different" Homestar ever again? It was a hidden joke for *all* those people that actually watch the swf file looking for inside jokes like this. -- Tony Stony 11:03, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
"If you view the Flash file directly, then in the scene with two Homestars, you can see that the Homestar on the right has a mustache." "{Two Homestar Runners, bizzarely, can be seen flanking the stand and barely on screen. Both throw confetti.}" That's what's on the Senioral Page. Do we really need any more than that? -- Joshua 11:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I wouldn't think so, at least until we get more information, should TBC decide to -- Tony Stony 11:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
We do need the page if there's a link in the cast list. Also, some people can't or don't know how to view the Flash file directly. Besides that, it's handy to just be able to click on the link. — It's dot com 18:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
But it wasn't in the cast list until relatively recently. It used to be Homestar Runner listed twice, which is exactly what we do for pizzaz. --Jay (Talk) 21:38, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yes, but in "pizzaz", it's supposed to be two Strong Bads somehow ("Strong Bad aims the barrel of his sawed-off journalism shotgun at his toughest interviewee yet... himself."). In this case, however, I feel like TBC wanted us to realize the Homestars were separate. On the other hand, I would be willing to do away with this page as long as the accompanying graphic (which took a little doing to get) was added somewhere else. — It's dot com 22:09, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I don't think that TBC meant for us to realize the Homestars were seperate, as it is not aparent unless you watch the swf, which very few casual fans do. After all, there are a lot of things with swf's that are not noted (such as character's missing parts of their body out of the frame). TBC just stuck a mustache on the second Homestar because it was funny to them, not because it was a new character. How do you know that the mustache is real anyway? -- Tony Stony 22:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Oh, I very much think they meant us to find it. Not the casual fans, of course, but us die-hards. In fact, I think it should be an Easter egg. I'ma gonna go fix that right now. — It's dot com 00:07, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yeah you know, your right. TBC probably meant for people to watch the swf and realize there was a mustache on the other Homestar. In turn, TBC obviously meant that we were supposed to realize that this was a totaly different character from Homestar, and not just him wearing a mustache. In no way whatsover were they just making a silly joke about the fascination with "evil twins" wearing mustaches. -- Tony Stony 00:14, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Whoa, what's with the sarcasm? Whether or not the second Homestar is a true character has no bearing on whether they meant for us to find the mustache. — It's dot com 00:33, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I agree. After thinking about it, I do think that TBC meant for hardcore fans to find it and take it as a joke. What I disagree with is giving the mustached Homestar a seperate page as if he was a totaly different character, when there is no proof of that. -- Tony Stony 01:33, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
There's no proof that he is, but there's no proof that he's not! This is just a placeholder stub to document the observation until further evidence compels us to expand or delete the page. -- tomstiff 01:40, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
But why is such a placeholder necessary? All information you could ever want on this "character" can be found on the Senorial Day Page! -- Tony Stony 01:47, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Except the image. The image is not on the page. That's my main sticking point. But tomstiff is right: we're too close to the release of "Senorial Day" to know what the future holds for this mustachioed confetti thrower. We need to let time pass. If, after a while, he never reappears, then we can merge this page with the main Homestar Runner page. On the other hand, if he shows up again someday (like I think he will), then we'll be glad we have this page already set up. In either case, this page isn't really in the way by being a placeholder until we get more info.It's dot com 02:03, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Well I personally think that a small form of the image could be placed on the Senorial Day page so that people can check it out, but that idea will most likely get shot down instantly. -- Tony Stony 02:07, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
That's not a bad idea, and I would be willing to accept it as a compromise should it come to that. But, like I said, I don't think a decision should be made either way this week—or even this month.It's dot com 02:13, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I suppose for now we will have to agree to disagree. Lets leave this for a few weeks and see what happens -- Tony Stony 02:17, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Now we can agree to agree. — It's dot com 22:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with and redirect to Senorial Day

Mustachio!

Everything on this page can be fully covered in the Senorial Day article. I think this page can safely be merged and redirected until he becomes more than the Inside Joke he is now. -- Tom 04:17, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to remove this page yet, but if we do merge it, the image of Homestar with the mustache should be placed down in the fun facts. — It's dot com 04:35, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I do. What use does this page have that couldn't easily be put into a fun fact? —FireBird|Talk 04:43, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It has the image. As I've said, the only thing I really care about is the image. If it's not on this page, it should be on the Senorial Day page. — It's dot com 05:11, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Instead of putting the image directly in the Senorial Day page, you could make a link to the image: [[:Image:mustachioedHR.png|link text]] Then there'd be no reason to keep this page here, until if/when he returns. --phlip TC 05:34, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If the image is put into a fun fact, the image is going to have to be scaled a whole lot smaller (or maybe just an image of his head with the 'stache; crop everything else). The image is way to big as it is now. —FireBird|Talk 15:59, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
A thumbnail the size of the image just above would be perfect. Users can click on it if they want a better view. (It should not be cropped.) — It's dot com 17:41, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, okay. That looks good. —FireBird|Talk 17:56, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Looking over this entire talk page so far, there is a 2 to 1 consensus to remove this article. I am setting it up to redirect to Senorial Day. (Should it redirect there, or to Homestar Runner?) I am putting an image like the one above on Senorial Day, lined up with the Easter eggs. — It's dot com 22:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I still think it would be better to simply link to the image, rather than include it as a thumbnail, something like "...the right Homestar has a mustache" --phlip TC 00:22, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, I guess I should have actually looked at Senorial Day before saying that, it actually looks alright... Ignore me... --phlip TC 00:22, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Return...ing the old page.

With lady...ing, Mustachioed Homestar Runner makes an appearence in an Easter Egg. Should we bring this page back from the dead, as he now seems to be a valid(ish) character? --videlectrix.pngENUSY discussionitem_icon.gif user.gifmail_icon.gif, 00:54, 9 August 2005 (BST)

I did it. Rogue Leader / (my talk)

Thank you, Rogue Leader. I was about to do it but I noticed that the link to him had already been changed from Senorial Day to here. —THE PAPER PREEEOW 00:52, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)


This page should go. The Homestar in lady...ing is just homestar wearing a fake mustach! it's not some werird "evil twin". Jeez...--DumDe 09:32, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fabrosi

Strong Bad says that Fabrosi wore a fake mustache in lady...ing. Fabrosi = Mustachioed Homestar Runner?

I thought the same thing. But I'm afraid we will remain in speculation of the true identity of HR's alter ego until a solid answer is provided some weeks, months, or years from now. —BazookaJoe 02:49, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I think Homestar was just using any advice he could get out of Strong Bad (even if it does only attract gold-diggers) small_logo.pngUsername-talk 02:47, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Just a late opinion

  • Personally, I think this page should stay. I think this because we all know that the Thnikkaman is Bubs, so Mustachioed Homestar is Homestar's Thnikkaman, so to speak. Cheatachu72 22:04, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • What I was reminded of instantly from the Mustachioed Homestar Runner was of Spock from Star Trek. I know it seems really far fetched, but hear me out. Anyone remember the episode called "Mirror Mirror" where Spock's "Mirror" person was Spock with just a beard and mustche? Maybe that was a reference? Just a though. GrayEco 15:09, 10 Aug 2005 (UTC)
    • The idea of the evil twin having a beard or mustache is an old cliche. More recently, Futurama and Space Ghost Coast to Coast have parodied it. Homestar Coderhomestar-coder-sig.gif 19:14, 10 Aug 2005 (UTC)
      • Note, too, that there are about half a dozen mentions of the idea in the threads above ↑. — It's dot com 19:22, 10 Aug 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect

What's with the redirect. People seem to agree with this article now. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 19:13, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Shouldn't Mustachioed H*R be removed from this list if it has its own article? Maybe not. I think I'll rv the redirect. I can't make up my mind today. —BazookaJoe 19:19, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)�We should supply a link to the page and a picture, butg not a detailed decription. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 19:21, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Why don't we move the entire contents of this page to Minor Alternate Versions and redirect this page there? It would fit perfectly. — It's dot com 01:28, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I agree. I'm not against this page, but I agree with those who suggest that there is no "evil twin". It's dot com has something here and I think we follow his proposal. —THE PAPER PREEEOW 01:34, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I'm gonna go ahead an redirect it. We probably should have redirected it there from the beginning, instead of to Senorial Day. — It's dot com 02:06, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

The Mustachioed Homestar Runner link in the cast list on the Senorial Day page redirects to Other Character Variations. Should I leave it the way it is or change it so that it will go directly to that page? [[PLEASE REPLY.]]2Fast2Furious 00:47, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes you should. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 13:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
You should leave the redirect. a) Redirects are cheap; they are not evil and we shouldn't be trying to avoid them, because b) MHR might someday get its own article. You wouldn't want its links to be going to the wrong page. —BazookaJoe 13:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Personal tools