Talk:Unnamed Characters

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search


[edit] Keep the page

Why are we deleting this? Kvb 19:53, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I see how this could become a decent page, but for now I really don't like it. If we keep it it'll need major work. And what's with the made-up names for the Marshmallow crowd? —FireBird|Talk 19:53, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The idea of this page is good, but it will mix characters from differnet worlds. You can clearly see that characters from MLS are completely different from a "character" we know is played by Bubs. Those can not fit together. For this kind of thing I stated Old Characters. E.L. Cool 22:28, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I like this article, but it should be limited to characters that have never been named. Bubs' character should not be here as he is playing someone else, but its still Bubs. keep it for all the characters without any names at all, real or unreal -- Tony Stony 14:54, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I definately agree: Bubs is out of place. Aurora the Homestar Coder 15:53, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

no he's in place losers we don't know the badguys name!-anynonomous I just don't like this page. An unnamed "character" who's just a placeholder isn't really a character. --TROGGA! 23:32, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

But we do need to mantion them somewhere. Do you think we need a full page article about That Alian Guy? We don't. So we thats why we have this page for. E.L. Cool 05:45, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think these "characters" can just be "mantioned" in the transcripts. Should we add the penguin from Experimental Film and the Dogbert-like character from dullard? --TROGGA! 20:23, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't see why not. E.L. Cool 20:58, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I hope you're joking. --TROGGA! 02:45, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If he's not, I'm ready. --Technochocolate 05:30, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why delete it? It's very useful, you know. -Kinsey

Actually, it really isn't. There is literally no useful information here, except for "The Alien Guy" being the only source of nudity. —FireBird|Talk 02:32, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
But consider the alternative...would you rather have one useless page devoted to unnamed characters or lots of useless pages devoted to each character seperatly? These characters need to be on the wiki, because you never know if people might actually be interested in finding out something about someone. -- Tony Stony 02:42, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'd rather not have them here at all. What good is "An Unnamed Girl appears in the background of Dancin' Bubs"? I say if they appear more than once we should have a page for them. —FireBird|Talk 02:44, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Ok, lemmie give you an example. A while back, before my wiki days I was really into Homestar Runner in its own right. One day I discovered the old games menu, and began playing. I noticed a character I had never seen at all before. Had I known about a wiki at that point, I would have loved to see someone else acnowledge her and also to have somewhere to discuss the posibiility of her becoming some other character. It doesnt matter if you see it as useful, but some random user might be really curious about the character (or lack thereof). As a wiki, we have the responsibility to categorize everything (within some reason) for other users to benifit. -- Tony Stony 02:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I see your point, but I'm still staying by what I think of this page. —FireBird|Talk 02:48, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Well I'm certainly not saying your position is wrong. I just consider myself a liberal wiki editor. -- Tony Stony 02:55, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Everything needs to be documented, the only question is how much weight the thing gets. Grouping this things that we are unlikely to see again together is a good idea, however naming and formating needs to be standardized.- Dr Haggis - Talk 03:52, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What's wrong with this page? It lists unnamed characters. What if people want to know how many unnamed characters there are? I really don't think it needs to be deleted. -Darklinkskywalker

He's right. With this, we'll be able to delete the individual pages, and the bandwidth will never be exceeded again! Besides, what kind of heartless jerks are you, to leave these pageless characters out on "the streets"? What if somebody wanted to delete a page you like? Think about that. --Technochocolate 03:34, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Who cares if some user likes a page? That doesn't stop us. They'll (you'll) just have to go along with it. Big deal. And you're way off if you think deleting a couple of pages will stop bandwith problems. —FireBird|Talk 00:59, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Theres nothing useful about a crowd with 10 of the 12 people already named!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Keep it. It's useful to add to and for reference. You know, for like, seeing all of somebody's appearances or something. I dunno. Forget I even wrote that. Please. --daunrealist 01:02, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This is a legitmate, good, article that has a lot of information and does NOT deserve to be deleted. Come on. It's a great page! -User: Tapd260

According to a certain quote on this page, we may be planning to move "Main Page Characters" here [Note: this has happened]. Therefore I think it would be a good Idea to keep one of them here - probably this one - so we kan move one of them to the other so we won't lose them both. They may be useful to us later. --Darklinkskywalker 22:07, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC) POST #2= --Darklinkskywalker 23:01, 14 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Please, if just for the sake of the little unamed girl with a medal, let us keep this page, so that it may grow in its anonymity and the anonymity of these wonderful, unknown characters. The Smoking Monkey 16:43, 26 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Keep. We have other lists, why not one more? — It's dot com 20:55, 26 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Keep as is This page has merit. There will be other unnamed characters in the future, and if you delete this, where will we put them? also, this page will be expanded when the main page characters page gets moved to here. Rogue Leader / (my talk)

We should keeep this page. It tells info about characters with no name. Without this, where will the info of those characters go?

I say we should keep this page. Even the most unpopular characters shoud have some information! -Lotionman 17:38, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)Lotionman

Update: Main Page Characters has been merged with this page. It now has a reason to exist, especially because there are some things noted here but nowhere else on the wiki. — It's dot com 23:46, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Switch

Does anybody else think that we should switch the position of Main Page Characters and Other Unnamed Characters? - AtionSong

[edit] Unnamed Girl could be...

The Girl With The Medal might be the Homeschool Winner version of Marzipan... well I think so at least. Begone Demon 00:58, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dangeresque villain

Shouldn't Bubs as the unnamed villain from Dangeresque 2 be here? I'd add it myself, but I'm new to Wiki editing. --Ragey 01:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Added. Nice suggestion. --DorianGray

[edit] Dullard Inconsistencies

Here the tie-wearing animal is described as resembling Dogbert. On Dullard it's Catbert. Then here the take-out guy, an unnamed character, is missing. He can be added easily enough, but how shall we deal with the Dog/Catbert reference? TTATOT? More clearly one than the other? Finally, Randy (the IT horse) and Dullard himself seem to not be mentioned anywhere - they ought to get a mention at least in the "Characters from Created Worlds" section of Characters. Thoughts? Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 03:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Perfume Cloud

The following discussion was moved here from Talk:Perfume Cloud after it was decided to merge the content of that article with this one.
Umm, shouldn't this all just go on the minor characters page? DeFender1031 14:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah. If I remember correctly this guy didn't contribute much to the plot. Bad Bad Guy 17:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I distinctly remember saying "We're not making a page for this guy" when I added it to the cast. Or something similar. Get thee gone! --DorianGray 19:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I propose a MERGE and REDIRECT to Unnamed Characters, for obvious reasons. Dr. Clash 22:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree wit' Clash for reasons said above. --TheYellowDart(t/c) 22:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with The Yellow Dart for agreeing with Dr. Clash. – The Chort 18:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Yup, this belongs on Unnamed Characters. Homestar Coderhomestar-coder-sig.gif 18:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
This article DEFINATELY goes under Unnamed Characters. I mean, why have an article that you can read in 5 seconds? That's just a waste of space. SuperfieldCreditUnion 18:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dullard characters

It seems a little awkward to have the Dullard characters tacked on the bottom of this page. Unlike most of the other characters on this page, they have appeared multiple times. It seems to me that they should have their own page at Dullard Characters. Anyone agree or disagree? Trey56 02:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Much like the new Strong Badman Characters, I tend to agree. Although these characters remain unnamed, they do have the comic connection. In case one of their name will be unveiled, we won't have to move him or her to any other page. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 06:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
It didn't get done, but I like this idea. Can we revisit it? DAGRON 02:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Sure! Let's revisit it in 13 years.
Okay, now that that's done, let's revisit this idea. There is already a #Characters section on the Dullard page, so I feel like the best course of action is to move the Unnamed Characters section there. Although I'd approve a separate Dullard Characters page as well. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 19:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

[edit] DELETE this!

This page is mostly pointless. The characters listed aren't of much note, but there is one, Dangeresque Bubs. He should be put in the Dangeresque article.

Nah, no need to delete this. The characters are minor, but that's why they're all in one article. Still worth covering them. Heimstern Läufer 00:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baron Darin Diamonocle

He's no longer unnamed. Should "Unnamed Bad Guy]] be removed from the list, or just reworded to indicate that he was once unnamed? — Defender1031*Talk 18:36, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to have to wholeheartedly suggest taking him off this page. My example would be (the first example on the Characters page) The Little Chef Guy, who is not named until his second appearance. As there is no such example on this page, and other examples to my point (The Fat Bee, Gavin, Fort Wayne Locomotive, 1-Up) I'm going to be bold and remove until an opposing consensus can be reached. Flashfight 21:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
After reading Flashfight's argument I'll have to side with removing Baron Diamonocle. BBG 23:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree as well. I was wondering if there was precedent, and if not, what the various opinions were. We might consider adding a section about characters who were at one point unnamed. — Defender1031*Talk 23:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I also think this could have a section like that. Strongkinghomsarsmith 23:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth, Champeen used to be listed on this page, and she's not now. There's a precedent for you. --Jay (Talk) 23:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Know what? I'm gonna be bold and do it. Strongkinghomsarsmith 23:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, then the question becomes format. Specifically, when they become canonically named. Fort Wayne Locomotive was given in DVD Commentary years before Big Outing. Which one counts? Also, can I bring up Rocoulm again? Flashfight 09:39, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... I think that since TBC's word is law, the commentary should be considered his naming. Now, I gotta go and edit this stuff! Strongkinghomsarsmith 23:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree, 'specially since there are a nontrivial number of cases of TBC just throwing out some idea into a commentary that they use later on. The Lappy was like this, and so was Blubbo's. I was half-wondering if Diamonocle's name was in a commentary (didn't see it if it was.) --Jay (Talk) 23:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Page text search says "no". Or at least, "not in the commentaries that have been transcribed so far". Considering his first name is the same as the surname of writer/director/designer Mark Darin, I'm suspecting it's a recent idea, probably as a nod to ol' Mark. --Belthazar 23:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking that that section would be more prose and less of a list... — Defender1031*Talk 13:01, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Yodeling Man

To me, The Yodeling Man looks like The King of Town -- 02:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Formerly Unnamed

This just isn't going to work out. Even Strong Sad went without a name at one point! - 16:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be reserved for characters who went several years without a name. Or several subsequent appearances. --DorianGray 20:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Moby Dickard

The Moby Dick from Main Page 3 and the Moby Dick from Homestar Runiner Teen Girl Squad aren't the same whale, so should it really be on the "formally unnamed" list? -Essence of Ghost Water

[edit] The Rest

Should they get their own page? 1. They're not really unnamed. They're "The Rest". 3. Yes, they're minor characters, but so are The Guys (who are also kind of unnamed). Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 18:40, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Based on the draft I made forever ago, it seems like there's more to say about The Rest than The Guys, and possibly even Mr. Bossman, Old-Timey Ghost, Dee, and Don Knotts. Does anyone have any thoughts? Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 19:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Personal tools