Talk:Homestuck
Why?[edit]
Why does this article need to exist? It's not even tangentially /tg/ related. I'm an ardent fan of the comic, but it's not relevant to this wiki or its purpose. --Dr. Thompson (talk) 14:15, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- I concur. This article was relevant when there were many attempts to make a Homestuck tabletop game / RPG, but those attempts seem to have died off. I feel the article should be pared down to what /tg/ needs to know the next time there's a Homestuck RPG attempt, with pointers to where they can find out more without drowning in fandom. --NotBrandX (talk) 04:32, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Should we put this on /co/'s wiki? I think giving a large part of the article to /co/'s wiki might reduce reluctance of editors to trim the article down on this wiki. /co/'s wiki has far fewer articles than we do, they don't even have a homestuck article. I am wondering if they have a much lower relevance tolerance, although I suspect they just have less contributors. I plan to read homestuck (and have just started), I am pretty sure that this wiki has spoiled alot of stuff for me, so am quite eager to take advantage of the spoiler alert. Thus I am not going to move it. If someone else wants to go through the article, copy it, paste it and then alter it to be more suitable for /co/'s wiki, /co/'s wiki is here: http://the-conservatory.wikia.com/wiki/The_/co/nservatory_Wiki --99.160.164.162 09:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- /co/ has a wiki? ... oh, on Wikia. Well, that won't last long. Last time I was there, 1/3rd of every page's area was reserved (by policy!) for advertisements from Wikia sponsors. Thank fuck for adblock, and thank the God-Emperor's grace for our Wikifag. Otherwise, see above about "only what we need for the next RPG attempt." -- NotBrandX (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how long you expect that wiki to be around, but I found it in May and its still around. And as I said, I think putting the information some place else would reduce reluctance to get rid of it here. I know that it would probably still be in the page's history but know one looks at that and no one will appreciate what has been written if thats the only place it is.--99.160.164.162 22:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed with all the above. The webcomic is ancient history now, and if there were any homebrew attempts ever made they weren't mentioned on the page at all. Is it just kept here for the sake of tradition? --Newerfag (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
- If we deleted everything the moment it was no longer actively worked on we'd have deleted like half of the articles on this wiki. Things like our Samus and Command and Conquer page would have been deleted years ago because we haven't touched either of them in literal ages. As someone who's been here for years, I can say pretty firmly that there's no precedent for deleting things when they're no longer the flavor of the month on /tg/. I mean, FATAL jokes are old, crusty and inspire eye rolling these days and few people even touch it as a joke anymore, when are we going to delete that? Similarly, Matt Ward hate is passe as fuck these days and the man's no longer even remotely relevant to Warhammer. And I don't see attempts to delete order of the stick when that's an even older, crustier, and more faded webcomic in its final stages. Like shit, I was here when half of the articles on this wiki weren't even properly categorized and our article count was in the hundreds at best (you could fit all the 40k articles on one page still), I'd rather not have us delete things willy nilly simply because they're past their prime. Crazy Cryptek (talk) 23:29, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- A worthy counter-argument, however... Newerfag is the Gatekeeper! The Ultimate Voice of Deletion! The wiki must be scrubbed clean! He is /tg/!--71.47.208.127 02:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- The sarcasm is not appreciated. But I see Crazy Cryptek's point. That being said, the least that could be done is to clean up the page and put more emphasis on the parts which are relevant to /tg/. That was my real issue with the page- it's disorganized and doesn't make it clear why the subject matter is relevant to /tg/. --Newerfag (talk) 14:05, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? My dating advice is totally relevant! :P But it could do with a clean up yes. Crazy Cryptek (talk) 15:35, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- if I knew anything about the webcomic, I would do so myself. As it is, the whole thing just feels out of place on the wiki in its current state. What it needs most is to answer the question "Why should the average fa/tg/uy care about this webcomic?" Just like what Jaimas said in the section below this one.--Newerfag (talk) 17:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- I wasn't being sarcastic. Somebody has to be in charge around here.--71.47.208.127 18:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- I've been around here the longest so I now declare myself dictator of 1d4chan. :B Crazy Cryptek (talk) 09:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
- Ok.--71.47.208.127 19:29, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
- I've been around here the longest so I now declare myself dictator of 1d4chan. :B Crazy Cryptek (talk) 09:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
- I wasn't being sarcastic. Somebody has to be in charge around here.--71.47.208.127 18:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- if I knew anything about the webcomic, I would do so myself. As it is, the whole thing just feels out of place on the wiki in its current state. What it needs most is to answer the question "Why should the average fa/tg/uy care about this webcomic?" Just like what Jaimas said in the section below this one.--Newerfag (talk) 17:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? My dating advice is totally relevant! :P But it could do with a clean up yes. Crazy Cryptek (talk) 15:35, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- The sarcasm is not appreciated. But I see Crazy Cryptek's point. That being said, the least that could be done is to clean up the page and put more emphasis on the parts which are relevant to /tg/. That was my real issue with the page- it's disorganized and doesn't make it clear why the subject matter is relevant to /tg/. --Newerfag (talk) 14:05, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- A worthy counter-argument, however... Newerfag is the Gatekeeper! The Ultimate Voice of Deletion! The wiki must be scrubbed clean! He is /tg/!--71.47.208.127 02:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- If we deleted everything the moment it was no longer actively worked on we'd have deleted like half of the articles on this wiki. Things like our Samus and Command and Conquer page would have been deleted years ago because we haven't touched either of them in literal ages. As someone who's been here for years, I can say pretty firmly that there's no precedent for deleting things when they're no longer the flavor of the month on /tg/. I mean, FATAL jokes are old, crusty and inspire eye rolling these days and few people even touch it as a joke anymore, when are we going to delete that? Similarly, Matt Ward hate is passe as fuck these days and the man's no longer even remotely relevant to Warhammer. And I don't see attempts to delete order of the stick when that's an even older, crustier, and more faded webcomic in its final stages. Like shit, I was here when half of the articles on this wiki weren't even properly categorized and our article count was in the hundreds at best (you could fit all the 40k articles on one page still), I'd rather not have us delete things willy nilly simply because they're past their prime. Crazy Cryptek (talk) 23:29, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- Agreed with all the above. The webcomic is ancient history now, and if there were any homebrew attempts ever made they weren't mentioned on the page at all. Is it just kept here for the sake of tradition? --Newerfag (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how long you expect that wiki to be around, but I found it in May and its still around. And as I said, I think putting the information some place else would reduce reluctance to get rid of it here. I know that it would probably still be in the page's history but know one looks at that and no one will appreciate what has been written if thats the only place it is.--99.160.164.162 22:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- /co/ has a wiki? ... oh, on Wikia. Well, that won't last long. Last time I was there, 1/3rd of every page's area was reserved (by policy!) for advertisements from Wikia sponsors. Thank fuck for adblock, and thank the God-Emperor's grace for our Wikifag. Otherwise, see above about "only what we need for the next RPG attempt." -- NotBrandX (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- Should we put this on /co/'s wiki? I think giving a large part of the article to /co/'s wiki might reduce reluctance of editors to trim the article down on this wiki. /co/'s wiki has far fewer articles than we do, they don't even have a homestuck article. I am wondering if they have a much lower relevance tolerance, although I suspect they just have less contributors. I plan to read homestuck (and have just started), I am pretty sure that this wiki has spoiled alot of stuff for me, so am quite eager to take advantage of the spoiler alert. Thus I am not going to move it. If someone else wants to go through the article, copy it, paste it and then alter it to be more suitable for /co/'s wiki, /co/'s wiki is here: http://the-conservatory.wikia.com/wiki/The_/co/nservatory_Wiki --99.160.164.162 09:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
If we're going to keep this, we should get shit done here[edit]
If this is an article we're keeping, then we should endeavor to make it more related to /tg/'s interests. By all means, cover a bit of it, but explain its relevance to /tg/ as a whole, get a bit into the ins and outs regarding its involvement with /tg/, and so on. Like... More than it is now. -- Jaimas 17:34, 15 August 2014
Deletion. Yes, I think it's very appropriate.[edit]
This article sorely needs to be deleted - I mean, really, it has a borderline creepy "how to date people from this fanbase" - and even if one should not agree that it's creepy, it's still a damn weird thing - what other article has a "how neckbeards should approach fandom X"-bit? It's... Not relevant in any way at all, and stinks of advertisement and fanboyism. If this isn't challenged in a week or so, I'm just gonna blank the page and mark it for deletion. incassum (talk) 00:05, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
It's existence is probably a popularity mandate (aka "you'll see this in /tg/ at some point because it's Literally Everywhere"), or so I assume. That much I don't mind, but it IS in sore need of trimming and pruning rather than outright deletion, a la the treatment given to Transformers. --72.89.209.72 22:04, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, see, that's the thing - that's assumed. I've never once seen this discussed on /tg/. However, I do believe that it's been brought up a few times (I'm not exactly on there 24/7), perhaps even a large number of times; what I do not believe is that it's a constant enough thing (because then I'd have seen it at least at some point) to be considered a genuine /tg/ non-gaming interest, as e.g. manga/animoo is (which isn't /tg/-related either, but is brought up frequently enough that if one hangs around /tg/ for a few consecutive days, animoo will be mentioned or referenced at one point or another, in some context or another). I'd like to see a reason to have it on our beautiful, pristine wiki at all. For now, I'll do some serious pruning, and the discussion will go on. incassum (talk) 13:04, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, did some pruning - I still feel that it's far too long, large, and detailed for us, but it's a start. incassum (talk) 14:36, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
I say the article should be kept or deleted depending on the games the ol' fandom spawned. Are any of them playable? Do they have cohesive, logical, and accessible rules? Now that the article has been given good chemotherapy, that's the question that we should ask. 2605:A000:F744:8A00:A1C0:3F26:B143:327B 03:42, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
