Talk:Teen Girl Squad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 16 July 2007. The result of the discussion was redirect to Homestar Runner#Teen Girl Squad.

I'm a big fan of Homestar Runner and I personally find the Teen Girl Squad cartoons to be hilarious, but do we really need a Wikipedia article for this? This sort of article has me questioning what the role of Wikipedia is. I don't believe this project is designed to include a blow-by-blow account of every online cartoon ever created. Though technically well-written, this article is anything but encyclopedic.

I think articles concerning topics of the scope of Harry Potter, for instance, are justified due to both the appreciable impact of the series on society and the author(s) discussing the significance of the series as a phenomenon and literary work, rather than merely relating the events of the plots. However, I do not believe that something of this nature qualifies for an encyclopedia article. If we allowed this to go through, then Wikipedia would soon be littered with articles that would be little more than plot synposes of obscure items of interest.

Furthermore, this article only informs the reader of the plots of a silly cartoon series, which they could easily discover by simply watching it. Because of this, I think it's hard to argue that this article is doing anything more than promoting the Homestar Runner Website, which is fine to do, but this is the wrong place to do it (it violates Wikipedia's terms of use). I hesitate to vote to delete this because I am relatively new here and not really involved in contributing to the community so much. For all I know, this may be a perfectly legitimate and acceptable article. If anyone feels like they could debate the merits of including this article, I hope they use this opportunity to do so. Otherwise, I humbly submit the decision of whether or not to retain it to the community.

Most of this article should be hacked out and left to the Homestar Runner Wiki. A listing of all the easter eggs is definitely more appropriate there than here. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:50, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Brainkrieg

Why is Brainkrieg considered "nu-metal"? This may stretch the boundaries of being anal, but I thought the SB e-mail in which Brainkrieg was featured focused on death metal (not that BK sounded death). Undersea


[edit] Issue #9

Just to let you know, I added the info for Issue #9. ~Shippy Mandy


[edit] Redirect conflict

As I am a new user and cannot move pages, please change "What's Her Face" into a disambiguation page. It conflicts with the name of a doll line. Alcy 07:57, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I think this is funny

Wikipedia was not really made for this but who cares it just shows how many fans of the [[[homestarrunner website]]]. LONG LIVE TROGDORRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[edit] Referenced by the Runaways (comic)

I forget which issue.

[edit] Issue #11

I added the info for Issue #11. It was released July 17, 2006. KdogDS 19:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture of title page

how do i change that so it shows all eleven issues? It should be this: Image:Teen girl squad NEW.png KdogDS 18:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Teen girl squad NEW.png

Never mind! --Addict 2006 06:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unnecessary fancruft

There is no need for a plot summary of each episode and a detailed description of characters when all this information is easily and freely available on HRWiki. I'm making it short and (more) encyclopedic. Darobsta 07:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. This has also been touched on in the merge discussion on Talk:Homestar Runner. —BazookaJoe 04:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
While I disagree entirely with this neutered article, I will not revert it. However, remember that fancruft is NOT offical Wikipedia policy term, nor is it necessarily a bad thing. Payneos 21:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, no way. One man is not the majority and you DO NOT erase almost an entire article before FIRST discussing it and seeing if it is necessary. Just because you mentioned it on the discussion page, it doesn't justify your action as appropriate. Such large edits are discussed PRIOR to action not POST. So I am going to reinstate the article as it was until a PROPER discussion is had.

Your opinions on what is "fancruft" and what is necessary will be weighed out against the opinions of other editors. This is not your article to do with as you please. We will operate as a community, not as a dictatorship. Not everyone knows about HRWiki, but everyone knows about Wikipedia. Just because the information is mentioned elsewhere, doesn't mean it shouldn't be mentioned here. This is why we have a discussion page: so we can sort things out BEFORE we do anything major. Sage of Ice 06:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I personally preferred Darobsta's version. Just making my opinion known. JuJube 06:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
That's fine. This is what we're here for. We'll get stuff sorted out and THEN we'll act, based on a community decision. It's just wrong to allow one person to do something so major without FIRST consulting everyone about it.
Keep in mind though that some people don't bother looking at external links. A lot of people come to Wikipedia as their go-to source and don't give much second thought to external links even if that link takes them to a much more vast source, like HRWiki. They like to get their info from Wikipedia and Wikipedia only. If the page is kind of empty, then they'll just move on. I personally feel that another site having the info isn't really enough to condemn all the work that went into this one.
Like I said though, I'll go with the vote of the majority. The page stays until then, though. Sage of Ice 06:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] To do: pictures of characters with {{web-screenshot}} tags

Read the heading. --Addict 2006 06:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Issue 13

Issue 13 has come out as of June 18th. We need to add this.