User talk:Themightytruk/SPOON

I love this page--completely and totally.--Hardvice (talk) 12:38, 20 October 2007 (EDT)

• Not a fan of it. I dont find their occurence in the show to be notable in the least. Rather this be a user subpage. (Admin 12:41, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
  • I agree with Admin. I don't see Spoons as something worthy of pointing out, any more than plates (I can think of a dozen more uses where plates are used) or any other kitchen utensil for that matter are. I actually thought this was going to be a parody.--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  12:47, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
    • This is stupid. --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 12:50, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
      • Any more so than these pages?--Bob (talk) 12:54, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Do we have a Parody template?--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  12:58, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Bob, those pages are Theory pages. They have different criteria for inclusion and are by their very nature lower quality than most of the other articles here. The best comparison is to Waffles which, while I wouldn't mourn if it were ever gone, does show a number of more conspicuous references to a less commonplace item. With the exception of demonstrating Bob's ability they've never directly mentioned or focused on a spoon. Like Lost Soul said, why point it out over say plates? (Admin 13:00, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
          • Plus, Waffles are actually directly mentioned by two characters in the show - Sandra and Hiro. Spoons are not. Their only relevance seems to be with Bob's power, and as we already have a page for that, I don't see this article is neccessary.--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  13:04, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
          • The thing is--would we even notice waffles if there wasn't an article? I know every time I get excited when waffles are mentioned on the show, my partner looks at me like I'm an idiot. As far as he's concerned, there's nothing particularly noteworthy about waffles, either. Now you can bet the next time a spoon shows up, I'll be sure to notice it. Do we need an article to track spoons (or waffles) throughout the show? No, probably not. Does it hurt anything? No more than any of the other reference articles--which, as we've previously noted, are not necessarily conscious/intentional references, but are references that can be identified and tracked nonetheless.--Hardvice (talk) 13:18, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
            • What sets this apart from other articles that we move out of the main namespace and into user subpages, though? There are a lot of generally insignificant things that some people notice that they'd like to see articles on, but since they're not relevant enough they end up as subpages. This seems like just such an example. I see no significance to spoons within Heroes whereas at least waffles have been specifically mentioned (and even conspicuously so with Hiro's conversation with his father). Were you a fan of The Tick? I suspect this article is mostly of interest to fans of The Tick and is essentially just an attempt to interpret scenes involving a spoon (which again is so commonplace) as relating to the show. If there's an article on this then there could be an article on plates, jackets, shoes, televisions, chairs, etc. I suspect very few people would agree there's anything significant or interesting about those items within the context of the show. (Admin 13:28, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
            • At the very least our default position has been for these types of pages to originate as user subpages and then be moved to the main namespace if they gain support, so I think we should do that for now and then discuss its merits as the page evolves.
          • Not disagreeing, and you're correct. My point was that we have obsurd pages regardless. Personally, I could go either way with keeping it or scrapping it. As long as it's a reference (like it is now), then I don't have a problem.--Bob (talk) 13:23, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
            • Personally, I like the page. I'm not going to fight tooth and nail for it, but it's fun and light. It's also well-written, and I don't think it hurts our credibility. I'm a fan of minutiae and trivia, and I don't think there's anything wrong with an article that tracks the appearance of a utensil. Plus, Hiro really does reference The Tick in his blog--not that that's a reason alone for the page, but it does strengthen the argument. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 14:23, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
              • Where's the line, though? What distinguishes the pages we've opted to move into userspace from this one? If this page exists in the main namespace then so can articles on all the other mundane objects I mentioned before and I'd hate to see that happen. (Admin 14:34, 20 October 2007 (EDT))

Template

• Like Waffles this article should probably use Template:Infobox reference. (Admin 12:39, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
  • Agreed.--Bob (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2007 (EDT)