Talk:Homestuck/Archive 1

Archive 1

Split

The information in this article was split from the section it was in in the MS Paint Adventures article. All content that was not created by me directly there belongs to the individual content creators, as of this version of the article. Silverseren^C 19:54, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Article sections

I rearranged the sections in a way that made more logical sense to me. Of note is the Style and development section which, right now, mentions in passing the HTML5 and Flash animations and games. Perhaps it could include more information on the actual format of Homestuck (majority being GIFs with occasional ventures into interactive elements), it being somewhat unique and a point of interest. — daranz [ t ] 20:32, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

It definitely could use that info. However "unique and a point of interest" is something that needs to be sourced, so if a source says that, it should definitely go in there. Sang'gre Habagat (talk) 06:35, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

The information in there is pretty much all we have that is sourced. We can't add any more in without finding more sources that discuss it. Otherwise, we'll be running foul of original research. Silverseren^C 21:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

In the 'Fan Community' article, there is a good lump of missing information. First off, the fans themselves are a major part of the community. There are thousands of homestuck cosplayers, many (if not all) of them often attend anime conventions or simmilar events, though Homestuck is no anime in itself. Another major part of the community is the fan art, which can be found on almost any site that displays fan art of any kind. Not only that, but there are a number of fan art styles, such as 'trickster mode', 'genderbent', and just about anything else. Also included are referances to other media productions and internet memes. Among this list is Slenderman, My Little Pony, Gangnam Style, Pokemon, and even the recently released movie 'Wreck it Ralph'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.117.2 (talk) 07:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I think we all know this stuff is true, but it can't be included in the article unless the information is covered in reliable sources, namely newspapers or gaming/comics news sites. Silverseren^C 07:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Wouldn'd the souce of fan art count as a primary source? I can't think of anything more reliable that the origin of something. Additionally, even if it is not considered a reliable source, is it not possible to just label the information as 'not from a reliable source'? It's the fan community that makes Homestuck what it is today; Andrew Hussie has admitted to looking at fan work for inspiration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.254.222.254 (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid not. The rules on reliable sources are pretty binding and the use of primary sources only extends so far. Otherwise, you could say every opinion of something counts as a primary source and include any random person on the internet's opinion into an article. Silverseren^C 21:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Generally, with primary sources, they either have to be the main subject of an article or they have to be content that has actually been published. Silverseren^C 21:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Reception and Impact

Nabokov's Pale Fire was published in 1962 according to the library of congress. It should not be listed as a book inspired by this web comic's , which was created DECADES after Pale Fire was written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CapitalistRunningDog (talk • contribs) 03:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I think you're misunderstanding the quote. The reviewer for Tor Books is saying that Pale Fire was one of the earliest attempts at the hypertext fiction genre and that Homestuck is the first work to actually be a successful attempt at the genre. It is not at all saying that the book was inspired by Homestuck. If anything, it's saying the opposite. Silverseren^C 12:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

New source article

Is there anything here that we don't already have? 140.211.8.7 (talk) 01:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Since that article has since been taken down, it's moot. For the record, I don't think it had anything worthwhile to contribute anyway. Wehpudicabok (talk) 07:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

No criticism?

That's strange. I'm just saying, I always see hate on this webcomic and it's obsessive fanbase pretty much on every forum I visit.76.98.53.123 (talk) 01:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Obviously we can't just cite internet forums. If there's a negative review of Homestuck from a reliable source (I'm not aware of any, since it's only recently that reliable sources have begun paying attention to it), feel free to add it. (Also, I'm pretty sure that most of the hate is toward the – admittedly quite obsessive – fanbase, not the comic itself.) Wehpudicabok (talk) 07:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Picture

May I suggest selecting a picture for the article? It looks kind of empty now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.108.30.14 (talk) 16:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if taking a panel (the first or maybe the titlecard where John steps out of his house) would constitute fair use. Would it be, if we only use one panel? Thoughts, anyone? Sang'gre Habagat (talk) 23:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

How about the Sburb logo, or perhaps This, from the MSPA Wiki? 81.99.87.2 (talk) 00:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

A scan of the cover of the first book should be fair use. I'm surprised there isn't coverage of that in the article already. Sang'gre Habagat (talk) 02:02, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

If a picture is what is needed, go to the fans. You'll end up with tens of thousands of results for a specific image alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.117.2 (talk) 07:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I added a picture of myself cosplaying Dave Strider to the Fan Community section. Moosehadley 20:36, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Brilliant! Sang'gre Habagat (talk) 01:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Someone MUST add this to the article

I don't know how to code in references, but this is VERY useful: http://readmspa.org/stats/#HS — Preceding unsigned comment added by WolfgangAzureus (talk • contribs) 15:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Seems useful as a source for the page count, if we assume it's accurate. I added it as such.  — daranz [ t ] 20:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Style

I think for the style portion there should be a page from the comic showing how everything looks and drawn. Maybe from the first page and include the little section under that tells the story. --Matt723star (talk) 20:10, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Plot

I reckon that the next thing that's needed here is a short and sweet plot summary - currently nothing in the article really tells the reader what Homestuck is all about! ashdenej 14:13, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, i'm thinking we should be allowed to write it similarly to how plots for books and films are made, which means following WP:FILMPLOT. The main restriction in this is that it would need to be between 400-700 words. We'd likely be much closer to 700 for Homestuck's convoluted plot and i'd be okay with going slightly over, per what FILMPLOT says about convoluted plots, but 900 words should be the absolute max. This means we're going to have to be both general and specific. At least 100 of our words is going to be character names, but I think we should only introduce the 4-12-4 groups. No other antagonist or secondary characters beyond Bec Noir, Doc Scratch, and Lord English. Those are the only characters we need to put out. We can see about adding a little more if we have words left over, but I doubt that will happen. So, a general plot that gets most of the information across. Remember that we do not concern ourselves with covering up spoilers, we're describing the plot in its entirety.

The good thing is that a lot of the game mechanics can be described in a separate section (so long as we have sources for them). Whereas, the plot section won't need to be sourced if we're properly following FILMPLOT, as it is implied that the work itself is the source. Though that does mean only writing facts, with no interpretation whatsoever in the plot section. Any interpretation of meaning would have us fall into original research territory and we don't want to do that. Silverseren^C 17:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I've added a brief summary of the plot so far. (Just for the record, trying to summarize Homestuck in 400 words was insanely hard.) I tried to keep it straightforward and not introduce anything that would confuse a new reader, and also refrained from analysis. Critique/improvements are quite welcome, and of course we still need a separate character section. Wehpudicabok (talk) 04:44, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Props to your attempt, Wehpudicabok. It's really well written. Eventually, we should add in info about the ancestors and pre-scratch troll characters, but we should wait until Homestuck unfolds more and we figure out just how important they actually are to the story, as they aren't all that important right now. And then, once Homestuck finishes, we can add in the ending to the plot section.

I do still think we should add in the full names of all the 4-12-4 characters though, since they don't have to be sourced in the plot section. If we make a separate characters section, that will have to be sourced (it's stupid how the rules work) and we don't really have the references to cover the names. Silverseren^C 07:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Nah, I'd recommend against putting the full names in. It'd seem too much like fancruft - as-is, it looks nice and streamlined. Having all sorts of "weird troll names" shoved in there would just make it inaccessible and harder to read for an outsider. Let's save it for when there are some decent citations, perhaps? (Also, the A2 Trollcestors have kind of served their role in that they've successfully foreshadowed the Guardian Swap in Universe B.) ashdenej 12:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I noticed a couple of small errors in the plot synopsis. The first is that Sburb is incorrectly blamed for bringing about the end of the world. Both in the childrens' session and the trolls', Sburb and Sgrub are the key to escaping the meteors, not their cause. The second error is the implication that the scratch effected both the human and troll sessions. The effects of a scratch are limited to the session they are made in. The pre-scratch trolls scratched their session resulting in the session for the trolls introduced in Act 5. Whtwlf (talk) 15:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood what Sburb is about? The meteors that destroy the Earth are sent through the portals above Skaia as it is threatened by the Reckoning. Said meteors rain destruction on the kids, giving them incentive to enter and to trigger the Reckoning. Sburb is not restricted by time or space, remember! I've edited the Scratch passage for clarity, though. ashdenej 07:02, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I would like to point out an error that currently is in the plot section. When mentioning Lord English in the last paragraph, it claims that he is "semi-indestructible", which according to This Page is not really true. It says that "ARANEA: Long ago he discovered the secret to indestructi8ility.", yet 2 lines later is also says "ARANEA: Defeating a foe doesn't always involve killing." Anyway, I would just like to get the go ahead before I go editing this (and sourcing, which this section appears to need quite badly) --[CK]: ciscoKid 05:36, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree that "semi-indestructable" isn't really accurate, and changed it to "purportedly invincible", since the story itself is not really clear on this. Wehpudicabok (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Wehpudicabok! --[CK]: ciscoKid 04:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

omygod whoever wrote the plot is the absolute hero. it even all makes sense. good job! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.72.200.237 (talk) 09:23, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Keeping the plot summarized

I have recently noticed some users gradually adding more content to this section, and while they are generally accurate and well written, some of them tend to go into too much detail. This is a summary, after all! As per Silver seren's earlier suggestions on the form of the summary, I've trimmed some of these new contributions down. I would suggest that future editors avoid going into too much detail when editing this section. Wehpudicabok (talk) 09:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 31 March 2013

Please change "foums" found on the first line of the Plot section to "forums". Nyphera (talk) 23:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Done RudolfRed (talk) 23:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request May 8 2013

Please change "6000" found on the third line of the introduction to "8000" — Preceding unsigned comment added by V10L378L00D (talk • contribs) 21:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

As you can see in the reference, Homestuck has 6242 pages. The first ~2000 of the page IDs are taken by previous the adventures (mostly PS). ー HigherFive〈Ｔ | Ｃ〉 21:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Homestuck the Postmodern?

I've often thought of Homestuck as a work of postmodern literature, and after recently rereading our page on that topic it struck me as an extremely apt label, especially since Act 6 began. I mean, look at what characterizes postmodern literature:

1. "Irony, playfulness, black humor" – Homestuck of course prides itself on irony and black humor, and Hussie never misses an opportunity to ruin the death of a beloved character by mocking it – for instance, when Gamzee kills Equius, Hussie illustrates Gamzee in SBaHJ-ish, deliberately low-quality style. Characters' analysis of the concept of "the ironic" is halfway between a theme and a running gag!
2. "Intertextuality" – Aside from the fact that MSPA is essentially an intertextual discourse unto itself, the way the stories constantly run together, Homestuck also thrives on references to other works of fiction, sometimes very cleverly concealed (EarthBound is to Homestuck what the Odyssey was to Joyce's Ulysses).
3. "Pastiche" – A combining of disparate styles and/or a parody. See also: basically every page of Homestuck.
4. "Metafiction" – By now, Homestuck has shattered the distinction between internal narrative and the process of creating a story, rebuilt it, and shattered it again, several times over. At present Caliborn is making a mockery of the whole idea, thus shattering it again.
5. "Fabulation" – A complicated concept I'm not sure I understand, but I'm reading that fabulation "challenges... the traditional structure of a novel or role of the narrator" (Homestuck has no need for such tradition, of course, and mocks it regularly) and "and integrates other traditional notions of storytelling, including fantastical elements," which is obviously present here.
6. "Poioumena" – The idea that postmodern literature is about the process of creation. The playful manner in which Hussie in turn accepts and subverts his audience's input is the embodiment of poioumena.
7. "Historiographic metafiction" – Hussie takes this one to an absurd extreme, with Insane Clown Posse as President, Guy Fieri as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Betty Crocker as an evil alien overlord, and (of all people) Charles Dutton as a prophet.
8. "Temporal distortion" – "Why Is It That When The Subject Of Temporal Mechanics Is Broached Your Sparing Human Intellects Instantly Assume The Most Ingratiating Posture Of Surrender Imaginable"
9. "Magic realism" – This is described as having, among other things, "the mingling and juxtaposition of the realistic and the fantastic or bizarre, skillful time shifts, convoluted and even labyrinthine narratives and plots, miscellaneous use of dreams, myths and fairy stories, expressionistic and even surrealistic description, arcane erudition, the element of surprise or abrupt shock, the horrific and the inexplicable," which sounds like what Hussie mumbles to himself right before he falls asleep at night.
10. "Technoculture and hyperreality" – What else could SBURB possibly be?
11. "Paranoia" – Not as rampant as some of the other stuff I've mentioned, but the Horrorstuck arc was pretty thoroughly fueled by paranoia, I'd say.
12. "Maximalism" – When you conclude an arc with a fifteen-minute Flash animation that essentially breaks the Internet, I'd say you've achieved this label.
13. "Minimalism" – Okay, no minimalism here, not really. But then, how could you have both this and the preceding item in a single work anyway?

As far as I know, we don't have a category for postmodern webcomics, and I doubt that there are enough others to populate one in the first place. But, the similarities are too apt to ignore. I suggest that Homestuck be added to the category for postmodern literature. Wehpudicabok (talk) 06:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Cool analysis, but that's original research. If a reliable source says it's postmodern literature, then we can add it to the infobox. Mr. Gerbear (talk) 07:00, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

But reliable sources pay so little attention to Homestuck... :( Wehpudicabok (talk) 07:30, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Can't do anything about that. :C Mr. Gerbear (talk) 00:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

But we already have a source that describes it as postmodern. The Tor article. It says "Maybe I should assert that Homestuck is a post-modern masterpiece about breaking the fourth wall and making the most of both author insertion and audience participation". Silverseren^C 02:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I suggest quoting it somewhere, and then categorizing appropriately. Mr. Gerbear (talk) 02:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

When was Homestuck first published?

When was Homestuck first published? When did it begin? What date was the first comic published? The article doesn't say. 24.79.74.133 (talk) 19:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The sidebar says April 13, 2009. Mr. Gerbear|Talk 20:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

More precisely, the original, all-Flash beta version of Homestuck was first published on the 10th, but the project was soon cancelled, and Homestuck was rebooted / relaunched in its current form on the 13th. -- Gordon Ecker, WikiSloth (talk) 02:26, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Size?

This article isn't a bad start, but I feel it doesn't really get across the unarguable most notable aspect of Homestuck - the sheer goddamn size of the thing. I mean, you could read this comic nonstop for weeks and not reach the second paragraph of that plot summary. There's something in the Reception section about '5,000 pages and 128 characters'(!) - that should really be in the lead, it's what makes it significant as a comic. I mean, in terms of length that's gotta be up there with the likes of Akira and Cerebus the Aardvark, right? Robofish (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I've added a short note on the comic format, complexity, and length to the lead section, using the Knode article as reference (although I'm sure some of the other sources mention this as well). I would've also included a one-sentence plot summary there, but alas this is Homestuck. — daranz [ t ] 19:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Current size is just fine. We don't need a scholarly review of the comic and the existing summary covers all major plotlines. --Lord Roem ~ (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

The concern here was that we should mention the size of Homestuck itself, as it is one of the more notable features of the webcomic. The concern wasn't the size of the Wikipedia article. — daranz [ t ] 22:29, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. Yeah, that should be included. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 22:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

If Homestuck were a book, it would be the longest work in the english language. --Bloo47 (talk) 00:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Actually, that's not quite true. At a little over 750,000 words, it's longer than Atlas Shrugged, The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, but there are a few longer single novels, and if "longest work" includes single stories spread over multiple novels then it has to compete with multi-novel doorstoppers like A Song of Ice and Fire, The Sword of Truth and The Wheel of Time (which weighs in at just over 4.4 million words over its 14 books). I'm not sure how it stacks up against other long-running comics. -- Gordon Ecker, WikiSloth (talk) 07:27, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Ulysses Comparisons

This article credits someone else with this idea, but that person (Onisi? Ornisi? Or something) was commenting on Idea Channel's video. It was definitely Mike Rugnetta and the rest of the Idea Channel Crew to put that forth originally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.216.14.19 (talk) 19:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

guardians

Please correct someone this sentence in the plot summary: "The scratch causes the humans' universe to restart, with the condition that the kids' guardians are the ones to play through Sburb now..." This is wrong for two reasons: 1. People coming here don't know about Homestuck, and won't be able to understand Homestuck terminology like "guardians" without explanation. 2. This is not true for 2 of the 4 kids. Since Dirk/Bro and Roxy/Mother are the guardians for Dave and Rose, Jake and Jane/Nanna are not guardians for John and Jade. They are rather like ancestors for the kids, dead but influential. (But precisely, "ancestor" isn't right too, because this term applies to trolls). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.19.169.21 (talk) 20:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

i've changed the language a bit; hopefully it's a bit more accessible now. i just went with the word "ancestor", as people unfamiliar with the comic won't know that that term has a more specific canonical meaning, and even if they do know i think they'll be able to understand anyway. ~ Boomur [☎] 00:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

woops, i just got what you actually meant about the "guardians" being like troll ancestors — i guess Dirk isn't really an ancestor to Dave...but i don't think calling them all "ancestors" really mars the impression of the roles the beta kids have in this summary. ~ Boomur [☎] 00:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Why not "genetic parents?" That would make more sense, given as it's just about the one thing the post-scratch kids have in common compared to their counterparts. And I don't think that "ancestor" is too commonly used for people only one or two generations up. Great Pikmin Fan (TD) (Talk) 01:02, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

i think "genetic parents" is also a bit of a quandary considering the grey area ectobiology creates. plus, roxy is the only analogue to an actual parent. perhaps explaining ectobiology would help clarify this? i wouldn't want to overcomplicate things, though. ~ Boomur [☎] 01:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

In this panel http://www.mspaintadventures.com/scratch.php?s=6&p=005953 Doc Scratch refers to them as ancestors. Yes, technically, he's talking about A1 to A2 and not B1 to B2 but the idea is the same. Even if "Ancestor" does not refer to biological or even ectobiological ancestors, but instead a kind of metaphorical lineage, it still works just fine. 131.216.14.19 (talk) 19:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

like i said above, "ancestor" does have a specific, non-biological (well, maybe ectobiological) meaning in Homestuck, which, as you said, is separate from the literal meaning of the word. but, the literal meaning is the only one that most of this article's audience will be familiar with. if we want to use the word "ancestor", then i think it would require some explanation, in order to separate it from the typical meaning. which i'm not necessarily opposed to, but it might unnecessarily lengthen the plot section. ~ Boomur [☎] 22:27, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Gigapause

With the monumental Gigapause no drawing to a close, I feel It should be mentioned in the article. KarkityVantas (talk) 04:25, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

i added a bit to the "Style and development" section based off andrew's newsfeed on the MSPA site. it would be nice to get some third-party info in there too, but a cursory google search did not reveal any helpful sources. ~ Boomur [☎] 05:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Homestuck is no longer on gigapause, "current status/schedule" and "status/development" need editing, to show respectively "updating" (or whatever word) and (on the latter) something like "Hussie posted a new page on 10/17, the anniversary of the gigapause, which initially crashed the servers [optional information I guess]." and then about that he resumed updating. You could look at the news post at the mspaintadventures front page from Hussie.71.199.199.144 (talk) 01:39, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2014

update outdated information 202.166.5.22 (talk) 09:24, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 09:37, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Difficult sentence

The following sentence is very difficult to follow:

Exemplary of the community's size, one of Homestuck's Flash Animations crashed flash game and animation site Newgrounds when uploaded due to the strain the views put on the servers.

I suggest re-wording it as follows:

As an example of the community's size, one of Homestuck's Flash animations caused Newgrounds, a flash game and animation site, to crash when it was uploaded, due to the strain the number of views put on the servers.

(Note also "animations" with a lowercase "a"). 86.41.34.245 (talk) 10:45, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 11:44, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. 86.41.34.245 (talk) 12:31, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 December 2014

Please change "with more than 5,000 pages" to "with over 9,000 pages" because it does now and why would you not want that joke in here. Cedeelbe (talk) 22:44, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Haha no!. –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2015

Current status should be changed from active to hiatus (or something with similar phrasing) because as of January 19th 2015 the comic will not be updating until April 13th 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.134.67 (talk) 00:02, 21 January 2015‎

 Done Okay. It's been changed, with a source. A primary source seemed acceptable for a non-contentious detail like this. I couldn't figure out a way to directly link to the news part of the main page, so I used an archive.org copy of the site's front page from today's date, which includes the relevant post explaining the schedule change. It's unlikely to be pushed off the main page without any actual updates, but you never know. Grayfell (talk) 00:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Nonsensical sentence

"Orsini also suggested, in a separate article, that the effort put forward by people who finish Homestuck is an example of effort justification." Firstly, you don't "put forward" effort; you make an effort, or invest effort into something. Secondly, effort itself cannot be effort justification (see Effort justification); E.J. is the justification for effort that one put into something, so the sentence seems backwards. 86.179.191.90 (talk) 17:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2015

The page and word statistic hasn't been updated in almost a year. Homestuck now has almost a thousand more pages and more than 800,000 words. These numbers were taken from the given linked website. MindtheFangs413 (talk) 17:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Partly done: i've updated the word count per this request. i didn't bother to do the page number since it hasn't gone over 8,000 yet. i am also not sure it's actually necessary to cite a source for these tidbits... Boomur [☎] 05:11, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Stop Protecting Everything

Please unprotect this page or I will explode. Or something. :) 98.177.240.157 (talk) 05:54, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

 Not done; not an actual edit request, what is it you would like to change about this article? I'm all ears for improvements. ~Mable (chat) 06:29, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Genres

Shouldn't there be more genres? It could be science fiction (the entire story does happen in a video game), drama/romance (not so much at the beginning, but in Acts 5 and 6, the characters' complex relationships do play a huge role) 67.188.156.143 (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Do there really need to be more genres? The science-fiction vs fantasy debate would be difficult with Homestuck, and I don't think it really matters how you call it. It would get awkward if the infobox got filled up with all the genres Homestuck could possibly fall under :p

That being said, as I always say: follow the sources! I'm sure the existing sources have called it certain genres. Only pick the ones you can source. ~Mable (chat) 15:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Is Homestuck a Western? Neigh. If we tried to include every genre it's every played with, we'd end up with more infobox than article. That would be pretty funny, actually, but not very helpful. Although I'm also tempted to add a few genres to the list, it really, really should have reliable sources first. Grayfell (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Past tense in header

Homestuck hasn't stopped being a webcomic, no matter if it ended or if it's secretly been an anime all along. It's not a dead person, so you don't need to use "was". Especially since that change in the first two lines doesn't line up with the tense used in the rest of the article. I can't edit it because it's semi- protected, of course. Anyone else willing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redman1111 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

There's no precedent of using past tense for webcomics. I can imagine someone doing this when a webcomic is truly lost (i.e. not available to even the author himself), but this otherwise improper. Based on consensus over at the video game WikiProject on how to handle MMORPGs, online content that is no longer available should still be referred to in present tense. ~Mable (chat) 18:00, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Request edit on 29 June 2016

Please add this a Template:Commons, please? 2601:183:4000:D5BD:C96:3B26:656D:720C (talk) 19:40, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 21:01, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Request edit on 23 June 2016

• Homestuck - MSPA Wiki

— 2601:183:4000:D5BD:50A1:D7A3:EB27:52A (talk) 19:27, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Blank empty request. This also isn't a CoI edit request but rather a semi-protected edit request. I've changed the template as such. --st170e^talk 19:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm assuming this was a request to add the MPSA Wikia to the external links section. WP:LINKSTOAVOID explains that other wikis generally don't belong there for various reasons. Grayfell (talk) 21:08, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Editorialising in the Reception section

I refer to the following sentence, and in particular the bolded:

Orsini also suggested, in a separate article, that the effort put forward by people who finish Homestuck is an example of effort justification, although, given Homestuck's undeniably complex and interwoven plot, which reveals new details over the course of the entire story, the merits of this claim are debatable.[37]

The reference cited at the end of this paragraph does not include anything that supports the bold. Frankly it reads like a fan's defence of criticism rather than a neutral summary of secondary sources. At a bare minimum the citation should be moved to after "effort justification" to clarify that this is the part supported by citation, not the rebuttal. Preferably the rebuttal should either be cited or removed - currently it just reads like biased OR.

I've moved the citation for now, will leave it a while to allow others to respond before removing the rebuttal. almightybob (pray) 04:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Sounds exactly like the kind of thing a fan would add in without looking through the sources, that apparently went unnoticed for way too long. The bold section should be removed, yeah. ~Mable (chat) 09:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry. That was my edit. I could no doubt come up with many sources acknowledging Homestuck's complexity, but I think it would be better to suggest that the effort justification claim be removed altogether on the grounds that exceptional claims require exceptional sources. The idea that Homestuck is effort justification is certainly contradicted by the prevailing view within the webcomic/Homestuck communities. Frankly the article is absurd at face value, making claims about what it means to finish a series that was only 3 years into its 7 year publication. That's like calling Harry Potter effort justification before the release of Goblet of Fire. In fact this claim is already disputed later in the article, with "Bryan Lee O'Malley, creator of the graphic novel series Scott Pilgrim, described Homestuck as a 'massive undertaking of deftly-handled long-term serialized storytelling. It's well-written and thoughtful. It has things to say.'" This is much closer to the community consensus than it being effort justification. Does a massive undertaking of deftly-handled long-term serialized storytelling sound like effort justification or an undeniably complex and interwoven plot, which reveals new details over the course of the entire story?

I'm sorry for adding uncited material to the article, but what I wrote certainly wasn't biased OR. It was certainly not intended to be editorializing as I understand the word to mean, as Homestuck's quantity of plot connections is a tangible figure and objectively far more than the average work of fiction. It is something that can be measured and verified, not an opinion that I hold. I mistakenly thought that the Common Knowledge policy was much more lenient and thought the information was acceptable to add on the grounds that anyone who has read even half oh Homestuck knows what a complex and evolving story it is, but as I see now upon reviewing the policy, even such widely-held community beliefs need to be cited.

Anyway, to summarize, my point is that Orsini was being completely ridiculous to call a story an example of effort justification before the vast majority of it has even been published and before the plot had any chance to start paying off, and that the sentence should be deleted unless multiple supporting sources can be provided for this undoubtedly exceptional claim that goes against the prevailing view. If anything went unnoticed for way too long, it was this ridiculous claim about the long-term implications of a webcomic before it even reached the halfway point, not my unsuitable attempt to make the paragraph read like something other than utter nonsense.Uchiha Itachi 25 (talk) 12:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

If I may weigh in, I don't believe the comment of effort justification was so much a criticism ("Homestuck isn't actually all that good"), but more of an additional explanation ("This may be another reason why fans are so obsessed by it"). I'd also like to note that the webcomic was already incredibly long at this point, or at least known for being incredibly long. Whether this idea is entirely valid compared to other long-form media can be questioned, but I think we can find plenty of sources from this period that would describe Homestuck as such (like the Idea Channel video). Mentioning Idea Channel, I should note that Orsini didn't just "come up" with the idea that Homestuck has an effort justification aspect. The article responds to Mike Rugnetta's claim, and agrees with the ideas brought forth. ~Mable (chat) 15:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2016

please change April 13, 2016 (not counting epilogue) to October 25, 2016 (not counting epilogue) because...that date correct when Homestuck ended

Daniel Methow (talk) 07:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:55, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff

Not sure if this... thing... they call Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff is notable or not, but it's now been published on actual paper. If ever there were a reason to add a SBaHJ section to this article, this is it. Wehpudicabok (talk) 07:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Not until it satisfies WP:BKCRIT. Sang'gre Habagat (talk) 08:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I don't think that applies, since the inclusion would be of SBAHJ the comic, not the book; I was bringing up the book as potential evidence of notability. But then I reviewed the notability guidelines for web content, and it doesn't seem to meet those either. So never mind, I guess. Wehpudicabok (talk) 10:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it could be mentioned under side projects, or in Dave's entry in the characters section or characters page once it gets one of those. -- Gordon Ecker, WikiSloth (talk) 06:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

This section's wrong. SB&HJ didn't start in homestuck, it started in Hussie making fun of a guy's awful gamer comic on the penny arcade forums: [1]. All the images are broken now, but in the linked post you can see where the 'how HIGH do you even have to BE just to DO something like that' comes from. 90.41.169.225 (talk) 13:31, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Huh, ineresting. Too bad I don't think any reliable sources know anything about this... ~Mable (chat) 13:41, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2016 (Epilogue complete?)

Request to remove "epilogue pending" from "Current status/schedule" as the epilogue has been posted as of October 25th, 2016. JGMasterson (talk) 00:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

That would make sense, but there doesn't seem to be universal agreement that this was the full epilogue. Are there any sources specifically saying as much? Better yet, are there any reliable, independent sources? Grayfell (talk) 01:17, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

There is no source that specifically states the epilogue as being fully complete, but it can be inferred from the title of the link of the epilogue on MS Paint Adventures that those are the end credits in their entirety. There are also two tweets (from Andrew Hussie and Toby Fox) that state Homestuck as having concluded, but they are in reference to Act 7 instead of the epilogue, so I'm unsure if that is sufficient to warrant a change in the article. JGMasterson (talk) 01:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

The edit request templates are for after Wikipedia:Consensus has been reached, so reopening that doesn't really accomplish anything.

It ended on yet another cliff-hanger, sort of, which could mean anything at this point, but we'll know more relatively soon with Hiveswap. In this case, there is no deadline. My thinking is that it's better to wait, but maybe other editors disagree. Grayfell (talk) 03:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I've heard some rumors around that there might be more to the epilogue. I agree with Grayfell: let's just wait and see. There's no hurry. ~Mable (chat) 10:27, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Characters

should we include a character section? most anime/manga articles include a short section with descriptions on each of the characters. but. homestuck does have alot of characters.. 163.120.70.10 (talk) 18:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

If we do include something about the characters, we should do a separate page for all of them together (similar to what was done for Touhou http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Touhou_characters) instead of sections on the main Homestuck page. This would be more organized. 75.15.223.109 (talk) 03:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

...No, I disagree on creating separate pages for each character. There isn't really enough information about every character. Maybe just the four beta kids (i.e. John, Dave, Rose, Jade)? They are arguably the most important characters. TravellerQLD ^{(talk | contribs)} 03:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Eh, sorry - misunderstood you. That would be a good idea. TravellerQLD ^{(talk | contribs)} 03:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

So, is there a character page in creation? It seems acceptable given the Touhou example. Indydegrees1 (talk) 09:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Maybe instead of a whole character page, maybe for now someone should create a page for just one character, like John, one of the more well known ones. --Matt723star (talk) 20:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

We could always have seperate pages pages for 'Homestuck troll characters' and 'Homestuck human characters', that way we can have seperate biographies from the main Homestuck page but still have enough information. Or, if possible, pages for Alpha Kids, Beta Kids, Alpha Trolls and Beta Trolls~ Starice12 (talk) 19:00, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I like that idea, dividing it into Alpha kids, Beta kids, Alpha trolls, and Beta trolls. We should also have a page for the Felt and the Midnight Crew, one for the Alpha ancestors (the Signless, Her Imperious Condescention, etc.), and one for the human guardians (Mom Lalonde, Dad Egbert, Bro Strider, Becquerel, G-Cat, Alpha Mom, and Alpha Bro). Do the cherubim warrant a page of their own, or should we have a page devoted to miscellaneous characters such as Caliborn, Calliope, the sprites (should they get their own page?), Hussie (aka orange guy), Rufio (as opposed to Rufioh), Ms. Paint, Lil' Cal, the rabbit with her various names, Jaspers/Frigglish, Serenity, WV, AR, PM, WQ, maybe the midnight crew and the felt on this page rather than their own, Squarewave, Dirk's auto-responder (though I would include him as one of the alpha kids on principal), the Lusii, Doc Scratch, Jack Noir, Viceroy Bubbles von Salamancer, et cetera. Dang here are a shitload of characters, but I'd totally be willing to help write up a lot of this once school is over. Yes Viceroy Bubbles von Salamancer deserves a character summary. And yes, half the purpose of me writing this was just thinking out loud about how the heck we could organize all these characters. Also I think John's arm now qualifies as a character. (Nonsense aside, though, I do think this is a decent organization strategy.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.129.57.126 (talk) 02:54, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, definitely, definitely not. No pages for each character or pages for a certain range of characters unless each of those page has enough material from secondary sources that discuss these characters. This isn't the MSPA Wiki. This is the English Wikipedia. Please keep in mind that in a year or two, after the comic stops updating, and after the fandom's moved on to the next big thing, Homestuck would cease to be relevant enough for such expansion. A separate page for ALL the characters is fine, but would still need reliable secondary sources. Please read WP:SECONDARY, and WP:RECENT. Mr. Gerbear (talk) 02:54, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

List of Homestuck characters

Yes, or at the very least Dirk Strider because he is the best one. Dirk Strider (talk) 07:12, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Homestuck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://mspaintadventures.com/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mspaintadventures.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120907184355/http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/09/05/homestuck-kickstarter-nears-game-goal-in-less-than-three-days/ to http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/09/05/homestuck-kickstarter-nears-game-goal-in-less-than-three-days/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130308091741/http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/10/02/homestuck-interview-andrew-hussie-bryan-lee-omalley-ms-paint-adventures/ to http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/10/02/homestuck-interview-andrew-hussie-bryan-lee-omalley-ms-paint-adventures/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:21, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Reflect new changes?

Homestuck is now hosted on homestuck.com, and is now completely owned by Viz Media, Inc.

RushilU (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Epilogue?

Should Hussie's promise of an epilogue after Homestucks credits be mentioned in the article? If so, where?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Carbdrdad (talk • contribs) 11:25, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Sweet Bro And Hella Jeff

Sweet bro and Hella Jeff was made before Homestuck. Sure, canonically in Homestuck it is made by character Dave Strider, it was in reality made a bit before Homestuck. OddlyMauveDust (talk) 07:35, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Interesting, I'd never heard of that but it should definitely be reflected in the article if you can find a reliable source for it ♦AcoriSage 18:34, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Fresh source!

Found a new RS what with the anniversary. Tried to find more but it seems Homestuck is still too "niche" for mainstream sources...

https://www.cbr.com/homestuck-internet-most-ambitious-comic-primer/

♦AcoriSage 18:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

@Acorri: I think I saw that one when I was searching before. It was written right before 4/13. There's been another UPD4T3, but no WP:RS coverage? What gives?? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 00:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, seriously! You'd think there'd at least be, like, an i09/gizmodo article or something but... nothing. I guess it's been a busy news week but... nothing even from sources that only cover entertainment topics. Homestuck never stopped being culturally relevant just because most of the fans are watching JoJo now. I guess we need to wait for it to have historical significance in a hundred years or so.... ♦AcoriSage 03:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

We could possibly use this page as a source, but that is just a fansite. Years in the future, but not many... –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:28, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Polygon has come to the rescue, it appears. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:47, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

References

spoiler policy?

Whoa! There's an 'end of the world' spoiler in paragraph one? I came to this page to find out what this bizarre creation I had stumbled upon is, not to be instantly told the ending. Does wikipedia have any policy regarding spoilers? Anon, a mouse... (talk) 02:28, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Firstly, to answer your question, Wikipedia:Spoiler explains the (lack of) spoiler policy. Secondly, while the "end of the world" would be a surprise if you were going in blind, it is part of the premise and happens fairly early on. Even Homestuck's own about page mentions it. Thirdly, for getting a sense of what a work is about without spoilers, I'd usually recommend looking it up on TV Tropes. Oornery (talk) 05:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

I think my favorite thing about Homestuck, aside from all the rest of my favorite things about Homestuck, is that the end of the world is barely even the end of the beginning of the story. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Homestuck 2

I haven't been logging into Wikipedia lately bc I've been busy with other stuff but this is a huge update that we should definitely include in the article! Unlike the epilogues it was covered almost instantly by multiple reliable sources ♦AcoriSage 17:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I overlooked that it had already been added to the article. Still, I think there is definitely some room for more detail. ♦AcoriSage 17:55, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Change of Image

I feel a different image than the first book would better represent this webcomic. I feel we should use something like that actual logo or a capture of the homepage for the image and use the current image down in the "books" section. ML Dream (talk) 19:54, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

We could also use the SBurb Logo. I just really don't feel like the book cover is a accurate representation of the series. ML Dream (talk) 19:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

broken sweet bro and hella jeff link

proper link is https://www.homestuck.com/sweet-bro-and-hella-jeff. can someone pls fix this bc the article is protected and i can't do it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.125.130 (talk) 21:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Things to do...

Comparing this to the GA criteria right now:

1. Well written.
   1. Just gotta tighten some language here and there. Otherwise, we're most good.
   2. Gotta reign in the plot section to comply with MOS:PLOT. This is going to be hard since Homestuck is told in a non-linear fashion.
2. Verifiable. This all mostly shouldn't be an issue. I have a few scholarly sources lined up, and I'll try to dig for more.
3. Broad in its coverage.
   1. Have to add Pesterquest to the sister projects section.
   2. Gotta cut a lot of the info about the various pauses. Just too much info right there.
4. Stable. Not an issue.
5. Illustrated. Got a few pictures I am going to probably add to this article like Nicolas Cage, the community, the Spirograph, 2009 Obama, etc.

That's what I think roughly needs to get done before I am comfortable putting this up for a nomination. It might not be as well done as Our Lady of Vladimir, but I am confident I can get it pretty close. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 06:07, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Pauses

@McLennonSon: I intentionally removed the content about the pauses since it was incredibly WP:UNDUE. I plan on incorporating information about the Gigapause (the most notable pause) into the section titled "Style and development". –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Homestuck/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) Dibs! I'll hop on this within the week. 03:14, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Act 1

Trying to read from the perspective of someone who knows nothing about Homestuck while simultaneously remembering a pointless amount of information about it.

Lead

• can we get slightly more context for what MSPA is? Something like "the MSPA website" or "under Hussie's MSPA banner" or whatever would work.

• should the trolls not be at least mentioned in the lead? They're a huge part of the story; it feels odd to leave them out.

• "consistent of" – should be "consisting of"

• "to supplement its structure" the meaning of this phrase isn't really clear to me. Honestly I don't love this paragraph in general. It feels kind of like it's leaving out a major thing, which is that HS was directly inspired by old-school point & click adventure games, hence the game commands (and on closer inspection that isn't mentioned anywhere in the rest of the article, which to me is a big omission – here are some sources that mention it: Wired, Kotaku).

• I think for smoothness' sake you can probably omit the "at over...words" phrase and just go with "complex and nonlinear plot, considerable length, and intensely devoted fan community"

• Speaking of, can we mention the soundtrack there as well? And I think we can probably mention the fan contributions in this paragraph first; it flows from the devoted fan community.

• For the rare reader who isn't familiar with the English canon, can we mention that Ulysses is a famously genre-busting modernist novel? (ie, some context to the comparison)

• "Compacities" isn't a word, you might be thinking of "capacities"?

• It feels weird that the original run is the last thing we get in the lead, shouldn't that be in the first paragraph?

• In the infobox, can we swap {{event date and age}} for straight {{end date}}? Event date gives us "aged 7", which is just weird phrasing for a piece of media.

• Lead fixed. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖

Synopsis

• Trying to read from the perspective of someone who knows nothing about Homestuck, I think the plot summary needs to be reworked, a lot. There are game details that are mentioned and never referred to again and names just dropped in without context, and yet we're missing major plot details like the cherubs, the guardians (which informs the setup of the post-scratch universe so imo they're relevant), Doc Scartch, even going god tier. You're at 518 words for a synopsis of a comic that's 800,000 words; that's less than the 750 we allot to a 2-hour film. I think you can afford to be a little more expansive about the plot while also being more sparing about intricate details.

• Can we please remove the Obama picture? It makes no sense, contextually. He's not mentioned in the synopsis at all or anywhere else in the article.

  I added context.. that good?

• We can trim references to game constructs like the Incipisphere and Skaia, as they are not mentioned later in the synopsis, and it'll save words that can be spent elsewhere.

  Done.

• We should mention why we've highlighted these 4 trolls in particular? Maybe mention that they become "patrons" of sorts to the kids?

  Done.

• …who have unsuccessfully played a version of the game before" – trim to "who played a failed session of Sburb" or "whose own session of Sburb was a failure" (and let's also add context for the harassment – they think the kids' session is pre-doomed because of something the kids did)

  Fixed

• "are not human at all, but" – extraneous, we can replace that whole phrase with "actually" and then lose the following "actually"

  Fixed; legacy plot descriptions.

• "As the trolls gradually become more important to the story" – extraneous. The following clause "the narrative shifts to a side story" makes that clear enough without having to explain it again.

  Fixed; legacy plot descriptions.

• Can the sentence describing the troll session be reworded? Right now it (unintentionally) reads like the side story stops with the trolls entering Sburb. There's room to expand on the fact that the troll story also includes the present day and ends with most of the trolls dying to infighting.

  Added more context and more Vriska.

• "The trolls' arc concludes with them winning their game only to be stopped by Jack Noir and originally creating the humans' doomed universe." Awkward phrasing, and let's get some context on Jack Noir, who hasn't been mentioned previously. We can also use this as an opportunity to contextualize where the trolls have been the whole time they're hassling the humans.

  Partially done. I'll work on the Jack Noir part tomorrow.

• "As the story returns..." again, extraneous.

  Removed.

• I think we need to get Lord English into the synopsis a little earlier, given his endgame importance. We have enough words to discuss the events of Cascade briefly; I think it's worth doing since it basically caps off what acts 1-5 have been building to and reveals LE as the true endgame antagonist.

  I've added more info on Caliborn. I'm going to finish the LE work tomorrow.

I'm actually gonna leave it here for now, since any further comments I make about the synopsis are probably gonna hinge on changes that you make re: the above. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

• @PMC: I've done about three-fourths of this.
  The lead has been updated per your specifications, and I am halfway done re-writing the synopsis. I'm thinking of adding something at the end of the "In the post-scratch version of Earth..." paragraph like "Meanwhile, Andrew Hussie's author insert is killed by Lord English, a purportedly-invincible villain threatening all of reality.
  I'm not too keen on adding info about Doc Scratch in the synopsis since honestly he's just a proxy for LE anyways and would only complicate the summary. Same goes for describing the events of Cascade beyond "Kids do the scratch thing", but I could imagine including something about John and Jade literally breaking the fourth wall (but that would necessitate explaining how the trolls, Rose, and Dave left through the Lovecraftian horror that is the Furthest Ring). Please, let me know what you think. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 07:08, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

• You're right about getting more into Cascade in detail, it's too much. I think on balance over-explaining the 4th wall/furthest ring thing is probably too much, journey through dimensions is probably enough for the casual reader. Not sure we need the reference to Hussie's self-insert, since it isn't mentioned elsewhere in the synopsis. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:42, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Act 2

I think we're definitely starting to get there. The lead looks good, and the synopsis is better overall, but there's still some awkward phrasing in places. You're still only at 614 words; you have room to get wordier. Writing a really good synopsis is a trick of getting as much meaning as you can from not only the exact words you use, but what plot points and characters you highlight, and where you mention them (and also what to cheat and gloss over without losing the reader). A good rule of thumb is that if you mention something, you want it to be something that comes up more than once (hence why we cut out Skaia but need to add more Jack Noir and LE). We basically want everything to be a Chekhov's gun - if we mention it, we're firing it a few paragraphs later. With regards to Homestuck, one of the most important themes is the cyclical nature of the narrative and the law of unintended consequences, and we can demonstrate that to the reader subtextually without ever actually saying a word about it if we write the synopsis right.

• I think you can cheat around having the Sgrub footnote by just leaving out the word Sgrub and saying "led this group to play their own session of the game". The uninformed reader won't really care why the troll name is slightly different, and the informed reader already knows.

• We should mention Jack Noir earlier; he fucks around with the kids session a lot sooner than I thought. Probably early in the second paragraph? "A seemingly-invincible villain known as Jack Noir ruthlessly attacks the players and their allies throughout the session." That sets up Jack Noir, so when he appears and attacks the trolls, we already have context for his role in the story.

• "After winning their game and about to claim their prize of a new universe, the trolls are suddenly attacked by an unbeatable Jack Noir who forces them into hiding." This doesn't quite flow, and it still doesn't fix the context problem of Jack Noir (which makes getting him in earlier more important). Assuming that we are mentioning him earlier, I would write it something like, "The trolls win their session and a new universe–the universe the kids inhabit–is created. Before they can claim their prize, they are attacked by Jack Noir and forced into hiding, where they begin to troll the kids via a chat program." (Only two sentences, but it packs in a lot of useful background information in for the reader: why the trolls even care about these humans, why they're so sour to start off, and how they're contacting the kids in the first place).

• "previously mentioned unbeatable Jack Noir." You should never need to say "previously mentioned" in any synopsis. If something is memorable, that phrase is redundant, and if it isn't, you need to fix the earlier prose. In this particular case, if we explain Jack Noir in the second paragraph, with the second mention in para 3, the reveal that the players accidentally created Jack actually becomes a fantastic wham line - our first example of unintended consequences/cyclical narrative. (I would reword it though, you can't really "bring about" a person. Maybe "accidentally empowering Jack Noir from a minor adversary to an invincible monster.")

• Arguably, the trolls didn't kill each other out of fear, especially not Gamzee. And you've got more filler words in "but that is not before". What about... "Rising tensions among the trolls eventually boils over, and some begin to attack and kill others; half the group dies before Karkat manages to restore order." This phrasing lets us cheat and not mention their individual motives, but still tells us enough about Murderstuck to get us by.

• In paragraph 4, you mention "the kids and their ancestors", but we haven't mentioned their ancestors, so the reader is going to be confused. We need to mention them earlier, even if only briefly. Maybe in paragraph one, at the end? "Each kid is assisted by an associated relative, known as an ancestor, who were drawn into the game with the kids."

• That being said, "they and their ancestors switch places" isn't super clear to a reader who knows nothing about the mechanics of ectobiology-cloned babies flying to Earth on meteors sent from the Furthest Ring. It begs the question of how "switching places" turns a bunch of adults into kids? "Executing the Scratch resets the kids' universe where versions of themselves become ancestors to a new group of players, who are versions of their own ancestors." It makes it a little more clear that the switching isn't physical. The rest of the paragraph as written from "as a result" is a pretty solid, concise explanation of rest of the Act 6 setup. Maybe "journey through dimensions" to make it clear where the beta kids/trolls are coming from?

• Interestingly, I don't actually think we need the detail about Dirk and Roxy being from Jake and Jane's future - it's never mentioned again in the synopsis, and it doesn't wind up playing that much of a role in the greater plot. I think we can cut it out entirely and just merge the remaining sentences about the cherubs into para 4. (We also need to briefly explain that the cherubs are also aliens). We could also expand on the alpha kids' session just slightly, enough to mention that it's a complete disaster.

• We need to mention Lord English earlier. For the whole synopsis, Jack Noir is the largest threat, and now suddenly some other guy is the real villain. It's confusing. I know you think it'd be too complicated, but I think we can set up LE as early as para 2, if we mention Doc Scratch as his precursor/servant. "As they play, the trolls are manipulated by an enigmatic figure called Doc Scratch, who serves an even more mysterious master." Then in para 4 something like, "unknown to the kids, performing the Scratch also enables the arrival of Doc Scratch's master, Lord English, an even more powerful villain whose existence threatens all of reality." Bam, now we're back to cyclicality and unintended consequences.

• Speaking of that, since we have the cherubs in the synopsis, we should talk about how Caliborn manipulates his session to empower himself to become Lord English, because that gives us another example of the narrative turning in on itself.

• Para 6 is awkward as written. The first sentence has "finally" twice. At this stage, we shouldn't be introducing new characters like HIC unless they're going to be super relevant later, so she either needs to come out entirely or we need to talk about her earlier. (My reluctant vote is yank her - as much as I stan a trash queen, it would take too much detail to get into her role in the story). "Matters complicate further" is filler - in a well-written synopsis, the reader will understand that things are complicated without you saying so.

• We can probably combine para 6 and 7. Although we mentioned Vriska's death earlier, it doesn't say it was at Terezi's hands, so we're now introducing new details to the reader at the last second. I think we can reword. Lord English fighting the ghost army is deeply badass, but since ghosts have never before been mentioned, it's another "wait, what?" problem. We gotta either remove the ghosts or find a way to pack in the dream bubble ghost army earlier.

Sorry to be such a hard-ass about this. Writing a good synopsis of anything is a fairly particular skill, and writing a good synopsis of something as stupidly long and annoyingly complicated as Homestuck is a brutal test of that skill. Hopefully what I'm getting at with my requested changes makes sense - when it's all said and done, a reader who has never so much as looked at page 1 of HS should be able to feel like they understand the broad contours of the story and its themes. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: I'm ready for a Act 2 Part 2 lol. There is a fair bit that repeats itself that I am sure you will be able to point out to me, but I wanted to get your thoughts on the new synopsis.
I also sidestepped the ancestors thing by just doing some word swaps with the phrase "guardian" to oversimply it (yes, I know not all ancestors == guardians, but I think people will get that they swapped with their literal ancestors now). I also introduced Doc Scratch using how the kids found out about the Scratch (since he guides Rose through the process) and also introduced Lord English in the same vein.
HIC is added earlier in the second-to-last paragraph since I felt not enough was going to be said about the Alpha kids otherwise, and I couldn't find room to mention any other detail of their session (HIC being there is the only thing I found noteworthy besides it being a void session, but checkoff's gun led me to say then we should mention HIC now and then again later). The new paragraph 5 and six are incredibly weak probably, but I think at least it ends in a stronger place (by mentioning Caliborn in the end becoming Lord English). The ghost thing is fixed, and no mention of Andrew Hussie's death is made.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

The cheat with the guardian/ancestor is good. I'm moving my comment about the Obama pic down since I'm not sure you saw it from where I accidentally marooned it in Act 1: I still think the image fails GA criteria 6b, in that Obama isn't discussed anywhere in the text of the article. Yes, the Obama presidency is kind of a background hum to Homestuck, but it really has nothing to do with the story itself. If HS had taken place during the Clinton years, we'd have Dave making cracks about saxophones and sex scandals, but the story of Homestuck would be the same. Obama's not a character in HS, which is the subject of the synopsis. He briefly appears as a joke character in the Epilogues, but we aren't summarizing the Epilogues here. The article should be clear for a reader who doesn't have all the background knowledge that a longtime fan does.

Okay, having gotten that out of the way, I think we can consider the following comments to be...

Act 2 Act 2

• I may be being pedantic, but the first sentence of para 2 is a run-on. If not grammatically, then spiritually. It will read much smoother if you find a way to split up Jack Noir and the troll explanation into different sentences.

• You still have that tendency to use filler-y phrases. "and their contact with one another reveals..." You can trim that - you've just explained that they develop a relationship with the humans. Contact is implied.

• "explores the nature of troll society manipulated by the enigmatic Doc Scratch" is awkward. You need...something in there to split up the clauses, or you need to put Doc Scratch in his own sentence. Also, as written, you don't actually make it obvious that Doc Scratch is a character. For all an uninformed reader knows, Doc Scratch is a game mechanic that manipulates the game (which will be extra confusing when they read about the Scratch two sentences down) Describing him as doing something (anything) should make that obvious, which IMO is all the more reason to plop him in a separate sentence. (I also think you need to mention that DS serves LE, if possible, to tie him in)

• the way this clause "but will also inadvertently summon his even more powerful master" follows "the kids learn" makes it seem like they also learn about LE beforehand, which isn't the case. You can split it into two sentences, or toss in a semicolon. (Also, I am being pedantic here, but LE isn't Jack Noir's master, that I recall - the B2 kids' Jack winds up as an LE minion, but that's a different Jack).

• "Executing the Scratch resets the kids' universe where versions of themselves become guardians to a new group of players, who are versions of their own ancestors." the "where" in this sentence is awkward. Try just "universe, and versions..." - it should work fine like that.

• I realized the dashes in para 4 are inconsistent with the ones I suggested in like para 2 or whatever. I had to look this up, but WP:DASH says we can use either one, we just have to pick one. Whichever we pick, the longer ones go unspaced, and the shorter ones get spaced (so technically both the uses we have right now are mildly wrong, lol).

• I think we should de-link "cherubs", Callie & Caliborn are really only cherubs in name only, and the average reader will be more confused on following that link rather than less.

• Not a hill I'm gonna die on, but arguably the Crocker naming is more detail than the reader needs, even in a footnote - the whole HIC-is-Betty-Crocker thing is great in-comic but it's not really relevant to the synopsis.

• "Caliborn resents them all as well as their friendship with one another" - you could simplify this to "Caliborn resents the group's tight friendship" or something similar.

• "With the post-scratch kids entering their session, the two cherubs play their own version of Sburb in a session that sees Caliborn cheating to win by having his sister assassinated." I have zero complaints I just want to highlight that this is an excellent summary, all killer no filler.

• "the later whom" - probably a typo for "the latter of whom"?

• "Under her guidance," pedantic, but since you've just mentioned two 'hers', only one of whom has a conventionally-female name, you might want to clarify that it's TZ.

• "preventing events leading to the plan's failure from occurring" this feels awkward than it needs to be and you have "preventing" twice in one sentence. Try... "With Terezi's guidance, John retcons key events in the narrative, particularly Vriska's death, setting up a timeline with a clear path to victory."

• "Caliborn claiming the power of his session" this is gonna be less clear to the unknowing reader, maybe "Caliborn winning his session and becoming Lord English"? (Although come to think of it I think that necessitates making note that he can time-travel, when you first mention him)

• "with the remaining" - you already have "with" earlier on in the sentence, so it's wonky. Try reading the sentence as though all the other clauses were super short: "The comic ends with Lord English, Caliborn, and with the kids." See what I mean?

That about does it for the synopsis, I think; I'll get rolling on the rest of the article once you get a chance to deal with the comments above. Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: I think(?) this is done? Let me know if I missed anything. Also, I mourn the loss of Obama.
The only significant deviation I made was adding a description of the Cherubs in the notes section. I have a general rule that all notes sections have to have at least two notes in it. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Act 3

Synopsis looks good! I made a few minor tweaks, but overall I think we're over the biggest hill and on to the rest of the content. Sorry about killing your Obama dreams. I like the footnote for the cherubs - come to think of it, maybe one that briefly describes the trolls would be worth including too? Anyway, let's move on to style & development.

• Not a hill to die on, but I wonder if "nominally" is the right word? And should we not also include the numerous flash animations and walkabout games? I see they get mentioned later but since we're describing what the comic consists of, we should do that all at once. (Actually, see my last paragraph)

• Since the text discusses the formatting of the panels, I think we can justify a screenshot of a random page under NFCC

• Citations ought to be to specific pages in journal articles where possible for ease of verification, not the entire article, which is 17 pages long and rather dense

• I feel like there's a lot we can expand on from the Veale essay in order to meet the "Broad coverage" criteria. The single sentence introduces an interesting idea, but leaves out a lot of detail about what, exactly, HS does with its weird multimedia bullshit, and why it does it.

• On the topic of "Broad coverage", I just noticed there's sources on the talk page and in the further reading section that aren't cited in the article – are they being excluded for a reason? (you may also be interested in this open-access book, https://www.fulcrum.org/concern/monographs/x346d608w, which, based on a super-basic Ctrl+F search, mentions HS and the fandom a few times)

• Speaking of "broad coverage", it feels like we're missing a discussion of the actual art of Homestuck. The two CBR sources already linked in the article discuss it briefly, this student newspaper article mentions the art shifts, and searching "art style homestuck" brings up more hits that I haven't gone through in depth yet.

• Harping on coverage again, I noticed that the Viz acquisition, the published books, and Hussie's commentary in them aren't mentioned anywhere. This seems like relevant information, and I came across sources that mention it when I searched for the art style stuff, so it should be in the article.

• "previous adventures" – can we clarify that this means previous MSPA stories, whether that means rearranging the para or just rewriting this sentence a little?

• Para 2 sentence 3, can it be rearranged to mention the other MSPA stories first? It's clearer to the reader to mention other stories, then say that there were differences from those stories.

Broadly speaking, this entire section feels disorganized. Each paragraph should have a single overall thought, and each one should flow logically into the next, but the content here is all over the place. Para 1: the comic's composition. Para 2: comparing one in-story element to real-world games, comparisons with previous Hussie works, back to composition. Para 3: stray short paragraph about the HS Beta. Para 4: back again to the composition of the comic by way of fan contributions, then hiatuses in the same para. Para 5: the release of the end of the comic and its length overall. You see what I mean?

To be honest, having reached this point, I'm not sure continuing this review is a good idea. I didn't have an issue with the amount of work the synopsis needed; I kind of expected that given how complex Homestuck is and how difficult writing a good synopsis can be. Like I said above, I expected that to be the biggest hill. But looking at this section (and again without having yet gone deeply into the rest of the article), it feels like there are enough issues with organization and coverage that in my opinion, this will not pass the GAC without a lot more work. I think it might be best to stop here and come back at a later date once it's been worked on some more. If you think I'm being unfair, I'm totally happy for you to ask for a third opinion to look at my comments to see if I'm being unreasonable, or if you'd prefer someone else to take over the review entirely. I'm sorry to do this - I know you've worked hard on the article, and I hope you don't feel as though I'm not recognizing that. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:07, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

@PMC: I'm still game for this review! This is a lot of fun, and the article has never looked better! If you want, we can take an Intermission while I work on the improvements you mentioned here. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

• Based on our further discussion, I'm going to fail this one out so you can come back fresh on a new review. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:37, 9 March 2021 (UTC)