Difference between revisions of "34: Flowers"
Blaisepascal (talk | contribs) (→Trivia: Added trail through lj comics) |
(moved incomplete template to explanation section) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | ||
{{comic | {{comic | ||
| number = 34 | | number = 34 | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
| − | + | {{Incomplete}} | |
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== | ||
[A sketch of flowers, drawn in red and green] | [A sketch of flowers, drawn in red and green] | ||
Revision as of 19:59, 3 September 2012
| Flowers |
![]() Title text: This is actually pencil on paper, just inverted and colored |
Explanation
| This is one of 57 incomplete explanations: Please help by editing it! |
Transcript
[A sketch of flowers, drawn in red and green]
Trivia
- Original quote from Randall: "Original drawing is pencil on graph paper. Bonus points if you can identify the flowers. 'cause I sure can't."
- Original guess on flower identification: "Trillium!"
- This is the thirtieth comic posted to livejournal. The previous was Explanation of comic 30. The next was Explanation of comic 29
Discussion
Instructions for photoshop editing is quite irrelevant here, I think. The comic itself is just a drawing of flowers, and hardly needs much explanation (if any). –St.nerol (talk) 18:21, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- Correct. I'm working on this comic because you did not;)--Dgbrt (talk) 22:38, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
- Shit, shit, shit... as Randall would say, but finally I could upload my edit. It's still not complete.--Dgbrt (talk) 00:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
- As I remember it, I removed the "explanation" that was, which wasn't popular. So I just let it be... ––St.nerol (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
- Check the history, your edit was reverted. When you have problems with some pages do not only tell us what's wrong, just try to give an better explanation. Without a new solution these discussions are meaningless. Everybody is doing mistakes, but the magical word is UPDATE not DELETE.--Dgbrt (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Dgbrt, I did not remove content, I removed redundancy. One sentence about graph paper instead of three. Clearer, shorter wording about botany and picture editing, but no less informative. - Frankie (talk) 20:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Frankie, you did remove the incomplete tag. We still have to review pages like this. But your enhancements are welcome!--Dgbrt (talk) 21:13, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Uhh, the title text is just an explanation, it isn't a reference to anything... You guys really try to squeeze stuff out of nothing 141.101.98.33 20:13, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
- I dont see how the title text could be a reference to anything, maybe because of the two words "this is" ?... I'm really not convinced. I would be okay if the sentence began with "This is *not*". 173.245.49.124 23:28, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

