Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

Working Title: Suspciously Specific Statement: From YKTTW

Eponymous Kid: Any reason this is missing like half the examples fro mthe YKTTW?

The Stray: Many of the examples didn't actually fit the trope. Wiki Magic will bring up the ones that did.
The Stray: I'm removing this bit:

  • Truth in Television: Notice how the country's with words like "democratic" "Republic" or "peoples" tend to be anything but, and rather dictatorships or communist country?
    • Among the few exception are The French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany.

This is politically charged, and, really, is more an example of false advertising than a denial.

Chad M: Removed this for similar reasons:

The suspiciously specific denial is when you say something is NOT X in a fashion that makes it very likely that thing is X. So the suspiciously specific denial version of a country name would be something more like "The Completely Not Totalitarian Regime of Non-Oppression"
  • In Dave Barry Slept Here, the Puritans are said to have been very religious people who "did not believe in drinking or dancing or having sex with hooved animals." Discussion Question #1: "Why only hooved animals?"
  • This xkcd comic gives a rare example of a Suspiciously Suspect Assurance.
I wonder if it's a separate trope when the specific denial is both true and not a False Reassurance, but it's still slightly too specific to be reassuring. This seems like it'd fit. —Document N
Shotgun Ninja: I was thinking of a picture that could go in this article: the fourth panel of this page from Negima. Actually, the one from the actual manga is even better. I'm just not very good at editing pictures like that and was wondering if anyone was.
Daibhid C: Isn't the King Arthur example actually one of the tropes where a character says something truthful but misleading? Rather than something untrue that gives the game away?

Daibhid C: I'm moving it to False Reassurance.
Mike Rosoft:
  • Does Bill Clinton's claim that he didn't have sex with Monica (which he, well, justified by pointing out that the investigator neglected to list oral sex in the definition) count?
  • In a related note, is there any difference between Real Life and Truth in Television entries? Shouldn't they be merged?

Thinks Too Much: The personal story has been moved to the relevant section.