History DarthWiki / TropersLaw

26th Apr '15 10:37:40 AM SeptimusHeap
Is there an issue? Send a Message


A common cry among TVTropes traditionalists is "We Are Not Wikipedia!" This invokes a slippery slope fallacy that implies that any change to the wiki will lead to TV Tropes losing its "character" and becoming SeriousBusiness. Of course, {{Wikipedia}} has a different mission in mind, so such a comparison is moot. Besides, when was the last time you heard a Wikipedian claim "We Are Not TV Tropes"?[[note]]Since you asked, [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nerd_girl July, 2009]][[/note]] Lesser used, typically as a response, is "We Are Not 4chan!", implying a descent into chaotic snarkiness.

to:

A common cry among TVTropes traditionalists is "We Are Not Wikipedia!" This invokes a slippery slope fallacy SlipperySlopeFallacy that implies that any change to the wiki will lead to TV Tropes losing its "character" and becoming SeriousBusiness. Of course, {{Wikipedia}} has a different mission in mind, so such a comparison is moot. Besides, when was the last time you heard a Wikipedian claim "We Are Not TV Tropes"?[[note]]Since you asked, [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nerd_girl July, 2009]][[/note]] Lesser used, typically as a response, is "We Are Not 4chan!", implying a descent into chaotic snarkiness.
23rd Jul '12 7:00:05 PM Willbyr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


A common cry among TVTropes traditionalists is "We Are Not Wikipedia!" This invokes a slippery slope fallacy that implies that any change to the wiki will lead to TV Tropes losing its "character" and becoming SeriousBusiness. Of course, {{Wikipedia}} has a different mission in mind, so such a comparison is moot. Besides, when was the last time you heard a Wikipedian claim "We Are Not TV Tropes"?[[hottip:*:Since you asked, [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nerd_girl July, 2009]]]] Lesser used, typically as a response, is "We Are Not 4chan!", implying a descent into chaotic snarkiness.

to:

A common cry among TVTropes traditionalists is "We Are Not Wikipedia!" This invokes a slippery slope fallacy that implies that any change to the wiki will lead to TV Tropes losing its "character" and becoming SeriousBusiness. Of course, {{Wikipedia}} has a different mission in mind, so such a comparison is moot. Besides, when was the last time you heard a Wikipedian claim "We Are Not TV Tropes"?[[hottip:*:Since Tropes"?[[note]]Since you asked, [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nerd_girl July, 2009]]]] 2009]][[/note]] Lesser used, typically as a response, is "We Are Not 4chan!", implying a descent into chaotic snarkiness.



For the record, it is fine to disagree with the site's editorial or administrative policies. However, invoking blanket arguments such as "[[RuinedFOREVER ruining the wiki]]" renders your opinion uselessly vague. It should go without saying that different people have different ideas about what makes the wiki fun and useful. Be specific and argue constructively.

to:

For the record, it is fine to disagree with the site's editorial or administrative policies. However, invoking blanket arguments such as "[[RuinedFOREVER "[[DarthWiki/RuinedFOREVER ruining the wiki]]" renders your opinion uselessly vague. It should go without saying that different people have different ideas about what makes the wiki fun and useful. Be specific and argue constructively.constructively.
25th Jul '11 11:17:47 AM Fighteer
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Trope Repair Shop has recently been working on Troper's Second Law: ''As a thread becomes longer, the probability of it turning into a discussion of whether to rename {{Nakama}} approaches one.''
24th May '11 9:16:34 PM nuclearneo577
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:


For the record, it is fine to disagree with the site's editorial or administrative policies. However, invoking blanket arguments such as "[[RuinedFOREVER ruining the wiki]]" renders your opinion uselessly vague. It should go without saying that different people have different ideas about what makes the wiki fun and useful. Be specific and argue constructively.
----
24th May '11 9:16:05 PM nuclearneo577
Is there an issue? Send a Message


[[redirect:DarthWiki/ptitler7tmx55n]]

to:

[[redirect:DarthWiki/ptitler7tmx55n]] ->"As a trope page discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Wikipedia approaches one."

A common cry among TVTropes traditionalists is "We Are Not Wikipedia!" This invokes a slippery slope fallacy that implies that any change to the wiki will lead to TV Tropes losing its "character" and becoming SeriousBusiness. Of course, {{Wikipedia}} has a different mission in mind, so such a comparison is moot. Besides, when was the last time you heard a Wikipedian claim "We Are Not TV Tropes"?[[hottip:*:Since you asked, [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nerd_girl July, 2009]]]] Lesser used, typically as a response, is "We Are Not 4chan!", implying a descent into chaotic snarkiness.

A subset of GodwinsLaw, and just like that one, invoking this law means the person in question automatically loses the discussion.

Trope Repair Shop has recently been working on Troper's Second Law: ''As a thread becomes longer, the probability of it turning into a discussion of whether to rename {{Nakama}} approaches one.''
This list shows the last 5 events of 5. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=DarthWiki.TropersLaw