This is not Wikipedia. You will see these words written in many places on the website. One of the main ways we are different from them is our take on "notability."

![[foldercontrol]]

[[folder: All works are notable. ]]


Wikipedia tries in many regards to be the opposite of what we are. We want to be fun, interesting and a cool place to [[TVTropesWillRuinYourLife sink hours of time]]. Wikipedia wants to be a compilation of previously published facts from respected sources. SeriousBusiness. Presented with a choice between serious and fun, we went with fun.

Much of our wiki relies on the "Examples" section, where we pull our many articles together. Every now and then you might see a WikipediaUpdater who will delete your example with no reason. A small EditWar of delete/restore will start, before someone on the discussion page brings up "notability." This page is your response.

If it fits the trope description, then it can be put in. All it requires is someone to put it in there. Simple as that. It could be a multi-million viewer Creator/{{ABC}} {{sitcom}}, or an all-but-forgotten Japanese [[VideogameTropes videogame]], or a SpriteComic about ''VideoGame/EarthBound'' that [[StillbornSerial died after seven strips]].

We have examples ranging from media as diverse as {{Film}} to FanFiction and everything in between. Removing tropes, examples... anything... because of "notability" stifles the wiki. It can intimidate new writers who wanted to put in an example they liked and had it shot down. Hell, tropes are ''defined'' by their examples.

This is a double-edged sword. Someone could add an example they made up and there is really nothing you could do to stop them. If the discussion finds an example to be purely fictional then it might get deleted, ''might''. That's the way of things. But remember, we're here to have fun. Don't let this stuff burn you out.

![[/folder]]

[[folder: By, For, and About Fans ]]


TV Tropes Wiki was started by fans. People, that is, who ''like'' stuff. You will see that articles work better here when they are about something you like. This is a little bit of a shock to folks that are used to cynicism about the media. It takes a minute or two to get used to.

People who come looking for a place to bash stuff and rant about how ''dumb'' this or that is are in for some disappointment. Here, anyway. There are plenty of places on the 'Net to bash stuff. Shouldn't be too hard to find one.

This doesn't mean, of course, that every article is all sweetness and light, just that the articles trend more toward {{constructive criticism}}s than toward cynical bashing. More toward what does work, and how it works, than what didn't work and why it didn't.

If you really must vent, we have a Reviews section, and a forum. The main articles aren't for that.

Other than that, all we ask is that [[SquarePegRoundTrope the examples fit the trope]]. Go on, have fun.

![[/folder]]

[[folder: Just Because It's Notable Doesn't Mean It's Safe To Host ]]


We consider every work notable. But works that are nothing but porn [[Administrivia/TheContentPolicyAndThe5PCircuit aren't appropriate to host on this site]]. We don't need porn in order to understand storytelling.

----