Rename: Eccentric Mentor

The standard that the mods have set in the past is a 2:1 ratio for renames because of the seriousness of it. This one doesn't.

unfortuneately yes

The people have spoken. The bastards.

I'd like to know why some of these people voted against it. The posters in the thread have all seemed in favor of a rename. Stupid drive-by voters...

At any rate, I guess it's now time to come up with a Plan B.

Geez, maybe some of them felt the same as I original (and still partially) have. That the rename suggestions were dumb and no better than what we already have as the trope name.

Maybe they're just Harry Potter fans.

Maybe they're both.

Maybe they just find all rename ideas dumb, don't care for Harry Potter, but think The Dumbledore doesn't need to be changed.

There could be lots of reasons. Just because they don't post doesn't makes them or it stupid. Maybe they feel their opinion would be in the minority, so they didn't WANT to post.

It was well beyond 2:1 earier this crowner just stayed up long enough for harry potter fans to trickle in and take it down a notch.

The massive misuse and ill defined trope that doesn't match the character its named for is still there!.... (I would defend it if it was better defined and actually fit the character it was named for.)

edited 29th Mar '11 2:57:29 AM by Raso

What? How is Dumbledore not The Dumbledore? I supported the rename, but not because I felt the trope namer wasn't an example.

Yeah, "stupid" was the wrong word. I do consider drive-by voters annoying, though, particularly the ones that vote against renames - I always get the feeling they're either just trying to save their particular Fan Myopic name or just hate changing the status quo. If they have genuine reasons to oppose the rename, then they should post them so others can see them.

edited 30th Mar '11 12:22:03 AM by nrjxll

Not wanting to disturb the status quo is a quite good reason, if there is no bigger reason for the change. Letting the wiki to be as much stabilized as possible is a good thing. It is a problem if we change names all times. Many, me included, believe that names should never be changed unless they are effectively broken. Never because "we could do better" (there is aways room for 'doing better', after all).

Then the other arguments are in the crowner itself. Particularly the second bullet of the reasons against rename (which I am not convinced it is correct). Personally, I am don't believe a sinkhole is a 'misuse', although it is bad format. That way, the primary reason people are pushing it for rename is bullshit for me. (and the second bullet is meaningless considering the number of wicks and inbounds)

I am voting for the rename, though. But only because of this troacctid post. Even if we ignore the bad sinkholes, there seems to be a large number of misuses. And the large amount of sinkholes are a problem on its own: there seems to be as much potholes to Dumbledore himself then to other characters.

tl;dr I think the reasons for rename are all bullshit and would totally vote against it, have I not noticed other problems myself. I can totally understand why one would vote against here.

It's a character-named title, which I'd be against if it were just being proposed, but it's an extremely well-known character, and no one seems all that confused as to what it refers to. Yes, there are a few sinkholes, but that's true for everything. Let's certainly not go with a snowclone, at least not one from Crouching Moron, Hidden Badass, which has little to nothing to do with this trope; these characters aren't usually "badass" as it's usually understood, and Crouching Moron, Hidden Badass implies deeply hidden talents, often hidden from the character himself, whereas The Dumbledore's talents are simply not immediately obvious. I don't think a rename is necessary at all, but if there must be a rename, it needs a much better title.

At the same time, Eccentric Mentor seems a bit too broad, in that I'm not sure it really gets across the duality the trope suggests. Of course, by itself, The Dumbledore certainly doesn't, but it's hard to imagine someone in the English-speaking world not having at least a passing familiarity with Albus Dumbledore. I think I'd rather have a name that moderately needs changing and will be changed than one that desperately needs changing and will see the description warp to fit it, as has happened many times around the wiki.

Actually, I didn't see Weird But Wise - yeah, if there must be a rename, Weird But Wise is the way to go.

Have you read the thread and seen the misuse percentages? A lot of people on the wiki seem confused about what the trope means.

Well, the sample is not all that good, but what you say is is correct.

Disconsidering all sinkholes(except the one that proved the editor misunderstood the trope) and ambiguous examples, I have counted 4 correct uses and 4 misuses. 50% of misuses is pretty bad, indeed.

edited 30th Mar '11 8:33:11 AM by Heatth

To be honest, I think you're coming off a bit hypersensitive to "misuse." Dumbledore is certainly an example of the trope, and characters are often potholed to the tropes that best describe them even when they're irrelevant. A lot of them should probably be changed, but that problem's not on this end. I expect if the name of the trope were changed, many of those "misuses" would just be rerouted.

This have already been pointed. Multiple times. Some people disagree. (I agree with you, btw)

Majority supports rename Becoming Hope got renamed with a lesser ratio and less votes. Can we rename it already?

Mods Can I start a Crowner for a new name?

edited 25th Jul '11 11:24:06 PM by FallenLegend

Becoming Hope got renamed because it was a new trope, so renaming it causes minimal disruption. You don't need the 2:30 1 consensus on those.

Bigger ones (such as this), you do. Which you don't have. So no, don't start an alt crowner.

And once again, an objectively awful title sticks because it has Popularity Power. Sheesh. I wish I had the power of admin fiat behind me.

I totally agree with you. This name is obviously protected by the HP fandom.

Even mods share my frustration it seems.

edited 26th Jul '11 10:11:10 AM by FallenLegend

Although I voted for a rename, isn't the main problem that its being sinkholed for the character? Maybe a little bit of cleanup is all it needs.

The crowner says it has about a 1/4 to 1/3 misuse rate. They can't all be just sinkholes can they?

Only two of them weren't Sink Holes. It has a very consistent pattern of misuse and it's almost ALL on the title.

A very consistent problem with sinkholing would go away quite quickly if the name wasn't the character. The name needs to be changed.

To that "con" reason - "The name has no danger of being confused with another trope". No, it has every danger of being confused with the character it's named for, and there's extensive evidence that this is what is happening. That con really is a pure semantic evasion of glaring problem.

edited 26th Jul '11 11:04:28 AM by CaissasDeathAngel

Agreed. This one is obviously entirely on the name and a rename would fix and stop almost ALL the misuse. This is one of those times where a rename really should be our first course of action.

Huh, apparently I had downvoted before. Dunno why. This really could use a rename.

I removed that misleading "Con".