Clean-up on aisle: Xanatos Gambit

The name still gets confused for "cunning plan". I say the best way to cut the misuse would be to just accept that and redefine the trope as a Super-Trope to most of the cunning plans (or even merge with Xanatos Planned This Index if need be). The current trope definition needs a name that actually gives the context of the trope.

But whether or not we do this, the description needs major work. It's messy, confusing, and far too big. Descriptions shouldn't muddle their meanings with Wordcruft.

EDIT: I don't mean clever to the viewer either. What I mean is that in some way it has to be clear that the show thinks a plan is clever, often by whoever made the plan describing it after the brilliant payoff.

edited 25th Mar '11 9:10:05 PM by DragonQuestZ

Last time we brought this up, it was generally accepted that we can't rename this trope, it's got way too many inbounds.

Actually, DQZ`s plan has the advantage that we would NOT loose the inbounds, and the page would describe what most people think when they link here.

I am intrigued by this idea

Hell yeah this is a good idea.

This will never succeed, but I agree in principle.

I vote No. Xanatos Gambit is what it is. If people keep confusing it for something else, they should be educated — that is, unless an external evolution of the trope gives it a new meaning. Otherwise it is just repeating Complete Monster et al.

Plus, moving the definition so that it would become "any cunning plan" would make it both a Subjective and a YMMV (if there's even a difference, I get lost too much in there). Right now XG has a quite specific and provable criteria.

Oh really?

No. It is a one of the Tropes Of Legend, and the rename would displace all of the correct examples.

Both of them?

You can't make people know something without making the information accessible first, and when the name makes the access wrong, that has to be fixed.

Plus this would be the story treating plans as though they were cunning, not the veiwers.

If the misuse is significant, that still means there is something wrong, and that it might even be legendary for the wrong reason (as in being a TOL hasn't stopped renames, or even cutting, when the misuse is rampant).

edited 18th Mar '11 1:46:09 PM by DragonQuestZ

What exactly do you mean "the name makes the access wrong"? That the page is somehow redirected to somewhere else?

Not really. Those examples would be pointing to the Super-Trope, so they would still be, technically correct. Start a special effort page to check the wicks over a few weeks, pointing the good one to the new page.

The cynical part of me doubts this will happen, which is a shame coz that is a very good idea you got DQZ

I phrased that poorly. You used the fallacy that we can make people know the trope without making the name clear, and history on the wiki has shown that is the exception (some unclear names have little misuse), not the rule.

BTW, forgot to respond to this line from chihuahua 0, "the rename would displace all of the correct examples". Um, since I'm suggesting making the name a Super-Trope, all uses would still be correct. Just those that are specific to the trope can also mention the renamed trope on the appropriate pages.

The last time this was proposed, it was stated by administrative fiat (Janitor I believe) that this trope would not be renamed, due to the extreme number of inbounds (35,000 and rising.)

This is a trope that has caught on well outside of the TV Tropes community. Divorcing the name for the context that people come for is a bad idea.

Thats the thing, we'd be doing the opposite. We'd keep the name and tie to the context people use it for (since most uses are incorrect). Xanatos Gambit would still exist... as a super trope

edited 18th Mar '11 2:06:03 PM by Ghilz

And again, by including the current definition in this super trope, all inbound uses would still be correct as well.

So there's misuse, and you decide something must be wrong with this trope, and you automatically assume that means it needs a rename?

It's blatantly obvious that the problem is in the description, not the name. Have you seen that mess? It doesn't define the trope at all. In fact, I'm pretty sure it defines it wrong. Of course there's misuse. It has nothing to do with the name.

Just because the description is bad doesn't mean the name isn't to blame as well. The misuse on other pages shows the name isn't helping matters.

What evidence is there that any of it has to do with the name, though?

That's not a fair question. We can't know the thoughts of anyone who wrote an example to know if it was the name or not, which is why such questions aren't valid arguments.

It's just been established that if the misuse is on the page, then it's safe to assume the description is the problem. If the misuse is from the wicks, then it's safe to assume the name is the problem. Now I know there is misuse in the wicks, so the name is clearly a problem.

Not sure about misuse on the trope page now, but as I agree the description is horrible, I'm suggesting both a rename and a description fix.

edited 18th Mar '11 4:14:00 PM by DragonQuestZ

If we don't know which is causing the misuse, the logical thing to do is fix them in order of least disruptive/easiest to most disruptive/hardest and see if that helps rather than do all or most of them at once. There are at least four possible sources for the misuse:

1. The trope name, which lacks much context.
2. The hundreds of incorrect wicks, which lead other tropers to assume the incorrect meaning in a spiral of misuse.
3. The poor description, which badly needs to be cleaned up.
4. The related tropes, such as Xanatos Roulette and Thirty Xanatos Pileup, which propagate the incorrect meaning of the trope.

My suggestion is clean up the wicks, fix the description, then come back and see in a few months. This trope has been around for years. Whether we rename now or in a few months makes little difference at this point.

Remember that this trope decayed into "any convoluted plan" at one point and was misused that way for a very long time before Batman Gambit came along. It may be that no one bothered to clean up the wicks for misuse, so the majority of tropers didn't get the memo. I know no one cleaned up the related tropes.

edited 18th Mar '11 4:17:51 PM by ccoa

I have to repeat that if we rename, but also redefine the current name to a Super-Trope, it's also not that disruptive, as nearly every wick would be correct, just a few indexes and explaining pages would have to be fixed. Then some genuine examples of the new name would be added to some pages (I would do that) to get the ball rolling on the new name.

But we'd still have to go through all the wicks anyway to make them more specific. So it would be exactly as disruptive as just cleaning them up.

Those thousands of inbound links don't just float around emopty. I've seen the definition of Xanatos Gambit out there in all its glory along with the explanation of the trope name and all the Gargoyles examples I can handle.

It's like trying to propose we rename Irony at this point.

I actually address that in my last post.