Swap title with redirect: Peek A Boo

First, let's play a game of guess that trope! Today's contestant is Peek-A-Boo.

Now onto the explanation: The trope title doesn't tell you anything about the trope and it could mean many different things, from the children's game to another term for Jump Scare (see Peek-a-Boo Corpse). Also, I don't think the term applies to the trope at hand. Peekaboo is about something hidden popping out at you and this is about keeping the private parts hidden from audience view. It seems to me that a nudity trope titled Peekaboo would be about a quick and sudden glipse of nudity that is hidden from view the rest of the time, and that may be a trope in its own right. However, the redirect Scenery Censor describes the trope perfectly and should be the title. Plus the redirect already has 74 wicks, which is significant when compared to the main title's 162 wicks. That's almost one third of the total wicks.

edited 7th Apr '11 5:38:15 PM by djbj

Well, it has 898 inbounds. That's enough that we should be looking for misuse before renaming.

edited 28th Mar '11 5:07:10 PM by troacctid

Hasn't this one come up before?

I don't think there's really any misuse and it's a pretty well-established trope.

I don't think it's an awesome name, but I don't think it's horrible either.

Okay, now that I have time I can check for misuse. This is my first time doing it so I hope I'm doing it right. Here are the first 20 wicks:

•Troper Tales/Accidental Pervert: Incorrect. Used to refer to someone's breast being exposed.

•Accidental Pervert: correct

•Accidental Pervert: seems to be correct

•A Date With Rosie Palms: correct

•Fetish Fuel/Advertising: page has been moved off site

•Characters/AH Dot Com The Series: no context

•Amaenaideyo: appears to be correct, not much context

•Values Dissonance/Anime: correct

•Anime Anatomy: correct

•Batman And The Outsiders: not much context

•Battle Strip: correct

•Between Failures: no context

•B Gata H Kei: correct

•Canaan:correct

•Censor Shadow: correct, but as a "see also", not as an example

•Censorship Tropes: correct, but as part of a trope list

•Danbooru: correct

•Characters/Darker Than Black: correct

•Characters/Darkstalkers: can't tell

•Ecchi: appears to be correct

Okay, so there doesn't seem to be much misuse. However, I still think my arguments have merit and I think they at least need to be discussed.

edited 7th Apr '11 5:39:36 PM by djbj

Deboss, I've only paid attention to the TRS for a few months so may very well have come up before then.

It's okay, I'm mostly just muttering to myself. You did the list right.

In the time since this thread started, Peek-A-Boo has jumped up to 235 wicks - an increase of 73.. Scenery Censor is still siting at 74.

Without some serious misuse, I don't think this name is going anywhere.

Actually, 235 is the total number of wicks, the wicks to the main page plus the wicks to the redirect. I counted to be sure. The way the wick count is presented on the page is kind of misleading, it look like it is the wicks just to the main page but it is actually all the wicks including the redirects. I have been confused by that in the past.

Note that as of this post, Scenery Censor has 74 wicks / 10 inbounds from the page itself. Unless we have a point of reference for this redirect, it's impossible to say whether the 70+ new wicks are from the main article and/or redirect.

edited 8th Apr '11 8:53:55 AM by Stratadrake

What new wicks?

... Oh, right.

edited 8th Apr '11 10:31:54 PM by Stratadrake

Scenery Censor is a much more descriptive name. Isn't that what we're going for? Do we really need misuse to swap a title with its redirect?

I agree. I seems to me that a more descriptive and self-explanatory name would naturally work better even if the old name was already "working". I think that people who already know the old name wouldn't have much trouble learning the new one if it is more descriptive. Even if the old name is "working" it's not like it is ingrained in troper's minds like certain other non-descriptive trope names (like Narm) so I don't think the change would cause any problems.

We can get around proving misuse when stats are low because less exposure means the impact of renaming is relatively low.

This trope has quite high stats, so we absolutely need to show misuse before renaming.

"Swapping with a redirect" is functionally identical to renaming, by the way, since Redirects Are Free.

edited 15th Apr '11 10:20:06 AM by troacctid

Again, why? Switching a redirect doesn't inconvenience anyone. Inbounds will be redirected. and apparently it's okay for a redirect to be used in actual articles, so there's no inherent work involved there.

Maybe we should do a crowner.

Let's prove misuse first, then we will have stronger ground on the crowner.

Switching with a redirect is the same as renaming because it's always free to add a redirect. You could add the redirect before renaming, and then any rename would instantly become a "swap with redirect".

Since when? I believe we are "going for" a name which works. Descriptive names, supposedly, works, because it is simple and get the point across. However, Peek-A-Boo have proved it work fine even not being descriptive. No rename need.

And, yes, swapping with redirect is the same as renaming.

Oh, @Big T, swapping with redirect does cause inconvenience. This trope is know and Peek-A-Boo. This is its main name and the name it is mostly know for. Swapping means people should use Scenery Censor instead (Indexes only use the main name, for example, and people from outside are more likely to use the main name). This change causes the same problems as a rename: confusion. People may think it is another trope. Also, meaningless renames hurt the Wiki stability.

edited 15th Apr '11 4:36:56 PM by Heatth

Agree with the rename. The new name would confuse no one.

Rename.

No misuse demonstrated, lack of misuse suggested, trope seems very healthy. Since April, wicks have jumped from 235 to 266, and only two of the 30 new wicks were for the redirect. Current name seems to be obvious and clear; I strongly oppose a rename.

Doesn't look like there was a consensus, so bumping and adding a crowner.