^A lot of the defensiveness is from me, since i've spent enough time around John's blog to learn the context behind certain events and dispell a lot of the negativity, hostility and common misconceptions about John. That said, if you want to have a more neutral article, by all means go ahead, but it'll make the page more open to haters. I sought out that defensive information for a reason, y'know-it's almost mind boggling to me how much hate this guy gets. You'd swear most people who go there only read one or two posts, don't try and understand the thinking and context behind them and take them at face value, or say outright lies like "He hates anything that isn't Bob Clampett" or "He hates Disney".
Also, i removed the "Too Dumb To Live" trope, since it dosen't belong there anyways.
edited 25th Apr '11 11:11:29 AM by prinzenick
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
^ Understandable, but the fact of the matter is that he's a pretty polarizing guy. Leaving the page to be reduced to hatred and bile by the haters is bad, but making the page out as if he's perfect and his critics wouldn't know taste if it came up and socked them in the mouth... isn't all that better. For divisive figures like him, it would be best to "neutralize" the page, making sure it doesn't take any particular side on the "arguments" concerning him.
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
The description is really long.
Rhymes with "Protracted."
Maid of Win
I took a look and tried to edit through for all the pertinent information. How's this:
John K is a fan of “classic” cartoons from The Golden Age Of Animation, such as Looney Tunes. He is a controversial figure in animation history, with some seeing him as the man who brought back “cartoony” cartoons to television, while others see him as egotistical. This is not the place to debate either of those things.
He maintains a blog, John K Stuff
, wherein he posts information on classic cartoons. There is also a more distilled version with advice and lessons on cartooning and animation, John K Cirriculum. Note that both are home to John K’s notoriously controversial opinions regarding animation, including his belief that good drawings are the back-bone of a cartoon's success (rather than it being the story, which is the common contemporary belief). He is very opinionated, and some rants may be a little overwhelming.
Yeah, it's only three paragraphs long. Reading through, pretty much everything else on the page was too... much. Lots of it was irrelevant and biased. Anyway, this is about as long as most creator pages. So, shall I put it up?
edited 26th Apr '11 4:19:58 PM by Ronka87
Thanks for the all fish!
^That seems fine, except he didn't work on the Beany and Cecil revival with Clampett (since he had passed away by that point) but rather his family.
That seems good.
Alright, i just applied the new version to the page. Actually seems better now.
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
Sweet. Ta, Ronka.
What's precedent ever done for us?
Maid of Win
Glad it works. So, can call it a day, get a lock on the thread, and remove the banner from the page?
Thanks for the all fish!
Nice work wrapping it up
OK, let me start off by saying that I'm cool with the movement against excessive negativity on the site. We're here to catalogue tropes, not bitch about stuff we don't like, and if a few pages have to get locked because the Hatedom can't control themselves, then so it goes. That said, I believe it's possible to be excessively positive in our articles as well.
Exhibit A - our writeup on the animator John Kricfalusi.
Now, my knowledge of the source material is limited, but even I'm aware that this guy is one of the most divisive figures in Western Animation, and yet the page for him is sufficiently remarkable in its one-sidedness, its defensiveness, and its worshipfulness that even I can spot it, with such things as calling a show cancelled for Unfortunate Implications Too Good to Last, potholing his critics to Too Dumb to Live, and attributing the entire course of his troubled career to malevolent outside forces. I don't want it turned into a flamey rant either, obviously, but would someone with a good working knowledge of this guy's history please see if they can go about neutralising the page to some extent? Would be much appreciated.
What's precedent ever done for us?