Whoa. How meta.
I don't see why we would need to merge them, offhand. What's its wick count?
You can see on the button below the link. But why wouldn't you see merging them? What is the distinction here?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.I don't see any reason not to just cut it; it only has 11 wicks, and it seems to be a complete duplicate.
Isn't the difference that Sub-Trope gets it's own page while an Internal Sub Trope is just a sub category but is left on the same page as the super trope? It's a soft split instead of a hard split.
^ That's the way I read it.
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.I'm convinced. Make Internal Subtrope an internal subtrope of Sub-Trope.
If that's the difference, then it would be less confusing to call it something like Soft Split Sub Trope, or something that makes it clear it's on the same page.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.It's another one of those YKTTW "canned messages" which have never been anything but a pain.
Goal: Clear, Concise and WittyIsn't that what the "Internal" is for? It means "Inside", as in "A subtrope contained inside the main trope's page."
A Sub-Trope is internal to the parameters of its Super-Trope, which is why I was confused.
But if it's a canned message, wouldn't Yes We Do Have This One cover that?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.An Internal Subtrope is often a soft split, but not always. It can also be a distinction for a redirect that is more limited then the main title.
It can be used as a "canned message", but it can also be used to point out the distinction.
So, in conclusion: Pretty much all soft splits are covered by Internal Subtrope, and the same goes for redirects-that-are-more-specific-than-the-main-title.
I recvcomend keeping it as it is. Or, if anyone bothers, expand it into becoming an index.
It looks like it to me, but what do you guys think? Is it distinct from Sub-Trope, or should we merge them?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.