How are we supposed to know?: Accidentally Accurate

I think this is a rather pointless trope. How can we tell whether an author researched the subject matter before hand? I mean it may be that the author just picked up a random fact somewhere and used it in the episode?

If this trope does have a purpose, how about it covers cases where an author makes up a fact abut some currently unknown subject matter and gets it right. (for example the "It looks like a turkey" comment about the velociraptors in Jurrasic Park). A subversion of Science Marches On is much easier to prove.

What trope?

Damn my inability to edit posts or Holler at the mods. I meant Accidentally Accurate. Can you flag a mod to change this thread title Mousa?

Fixed. There's a button to change the article link next to the "see stale discussion report" link.

This seems like an odd trope... And by odd I mean how does that work? How would we know?

Exactly. The only cases we can really verify is if the accuracy was a scientific fact that was discovered after the writing of the work.

is the "change linked trope" button.

The trope seems to be "work obviously Did Not Do Research but manages to stumble into something accurate".

edited 5th May '11 5:03:13 PM by Deboss

I think it's pointless, except as another way for editors to show off how much they know about some esoteric subject, or to take potshots at authors they don't like, or both. Aside from Word of God, we have no way to know whether the writer knew the fact when (s)he wrote the work or not.

^^ And that's Science Marches On, not a failure of research.

edited 5th May '11 5:05:00 PM by Madrugada

When I came across this, I thought it was abut when this happens in-universe. It that a trope yet?

That's workable. Do We Have This One Yet?

No because the writers still got lucky, but under that case we can be sure it was only that they got lucky.

Actually, why dont we just use this page? The name is perfect.

Sure. Examples.

I think we've got The Couko Lander Was Right or something there abouts.

The Cloud Cuckoolander Was Right. But that's not for this sort of thing; it's more for when the cloudcuckoolander says something typically bizarre and off-the-wall and it turns out to be the right explanation/the correct thing to do in the situation/a good idea.

That one. I can never remember how to spell cuckoo properly.

Which reminds me, when need to redirect farm cuckoo...coockoo...that one. I'll start a thread right now.

I thought this was supposed to be a Sister Trope to Strange Minds Think Alike and The Cuckoolander Was Right.

So we're going to redefine this one?

"What trope?"

Funny, I read that after the title was fixed, so I though you were suggesting it wasn't a trope at all.

I think the "change linked trope" button could stand to use a text description next to it. I see it needing to be pointed out ALL THE TIME.

Make a Tech Wishlist thread.

I think I started this one, but never launched it after it got bad responses in the YKTTW. Part of the reason for the trope was a clever title (critical research success was the working title).

I don't really think it's a great trope, but I won't go quite as far as suggesting we cut it. I think it can be especially good when Word of God is that they had no idea that they were right, and that it would appear as a Critical Research Failure to someone outside the field of study.

Post #8: Actually, "the accuracy was a scientific fact that was discovered after the writing of the work" would be an inversion of Science Marches On, which is when something thought to be accurate is later proven to be false.

In-Universe would be also a good idea, but we already have Right for the Wrong Reasons.

edited 27th May '11 5:52:06 AM by Laukku

Exactly. But are there enough examples to make it a trope?

I added an in-universe example to the discussion page.