Choosing description: The Bermuda Triangle

In fiction, The Bermuda Triangle is a place full of alien abductions and such.

In Real Life, the triangle are three lines drawn on a map, making an area around which there is an urban legend that a lot of airplanes and ships disappear.

In my opinion, the trope description should focus on the trope, and thus start out with what the triangle is in fiction. Thus I prefer option A below.

However, one other troper strongly disagree, and since we can't seem to reach an agreement it's time to discuss it on the TRS. He's insisting that we should instead use the option B further below.

Description alternative A

The Bermuda Triangle is a popular place for works of fiction to place mysterious events, especially the disappearances of ships and airplanes. While a few such works leave the mystery unresolved or give it a simple explanation, it often turn out that something really weird is involved: Aliens, paranormal activity, Eldritch Abominations, or Atlantis. If the events are of human origin, it's still something weird like an Ancient Conspiracy or dangerous Cult.

Part of the Hollywood Atlas. The triangle is a region in the Atlantic Ocean, much of which is south-east of the coast of Bermuda. Before it became popular in pure Speculative Fiction, the triangle started out as an Urban Legend. In spite of having been solidly discredited since 1975, the legend still live on through it's popularity in fiction.

Description alternative B

The Bermuda Triangle is a region in the Atlantic Ocean, much of which is south-east of the coast of Bermuda, where, allegedly, boats and airplanes that enter the region tend to disappear, become lost, or be subjected to other bizarre and unnatural occurrences. According to fiction, urban legend, and (on occasion) Conspiracy Theories, strange events such as these in the region are often said to involve aliens, paranormal activity, Eldritch Abominations, Atlantis, or something even weirder.

Part of the Hollywood Atlas.

Alternative A start out with what the triangle is in fiction, wile B start out with where it is - information that imho is less relevant, and also redundant because the page illustration is a map that give this information.

Alternative A present the triangle as a place where strange things do happen in fiction. Alternative B instead present it as a place where strange things allegedly (with the italics) happen in real life. In other words, A focus on the trope while B focus on a discredited urban legend.

Alternative A briefly mention this urban legend and give a quick reference to it being discredited. Alternative B does not, and it's proponent argue that such information belong instead on an Useful Notes page - something that I would agree with, if there was actually a lot of information. However, it's merely a quick bit of trivia.

So, I'm arguing in favor of option A, and I assume the other guy will argue for option B. Anyone else got any argument for either version, or feel that a third option would be preferable? :-)

edited 29th May '11 1:10:33 AM by Xzenu

Actually, when I think of it, we could just as well ax teh geographical reference altogether: While the information is good to have, having it in the illustration is enough. So we might as well make the description slightly shorter:

---

The Bermuda Triangle is a popular place for works of fiction to place mysterious events, especially the disappearances of ships and airplanes. While a few such works leave the mystery unresolved or give it a simple explanation, it often turn out that something really weird is involved: Aliens, paranormal activity, Eldritch Abominations, or Atlantis. If the events are of human origin, it's still something weird like an Ancient Conspiracy or dangerous Cult.

Part of the Hollywood Atlas. Before it became popular in pure Speculative Fiction, the triangle started out as an Urban Legend. In spite of having been solidly discredited since 1975, the legend still live on through it's popularity in fiction.

It should certainly be the first option. We're interested in the applications of the triangle in media.

I agree, since its focused on fiction the description should stick to how it's used in fiction. Plus, having a whole paragraph specifically there to make sure the reader knows that it's not real seems too much like a Take That! to me.

My tropes launched: https://surenity2.blogspot.com/2021/02/my-tropes-on-tv-tropes.html

Why? The Bermuda Triangle is a trope specifically about a precise, known geographical location. How could we not mention that?

Anyway, Xzenzu, your stated intention for your edits on the the trope's talk page is to educate people about the REAL hoax behind the Triangle and teach them the true facts behind it, and I've already told you that that is much better suited for a Useful Notes page.

I've proposed spinning off your ideas for a Useful Notes page; I've even offered to help you write it if you so desire.

There's no reason why we should be going off on a tangent on a page about an occurrence in fiction and media about how something was exposed as a hoax in real life if it does not help us to understand the trope. It's peripheral to what the trope page is supposed to be. There's no point in linking people to information on Larry Kushe's work on this page. Hell, your description makes it sound like the Triangle being used in fiction and media as a place for paranormal occurrences is a bad thing just because it has been thoroughly discredited in Real Life.

You even said yourself on the talk page that my arguments are completely reasonable. Why are you then going ahead and completely ignoring them for no stated reason?

edited 29th May '11 6:07:40 AM by SeanMurrayI

Wait, who wants which option? Because Option A is the actual trope, Option B is not.

Option B was the original trope description before Xzenzu had it redone as Option A to include URL links to information about how the Bermuda Triangle itself isn't a real paranormal phenomenon (just in case anybody who doesn't know it to be a hoax can learn about that), but it contributes nothing to the describing the trope itself and such information is more suitable for a Useful Notes page (which exist specifically for debunking misconceptions about things in the media and our world, among other things), if we'd really want to educate people about the truth of the Triangle beyond just describing a media trope.

edited 29th May '11 6:20:34 AM by SeanMurrayI

Hi Sean.

We seem to have three issues here:

• 1) The issue about what the issue is,
• 2) the useful notes issue, and
• 3) the geography issue.

1) The issue about what the issue is

You seem to believe that belief in the urban legend is the primary issue here. However, it is not: It's only the "first" issue in a strictly chronological sense. I took an interest in the trope when it got potholed by someone who took for granted that it's a real phenomenon, so that was my starting point. That was several iterations ago.

2) the useful notes issue

Could we make a Useful Notes page about the triangle? Sure we could! And if we bother to do one, we should replace the current wikipedia pothole in the trope into a pothole for that useful notes page.

However, will we bother? I'm not as interested as you might think, see above, but if someone else want to run the project then I'll help.

3) the geography issue.

Does the trope require a geographical reference? Should it have it? Should it have it more than once?

My answers are "no", "yes" & "meh".

No, the geography reference is not nessecary, but yes we should have it. It's an amusing & interesting piece of trivia. However, should we have it more than once? My argument for removing it from the description is that we already have it in the illustration, and we don't need to have it twice. Not that it really matters.

It should be in the description, even if it is in the page image. The description is the important part of the page. The page image is a nice extra. But the page image isn't always useful — to someone who prefers text-only browsing, or needs to use print-to-voice software for any reason, the page image is completely useless.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

^^ Belief in the Urban Legend isn't the primary issue; it isn't even an issue to begin with. All that is important is explaining what the Urban Legend is because that's what the trope is.

Again, your stated intentions from our conversation on the talk page was to allow people to learn the "interesting facts" about why the specific claims made about specific occurrences that are purported to have happened in the Triangle are false. That is peripheral and non-essential to the purpose of a trope page. Like I said in our earlier conversation, we don't go off on a tangent on the Who Shot JFK? page so that we can let people learn about the facts from the Warren Commission Report that discredit the conspiracy theory that the trope is based on. Likewise, we don't need to go off on a tangent on the Bermuda Triangle page itself about information that discredits the urban legend. These would be subjects already suited for the Useful Notes wiki.

Like I said again, we have the Big Applesauce page for the trope about New York City as it appears and behaves in fiction and media, and we have the Useful Notes page New York City so people can learn more factual information about the actual city itself. The same thing can be set up here; The Bermuda Triangle for the trope that appears in fiction and media and The Bermuda Triangle for explaining the basis behind the claims made in the Urban Legend itself and how they do not match up with reality.

edited 29th May '11 12:35:33 PM by SeanMurrayI

@ Madrugada: Oh, that's right. I forgot about people using text only browsing.

@ Sean Murray I,

Is even one of the examples about people hearing legends? All examples I see is about people actually encountering weird stuff in that particular setting. In other words, the urban legend is the background of the trope more than being the actual trope itself. Characters merely encountering the urban legend itself does counts as examples, if we have/get any such examples. But it's not the primary focus.

Anyway, both versions describe the urban legend. It's just that Option B (your version) puts too much focus on the urban legend, while Option A focus more on how the trope is actually used in works. Also, both versions indicate that the legend is nothing more than a legend- It's just that option A does it in a simple matteroffactly way while option B does in a way that can be interpreted as very sarcastic.

Just because a trope is based on an Urban Legend does not mean that the trope specifically involves people "hearing legends."

Spontaneous Human Combustion is a trope based on an Urban Legend. The examples of the trope in fiction are not about people hearing about it; it's about the event actually occurring within a work or narrative. Likewise, The Bermuda Triangle is not a trope about people talking about the place; it's about abnormal events being shown to happen there within a work or narrative.

Discussing the actual legend itself as it is talked about in Real Life among believers in the paranormal and the like and providing analysis/verification of their claims made—unrelated to describing how the legend is shown and presented in fiction and media—is not the primary purpose of the trope page.

edited 29th May '11 12:54:48 PM by SeanMurrayI

The main point is what the Triangle is, not where it is, which is secondary. Description A gets the point across much more clearly.

What the Bermuda Triangle is is a place, one with a set geographical location. Where it is is just as important as what is shown to occur there when the place appears in fiction and media.

Even so, this still doesn't excuse the fact that the focus in Option A is mostly peripheral to what the page itself was originally intended to cover. This is not a page intended to go into detail about the claims made about the Triangle in Real Life and the veracity of said claims; that is a subject set that should be aside for a Useful Notes section.

edited 29th May '11 1:50:31 PM by SeanMurrayI

One line in the second paragraph does not a focus make.

I prefer A, for the simple reason that (at least going by what I've seen on other pages) many people don't read anything more than the first sentence or couple of lines of the description before adding an example.

By starting out with "In fiction, the Bermuda Triangle is..." we're making sure that those first couple of sentences are about its use as a setting in fiction.

Conversely, starting out with "The Bermuda Triangle is an area located..." makes the first several lines about Real Life, and will encourage Real Life examples. Which we don't need.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

If people don't read more than the very opening lines, then the opening should focus on the trope's most general and basic qualities—essentially, that it is a given location that is specifically known for mysterious, abnormal things happening to anything that enters the region. How fiction and media specifically portrays such occurrences (be it involving aliens, dimensional portals, time travel, Cthulhu or what have you) should follow after because of how much this part of the trope varies from story to story.

The established location of the Bermuda Triangle, the most basic and objective fact about the trope itself that is true for all portrayals of the Triangle in fiction and media no matter what, should not be among the last piece of the trope to be mentioned.

Just like on Spontaneous Human Combustion, the description begins by stating the most basic parts of the trope itself, followed by explaining why it is significant, then a mention of the variables in how fiction and media use the trope, and finally concludes with listing related pages. It's direct, simple, and if anybody only reads the very beginning, the most important things to know about the trope are all right there.

edited 29th May '11 2:58:09 PM by SeanMurrayI

I would go with A. We're about tropes. We do need to mention that it's a discredited urban legend, but that shouldn't be the most prominent thing on the page.

No, you just need to make sure it's called an Urban Legend, which the description already did, anyway. An Urban Legend, by its definition, is a false story, usually humorous or horrific; Urban Legends are presented as being true, but they are still only made up stories.

Whether or not the Urban Legend is fully discredited is only really important if the revelation of this actually influences how the trope is used in fiction, like Alien Autopsy; the presumptions and ultimate revelation of the Trope Maker being a hoax sees many other fictional portrayals of Alien Autopsy involve hoaxes. In the case of The Bermuda Triangle, facts about the trope in Real Life being shown untrue is just a sidestep to the main focus.

It's the same reason why we don't go out of our way on Who Shot JFK?*

to explain that the Kennedy assassination Conspiracy Theories are discredited by the information in the Warren Commission Report and other research. It's a fact, it's certainly interesting, but it has nothing to do with how the trope is used in works and narratives. If we'd want to touch upon how certain tropes based on falsehoods that are presented as truths have been discredited (when that fact has nothing to with the trope's portrayal in fiction and media), then it should be reserved for explanation on Useful Notes pages.

edited 30th May '11 6:28:42 PM by SeanMurrayI