Needs a major rewrite: Neglectful Precursors

The opening paragraph started a running joke that was amusing at the start and completely out of control at the moment. The entire article is filled with natter and written like a Phoenix Wright game with the examples being presented "as evidence" presented to a "judge" and matters being debated with "OBJECTIONS!" and the like.

I will be attempting a sandbox writeup a little later.

• I think the opening paragraph is fine. It's clear enough on what the trope is and clever to boot. I think a warning at the end reminding people who frequent the page to follow normal example guidelines and not play court on the page should be attempted. If people play ball then awesome, otherwise if they ignore the warning I guess we crack a few heads and rewrite it without the court metaphor. I don't think it's breaking the rules, the rules just haven't been enforced here.
• Obviously, examples that aren't examples need to be removed. Along with any natter accompanying it.
• I suppose this is YMMV.
• Real life section should be purged. While I'm more sympathetic toward Real Life examples then most people here, having a real life section for this trope is completely illogical and weird. With one possible exception:
  • It might be possible to list an aversion. In addition to a heavy environmental movement nowadays, there are government projects to figure out how to leave a completely universal "DANGER!" warning for future civilizations stumbling on our nuclear waste stockpiles. It's a stretch, it hasn't happened yet, but there is an attempt to NOT be the assholes who left deadly garbage behind for future generations who are completely oblivious to our civilization's existence.
• The main issue is that there is a CRAPTON of natter going on and I'm not familiar with a lot of these examples. I have part of a write-up for what I'm familiar with. In particular, I think I condensed the Stargate folder to a single short paragraph. At best, that folder is too much detail on a given sub-example and at worst arguing in the topic. I was hoping to present a solid rewrite for approval but there is SO DAMN MUCH to wade through and I barely understand half of it.

As the sandbox works, just dump what I have in it...and link somehow to this topic?

edited 16th Jun '11 11:41:10 PM by Rotpar

I think this page is amusing.

I wouldn't object to the current version of the page becoming Just for Fun, but as it stands, it's filled with natter, This Troper, Conversation On The Main Page, just about everything we discourage editors from doing.

I think its fine. But every instance of This Troper should be replaced with "The Court", "The Defense" or "The Prosecution". To stay in character.

How did This Troper ever get popular? Its the most annoying thing about the Wiki I can think of.

Agreed on both counts. A general clean up to make it more court like would do wonders for the article. Speaking only for myself, I actually like the structure of most of the examples and learned a great deal more about the context of them than a straight example.

& Agreed. Love the structure, could use just a bit of a cleanup.

And another vote for "keep the structure, clean it up and make it consistent through out the page".

The examples should be kept to examples, and the various "Objections" should be cut as Natter and Justifying edits. The "Verdicts": parts should be removed.

edited 17th Jun '11 2:23:08 PM by Madrugada

There, all of This Troper is gone.

As per the rest, keep the structure, clear the natter and you have an amusing and fun page.

Ok, that looks much cleaner and less nattery. That takes care of my objections to it.

You know, I was expecting a more Kill It with Fire response concerning this. But I'm not going to argue, it is a fun page, I just thought the format crossed that Clear/Witty line. If you guys think it needs a clean up and nothing more that works with me.

Cleaning some stuff up then.

Will ask though, if you guys were reading the article, did you see anything blatantly wrong that needs to be cut? The Green Lantern example for example, one of the responses claims that the characters in question can't even be considered Precursors since they're around. I'm cutting the example since it sounds like it's wrong for all I know. Or it could be badly written and not getting the point across.

edited 21st Jun '11 11:37:31 AM by Rotpar

Bump. Any problems here? The consensus looks like its fine as is.