A different defintion seems widespread: Hannibal Lecture

Supertrope Break Them by Talking created.

Now the question becomes how we can make clearer what the real definition of the trope is, and how else to cut down on the input of misuse...

I suggest a rename. First, there are several well-known Hannibals and this only refers to one of them; second, the trope has little to do with lecturing, that's just a pun.

An important character named Hannibal is found in The A Team; Blade; Xiaolin Showdown; Alias Smith And Jones; and classical Roman history. Also, Star Trek has a spaceship by that name. In other words, this fails the One Mario Limit big time.

To be fair, you're only looking at the "Hannibal" part. The "Lecture" part is a clear pun on Hannibal Lecter's last name so the title is, at least, making a conscious effort to make it clear which particular Hannibal is being referred to.

No, that only works if you've already guessed the correct Hannibal. If you're more familiar with, say, The A Team, then the trope name makes perfect sense: a lecture by B.A.Baracas where he Pities The Fool. Unfortunately that's not what the trope is about.

If I was more familiar with the The A Team and thought "Hannibal" referred to THAT Hannibal, why would I assume "a lecture by a character who ISN'T Hannibal" as the definition?

I'm just trying to play Devil's Advocate here. You made your point about there being multiple Hannibals in media, fiction, and history. But how many of them have a last name that sounds a lot like "Lecture"?

edited 6th Jan '12 6:42:05 AM by SeanMurrayI

That's not the point, since "lecture" is a normal English word. When you see a trope called "Streisand Effect" most tropers aren't going to look for the particular Streisand whose other name sounds most like "effect"; they're going to pick the first Streisand they know and think of a related effect.

Same thing here. If you're a Star Trek fan, then a Hannibal Lecture is probably what the captain of Starship Hannibal uses to admonish misbehaving crew members. That makes perfect sense in normal English, but unfortunately it's not this trope. That's why the name is unclear, and that would explain why we're dealing with so much misuse.

edited 6th Jan '12 7:29:02 AM by Spark9

The basic argument here sounds like, "If you're a fan of a work, then you're going to warp any trope name into something related to that work", which doesn't sound entirely fair or accurate for an argument.

Besides, I am a Star Trek fan, and I wouldn't be automatically inclined to believe that Hannibal Lecture has something to do with the name of an obscure starship in the Federation fleet just because I happen to like the given franchise.

So then where's all the misuse from Trekkies believing this has to do with starship captains admonishing their crews? Or any tangible sign of confusion with any of these other Hannibals you name?

I was under the impression that this trope's misuse owes more to misinterpretations of the trope description as a broader concept (hence why a new Super-Trope was just created)—not confusion over the name Hannibal.

edited 6th Jan '12 9:47:14 AM by SeanMurrayI

That's what I've been saying — the problem was/is that it has long been recognisable, just not taken as meaning what it's supposed to. The problem with other Hannibals is just theoretical, or at least it can't be proven to be behind the current confusion, since the problem as it appears so far can exist even if everyone did think of Hannibal Lecter.

Nevertheless, though I don't like the idea of changing the name, it could still help. The new name wouldn't be associated with the old use and it could be made more explicit.

But I would suggest something else. Just clean out the incorrect examples on the page now and misuses elsewhere where they're found and see what happens. We now have a shorter, more to the point description that includes an explicit, kind of prominent mention that if it's not about interrogation, it's only the supertrope. The page itself is certainly a lot clearer about the definition now. Combined with correcting current misuses, that might or might not be enough to prevent most future ones, particularly if people notice something has changed and therefore have to stop to think about it. I'd say it's worth a try before doing anything more drastic.

edited 6th Jan '12 10:57:48 AM by VVK

Count Chocula doesn't leave you wondering which count the name is a pun on.

Please familiarize yourself with the pages on Fan Myopia and Trope Namer Syndrome. In short, do not assume that anybody will be familiar with a 21-year-old movie just because you are, because the average reader will simply have never heard of it.

And that's precisely why our renaming guidelines say that character-named tropes like this one are a deprecated practice.

That was extremely condescending, and my point was (obviously?) about the pun confusion, not the merits of character-named tropes. Not everyone knows who Count Dracula is, either.

You can concede that the "which Hannibal?" angle is a weak argument and still have a considerable case against the trope being called Hannibal Lecture.

edited 6th Jan '12 4:17:36 PM by rodneyAnonymous

That.

Again, at the very least, if you're going to claim that confusion over the name "Hannibal" is a problem with the page, you should have a few wicks on hand that make it clear that the problem actually exists.

edited 6th Jan '12 5:24:44 PM by SeanMurrayI

self-thump

edited 7th Jan '12 5:51:03 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Bump bump.

The name is fine. Just because the most popular movie is 21 years old doesn't mean people aren't familiar with the character. Besides, it may have been bad, but the most recent Lecter movie came out only 5 years ago.

But the film of The A Team came out a year and a half ago.

Look, for the third time already, where is there misuse from people confusing Hannibal Lecture for something to do with The A Team (or Star Trek or the elephant guy...)?

If it's a legitimate problem, you can point out where the problem is actually occurring.

edited 20th Jan '12 6:54:49 AM by SeanMurrayI

The pages on Fan Myopia and Trope Namer Syndrome point out the problem with character-named tropes, and the Rename Guidelines tell us that this is a valid reason to rename. This is nothing new, just check The Mario, The Libby, or The Umbridge for earlier examples.

Anyway, as pointed out earlier in the thread, the "lecture" part of name is also wrong, because the trope isn't about lecturing.

I get that you're probably not going to agree anyway, and that's fine. We should probably get a crowner in here, because this thread has been running in circles for awhile.

Just because something has a Trope Namer does not mean Fan Myopia and Trope Namer Syndrome have created actual problems for the page. The "Rename Guidelines" may list these as valid reasons to rename something, but you still haven't brought forth any examples or wicks that show these reasons are applicable to this page.

All I'm requesting from you is evidence which shows that the problems you are suggesting are real. That shouldn't be too much to ask for.

edited 20th Jan '12 8:10:08 AM by SeanMurrayI

<Mod Hat ON>

This thread does not need a crowner yet. It needs some evidence one way or the other.

Spark, you're the one saying it is being confused for other things. Please present some evidence that it's the name that's causing the problem. Something more than "There's more than one Hannibal."

<Mod Hat OFF>

edited 20th Jan '12 8:10:30 AM by Madrugada

No, I'm not saying it's confused for other things. I'm saying it's a bad trope name, because (1) no word in the name indicates what the trope is about; (2) it's not a real-world term; and (3) it's named after a character that most people are unfamiliar with. I'd be happy to post evidence for those three points if needed.

Last week we had the exact same issue with the trope "Christie Time". There are dozens of Christies, just like there are dozens of Hannibals. That thread also had a few tropers claiming that surely everybody had heard of Agatha Christie and that the name couldn't possibly refer to anybody else, and a group of other tropes came by to point out how incorrect that is.

That's the exact same issue as here, and it was resolved by a crowner, which showed us which side was consensual and which was the vocal minority. I suggest we do the same here; I thought we had deprecated the argument "abuse or GTFO" at least half a year ago.

Christie Time has 98 wicks and has only brought 29 people to the wiki in the past year.

Hannibal Lecture has over 1500 wicks and has brought over 4000 people to the wiki in the past year.

As I see it, these pages are not comparable at all. In the case of Christie Time, one can at least make the argument that the name is possibly hindering the page's ability to thrive. Hannibal Lecture, on the other hand, has more-than-obviously caught on very well with others, and unless you can show tangible evidence that the name is causing a good deal of confusion with other people named Hannibal, your arguments are not sufficient enough for us to take further action with this page.

edited 21st Jan '12 11:09:24 AM by SeanMurrayI