Agreed. Unfortunately, I'm crap at descriptions.
Doing the ptitle thing now.
"A person with the power to create tangible copies of themselves."
That's all I've got for a description.
But does the person have to always have this ability. If a specific plot device has this power and it can be used by different people, would it still count? If it's the effect of a magic spell that's only ever used once, would it still count?
I support broadening it to include people who have this power, but I'm concerned about making the original examples incorrect.
It is not about the person, it is about duplication. It is about plot, not character. Anything in the article not about that should be moved/cut.
Goal: Clear, Concise and WittyWhy is it called "Me's a Crowd", anyway? It might help us better understand what was supposed to be about.
And I will be quoting the description in all of its brief glory for conveninece:
These copies rarely count as persons in and of themselves. See Cloning Blues. If they are counted as people, expect Which Me?.
Compare with Doppelgänger Spin, Sorcerer's Apprentice Plot. Not to be confused with I Am Legion. May be used in a Doppelgänger Attack. See also Literal Split Personality.
Power Perversion Potential means this naturally leads to Screw Yourself.
The first paragraph sounds like it's attempting to be about a plot where a character duplicates himself via external means. The subsequent paragraphs, however, would fit better on a "Self-Duplication" Super-Trope that encompasses all forms of self-duplication, superpower or not. I think a YKTTW for said Super-Trope is in order. Any objections?
edited 14th Jul '11 1:25:40 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Why does this trope name sound like Jar Jar Binks?
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!Me's A Crowd is a play off the common expression "three's a crowd" (as in "two is company, three's a crowd.")
In Xiaolin Showdown, there's a Wu that divides people into up to nine "selves." The first time this is used, it plays out very much like the "Me's a Crowd" plot described in the trope description. Then it falls into the villain's hands and gets used for a few one-off gags and a couple times as an effective fighting technique. It does change hands, though, and it's never a "power" of one specific character.
How would that situation be treated?
Bump. And going to create a Self-Duplication YKTTW now.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Wait, I thought the decision was to use this for the power, not the plot, since every wick is wrong.
See Fast Eddie's post above. It makes sense, I suppose.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus....it makes sense to move 342 wicks to a new trope, rather than just redefining the old one to match the (much more common trope) misuse?
Well the plot trope needs to be made though right?
Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!If the examples and wicks are consistently using Me's a Crowd to refer to the ability, we should probably do a Trope Transplant of some sort.
I like the idea of this page being the character page and splitting off the plot trope.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickThe thing is, not all examples are of the "able to make several duplicates" kind; there is the "only able to self-duplicate once at a time" sort. That would clash with the inherent implication in "Me's a Crowd" of three or more duplicates.
edited 17th Jul '11 7:28:11 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Support a split. I have to say that Me's a Crowd sounds more like a plot point than an ability. If it weren't for the issue of re-training tropers, I'd argue for giving the ability a new name. As it is, I'll stay neutral on that point for now.
edit: just to clarify, I mean the name Me's a Crowd sounds more like...
edited 17th Jul '11 1:26:07 PM by Xtifr
Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.I too support this split-Trope Transplant. The misuse on the page itself is palpable, a rename's in order anyway. I think we have a consensus in the thread, though the activity is low. What we need to do is find a name for the My Clones Do My Chores trope and then we can move it over.
So yeah, My Clones Do My Chores.
Though I prefer your proposed solution, I thought the consensus so far was that Me's a Crowd is the plot, and it's the superpower/ability that should be split from it.
edited 1st Aug '11 6:17:10 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Well then, that means we need a crowner.
No matter what we do, Me's a Crowd is a failure of a name. The page itself can't be kept clear, I know I didn't think it was about the plot and if we check the wicks I bet we even find the misuse is the majority. So a name for the plot needs to be found, no matter any further action and we can run a crowner while we discuss what a Self-Duplication trope would look like and whether we want Me's a Crowd as a name for that.
Judging what to do with "Me's a Crowd" as a name will need an accurate understanding of how it is being used. I think we'd need an overwhelming majority to use it for the broader misuse safely. A 50% misuse rate means that the name is definitely a failure and yet by the exact same degree definitely isn't going to be right for the power.
As it is currently written, Me's a Crowd is only about a particular use/plot of the power of self-duplication, be it externally induced (i.e. by a machine or a magic spell) or an innate superpower. However, the trope has over time evolved to denote "Self-Duplication as a power/ability". I suggest rewriting the description to match this evolved definition, and if the original description does merit a trope of its own, then it should be into a separate trope with a more appropiate name.
And while we're at it, we should get the ptitle replaced; of the trope's 339 wicks, 327 of them are from the Me's a Crowd redirect. Done.
edited 30th Jul '11 12:05:20 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.