Move the stuff about the video to a works page.: Leeroy Jenkins

I think describing the original video is clogging up the description of the trope, I think it would be best to move the stuff about the video to WebOriginal.Leeroy Jenkins or Leeroy Jenkins Video.

That sounds like a good move. But are there enough tropes in the video to make the article not a stub?

What about the Laconic which is, hopefully, guy's rash behavior ruins a group's plan.

What about it? I think the long discussion of the video detracts from the description of the trope.

The video should be split off.

But, again, does it have enough tropes to not be a stub?

Wait, that doesn't seem all that long. It's only three short paragraphs and a quote, in a fairly long trope description. Am I overlooking something? It could stand to be tightened up a bit, but it doesn't seem all that distracting to me.

...Or, do you mean the part in the Video Game folder? Personally, my first reaction would be to move it to the proper folder (belongs in Web Original). I'd probably trim it down a bit as well, but I don't think it's too horribly long, even though I have no interest in all those details.

The two after it might stand a bit of trimming and de-natter-fying as well, but again, they don't strike me as really excessive. At least one of them is also in the wrong folder (can't tell about the other).

No objection a page on the work (Works Pages Are A Free Launch), but it does seem like it would have to remain pretty stubby.

edited 21st Jul '11 8:57:22 PM by Xtifr

I have a preference for "short and sweet" descriptions, provided they don't look like stubs. I think we could remove the (unnecessary) elaboration in the description without losing anything about the trope, it's just a large amount of Trope Trivia that snuck into the description, as Trope Trivia is wont to do.

Three paragraphs is a lot of text for something that isn't even about the trope. We try to keep trope namers down to about a sentence.

Anyone got some tropes I can put on the Web Original page? I assume I can safely put Leeroy Jenkins on there uncontested. Also, preference for plain Leeroy Jenkins or Leeroy Jenkins Video?

Prefer Leeroy Jenkins Video for the sake of clearness. I've never actually seen it so I don't know what tropes would apply, but the actual description on the page mentions Total Party Kill and Leeroy as a Karma Houdini (he survived unscathed) - although I'm not actually sure if either applies, as not everyone died and Leeroy isn't technically a "villain".

Edit: Just to clarify, that would be Web Original - I just don't really like using the namespace formatting if I don't have to.

edited 21st Jul '11 11:39:25 PM by nrjxll

If it's a work page, you have to use the proper name space. That's why I think just WebOriginal.Leeroy Jenkins should be enough.

edited 22nd Jul '11 6:32:21 AM by shimaspawn

Except they are three short paragraphs. The kind of paragraphs you technically wouldn't need to even indent for but people who type online put a space between anyway.

See?

Most of it is left out and it directs the player to the video game section for more details. As for the video game description, if it's too much information for you then don't read the entry.

The tropes page doesn't take that long to read, especially if you skip the 'hot tip', which is just a bunch of war craft mumbo jumbo. Laconic is there if text intimidates someone.

The reason I was asking was because AFAIK, the video doesn't have an official title, so it felt correct to define the work. I'll put the page on the WebOriginal.Leeroy Jenkins page and make the main page Leeroy Jenkins Video a redirect.

Actually, a bigger problem is that it's written Video Game specific, which is kind of a problem when a page has other mediums. It also delves to far into having to kick them. Perhaps a chainsawing is more in order.

I've seen this used in non- video game contexts, and it seems there's a demand for a trope that just means approximately "someone who charges in stupidly" (leaving out the video game part). It doesn't seem to exist yet, in spite of all the tropes that this one links to for comparison, and it looks a reasonable idea to me to just change this trope. You wouldn't even need to change the Laconic description.

That might be Attack! Attack! Attack!.

Attack! Attack! Attack! is "refusing to run away", not "charges in stupidly". They have similarities but aren't the same.

I don't see why this needs to be a video game trope specifically.

edited 22nd Aug '11 2:20:56 PM by nrjxll

Me neither. I think moving "why you should kick them" to an Videogame Analysis.

Decided to take a stab at writing a page for the video. Let me know how you like it.

Like it. Moved it to Web Original though.

Is this good enough to close? We're working on the IP thread for the trope page and need to close it out.

It looks like the descriptions for both the trope and the video could use a little bit of clean-up. The video page dwells too much on the spell-by-spell recap, while the trope page still has some random details about the video.

Main issue handled. Tweaks to the descriptions can be handled on the discussion pages.