Name is same as a work.: The Magic Goes Away

Not sure if there is a thread for this (if so, feel free to link and lock). The Magic Goes Away is a short story, and later a novella, by Larry Niven.

And let's not try to argue if those count. There are plenty of ways to tweak this so that it has a distinct name as a trope.

Put them on their own namespaces. That's what they're there for.

Put it on Literature. We no longer have as many issues with the presence of Namespace, and as long as it's not a shoehorned title to try and pimp a work I'm okay with the names being shared. I also think it's a really good title.

No, namespaces do not excuse a trope being named for a work. That has not been changed.

There's nothing wrong with the name though.

That's not how "don't name tropes after the sames titles as works" goes.

This isn't some new trope somebody dreamed up yesterday. It's been around for a while, has acquired a decent number of wicks and inbounds, and is being used correctly. Not to mention its a perfectly clear title. There's no reason to rename this, especially since we don't even have pages for the works its conflicting with.

Don't get stuck up on how things work around here. Concentrate on how to make the Wiki better.

The name works. It's clear, it's accurate, it gives a clear indication of what the trope is about. It's in the Main namespace while the work will go in the Media namespaces. You haven't shown that anyone's misusing it.

So tell me. If it's not taking up the namespace of a work, it's a good working title that is indicative of the content, and people are not misusing the trope, why is there any reason to rename it?

Because, and this is something Eddie has been very clear about, it makes people looking for the work either find or wick the wrong page (and that's if a page for the work also exists), or it makes them list things incorrectly on examples.

And it makes sense, since tropes and works are meant to be distinct.

We are already moving all works to their Media spaces anyway.

If they get used on the wrong page, leave a note on the page saying "Not to be confused for the book The Magic Goes Away. Please make sure you link to the correct namespace." and "Not to be confused for the trope The Magic Goes Away. Please make sure you link to the correct namespace".

Beyond that, that's what editors are for. To fix up any links an editor thinks is incorrect, and to correct a link to go to the correct namespace.

Now here's a challenge for you.

If you think a rename is desirable, think up a better name for this trope. One that is more indicative of the content and/or one that is more accurate/memorable.

No, that ONLY changes where the works are being placed. It does NOT mean tropes can suddenly be named for works.

It is not named for the work. It is named for the concept that the title implies, and a work just happens to bear the same name as well.

There is a simple solution- Change the namespaces and make it clear that people should refer to the correct page.

There is no need to rename this otherwise. The name is clear, it is concise, it carries the meaning of the trope in itself, it is a very good name. There is a simple, easy solution to the problem.

I'm not seeing how this name is breaking anything.

The concept doesn't need to have the same title as the work then.

And namespaces is still not valid, as I've already stated.

You are trying to change a good name. If you think a rename is desirable, then please think up a better name.

There is a simple solution to the problem. If you have an objection, then state it. "It has the same name as a work" is not valid if there is a solution- there is, which is to make it clear that you should wick to the correct example.

If this is not a valid solution, lay out reasons why.

It's a trope about the magic. Going away. What is wrong with it? Should we change The Cape because somebody made a TV show with the same name?

Ninja'ed

edited 5th Aug '11 9:51:41 PM by Discar

"Should we change The Cape because somebody made a TV show with the same name?"

You don't know the difference between naming a trope for a work and naming a work for a trope?

The Magic Goes Away was not named for the work...

How? The page example doesn't claim what you are. Do you have a link to the ykttw that says it wasn't named for the work? So far, it looks like you are just assuming that is the case instead of actually showing proof.

And no, calling on the concept is not enough.

That's apparently not true. Down in Literature:

• The Trope Namer, Larry Niven's The Magic Goes Away...

So right there we've got a bad link. Naming exactly for a work has caused trouble with several other tropes: it's listed as a valid reason for proposing a rename on When To Rename A Trope. It used to be an automatic rename, I'm not 100% sure how we stand on it now. How does this one look in terms of misuse?

edited 5th Aug '11 10:30:16 PM by Camacan

The page doesn't claim what you are. Where does it say "This work was named after The Magic Goes Away"?

I do have to wonder if this is true... But the edit history looks like it is so. Hm.

Misuse... Give me a second, please.

It doesn't matter about misuse. As stated two posts above, it's an auto rename condition.

How old is this short story? Is it part of a compilation? Is it the Ur-Example? Make the page could help your case a bit.

Also that line might of just been added by some person who thought is was the case.

Even so I do not think the name can ever get better.... I mean seriously this is one your going to have to just swallow. It's not a Auto Rename for these. (it helps sometimes but it's not always the case) The Namespace thing is partly being done to sort these out so we don't always have to.

edited 5th Aug '11 10:46:25 PM by Raso

Besides which, I'm fairly sure the mods can use discretion :/

Still checking wicks.

According to Eddie a while ago, it is an auto rename reason. As for how old the story is, it would have to have been written about five years ago to be younger than the trope. And being the Ur-Example is not a point on renaming one way or the other.

5 years? Then for sure it's named after the concept I have heard this phrase used in a lot of works made well before that... No to rename.