I think Forced Regime Change would make sense as a new name if we are going to rename this trope.
I wonder if redefining it to match misuse would be a good idea though. I guess I am just not sure that a regime changing in and of itself is really trope-worthy since it seems pretty broad. If we do decide to change the trope's meaning to that, I think it would make sense to work on the trope's description a bit to explain the importance of Regime Change in terms of storytelling.
edited 14th Jan '12 10:41:09 AM by LouieW
"irhgT nm0w tehre might b ea lotof th1nmgs i dont udarstannd, ubt oim ujst goinjg to keepfollowing this pazth i belieove iN !!!!!1 dI think we should rename this trope since its name means something else in real life. We can later decide whether to YKTTW a supertrope about regime changes in general.
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!I'd rather just send it back to YKTTW. It needs more time to percolate and lose the focus on real life.
Fight smart, not fair.Any objections to cutlisting this trope and re-YKTTW the definition as Forced Regime Change? Do we need a crowner first?
Yes, I think it should be Foreign Regime Change, to stress that someone is doing it to another country. Citizens can force a coup of their own state, they do it all the time actually.
Modified Ura-nage, Torture Rack
This has eight non-index wicks, ALL of which misinterpret the trope to be Exactly What It Says on the Tin. (The actual definition is one country/government/army/whatever forcing a regime change on another; revolution by your own citizens doesn't count.) I'd recommend changing the definition to match that interpretation, and then maybe re-YKTTW the old trope. Or just cutting it.