How is this an example?: Ptero Soarer

I don't get it. As far as I can tell, the Hatzegopteryx in the picture is correctly sized, it doesn't have bat wings, it isn't a Mix-and-Match Critter, it doesn't have teeth, it's shown as a quadruped, it goes waaay outside of Small Taxonomy Pools, it doesn't appear to be lost on the ground, and it even has pycnofibres. What's the problem?

edited 20th Jan '12 3:52:36 AM by ading

It's not bad per se, but I'd like to find one of a pterosaurish creature actually flying or attacking a human or something.

A pterosaur attacking a human could work, but how would it flying help? The trope is about inaccurate portrayals of pterosaurs, not just any portrayals of pterosaurs.

I think the whole point is that it isn't an example. There'd be no point in a picture of hollywood's version of the animals - everyone already knows what those look like. The picture is saying "This is an example of an actual prehistoric flying reptile. You've never seen anything like this in movies, have you?"

If we found an image that were an example, we'd still have to have the current image alongside it so that you could compare the two and say "Ah, I see. this trope is about how the fictional animal is nothing like the real-life animal." Since everyone already knows what the fictional animal looks like, I don't think that's really necessary, but I guess it couldn't hurt.

edited 20th Jan '12 4:32:13 PM by abk0100

If that's the point, then the caption needs to change. Captioning it "Jurassic Park IV?" gives the impression that it's the movie version of pterosaurs, which it's rather obviously not.

edited 21st Jan '12 11:18:24 AM by ading

We don't need a picture of what pterosaurs are presumed to really have looked like. We need a picture that illustrates the trope. I suggest this, from B Movie Comic:

edited 21st Jan '12 11:52:38 AM by Madrugada

We do need a picture of what they really looked like, otherwise the picture doesn't really explain the trope. If you see a picture of a pterodactyl from Jurrasic Park, you just think "Oh, a pterodactyl." You need to be able to compare it to what they're supposed to look like so you know that the trope is about how inaccurate most depictions are, and that it's not just about prehistoric flying reptiles in general.

The trope is not really "Oh, look they got it wrong! Neener neener, we know better than that." It's "Pterosaurs in fiction are giant, ferocious, carnivorous, toothed, bat-winged creatures that regularly attack people and carry them off to their nests."

edited 21st Jan '12 11:59:11 AM by Madrugada

The fact that flying reptiles like that never existed in real life is an essential part of the trope. That's why it's a subtrope of Somewhere A Paleontologist Is Crying. If you don't show that part of the trope in the picture, than people might just assume that the trope is about all flying dinosaur-like things, regardless of how accurate they are, and that could easily lead to the trope decaying to fit that.

So, yeah, the trope basically is ""Oh, look they got it wrong! Neener neener, we know better than that." Except without the "neeners".

edited 21st Jan '12 12:45:34 PM by abk0100

No, it's not.

Tropes aren't about how bad a writer is for not getting something right. That was the whole reason that all of the ...Is Crying" and "You Fail... Fotrever" pages were renamed and reworked: because they weren't about tropes, choices made by creators, they were about how the creator was bad for not being perfectly accurate. They were pages for complaining about the work and preening about how the editor knew better.

What pterosaurs were really like is very close to irrelevant to the trope: Pterosaurs are giant, fierce, toothed, carnivorous, batwinged creatures that attack people and carry them off to their nests.

edited 21st Jan '12 1:07:52 PM by Madrugada

"Tropes aren't about how bad a writer is for not getting something right."

Yeah, that's exactly what I said.

The trope is about writers not getting it right. It doesn't matter whether or not they're bad writers - it matters whether or not they got it right, even if they did it on purpose, and the picture needs to show that.

The trope is not about what writers don't do. It's about what they do do.

I do like Madrugada's suggestion.

Gee, thanks.

"The writer got this wrong." is not a trope. At best, it's trivia.

"This is how pterosaurs are almost always presented in fiction" is a trope.

Yes, how they're presented in fiction is the trope.

In order to show that trope, it needs to be contrasted with how they're depicted in real life. Otherwise, things like "Bears with big claws and lots of fur" or "Birds with feathers and beaks" could be considered tropes.

If the person reading the article doesn't understand that pterosaurs weren't really like what they're like in fiction, then they don't understand the trope.

Technically. Kind of. The focus is (a lot) more on how they're portrayed in fiction, than how they're portrayed in fiction is different from reality. If "Ptero Soarer" traits were exactly consistent with reality, it would still be a trope.

Absolutely "bears with big claws and lots of fur" or "birds with feathers and beaks" would be tropes if that depiction were used to communicate a particular message.

edited 21st Jan '12 1:59:57 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Real Life doesn't really matter. This trope would be the same even if the depiction of Pterosaurs was accurate. The only thing that matters here is "how are they portrayed in works?". What they're really like doesn't matter.

That doesn't make sense to me. If that were the case, than couldn't "dogs that have tails" be a trope too?

If that were used as a storytelling device, sure. It doesn't really matter whether or not real beavers are industrious; it's whether that is a convention of fiction. Pterosaurs are (almost always) used as wyverns / flying Tyrannosaurs / giant eagles in fiction. An image that shows that would be great. Like maybe this◊ but less silly.

edited 22nd Jan '12 12:06:12 AM by rodneyAnonymous

The trope description barely mentions pterosaurs being story-telling devices. It gives an overview of pterosaurs in general in the first paragraph, then the next paragraph explains that pterosaurs in fiction aren't like they were in real life, and then it finishes off by actually linking to 2 articles complaining about what's wrong with how pterosaurs are shown in fiction.

If this trope is supposed about pterosaurs as a story-telling device, and not about how they're presented inaccurately in fiction, then the description needs to be totally changed, and so do the examples. Then maybe we can find a new picture that fits new description.

Erm, okay, fine. (And I am pretty sure I said that is true.) But a picture of a Pterosaur depicted as a giant, fierce, toothed, carnivorous, batwinged creature that attacks people and carries them off to its nest would illustrate the trope, which is about how Pterosaurs are portrayed in media. Quite well. The contrast with real life is not critical.

All similar articles (e.g. Artistic License - Astronomy or Hollywood Darkness) have images that are a depiction of the thing, not a depiction of how the thing is wrong.

edited 21st Jan '12 9:16:15 PM by rodneyAnonymous

"The contrast with real life is not critical."

Based on most of the examples and the description, that's the whole trope. Seriously, count how many examples there are they don't have the word "accuracy" in them or otherwise complain about the work being wrong.

edited 21st Jan '12 9:23:50 PM by abk0100

Well few are giant and most don't have teeth there are some with teeth and there are some that are indeed giant. You guys realize how horrible it would be to look up at anything capable of flight with a 12 meter wingspan.

The trope here is using Pterosaurs as predators in a story. Just like Tyrannosaurus Rex or Ninja the article cites common mistakes made but they don't have to be universal. I think the current image is cool.

Yeah... but look at the other articles about inaccuracy... whether or not the trope is "it's this way in fiction, but that way in fact" it's fine if (and universally true that) the image shows only "it's this way in fiction".