Duplicate Trope: Engaging Chevrons

The trope is a fan term, whose definition is pretty much identical to Padding.

The definition itself is pretty clear they are the same thing: A time-filling sequence. [...] In some fan communities the phrase "engaging chevrons" has come to mean any recognizable time-filling ploy.

Furthermore, look at the examples on the pages, many of them are on both pages, or are on one of Padding's subtropes. There's nothing about the page on its own to differentiate it from regular padding.

edited 1st Mar '12 10:36:32 PM by Ghilz

"In some fan communities". Really now. I've tried googling the term and pretty much nothing comes up: the first few hits are for T Vtropes, and the rest are for gibberish.

This is not an established term. "Padding" is an established term.

It is not exactly Padding this is more of a subtrope to that, its more related to Transformation Sequence. Activation Sequence would be a better name.

Padding is a supertrope that really should be indexing or even just made strictly into an index.

edited 1st Mar '12 11:57:39 PM by Raso

Most of the examples aren't activating anything. Nor is the definition about activations outside of the Trope Namer in the Example As Thesis. It includes anything padding from Transformation Sequence to shouting in Dragonball z. IE: Padding.

edited 1st Mar '12 11:59:39 PM by Ghilz

The description needs work, but I think the trope is supposed to be when a show has a recurring go-to sequence for when they need padding.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:05:58 AM by abk0100

Isn't that precisely what Transformation Sequence is?

Yes, this is related to Padding, but it's not a duplicate. This is using the exact same bit of stock footage again and again and again and again.

Transformation Sequence is a set of shots where a character turns into another form. It only needs to happen once in the entire work to count. It's just in certain series they us Engaging Chevrons in conjunction with Transformation Sequence to save on having to animate a new one each time.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:10:53 AM by shimaspawn

Except that again, useage and examples don't really carry that out, since we have stuff like the videogame section (hiding loading time behind certain activity or animation, which is Dynamic Loading), the Buck Godot Zap Gun For Hire example which is about technobable, plot arcs a viewer just didn't like (The Battlestar Galactica example).

Heck, some of them are closer to Fighter-Launching Sequence, or just any speech thing that is slowly abandonned (The Star Trek Example).

A bunch of them are stuff that occur just once only in a show (The Colbert Report one) or occur very rarely (The Family Guy Chicken Fights)

See above. Also, the definition never mentions that, or stock footage, or doing the same thing. It literally says: A time-filling sequence. [...] In some fan communities the phrase "engaging chevrons" has come to mean any recognizable time-filling ploy. (Emphasis mine)

You are trying to give the page a definition it doesn't currently have, which is neither supported by the examples, or the definition. It is certainly a trope, but it's not this trope.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:17:47 AM by Ghilz

It's badly written and it has had trope decay I admit. I'm not trying to force it into a definition. The recognizable bit was at one point clearer that it was about repeated stock footage filler. That's why it's recognizable. Because the audience had seen this same filler before.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:18:29 AM by shimaspawn

So start from scratch? YKTT Ws for

• Activation Sequence
• Repeated Use Of Stock Footage into the Once an Episode territory.

I dont mind choping the latter and just fold it into Stock Footage... I hate this kind of negative trope.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:27:45 AM by Raso

That's not what the Wayback machine says The oldest version I found has the also says "any recognizable time-filling ploy". In january 2008. In fact, it says that Stock footage CAN, but isn't necessarily, this. It treats them as an exception that can overlap. Not the core of the trope.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:25:44 AM by Ghilz

I do remember that this has come up for TRS before and that the definition I gave was the one we settled on. At some point it must have drifted back into a mess. Part of the issue is, it's not always stock footage. Sometimes they will film a new version of the same sequence of padding events. But it's still the same deja-vu we've seen this same thing before padding.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:27:12 AM by shimaspawn

I find no change in definition as far as I can see. either the definition was reverted to the original so fast it never registered anywhere, or more likely, no one ever changed it and the TRS thread probably expired without any action.

While I agree with your proposed definition that it is a trope, it's tantamount a new trope: Most of the examples don't fit it. The trope name itself isn't that great. It should be sent to YKTTW. Coz there's little to salvage. The definition is terrible. The examples are terrible. The name sucks.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:30:38 AM by Ghilz

Actually, our version of the page for Stock Footage covers this: A shot or series of shots that are frequently reused in a show.

Which brings me to another problem we have: our definition of stock footage is wrong. Stock footage isn't footage that is frequently reused in a show. It's footage the makers have on file. either from earlier episodes, or from other material the company has made. The number of time stock footage is used in a show is irrelevant.

Case and point: Look at The Other Wiki's definition of stock footage or google the term.

edited 2nd Mar '12 12:39:24 AM by Ghilz

The last time this was brought up, it was pointed out that the name is actually wrong - you don't engage chevrons, you encode them.

I believe Eddie also put his foot down about keeping this, so unless he's changed his mind, we probably need to at least keep it as an example-less fan term.

My personal opinion: "Using roughly the same sequence of events that the audience has seen before, usually but not always Stock Footage, to fill time" is a valid subtrope of padding. This name hasn't taken off for it, though, and the description needs to be narrowed.

Let's just leave it alone. It is not hurting anything and it has been here for nearly eight years. It was one of the terms entered the first day we opened, in fact.

edited 2nd Mar '12 8:36:31 AM by FastEddie

Isn't this supposed to be locked?