Removing complaining, bashing and other negativity from the wiki

The recent Dork Age edit to Star Wars seems suspect to me. Basically, it says "Everything after Empire Strikes Back is a Dork Age to somebody," and it repeats the old myth that SW killed the New Hollywood.

edited 9th Sep '17 12:00:51 PM by HamburgerTime

It's misuse anyway. Dork Ages are about series or franchises that are on a low point, not media. The violation of the Examples Are Not Recent policy and the overreliance on Weasel Words give more arguments against it. I have crosswicked the examples from DorkAge.Film, as they're much better written.

edited 9th Sep '17 1:36:49 PM by MyFinalEdits

How does this example on BrokenBase.Steven Universe sound?

• Concrete from the SU Artbook has been accused of racial stereotyping. Despite this, plenty of fans like her design. Still, many people were upset, prompting Rebecca Sugar to give an apology. Some people accept the apology. Others think her design is incredibly racist and accuse anyone who likes her design or defends the Crewniverse as also being racist, and refuse to accept the apology until the person who designed Concrete is fired. Yet others point out that Concrete as shown in the SU Artbook is nothing but a character concept and claim anyone who would call Rebecca Sugar "racist" after creating a show that promotes acceptance and diversity is no more than seeing racism where it doesn't exist.

It relies too much on Thread Mode. It goes constantly back and forth between "one side thinks/points out" and "but others think". It should either segregate fully the arguments and counterarguments, or have a rewrite so it doesn't read like it's unable to agree with itself, or if all else fails it should be pulled for the discussion tab so people can discuss if it's an example at all.

So this page on that infamous webcomic thats always being shown around seem to use massive Accentuate the Negative, I got rid of some, but the page still needs work if it is to remain here.

edited 13th Sep '17 2:48:30 PM by Monsund

I removed this two days ago from the YMMV.FireEmblemHeroes page which seemed to be mostly complaining and Creator Bashing. This fell under the Broken Base section:

• Elincia's new artwork has rubbed some fans the wrong way, since they believe that the artist is trying to "loli-fy" her due to her younger appearance. However, others still like it for how pleasing it looks from a technical standpoint.

Just now, I also went ahead and added a disclaimer/reminder when editing the YMMV page. Last thing we need is to lock another Fire Emblem YMMV page again.

edited 17th Sep '17 2:53:24 PM by BZL8

Broken Base, if I recall, needs to be a sustained conflict with very little middle ground. If that entry is talking about something recent, then it definitely doesn't fit.

Definitely hope that note helps out.

edited 17th Sep '17 3:24:16 PM by dragonfire5000

The YMMV for Samus Returns is also shoehorning in blatantly whining related to Other M.

"** The True Final Boss is much more pronounced. How does Samus react when she saw Ridley? Absolutely no PTSD. She wastes no time and proceed to kick his ass yet again."

I bolded the part that's a shoehorn. It's absolutely unnecessary as is. Mind you, "she wastes no time and proceed to kick his ass again", needs a slight grammar fix too. Key issue is still the fact that this is unnecessary. It does also seem that there's some pot shots at Other M to potentially look at, not that it didn't have some justified complaints.

edited 17th Sep '17 4:20:53 PM by Irene

YMMV.MetroidSamusReturns: I took care of it.

Yeah, for the Fire Emblem Heroes YMMV, that edit was added shortly after the reveal of said character. "Knee-jerk" reaction most likely.

edited 17th Sep '17 4:44:13 PM by BZL8

I have seen literally no complaints about Elincia's design. I suspect that troper was posting opinions from just one particular thread/fan site.

I know that Strawman U is a trope that is often negative in nature, but the trope description feels almost like a rant. Could it use some cleanup?

Not liking how real-life schools are thrown in to describe the school types. Either way, it looks like two sets of Wall of Text that needs to be turned down a notch.

Maybe keep the descriptions of the two types of universities (maybe with more neutral wording) and delete the lists of real-life schools? The Jokes section could possibly also use a trim.

I would like to delete these example from Nintendo

The first entry links its context to the Headscratcher Page, and the second entry is so specific and they probably are mentioned on their own work pages already.

edited 20th Sep '17 9:57:35 AM by RAlexa21th

This The Scrappy example of YMMV.The Powerpuff Girls 2016 seems more negative leaning. Or at the least, poorly worded.

• Many dislike Bliss right from the announcement of a fourth due to seeming like an ascended Mary Sue OC and making The Professor look like a prick with her Flawed Prototype backstory. To the point where some even considering her to be Jumping the Shark even by the show's standards.

Yeah, definitely sounds like kneejerk complaining.

"Friday" has quite a bit of complaining.

So should I try to make it sound less complainy, or should I just cut it outright?

edited 21st Sep '17 4:21:42 PM by Crossover-Enthusiast

How recent was the episode with Bliss? I don't follow the show, but if that episode is pretty recent, I think we'd need to give it more time before this Bliss character develops enough of a hatedom to be called a Scrappy.

Last Sunday. Her announcement was a few weeks ago, though.

edited 21st Sep '17 5:31:59 PM by Crossover-Enthusiast

Sorry for double posting, but I feel this example of Audience-Alienating Premise from YMMV.The Powerpuff Girls 2016 is mostly just complaining, and wanted to get a second opinion.

• Fans of the original show are turned off by the Genre Shift from superhero to slice-of-life, the changes in voice actors, the Flanderization of various characters, and the replacement of the girls' old Rogues Gallery with newer villains. Younger viewers don't appreciate the low animation quality or the awkward references to "hip and trendy" memes. Viewers who appreciated the original show for its subtle feminist themes dislike how hard the You Go, Girl! angle is being pushed. So...who is this show supposed to appeal to, again?

There are possibly valid points, but the last line needs to go and needs a bit of a rewrite.

edited 22nd Sep '17 1:30:43 PM by Irene

So the person who originally added it edited it a bit, and...

• Audience-Alienating Premise: Fans of the original show, as well as superhero fans in general, are turned off by the Genre Shift from action to slice-of-life (and the accompanying reduction in violence and fight scenes), the changes in voice actors, the Flanderization of various characters and removal of others (notably the much-beloved Ms. Bellum), and the replacement of most of the girls' old Rogues Gallery with newer villains. Younger viewers don't appreciate the low animation quality^note which is often seen as a poor attempt to emulate the simple yet fluid and consistent art styles of Adventure Time and Steven Universe or the awkward references to "hip and trendy" memes. Viewers who enjoyed the original show for its subtle feminist themes dislike how hard the You Go, Girl! angle is being pushed. So...who is this show supposed to appeal to, again?

edited 22nd Sep '17 5:01:20 PM by Crossover-Enthusiast

Pull it with a link to this thread itself with the edit reason that it needs to be discussed to avoid it being just complaining.

I won't pretend that there are people who have issues with it legitimately, although I can't say for sure if this is the exact proper trope(I have yet to see anything beyond the Bliss special).

Done. Hopefully I worded it right.

Edit; by the way, I put the Concrete example from earlier to the discussion page.

edited 26th Sep '17 4:37:09 PM by Crossover-Enthusiast