Total posts:  1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 ... 18
Removing complaining, bashing and other negativity from the wiki:
Puʻu ʻŌʻōViewers Are Goldfish is in TRS because of these issues. Maybe Viewers Are Morons needs the same treatment.
ReymmăHaving taken a look at the examples in Viewers Are Morons, it seems to me to have a lot of overlap with the Goldfish entry and Show, Don't Tell. A lot of other examples are not cases of assuming the audience are idiots, but rather that they don't have knowledge of a certain topic. And I know it's annoying for those in the know to have to wait through exposition of the topic, but it's necessary in a show that will go out across an entire nation and possibly beyond, and wants to be for the masses (which need not be for purely commercial reasons, or be accompanied by genuine dumbing down). It's in need of help, but I'm not sure what to do. Examples that could stay are The Emperor's New Groove (sort-of in-universe), Yu-Gi-Oh! (the America dub makes things more evident that the original), and the various guidelines for developers and laws for advertisers that state how much things should be explained. (Forgive me for a personal note, it's just that one seems to me outright wrong, the World of Warcraft example. The devs weren't assuming players are incapable of learning a new rotation, they are fighting against the idea that if one spec does a few percent more damage on logs of the best players you should switch to it or you're gimping your raid. Actually most players do best in the spec they are most comfortable with and bandwagon switching is more likely to hurt your performance.)
Documentary Of Lies has some problems, mainly that its purpose appears to be Schmuck Bait for bashing things. I see no value in keeping examples that are not parodies or In-Universe. Specifically, we aren't here to adjudicate or appear to adjudicate the truth or falsehood of a work. We care about the tropes being employed. This article makes it look like the wiki is taking a stance in the matter.
edited 31st Jul '12 1:23:34 PM by Fighteer
Neoclassicism, AKA the Tinkerbell school of economics.
Puʻu ʻŌʻōYeah, as currently written it comes off like an Audience Reaction. Narrowing it would come off to TRS business, however. Here is one
edited 31st Jul '12 2:48:51 PM by SeptimusHeap
Critical Annoyance desperately needs a hose-down.
Puʻu ʻŌʻōScrappy Ship YKTTW. I don't want to hear about the tropology argument anymore that is cropping up at the bottom, but it seems to be complainy.
A "Scrappy" subtrope plus shipping? DO NOT WANT.
ScallywagI've asked about if critical reception belonged in a work's description, but how about commercial reception?
Puʻu ʻŌʻōI don't think that there is a difference between commercial reception and work reception.
Just zis guy^ That's not what ^^ said. Critics can like or dislike (critical reception) a film independent of how much money it makes (commercial reception). F'rex, how much did Avatar make, compared to what critics thought of it outside the visuals? (Or going further back, the 1998 Tristar Godzilla.)
edited 3rd Aug '12 7:06:13 AM by Nohbody
Puʻu ʻŌʻōCommercial reception at best is trivia. It should go to the trivia tab.
I see the Awesomeness.No, Septimus is right. How a work was received means jackshit for the work page. I think it falls under trivia. Or possibly audience reaction. Don't know.
Puʻu ʻŌʻō"Critical reception" is subjective as it is a "critic's" opinion. "Commercial reception" is a thing of the box office and trivia.
I see the Awesomeness.The reaction of the audience of handing over money was the angle I was thinking of.
The main page and especially the YMMV page for Black Jewels seems to have been half written by someone who disliked the series. I'm a really big fan and I don't want to go in there bonking heads because someone said something negative about one of my favorite series, so I was hoping someone with less of an agenda could take a look at it.
Puʻu ʻŌʻōWhich pages? My connection currently isn't friend of lacking courtesy links.
^_^The main Kamen Rider Hibiki page has a really long rant about how the end-of-show retool was horrible and how Executives should all die in a fire, should I chainsaw it?
edited 4th Aug '12 12:13:13 AM by fourteenwings
TerradorablyfyingI axed the bottom two paragraphs of the description; they really didn't belong there. I prefer axes to chainsaws. Far less noisy.
edited 4th Aug '12 12:47:31 AM by Telcontar
Merge those duplicates! Fix that factual error! Delete that shoehorned non-example! You have the power! —Meta Four
Puʻu ʻŌʻōThe last part of the description there can safely go away for being a review in the main page.
The description of Shadow War Of Succession was a rant about how horrible it was, and I cut most of it. Some of it went to Horrible.Video Games, where it was already listed.
Transplanted Character Fic <—really? Permission to snip some of the complaining from the description?
Ecce Homo SuperiorI certainly won't mind.
(it's David Bowie)
*hands animeg a pair of hedge trimmers* go ahead.
Thanks. I hope I didn't mess it up.
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from firstname.lastname@example.org.