Rename (alt titles crowner 6/19): Badass Spaniard

Badass Hispanic doesn't fix any of the problems we had with the name apart from the nationality being too restrictive.

Yeah, that's the only one I've been able to vote on so far—and I voted it down. :)

I'm just not thrilled with this list of options. I could live with "swashbuckling", but it really doesn't seem quite right to me. If neither I nor anybody else can think of something better soon, though, I'll probably upvote whatever's in the lead in a couple of days.

ETA: actually, I think I do have a mild preference for "hispanic" over "spaniard". The latter seems too narrow. Zorro could arguably be disqualified under "spaniard", since he was Californian.

edited 19th Jun '12 4:31:04 PM by Xtifr

I myself have a problem with "Spaniard" as the word itself quite literally specifically means a person from the country of Spain, while the trope itself isn't about a specific nationality. It makes as much sense as "Evil Brit" being expanded to allow non-British examples.

Okay, I'm going to try and clean up the worst misuses of this trope, before the trope description is rewritten.

I still don't like the fact that the most popular option still includes "Spaniard" since it still implies that this is a nationality trope, but the swashbuckling part should stop people from thinking this is "badass who speaks spanish."

After the crowner is called, what's the next move for the cleanup of bad examples/wicks?

edited 25th Jun '12 8:18:15 AM by Shaoken

Okay, it's been 10 days since the crowner started, can we call it so we can start on the clean-up?

I think we should give it another day or so, the top options have completely reversed from what they were, so I'm not sure it's stable yet.

True, fo the first five it was Swashbuckling Spaniard, then it swapped to Swashbuckling Hispanic for the last five.

At least we know that nobody wants Badass Hispanic.

Okay, another day and the options are still in the same place, with Swashbuckling Spaniard two votes behind Hispanic. Is that decissive enough or do we need to take it back to discussion to get a more definitive name?

Also the trope description will need to be rewritten to be more clear as to what this trope is about.

EDIT: Nevermind, both are now tied at 5.

edited 30th Jun '12 1:04:22 AM by Shaoken

The ratio of yes/no is what matters, not the absolute difference. Even though they are both at +5, Hispanic has a yes/no ratio of 2.25:1, which is more than the minimum 2:1 required to pass, while Spaniard is at 1.63:1, which is not.

Yes, that means that every no vote offsets two yes votes. That's intentional. We want a solid win on these sorts of decisions, not a divisive narrow majority.

ETA: (I'm oversimplifying a little, but that's the basic gist of it.)

edited 30th Jun '12 1:17:46 AM by Xtifr

I'd feel better if we got some more people giving opinions and explanations behind which choice they think is better. I prefer Hispanic over Spaniard because the latter is a word that in the real world exclusively refers to a Spanish National, whereas this trope is not a Nationality trope.

Anyway, last page Shima gave the following six criteria that a character has to meet to be called whatever it is we decide on;

• Hispanic with a notable accent
• Bound to a code of honour
• Romantic, dashing, and/or debonair
• Badass with their weapon of choice
• Athletic, nimble and graceful in battle
• Quick thinking and witty

At present the description doesn't clearly reflect this. So does someone want to rewrite it so it matches up and better explains what this article is about (I'll give it a shot tomorrow when I have more free time)?

Also, although Shima said that a character has to meet all six criteria to be listed under this trope, does everyone agree to that or will we need another crowner to sort that out?

edited 30th Jun '12 1:21:38 AM by Shaoken

^^ Alternative titles do not need a 2:1 consensus. Also, from what I recall when I asked, it actually is the option that has the highest number of plus votes, not the ratio. That's probably a flexible idea, but it's still the policy last I checked, so if they're really close we'd probably go with the one that has a higher ratio.

Also, so far as I can tell the difference between the two titles is that Swashbuckling Spaniard sounds better due to alliteration but Swashbuckling Hispanic is more accurate. Either one is fine with me.

edited 30th Jun '12 9:47:32 AM by Arha

The poll has been stable for a day, and it's been 11-12 days since the crowner was attached, and it's been three months since I created the topic. Can we call it and get on with rewriting the Trope description for more clarity?

Once again, this trope has NOTHING to do with swashbuckling. Those titles are misleading. Modern incarnations of this trope almost never use that fighting style and are generally gunslingers. Using a title with swashbuckler in it would require the first line of the trope to tell the reader that it has nothing to do with swashbuckling.

Traits that do matter to this trope:

• Code of honour
• Charming
• Chivalrous
• Good with the ladies
• Hispanic or Spanish accent
• Athletic and acrobatic
• Vengeful streak, wants revenge on someone or something

If you're really stuck on one of those names though, here's a write up:

Despite the name, this trope has nothing to do with swashbucklers. In fact, most modern incarnations would have no idea what to do with a sword if they were handed one. Instead they tend to be gunslingers generally with pistols as weapons of choice.

What does make this trope is that the character is always Hispanic or Spanish, charming, great with the ladies, and witty. They tend towards an acrobatic fighting style and tend to have a strict code of honour about what they will and will not do. Expect them to swear revenge for something or another and for their character arc to revolve around resolving this.

While this trope was codified around Zorro, it's since evolved a long way from it's roots and is now as at home in a modern setting as it is in a historical one.

edited 30th Jun '12 8:29:57 PM by shimaspawn

Well, if you don't want swashbuckling, then we're better off cutting the trope because we're trying to get rid of the badass tropes, and no other name came even close to get the same degree of popularity.

This as well. Swashbuckling can also be interprted as more of a general style.

edited 30th Jun '12 8:41:49 PM by Shaoken

Personally, I've always tended to think of this sort of thing being what makes for a "swashbuckler" archetype, not whether they actually use a sword or not.

It's a very distinct codified trope. It just has nothing to do with swashbuckling. What make a swashbuckler is a fighting style, not just a personality. Naming it swashbuckler when it's not about swords is going to cause trope decay. It's just going to become a list of every Hispanic character that uses a sword. And it's going to discourage good examples that don't use swords.

edited 30th Jun '12 8:42:39 PM by shimaspawn

Dashing Hispanic Hero, maybe?

Well it can't be that distinct, considering that no-troper has been using it that way for the last few years. The overwhelming majority of examples are "badass who speaks spanish," because of how unclear the name is.

No, because this trope could be applied to villians as well.

edited 30th Jun '12 8:45:03 PM by Shaoken

Ninja'd — I was actually entering Dashing Heroic Hispanic when you entered that one. :)

edited 30th Jun '12 8:51:54 PM by Xtifr

Not as I understand it.

I think Heroic works a little better than Hero, but maybe that's just me.

Looking over the criteria;

• Code of honour
• Charming
• Chivalrous
• Good with the ladies
• Hispanic or Spanish accent
• Athletic and acrobatic
• Vengeful streak, wants revenge on someone or something

None of those traits have to be unique to a hero. Granted a villian who has a Code of Honour, Chivalrous and good with the ladies is hard to come by, so maybe I'm wrong on that front.

It can apply to anti-heroes and occasionally anti-villains or characters that end up doing a Heel–Face Turn (like Inigo in The Princess Bride) but I've never seen it apply to a true villain.

Exactly. By the strict letter of the trope it might be possible for a sufficiently gray villain to qualify, but in practice it's a trope for "good guys".

Eh, it's almost never a trope for the really good guys either. It's actually really just a trope for the morally grey tending heroic but never really getting more than anti-hero. Even Zorro was morally grey. This isn't a trope that's seen on characters that are true heroes or true villains.

edited 30th Jun '12 9:10:39 PM by shimaspawn