Needs Help: Darth Wiki.Crowning Moment Of Indifference

This page appears to be a Troper Tales page, not a trope. Does anyone have a reason we should keep it?

It reads like a chapter of a mediocre humor book, full of uninspired observations about random everyday things. No, it's not "kind of okay" by me.

This is the only Moments page with no media examples and instead has troper tales. I see no value in keeping it.

It doesn't actually have troper tales, or is not supposed to. We should limit this to media stuff at least.

Cut. It's nothing but Troper Tales. As a joke it falls flat.

I don't see the point of this page. It's just Troper tales.

I feel like it is using up space with the first person and also, I feel that very few people care about some guy looking at goatse. That's just my opinion, man.

Nothing to do with this site, or with anything. Cut.

1. You guys do realize this is a Darth Wiki plus Just for Fun page, right?

2. Are you choosing to cut it based on the examples or definition? If the former, then the solution is to cut the bad examples and fix the page, not condemn it.

edited 20th May '12 8:44:07 PM by DragonQuestZ

There are a few media-related examples. I say cut the rest, but leave the page, because, erm, why not? It's Darth Wiki.

Some examples that seem ok:

• Saw Schoolhouse Rock the other day. Already knew how to multiply by 3, though.
• While playing Godzilla: Monster of Monsters on the NES, I went through a period of about 30 minutes where I was vaguely aware that I wasn't enjoying myself at all, but kept playing anyway.
• The second time I saw Napoleon Dynamite. They say it gets better with each viewing, but since I already knew what was happening, I may as well have been staring at a wall.

Then there's a bunch that would have worked if they'd been just a little more specific, like:

• There was this time I beat a video game for the 11th time.
• Watched some animes that everybody on this wiki raves about. S'alright.
• After a few years of very passive searching I finally stumbled on one of the first games I played and downloaded it on freeware. It was just as I remember it - alright. Not as good as some of the newer games, but not too bad either. I am now almost totally ambivalent about it.

Those should probably be cut, but I could see a week argument for keeping the ones that are most near to being specific (like that last one).

ETA: "This Troper" use all over the page definitely needs to go.

edited 20th May '12 11:49:28 PM by Xtifr

You know, since this is supposed to be the joke counterpart to Awesome Moments and Dethroning Moment of Suck, this could be reworked to focusing on meh or unremarkable moments than just how those writing the examples felt.

Its a Darth Wiki page, they're all like that.

Paint The Hero Black

Tropes That Will Never Exist

How Not To Write An Example

This Exists to satirize This Very Wiki, it is not supposed to have proper trope pages.

Yeah, but some of those are actually funny. How Not To Write An Example, Tropes That Will Never Exist.

1. We cannot base a page's validity on whether one finds them funny or not.

2. There is still some help we can give it, which you could at least offer.

If a page is supposed to be funny, and it is funny, that's a reason for keeping it. If a page is supposed to be funny, and it's not funny, that's not a reason for keeping it. You say this page is satirical. Do you think it succeeds at that?

That should not be judged on whether it fits someone's subjective idea of funny. It should be judged on on how it fits the way the page is supposed to work.

I don't find a lot of the entries on Worse Than It Sounds funny, but they still work.

So if entries don't work on the page, that is what the problem with the page is. We fix that, not try to pretend being funny is an objective thing.

Do the current entries meet any standard of funny, subjective or objective? Or has it become a Troper Tales page where people genuinely post things that left them indifferent?

To fix this, we must first remove all current content. For this to work as a satiric page, it must then list moments in fiction that left editors indifferent.

But do we want that list? Is different enough from the other moment pages to mock them, or will it be just another outlet for people to share their opinions?

"Do the current entries meet any standard of funny, subjective or objective?"

We can't use a standard, or else Crowning Moment Of Funny would be an objective trope.

Yes, we can use a standard, and yes, you may delete Crowning Moment Of Funny examples that do not document humor.

One example on the page is: "I just blinked."

This is a joke because it references something absurdly unremarkable. I do not think it is a good joke, but that does not matter in determining whether it is one.

Anther example is: "The ending of Mr. and Mrs. Smith was crap, but i was just glad the film was over and I could leave the cinema. Most of the jokes in that film drew either silence or an indifferent cough from the rest of the cinema."

That is not a joke. It is a genuine criticism of the film.

If this page is supposed to be satirical, examples of the latter kind must go. It the page is supposed to catalog audience reactions, examples of the first kind must go.

(I say either mission is flawed, and the whole page should go.)

"examples that do not document humor"

That is not the same as not finding an attempt at a joke funny.

"I just blinked"

That's not bad because it's not funny. It's bad because it doesn't really show indifference.

We just need to fix this and find a better definition. So do you have one or are you just going to complain that you don't think it's funny?

My complaint was that they're not jokes. "I blinked" is a joke, but many of the examples aren't. If we want the article to be a joke, we must remove all those examples that comment sincerely on media.

Once we have removed all examples that comment sincerely on media, the article will depart too far from our purpose to be of any use.

No, I will not suggest a better definition for this page. Nor should you.

edited 22nd May '12 7:02:04 PM by Routerie

Wait? Why remove the comments that are sincere about media? Comments that are about non-media things would make more sense.

Plus being a joke article is not the same as requiring every entry be a joke.

Remove sincere examples if this is a spoof article. Just as we'd remove paragraphs detailing trope guidelines from Tropes That Will Never Happen or serious commentary from The Onion.

But yes, we should remove what remains as well. Therefore, we should remove the whole article.

You have to know what is sincere first, and we have to look at context.

And where the hell is your proof that they are all sincere, therefore all examples get cut, and therefore the whole article? That's trying to invoke a slippery slope. You have to prove a page is broken by its core to get cut, not just bad examples. That is fixing the article.

I never said they're all sincere.

The sincere ones aren't satiric so don't belong in the article. The satiric non-media ones have nothing to do with media so don't belong on the site.