That this is a topic for TRS. Please take it there.
...
(Consider this post deleted since there's no way to delete forum posts.)
edited 11th Jun '12 12:27:33 PM by AmateurPolymath
Thread has been moved from Special Efforts into the Trope Repair Shop.
"Yup. That tasted purple."
Tagged a page that seemed to fit the purpose.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Thanks, I'm new here, sorry about that!
One more thing, could a moderator change the thread title to the left of the tag to "Not Tropeworthy"?
edited 11th Jun '12 12:48:14 PM by AmateurPolymath
Differences between reality and fiction are most certainly tropeworthy.
Otherwise, "complaining" or even "not thriving" are more indicated since the wicks to Did Not Do The Research would be better off on Artistic License – Indexes.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I'm sorry, feel free to close the thread then. This was only my first attempt at helping this wiki. Perhaps I didn't do the research myself. 
Still, Artistic License doesn't feel like it belongs on the main page. I guess that's the most valid concern I can give now.
edited 11th Jun '12 1:10:37 PM by AmateurPolymath
I say that departures from reality are definitely notable - when they mark a trend or a way to express fiction. They are not notable when it's just a mistake.
So, 2D-Space may be Artistic License: Space or You Fail Galactic Cartology Forever, but it's also a trope. Any other error that similarly spans multiple works may similarly be a trope (and may deserve its own page). But we shouldn't have artistic license pages that just catalog bloopers, divided by academic subject.
edited 11th Jun '12 3:01:54 PM by Routerie
I say that departures from reality are definitely notable - when they mark a trend or a way to express fiction. They are not notable when it's just a mistake.
The distinction between intentional and mistake is going to be quite ambiguous without Word of God so there is no way to use that except by periodically splitting actual tropes like 2-D Space off of Artistic License – Indexes. They are a bit like bloopers. I do think there is worth in cataloguing examples as they are in large part the thing that distinguishes fiction from reality: The former doesn't happen and often can't actually happen
That said, I have to ask whether Artistic License – Indexes and its subitems are supposed to have wicks, rules-wise, and whether they get any usage issues.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I don't think we should split by intentional / unintentional. We should split by patterns. Two-D Space is a pattern, a way that various stories portray space. You Fail Space Forever is just a collection of various bloopers, not a pattern.
From my reading of the threads concerting the You Fail Forever rename I see that the point of these pages is to collect examples for specific tropes. They are proto-tropes, more relevant than chairs or bloopers since as I said ![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
they reflect one of the main distinctions between fiction and reality.
edited 4th Jul '12 1:52:00 PM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I think that's a fine goal, collecting inaccuracies for future tropes. But the inaccuracy categories aren't tropes themselves, and we shouldn't link to them from trope pages. Similarly we have a large section
for developing tropes, but trope pages don't link there.
But the inaccuracy categories aren't tropes themselves, and we shouldn't link to them from trope pages.
Methinks you meant work pages.
Still, blooper has examples as well as several other Trivia, and they have the same degree of "non-trope-dom", so I'd like to crowner this rule before making it official.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Yes, I meant work pages (but trope pages too, now that I think of it).
Blooper has an open TRS discussion. I don't think we should catalog bloopers. Other sites already do so, exhaustively. But looking at bloopers could be a good way to spot tropes, just like looking at inaccuracies. Corpsing is a specific type of blooper, and I think it deserves a page more than general bloopers do.
One thing that occurred to me: Since we were discussing Artistic License – Indexes in the Did Not Do The Research TRS thread, that both have the same issues (inappropriate wicks), and both are roughly the same, except that AL-I holds DNDTR's examples, should we discuss it all over there? Methinks they would benefit from a tandem fix.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Hurler of Swine
I'm not sure how these are appreciably different in intent from indexes like Space Does Not Work That Way. Just cut out the examples that don't form tropable patterns and create new trope pages if necessary for the ones that do.
We can't "cut out examples that don't form a tropable pattern" because it's a dynamic process, not a static one. I'll investigate the The Wesley thread to check how multi-thread crowners are dealt with.
Seems that since the issue here is basically "does this warrant wicks", it needs a Single Proposition crowner.
edited 5th Jul '12 3:21:58 AM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
It's a dynamic process, but that's not what most people think. Most people just consider these pages a good place to note mistakes they notice. If these pages are a brainstorming ground for new tropes, we should label them as such and put them somewhere separate that's clearly for construction, like YKTTW is.
(Yeah, we should probably merge this thread with the DNDTR one. This is getting confusing...)
Anyone opposed to tabling any discussion on Artistic License – Indexes until we have worked out (in the DNDTR thread) whether we merge them?
Bumping this with the notice that we are considering to merge the Artistic License - Whatever tropes with Did Not Do The Research as they all are The Same But More Specific. If all the options here pass, this would fix the AL-I problem wicks.
Ravenous Sophovore
This is already being addressed by the TRS thread for Did Not Do The Research. No need to duplicate. Closing.
Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.
While responding to the negativity thread in special efforts, something popped into my mind about a certain set of "Tropes" (Term used lightly).
I'm quite new on this forum, but I've lurked the site for almost 2 years. Back when Artistic License "Tropes" were known as "You Fail X Forever", they attracted predictable hatred and natter on most pages they graced. While the rename to Artistic License has improved the usage of this "Trope" by quite a bit, it doesn't stop the predictable flow of natter on works with warring Fan Dumbs/Hate Dumbs such as Twilight. At best, these "Tropes" are unnecessary trivia that are irrelevant to this wiki's stated goals: "This wiki is a catalog of the tricks of the trade for writing fiction." . At worst, these tropes are one more opening for NERD RAEG between fans and fan haters. Personally, I consider these tropes to be Audience Reactions not worthy of placement on the main page. Before being listed as an audience reaction, Did Not do the Research and Artistic License tropes were used somewhat interchangeably when appropriate. Why eliminate one, and not the other?
I have no power over this, but after searching the forum, nobody seems to have brought this up. Forgive if I'm wrong. What do you guys think?
My suggestion would be to move them to the trivia tab, as they seem to fall somewhere between trivia and audience reaction. I believe they don't belong the main page.
edited 11th Jun '12 12:40:47 PM by AmateurPolymath