Needs Help: Darth Wiki.Wall Banger

Wallbanger has some shades of headscratcher though.

Wallbanger is about moments, not works as a whole. While Metroid Other M has divisive opinions on the work as a whole, pretty much everyone agrees that the infamous Ridley scene was poorly executed and relied upon knowledge of a mediocre Japanese comic that hasn't seen an official translation; whether you thought it was a tear-jerking scene or character derailment was something else entirely. Therefore, the Ridley scene would be a Wallbanger.

What I'm getting at is: A work that's not universally considered bad can still have a Wall Banger if a moment in it is considered poorly done near-universally. Just look at Loss; despite its infamy, Ctrl Alt Del is still a popular webcomic.

However, I don't really see the point of Wallbanger other than a place to vent. "This moment was STUPID! And everybody agrees it's STUPID!"

edited 7th Nov '12 2:19:49 PM by Scardoll

Fight. Struggle. Endure. Suffer. LIVE.

Both DMOS and Wall Banger exist pretty much as pure venting (being distinguished from SBIH by the moments-not-works thing), and I don't think we need two separate "tropes" for that. So I'm going on the record as supporting a merge into whichever of the two is less of a mess.

I don't really think we need any pages for venting.

Put me in motion, drink the potion, use the lotion, drain the ocean, cause commotion, fake devotion, entertain a notion, be Nova Scotian

Ok, so I've made a crowner [1] and incorporated all the main suggestions here.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

@Septimus:

If you're really going to try and push this through, you have to hook it to the topic, not squirrel it away in a crowner that hardly anyone will see.

I'll reiterate the same thing I said in the "Dealing with the complaint pages" thread (which you posted in - I hope you read through that whole topic):

1) Again, "I don't like it" is not an excuse. I don't like the Sugar Wiki, but I don't go on TRS to say that the whole thing should be cut because (a) it's more mindless than WB/DMOS by far, (b) it has little to no curation whatsoever, and (c) the protracted rants about how awesome something is are far more prevalent than the odd rant about why a moment in a work failed completely.

2) You fail to mention that before WB/DMOS was instituted, there was a significant influx of natter and whining on the wiki. Creating those two pages was the best solution to the problem, and it has still worked effectively. You will never be able to truly eliminate natter, but you can mitigate by relegating them to a handful of structured pages. Why this still continues to bother people is beyond me.

3) As I said before, I believe that the cataloging and noting of these "negative" moments highlights a very important resource for people who want to know the reasons why a failed concept didn't work, why a show was critically/commercially panned or want a change of pace. It has more thought put into it, on average, than the typical "character x did event y and is awesome for it" whinging that still occurs far too frequently.

4) Wall Banger (and, by extension, the Darth Wiki) exist as the counterpart to CMOA. You can't get rid of one without getting the other, no matter how many people try to tell you otherwise.

I took a look at some of the WB subpages yesterday. There are a few examples that are walls of text, and it could stand a trim in places to remove the errant examples that don't explain their case. Yet, I don't see the misuse you're talking about, and I fail to understand why we're launching another crowner against it so soon (we just dealt with what to do with the "complaint pages", and the only consensus was to clean them). The only thing I would agree to is that the bold, italics and underlining in both pages need to be stricken. Otherwise, it is what it is.

edited 19th Nov '12 9:01:34 AM by crazyrabbits

^Point zero, I did ask. Never received a reply.

Point two, who is saying that I voted in favour of cutting? I am saying no to cutting.

Also, if the pages are now clean, I'd also vote for "leave this alone" since it's the second attempt in this year to my knowledge.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

What about the duplicate issue? No one is proposing that both pages should be cut.

Yes. One page, I can understand the use for. But two, with very little distinction between them? That's another story.

I'm personally in favour of keeping Wall Banger, but reworking it to be strictly "moment in an otherwise good work that pretty much everyone agrees was executed poorly/could have been handled better" type of stuff. Keep it specific, prune out hyperbole, etc. Some works have their low points, and I don't think acknowledging it is necessarily complaining.

I'm in favor of keeping it as it is. Like I said before, too many people are getting cut happy with pages and now pages I used to check for research into works to check out and for enjoyment are gone.

Merging these pages seems like the best way to go. WB and DMOS are pretty much the same thing and both are used for complaining, but we should keep the rules of DMOS if we merge the pages.