The renaming option seems to be getting support here. Anyone have any ideas ? I'll stay out of the renaming thing otherwise because I'm biased towards keeping it a Cerebus snowclone (while taking away the retcon part), but acknowledge that if all Cerebus swowclones are going to be renamed sooner or later anyway (like some have suggested), this one may be a good place to start.
The trope is being redefined to no longer be limited to retcons. You don't see "being factually incorrect" as a problem?
Although I'll admit that the retcon name hasn't stopped people from including pre-planned examples already.
I rewrote the tope to include non-retcons (and cases that made early gags more serious whitout necessairly being a deconstruction) when the option seemed to get enough support quite a while ago. It had however been changed to a rectcon-only thing before that. Didn't really check the examples for misuse based on the new definition, however.
Before the crowner was created, the discussion got mixed up between :
People who wanted the trope to be retcon-only and create a new page for the planned versions. That option sort of got hijacked by people who didn't want the new trope to be a Cerebus Bad Snowclone VS people who saw nothing wrong with having Cerebus in the new page's title, that sort of went stale.
People who just wanted to keep the trope rectcon-only and the misuses to be kicked out of the page, which would have erased away a lot of examples that just needed a better suited page or to be accepted in their current one.
People who wanted to only change the Recton part of name and keep the (now overwritten)initial definition that had the trope name the only thing containing the word "Retcon". The inital definition broadly defined the trope as retroactively deconstructing early gags in the later part of a work that had gone darker over its run.
People who wanted to have the defenition include both intentional and retcon but saw nothing wrong with the name.
Overlap between the two last (eg someone in favor of both redefinition and renaming) wasn't really visible. That's why it got separated in the crowner. Just look at the first page of the discussion and you'll be grateful of how smoothly it's currenty going.