Do you have trouble remembering the difference between Deathbringer the Adorable and Fluffy the Terrible?
Do you have trouble recognizing when you've written a Zero-Context Example?
Not sure if you really have a Badass Bookworm or just a guy who likes to read?
Well, this is the thread for you. We're here to help you will all the finer points of example writing. If you have any questions, we can answer them. Don't be afraid. We don't bite. We all just want to make the wiki a better place for everyone.
Useful Tips:
- Make sure that the example makes sense to both people who don't know the work AND don't know the trope.
- Wrong: The Mentor: Kevin is this to Bob in the first episode.
- Right: The Mentor: Kevin takes Bob under his wing in the first episode and teaches him the ropes of being a were-chinchilla.
- Never just put the trope title and leave it at that.
- Wrong: Badass Adorable
- Right: Badass Adorable: Xavier, the group's cute little mascot, defeats three raging elephants with both hands tied behind his back using only an uncooked spaghetti noodle.
- When is normally far less important than How.
- A character name is not an explanation.
- Wrong: Full Moon Silhouette: Diana
- Right: Full Moon Silhouette: At the end of her transformation sequence into Moon Princess Misty, Diana is shown flying across the full moon riding a rutabaga.
Other Resources:
For best results, please include why you think an example is iffy in your first post.
Also, many oft-misused tropes/topics have their own threads, such as Surprisingly Realistic Outcome (here
) and Fan-Preferred Couple (here). Tropers are better able to give feedback on examples you bring up to specific threads.
For cleaning up examples of Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard, you must use their dedicated threads: Complete Monster Cleanup, Magnificent Bastard Cleanup.
Edited by Synchronicity on Sep 18th 2023 at 11:42:55 AM
Damn, I was expecting both of them to be from MLP or related works. Interesting that one is a Pokemon fanfic.
But yes, after seeing them, I concur with the other comments that they actually do fit. Color me surprised.
EDIT: Also, after reading the page, it doesn't say anywhere that Cynthia is a horse. Is that just something you know through familiarity with the work? It would be nice if it were stated somewhere on the page.
edited 30th Dec '14 2:54:50 PM by SolipSchism
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
I think it's because the one expressing the attraction in her case is a nonhuman being whose morphology is a caricature of an overmuscled male human, and different enough that it's highly unlikely they'd share much with human society's standards of female beauty (except for muscularity, given the nature of said humanoid species).
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Weird. But in any case, going by the description, it fits.
And besides, Cynthia is a human.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
My understanding is that the character admiring the Amazonian Beauty is a horse. Or something.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
In the MLP, it is a horse (well, biologists my dispute that, but it's equine enough). In the Pokemon example, the one admiring her is of this species of Pokemon.
Hi, I'd like to know if, in the description of the trope, one should comment if the trope is used well or poorly. Could someone please tell me?
A specific question: in Drag Me To Hell, the protagonist sees the corpse of the woman who condemned her to hell. Its eyes are open and staring directly ahead, at her; after she walks around the coffin that holds the corpse, she makes conversation with another character, then looks at the corpse again to see its eyes looking at her sideways; again, when she digs it up from its grave, its eyes are looking upwards, at her. Is this an example of a Creepy Changing Painting?
edited 2nd Jan '15 4:38:35 AM by Az_Tech341
Hey Harmonica, when they do you in, pray that it's someone who knows where to shoot.
Well, the trope description only specifies "an inanimate object", and a corpse is technically inanimate... But I'm on the fence. I'm inclined to say it fits because a corpse is an inanimate object that you wouldn't expect to move, so it's in the spirit of the trope.
Examples shouldn't be judgmental unless they're on YMMV pages, no.
I'll add that example then, thanks.
Got it, thank you.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Are the tropes I Call It "Vera" and Named Weapons, in spite of their respective descriptions, flexible enough to accomodate examples of named inanimate objects that are not weapons — like a civilian-model car? There are some examples of such named vehicles on I Call It "Vera" (mostly within the real life folder), FWIWnote .
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
I feel like I Call It "Vera" could be expanded to cover people naming weapons as well as vehicles and other singular inanimate objects (e.g. their Companion Cube), but obviously not vehicles that actually have a name like ships, and not for "class" names like the A-10 "Thunderbolt" or F-22 "Raptor", etc.
But then, if an A-10 pilot calls his plane "Cassandra," then I think the trope could be expanded to fit it. (Or maybe the Third Doctor calling his car "Bessie", if we want a real example.
That's just me, though.
Although, maybe we could just make a sister trope that is I Call It "Vera" But With Vehicles.
All of that said, I would not say Named Weapons should apply to vehicles unless the vehicle is actually a weapon itself, like Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War has the Scinfaxi and Hrimfaxi submarines.... Maybe.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Maybe we need a less weapon-focused Super-Trope of Named Weapons, to cover examples like "vehicles that actually have a name like ships".
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
My only problem with that is that there is a difference in the significance of a ship being officially named the "HMS Enterprise" versus the Doctor calling his car "Bessie". The former is a systematic use of policy and record, not to mention I personally think it's Chairs; the latter is a character's affectionate nickname for his Companion Cube.
edited 6th Jan '15 11:17:42 AM by SolipSchism
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
Lost in Space
"People Name Inanimate Objects" is PSOC. It carries no narrative weight whatsoever.
edited 7th Jan '15 5:25:47 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
And yet we have Truth in Television (and its counterpart, Reality Is Unrealistic), which is the main reason why we have Real Life sections for trope examples (and counter-examples).
It's not simply "People name inanimate objects". It's "People name inanimate objects and treat them as if they were not inanimate objects (e.g. by using gendered pronouns instead of 'it')".
edited 7th Jan '15 5:27:18 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Lost in Space
People treating inanimate objects, named or otherwise, as if they were real people is Companion Cube, full stop. Personifying an object by giving it a name, as in I Call It "Vera", is not the same thing, as the character doesn't actually believe that "Vera" is a real person.
That people anthropomorphize their tools and vehicles is an observable phenomenon in human psychology, but it doesn't mean it's a trope unless it carries narrative significance. It's precisely because it's so universal a thing to do that it is only meaningful when given special attention or atypical context.
edited 7th Jan '15 7:33:33 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Please explain how the fact that ships and space shuttles have unique names has narrative significance beyond possible cases of already existing tropes like Companion Cube and Spaceship Girl, etc.
That said, I do think Named Weapons and/or I Call It "Vera" could be expanded or have a Sister Trope for vehicles if and only if they are named in the same manner as those existing tropes, such as the Doctor's car.
I don't see how "a systematic use of policy and record" factors into Named Weapons' description. One of the examples even points out that official names (the M1 Abrams in particular) are an aversion of the trope. Thus, official names like ship and shuttle names seem irrelevant to the trope unless the name originates from a nickname or pet name that may have ascended to be the official name of the craft.
edited 7th Jan '15 8:57:25 AM by SolipSchism
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
Imagine a circle that describes the area of things that are on-mission for this wiki. Truth in Television and Reality Is Unrealistic are on the line: they help describe what this wiki is about. Real Life is outside of the circle. A Biography or Biopic straddles the line.
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
Mostly good, but I think a slightly more accurate explanation of why we have Real Life sections is because art imitates life, which means there is bound to be some correlation both ways between life and art. We are about art. We are only interested in Real Life as it bears resemblance to art, but we constantly have to remind ourselves that life is not art, it just resembles it sometimes. Or a lot of the time. But they are not the same thing and this site does not, strictly speaking, care one lick about Real Life for its own sake.
There is no Planet B
Re: Lexicon's question's about Spirited Young Lady re-addition, Margaret Brent: I've said that in the page discussion that I think she can be included. I am no great scholar on her, but it is hard to imagine she would be wearing man's clothes or behave very un-lady-like that era.
I'd like to hear your opinion on these examples from the page '20s Bob Haircut.
- Shiemi from Blue Exorcist, as part of her retro Kimono Hime aesthetic.
- Hunter × Hunter doesn't take place in the 20s however Kalluto wears a bob hairstyle along with his kimonos.
I would very much like to delete those examples. Because this trope is defined as genre/setting/time indicator of the work, and these two works apparently do not take place in the 20's in Europe or the US.
This trope was launched from TRS of Bob Haircut which was indentified as very chiarsy because lots of women wear it nowadays and it has no story-teling purpose. This smells like the beginning of a new cycle of misuse.
I also think this following example is, well, if not misuse, then very boarderline.
- My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic has Coco Pommel, the Manehattan stylist. Justified in that she's a reference to Coco Chanel.
Is the whole land of the ponies supposed to be a reference to the roaring twenties? If not, I'd delete it as well.
Lost in Space
I'm tempted to agree with those. Frankly, the whole idea of hairstyles invoking era nostalgia seems like it should be wrapped up in a larger trope.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Yeah, they're in the spirit of the trope. It helps that the ones expressing the attraction/admiration in the MLP example are fellow nonhumans.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.