TLP Crash Rescue - Fixing prematurely launched TLPs and pages

Checked history, and it seems to be created years ago. I'll check wicks and see if it can be salvaged.

Edit: Okay, I checked, and only one other work lists it, but it's an aversion/conversed. It mentions how it's common in kids' shows, but none are listed/wicked.

So I'm thinking we can cut this. Two examples, one of them not being a straight example, does not a trope make.

edited 12th Jan '16 10:12:02 AM by Berrenta

Additional work page stubs: Race To World First, Blood Quantum, and Born To Fight.

Today's worklist:

• David: Stub work page; creator messaged.
• Kollektivet: ~Klaro, please do not write pages in Swedish in that namespace.
• ScoobyDooAbridged.The Scooby Gang: ~Chaotic Tropes, please do not make up namespace ad hoc, these pages go into Characters.
• Shrink High Gaiden: ~Tropers/Koveras, where was the work page previously? Also, it's really pointless to namespace such stub pages.
• SlidingScale.Complete Monster: That looks like a rather bad misuse of Complete Monster, sliding scales being bad ideas aside.

It was under Analysis.Video Game Tropes. Whether it's pointless or not, another troper put some work into it, and I am not presumptuous enough to decide for them whether it was worth it or not. :-)

I've messaged them, then.

^^^ I don't think that's the first time someone has tried to post a 'Complete Monster Sliding Scale' that misuses the trope so badly, never mind one that looks unfinished or just someone goofing off.

edited 13th Jan '16 7:20:04 AM by Morgenthaler

Everyone Gets Their Turn might be salvagable because it's definitely a trope. A borderline omnipresent one, honestly. It's pretty much expected for everyone to get a line in every major scene or reaction.

... good lord, stubby article aside, Webcomic.David is amazingly bad. I can't believe someone even bothered to make that stub for it.

So we've got this: Creator.Milo Yiannopoulos. I'm considering cutting the examples that seem to be troping the guy except... that would pretty much be blanking the page. Is this one for the cutlist?

edited 13th Jan '16 7:20:25 AM by Larkmarn

^The first can go to YKTTW, mayhaps. The second will be cut in a few days if not improved. The third can be cut as well.

Today's worklist:

• American Crime Story: Stub work page; creator messaged.
• Disappearing Bullets: A trope made without YKTTW by ~YT45 with a bad description.
• Ninja Monkey: Aside from being exampleless, this page by ~writingteam looks like a complaining page.

I say we cut Ninja Monkey, doesn't seem to be anything but complaining(plus, you know, stub). If anyone wants to YKTTW it they can go ahead, but I have a suspicion it wouldn't pass.

Additional work page stubs: The Wedding Video, To the Wonder, Runner Runner, Syrup, Moron Five and the Crying Lady, The Kings of Summer, Liz & Dick, Dead Sushi.

For a while I've thought Disappearing Bullets was a reasonable subtrope to Bullets Do Not Work That Way. The name's good enough and it's definitely a trope. The only question is should we split it off from Bullets Do Not Work That Way? Disappearing Bullets is probably the single most common use of Bullets Do Not Work That Way on the wiki, so it may render the page kinda barren.

We can clean up the description easily enough, and example migration may take a while, but it's feasible. It's just a question as to whether it's worth splitting. At the very least make it a redirect, though.

edited 14th Jan '16 8:29:53 AM by Larkmarn

Hi guys, we're just wondering what went wrong with ninja monkey. This is our first post so any input you could give us to salvage it would be helpful.

We've noticed this trend in our writing group where people either write out of desperation to be liked by their audience so they heavily appeal to what they think their demographic will like.

We also saw that this has a parallel in people who placate to their audiences in a disingenuous way. The result is a work that appeals to the lowest common denominator, and can be unappealing or cringe inducing to a general audience.

Is it that this concept is more of a breaking of current tropes like rule of cool or ninja robot zombie etc?  Or would it just be too inflammatory to come to a consensus on and would produce complaints simply because tastes very?

At any rate sorry to come off as complaining in the post. Any help with this would be appreciated.

Um, who is "we"? Are you a role account shared between several people?

Barely Wrong Translation. Seems like a straightforward cut. No YKTTW, poorly done, unindexed, etc. Also seems to have been made solely to further an agenda.

EDIT: Aaaaaaaand it's cutlisted.

edited 14th Jan '16 12:21:46 PM by Larkmarn

Yes, we're a writing team.

This has been around for a while, but Cloud9 has only 4 examples and one crosswick (From Manga).

edited 14th Jan '16 2:10:25 PM by bitemytail

Today's worklist:

• The Dynamite Twins And Friends: This work doesn't look like it could have a Franchise page under policy, ~JWEdwards.
• Tacticool: Trope created by ~mephistos without crosswicking or YKTTW.
• The Meme Contendings: What is the purpose of this page, ~pragmaticgryffindor?

Everyone Gets Their Turn needs more input.

Everyone Gets Their Turn does feel like a trope, it just feels like a hard one to write proper examples for. I know I've seen it before in children's media, but I can't think of any examples offhand.

edited 15th Jan '16 8:59:25 AM by Darksilverhawk

Regarding Tacticool, isn't that already covered by Awesome, but Impractical and Cool, but Inefficient (which are both listed on Boring, but Practical as contrasting tropes, and Tacticool explicitly contrasts itself to BBP in the description)?

[edit] Never mind that I foresee it soon becoming a complaining magnet for people looking to denigrate gun enthusiasts, whether or not the enthusiasts get carried away with the toys added to their weapons...

edited 15th Jan '16 2:46:23 PM by Nohbody

Today's worklist is only Peri Tale, a stub work page whose creator has been messaged.

Today's worklist is Let's Dub Project, a stub work page whose creator has been messaged.

Today's worklist:

• Aeons' Gate: Stub work page; creator messaged.
• Carry On: Stub work page; creator messaged.
• The Collab: Stub work page; creator messaged.
• Monster Infighting: Stub trope without YKTTW by ~New Bob 123.
• No: Stub work page; creator messaged.
• The Forsaken Children: Stub work page; creator messaged.
• Unsong: Stub work page; creator messaged.

edited 18th Jan '16 12:37:59 AM by SeptimusHeap

Hey, I made the Aeons Gate entry. In the creating a work page mentioned, it said the minimal amount of tropes is 3. I had 4 so I thought it'd be enough.

I'd just add more, but there's a slight problem with this. I am actually not a huge fan of the work. Not that I dislike it, I am only 50 pages into the first book, and I don't know much about it. I was just annoyed that there wasn't an entry for it, so I thought I'd make one and message it to the author, who tweeted it, and I hoped that he had enough fans that would come in and expand the entry. They might not do that if there isn't a page already available, which is why I made it.

Can you let me know what the minimal amount of tropes needed for the work to have is? Because I want it to stay on for actual fans to come in and edit, maybe me if I like it enough by the time I'm done reading, but for now, I want to expand the page, I just really, really can't.

Advise?

edited 18th Jan '16 1:36:21 AM by Jerkass

For starters, if you're working up a new page for a work, use the Sandbox namespace. In this case, Sandbox.Aeons Gate.

Secondly, the minimum is three tropes, but the thing is that all of the ones currently listed on the page are Zero Context Examples, in that they don't say anything about how the tropes are used in the work. As written, someone looking up the work that hasn't read it won't have the slightest clue about how they're applied.

Third, while you don't need to take War and Peace as a role model when writing a description, one single line for a description is pretty much useless. You should at least describe the setting and the overall plot in general terms. The current description is so generic that it could apply to umpteen bazillion different works.

[edit] Finally, you should wait until you've read the entire series before making a works page for it. At the very least, it will save you the hassle of having to backtrack entries, should what appears to have happened earlier in the series wind up to be subverted or shown to be something else entirely in a later book.

edited 18th Jan '16 4:07:09 AM by Nohbody

I'll say, as a counter-argument, that it's not necessarily bad to start writing your entry one book into the series, or even halfway into the book. Better to get the details down while you remember them and then have to go back and revise a bit, then to forget to do it entirely.

That said, I do agree that it's good to get a little more description, and to provide context for examples. For the description, paraphrasing whatever is on Wikipedia or Goodreads isn't necessarily a bad start.

You also haven't cross-wicked your examples (gone to the example pages and added them). You don't have to link all of them (I personally omit what I feel are weaker examples on the trope pages, although I'll keep them on the works page since they are, in my opinion, still relevant there), but if you find that most of your examples are weak... well, that might tell you something about the relevance of the tropes you're adding. :) Lastly, you need to index the page (Fantasy Literature and Literature of the 2010s probably both fit). I'd do it myself, but it's good practice for you.

edited 18th Jan '16 6:21:10 AM by FuzzyBoots