Currently on the table: Axing any appearance trope with more than 50% misuse and/or ZCEs on a wick check
There is on TV Tropes, a common bad habit that persists among editors of using appearance tropes, or names that sound like they could be appearance tropes, badly. They always suffer from the same problems and they tend to clog up the TRS like they're on a revolving door. As such I'm making a large scale special effort in order to address the common problems all of these tropes have.
Sometimes non-appearance tropes are mistaken for appearance tropes. Report them here and the clean-up will be handled.
We're going to search for the best ways to change the culture and make sure that the misuse stops. Tropes will be handled here and we'll likely have a fair number of crowners on this thread. Keep checking back for new developments.
For full details, including the to-do list and crowner list, check this post.
All appearance tropes that show more than 50% misuse and/or ZCEs on a wick check may be cut freely after posting the wick check here on the thread for approval as per crowner results.
Yeah, there's times I miss the whole "strength of the argument" thing that the other wiki uses instead of voting. Relying on pure votes is why it can be so hard to get rid of bashy, complainy pages sometimes. Some people think bashing and complaining is just too much fun, and will vote against cutting it whenever they can.
I suspect a similar effect is going to happen sometimes with appearance tropes. Some people just aren't going to care that it's not a trope—they still want to use it to help describe their favorite character.
A reminder for Shiny Midnight Black, if we don't get a consensus, the definition remains as-is: "Shiny black hair with blue or purple luster." No special connotations or additional meanings, just the color.
Well the crowner option for it is "Just keep it as is", which implies leaving the current description in place. It's a pretty bad description. I certainly wouldn't want to keep that description.
I also think its tropability is dubious.
I think some people just hate to see a page go, and would rather redefine and rename something than simply start from scratch at YKTTW, even if that means throwing out all or most of the examples, and engaging in a lengthy and tedious review of wicks.
I remember that happening with some trope about nukes recently. The definition was completely changed, so all the examples had to be fixed, and the trope was renamed. The whole exercise made no sense to me. I mean, throw out the name, the definition, and the examples, and what have you got? :)
Not sure that Shiny Black Whatsit is really in that territory, but I think it may be close, at least if we really want to try to do anything useful with it.
All the ZC examples will have to go anyway, no matter how the crowner turns out. And since there's nothing to say other than "Character has black hair with _____ highlights" there's not going to be much left.
I question, however, the logic and fairness of "just keep it the way it is" winning by default if there's no consensus, since that option is at the bottom. A runoff of the top two options would be better.
edited 13th Dec '12 8:40:25 PM by ArcadesSabboth
Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
"Just keep it the way it is" should not win by default since it's at the bottom of the page. If there's not a clear winner between the first two it should be to 'cut all examples, but keep the page,' because you can always cut it later and most people want to at least cut the examples.