Total posts:  2 3 4 5 6
Hey, It's That Guy! sees huge misuse. The misuse is so high that when I removed some misuse, I got a PM saying I risk suspension if I don’t open a TRS thread about it. The definition of Hey, It's That Guy! is “An actor you've seen in other works, but you don't remember his name, just his face.” Yet people routinely use it for, “here is a previous role for each of several of this film’s famous actors.” Leading to examples like this, from our ‘’Inception’’ page:
edited 8th May '13 12:33:55 PM by AmyGdala
Another Wizard boyThe misuse displaced the correct use a long time ago. Good luck getting that changed.
So what do we do about that? Rename Role Association to Hey, It's That Guy! and rename Hey, It's That Guy! to something else?
Another Wizard boyWith close to 5000 wicks, I'd rather leave this name alone. By the way, the de facto usage I am familiar with is "this actor is also in that other work", and it's on a per work base. I am not exactly sure what Role Association is about.
No, the other one.Personally I think all these pages can be cut, but I don't really think that's going to fly with a lot of people. I mostly just see them as irrelevant Just for Fun pages.
Check out my fanfiction!
Another Wizard boyYeah, with these usage numbers cutting HITG is off the table, and RA looks like a harmless Just for Fun item. I'd oppose cutting it.
Yeah, just give up and rewrite the definition of Hey, It's That Guy! to hew to the misuse. (As I've said before, giving up isn't something I like to suggest, but...)
Ideally, we'd let people type whatever they want in the just for fun page but cut all examples from actual work pages and trivia tabs. But that seems hard with 5000+ wicks. But the status quo is unacceptable. We can't have a page that describes a trope and then thousands of wicks that cover something else. So I suggest redefining HITG to suit the misuse and merging it with Role Association (and labeling it as Just for Fun). And then airlifting the actual Hey, It's That Guy! trope into a new page with a new name.
What the OP was saying is that the concept that most people are attaching Hey, It's That Guy! to isn't even trivia. (S)He wasn't talking about the page itself; (s)he was saying that the popular misuse is Just for Fun, if that.
Another Wizard boy"This actor was in that other work too", which is the use I see on Trivia pages, is Trivia.
Hey, It's That Guy! over a slow fire and watch it burn to death, screaming.
Well, that depends whether you think that that definition you use is the "right" one. The way the OP put it definitely doesn't sound like trivia. :)
edited 8th May '13 1:00:39 PM by Leaper
ZzzzzzzzzzThe way we've defined it is the way it was defined by the (sadly, now-defunct) website called "Hey, It's That Guy!". "<This actor> also played <this other completely unrelated character>" isn't even trivia. It's just a fact of life. Actors play lots of roles in the course of their careers.
'He strutted across the bedroom, his hard manhood pointing the way' sounds like he owns a badly named seeing-eye dog. 'Sit, Hard Manhood!
I see it get used for A-Listers all the time.
^^^ Yes, and it's even worse - people use it for A-list actors too. (As Larkman wrote, as I wrote this.)
edited 8th May '13 1:09:03 PM by AmyGdala
You Know That Show for works and Lost and Found for tropes. Why not turn Hey, It's That Guy! into a threaded discussion page to identify actors? I suppose it's a little redundant given that you can look up anything on IMDB, but it's a solution that would let us keep the inbounds.
edited 8th May '13 1:11:27 PM by Fighteer
Yeah, I think the best and easiest thing to do is to redefine this to make it fit the misuse and move it to Just for Fun. (Although good luck in coming up with a misuse-fitting definition that doesn't sound completely dumb. "Actors play many roles. The role of this entry is to chronicle the roles they play.")
No, the other one.Just going to say, even if I think it can be cut, I'd still vote against it, since there are lots of people who do find it interesting, and I don't think it's harming the wiki. @Maddy: Isn't that what trivia is?
Check out my fanfiction!
Another Wizard boyThe proposal in @18 looks interesting, although I would be also fine with not doing anything.
Not doing anything? Not even rewriting the description?
Anime-ted+1 for Fighteer's idea; at least it would be something possibly productive instead of what it's become now.
Just for Fun and stripping out most of the wicks, redefining it to fit its current use, cutting it entirely, or doing nothing. That, too.
edited 8th May '13 2:09:58 PM by Fighteer
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from firstname.lastname@example.org.