Ambiguous Name (titles crowner 6/30/14): George Lucas Altered Version

Bump.

Made an Alt Names crowner and asked for its hooking; someone will have to add the remaining items.

Titles crowner's hooked and the thread title's updated.

Bumping for votes.

ugh, NONE of the options are in the green, what do we do about this?

Not sure this is tropeworthy at all. Seems like the idea is well covered under Re-Cut.

I feel he has a point. Why not just cut this trope?

I don't think this thread should have been opened; what is the approval system for, if not to avoid wasting time on threads like this? IMO it is an exact example of one of the reasons OPs should include statistics, or else some kind of evidence of a problem. In the first sentence of this thread, the opinion is given that "I find the 'George Lucas' part is completely accessory to this trope's meaning." Neither "I don't like the name" nor "another name was changed" is a good argument for a rename. Getting off on the wrong foot like that can (among other things) steer a thread toward being all about choosing a different name, before it's been decided that is an appropriate solution, or even whether there is a problem to solve. Objective information that gave evidence of a problem did not appear until the low inbound link count was mentioned, but even that post jumped to the conclusion "...so it should be renamed", when there were other options, notably "...so it can be safely cut."

edited 1st Aug '14 3:59:26 PM by rodneyAnonymous

I am terribly sorry. Blame my lack of experience (and research, I'll admit) regarding Trope Repair Shop.

But I still believe this thread can end up in something worthwhile.

edited 1st Aug '14 6:52:00 PM by Gaon

For what it's worth, the reason why the lack of inbounds wasn't taken as a reason that a page could safely be cut is because a lack of inbounds doesn't tell much about tropeworthiness. There are plenty of obscure concepts in tropes out there that don't get many inbounds.

^ Low inbounds or few examples or other signs of underuse is a red flag, is all. I don't think a particular action should have been taken, I think no action should have been taken, not without talking about which to take. The actual problem (lack of tropeworthiness) was not identified until near the end of this thread, months (!) after it opened. It was assumed (from the get-go, and throughout) that the problem is the name and the solution is to change it. Renaming is not a magic solution to any problem.

^^ Not at all; my criticism is not that someone doesn't know the rules, it's their lack of consistent enforcement. Eventually this thread got somewhere, but it'd have gotten there much faster if there was evidence of a problem given in the OP, and you'd know OPs are supposed to make a good case if this had been declined (with that message) instead of opened.

edited 2nd Aug '14 2:22:11 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Not sure what anyone is apologizing for, or what anyone's done wrong in this thread.

I think the fact that none of the names are in the green is a pretty good indication that this isn't really a trope. We have Re-Cut, which is about re-cutting, and George Lucas Altered Version, which I guess is Re-Cut taken Up To Eleven. I think the right thing to do is to make George Lucas Altered Version a re-direct to Re-Cut. If we do keep this, I think we should also keep the original name.

edited 4th Aug '14 6:05:02 AM by gallium

The distinction between Re-Cut and this trope, according to Re-Cut, is that here completely new material is inserted along with the old footage.

Still seems like this could be dealt with within Re-Cut.

It's a lumper vs. splitter debate, and we have plenty of distinct examples in this trope that we can't really say it is basically the same thing as a normal Recut. Cause the 5+ different cuts of Blade Runner are a pretty different beast than the Star Wars special editions.

^^^ So Recut can be expanded a bit. No need to be so narrow.

^^^^ "Not sure what anyone is apologizing for, or what anyone's done wrong in this thread."

Exactly. One of the consequences of not enforcing rules is people not knowing what they are.

Probably because of the bad OP, useful discussion did not happen until your post #56, months after this thread opened. All the time spent on this before that was a waste of time. No good case for renaming this article was ever made.

edited 4th Aug '14 4:55:07 PM by rodneyAnonymous

I think it might have slipped in just before the mods started, well, moderating the TRS forum and validating repair shop topics before they are opened up for general comments.

I did say in the first page I don't think the name is doing any harm, it's a solution in search of a problem rather than something that is well and truly broken. It has decent wicks, the name is imperfect but still evocative of the idea (it's not like it's "George Lucas Effect/Syndrome/Douchebaggery), and we can't really come to the conclusion of what name to change it to.

I guess it would not be appropriate to post a "Merge with Re-Cut" option on this crowner?