Example Rubrics

So, as part of the redesign, we're thinking about adding in example rubrics for tropes. These would be short blurbs about what sort of information should go in the example that you're writing for a particular trope.

For example:

Badass Longcoat:

• Describe the coat
• Explain how it indicates that the character is a badass or is trying to appear to be a badass

These would be ideally short and sweet, though certain tropes may have to have more strict ones to curb misuse. Currently, we're looking for feedback as well as to compile a list of possible rubrics for pages. This would be done in part to combat the ZCE trend by letting people know just what we mean by context.

This post intentionally left blank.

If we could add that to the edit page that could really work well or at the very least use the markup that makes it invisible on the main page.

The current plan is to have them both as a sub page, and have them show up on the edit page. That way they can be easily seen by editors. We're pretty sure we have the logistics down. We just need help coming up with rubrics as well as getting feedback from the community.

Sounds good. I'm looking at a page right now that could have benefited from this system: Deader Than Disco. The trope is supposed to be about something being:

A. Fallen from popularity.
B. Now commonly regarded with disdain or treated like a joke.

There's a lot of good examples that fit both criteria and there's a lot that are basically a list of "X is no longer popular", which is only half of the idea. There's a far cry between "disco isn't popular anymore" and "disco isn't popular anymore, everyone laughs at it, and people who liked disco are now embarrassed that they liked it."

What sort of tropes should we be looking at to start with? Appearance?

edited 5th Dec '14 1:06:37 PM by Rotpar

Appearance tropes, and other tropes that have a history of misuse and ZC Es are the target of this initially.

Wasn't there a policy about trope pages being for readers and not for editors? That's for editors. Or was that just a preference stated somewhere?

But basically a brief description of what goes into a proper contexted example in one or a few bullet points? I think it's a good idea.

That's why these would be displayed on a subpage and the edit screen and not the main page.

You mean a subpage like a laconic page?

Yes, like the laconic page, though it will also show up on the editing screen.

Gotcha. Sounds great.

Saying what counts as context on that page sounds good and helpful. Some of the pages already say that in the ZCE note at the top like Raven Hair, Ivory Skin says, "Zero context examples and badly written ones have been commented out. Every single example on this page needs to make three things clear: The character has pale skin, dark hair and how they are outstandingly attractive."

Yep. Notes like that, but in a standardized place and where everyone can see them as they edit.

I think this a great idea that would help curb ZC Es and help people who have difficulties on whether what is important for context and what's not.

So, anyways, I have a question; when these "example rubrics" get implemented as subpages, will the aforementioned practice of using commented out ZCE notes still be neccessary?

I'm leaning towards "no" because having subpages like this probably defeats the purpose of doing them.

edited 7th Jan '15 5:57:26 PM by MacronNotes

Shima: I kind of like this idea. A soft guide to push people in the right direction for what we want from the examples in the first place. Plainly and persistently visible where it matters. IE when editing. Though for this I would want this always up front rather then on rotation in the tips as it is aimed at the specific trope in question. I am on the fence about a sub-page though. That could easily get missed or dismissed and it just adds to the pile of subpages. Perhaps with the site upgrade something more useful will come about.

The idea is that the subpage is the editable version of what shows up on the editing page so that moderators don't have to individually hook each rubric.

No, this wouldn't replaced commenting out ZC Es. It would compliment that practice. We'd still need to get the ZC Es off the page, but it would help explain how to fix them.

edited 8th Jan '15 2:07:22 PM by shimaspawn