How can we prevent "Negativity Entitlement"

Some people just cant get it into their heads that TV Tropes is not a blog or a forum. Its a wiki, one with more relaxed rules than others but still a Wiki.

I used to like pages such as Wall Banger for calling out some of the more questionable writing choices...until I realized that its a mess, not just because of the negativity but also Natter, Justifying Edits and This Troper, all of which are not allowed and should be killed with fire.

I know Mods are too few in number to completely remove this stuff.

So,I say we just kill Wall Banger.

And if a troper who feels entitled to whine and complain protests the simply ban him/her

If people see Mods do ban people for doing that they will stop doing it period. The current state of affairs is not acceptable. We killed Kodomo No Jikan. We can kill this.

And keep in mind that its not negativity I want to kill, its the entitlement and negative sideffects of such.

If we keep it, I'll gladly clean one part...actually grudgingly. The wrestling sections of this wiki are ignored by all but a handful of users. None of the strengthened or new policies put in place since the lock have been applied and I'm tired of looking at the lack unfixed namespaces and lack of cross wicks.

I used to avoid adding any pro wrestling to the wiki, especially if "obscure", because I knew if I made a mistake it was likely no one would ever fix it. My attitude now is the more eyes, the more who may curate. To that end, wall banger was one of the few wiki sections, even if it is Darth Wiki, where the sport/art/genre/whatever got strong representation. I'm not sure there was a single word on the entire site typed about Jesse Sorensen till his treatment showed up on Darth Wiki's designated complaint pages, of which there are only three. As a fan, I'd like to see the more flattering and incidental happenings brought up but as long as we're being honest we might as well mention those moments that made us want to toss our remote or mouse across the floor. It generates user activity all the same. Was there anything on The Age Of The Fall or El Generico till someone complained about them? That first complaint isn't even on the wiki anymore but El Generico now has his own page and Age Of The Fall shows up on quite a few, with Jimmy Jacobs having a healthy (by our standards) page of his own.

Lots of our oddball pages do that, not just the complaints. I don't remember seeing anything on S.C.U.M. till someone made a crackpot theory about them on Wild Mass Guessing and am positive there was nothing about the entire South American industry until a bullet point showed up on Germans Love David Hasselhoff. Still, wall banger has potential to draw in fans and inspire user activity regarding one of the otherwise neglected categories on this wiki. So I don't just want it not deleted, but opened back up.

What I will argue is that wall banger probably should not be on Darth Wiki. So Bad, It's Horrible, Crowning Moment of Indifference, Dethroning Moment of Suck, ect? Those fit in much better with the Evil Counterpart Parody, theme the Darth Wiki has. Wall banger should probably just go to Your Mileage May Vary, though I can accept its presence on Darth Wiki simply because of Grandfather Clause. It was born out of a Dorothy Parker quote back when the website still had pages for "Idioms" as well as "Tropes", which is another argument for keeping Wall Banger. It's a preexisting term.

Frankly, I see no difference whatsoever between Wall Banger and Dethroning Moment Of Suck except that the latter is limited to one example per troper. They're both pretty much pure complaining.

In addition, the latter is a wee bit better policed than the former. The former's just a natter-fest in general.

They are different though. Wall banger is just a stupid instance that breaks your immersion and makes you mad because of the nonsense it is.

Dethroning Moment Of Suck is supposed to be the absolute worst moment of any given program. There can be several wall bangers but only one dethroning moment of suck, sort of like there should only be one Crowning Moment Of Awesome, but I digress. Awesome moments is now more like the sugar equivalent to wall banger and most triumphant example is more dethroning moment.

Indirect Active Transport, the simple fact is that very few editors care about the wrestling section, and those that don't also generally aren't informed enough about what is being listed to know whether something needs to be changed or not. I'm not a wrestling fan at all. All I can do to clean up a Wrestling section is remove any examples that as they are written clearly don't fit. I can't add context; I can't make a call on one that might fit or might not; I can't correct a factual error, because I don't know enough. All I can do is remove the ones that are clearly wrong as they're written at the time.

It's up to the wrestling fans to police that section, just like it's mostly up to the Theatre Geeks to police the Theatre sections.

edited 16th Jan '15 11:28:23 AM by Madrugada

I find the Wall Banger examples entertaining to read, so I'd prefer if an alternative solution was found instead of deleting them.

A lot of people found Troper Tales and Fetish Fuel entertaining; that doesn't mean we had any desire to keep them.

Weren't those things deleted because Google Advertising pressured TV Tropes about how NSFW they were?

edited 17th Jan '15 8:15:28 AM by AHI-3000

No, Troper Tales was removed by a vote back in 2011 and Fetish Fuel by Eddie plus a minor vote.

I wasn't here when those pages were around. But man it must have been a relief that this site deleted those pages, lest TV Tropes further eject an image of being filled with completely lifeless nerds and weird/creepy perverts.

That's a fair argument until wrestling fans can't edit a page. As said, I would, cleanup the wrestling sections of wall banger but I was around to see at least one request to unlock it and it did not go well.

Well, this one's been going better(so far), but maybe that's because this discussion is on a broader topic that hasn't attracted all those involved last time? Point being, only the mods can edit those wall banger pages now. As none of you are wrestling fans, it remains unfixed. I'm not looking forward to it, but I'll start.

Truth is, I wasn't enthused about Chris Hero's page either. I wasn't his biggest fan, still am not. I'm not sure how long his page festered on this site as a stub, I suspect the troper who launched it isn't even around anymore, but occasionally someone such as myself added something too. His page is still very much a work in progress but it has progressed. Austin Aries isn't as far along, Roderick Strong's even less, but Wiki Magic has been coming into effect over time.

The wall bangers, like it or not, were one of the facilitators of that wiki magic. Now, unlike Chris Hero's page, I know that coming off an unlock the expectation is going to be that all the unlocked pages get cleaned up right away, just the idea of doing anything more urgently than I feel like is annoying. But I'll do it, because it will mean less to do in the long run.

We have a pinned thread specifically for you to make requests for edits to locked pages in the FAQ section. It's called something like "Edit requests for Locked Pages". Post there, with separate posts for each page (that makes it easier for us to be sure we've gotten them all) listing 1) what page you want edited, as a link; 2) which example(s) need(s) to be changed and why; and 3) what it/they needs to be changed to, including all mark-up.

Basically, write up the edit the same way you would in the edit box for the page, then post it to that thread. We'll make the change.

I know the thread and think I might have used it to add an entry before. Redoing a whole page sounds like more of a bother for all of us. I suppose there would be no pressure for me to rush it that way, guess that's a silver lining. Fine, that will be my channel for now.

If you want to rework a whole page, make a page for the new version in the Sandbox. namespace. You can work on it at your leisure, you're unlikely to be interrupted (since few people go to the Sandbox pages except the people who are actively working on them — they aren't indexed to the main wiki), and when you're satisfied with it, you can ask for a content swap in the Edit Requests thread.

For whatever it's worth, I have long been against permitting Wall Bangers, Dethroning Moments, and similar material; it only detracts from the quality of the site. I believe that if you have something that negative to say, you should keep it to yourself. However, I've been persuaded that it's better to have a segregated place for it than for people to dump it all over the main articles instead.

edited 17th Jan '15 5:15:55 PM by Fighteer

I used to be of that argument but then noticed "it generates activity" or some variation there of is the most commonly used defense for problem pages on the repair shop.

I know we've had our diferences but I love you so much right now. Also Im back because I realized my "Graceful Leave" was in fact childish and moronic. Im sorry for being such a douchetard.

Seriously, some people should be grown up enough to understand that TV Tropes is a FRICKING WIKI. Not A Forum. Not A Blog. If you must post something objectively negative which cant be denied, be objective about it. If its just your opinion, keep it to yourself.

Is it just me or are Wall Bangers basically the stuff we wanted out of headscratchers when it was It Just Bugs Me!?

Probably not.

@ #1:

"Some people just cant get it into their heads that TV Tropes is not a blog or a forum."

Last I checked, we have both a thriving liveblog section (albeit one shoved to the back by both layouts) and a forum which is seen just as favorably in the eyes of its users as the articles themselves. Sure, the former is often filled with horribly-written recaps or half-assed gameplay experiences, but hey, here we are.

"So,I say we just kill Wall Banger.

And if a troper who feels entitled to whine and complain protests the simply ban him/her."

I asked this question the last time we had a debate about Wall Banger, and didn't get a satisfactory answer. Negativity is always going to exist on any wiki. Short of hiring a lot more staff and being a lot more thorough and diligent in regards to what does and doesn't constitute negativity (because there's plenty of grey, even on the WB pages themselves), what are you going to do about it?

I know what I've done. I've sorted through several of those pages. Just off the top of my head, I sorted the Mass Effect and Star Trek: Voyager subpages, both of which were complete messes. You can have a dissenting opinion that's structured and well-reasoned, which is what I always try to champion.

I also feel that WB is just as valid as the Awesome Moments pages, which are mostly filled with nothing but long-winded platitudes about games, movies, levels, etc. that say nothing of substance or merit. Despite how this wiki proclaims that they're not here to "bash things", the gushing doesn't serve much purpose either. We keep both of them because they are - I would argue - an inalienable part of the fan wiki this site was and is.

I'm not even sure what your argument is, and honestly, this seems like a half-baked TRS topic. Just like others I've spoken to in the past, you want to "throw the baby out with the bathwater". You want to police the wiki, but you don't know what to do beyond vague blanket statements. The way people complain on this site takes a lot of forms - snide comments in articles, little asides in the midst of writing examples, Repair Dont Respond, etc. The best we can do is direct new users where to go and help them understand that there is a loose set of rules to be followed, and to take the appropriate complaints/gushing to the respective sections.

"TV Tropes has a forum"

I meant that the WIKI ITSELF is not a blog/forum. We do have a forum, for the PRECISE reason of keeping discussion of the Wiki.

And all we need to get rid of Negativity is Ban all the whiners and show their E-Heads on E-Sticks mounted on our E-Castle's wall. Sorry for the brutal example, but I really think that's the most valid solution.

Im not saying we should get rid of all negative facts. There is a difference between stating a negative example and using the Trope Page for needless complaining

One Example.

Executive Meddling went through this. Many people think its almost always negative and that its really hard to find positive examples? Did we decide just to get rid of all examples? NO. We just removed excess subjective whining and left the facts intact.

"WB is just as valid as Crowning Moment of Awesome"

You know that C Mo A is pretty much worthless? Most people think so. And that its only kept because its not mostly negative and whiny. And for that there's Dethroning Moment Of Suck.

"Inalienable Part of this wiki"

Its not. People thought that of Troper Tales and Fetish Fuel and we got rid of those juuuuuuust fine. Seriously, get a grip.

"Im not giving any valid reasons/ways to fix Wall Banger"

Again, E-Heads on E-Sticks. And snide comments HAVE NOT dissapeared just because Wall Banger is in place. Just make sure to ban all the whiners as we see them and all will be fine.

I don't like Either the gushing on Sugar Wiki or the moaning on Darth Wiki, some pages are good on both of them, but the excessive gushing on some pages on Sugar and the excessive moaning on some pages on Darth isn't. I wrote a page on Darth Wiki, an Alternate Character Interpretation of Robot Unicorn Attack, which implied a fascist and evil ruler of the place the game is set (now repurposed for Robot Unicorn Attack Heavy Metal.) And it's those sorts of pages, for mainstream series, that are good ways to use Sugar and Darth, as long as a main work page on the main wiki exists containing all the tropes, and other things that aren't complaining or excessive gushing but jokes, such as DarthWiki.Tropes That Will Never Happen.

There's also the constant removal of things that are Sugar, Darth or Just for Fun from trope lists, because people don't understand that they are either not tropes, or tropes that we want contained to their own page and subpages because of being problematic for complaining (or gushing for Sugar, or just not relevant for Just for Fun). After all, we can't have every trope like that have the equivalent of the Complete Monster clean-up thread. Xmeets Y is one that needs a massive clean - and that was a Just for Fun page with Sugar Wiki colouration before the changeover.

edited 19th Jan '15 5:36:35 AM by TheOneWhoTropes

The Real Life Gushing About Shows You Like section MUST DIE!

Seriously they are GUSHING ABOUT WAR AND THE INQUISITION.

And Real Life is not a show nor is Real Life Troping allowed.

No, It just needs cleaning.

There are two or three examples and their sub-bullets that should be removed, and some that should be edited.

Anyway, I'll mention it in the Real Life cleanup thread.