The Fic May Be Yours, but the Trope Page Is Ours

I was reading through the Adminisrivia pages this morning and I come across this The Fic May Be Yours But The Trope Page Is Ours I was actually quite shocked when I read the part that said "Please do not even request that we cut a page on your work" I really think that TV Tropes should consider revising this rule

I'm certainly not saying people should just be able to delete a page for a work they made but I feel that if they do not want there to be a page for there work and they politley contact TV Tropes and request its removal that it should be removed

To be compeltley frank the way it is now seems quite unproffesional to me and it seems a little immoral to utlise peoples works if they don't want to and have asked us not to, even if the law allows us to

After all, if an author asked that his novel was never addapted into a film or a video games company asked that no videos were put online of it people might think thats a bit draconian but I think most would view it as more immoral to go against a creators wishes

TV Tropes I feel should be allied to content creators rather than in opposition to them, yes its true that they released a work 'to be read and remarked on' but that doesn't mean that we have to remark on it even if that would upset the person who truly put the most work and spirit into its creation

---

If we are not meant to post sudjestions for policy changes then I am very sorry for doing so, I have checked all the forums rules and the only thing I come across that might say not to do this is the rule about not making trads to complain but I feel that sudjesting something should be changed is diffrent to just saying you don't like something but again I'm sorry if this shouldn't be here

edited 15th Feb '15 10:30:13 PM by Xexanoth

Xexanoth

You absolutely can propose a policy change. I am not too excited, though - many such requests happen with bad reasons, plus it's questionable if trying to unring the bell has a point.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Commentary and Criticism are part and parcel of having published a work. IF a creator is unwilling to have such things exist, the work never should have been published in the first place.

RE:Book to film. The author doesn't ask that is not be done. They simply refuse to sell the right to someone to do it. That is a totally different situation. This would be more like a movie studio releasing a film and saying "Not only are we not going to have advance screenings so that critics can have their reviews ready on release day, we are going to ban all critics from writing reviews at all." Not a reasonable request, and one that no sensible person should feel bound by.

I see, thats good to know, thank you very much

---

I do understand that commentary and critisism are part of publishing a work, I think they are good things, I do like this website afterall, I just feel that in a case of a creators desire for their work vs. other peoples desire for that work that the creators wishes should count for more

I'm not saying we should always ask permission before making a page for a work only that if a works' creator contacts it and asks for it to be removed that we should do so

Or mabey not even that, if it was how it is now but more unoffical that as an encycolopeia like entity that TV Tropes would always record works that would be okay but even the name of the page seems, to me at least, to sort of be kinda like a mocking 'I know its yours but you can't stop me sort of thing' I just feel that the whole thing comes across as a little hostile and really paints a piture of 'Authors vs. Tv Tropes'

With the whole novel > movies thing I was more thinking of cases where authors said they didn't want it addapted but died and lost their copyright

edited 16th Feb '15 4:00:30 AM by Xexanoth

Xexanoth

TVT is basically a form of commentary, which I don't think creators should be allowed to stop

I can see your guys point of view definatley, I certainly do not like censorship

However at this point I have finally worked out what I think the real issue with this rule is and What I would actually change. I think the rule should be left as it is but the line 'Please do not even request that we cut a page on your work should be removed Thats not to say I think we should grant all such requests by any means but I think creators should at least be able to state thier reasons, sort of like an appeal to a ban

Pages wouldn't be removed just because the creators asked but they would be if they have a significant reason thats not "I don't like what people are saying about it" or "the information on the page is wrong"

In short I think the rule could stay but there should be room for compromise rather than just a blanket rule

(sorry about all the spelling errors and grammar stuff by the way, I go through and edit multiple times to remove it but I still have some problems with that stuff)

edited 16th Feb '15 4:41:45 AM by Xexanoth

Xexanoth

If the information is wrong, then we need to correct that, not delete everything.

You haven't proposed a reason why Creators should get a say in how our site operates beyond being generic tropers. The laws regarding work criticisms apply to this site because we analyze works. Certain forms of request are strictly honoured, but "remove any mention of my work" is not.

edited 16th Feb '15 4:51:14 AM by crazysamaritan

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

I certainly agree with your first statment

When you say ceritain forms of request what do you mean? I suppose it would be fine if upon there request a disclaimer could be put at the top of a page or something to say that the authour objects to the pages existance?

Its not so much creators having a say in how the site works as much as having a say in mentions of thier work

I honestly cant think of a plausable situation for what I'm talking about (when a creator has a vaild reason for a pages removal) but if such a situation did arise I feel that it should be negotiable

Say for example an author thought the idea of having a list of tropes would ruin the story for a new reader somehow? Shouldn't we at least note that the creator thinks that on the works page?

edited 16th Feb '15 5:03:08 AM by Xexanoth

Xexanoth

See, this is something I'm fundamentally against...

If they are allowed to determine things on our pages, it is a say in how our website works. It affects policy decisions and Wicks.

• Richard Garfield, Creator of Magic: The Gathering, requested that certain cards never appear on the internet. This is honoured.
• Gary Larson has a standing request of all internet users: No The Far Side images.
• The Mousetrap requests that audiences not reveal The Twist anywhere.

Reasonable requests are honoured, and are determined on a case-by-case basis by the groupmind usually. But it isn't policy, in the sense that we will ever create rules on what we will and will not allow Creators to say what goes on our website. Note that the three requests I mentioned are requests to the entire world, not to our site specifically.

edited 16th Feb '15 5:22:34 AM by crazysamaritan

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

Yes reading that again it does seem very flawed I'm not trying to say they should have contorl or always have imput Only that with very good reason it would be possible for a page to be edited or removed

Or even just if the administravia page could just be reworded to be a bit less confruntational Move of a 'we are an encyclopedia and are going to list all works we find so please dont delete them' Rather than 'we are going to list it and you can't make us not list it'

---

---

Oh, well if those request are honored then thats pretty much what I am getting at here, the way I read the rule I thought it was pretty much saying that if Tv Tropes wanted to ignore those request they just would

I am very glad that things like that are honored

The only issue I still would put foward is if a creator for some reason specifically did not want a list of the tropes in thier work, I feel if they had a valid reason for that request we should honour it

edited 16th Feb '15 5:27:04 AM by Xexanoth

Xexanoth

You want fanfic writers to be allowed to have pages of their fanfics not list tropes? Look there may be many different reasons for not being allowed to cut fanfics, but this what I think is the main reason:

They list tropes.

Seriously, this site is called TV Tropes. If a work page doesn't have tropes, only then do we cut it. But if we can list tropes, sorry, but it won't be cut or be rid of tropes for any reason.

edited 16th Feb '15 5:54:11 AM by SatoshiBakura

We are going to list tropes, and you can't make us not list them.

Other things are negotiable, on a case-by-case basis, but not that one.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

Very well, I cant say I agree but it seems I'm alone in my belifs Thank you all for your input

Xexanoth

I actually take issue with this policy myself. I feel as long as a creator asks politely to remove a page on their work, it's simply courtesy to acquiesce there. Even things like Retsupurae, which outright make fun of the works they use, do that. What do we do? Say "this element was used in this scene" about each work. I'm not sure anyone will really be hurting if the author of Superwholock Fanfic #134 deleted her fanfic from the web out of embarrassment and doesn't really want there to be any trace of it left.

Insert witty 'n clever quip here.

Nope, an author has the right to attempt to remove their work from view, but they can't retroactively stop people from having read it. If they don't want it analyzed and/or criticized, they shouldn't put it up in the first place.

edited 24th Feb '15 4:39:31 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Nitpicking but re:10 there aren't any The Far Side page images because we can't use copyrighted entire works without permission, and they're all single-panel cartoons. Gary Larson not wanting those cartoons posted online doesn't affect the matter.^note (Although anyway we'd be using it for something probably way different than the uses he objects to.)

edited 24th Feb '15 10:28:32 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.

I'm not opposed to the policy itself, but playing Devil's Advocate for that specific line of reasoning: If the author is genuinely successful in removing any and all traces of their work's existence from the Internet (or, more generally, the public eye) to the point that an outsider whose first exposure comes from the TV Tropes page cannot independently verify the work's actual existence, how is having a page for that work any more useful than having a page for a work that never existed in the first place?

edited 8th Mar '15 8:58:21 PM by Specialist290

Since such a removal is logically impossible (the very act of trying would result in the exact opposite), there's little point thinking about it.

The only times we've permitted such removals are for Unpublished Works where the author decides to discontinue or remove a work before it has been published.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"