Needs Help: Critical Research Failure

Can we still create a Darth Wiki page?

Should Artistic License tropes be Trivia or not?

Probably not, since Artistic License relates to the work itself rather than behind the scenes.

Read the TRS thread I linked to.

Those arguments may still be valid but time goes on and things change. If you think the AL tropes are trivia-worthy, ask in the dedicated thread. I personally don't see how it's Self Explanatory as to how it's trivia.

Do you think it's correct that they "don't carry any significance within the work"?

I seriously would not want to discuss changes to the AL tropes in the CRF thread.

Should I take it to the Trivia cleanup thread? And should CRF also be Trivia?

I think all this discussion about how to treat Artistic License tropes would be better suited to another thread, because this one was only intended to cover Critical Research Failure.

edited 9th Feb '18 10:34:01 AM by GastonRabbit

Which thread?

A new thread that's specifically about AL tropes, if one doesn't already exist. As I said, this thread is about CRF, so AL is kind of off-topic.

I'm talking about all inaccuracy tropes, and should I take it to the Trivia cleanup thread?

I don't know. My point was that this thread is about Critical Research Failure, so this thread is for discussing issues with that trope specifically.

As I said, I'm talking about all inaccuracy tropes.

Referring back to #22 I agree that the writers and the target audience should be taken into question. If someone from the US writes a story and says the capital of Spain is Barcelona that shouldn't be a CRF. If they lived in Spain for 10 years, or the story is intended for Spanish people, that should be CRF. This would mean though there won't be very many examples since most shows tend to be aimed for a general audience.

Also, The Nostalgia Critic should also be moved to Dan Browned IMO, along with any educational media.

edited 14th Feb '18 6:12:57 PM by BreadBull

True.

I'm still not sure what to do about inaccuracy tropes being Trivia. I already took it to the Trivia cleanup thread, and the discussion ended before it was finished.

I'll probably just bring it up again in a while and link to the TRS thread.

edited 16th Feb '18 11:37:57 AM by Lymantria

We need a team of idiots They'll go through every example and remove anything they didn't already know.

Can we start a new crowner about moving the subpages to Dan Browned?

Wouldn't that fall under the 'clean up misuse' clause of the original winning crowner?

Yes, especially because the subpage for The Nostalgia Critic brought up by BreadBull is probably the "successor" to that show's PRLCed Did Not Do the Research page, which is related to the discussion about how people who were misusing Did Not Do the Research migrated to CRF after DNDTR was cut, in contrast to how the Game Theory page presumably came later.

Also, some of these examples might be for Cowboy BeBop at His Computer and not Dan Browned; the former was previously brought up when these CRF subpages were brought up.

edited 16th Feb '18 2:16:12 AM by GastonRabbit

Should we move the Nostalgia Critic page to Cowboy BeBop at His Computer then?

>This is when the media reports blatantly incorrect facts about a creative work that any fan (or casual observer, or anyone with access to The Other Wiki, etc.) would know to be wrong.

On another note, Cinema Sins is most definitely Bebop at the Computer.

edited 16th Feb '18 7:53:50 AM by Albert3105

It depends on the example. It's possible that not all examples are for a single trope.

I have switched the Honest Trailers and Game Theory subpages to Dan Browned.

edited 16th Feb '18 8:18:52 PM by Albert3105

The Chris Stuckmann subpage should be cut IMO because it is too short (two entries only) as well as the primary example being stealth bashing over an opinion about pacing dissonance between international audiences.

edited 26th Feb '18 7:13:30 PM by Albert3105

We should also move CriticalResearchFailure.Vegan Art Book to Dan Browned. While there's a lot of misinformation in it, most of it is not blatantly obvious. The author keeps insisting that the comic is supposed to "educate" omnivores, so it is a pretty clear case of Dan Browned.