Just a Face and a Caption: Secondary Character Title

Unless you know that Godot never actually appears in Waiting for Godot, the image is meaningless.

Also, it's a duplicate of the work's page. The Legend Of Zelda might make a good image, if we can figure out how to make the context clear.

Opening.

Until a suggestion comes up, I'm down with pulling as a duplicate image.

Pull it.

Pull regardless of replacement.

The Three Musketeers

Moby-Dick◊

Both of these are JAFAAC.

I beg to differ. These are a movie poster and a book cover, respectively. More often than not a character appearing on one of those is very prominent in the story. So:

1. The title is "The Three Musketeers" yet there are four dudes on the poster. Of them, at least one should not be a main character or included in the title.
2. The title is the name of the whale pictured on the cover. Unless it's a Xenofiction, the whale is not a main character.

edited 25th Jan '18 8:00:39 AM by Millership

If there are 3 musketeers, but a fourth guys is on the poster, he's probably an Advertised Extra.

Moby Dick would easily be about the whale if you know nothing about the book already. The Call Of The Wild is actually about the dog, after all.

edited 25th Jan '18 8:22:47 AM by bitemytail

Well, now that depends of whether literary classics are exempt from JAFAAC rule. They are on the Spoilers Off list, which implies that most TV Tropes readers are familiar with them.

They're on spoilers off because they're old, which doesn't necessarily make them immune to JAFAAC.

An outright lampshade in the vein of second panel◊ might work, if someone can find something less may-as-well-be-a-quote-y.

From the Spoilers Off page:

"Enough time has gone by in enough markets that only one or two humans are left who haven't seen/read it. We feel for them, but not enough to make our wiki look like some sort of weird Swiss cheese."

JAFAAC means "it's illustrative only to those who are familiar with the work". The above paragraph states that most people are familiar with them.

That said, panel 2 of the above is more illustrative.

From Just a Face and a Caption:

"Remember, There Is No Such Thing As Notability, and so there is no show that you can assume that all of the readers will know about."

Rules seem to contradict each other, but the webcomic example is at least clear, even if it's more of a quote than a demonstration.

edited 25th Jan '18 9:13:07 AM by bitemytail

I can go with 10 as is.

edited 25th Jan '18 9:14:17 AM by Gosicrystal

Title tropes can be hard to illustrate, especially if they require knowledge of the work itself (unlike, say, One-Word Title). But the current is not only JAFAAC, not even the caption says how it's an example (you need to read the work's example listing to see why). And that's ignoring the duplicate pic issue, which is grounds for an insta-pull.

I can live with the second panel in 10 pending other ideas.

16.1. If we can't find any other way to illustrate it, a lampshade works.

How does this Fiddler on the Roof◊ poster work as an image (with the idea being that the actual main character gets a portrait, while the Fiddler is just a silhouette.) I mean, it needs a decent caption to work, but at least the visuals are adding something.

Works for me. Caption can be "The Fiddler is the one on the roof"

That's not bad...gets my vote pending other options.

18 works, I think?

My first impression of 18 was that the man in the foreground was the actual fiddler when not on the roof.

edited 28th Jan '18 2:24:34 AM by eroock

Same here.

I agree that the Three Muskateers better illustrates Advertised Extra. Also, the Moby-Dick story is not as globally known as, say, Mickey Mouse, and so I agree that it is also JAFAAC. To put it another way, not everybody knows it isn't Xenofiction, so not everybody would know the whale is not the main character. Most people would probably have no idea that the whale is Moby-Dick, to be honest.

The "It Sucks to Be Weegie" image is a better quote, imo. And the page currently lacks a quote...

18. The poster clearly gives prominence to the non-fiddler characters. The concern in 22 and 23 don't bother me too much because you just need to look at the image a bit more closely to see the fiddler in the background. And "looking closely" hasn't disqualified other images (like the one on Stepford Smiler).

The Three Musketeers would be misuse in Advertised Extra seeing how he is the star of the movie, just not the poster boy.

edited 28th Jan '18 6:04:48 AM by Memers