Needs Help: Alliterative Name

I was looking through the fan fiction section and noticed that there are a lot of examples that are already mentioned in their canon mediums. I feel like we should only include examples that are created by the author of said fan works (i.e., an Original Character, an Adaptation Name Change, or an invented alias not seen in canon).

I saw Pinkie Pie listed in the fan fiction section thrice. It seems redundant at that point to include a canon example that is already listed on the page of its original medium. Let alone, listing it three times on the same page.

Edited by ClownPrince47 on Jul 29th 2019 at 12:20:28 PM

Sorry for the delay, ~Clown Prince 47. Opened.

I'm fine with cleaning up duplicates.

Yeah, sounds good to me.

Same here.

Wouldn't this be a general problem with Fan Fics not only related to this trope?

I guess it's just more obvious when you only have so much information to work with. It's easy to see this trope. Others might not be so obvious. Also, some might play the tropes in a fan fic to a different context. Cinder Fall is listed in Narcissist for both Web Animation and Fan Works, but those apply the tropes in different contexts. For this trope, there is no other context to apply the canon example.

If you think that it's a general fanfic problem, then is should be considered whether or not the trope is played in a transformative way compared to the canon work. You can't do that with Alliterative Names (or really any naming trope).

Edited by ClownPrince47 on Aug 15th 2019 at 7:22:10 AM

Maybe the rule can be to not add canon characters unless the context in the fic changes? A note or something may do the trick. It certainly couldn't hurt. Otherwise, it's difficult to enforce.

It would be difficult on other tropes. Not this one though. It would be absolutely redundant to list any canon examples unless something different is done with it or it becomes some kind of plot point in the fic.

Edited by ClownPrince47 on Aug 15th 2019 at 7:23:56 AM

Edit: Never mind, I think we're on the same page.

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 15th 2019 at 8:24:35 AM

Also, now that I think about it, that should probably apply to adaptations of works as well.

There was a previous thread on this, which questioned the tropeworthiness and scope of the page. A lot of good points were brought up, and I think the thread even voted to redefine the trope to Alliterative Theme Naming, but then it was closed without action.

Honestly, I don't see any issue with using the trope itself. I do think it counts as tropeworthy, but its merits as a trope are not what I'm worried about. My problem is the redundancy of using examples that are already listed in canon in folders of adaptations. (The fan work folder was just the most notable since it included many repeated examples.)

If it matters, Added Alliterative Appeal was turned into a proper alliteration trope fairly recently (it was previously an index for tropes with alliterative names, but those were moved to subpages of this trope after the page got too long). Would Alliterative Name be redundant with that trope?

Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 17th 2019 at 10:19:35 AM

Not really. It would be a subtrope of Added Alliterative Appeal. If you were to say it was redundant, you'd have to say that with all the other current alliteration tropes.

Edited by ClownPrince47 on Aug 18th 2019 at 10:57:03 AM

I see.

Edit: To clarify, I wasn't necessarily questioning its tropeworthiness myself in my previous post; that post was mainly a response to naturalironist's post about the trope's tropeworthiness being questioned previously (including others commenting on possible redundancy with other tropes), and not necessarily my position here. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 18th 2019 at 1:01:49 PM

In that case, let's get back to the issue I put forward originally — which is the duplicate examples in derivative works when canon examples are already listed.

Do we have the go-ahead to axe those various examples?

Edited by ClownPrince47 on Aug 19th 2019 at 11:20:59 AM

I think we should get rid of those duplciates. One key factor of alliteration is that it's intentional, and in these names' cases, it's intentional on the original creators' part and not the derivative works' creators' part.

If we need mod permission, hollering would be your best bet, especially since crowners are probably still broken.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 19th 2019 at 1:23:41 PM

If I get mod approval, I'll get started right away. Honestly, I'll do it myself if I'm allowed. Someone has to do it though.

Edited by ClownPrince47 on Aug 19th 2019 at 4:50:21 AM

Yep, crowners are borked. I'll see if the other mods are alright with purging duplicates.

I'll get started with that then.

We should change the description to note this change in policy?

What is there left to do here?

- Other than updating the description?

Have Fanfic examples been cleaned?

There's a similar discussion in ATT currently and the majority there seems to have reached a different consensus:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?parent_id=82121&type=att