Victoria Cleanup

Okay, so what's the plan? Work on Sandbox.Victoria, swap it into Literature.Victoria, then move that to Literature.Victoria A Novel Of4th Generation War? Or something else?

I don't think so. That trope is specifically about how orcs (the fantasy race) is portrayed in different works. It appears that orcs is just used as a slur in towards certain groups of people in the book in an attempt to dehumanize them

I think that works.

Macron's notes

I agree.

"But... nobody told me I needed a signature!"

Just confirming that "4th" uses the numeral? It's like that on the cover but the majority of move proposals have spelled it out.

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

I forgot the sandbox page existed and edited the main by mistake. Is this a valid example?

• Accidental Public Confession: The Christian Marines' psy-war eventually gets on Governor Fullarbottom's nerves so much that he makes a complete confession of his dirty laundry at a public press conference.

(my edit was removing the type-label reference)

---

Unilaterally removed the references to Victoria on X Meets Y for Fan Works and Literature. I'm prety sure this is the right move, but being public about it so it's easy to reverse.

---

Removed Victoria from SoBadItsGood.Literature. While not added by Patriot, if this thread is anything to go by, SBIG is definitely a minority opinion.

---

Removed Victoria from Rousseau Was Right because the example itself stated that it only applied to white, heterosexual Christians.

Edited by ANonagon9 on Feb 10th 2023 at 8:21:06 AM

The Accidental Public Confession example is wrong. He doesn't confess or reveal anything, he just rants about what he's entitled to after the protagonist organizes a recall petition against him

Oh OK, in that case, easy cut.

I was editing the entry for Straw Character but then I noticed that trope, Straw Man, and Strawman Ball more or less said the something and they're all right next to each other on the example list. What exactly differentiates these three?

Strawman is a redirect to the index The War on Straw and can be cut on that basis alone.

Straw Character is essentially where a character's mere existence is to act as a strawman for the protagonists to knock down.

Strawman Ball is a scene where one character acts as a writers' mouthpiece, a Straw Character acts as their opponent, and the writers' mouthpiece character calmly lectures the strawman while the strawman incoherently rants back.

Thanks.

I finished taking out the incorrect examples I saw and adding clarity to the ones still there on the sandbox version. I think the most depressing example was this one:

Which had to be deleted since, in the book, they made a point of refusing to help Mexicans since they're not white.

Where did the Artistic License examples go?

Well, it can't hurt anything to advertise this book as the work of a complete moron in addition to a bigot.

Edited by StarSword on Feb 13th 2023 at 6:57:20 AM

They weren't part of the pre-Idumean Patriot rollback. I haven't added any new examples.

Man, those are going to be the majority of the page at this point.

Added the Artistic License examples. Turns out they make up just a little under half the page.

The sandbox page is as clean as something like this can be now. What's next?

If other people agree that the sandbox is good to move, we can update Victoria with the sandbox's contents and move the page to Literature.Victoria A Novel Of4th Generation War

Edited by MacronNotes on Feb 13th 2023 at 12:25:07 PM

Macron's notes

Well, I would nix the last paragraph of the description in favor of something less subtle. For example:

Edited by StarSword on Feb 13th 2023 at 12:45:06 PM

Ironically I think the disclaimer currently on the Literature.Victoria page would be good.

Please visit the "AITA" forum game

Given the Artistic License listed and the general consensus here, is the book badly written besides that? Like, in terms of grammatical error, prose, plot holes? From an observation I noticed that the book's pop culture references seem to be stuck in the 1990s (the lack of references to Obama, the Jane Fonda bashing, etc).

The prose is nothing to write home about. It's dry and more summary than action. More often than not we'll have a talk between the main character and a handful of others discussing what they are going to do, and that's mostly just them agreeing with each other's viewpoints, followed by, "And then we did that."

The actual events in question are then summarized in a few paragraphs.

There's a lot of inconsistency surrounding the state of the world. Gas is frequently mentioned as unobtainable for everyone in one chapter but then everyone is driving in the next, for one example.

And the main characters themselves are inconsistently written. They talk about forming a Christian nation and living true to the values of "Western Civilization" and fighting back against the "Cultural Marxists. They explicitly talk about the Ten Commandments and Constitution and then proceed to ignore almost everything about the former and absolutely everything about the later. In fact, you would not be able to recite a single thing about either from reading this book. The book itself it entirely unaware they are being hypocrites.

Calling it artistic license is putting it as mildly as possible. There's a lot of just factually wrong lines in the book that are there because of the author's personal ideology and vendetta. Like, women can't be pilots because they biologically lack special awareness is something the book says with a straight face. Segregation is good because races knew their place before the 1960's.

Doktorvon mentioned that the person who had been whitewashing examples tried to paint the story as a Black-and-Gray Morality. If this was literally any other story I could believe this was a dystopian hellhole in the far future where environmental extremists, militant feminists, Aztec cults, and a reborn CSA, all battled each other and a Knight Templar Christian society. But A) the book is set in the modern day, which means all these wackjobs, who are everybody to the left of George Wallace, exist right now and in enough numbers to form their own nation states. B) The main character's faction is clearly depicted as morally superior to everyone and ushers in a golden age. And C) All those other factions fall over like a house of cards the minute the main character decides to fight them. There's no struggle, no tension, everyone not the main faction is led by either degenerate incompetents or spineless incompetents.

That sounds like if Ayn Rand tried to write a Tom Clancy novel: all speechifying and strawmen.

Edited by StarSword on Feb 14th 2023 at 4:30:02 AM

I'd remove the mentions of slavery in Star Sword's disclaimer since the book doesn't actually go that far in the text. One can make a Fridge Logic argument, but I don't think those belong in the description. Other than that it seems fine to me.

Yeah, they do. The Azanians that refused to be brainwashed into "war brides" were sold as sex slaves.

Edited by StarSword on Feb 15th 2023 at 12:14:05 PM

Ah, that's right. That can be added at the end of the feminazis bit.

Question! Does Make an Example of Them belong on character pages? Cleaning up the page in question but wondering if that particular trope should even be listed there.

Also, you have no idea how much I'm resisting adding so many villain tropes to these supposed heroes.

We have a separate thread for that.

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

I think it can be, considering it refers to how a character died.