Is this tropeworthy/Chairs?

Stock American Phrases as-is is just a useless quote list. If it was remade into Nation Identifying Stock Phrase and have some work examples, it'd help, but currently it's parely usable as a page.

Even if it was reworked, it would be questionable as anything else than Useful Notes

No arguments from me.

If we are talking about Wild West era, then nothing beats Mainstream Obscurity, a literal hipster bragging "trope" from the times when being a hipster was the most hipster thing.

That "trope" has no right to exist, even as YMMV

I don't think so, but my issue with Mainstream Obscurity is that it'd be very difficult to verify and it has a major overlap with Fanwork-Only Fans.

I don't have a problem with Mainstream Obscurity. It's YMMV for a reason.

As YMMV concepts aren't technically tropes, tropeworthiness/ chairs doesn't really apply.

Can this thread purpose the "noteworthiness" of YMMV items as well, actually? I know YMMV can't be chairs, but the discussion is close enough.

Aren't YMMV.Home Page items technically considered tropes in the sense that the subjective part comes from different opinions on when or where they're in use, but are objective as a broader category since they('re supposed to) have plot relevance?

More on topic, wasn't one of the issues raised with Hype Backlash that it's chairs (however that can be defined here), because disappointment about the popularity of something doesn't really say anything about the viewers except "most viewers, but not all, liked the work/character"? Mainstream Obscurity is an "answer" to HB in a sense, though I think the issue is that despite it not actually being chairsy/meaningless to begin with, there needs to be some verification (like Amon said) for it to be meaningful to document. That and IDK how it's distinct from Pop-Cultural Osmosis.

The issue with it not being noteworthy was brought up a while ago here, though I know its other problems are more at the forefront.

Edited by Coachpill on Mar 19th 2024 at 1:42:51 PM

Technically, though Mainstream Obscurity isn't really that, so... yeah. Handling noteworthiness is harder since there's not really any metrics beyond what people consider worth discussing. I don't remember Hype Backlash being discussed, though.

Edited by WarJay77 on Mar 19th 2024 at 1:38:39 PM

I don't consider Hype Backlash chairs. It would only be chairs if every remotely popular work was struck with it.

I don't think it's more or less relevant than any other YMMV item.

What does Stock Foreign Name represent? While some names are more common than the others if someone looks at statistics, when there are nearly are hundred of stock names from the same country it just means none of them are, and they are impossible to add context to.

I think the amount of stock names added to the page lessen the usefulness, but I definitely think there's something to works from other countries going to the same few names for characters with specific ethnicities. It feels more like a Trope in Aggregate, like how the most stereotypical Mexican characters will be named something like Pedro or Jose.

I agree, it could probably be slimmed, but there is a pattern there. Essentially, it's a name-specific Small Reference Pools. (My own pet example is how "Lobsang" tends to be the go-to name for Tibetan characters in Western works.)

Edited by DoktorvonEurotrash on Mar 20th 2024 at 5:26:13 AM

There's even a trope primarily consisting of Japanese girls and women named Sakura: Cherry Blossom Girl

This is the first time I heard that tibetan name (I THINK my most usual one is... Tenzin?) but now I will never stop seeing that name. No, really. When I hear a concept once it will then forever be filling my life. I dont get why but it does.

That's Baader-Meinhof phenomenon in action.

...Which, funny enough, I think happens pretty often when with tropes in general.

I think the problem with Mainstream Obscurity is that it is treated as details people don't know and some examples are misconceptions. What it probably should be is things like Moby Dick, where everyone knows about the book, but few have read it.

I think the Foreign Stock Names could use a clean up.

No, Cherry Blossom Girl revolves around a flower motif connecting a female character and cherry blossoms. She doesn't even have to be named Sakura (that's usually just a bonus). In fact, the trope was originally renamed from "Sakura Girl" to prevent chairness (and so far it worked).

Anytime.

Edited by MyFinalEdits on Mar 21st 2024 at 12:50:45 PM

Thanks.

Currently There are Rhyme Tropes. But is rhyming itself a trope of its own? People making poems and songs don't have to rhyme, yet it's done all the time!

Edited by artman40 on Apr 2nd 2024 at 2:10:39 AM

Yes, or sorta. If a draft were made, you'd probably be encouraged to roll it into my Rhetorical Figures draft, as it's listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech

I've had concerns for a short while about Gender-Blender Name. I assumed it was for characters whose gender-nonconforming name is pointed out or where it's plot relevant (i.e. they're gender-nonconforming themselves, or they consider it an Embarrassing Name). But the page as written just seems to be "character has a name that's either reserved for the other gender or is gender-neutral."

That one needs TRS anyway for it's bizarre definition. I think there's something to the general idea of "a character has a name that's usually given to the opposite gender", but if it gets too nitpicky (i.e., something like "this guy is named Kelly which is more of a girl's name these days"), then yeah it's lost any meaning.

It's fairly subjective and relies on cultural context. If a name isn't inherently gendered, then it's not really noteworthy, but a boy being ashamed of having a "girly" name would be a trope, or a character is named through Gender-Concealing Writing.

Edited by Amonimus on Apr 10th 2024 at 6:45:11 PM