During the investigation of recent hollers in the Complete Monster thread, it's become apparent to the staff that an insular, unfriendly culture has evolved in the Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard threads that is causing problems.
Specific issues include:
- Overzealous hollers on tropers who come into the threads without being familiar with all the rules and traditions of the tropes. And when they are familiar with said rules and traditions, they get accused (with little evidence) of being ban evaders.
- A few tropers in the thread habitually engage in snotty, impolite mini-modding. There are also regular complaints about excessive, offtopic "socializing" posts.
- Many many thread regulars barely post/edit anywhere else, making the threads look like they are divorced from the rest of TV Tropes.
- Following that, there are often complaints about the threads and their regulars violating wiki rules, such as on indexing, crosswicking, example context and example categorization. Some folks are working on resolving the issues, but...
- Often moderator action against thread regulars leads to a lot of participants suddenly showing up in the moderation threads to protest and speak on their behalf, like a clique.
It is not a super high level problem, but it has been going on for years and we cannot ignore it any longer. There will be a thread in Wiki Talk
to discuss the problem; in the meantime there is a moratorium on further Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard example discussion until we have gotten this sorted out.
Update: The new threads have been made and can be found here:
Please see the Frequently Asked Questions and Common Requests List before suggesting any new entries for this trope.
IMPORTANT: To avoid a holler to the mods, please see here for the earliest date a work can be discussed, (usually two weeks from the US release), as well as who's reserved discussion.
When voting, you must specify the candidate(s). No blanket votes (i.e. "![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_up_emote.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
to everyone I missed").
No plagiarism: It's fair to source things, but an effortpost must be your own work and not lifted wholesale from another source.
We don't care what other sites think about a character being a Complete Monster. We judge this trope by our own criteria. Repeatedly attempting to bring up other sites will earn a suspension.
What is the Work
Here you briefly describe the work in question and explain any important setting details. Don't assume that everyone is familiar with the work in question.
Who is the Candidate and What have they Done?
This will be the main portion of the Effort Post. Here you list all of the crimes committed by the candidate. For candidates with longer rap sheets, keep the list to their most important and heinous crimes, we don't need to hear about every time they decide to do something minor or petty.
Do they have any Mitigating Factors or Freudian Excuse?
Here you discuss any potential redeeming or sympathetic features the character has, the character's Freudian Excuse if they have one, as well as any other potential mitigating factors like Offscreen Villainy or questions of moral agency. Try to present these as objectively as possible by presenting any evidence that may support or refute the mitigating factors.
Do they meet the Heinousness Standard?
Here you compare the actions of the Candidate to other character actions in the story in order to determine if they stand out or not. Remember that all characters, not just other villains, contribute to the Heinousness Standard
Final Verdict?
Simply state whether or not you think the character counts or not.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 31st 2023 at 4:14:10 AM
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
perhaps Jafar does not count. but Discord's actions where truly terrible by Fi M standards. look at my last post for why. also I edited new stuff into the same post.
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
I'm still not convinced...
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
Azor Ahai
I'm not familiar with that series, but others have noted that the character is played for laughs at times and is liked by a good character in-series.
That's two criteria that they don't fit.
Hodor
Give it a rest, brony. It's been repeatedly explained why the character does not qualify under our definition as a Complete Monster. I don't see why you care about this so much - it's only a term. It doesn't automatically make him a better villain or the show he's in a better show.
he can be liked but he's been compared to The Joker multiple times on this very wiki. I really just want someone to say I'm allowed to see Discord as a Complete Monster. and Pinkie Pie is normally not taken seriously.
edited 2nd Oct '11 12:26:22 PM by brony99
And The Joker is rarely if ever a Complete Monster in any of his incarnations. Most of the time he's more absurd than anything.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Azor Ahai
I hate to argue against your point, but I thought that what Joker did to Robin in the backstory for Return Of The Joker was a great example of a villain on a kid's show doing something vile enough to justify complete monster status. Like all of the Bat villains try to kill people frequently (sometimes a lot of people frequently), but torturing a kid into insanity is something else.
Hodor
exactly and Discord kind of did the same thing to the Mane Six. both scenarios are classified as Mind Rape. and then you have all the other stuff related to Discord on Fi M's Nightmare Fuel page.
again, I just want someone to say I'm allowed to think Discord is a Complete Monster.
Azor Ahai
You're allowed to think it, you're not allowed to add it as an example. 
There are some rare exceptions, but for the most part Joker's characterization is very inconsistent on how evil he actually is.
Just because a character who was in two episodes has a couple of things in common with a character in a completely different that might count for the trope in a couple of incarnations across a broad range of adaptations and incarnations is about the single worst argument for fitting into a trope I've heard.
You can think he's a complete monster all you want. You can not add it to any of the wiki pages because he does not meet the criteria to be listed.
edited 2nd Oct '11 12:56:17 PM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
You are allowed to think whatever you want. Under the definition of this wiki, though, Discord is not a Complete Monster and should not be added as an example of one.
As long as you don't do that, it doesn't really matter what you personally think. It's not like TV Tropes has thought police or something.
Lost in Space
"Did something vile enough to justify Complete Monster status" is something that seems to be causing some confusion in and of itself. To qualify, a character must be consistently that evil, not merely garden variety evil with a Moral Event Horizon crossing or a Kick the Dog or two.
I like to keep going back to my two personal favorite examples, John Dread and Pryrates. In his first scene, Dread stalks, rapes, and murders a woman. In his last scene, he murders a main character and tries to Mind Rape an AI. Pure horror from beginning to end. In his first full scene, Pryrates crushes a dog beneath his boot. He sells his king's soul to the devil. He tortures people for amusement. He murders the fantasy counterpart of the Pope out of annoyance. He tries a Faustian Rebellion on an Eldritch Abomination.
These are the standards. Monstrous beginning to end. Clearly irredeemable from start to finish.
edited 2nd Oct '11 1:10:22 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I would leave it alone but the past few posts come off as saying I'm wrong and I can not have a different definition of Complete Monster.
You cannot list trope examples that have a completely different definition on any trope. That's not how things work.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
that's not what I was asking. and my definition is almost the same, I'm just not as strict with the second criteria. I was talking about a personal definition for the trope.
edited 2nd Oct '11 1:35:50 PM by brony99
We don't do personal definitions on this site. You can't just pick and choose your own definitions at random. You're allowed to have opinions, but you can't post in opposition to the rules.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Azor Ahai
@Fighteer- I see where you are coming from. I guess you could probably say that the Western Animation Joker is a consistently evil character and that incident was his Moral Event Horizon.
Please see Personal Dictionary.
edited 2nd Oct '11 1:37:54 PM by Jordan
Hodor
I am not talking about using my definition as a justification to list Discord. I'm talking about being able to have that definition period.
are you saying I'm wrong for having a slightly different definition?
to both of the above posters, should I give a quick analysis on my view of why Discord is a CM and maybe you'll at least understand where I'm coming from?
We're saying that as far as the wiki is concerned, you need to use our definition of Complete Monster. We have heard enough of your reasoning. It doesn't matter. He still doesn't meet the wiki criteria.
That's all that matters. Your opinions do not matter.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Azor Ahai
What he said.
Also, I do have to note that you more or less said you consider any non- Anti-Villain / Harmless Villain examples to be complete monsters, which IMO doesn't really make you well qualified to define what a Complete Monster is.
Hodor
$50 a day, plus expenses
Sure, you're allowed to think Discord is a complete monster all you want, Brony. You just aren't allowed to post him as an example on this Wiki, as he isn't one by our standards. If your standards aren't as specific, that's not a problem. You just can't use your standards when putting an example in this wiki.
Don't take life too seriously. It's only a temporary situation.
That Young Knockout Kid
What exactly do you think "having" a different definition from everybody else's entails, exactly? You can go around using words differently from everybody else all you want, it won't stop them from trying to correct you all the time.
We claim the land for the highlord, God bless the land and the hiiighlooord!
thanks, I'm satisfied. I was starting to think I had to abide by this wiki's definition when offline.
edited 2nd Oct '11 3:37:06 PM by brony99
since Trigger Loaded seems to be the only one that gave me a specific enough answer to my question, I'll ask one last time. is it alright to have my own personal definition of this trope? and I am not talking about using my standards on this wiki, just having a less specific definition in general.
We don't care. We only care when you persist in adding and defending examples that only conform to it.
That specific enough for you?
edited 2nd Oct '11 4:05:18 PM by Elle
