Needs a rewrite and a cleanup or split: Armor Piercing Question

There seem to be three kinds of examples here:

• A psychologically devastating question that needs to be repeated many times before the target will even face it. This is the definition in the article.
• A psychologically devastating question. e.g. "Why not just put the world in a bottle, Superman?'' which is only ever said once.
• A question that is repeated many times to show the asker's obsession with it. e.g. "You gonn' help, huh? You gonna look out for me? You gonna look out for me, Sergeant Carver? You mean it? You gonna look out for me? You promise?! You got my back, huh?!" which is only repeated for rhetorical effect: both parties know the answer. "How'd it get burned?" is probably a more clear-cut example, but I haven't actually seen the movie. And "Are you my mummy?"

If I were king of Tropedania, we'd rewrite the explanation to emphasize that repetition is neither necessary nor sufficient. That means we'd leave the first two types of examples there, and strip out the third, possibly adding them a new trope for a question the asker is obsessed with.

I think it sounds like definition 2. Three is something completely different, more like a Madness Mantra.

Definitely needs a rewrite to strip out the type 3 examples. I think the key point here is that the question is "psychologically devastating".

I don't think types 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive, both are psychologically devastating questions, one is just repeated and the other isn't. I don't quite understand type 3, but I think it should be cut. Cleanup the definition to include the first two only.

I vote that it should be a cleanup to include the first two, and then YKTTW the third. It's related to Madness Mantra, but clearly something separate.

I'd say that only type 2 counts. The title "armor piercing question" implies that the question completely bypasses all of someone's mental defenses; asking the same question over and over doesn't really count, because it's the repetition that breaks through the defenses, not the question itself.

I'd say that type 1 could be YKTTW'd as a separate trope, though. Type 3 is just Madness Mantra.

I think one and two belong together; repetition occurs when the subject manages to dodge the question.

Ok guys it's May.

As said by Native Jordan. Type 1 should be sent back to YKTTW. Type 2 defines the actual trope. And type 3 is Madness Mantra.

Let's finish this thread up.

Bump again.

Was anything done here?

I think that 1 and 2 belong together. Just because a subject avoids answering the question a few times doesn't mean it's not piercing their armor. Besides, sometimes a question is repeated simply for emphasis without even giving the subject a chance to respond. Separating all questions based on if they were ever repeated seems a little arbitrary.

There is now a page action crowner here.

Bump for more votes.

Ok, it's July now. I think there's a consensus here. Let's work on the rewrite. Does someone want to start the YKTTW?

I created the YKTTW here and edited the description to make both types clear. Is that enough to lock this up? I didn't see any type 3 in the examples, but I don't really know the works enough to be sure.

I think that it's enough to lock this up. Thanks!