Rework : GAR

I don't know if it needs to be reworked or renamed or what, but I saw the YKTTW for GAR and it got launched even though there were protests that people would just add their favourite badasses and bloat the page, that it might not be tropable, and that the name is a 4chan meme and non-indicative.

Trope itself is something like Memetic Sex God crossed with Memetic Badass causing Stupid Sexy Flanders, with Even the Guys Want Him and Even the Girls Want Her thrown in. Seems kind of to me like trying to make a meme into a trope.

edited 1st Sep '10 10:16:21 AM by Heart-mint

I think it's a horrible name. I have since it was back in YKTTW. The creators didn't seem interested in the input.

Well, it is a preexistent term and it is pretty well know in the anime fandom.

I agree the name is not really good, but keep in mind that the page was created for the term. Renaming it is a bit weird.

edited 1st Sep '10 10:44:18 AM by Heatth

I don't see how this isn't just Memetic Sex God.

The current description of GAR sucks, but the difference is GAR is less about sex and more about awesomeness and mainlines. GAR is actually closer to Badass (and, indeed, previously redirect to it).

Oh great, another of those "sheer Badassitude personified" descriptions.

Anyway, "gar" may be a fan-derived term but it's pretty simple: it means a masculine character whose selling point is his macho charm. (With the common joke that Even the Guys Want Him.) You could call it the male counterpart of Moe. GAR is strong, dominant, honorable. Moe is sweet, charming, appeals to protective instincts. In other words...The same traditional male / female hotness ideas all people are familiar with.

I say that it is worth keeping but change the description OMG because whoever wrote it wasn't very good at it.

Also, I don't know who created the Moe GAR redirect, but would anyone complain if I just deleted it altogether and removed the references to it from the Badass Adorable page? Fanspeak is one thing, but I don't think this one has any considerable popularity.

edited 1st Sep '10 11:14:04 AM by Vree

Dumbass memes. Kill It with Fire.

^You may say that now, but like Moe etc. this will just keep getting recreated. Easier to give it to the fans and throw it in with the other anime-only tropes now where it will not hurt anybody.

By that logic, we should let Natter, This Troper, and So Bad Its Horrible loose, too. No, thank you. Kill it while it's in its infancy, and lock it if necessary. We don't need this kind of memetic infestation - it's not a trope, it's fans wanking off over their favorite characters.

"Hurr, this guy's even more Badass than Memetic Badass, those tropes are too full, MY character is SUPER SPESHUL and needs a SPESHUL TROPE all his own. Durr."

edited 1st Sep '10 11:45:08 AM by Fighteer

Either cut entirely, which I'd prefer, or limit it to a few, non contestable examples. Archer himself, Kamina and Kenpachi would all be good examples. But why is Nodoka on this page? Roy Mustang? Gar isn't supposed to be just about badassitude, it's also supposed to be about overly manly badassitude.

I'd say cut it. The meme may be widespread in a certain demographic but it's utterly opaque otherwise, and the "trope" is nothing more than "This character is the awesomest of the awesomest."

I dunno, GAR gets a lot of use in certain fandoms and I expect people would expect us to have a definition or at least blurb on the concept if nothing else.

I'd say the best way of handling it is to make it an example-less fanspeak page. There are plenty of examples to be found on pages like Badass anyway.

edited 1st Sep '10 12:23:09 PM by Shadowtext

Exampleless fan-speak I can accept, if our mission includes incorporating fan-speak terms. I'd say that it really isn't, and that this has nothing to do with tropes, but Eddie seems to have conceded this.

I like the exampleless fanspeak page if someone can give it a better definition. If not, cut it. Do we have a fan speak namespace?

By that logic, we should let Natter, This Troper, and So Bad Its Horrible loose, too. No, thank you. Kill it while it's in its infancy, and lock it if necessary. We don't need this kind of memetic infestation - it's not a trope, it's fans wanking off over their favorite characters.

"Hurr, this guy's even more Badass than Memetic Badass, those tropes are too full, MY character is SUPER SPESHUL and needs a SPESHUL TROPE all his own. Durr."

Thanks for taking me for a moron and to have skipped what I have written two posts above. >.> About the actual use of the term and how that definition could still be tropable.

I'm not protecting yet another fanwank magnet. (What do you take me for?) The trope as it is is perfectly cuttable. I'm saying that there exists a good definition which could be a trope, and that taking the pre-emptive Wiki Magic approach before nuking stuff may be more progressive because the name is bound to come up again. (It needs not even have that name. Just something that we can point to when Do We Have This comes up.)

Yeah, I'm not thrilled about putting effort into fixing a launch that is basically 99% broken, but that's Wiki Magic for you. >.>

edited 1st Sep '10 12:58:29 PM by Vree

I support cutting the examples. The term probably does need a page.

Wow, that description is pretty terrible.

I supported it in the YKTTW, but I expected to original creator to write a better description.

A rename would be nonsense, the trope originates from the term.

I don't see why should we cut it with the reasoning that it's only used in a certain demographic. I would understand this reasoning for a rename, when a niche name makes it too inaccessible, but why not categorize niche tropes at all?

With the same reasoning, we could cut Mary Sue, because it is only recognized by fanfic reader and writer niche, or Capture the Flag, that only gamers recognize as a trope.

Yes, I exaggerated, but that's the point: We are not supposed to be selective solely on the basis that "nah, the audience for that trope is too small, we don't need it", especially when otherwise it has enough examples.

Cutting the examples.... Well, I don't see any misuse in the ones I'm familiar with, and no Trope Decay, but even if its list gets cut, a dozen from the best examples should be kept, just to demonstrate the text.

It's not one of those tropes where the examples list causes any problem, like flamewars or natter, so why would we be better off without it?

edited 1st Sep '10 2:15:19 PM by Superior

Fanspeak term. Should be a fanspeak page. Traditionally those don't have examples, though I suppose a few of the ones that codified it might be appropriate for explaining the term.

I don't think it's much of a trope, either. Moe can apply to either male or female characters—the character in question doesn't even have to be cute in a conventional sense—but there are whole harem shows and visual novels designed around trying to evoke that kind of reaction in their target demographics. It's practically a genre. GAR is just a meme, and it's just fan reaction, at that. There are characters that are "widely recognized" (i.e. on 4chan) as GAR, but leaving it open is asking for Trope Decay and natter.

This has been a redirect to Badas before, probably would be easies to change it back to that at this point.

I didn't mind it as a redirect to Badass.

Nuke 'em.

This page is supposed to be a redirect, nothing more.

Redirecting it to Memetic Badass would make more sense, IMO.

I rewrote the description to make it different from a mere badly written description of the term's origins, and

I believe that in this form, cutting the examples list could be the only necessary action, and I'm not even sure about that one, given that the examples are fitting the trope.

edited 3rd Sep '10 2:25:12 AM by Superior

GAR is already explicitely mentioned as a synonym for Rated M for Manly on that page.

Cut it, or merge it with Rated M for Manly maybe. I see no reason to keep it.