Ask The Tropers

Cutlist 'em, I'd say.

Who are you to say that they are not legitimate works? I can't speak to the Allison Praegler subpage but if you have seen any of SF-Debris's video reviews you would know that he does create his own interpretation of the characters. For some series, particularly his Star Trek reviews these interpretations have been consistently evolved as he adds new video reviews to his site. His view of Janeway as a power hungry tyrant or Paris as an overworked savant has been consistently built up in the fictionalized version of the ST universe. (Yes a fictionalized view of a fictional universe)

Your decision to excise the entire category and the sign off by the moderator seems...premature at best.

Shouldn't that be under AlternativeCharacterInterpration.Star Trek Voyager then? or AlternativeCharacterInterpretation.Kathryn Janeway?

Or it would be listed as an invoked trope on the main SF Debris page.

They being "legitimate works" is not the question, although alternative interpretations of characters are not really "works" in the sense that we define them. They're just collections of fan opinions, which is utterly irrelevant to tropes.

That said, the real reason we're cutting them is to punish johnnyfog, who is a serial ban evader. Everything he has added to the wiki that isn't factual tropes about a work should be purged.

I cannot talk to the the Allison Praegler subpage either, but I would say that SF Debris' alternate character interpretations are hardly "irrelevant to tropes". In fact, many of them, especially the Star Trek ones, are fully formed takes on the characters that have enough life of their own to be quite akin to fanfiction (though with a very satirical blend), which this wiki has no problem with cataloguing tropes for.

Also, does it matter that much who wrote the page in the first place? I would say that it has been edited by many other contributes since its creation, so this johnnyfog person really shouldn't matter here. It comes across a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If you're just mentioning SF Debris's interpretations of characters, presenting it as invoked (like with the AlternativeCharacterInterpretation.Zero Punctuation page), it should be fine. I'm assuming they were being used to trope real people as well, otherwise I agree they shouldn't have been cut (since it would probably be too big to just list on the shows' main page).

Just for the record: No, the page wasn't used to trope real people.

I don't know if I should make a proper Question entry for this, but could recreating the page with something along the lines of the following introduction (which I based on the mentioned Zero Punctuation page) work?

"Chuck's use of Alternative Character Interpretation is frequently invoked across the many series he reviews, where he casts many characters in a humorous light, usually by way of exaggerating certain character traits and (especially) flaws. Over the years, many of his takes on various characters has taken on a life of their own, effectively becoming Running Gags that are often referenced across reviews."

You might want to leave the SF Debris page cut, but put the contents back as a normal character page. That's what it was being (mis)used as anyway, a character page for his parody versions of the characters.

I'm a bit late to the party, but the SF Debris pages were:

1. Created before Johnnyfog was banned. 2. Edited by many tropers beyond johnnyfog 3. Basically character pages for the parody versions of these characters used in SF Debris's reviews. They were not in any way troping real people.

I am asking for permission to recreate the pages as character sheets.

I guess. Doesn't seem to cause any harm.