Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- • General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- • Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- • Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- • Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- • Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- • Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- • Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- • Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- • Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- • Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- • Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- • Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
resolved Unspoilered context for spoilers Videogame
Pokémon Scarlet and Violet currently has an almost-entirely-white example for its Magnificent Bastard entry. It was not like that previously: I wrote part of it outside the spoilers to give context. For the record, here's what it was previously:
- Magnificent Bastard: The Final Bosses of the game caught many players off-guard for how ingenious they are: Professor Sada (in Scarlet) / Professor Turo (in Violet) was Arven's parent who discovered and utilized the Terastal phenomenon while exploring the Great Crater of Paldea. The Professor proceeded to use the Tera crystals to create a time machine with hopes of building a paradise for their family, using the machine to bring over Pokémon from the past/future, in spite of their threats to Paldea's ecosystem. Even with the Professor's untimely death as a result of their research, their numerous security systems and failsafes, including forcing their AI copy to battle any threat to the machine and, in the event that would fail, locking all Poké Balls except their own, would defend the time machine from the protagonist and their friends, demonstrating the Professor's willingness to allow the destruction of the region for the creation of paradise.
And here's what it looks like now:
- Magnificent Bastard: Professor Sada (in Scarlet) / Professor Turo (in Violet) was Arven's parent who discovered and utilized the Terastal phenomenon while exploring the Great Crater of Paldea. The Professor proceeded to use the Tera crystals to create a time machine with hopes of building a paradise for their family, using the machine to bring over Pokémon from the past/future, in spite of their threats to Paldea's ecosystem. Even with the Professor's untimely death as a result of their research, their numerous security systems and failsafes, including forcing their AI copy to battle any threat to the machine and, in the event that would fail, locking all Poké Balls except their own, would defend the time machine from the protagonist and their friends, demonstrating the Professor's willingness to allow the destruction of the region for the creation of paradise.
Shooting Star 7 X deleted the non-spoilered context, with the edit reason of "Plently of Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard writeups are completely spoilered out, and this addition would make no sense without spoiler markup (i.e. on Magnificent Bastard.Pokemon)."
I don't see the reasoning behind that. "Other examples also do this" isn't good justification; Self-Fulfilling Spoiler points out that fully-spoiled examples are bad writing. Also, "this wouldn't make sense if it wasn't a spoiler" doesn't work either, because the example is a spoiler, and it's not like my addition detracts from the example if it's read in its entirety without a spoiler — at least, in my opinion.
I asked ShootingStar7X in a PM, but they didn't respond to me. I also consulted Magnificent Bastard to see if there's a rule that all MB entries must be fully spoiled, and it doesn't say.
Am I clear to restore the edit I made previously?
open Questionable characters image choices for an Anime character page. Anime
While I was looking up this anime called Gibiate, I stumbled upon seeing at least four character image in the character page. It was a poorly drawn sketch of each four characters. I don't know it was a troll edit because the anime is notorious for being bad animation, bad writing, bad voice acting and bad storytelling or it's an oficial character portrait image. I tried looking it up but no anvil. Although, I do found some character design that is similar but not close enough.
Edited by BubblepigopenThe Launch Pad Incident
Hey, so this is Kryppuk‘s older sister speaking.
I will be the one responding to this whole disaster on the Launch Pad page because I don’t want them to get even more upset over this than they already did. I don’t know much about how this page works and I don‘t know where a post like this would go nor do I know if the formatting will be functional, and I apologize if it‘s not.
But I feel like this is something that needs to be explained, so I‘m asking you to hear me out.
My sibling(who is not comfortable with their gender being revealed online, so I‘ll try to keep it neutral) loves analyzing fictional stories and characters and wants to become a writer themselves one day. They are shy and don’t share this passion with a lot of people. And they loved the articles on this page since they were a young teen because of how much of an in-depth look they provided. They looked up to you guys, they really didn‘t mean to mess things up or offend people.
It took them a lot of time and courage to finally write down one of their ideas and actually post it in here. Finally having something that’s ready to post meant a lot to them, they wanted to make sure it was done right, they even had me spellcheck it twice because they didn’t want there to be any errors.
And the text looked fine to me. I‘m not too familiar with this page aside from what they showed me, but I have played some of the games mentioned in the article, so I was able to understand what it was about. And get this: I told them to just post it and not be so nervous about it because surely, your first post ever doesn’t have to be perfect and people would understand that it’s the thought that counts because everything else can still be improved afterwards.
Needless to say, I regret giving them this sort of encouragement.
Cut to about an hour later and they’re a nervous wreck, panicking and trying to „fix“ their article, which just seemed to mess it up more. I know for a fact that the apostrophes did read properly on the original post, so they must have gotten corrupted in one of the following edits. There also seemed to be some interface issues (It may have had something to do with us using a tablet rather than a real computer.) where the text field was partially covered by parts of the page that just added to the stress. I barely managed to get them to let it go for the night.
I don‘t think anyone is really to blame on this one as there were several aspects factoring into it, but it was not pretty and it took such a toll on my sibling‘s mental well-being, they are now considering quitting the page altogether.
It’s true that the formatting of their post didn’t look very good on this page. It was fine in the original document they wrote it in, but evidently, it just didn’t translate well. The numbers for one were underneath each other, not besides each other. This didn’t look like it was going to be a problem in the initial posting interface, (which was incredibly narrow by the way, the scrolling for the final spellcheck was a pain) but well, turns out that it is.
But honestly, that’s an innocent mistake, isn’t it? They didn’t know what their text would look like on the actual page because they had never written an article for it. In fact, they knew this would likely be an issue and asked for help.
It’s not even like they just typed random stuff directly into the text field without double checking it, their only crime was that they weren’t sure how to use coding, which I‘m sure all of you were perfectly versed in the first time you posted anything on this page, but they weren’t.
They knew it wasn’t going to be perfect right away and wanted to improve in this regard, but that wasn’t their main point. They wanted to talk to people about this idea they had. They didn’t think the formatting would mean more to people than the actual content of the article and frankly, neither did I.
Turns out it apparently does. I wish I‘d be able to tell them that they just misinterpreted the situation, but no, it really looks like people legitimately weren’t even reading what they actually wrote, with one person telling them to „just tell them what the trope is about“ only to edit their comment admitting they hadn’t even read the part right towards the beginning of the post that literally consists of a numerical list of exactly that. I‘m sorry, poor formatting or not, that’s just plain rude. This kind of criticism is not helping anyone. Both I and my sibling know that not everybody acts like that and that these comments aren‘t personal attacks in any way nor were they the only factor in their panic attack yesterday, but that doesn‘t change what happened.
Now I don’t see myself in any position to judge the article the same way people on this page can, but I did notice that a lot of the examples my sibling gave are not found in the examples section on the „Hijacked by Ganon“ page, which people claimed it was too similar to despite my sibling‘s best efforts to differentiate the two. If their suggestion was redundant, then I would have expected the other page to have at least more than half of the same examples.
Now I don’t see myself in any position to judge the article the same way people on this page can, but I did notice that a lot of the examples my sibling gave are not found in the examples section on the „Hijacked by Ganon“ page, which people claimed it was too similar to despite my sibling‘s best efforts to differentiate the two. If their suggestion was redundant, then I would have expected the other page to have at least most of the same examples.
There are also some things that I just don’t understand, like how is Ganon being used in a page name fine while referencing Bowser is problematic and needs to be replaced with „Big Bad“? I personally don’t have much involvement with this page and don’t know the definition of a „Big Bad“, but I do know who Bowser is, as well as that he is a common culprit of the phenomenon my sibling was describing. If the goal is to make the title more understandable for outsiders, surely it would be more helpful to reference franchises most people are familiar with rather than the internal terminology of articles that people who aren’t active on this page haven’t read?
I would be interested in hearing the explanations behind those since my sibling can’t explain them to me, but that’s just my two cents on the situation.
And before anyone thinks I‘m just some entitled Karen wanting to speak to the manager, this is not about my sibling’s suggestion being rejected and I’m not looking to change the fact that it was. In fact, I don’t think they ever actually expected it to be accepted. They just wanted to write something into the forum to get in touch with people who seemingly shared their passion for fiction. Having people complain about their foreign quotation marks and having the names of bad writing tropes hurled at them on their very first post was not exactly what they planned.
I know some of you will say that they shouldn’t have written a page suggestion for that, and you may be right, but some people, like my sibling, have trouble making connections just for the sake of making connections. They do much better bonding with people over activities, like, let’s say, writing an article on a topic they’re passionate about, getting feedback on how to improve it and talking to people about the contents of the article.
I don‘t think they would have written a page suggestion if they knew of another place on the page to do this kind of stuff. Maybe that one suggestion in the comments about having a „beginner score“ that goes up when making approved additions to pages and allows them to legitimately suggest new pages (completely independent from just bouncing off ideas) only after they‘ve collected the experience to make them formally acceptable to the general public really would be worth looking into for the future.
„Just do it.“ is not a piece of advice my sibling is going to take from me again any time soon, even if the situation seems as harmless as making your first post on a page you really like. Which is a shame because in my opinion, that is something they should follow. They have many good ideas yet never make anything of them because they keep backing out. And now the one time they didn’t, it became an absolutely miserable experience for them.
I‘m sure they’ll get over it, they‘re just very anxious right now. They usually know better than to let stuff on the internet get to them, but this time, it was in a community they really looked up to and that they thought they might fit in with. They met their heroes and it was not in the way they had hoped for. This just went out of hand for them and they panicked, emotionally jumping to the conclusion that everyone hated them and their ideas.
This might be the last post written with this account, which is sad because it’s also one of the first, but in the end, it might be better this way. I know they said they wanted to fix their post, but I think it‘s best for them to not deal with anything right now. They‘re not fixing it not because they don‘t care or don‘t want to, but because they need to calm down and get their mind off of things. Don‘t worry, I don‘t think they‘ll actually quit the page entirely, they just need to take a break for a while.
I do apologize for ending on such a somber note. I‘m not exactly the linguistic talent in this family, I just think it’s important to communicate clearly. You‘re looked up to so much more than you know and I know how awkward this can be. Just keep up the good work.
Thank you for reading.
openBad Writing Index edit war (again).
Generic Doomsday Villain was added, cut, and re-added to Bad Writing Index as "Stop cutting GDV from this list. Tropes Are Tools also applies to everything else, even if it is “bad writing”."
I think it was deemed not an example as, like Flat Character, deep characterization isn't always necessary to the story or their role. Just want some consensus before deciding if an example or not. I also intend to add that while Tropes Are Tools, their nature and workings mean straight or unironic examples that are that a good use of them is theoretically impossible and extremely rare. Any other way to put it.
This was also added:
- Captain Obvious Reveal: If you are going to write a plot twist, don't foreshadow it so much that your readers will know without working at it.
By now we're taking Bad Writing Index to ATT once a week. How long/frequent must this happen before it's worth asking for it to be locked?
Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaughtopen Potential Edit War in Bad Writing Index
In Bad Writing Index, there seems to be an ongoing conflict in which whether Generic Doomsday Villain deserves to be put on the Bad Writing Index. Any advice?
EDIT: NVM, someone else is discussing this, someone lock it
Edited by Siegfried1337openAdding to BadWritingIndex
The edit tab is locked. Can any mods add Protection from Editors as 1 of the causes of bad writing?
Edited by KelvinGopenRemove from Bad Writing
I intend to remove this from the Bad Writing Index:
- Dull Surprise: Have your characters emote during events that would make a real person do so. Otherwise, it can make scenes that are intended to be dramatic hard to take seriously.
This can be used intentionally to show someone as stoic or unemotional. Any unintentional examples are due to poor art or acting, not writing. All Literature examples are constructive uses arguing it's impossible for it to be bad due to writing alone.
There was discussion here about cutting game design trope from the index as they're not writing per-say, but stalled out. Should I wait until we have a consensus on that or go ahead and cut Dull Surprise as there are many examples of it being used to desirable effect?
openAffirmative action legacy example of lazy/bad writing
Lately, we’ve been seeing more examples of these, largely because of Executive Meddling, laziness, or creators with an idealogical axe to grind. Should this trope be added to the Bad Writing Index?
openCorrect usage of bold text?
Like how italics should normally only be used for work titles (and how using them to emphasize your example may be bad writing), how should bold be used?
openHypocrite vs Moral Myopia
What is the distinction between Hypocrite and Moral Myopia? My impression is:
- Moral Myopia is only for villains, their hypocrisy being intentional to establish we’re supposed to dislike them.
- Moral Dissonance is for heroes Unintentionally Unsympathetic as their hypocrites are unintentional due to bad writing.
So is Hypocrite for examples not reprehensible enough to make them villains but too minor and/or deliberate to fall under Dissonance?
Is Hypocrite like Jerkass where it should only be used if it’s sub-tropes don’t fit?
openBad Writing Index
Relatively recent additions to the Bad Writing Index:
- Space Whale Aesop: The results of a character's bad decisions should be logical consequences of those decisions.
- No Ending: While ending on a cliffhanger is fine, ending apropo of nothing will make the audience feel cheated with their investment into your story.
- The War on Straw: Misrepresenting a side you stand against, weather due to a lack of knowledge or you're trying to make it easier to argue against them, is a quick way to piss off people you just misrepresented, and possibly others should the efforts be too hamfisted. Not a direct cause of bad writing, but a frequent component of it nevertheless.
I cut Space Whale Aesop because it was cut 3 times prior. No Ending I'm fairy sure isn't innately bad (as stated it's redundant with Writer Copout which is already listed). The War on Straw note it isn't innately bad writing but symptom.
Since Square Peg, Round Trope became an Administrivia and locked, why not Bad Writing Index? It seems like it has the same potential for misuse forcing unapproved or misused examples.
Bad Writing Index could use a cleanup, at least.
openPoorly-written page Literature
I see a lot of bad writing in A Girl Who Brought Down the World, such as misusing the spoiler tags. Are the spoiler tags the only problem that you notice, or does the page itself need a bigger cleanup?
Edited by MitchellProductionsopenBad Writing?
Should I put Characterization Tags in the Bad Writing Index under "TV Tropes Troubles" as it says they shouldn't be used on this wiki?
openCharacterDerailment.VideoGames Videogame
I was checking out the CharacterDerailment.Video Games page and noticed a lot of the examples, particularly for Mario and Sonic, seem to be 'this character changed over time', 'this character underwent flanderization', or 'this character's personality/competence varies by the game' rather than 'this character was ruined forever by bad writing.'
openThat certain phrase that substitutes the pronoun "I"
I was having this query one time, and the mention of a certain phrase sent some tropers berserk. I only know that it's bad writing to use that phrase, but I was genuinely unaware that it was offensive. Might I know the context on why it was a bannable offense to use that phrase everywhere?
Edited by SeptimusHeapopenAbout the "reactions"
Somewhere I read that you wanted to be as mature as possible. It is fine for now. But there's a large amount of "reactions" (stuff like "The part where a panther jumps out. *shudder*", "X and Y are in love. Awww.", "Someone spits on the floor. Ewww.", "They won't leave each other. *sniff*") and addressing somebody ("X attacked somebody. Why did you do that, X?", "It was put back in Gravity Falls. Thanks, Alex Hirsch."). Look, if it's on a Headscratcher/WMG/Fridge/DMOS/whatever page or in text for an image, it's OK. But it seems like Bad Writing if there's no particular person speaking. Do you think so yourselves?
Edited by TommyTigeropenFlamebait editing in Bad Writing Tropes index
On May 13, 2017, Troper Fangusu edited the explanation of Chickification in that index from a neutral tone to a not-so-subtle slam against feminists; on May 27, Angie 710 added in a similar flame-bait description of Real Women Don't Wear Dresses to the index.
As I was browsing various tropes and this index, I kept running across these examples that seemed insistent that only "feminists" would get upset, and that raised my red flags. I edited those examples to be more neutral before I thought to check the editing history. I don't know how to access a troper's editing history, but here's the link to the page history:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.BadWritingIndex&more=t
Going back in the history, this seems to be an ongoing issue with the Chickification example; I ran across a few other examples of other tropers adding/deleting the "feminists" reference from the example. I did not mean to edit-war; I saw problems, fixed them to be more neutral, and only then thought to check the edit history. The prior edits before the ones I name were from back in 2016, though, so I don't know if those are too old to report or not.
(edit: gah. got upset enough with the iPad's limitations that I finally swapped back to my laptop. While I'm editing this, could someone also explain how to access a specific troper's edit history? Every time I click on a troper's name, I only get the page to send them a message.)
Edited by FranksGirlopenReverting an edit on Bad Writing Index
I was going to wait a bit longer for a reply to my post on the discussion page, but honestly this is rather straightforward.
Luc added Blaming The Railroaded Player Character to the Bad Writing Index suggesting that if it's used to blame the audience then it's bad writing. Not only would that not be automatically bad writing, meaning it shouldn't be on the list, but the trope specifically mentions that it's about the characters being blamed, not the player, and reading through the TLP thread, that was the intention (though you can't really fault someone for misunderstanding that when some of the description and the page quotes suggest it might be about players being blamed). In addition to that, both the times they added it, they were extremely vague, not explaining why the trope is supposedly bad, plus the entries were unnecessary vitriolic.
It's already become a minor edit war which is why I want to ask if it's alright to get rid of it.
(Also, does anyone else think that the trope in question is a bit redundant?)
openNo Title
There is a troper called Masonicon X whose handle name and edits resemble these from Masonicon II who was recently banned for bad writing.
Specifically, Masonicon X has some pretty bad writing as well, as visible on his edits and also in this discussion, and he seems to have an interest for DarthWiki.The Ultimate Crossover Movie, a work that was created as The Ultimate Crossover Movie by Masonicon II and which I moved over to /Darth Wiki since it was unpublished.
Can someone check if Masonicon X is a sockpuppet of Masonicon II and take appropriate measures if he is?
Back in Dec 2021, Dracoblade deleted these Creator's Pest examples (in folder due to sheer number/leangth) citing "The trope is creators not liking a character they wrote, not fan fic writers deliberately writing a character badly because they didn't like them. That's a different trope. Likewise, rewriting a scene or season like how it should have gone goes under Fix Fic, not here."
The issue is there are many non-fanwork examples of writers inheriting characters from the series they didn't care for and bashing them. I asked here and here but got no consensus or feedback on what to do. Several of the Creators Pest entries or similar are still under the fanworks Trivia pages.
I intend to add back the entries (save those just about not liking characters in the original as opposed to how it effect how the fics author writes them) as, while I agree this should be something more than authors bashing character they don't like, I see nothing suggesting it's misuse as it's currently defined and have heard nothing on it being misuse despite repeatedly asking. (If it should be changed is for a cleanup.) Any objections to adding back or should the Trivia page examples be cut as well?