• 1 May 24th, 2016 at 10:10PM
    Western Animation
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 10:56:46 PM
    Ok, so we have a bit of an issue over in the Steven Universe page over spoilers posted from the episodes aired early in France. Several people are insisting that this is kosher, that "America isn't the only country" to quote one edit reason. Is this actually kosher? Should these spoilers be left alone, or should they be pulled until the episode actually airs here? Reply

      Short Run in Peru is a trope for a reason. There's already full recap pages, character listings and so forth. Trying to protect this one page is like knocking over a bucket of water and then cleaning a single drop.
  • 1 May 24th, 2016 at 7:07PM
    Videogame
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 10:06:59 PM
    I'm fairly certain They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character doesn't have to do with gameplay all that much. Yet the Pokémon Shuffle contains too many character related to gameplay for They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character. And also, Pokemon Shuffle doesn't really have a story. Reply

      Personally, I think it's misuse and it should be deleted. The Pokemon used in the game aren't really "characters" in the sense of the word.
  • 3 May 24th, 2016 at 5:05PM
    Videogame
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 09:36:53 PM
    Hi! So, this is kind of my first post on ATT, even though I've been on the site for a while. I suppose it's sort of a unique situation. You see, there's a page called Legend of the Valkyrie, which covers a series by Namco that spans a few games, a webcomic, and a few other odds and ends. The thing is that the page only covers the webcomic, and so it uses the webcomic's name. The game it's based on, 1989's Valkyrie no Densetsu, is officially translated as The Legend of Valkyrie (as seen in Namco Museum and Project X Zone).

    What I want to do is create a new page, The Legend Of Valkyrie, for the game, and move Legend of the Valkyrie to from the Video Game namespace to the Webcomic namespace, altering it to cover the webcomic specifically. (There's a similar split with a related series, Katamari Damacy, and its adaption Katamari.) I'm aware that work pages are a free launch, so I was preparing to write up The Legend Of Valkyrie, but I wanted to make sure if it was okay to move the namespace for Legend of the Valkyrie first. The most relevant support page, How to Split Pages, didn't really seem to cover that, so that's why I'm asking here. If anyone can help, it'd be appreciated. Reply

      You should be fine. Just make sure to append the description with a note to the effect of "Not to be confused with the webcomic Legend of the Valkrie", appropriately linked, so readers know where to go.

      Use a detailed edit reason. Otherwise the move might get mistaken for vandalism if no one checks for the new page.

      Alright, I just wanted to make sure. Thank you both!
  • 11 May 22nd, 2016 at 7:07AM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 07:58:45 PM
    In general, do Indexes have to follow indentation guidelines? I'm asking because several indexes do have tropes indented under others via sub-bullets. Reply

      It is generally not OK to have subbullets on indexes.

      Can you list a source on that policy?

      ^ Example Indentation in Trope Lists

      "All tropes in a list should be at the same level of indentation...Subtropes should not be listed in sub-bullets beneath their parent tropes."

      Right, but we're asking about indexes, not lists of tropes on work pages. In my experience, it's common practice to index subtropes under their parent tropes.

      ^^The policy you cited is for trope lists. Not trope indexes.

      In the usual no one actually out it on the page, it was decided at some point the indentation applied to indexes as well, for the same reasons.

      Indexes should avoid sub-bullets, because they cause confusion with sorting in the index bar on pages, and also because someone trying to find an entry on the index may have difficulty doing so if it's not in alphabetical order.

      Rather than use sublists for subtropes, it's better to list items on both the main index and the supertrope index.

      That makes sense, but it needs to be put in a policy document.

      Either that, or the way indexes are processed by the system should be modified.

      In How Indexing Works: (proposed edit in bold)
      • How do I add something to an index?: Just add the page you want to index as a bullet in the bulleted list on the index. The page you want to index has to exist already, by the way - otherwise, you'll have to re-edit the index page for the page to display on the index. Please do not add subtropes as subbullets. Indexes should be sorted alphabetically.

      ^ Agreed. Also pothole How to Alphabetize Things in the last word.

      The page isn't locked. Is this addendum good to go?

      Sure, make the addition.
  • 9 May 23rd, 2016 at 6:06AM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 07:57:18 PM
    Are fanfic tropes (such as Common Crossover), or even fanfic references for that matter, allowed on works pages? Reply

      Fanfic stuff goes on the fanfic's page. Original stuff goes on the original's page. Putting fanfic or Let's Play stuff on the original's page is right out.

      I hope this helps.

      Most fanfic related stuff does not belong on a main work page.

      However, I see nothing wrong with listing a trope example that normally only applies to fanfics, or occasionally mentioning fanfics in a work's description.

      ^ It's definitely wrong. Mentions of derivative works, unless they are official spinoffs or sequels, do not go on the main work's article, period.

      I wasn't talking about derivative works of the work in question. But the same can be said about anything. If we restrict ourselves to only talking about the work, we can't talk about the work, because all language is in reference to something.

      Is there a specific reason derivative works are banned, or are mentions of any work banned from article pages?

      Work articles should not have trope examples from other works. What Fanfic X did with the characters from Work C is irrelevant to the article about Work C.

      I think we may have a failure to communicate here. Of course examples from other works are not to go on the main page, or any of the subpages, of a work.

      What about YMMV pages, which may have YMMV items based on fanfic or fan art rather than the show itself, or be troping how audience reactions towards the show are shaped by fanfic/fan art, and vice versa?

      Same thing. YMMV fanfic items go on the YMMV page for the fanfic, original YMMV items on the original's YMMV page. Ditto for Trivia and anything else.

      Referencing fanfics on the original's page, even in the description, is discouraged because page bloat. As long as the fanfic has the original's title in the description, a search will pick it up.

      There is also a Fan Works namespace, I believe, to list out derivatives for a given work.
  • 5 May 23rd, 2016 at 12:12PM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 07:31:36 PM
    There's a (very long) 'real life' section of the funny Deoxyrebornicleic page (Deoxyrebornicleic is a webcomic artist with an active tumblr, where most of the things mentioned there seem to be from).

    The entire main page had a problem of troping the creator themself instead of their work, though I've mostly cleaned it up by now. Is it alright to just cut the whole 'real life' section of the funny page? Reply

      Not sure; some of the entries are about their streams on Twitch.

      Trope the work, not the person. If there's a persona, that can be troped.

      Should I keep the stuff about the streams?

      bump

      On another note, it seems like most examples on the page have context issues. Readers should not have to click on any links to understand why something is funny.
  • 1 May 24th, 2016 at 4:04PM
    Literature
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 04:12:41 PM
    The "Analysis" namespace is supposed to be use to write an actual analysis for a given work, and not just link to someone else's. Because Evighet has just created an unindexed analysis page for The Fault in Our Stars, containing only a link to an unfinished off-site multi-part negative review for the work, which they don't appear to have written themselves. Reply

      We don't allow Complaining, plagiarism, or spam adverts. This is at least two of those and it just stops short of being full on plagiarism. Cutlist that page.
  • 9 May 23rd, 2016 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 12:15:24 PM
    So, excluding the Coppy entry, how close is this to troping real people? Not to mention, it talks about Paige's suicide attempt, which I know we're not supposed to talk about it on YMMV.Steven Universe (and I assume that translates to not talking about on other YMMV sub-pages.) Reply

      About as close as Lannister twins.

      Zap 'em.

      Should we be troping Tumblr at all? Most blogs represent real people's real lives, the troping of which is apparently being cut down on, and any roleplay or otherwise tropable blogs can just get their own work page if needed. Plus, the page has a few mentions of certain controversial blog types, which probably goes against the Rule of Cautious Editing Judgement.

      The websites themselves are probably fine, but things like the Moments pages should probably be gotten removed. That's my two cents.

      Well, the Coppy entry seems to be valid, so I'm not sure I want to zap the page entirely...

      No one's saying we should, we're explicitly talking about cutting the non-Coppy examples.

      Well, all the non-Coppy were cut yesterday, courtesy of the OP. Yeah, that stuff is sad, but it's also talking about real people, which is kinda not what we do the last time I checked.

      Should we make a page for the "No Troping Real People" policy?

      Wait, there was never a page for the "No troping real-life people" policy? Huh, I always assumed there was.

      Also @ troping tumblr at all, I think we could trope Tumblr itself, but not go into detail about individual blogs (excluding certain Troll/shitposting blogs)

      Yeah, the closest we have to a "No Troping Real People" page is the list of pages where real life examples are banned.

      Well, Creator Page Guidelines makes it pretty clear, but it's obviously a rule that extends past creator pages.
  • 2 May 24th, 2016 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 12:03:54 PM
    Vexer is constantly making edits that remove information from entries, these include Rock Music and Video Games. I told him to discuss these things before making such arbitrary edits. He then ignores me and continues to edit. I've sent out C&D's telling him to stop, but he hasn't responded and he has kept at it without even talking about it first. Reply

      He's posting in the discussion, has he since made any deletions?

      Alright, disregard this. We've settled our conflict.
  • 2 May 23rd, 2016 at 10:10PM
    Webcomic
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 06:43:17 AM
    DylanKeefer, who appears to be the author of Drakon Forge, made a page on both the Webcomic and the...Namespace Goes Here namespace (which is...odd). He's not actually making a page with tropes on it; he's just advertising his comic and putting links for where he's hosting it so he can get ad money. Reply

      He needs to be banned. Also, Namespace Goes Here gets clueless newbies making stuff on it all the time, but this is just a spammer. Cutlist everything he's made that isn't in a proper namespace, and cutlist the other stuff if people aren't improving it.

      Suspended and cut the articles.
  • 3 May 24th, 2016 at 1:01AM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 06:39:18 AM
    The Mane Six of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic has been added again to Beauty Brainsand Brawn, this time by Monarchofthe Fen who also added it years ago. I already put it in discussion last time but that didn't go anywhere. Editors can't decide if Pinkie Pie is beauty and Rarity is brains or Pinkie Pie is brains and Rarity is beauty. It changes through out the history. I'm pretty sure six character don't count for any trio. Reply

      It's shoehorning, hopefully that trope isn't as bad as F Ive Man Band.

      Is this a cast dynamic trope? If so, this trio does not appear in the show. The show uses other cast dynamics tropes. The Dazzlings might apply, but I don't remember that movie well enough.

      I've suspended that user.
  • 3 May 23rd, 2016 at 6:06PM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 06:34:18 AM
    The YMMV item is Flame Bait, yet it has examples on it without being Darth Wiki. Should all examples be removed and replaced by the "No examples, please! This only defines the term." message? The other Mary Sue pages (aside from Parody Sue) have the same message. Reply

      I don't know if this is relevant, but looking over the list of examples, I didn't see any examples. It mainly just talked about fandoms where it is more of a phenomenon and how it expresses itself in those fandoms.

      I didn't see any conversation, but I didn't look too carefully.

      The page line above the examples does specifically say "examples", and reading them, they seem to be more of the general variety. Among those, I do see a few direct examples: Llednar Twem from Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, Xion and Namine from Kingdom Hearts, Linkle from Hyrule Warriors, Sonichu'', and there are probably more. Some are lampshaded or invoked, but don't forget: Lampshaded and/or invoked examples are still examples.

      Looking at the page, there are other rule violations, including Examples Are Not General, Natter, other Example Indentation in Trope Lists issues,

      The various Sue tropes should not have any examples, whether on Darth Wiki or anywhere else.
  • 1 May 24th, 2016 at 2:02AM
    Lastest Reply: 24th May, 2016 05:01:01 AM
    Tropers/drumlip appears to be running a Trump-to-Drumpf substitution plugin, as can be seen on the edit history of Memes.Game Of Thrones. Reply
  • 5 May 23rd, 2016 at 2:02PM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 05:16:04 PM
    I'd like some guidance on how to handle a conflict of opinion between myself and troper @King Zeal on whether the Easy Evangelism trope applies to the conversion of Nux away from Immortan Joe's cult in Mad Max: Fury Road. The order of events so far:

    • @King Zeal deleted what I consider to be a perfectly valid example of Easy Evangelism from the trope list, leaving an edit reason which does not adequately explain why he feels the trope does not apply.
    • I restored it and left an invitation for him to take the matter here, to Discussion or to the Is This An Example thread so we can discuss the matter and solicit other opinions.
    • @King Zeal commented out the example and started a thread in the film's Discussion page reiterating his earlier points. At this point, I considered reporting him to ATT for edit warring, since as I understand it it's the third edit (he made an edit, I reverted it, he re-reverted it) that crosses the threshold into an Edit War, but since he was giving at least the appearance of being willing to talk it over at this point, I decided to let that particular point of order slide for the moment and join him in Discussion.
    • We went back and forth in Discussion for a bit; it quickly became clear that we were repeating the same arguments, neither of us was likely to be convinced by the other, and no third party was likely to show up and break the stalemate.
    • I announced my intention to bring the matter to the Is This An Example? thread to attempt to bring in further opinions and invited @King Zeal to join me there. He did not do so.
    • The reception at ITAE was mixed; a couple people agreed with me that it was a valid example, one person said he could see both sides and suggested listing it as a justified example. One person (@war877) didn't come down firmly on either side, wound up posting something that got him thumped by the mods (the post had already been blanked by a mod by the time I saw it, so no clue what) and bowed out of the discussion.
    • After a reasonable amount of time had gone by with no definitive conclusion being reached, but with the only parties besides myself (firmly for the example's inclusion) and @King Zeal (firmly against but no longer actively participating in the discussion) being very indecisive, I announced my intention to restore the example but invited anyone who had objections to my doing so to speak up so that we could continue the discussion. Only one person did, chiming in firmly in favor of the example's validity. After allowing three days to go by, I restored the example.
    • @King Zeal almost immediately made a Justifying Edit, calling it in his edit reason a "compromise solution." Here's the thing: it's only a compromise if everyone agrees to it, and he never put the issue up for discussion in the first place. I'm certainly willing to have that conversation, since at least one other person suggested listing it as a justified example, but @King Zeal declined my invitation to join the discussion in Is This an Example so he currently has nothing but his own fiat to back up his edit.

    I'm sort of at a loss for how to proceed at this point. What I'd like to do is delete the Justifying Edit and pull the matter back to discussion (preferably here or at ITAE since the film's Discussion page quickly turned into a 1:1 back-and-forth between myself and @King Zeal) to attempt to reach some kind of consensus (potentially including a new wording of the example), but considering that the last time I did that, @King Zeal's response was to cross the line into an Edit War and filibuster rather than discuss the matter in good faith, I'd appreciate some mod guidance before doing anything at all. Reply

      You are the one crossing the line toward edit war and filibuster. You had several people disagreeing with you in the comments, yet you still insisted on your version against all other opinions. King Zeal's edit looks like a good compromise to how the trope apply in this case by giving enough context. Though I was of the opinion to drop it altogether, since Examples Are Not Arguable and this one seems to cause lots of arguments.

      The Wiki works by consensus, deal with it.

      For the record: I didn't "decline" your invitation. I cannot post in forums.

      However, I was watching that thread very closely and agreed with points made by several people—especially Tobias Drake.

      Did you PM him and state you can't post in the forum, like you did with my invitation?

      I can tell you, I was thumped for posting something KingZeal told me.

      The reason I bowed out of the conversation was in protest to not everyone being able to participate.

      And that's why I eventually didn't argue further, but did ask for advice on the subject.
  • 3 May 23rd, 2016 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 04:14:11 PM
    you indicated: "In Stargate SG-1 Oma's planet has a monk who speaks entirely in koans. One of the famous ones is "If you know immediately that candlelight is fire, the meal was cooked a long time ago." It isn't actually the full kōan though, it is prefaced with "Because it is so clear, it takes a longer time to realize it," followed by the otherwise meaningless if statement. " But the statement is not meaningless. just as his earlier statement made sense, about no barrier between you and nature (aka Take Your Shoes Off), this makes sense once you know it's meaning. the setting is a romantic dinner. the guest comes in, sees the candles are lit, and knows dinner is ready. Why? 'cause one would not light the candles in the morning. nor at lunch, nor when starting to cook dinner. one lights them when you are ready to sit and eat. obviously some parts are a bit exaggerated for effect (affect). ie "a long time ago" is a relative statement. of course, one can debate what a romantic candle lit dinner has to do with them sitting down awaiting a jaffa attack. but that is for a different thread. Reply

      ...what are you rambling on about?

      No seriously, is there even a question here?

      What the hell are you talking about? This is for problems with the wiki, if you want to discuss specific issues on a page, use the discussion page for that page, which isn't here, it's the discussion button on the particular page you got that from. Do you have a question? Because all you have written are statements. You seem to be clarifying a koan used in Stargate SG-1, but saying "you" is a bit rude in English, we usually use "the page for link to page you're talking about says ..."

      That is best put on the Fridge tab under Fridge Brilliance.
  • 7 May 22nd, 2016 at 10:10AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 12:28:26 PM
    What exactly is SlidingScale.Badass supposed to be? Reply
  • 2 May 23rd, 2016 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 10:15:21 AM
    I want to ask, if trope is spoofed, is it another word for parodied or played for laughs, or is there any difference? The spoofed versions of tropes I saw seemed to be parodied in some way, so how is it? Reply

      It's a synonym of parodied in this context.

      Thank you :)
  • 8 May 20th, 2016 at 2:02PM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 08:21:35 AM
    It's that time of year again.

    Television Is Trying to Kill Us is filled with complaining about extremely minor artistic license or obviously incredibly unrealistic gags that aren't repeatable in real life. Reply

      stop unilaterally deleting stuff from the page. Did you know, a man in Halton (where I grew up) was arrested for using his guide/seeing eye dog to drive, telling the dog to bark once for left and once for right. Not Too Dumb to Live, as he didn't die of the resulting slow speed car crash. So blind driving should stay, someone did it at least once in RL. I've seen a number of missing persons cases where that 48 hour crap has been responsible for deaths. Adults are Useless deserved to be taken off, but the others could be toned down, and blind driving has been attempted in Britain, and maybe in other countries too.

      And as I've said before, PG-13 is aimed at 13 YEAR OLDS, unsupervised, and children younger supervised by an adult, AS WELL AS adults. Plus it doesn't matter how mature the EDITORS are, our readers can be much less mature. (since your edit reason contained the word adult, I must point this out.)

      EDIT:I'm adding Ass Shove back, as your edit reason is a non-sequitur about hancock, but enough idiots enter A&E with Morrisons (british supermarket chain) "pre-KY'ed" onions and things (they're not pre-K Yed, they just make up that they fell on their shopping.) up their bum that your deletion stinks of "I can only think of this one example, and that is the only thing that this applies to."

      Adults are stupid too. I am a Darwin Awards moderator (same name), and it's just amazing the amount of stuff people get up to. Including 'what they saw on TV'. Keep in mind our lower cutoff is sixteen.

      Is there a Projects forum thread for cleanup?

      If there isn't, one can be made to get consensus on deletions.

      If there is, use it.

      Like the man (in black) said: "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

      The other thing I heard was a person on the second day of St. Johns Ambulance course, copying TV to perform an emergency tracheotomy with a biro. Manslaughter was what he was charged with, since all he needed to do was keep the person stable and phone 999.

      I think a clean-up thread and locking the page if people start unilaterally deleting again.

      Adults Are Useless was an extremely generic example.

      http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/el.php?findfor=SuckerPerpetrator

      Sucker Perpetrator: Some of your recent edits aren't up to scratch, including on YMMV.Dear White People when someone adds then someone else deletes something, you're meant to take it to discussion not add it again. Both of the people before you left decent edit reasons, yours was "wew". You deleted something on Website.Reddit with the edit reason "ELLEN PAO DID NOTHING WRONG." which is a novel way to import drama- usually it gets added to the wiki.

      And then there's the unilateral deletions to Television Is Trying to Kill Us due to your lack of imagination when it comes to human stupidity, and the insult to other users here, and your inversion of Righting Great Wrongs view of reality (I.e. believing things that happen all the time only happen in fiction.)

      Man, did someone wake up on the wrong side of the bed. It's funny you accuse me of having a lack of imagination, because that's exactly one thing wrong with the page. Everything is hysteric 'people believe everything they see on tv is absolute', among the general complaining, the patronizing of the page; and natter about random tropes that's essentially Did Not Do The Research 2.0. Oh, and that 'non sequiteur' is about an example of Ass Shove, which I removed because the page had to tell us shoving things up asses without permission is rape.

      By the way, the Reddit "example" I removed was Complaining About Things You Dont Like about the moderation team.", and the example I removed from Dear White People was readded after I natterfied the troper for editing out YMMV and claimed they were justified in P Ms. See Eagal's edits on both the ymmv and main page as to why I readded it.

      Edit warring is edit warring. Period. Right or wrong to begin with, it's wrong when the edit warring starts. There's specific procedures to handle debated examples because edit warring is wrong.

      People are stupid. They try to imitate what is shown on TV. Whether they are successful isn't the point; the point is they often wind up in the DA slush pile or on other sites when they do.

      And sadly, some people have to be told, "Yes, X is rape." Whether it belongs in the example or is Righting Great Wrongs, should be discussed.

      Politely

      First site rule: "Don't be a dick."

      When you delete stuff for drama importation, don't use an edit reason that could make people re-add it under a different trope, always leave a note on discussion if you have PM'd someone or NOTE IT IN THE EDIT REASON. My problem was not with your edits, but your EDIT REASONS. One said absolutely nothing, leading to people out of the loop to say you're edit warring, the other felt like a sarcastic comment without a qualifier of "don't add it back." People ARE stupid, My example as to why I added Ass Shove back is a good one, and the hands over eyes thing has been done and caused car crashes. I noted an example of someone actually using his fucking guide dog to drive on this page.

      Sucker Perpetrator appears to be a recurring ban evader. Who has been summarily dealt with.
  • 1 May 22nd, 2016 at 11:11PM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 03:09:02 AM
    movietubenow564 left an ad for a website on this discussion page. Reply
  • 3 May 22nd, 2016 at 12:12AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 01:04:38 AM
    So the Aquaman character page is cluttered as it is. But there's also the bit where the franchise essentially got a hard reboot, to the point that many characters have two versions in one folder (and even then, the main characters full name was even changed). I was wondering if it'd be okay for me to make separate the page into Pre-Flashpoint and Post-Flashpoint? Reply

      Can't see why it shouldn't.

      I mean, look at all the Batman character pages across the franchise, from the 60s show. Films. Animated show. Games ect.

      Coo, I'll get on that
  • 6 May 22nd, 2016 at 3:03PM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2016 12:46:58 AM
    This entry was removed from the YMMV page for Fire Emblem Fates, and I'm confused as to the reasoning.

    • Picture this: you failed to reach an A rank support with Kaze by the end of chapter 15 in Birthright, resulting in Kaze's death. You had also managed to get him married before this happens. You then go back to My Castle and spot his widow on the castle grounds with an exclamation point over her head and talk to her, expecting to hear a customized grieving quote from her in response to this scripted story event. Instead, she proceeds to bitch to you about accessories like nothing's happened.

    It was removed for the following reason: "Not intentionally being Played For Drama."

    Can somebody explain what this means if this is valid? It's a dramatic scene being undermined shortly afterwards by an oversight in game mechanics. Does that not qualify? If not, do we have a trope for that? Reply

      Narm Charm requires (1) The moment be intended as drama. (2) The moment not be taken as drama. (3) This not ruin the moment in any way. 1 and 2 being much of the definition of Narm.

      The situation above is not an example of drama.

      So is there no trope for a dramatic moment being undermined by in-game variables not accounted for?

      This was for Narm, not Narm Charm, War.

      And... hmm. 's odd, if we're going to lawyer this it doesn't qualify as an example because the scene wasn't intended to be dramatic, because the devs didn't actually create a scene for the widow's reaction. Narm technically needs a ruined scene, here the problem IS the lack of said scene. Still, that's some heavy-duty lawyering. Is there a reverse of Developer Foresight, where the devs SHOULD have seen an obvious scene coming but didn't think of it?

      Well actually my point wasn't the lack of the scene, the point was that right after a dramatic plot-mandated death scene, you can walk up to the character's widow and have them act like nothing at all happened. THAT'S the undermined drama I was talking about.

      ^ That sounds like a notable example of Gameplay and Story Segregation.

      ^^^Oops. They were right next to each other.

      ^^The intended dramatic scene must be ruined by elements in the same scene, not the next scene to count.
  • 2 May 21st, 2016 at 11:11PM
    Western Animation
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2016 09:21:07 PM
    • Ensemble Darkhorse: Leni is getting this treatment for her cute looks and sweet-but-naive personality.
      • In fact, every Loud sister has gained a large amount of fans.

    Okay I get that the idea seems ludicrous, but I am willing to argue that this show has as many as 11 protagonists. (as the Expository Theme Tune states, 1 brother 10 sisters). With that said, I feel like there is some misuse of Ensemble Darkhorse. Despite that I'm a little unsure if all 11 siblings qualify as main characters (then again, that;s because tropes like Deuteragonist and Supporting Protagonist had kinda blurred the line for me). So I ask for a second opinion on this entry. Reply

      I'm not familiar with the show, but that's blatant misuse from what I see.

      If this Leni girl have substantially less screentime yet still be more popular than her siblings, I guess that can count. The second paragraph is plain misuse.

      She appears in every episode, AFAIK (along with her other sisters)

      I removed the examples
  • 1 May 22nd, 2016 at 8:08PM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2016 09:07:49 PM
    So, I check my watchlist and see that a new account has made an edit to Hates Small Talk, and check it out. It seems like the user just posted an ad for his card game to the page. It's his only edit. I'm removing it for other reasons (bad formatting, zero context, etc.) but I thought it best to let you know anyway Reply
  • 2 May 22nd, 2016 at 8:08PM
    Live Action TV
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2016 08:36:09 PM
    From the recap page: "Stealth Pun: Daleks on an elevator. What do they say before flying?" I don't get it. Could someone please explain it to me? Reply

      They say, "Elevate."

      They say "ELEVATE".
  • 2 May 22nd, 2016 at 3:03PM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2016 08:10:33 PM
    I plan on splitting the moments in Funny.Neptunia into their own pages, since there's enough moments in each section. What should I do with the original page once I'm done with it? Reply

      Make it an Index?

      Okay then, I've split all the moments and made the original into an index. Thanks for your help.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?type=att