Ask The Tropers - TV Tropes

Ask The Tropers

Appeals to the troper hivemind...

If you want to propose a new trope, use YKTTW; if you're looking for a particular trope, try Lost And Found. For a discussion on a particular topic, head over to the Forum instead.

Show only:
Add A New Query

jormis29
Medium:
10:21:22 AM 25th Apr 2015
edited by jormis29
Just Noticed that Soul Hunter and Houshin Engi pages seem to be about the same manga. Is there somebody who can merge the two?
see/hide 2 replies  
SeptimusHeap
07:18:26 AM 25th Apr 2015
Merge the latter into the former, I would say.
Discar
10:21:22 AM 25th Apr 2015
Moved everything over, including the wicks.

close replies  

sgamer82
Medium: Anime
06:18:54 AM 25th Apr 2015
edited by sgamer82
I was trying to do an Japanese-to-English title migration from LightNovel.Ore No Nounai Sentakushi Ga Gakuen Love Come O Zenryoku De Jama Shiteiru to LightNovel.My Mental Choices Are Completely Interfering With My School Romantic Comedy but whenever I try to copy/paste the markup from one to the other, the English title page doesn't change. It still stays on a page saying

"We don't have an article named LightNovel/MyMentalChoicesAreCompletelyInterferingWithMySchoolRomanticComedy. If you want to start this new page, just click the edit button above. Be careful, though, the only things that go in the Main namespace are tropes. Don't put in redirects for shows, books, etc.. Use the right namespace for those."

Was the page previously cut or is it a page typing issue of some kind?
see/hide 10 replies  
Zyffyr
08:45:39 PM 23rd Apr 2015
I suspect it is a page name length thing... Make the page name to long and it don't work. It will let you open up the edit page, but when it comes time to actually save it your work just disappears into the void.
sgamer82
08:49:00 PM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by sgamer82
That makes sense. I've been making it a personal pet project to migrate names over like that when I can. But I'll probably just have to let this one go, then.
muddycurve424
11:16:16 PM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by muddycurve424
would dropping the romantic comedy bit shorten the title enough? you could put that part in the description.
SolipSchism
10:27:18 AM 24th Apr 2015
^ Continuing from this, for works that just flat-out have titles too long for our system to accomodate, is there an acceptable method of shortening titles?
Fighteer
12:26:54 PM 24th Apr 2015
There's not a "standard" method, if that's what you're asking. For titles that long, usually there's a fan shorthand that becomes customary, such as "My Mental Choices".
SolipSchism
12:41:02 PM 24th Apr 2015
^ I thought it might be something like that. Then if just removing "Romantic Comedy" isn't enough, you could try going with whatever Fan Nickname the series (probably) has, or just My Mental Choices.
sgamer82
01:22:37 PM 24th Apr 2015
There's a shortening of the Japanese name that might work (forget what it is right offhand but it was mentioned in Officially Shortened Title) that could be used. Wasn't sure how official it was in the stars which is why i held off.
SolipSchism
01:48:56 PM 24th Apr 2015
Yeah, typically we wouldn't do that, but when it becomes a functionality issue, it sounds like it would be okay. Due to necessity, of course. If it's not necessary to shorten it, the full official title, or if it's a foreign work, the full official English title, is always the correct page name.
sgamer82
08:15:48 PM 24th Apr 2015
edited by sgamer82
Yeah, that's what I've generally tried to do when I spot a manga/anime/light novel listed as its Japanese name (when there's an official English to go with). Functionality being an issue, I may opt to leave this one alone or go with the Officially Shortened Title of NouCome
crazysamaritan
06:18:54 AM 25th Apr 2015
That looks like a shortened Japanese title, not English, so it may not work.

close replies  

harryhenry
Medium:
02:20:36 AM 25th Apr 2015
edited by harryhenry
The troper Chopshop recently added examples about the "Galbrush Paradox" to Positive Discrimination and Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. The wiki linked in both examples is a wiki for... yes, Gamergate. Here's the thing: Besides a brief reference to "some internet communities" and the aforementioned wiki links, there isn't any other mention of GG in either of the two examples. Should I just remove the link to the Gamergate Wiki, or should I just remove the examples entirely?
see/hide 3 replies  
wrm5
12:25:01 AM 25th Apr 2015
He is also making a valid point. I'd just remove the GG references and leave the rest, personally, but it's not really my call.
SeptimusHeap
01:28:22 AM 25th Apr 2015
The link can go, yes.
SetsunasaNiWa
02:20:36 AM 25th Apr 2015
edited by SetsunasaNiWa
Neither are trope examples. General things should go away or be included in analysis or description. Examples have to be stating the source (Administrivia.HowToWriteAnExample). Real-life section being some 99 % blatant shoehorns or uninteresting discussion moments is a given.

Then there's this. An entry about someone somewhere having a specific way of Complaining about Shows You Don't Like, with Agenda. And it cites a discredited taboo aggregator, on top of making it an example in someone's random post or blog.

^^ And saying that that was a valid point is your call? (edit: I mean, as long as that call decides the fate of example) Are there any other saving graces?

close replies  

NotOnAnyFlatbread
Medium:
01:28:59 AM 25th Apr 2015
Is there a way to remove reviews of a work from my watch list without removing the work itself?New reviews keep popping up as separate entries on the watch list, but if I try to drop them using the "drop" button, the main work gets dropped as well. If I re-add the work page to the watchlist, all of the separate review entries get added again, and the "new" reviews never seem to disappear from the list. It's especially distracting because the review entries are highlighted orange.

Thanks!
see/hide 1 replies  
SeptimusHeap
01:28:59 AM 25th Apr 2015
Not as far as I know. Might want to put a request in the Wiki Tech Wish List.

close replies  

Oberoniss
Medium:
08:15:22 PM 24th Apr 2015
edited by Oberoniss
Lowkey edit war over here.
see/hide 1 replies  
shimaspawn
08:15:22 PM 24th Apr 2015
edited by shimaspawn
I don't think that one is an edit war. It looks more like various people keep adding the same trope to the page without reading the page history before they do since no one seems to use the same wording for it. The thing to do in those cases is to add a %% note to the page with the rational of why people shouldn't add the trope in the place where the trope would be if it was proper to have it on the page.

close replies  

SolipSchism
Medium:
02:41:06 PM 24th Apr 2015
...What the hell is going on with Career Killer?
see/hide 4 replies  
valozzy
01:02:52 PM 24th Apr 2015
edited by valozzy
...A very failed re-direct?

What should do with it? Also, what is Synonyms and why is it locked?
DracMonster
01:17:11 PM 24th Apr 2015
Cutting pages used to automatically lock them. (It doesn't anymore.)

The reason Career Killer has that is it's using the old markup. You used to have to list a page's index at its bottom before the indexing system was changed.
SolipSchism
01:49:33 PM 24th Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
Weird. So would the solution just be to redo the redirect? Do we need to do anything with that Synonyms thing?
Zyffyr
02:41:06 PM 24th Apr 2015
The redirect is fixed, and since Synonyms wasn't actually a page there is nothing to do with it.

close replies  

DAN004
Medium:
01:36:48 PM 24th Apr 2015
Excuse me, what is Villain Corner about?
see/hide 6 replies  
Bisected8
05:24:53 AM 24th Apr 2015
It appears to be about a character becoming darker and more morally ambiguous.
wrm5
06:49:17 AM 24th Apr 2015
It refers to "painting oneself into a corner" - a phrase meaning to trap oneself into a certain spot through one's own actions - except in this case the corner in question is "becoming a villain."
JoieDeCombat
10:22:13 AM 24th Apr 2015
edited by JoieDeCombat
Except the description indicates nothing about the character trapping themselves into villainy by their own actions.
nrjxll
10:26:41 AM 24th Apr 2015
That's because it's actually about the narrative. A better way of phrasing it might be to say that the character "is being painted into the villain corner", not painting themselves into it.
JoieDeCombat
10:32:24 AM 24th Apr 2015
The only things I get from the description given for the trope are:

  • "a certain (allegedly) non-villainous character starts getting explicitly dark character development," which may take any form or happen at any rate of speed

  • but the narrative remains ambiguous about whether or not they're actually villainous, rather than having them step into a clearly antagonistic role.

And I am not sure what any of this has to do with anyone being "painted into a corner," given the incredible vagueness of the description.
wrm5
01:36:48 PM 24th Apr 2015
Might need a description rewrite.

close replies  

valozzy
Medium: Western Animation
12:58:58 PM 24th Apr 2015
edited by valozzy
Why was NightmareFuel.My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic spilt into seasons? According to ~Wandering Browser, "The Moments of Funny page has been broken into season-based sub-pages, so beginning the transition here." However, the funny page was very large, unlike the Nightmare Fuel page.
see/hide 1 replies  
Fighteer
12:58:58 PM 24th Apr 2015
My guess would be for consistency? It's not a necessary step, but might help people find the things they're looking for more easily.

close replies  

harryhenry
Medium:
10:28:30 AM 24th Apr 2015
If a YMMV trope has both an invoked example and a non-invoked example at the same time, where does the trope go? Do I put the trope separately twice on both the Main and YMMV pages, or do I leave all the examples on the YMMV page?
see/hide 2 replies  
Karxrida
08:11:18 PM 23rd Apr 2015
Invoked goes on the main page, the normal example goes on YMMV.
SolipSchism
10:28:30 AM 24th Apr 2015
^ This. Even if the trope itself is YMMV, you add it based on how it's used in the work. If it's YMMV, put it on YMMV; if it's objective, put it on the main page. If there's an example of both, place each one as appropriate.

close replies  

chasemaddigan
Medium:
10:25:36 AM 24th Apr 2015
One of the citations on the Unfortunate Implications page is in German. It's the one for Benjamin Blümchen and Bibi Blocksberg under the Radio Play folder. Here's the citation. Should it be removed, or is there something that can translate a web page?
see/hide 14 replies  
Fighteer
02:12:02 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Some browsers have built-in translation features, like Chrome.
GnomeTitan
03:36:42 PM 22nd Apr 2015
translate.google.com, for example.
GnomeTitan
03:36:54 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
EDITED: Sorry, double post. I have problems posting from my iPad.
Someoneman
03:40:12 PM 22nd Apr 2015
But automatic translators are not very reliable. The best solution would be for a troper who is fluent in German to translate a relevant part of the linked page and add it as a quote.
SolipSchism
03:54:18 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
^ It wouldn't fit our standards for a citation though (never thought I'd utter that sentence on this site).

Translating something from a foreign language into your own is always much easier than the reverse. It wouldn't be difficult for English-speakers to feed that page into Google Translate and use context, and common sense to make up for Google's shortcomings. I don't see why a non-English source would be unsuitable for a citation, as long as the example is written in passable English and explains its relation to the citation.
gallium
04:00:00 PM 22nd Apr 2015
I wasn't aware we had any standards for citations.
SolipSchism
04:15:49 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Basically, it has to be off-site.

Thus, translating something and posting it here isn't really any better than just quoting or paraphrasing something—in the end, you're asking us to look at something you put here and take your word that it's legit.

As opposed to posting a link and us reading that and seeing that, yes, there is a website somewhere with this opinion on it.
Candi
07:26:36 PM 22nd Apr 2015
It has to be off-site and it can't be a blog or other site that belongs to the troper posting the example. Other things can fall into a grey area, but those tend to be discussed on a case-by-case basis.
SolipSchism
08:55:30 AM 23rd Apr 2015
Well, we don't have any hard criteria for proving that the troper doesn't own the site (although presumably it can't be blatantly that troper's blog—like, I can't add a UI example and link it to solipschism.blogspot.com), but let's be honest, we're not going to hire a P.I. to investigate every citation to make sure it doesn't belong to the troper adding it.

My understanding is that if you add a UI example, you need to link it to something off-site that is at least ostensibly a third party. If you're really willing to start a blog under a pseudonym and conceal your involvement with it just so that you can cite UI examples from it, then as far as I'm concerned, you've earned the right to pimp your UI opinions. Just don't get caught. And obviously the examples themselves still have to be written up to snuff.

I'm not encouraging it, obviously, but there has to be a line where we say, okay, you've satisfied our standards at least insofar as we're capable and willing to verify that you're legit—after all, we're not Wikipedia.
chasemaddigan
01:28:47 PM 23rd Apr 2015
I brought this up not because I wanted to know the validity of the source, but because I wanted to know if it was okay to have a citation that was a different language. You know, for legibility's sake.
SolipSchism
01:32:35 PM 23rd Apr 2015
^ Well, we have gotten onto a little bit of a tangent, but my original opinion stands: I think a foreign-language source should be fine. It's not hard for anyone who wants to verify it to feed it through a translator and fill in the blanks using context and common sense. Quotes may help add context for the example, but aren't really going to do that much to validate the source.
Fighteer
03:45:09 PM 23rd Apr 2015
I don't see any inherent reason to limit sources to English only, but most of the wiki's readers use English, so it's courtesy to provide a translation.
muddycurve424
11:32:35 PM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by muddycurve424
Do both. Link to the original untranslated citation, with a note that has the translation. Don't trust the translation? check it out for yourself via the link using any translation program you prefer.
SolipSchism
10:25:36 AM 24th Apr 2015
^ and ^^ That seems reasonable.

close replies  

nrjxll
Medium:
10:22:16 AM 24th Apr 2015
Recently Bigger Bad was apparently renamed to Greater Scope Villain. However, as you can see if you click on the first link, Bigger Bad still appears to exist as a separate (if identical) page in its own right, not as a redirect.
see/hide 15 replies  
randomsurfer
05:13:46 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Per the TRS discussion it's in process of movement. Once all 3k+ wicks get fixed the old page will be dealt with.
crazysamaritan
06:19:51 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by crazysamaritan
I'm pretty sure that's not how it is supposed to work. I think it should be turned into a redirect while the wicks are worked on.
NemuruMaeNi
12:30:44 AM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
It's way easier to access the page, then "related" tab on non-redirect pages, rather than having to type out redirect page name into a certain URL, when you hunt for wicks. One could add a Wick migration message into Bigger Bad description to dissuade unwanted readditions some.
SeptimusHeap
01:05:34 AM 23rd Apr 2015
That makes the page look ugly in the meantime. So I'll say "no" to this idea.
crazysamaritan
05:22:35 AM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by crazysamaritan
^^ As a redirect, you can go to the main page's "related to", then click on the right-hand box of redirects, and see the related to page. No need to type in the URL.
NemuruMaeNi
07:54:00 AM 23rd Apr 2015
^ I was under wrong impression about links from that box then.
SolipSchism
08:46:06 AM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
The fact that it has a lot of wicks is not relevent to the basic process of moving a page—y'all should have considered that before deciding to move the page. If you're not going to do it right, don't do it at all.

You redirect the old page to the new one, you fix the wicks, you cut the old page.

Alternately, if you're just making it an alternative title, you can leave the wicks and the redirect, but it looks like in this case it's being renamed due to problems with the name, so the former method is probably what you want.

Under no circumstances do you put a "Please don't edit this" notice on the old page, because guess what: That doesn't stop anybody from doing anything. With a redirect, there's almost no way anyone could "accidentally" edit it.
SetsunasaNiWa
01:43:00 PM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by SetsunasaNiWa
SolipSchism
02:07:34 PM 23rd Apr 2015
^ What?
Zyffyr
05:27:47 PM 23rd Apr 2015
The redirect is now in place.
Ramidel
11:43:41 PM 23rd Apr 2015
Why are we planning to kill the redirect again? 1439 inbounds is quite a lot.
NemuruMaeNi
01:15:20 AM 24th Apr 2015
@ SolipSchism There is a notice on Main.YMMV, likeness of which I was thinking about.
TheNerfGuy
06:58:36 AM 24th Apr 2015
Turning all of those instances of Bigger Bad into Greater Scope Villain is going to take some serious effort. Over 3800 pages, some of which having multiple instances and possibly ZCEs and Square Peg Round Trope entries.
crazysamaritan
09:41:03 AM 24th Apr 2015
That's why it can't be done blindly, like a macro could do. :)
SolipSchism
10:22:16 AM 24th Apr 2015
^^ Yes, well, that's what I was referring to when I said that needs to be taken into consideration. Obviously whoever decided to rename the page really, really thought it was worth the effort.

close replies  

mlsmithca
Medium:
07:19:44 AM 24th Apr 2015
Editor jesse19 has some rather serious spelling and grammar problems - more, I suspect, than a PM can readily address.
see/hide 1 replies  
Fighteer
07:19:44 AM 24th Apr 2015
Yeah, we'll call them in.

close replies  

DAN004
Medium:
03:57:39 AM 24th Apr 2015
edited by DAN004
I know that the meme Too Long Didnt Read stems from a Wall of Text, but I think that would be a better trope name for this ykttw instead.

Is that allowed?
see/hide 5 replies  
SeptimusHeap
12:00:21 AM 23rd Apr 2015
Allowed? Yes. Good idea? No way.
GnomeTitan
02:39:52 AM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
I agree that it's a bad idea. The meme is very associated with walls of text, and seems to be used mostly either to tell somebody that they wrtite too long, or as an abbreviation for "I'm aware that what I've written is a Wall of Text, so here's a short summary".

The YKTTW is about when people misunderstand a text because for some reason they didn't read all of it. It could be because the text is a massive wall of text, in which case TLDR applies, but as the examples show it could be for other reasons as well.
wrm5
04:18:08 PM 23rd Apr 2015
To be fair, TL;DR often does result in Stopped Reading Too Soon style misunderstanding...
GnomeTitan
03:19:38 AM 24th Apr 2015
Yes, I acknowledged that, didn't I (or was my post too long to read? :) ).

But TL;DR would still be a bad trope name, because it excludes all the cases where the "TL" wasn't the cause of the "DR".

In other words, the trope is not TL;DR, it's just "DR".
NemuruMaeNi
03:57:39 AM 24th Apr 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
Won't it violate the stock phrase clause either way?

^^ That "often" is a convenient unquantifiable thing. I don't remember seeing people go "TL;DR, here's my rebuttal of your first three paragraphs". To-the-point name would have to be sum'like "TL;DCRLETGTTIP", owing to the fact that you can stop reading tired from the length, yet get to and past the important part before stopping. Often.

close replies  

captainmarkle
Medium:
01:26:44 PM 23rd Apr 2015
I've noticed that the page Literal Bastard appears to be lacking examples and also isn't indexed.
see/hide 13 replies  
Larkmarn
07:26:48 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by Larkmarn
If I recall correctly, a long time ago there was a YKTTW for Literal Bastard which was shot down because it's not a trope, and eventually molded into something akin to Bastard Shame or something.

That seems to be a (flawed) attempt at making a disambig, but given the lack of wicks and inbounds, I don't see the point.

I know Redirects Are Free, but are disambigs?

EDIT: Found the YKTTW, it's Bastard Angst, and it's currently Up for Grabs.
randomsurfer
08:54:44 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by randomsurfer
.
SolipSchism
10:45:58 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
Ech. It needs to go. I'm cutlisting it.
Morgenthaler
05:13:26 AM 23rd Apr 2015
Related to the above question: are there any standards for when to create a disambiguation page? With the current automatic disambiguation system I suppose it would be useless to create new ones for anything other than to retain inbound links, but then there are pages like Maniac and Men with Brooms, which disambiguate between work pages that don't even exist.
Fighteer
07:58:28 AM 23rd Apr 2015
Main disambigs are no longer needed with the automatic system. So I would can those.
SolipSchism
08:44:01 AM 23rd Apr 2015
I'm reasonably sure we only do manual disambiguation pages for works that share titles, right?
Fighteer
08:49:06 AM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by Fighteer
That is correct, if the works are not part of the same franchise.

We really should have the auto-disambig page prioritize and separate primary articles from subpages. I'll bring it up.
SolipSchism
08:57:01 AM 23rd Apr 2015
^ That's a good idea. Probably not an urgent priority, but a good wishlist item.
Larkmarn
01:02:20 PM 23rd Apr 2015
We do also do them for split tropes, correct? All Asians Are Alike is a disambig for Interchangeable Asian Cultures and Identical-Looking Asians, for example.
crazysamaritan
01:05:32 PM 23rd Apr 2015
To preserve inbound links, yes. Not every time.
SolipSchism
01:06:24 PM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
^^ I'd say that page can probably go, actually. It only has 5 wicks. Lots of inbounds, but... Well, I have an unpopular opinion about the importance of inbounds.
crazysamaritan
01:08:31 PM 23rd Apr 2015
There should only be one wick for any disambiguation page: Ambiguity Index.
SolipSchism
01:26:44 PM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
My major problem with manual disambig pages is this:

When I type a link to something, I often check the page I'm linking to just to be absolutely sure it's what I think it is, but often enough I know what the page is, either because I just saw it recently or it's just such a prominent page that it's hard to imagine it changing. Like The Scrappy, or Luke, I Am Your Father, or Big Bad. Tropes that are so well-known and big that we're all just aware of them and they could never conceivably change.

But even when I don't check the link directly (i.e., by visiting it and making sure it's what I think it is), I do at least check the edit I've made. Mostly for proofreading, spelling, grammar, etc. When I do that, a Red Link is a huge red flag that I fucked up. If you're changing a page title because you don't want people to use that title anymore, putting a new page in its place is self-defeating because it keeps the link blue. For instance, because I frequent ATT, I happen to have noticed that Bigger Bad has been renamed to Greater Scope Villain. But if I hadn't seen that thread, and if I were going to link to that page, I wouldn't bother checking it first. Keeping the page around as a disambig (or whatever the hell they're doing with it—I notice it's still up) means I'd check my edit, see nothing wrong with it, and move on with my life, completely unaware that I've just linked to a disambig page.

And before the subject of crosswicking comes up, it's entirely possible that I could be Pot Holing to it in the context of a different example, meaning I'd have no reason to check the page.

tl;dr If a trope name is changed, there had better be a damn good reason to keep something on the old page name, because Red Links are a very useful tool in encouraging people not to use defunct trope names.

close replies  

sgamer82
Medium:
08:20:28 AM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by sgamer82
Two Page-Type questions:

I was looking at the "Untyped Pages" tool and was wondering, what type of page does a Recap fall under? A sub-page or something else?

While moving Manga.Akame Ga Kiru to Manga.Akame Ga Kill to match the English title, I reassigned the review that was there to "kill" but don't see it appearing. I wonder if that's because the page type for Manga.Akame Ga Kill is currently set to "redirect" rather than work but have no way to readily change that. Is that something that will just need to be fixed, first?
see/hide 4 replies  
SeptimusHeap
11:59:49 PM 22nd Apr 2015
  1. Examples. Not subpage - recap pages don't get YMMV entries.
  2. Aye, it was a pagetype issue. Fixed it.
sgamer82
12:55:16 AM 23rd Apr 2015
1. So would I select "a works' example page"?
SeptimusHeap
01:05:55 AM 23rd Apr 2015
Yep.
sgamer82
08:20:28 AM 23rd Apr 2015
All right, and thanks for fixing the page type issue.

close replies  

NonoRobot
Medium:
04:40:41 AM 23rd Apr 2015
edited by NonoRobot
Hello,

I noticed that the Ho Yay page of Homestuck wasn't indexed. I went to the Ho Yay page to fix that (webcomic section), only to discover that it was already listed along with Sinfest, whose page also mentions that it is not indexed despite being listed. So, how do I fix this?
see/hide 2 replies  
Candi
04:35:56 AM 23rd Apr 2015
Try a null edit on the index; that usually fixes that bug. If not, report it back here.
SeptimusHeap
04:40:41 AM 23rd Apr 2015
HoYay.Webcomics wasn't set to do indexing. I've fixed that.

close replies  

mariovsonic999
Medium:
11:58:44 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Does anyone knows how to create Sandbox pages?
see/hide 1 replies  
SeptimusHeap
11:58:44 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Head over to Sandbox.Title Of Article and hit "edit".

close replies  

randomsurfer
Medium:
09:42:34 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Difference between One World Order and Planetary Nation please?
see/hide 8 replies  
SeptimusHeap
08:55:32 AM 22nd Apr 2015
The first is about a human world being ruled by a world government, the second is more about other "nations" typically existing as a planetwide polity. The first is a politics thing, the second a cultural comparison thing.
valozzy
08:58:26 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by valozzy
blanked.
wrm5
02:21:24 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Important thing to note here is that World =/= Planet.

World, here, refers to the entirety of the space that is open to the average person in the work.

So... if your entire work is set on a single continent, and no one can leave it. (Say it's set in ancient times and ocean travel hasn't been invented.) If that entire continent is ruled by a single power, then it's a One World Government.

On the other hand, say you have a work set in the distant future. The entire Earth is ruled by a single government, but there are spaceships so you can leave whenever you want and the rest of the galaxy is totally independent from the Earth government. That is NOT a One World Government, though it is an example of Planetary Nation.
randomsurfer
05:23:04 PM 22nd Apr 2015
I'm not seeing where on One World Order it says that it's a human world, nor that it can be limted to a geographic region. Laconic.One World Order says "A species / planet answers to a single government," Planetary Nation (which doesn't have a laconic) says "This is an Omnipresent Trope in Science Fiction where inhabited planets not named Earth are shown to have only one government." I don't see how those are any different.
crazysamaritan
06:24:11 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Laconics aren't always accurate. The One World Order page is pretty clear that it applies to a species' culture, rather than to a planet. Planetary Nation is equally clear that it applies to a specific planet, although there's a suggestion that it applies only to alien races, which doesn't look right.
wrm5
07:02:40 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by wrm5
The idea that One World Order is "Planetary Nation, But Humans" seems... well, stupid. Like, if that was true then why bother making them separate tropes, right?
Candi
07:23:47 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Sounds like it might be time for a thread in Trope Talk to discuss the differences and similarities.
nrjxll
09:42:34 PM 22nd Apr 2015
^^Doing it for aliens generally has different reasons than doing it for humans. The former is related to Planet of Hats, as it's another case of authors not bothering to create differences within an alien species, whereas the latter can have a number of different possible explanations.

close replies  

MrL1193
Medium:
09:27:11 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Would I be correct in saying that the key elements of Absentee Actor's definition are as follows?

  • The plot of the episode is such that the character's presence would be expected in some way.
  • The character is absent.
  • There is little to no explanation given for the character's absence.

Also, does anyone think that the description is unclear? I recently got into a dispute over whether or not this trope applied (specifically because of that first point), and the other editor said that the description must be unclear, since we didn't interpret it the same way.
see/hide 3 replies  
wrm5
08:26:39 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Sort of? I think they might also need to be a major recurring character.

Because there's also this issue...

Alice is a one-time character who is said to be Bob's sister.

Episode 63 of Secret Agent Troper Bob involves Bob's dad on his death bed. However, Alice (who is ALSO this character's kid) is not in the episode.

Is this a case of Absentee Actor?

On the one hand, you would expect her to show up for her dad's last moments, but on the other hand she was only a one-time character so you might not expect her to return...
sgamer82
09:03:57 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by sgamer82
My understanding is an Absentee Actor is either a main character or plot relevant minor character who fails appear in a given episode with no stated reason to justify it. First example that came to mind is Twilight Sparkle of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. In the first season, she appeared in literally every episode, even if she was just being shoehorned in for a bit part. Others among the "Mane Six" might not appear for given episodes, either, but because Twilight appeared all the time, it became noticeable when, from the second season onward, the writers left her out of particular episodes altogether.

Put another way, it'd be like an episode of Gilligan's Island where Gilligan didn't appear at all for no adequately explained reason.
MrL1193
09:27:11 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by MrL1193
^^That is a bit of a conundrum. The description specifically allows "main or bit" characters, so I suppose it could theoretically fit, but it still feels iffy to add examples like that, somehow.

^Funny that you should mention MLP:FiM, because that's exactly where the dispute arose. (The discussion page in question is here, if you're wondering.)

People have been adding Absentee Actor to almost every episode recap with the explanation, "This main character doesn't appear in the episode." That might be unusual for other shows, but MLP:FiM has long since established as part of its formula that the main six characters don't all have to appear in every episode. (In fact, I wouldn't even say that Twilight qualifies for the trope, since there was an entire episode's worth of plot explaining why she was no longer the only character who could deliver the Aesop in each episode.)

close replies  

lexicon
Medium:
07:27:57 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Does this count as Natter?

Changed from:
  • The Ingenue: Innocent, virginal, pure... definitely an ingenue.

to:
  • The Ingenue: Innocent, virginal, pure... definitely an ingenue. How she remained pure and naive while hanging around with a bunch of thieves and prostitutes, and doing sexy dances in public is not clear.
see/hide 9 replies  
SolipSchism
10:34:37 AM 22nd Apr 2015
The original was really, really sparse. The phrasing of the addition could stand to be made a little less nattery, but I wouldn't say it's completely natter.
SeptimusHeap
10:51:57 AM 22nd Apr 2015
Not natter. I wonder whether it's pertinent, though.
GnomeTitan
11:40:09 AM 22nd Apr 2015
I agree with Septimus - natter is when you turn the example into a conversation or debate, and that doesn't happen here.
lexicon
11:43:19 AM 22nd Apr 2015
I have a problem with it because it doesn't say anything specific about how she applies and it sounds contradictory. Innocent, virginal, pure and does sexy dances in public?
GnomeTitan
12:45:21 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
That kind of contradiction is what makes a character interesting.

I assume this is an entry on a character page? In that case the context can be provided by the description. Perhaps you could tell us which page this is so we can check for ourselves?
GnomeTitan
12:49:55 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
By the way, this is what natter would typically look like:

  • The Ingenue: Innocent, virginal, pure... definitely an ingenue.
    • But she used to hang around with a bunch of thieves and prostitues and made a living as an exotic dancer.
      • It's the fact that she remained innocent, virginal and pure despite this that makes her interesting.
lexicon
01:10:22 PM 22nd Apr 2015
Fighteer
02:11:17 PM 22nd Apr 2015
The wording is kind of snarky and seems to attempt to demonstrate the example by negation. It could be clearer.
Candi
07:27:57 PM 22nd Apr 2015
It's not natter as such, but it does comment on 'how she stayed that way' instead of explaining that she is that way, and how the work shows it.

close replies  

Dreadwolf
Medium:
04:17:04 PM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by Dreadwolf
How do I recommend a fanfic? I read the template and everything but I don't see a button to do it. Forgive me I'm relatively new to the site
see/hide 6 replies  
valozzy
08:01:15 AM 22nd Apr 2015
May I ask what work the Fanfic is in?
Dreadwolf
08:18:55 AM 22nd Apr 2015
It's a Dragonball Z fanfic.
valozzy
08:32:55 AM 22nd Apr 2015
Go to this page and press "edit", then copy-paste the template into the proper spot, and then fill it out with the info of the fic you recommend. Just make sure it isn't there already.
Dreadwolf
08:59:29 AM 22nd Apr 2015
Thank you very much

valozzy
09:11:24 AM 22nd Apr 2015
No problem.
TheOneWhoTropes
04:17:04 PM 22nd Apr 2015
also make sure it doesn't violate the P5 rules.

close replies  

TheNerfGuy
Medium:
07:42:50 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by TheNerfGuy
Heroesurvive has some issues with grammar and punctuation. I've messaged them, but no reply yet (to be fair, I only sent the message a few minutes before posting this).

Here is their history, though you may have to do some digging.
see/hide 1 replies  
Fighteer
07:42:50 AM 22nd Apr 2015
I didn't have to dig all that far. Wow. Suspended.

close replies  

katethegr8
Medium:
07:03:59 AM 22nd Apr 2015
Retloclive has been recently putting out angry edit reasons at Fairy Tail. I'm also concerned about a potential Edit War since there seems to have been constant adding and removing of a particular example filed under Ass Pull and Franchise Original Sin.
see/hide 2 replies  
TheNerfGuy
06:49:53 AM 22nd Apr 2015
Messaged them regarding rudeness.
Fighteer
07:03:59 AM 22nd Apr 2015
Seems they abandoned the fight, albeit somewhat passive-aggressively.

close replies  

harryhenry
Medium:
12:41:46 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by harryhenry
KelanFarron has problems with spelling and formatting, especially here and here. Send him a PM?
see/hide 2 replies  
SeptimusHeap
12:02:30 AM 22nd Apr 2015
Sent them a grammar PM; someone else might want to tackle formatting.
harryhenry
12:41:46 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by harryhenry
Just sent them some PMs. Will update if I hear back from them.

close replies  

Tuckerscreator
Medium: Film
12:03:31 AM 22nd Apr 2015
edited by Tuckerscreator
Was there a consensus somewhere that I am not aware of to move The Avengers to Film.The Avengers 1? Because it strikes me as a completely unnecessary move that is only going to complicate things further.
see/hide 31 replies  
rodneyAnonymous
05:41:43 PM 15th Apr 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
To disambiguate it from The Avengers (1998) and the upcoming The Avengers 1 sequels, I am guessing.
Tuckerscreator
05:47:35 PM 15th Apr 2015
edited by Tuckerscreator
That doesn't make much sense to me, though. The following Avengers sequels aren't numbered, and there wasn't that much confusion with the British film, especially with the date in the title. When the Film.Iron Man page was split into Iron Man, Iron Man 2, and Iron Man 3, it was because the overall Iron Man film page was now going to be used to record tropes across the entire trilogy. The Marvel Avengers films, however, are less in number and their overarching similarities can go in the Marvel Cinematic Universe page because that's basically what they are, whole MCU movies.
Larkmarn
05:18:16 AM 16th Apr 2015
I'm with Tucker. It's a wildly unnecessary move.
crazysamaritan
05:30:46 AM 16th Apr 2015
I wouldnt say wildly unneeded, but I do think Film.The Avengers 2012 is better, amd that Film.The Avengers shoukd be disambiguation, not a redirect. (Unless it was a redirect to a disambiguation on Main.The Avengers)
Fighteer
08:20:39 AM 16th Apr 2015
edited by Fighteer
I agree that the article should be disambiguated by release year rather than by arbitrarily adding a numeral that isn't actually in the film's title. That's our customary practice.
RoseAndHeather
09:01:28 AM 16th Apr 2015
The Avengers sequels have a post-colon title (Age of Ultron, The Infinity War, etc.) and therefore don't need to be disambiguated from the 2012 film.

The move was completely and utterly unnecessary. I don't agree that we need to add "2012" to the URL as the previous film is already disambiguated by having "1998" appended.
crazysamaritan
09:36:57 AM 16th Apr 2015
That's not what "disambiguated" means.

"Disambiguated" means a page like this: Main.Air Force One

If someone searches for a British film called The Avengers, then they should be able to go to Film.The Avengers and find that film. When works share the same name in the same medium, we disambiguate between them. Keeping one film at Film.The Avengers and putting the other at Film.The Avengers 1998 is emphasizing one over the other.
Tuckerscreator
10:17:08 AM 16th Apr 2015
edited by Tuckerscreator
This might be American bias from me, but the Marvel film, I would argue, is the more prominent film. It's the third highest grossing film of all time, and is linked to on this wiki almost 2000 times. The British film is less prominent, a box office bomb, widely deemed as terrible, and has only 140 links on this wiki. So if either film deserves the Film.The Avengers location, it would be the Marvel film. And there needs to be proof that there was indeed confusion between the two; a search by me is indicating that all the Film.The Avengers links are indeed talking about the Marvel film and not the British one.

Also of note is that Film.Iron Man 1 was briefly named Film.Iron Man 2008 but that caused confusion with the sequels' titles because folks were confused if it was the first Iron Man film or not.
SolipSchism
10:19:57 AM 16th Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
I seem to remember Fighteer remarking a while ago that we do not name one film with its year and another without it, solely based on which one came first or which one is more popular, because it sparks debates over which one "deserves" to have its own name. If a split is necessary, then all relevant pages get a year in ther titles. That keeps them standardized and prevents bickering over which film is "more popular".

More importantly, literally nothing outside of the YMMV namespace cares how "popular" a film is or was, for exactly this reason.

And if the main name is a disambiguation page, then there's no confusion anyway, because anyone searching for the regular name will find everything they could possibly be looking for.
Fighteer
11:08:30 AM 16th Apr 2015
^ That is correct. If a disambiguation is called for, all articles must get one, not just some.
Tuckerscreator
02:13:20 PM 16th Apr 2015
If that's the verdict, then we're going to have arrange another move for this page. I for one am not looking forward to having to rename 2000 links...
StFan
04:09:15 AM 17th Apr 2015
edited by StFan
^^ Following the above logic, the Merlin series should be moved to Series.Merlin 2008, since there's already a Series.Merlin 1998 page. (1570 wicks, woo-hoo...)

Note that the interest of such moves is mainly to clear up the subpages from severe cluttering when several works have the same title. That's why, notably, the first movie in the Spider-Man Trilogy has been moved to Film.Spider Man 1.
Fighteer
07:07:12 AM 17th Apr 2015
That is correct; the volume of work is not an inherent reason not to follow policy, but the volume of work does limit the willingness of people to make everything align with policy. We can't hold a gun to your head.
StFan
07:17:42 AM 18th Apr 2015
I had moved Series.Merlin to Series.Merlin 2008 yesterday. While I was at it, I decided to use the experience to do the same today with Film.The Avengers, now at Film.The Avengers 2012 (including the reviews, which had been forgotten during the move to Film.Avengers1).

The only thing left to move are the discussion pages for both works. If a moderator would be kind enough...

Now, any help would be welcome for the correction of the wicks.
Fighteer
08:51:45 AM 18th Apr 2015
I took care of the discussions.
bwburke94
12:31:49 PM 20th Apr 2015
Speaking of similarly named works, how is Angel being handled? It's theoretically same-titled with a 1960 CBS sitcom, but the sitcom doesn't have a page and will likely never have a page due to obscurity.
lakingsif
12:42:35 PM 20th Apr 2015
Wait, do we still add years of release if one isn't a remake of the other? As the 2012 film is nothing to do with the 1998 film, is it necessary? If so, can't you just have the 2012 film as Film.Avengers Assemble, given that it was actually released as that in a few countries in order to prevent the confusion?
Larkmarn
12:42:51 PM 20th Apr 2015
Preemptive moves like that bug me on a personal level. Film.Safe being one instance where the person doing it did it sloppily, and didn't even move the laconic.
lakingsif
12:46:58 PM 20th Apr 2015
To add, Film.The Avengers still redirects to Film.The Avengers 2012, so not only was the move pointless but it also does add that confusion that it is the 2012 version, update, or remake of Film.The Avengers 1998 - especially to those who only see the cover of the 1998 film with what looks like the Black Widow and maybe Coulson on it.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to A) Move it back or, B) Have it at Film.Avengers Assemble ?
crazysamaritan
12:59:26 PM 20th Apr 2015
I removed the redirect line, it was an accident by ~St Fan. I think Film.The Avengers should probably redirect to the Main.The Avengers page.
Fighteer
01:21:12 PM 20th Apr 2015
Using the year to disambiguate does not in any way imply that one work is an adaptation of the other.
bwburke94
06:30:05 PM 20th Apr 2015
Speaking of year-disambiguation, it's been a few months since the last time I tried to get Life on Mars renamed to UK/US instead of 2006/2008 due to the extremely short timespan between the original and the adaptation.

Also, the mess that started this discussion does have precedence: Sonic the Hedgehog (the video game franchise), Sonic The Hedgehog 1 (the first game), and Sonic the Hedgehog (2006) (the 360/PS3 game). If sequels are numbered 2, 3, et cetera, we do have a case for using 1 instead of year disambiguation based on that.
Larkmarn
05:55:15 AM 21st Apr 2015
bwburke94
06:21:32 AM 21st Apr 2015
Yes, and it's already been namespaced as such. So I have a precedent for my Life on Mars proposal.
crazysamaritan
07:12:22 AM 21st Apr 2015
^^^ Franchise.Sonic The Hedgehog is for the multimedia franchise, not the videogame franchise.
StFan
10:49:49 AM 21st Apr 2015
Disambiguation of identical titles are mainly done by country (like Dennis the Menace (UK) and Dennis the Menace (US) ), by years (more common for films) and sometimes by author. I can't say if one method is (or should be) favored over the others.
SolipSchism
11:19:54 AM 21st Apr 2015
^ I'd say Country if the countries of origin differ and there are only two works, and Year if they have the same country or there are more than two works. I can't say I've ever seen Author.
crazysamaritan
05:40:11 PM 21st Apr 2015
Isaac Asimov tells about writing "Blank" for a magazine that hired him and two other authors to each write story with that title.
bwburke94
07:52:28 PM 21st Apr 2015
I've seen disambiguation by author for fanfics.
randomsurfer
09:28:56 PM 21st Apr 2015
edited by randomsurfer
^^^Sally Forth (Howard) and Sally Forth (Wood), if nothing else.

ETA: Wonder why Sally Forth (Wood)'s title doesn't show up including parentheses even though when you go to its page it does.
SeptimusHeap
12:03:31 AM 22nd Apr 2015
I think this discussion is getting sidetracked. General discussion on disambiguating work pages would belong in the forum.

close replies  

Adept
Medium:
11:16:27 PM 21st Apr 2015
The page image of Creator.Clark Gable uses the exact same one as Tall, Dark and Handsome, but before I go and needlessly make an IP thread, I want to make sure if this is an Admin request, or have a troper hivemind consensus, as this "duplicate" is obviously deliberate.
see/hide 8 replies  
SeptimusHeap
11:29:20 PM 20th Apr 2015
No such thing. Thread it away.
wrm5
01:06:46 AM 21st Apr 2015
If it was a consensus then one or both pages would have the "This image has been decided on, do not remove it..." comment on it. Same with admin fiat.

Looks to me like it's just one guy who thought he was being clever. :p
Adept
05:12:44 AM 21st Apr 2015
Really? Because there's no such comment in the "Hello. My Name Is Inigo Montoya You Killed My Father Prepare to Die" pages, even though it does have troper hivemind consensus.

Thanks anyway. I've made the IP thread.
SolipSchism
09:18:54 AM 21st Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
Heh. I do think that's kind of clever, though.

^ Also, that's a good point. Perhaps the Hello My Name Is Inigo Montoya stuff should have a note on it. I actually thought they already did for some reason.
Candi
12:06:11 PM 21st Apr 2015
The quotes do, I believe, after discussion in the relevant thread. That might be what you're thinking of.
SolipSchism
01:21:18 PM 21st Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
You might want to Read That Again—I'm looking at the page sources right now and You Killed My Father is the only one with a commented out note regarding the page quote. I'll cross-copy the comment to the other pages.

Edit: Done. I also adjusted the one on YKMF to match the others since it was a little sparse (and not totally accurate—it stated that this particular phrase was allowed to be blue-linked, when in fact it's the only phrase that shouldn't be blue-linked, because that would be a self-referential link—but I digress).
Candi
05:29:49 PM 21st Apr 2015
And that would be the difference between discussing something and doing it. :p Good work. :)
KyleJacobs
11:16:27 PM 21st Apr 2015
^^Only reason I threw in that comment at all was that someone had gone and de-linked the quote, but only on You Killed My Father.

close replies  

nombretomado
Medium: Anime
08:05:46 PM 21st Apr 2015
So I'm working on correcting namespaces to either Anime/ or VideoGame/ for Main.Sands Of Destruction, and Main.World Destruction is a current redirect to VideoGame.Sands Of Destruction. Apparently "World Destruction" is a literal translation of the Japanese title, but not an official English title. Can this be safely cutlisted (with 0 inbounds), or should a redirect for "World Destruction" be kept, only with the correct VideoGame/ namespace?
see/hide 3 replies  
bwburke94
07:51:26 PM 21st Apr 2015
0 inbounds, so a cut makes sense.
nombretomado
07:59:06 PM 21st Apr 2015
Clearly I should cut the 0 inbounds Main/ redirect, but my main query is whether or not I should be creating a properly namespaced redirect on something that isn't an official title, but is a literal English-language translation of an official Japanese title.
wrm5
08:05:46 PM 21st Apr 2015
edited by wrm5
I'd say no. I mean, we don't use Pocket Monsters as a redirect to Pokémon, right? If it's not the official title then it's not the official title, I say.

close replies  

MagBas
Medium:
02:42:06 PM 21st Apr 2015
Bassforte123 included natter in Strawman Has a Point and Designated Villain.
see/hide 4 replies  
SolipSchism
01:19:51 PM 21st Apr 2015
Did you message them about it? Or fix it?
MagBas
01:32:43 PM 21st Apr 2015
edited by MagBas
Well, i fixed it, but not messaged them about it yet. Thanks.
SolipSchism
01:39:16 PM 21st Apr 2015
Yeah, not really worth reporting unless it's a recurring problem (or a really egregious instance of it). The fcat that they did it twice is worth making a note, but if no one messaged them in the interim, there's no reason to expect them to fix their behavior.
SeptimusHeap
02:42:06 PM 21st Apr 2015
Actually, they were already messaged for both natter and Example Indentation issues. Memo failed to sink in apparently, so they are suspended now.

close replies  

Karxrida
Medium:
11:11:56 PM 20th Apr 2015
Do examples for Feather Flechettes have to involve the feathers being used for slashing? I found what may be an example where the feathers are used for an Energy Ball attack.
see/hide 2 replies  
MyTimingIsOff
06:17:28 PM 20th Apr 2015
edited by MyTimingIsOff
What example are you talking about? (Also, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "slashing.")
SeptimusHeap
11:11:56 PM 20th Apr 2015
Also, this question is much better suited for Trope Talk.

close replies  

MrL1193
Medium:
11:11:17 PM 20th Apr 2015
Can It Makes Sense in Context be potholed as part of a Recap (for an in-universe example), or are they forbidden for the trope as well?
see/hide 27 replies  
DracMonster
02:31:16 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by DracMonster
We'd really need specifics to judge better, but probably not.
MrL1193
02:45:14 PM 18th Apr 2015
In a nutshell, a character spends a night having nightmares, then remarks over breakfast the following morning that she wishes it [sleep] weren't so exhausting. Of course, since she didn't bother explaining about the nightmares, she gets some very strange looks from her family.

In my writeup, I originally potholed the indirect quote about sleep being exhausting. If that's forbidden, though, I'll go back and remove it.
wrm5
03:12:16 PM 18th Apr 2015
Nope. It Makes Sense in Context is a fanspeak term. No examples allowed, not even on recap pages.
MrL1193
03:18:09 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by MrL1193
I didn't add it as an example, though; it's just in a pothole in a synopsis. The Example Sectionectomy page was a bit less clear on that point.

Also, I find it rather strange that the discussion page for It Makes Sense in Context contains worries about it encouraging Zero Context Examples. That seems to clash with the moratorium on actual examples.
wrm5
04:32:56 PM 18th Apr 2015
^ That's even worse. Tropes Are Not Emotes.
MrL1193
05:11:30 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by MrL1193
Er, when I think of "Tropes are not emotes," I usually think of YMMV things like Tear Jerker, Heartwarming, etc. This is about something objective (a character said something that confused others because they didn't have the whole story), so I'm not seeing the connection there, unless you're saying that tropes present in a work shouldn't be potholed in a synopsis at all.
crazysamaritan
05:31:23 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by crazysamaritan
Not everyone can hover over links, so a pothole can easily become a Sink Hole.
rodneyAnonymous
06:08:08 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
Potholed links should have the same subject as the text, not add information that isn't in the text, or change its meaning, or make a comment about it. In other words, a reader shouldn't have to find out where a link goes to get the intended message.

"In a wiki, it's better to pot hole words which represent the article they are linked to."
MrL1193
07:22:38 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by MrL1193
^The joke is present within the work itself, and all the info you need to get the joke is present in the synopsis; that's the whole reason I thought to add the pothole in the first place. I didn't just put it there because I thought something I wrote would sound strange to the uninformed reader.

I'm sorry if I'm being difficult, but I just feel like my intentions are being misunderstood. I honestly thought I saw an objective occurrence of the trope within the work itself, which carried over to the synopsis I was writing, so I thought I would link the reader to the article about just that type of situation. I wasn't trying to "add" anything with the pothole; I thought everything needed for it to apply was already present in what the reader would see.
rodneyAnonymous
07:31:13 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
Not all links are potholes. This is a pothole. This is not a pothole: Pot Hole. As far as I know, linking to the It Makes Sense in Context article in a Recap is fine. A pothole is fine too if it's a link from words about story events sounding absurd to someone who didn't see the setup.

Just don't hide the link behind text that says something else (such as "sleep is exhausting"). That is true of all potholes. Additionally, this article in particular shouldn't be listed as an example entry (which you weren't planning to do).
MrL1193
09:44:10 PM 18th Apr 2015
All right then. Someone else already removed the pothole, so I'll just forget the whole idea. For future reference, though, would have been better if I had potholed it more like this?

"She says that she wishes sleep weren't so exhausting, to the bewilderment of her family."
rodneyAnonymous
10:49:53 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
No. There is still stuff to "figure out" there, there is a message (the explanation of why her family is bewildered) hidden in it. Maybe "She says that she wishes sleep weren't so exhausting, but since she didn't bother explaining about the nightmares, she gets some very strange looks from her family."

That is awkward though. It reveals that the link is kind of a poor fit. Just "She says that she wishes sleep weren't so exhausting, to the bewilderment of her family." with no potholes is better IMO. And elaborate if you think it's important; but write that in text, meta-commentary isn't what potholes are for.
GnomeTitan
01:23:47 AM 19th Apr 2015
To start with, I think that's more of a sinkhole than a pothole - the link doesn't go to anything related to the blue words. Sinkholes are generally frowned upon.

Secondly, you are basically using a sinkhole as a kind of footnote - you're adding a parenthetical comment by linking to a trope with the same name. I'm not quite sure if there's an official policy, but personally I don't like that at all. I see a link and click on it, only to find out that it's a somewhat smart-ass way of telling me something that you could just have written out. Reading the It Makes Sense in Context article doesn't add any information for me, it's just distracting.

So personally I'd appreciate if you didn't do this.
MrL1193
02:35:49 AM 19th Apr 2015
you're adding a parenthetical comment by linking to a trope with the same name.

(Sigh)

For the last time, I was not trying to speak directly to the reader; I was not trying to say "It Makes Sense in Context." I was trying to use it as an actual, objective trope (which probably was another mistake, since the page seems to have moved away from that purpose). However, as Rodney pointed out, there's no convenient way to encapsulate all the elements of It Makes Sense in Context in just the potholed text, so I'm just not going to.
GnomeTitan
02:39:16 AM 19th Apr 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
It's been pointed out before, but It Makes Sense in Context is not an objective trope (the page refers to itself as a "fanspeak definition"). Even if you are trying to use it that way, to me it looks like you are just making a parenthetical remark that a certain, confusing-sounding thing makes sense in context.

If you think that there really is an objective trope being used here, it's not defined by It Makes Sense in Context, so either you should link to another, existing, trope, or create a new one (via YKTTW) to link to.
Candi
04:01:43 AM 19th Apr 2015
Mr L 1193, even objective tropes aren't used for commentary. Linked tropes are used to explain more about the entry or other tropes, not comment on the text. What you originally proposed was commentary.

I understand you meant nothing malicious, just humor. It's just the way the site has been shown to work best isn't compatible with that humor. Okay? :)
rodneyAnonymous
12:36:48 PM 19th Apr 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
No, I understand, the people that are confused are the parents, because the daughter didn't give them context for her saying last night wasn't restful. It would still be a Sink Hole to use a pothole that way.

It is still the equivalent of a parenthetical comment even if it's referring to an in-universe sentiment.
SolipSchism
07:56:31 AM 20th Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
People seem to be dancing around this instead of stating it outright, so I'll go ahead and say it:

It Makes Sense in Context is Not a Trope.

I'd like to know what the purpose of the page is, if it's Not a Trope and we discourage using it as a parenthetical aside, and yet it has almost 9,000 wicks, the vast majority of which are using it as a parenthetical aside on what are basically Rare Sentences.

So either that's okay or it's not okay.

If those 9,000 wicks are acceptable, then yes, you can Pot Hole it if you make it clear how you're using it, but I don't think any of the variants you've suggested are clear on that.

If those 9,000 wicks are not acceptable, then perhaps a large-scale clean-up is in order.

To be perfectly honest I don't think "I wish sleep wasn't so exhausting" is a rare enough sentence to warrant mentioning It Makes Sense in Context. As a general rule, if I can adequately explain the context in a single sentence, IMSIC is just being dramatic about how weird it really is.

Like, "In Code Geass: Nunnaly in Wonderland, Jeremiah gets turned into a Jabberwocky, and has tassels flapping in the wind, a fabulous Geass Canceler, and rooster legs." That would take me at least a couple sentences to explain.

But setting aside the hypothetical "rareness" of it, the best way I can think of to do this would be to put the sentence first, Pot Hole it, and then provide the context that makes it make sense.

Something like: "What's-her-name comes down to breakfast and tells her family that she wishes sleep wasn't so exhausting. She neglects to explain that she's been having terrible nightmares."

Even that is not ideal, and I don't recommend it.
GnomeTitan
08:19:49 AM 20th Apr 2015
Without actually performing a wick check, I'd guess most of the 9000 wicks are just people linking to it whenever they are saying "it makes sense in context" - the same kind of misuse as for every conversational phrase used as a trope name or page title.
SolipSchism
08:30:44 AM 20th Apr 2015
^ I also didn't do an actual wick check, but I pulled up a small number of main-or-work namespace pages, and all but one of them was potholing a rare sentence to it. The remaining one was just Blue Linking to It Makes Sense in Context for the exact same fashion—they just put it after the rare sentence instead of underneath it. In all cases, a troper is describing something from the work in such a way that it creates A Rare Sentence, and then wryly adding, "It Makes Sense in Context." It's all used in the "parenthetical comment" way, whether or not they're actually using parentheses or Pot Holes or Sink Holes or what-have-you.

GnomeTitan
09:09:37 AM 20th Apr 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
To me, reading an article with a blue link to It Makes Sense in Context is just a waste of my time - I know what it means to make sense in context, thank you, and I don't need to read an article defining the term.

And sinkholing to it just to make a parenthetical remark is misusing the wiki system - if I see a blue sentence I expect to be directed to some useful information or explanation, not just to be told in a roundabout way that it makes sense in context.

If It Makes Sense in Context were a trope it would at least provide some information, even though there are better ways of doing this than potholing.
SolipSchism
01:29:46 PM 20th Apr 2015
That's all truth.

...9,000 wicks' worth of truth that I don't feel like fixing.
bwburke94
06:31:16 PM 20th Apr 2015
We fixed Understatement, and that had about 9000 wicks. Why can't we do the same again?
Candi
08:27:53 PM 20th Apr 2015
It would probably need a Short-Term projects thread, and at least one troper, preferably more, to do the actual work.
MrL1193
10:08:32 PM 20th Apr 2015
I've never participated in this type of cleanup before, but I'd be willing to try. I'd like to do something in all this that's more useful than adding awkward potholes.
MorningStar1337
10:43:54 PM 20th Apr 2015
@SolipSchism her name is Apple Bloom, FYI.

Also if IMSIC is Not a Trope then what is it doing on the wiki? is it a YMMV item? trivia? some Just for Fun thing?
SeptimusHeap
11:11:17 PM 20th Apr 2015
Folks, Ask The Tropers is ill suited for extensive discussion. Please shift this topic to the forum - Trope Talk, say.

close replies  

ChrisX
Medium:
05:15:28 PM 20th Apr 2015
This is a forum problem, but... there's one forum goer that goes to Trope Pantheons discussion and has been annoying the hell out of people, pushing in who he alone thinks deserving to be in the Disgraces and pretty much not giving a *** to any forms of warnings that he should tone down his stuffs. A lot of forumers have been VERY annoyed.

So... is there something we should do about that? I'm just afraid he's going to flood the Trope Pantheons with his self-indulged ideas without everyone else's approval... and this might become a vandal in the making. Ideas? (Like banning him, or just flat out say that the Disgraces is locked and only by the agreement of the forumers it can be edited?)
see/hide 20 replies  
wrm5
06:47:53 PM 12th Apr 2015
edited by wrm5
If Disagraces is locked then it doesn't matter what he wants. Only a mod can edit it. :p

As for what to do... if he's being truly unreasonable the mods can forum-ban him and call him to the Edit Banned thread for a talk.
Candi
07:34:33 PM 12th Apr 2015
Reporting here is fine. No problems. You can holler (the little yellow triangle) one of his posts as well, reporting him and pointing the mods to a specific thread where he's causing problems.

Just remember: Report, don't engage. At all. Even though it's likely terribly tempting.
ChrisX
09:35:21 PM 12th Apr 2015
All right. The person in question is here: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13955282570A87068500&page=540 His name is Penguin3470 and I suggest that you go page to page until page 547 to see how... 'insistent' he is...

The thing is, it's not his single post that deserves warning, it's his series of posts.
MorningStar1337
10:04:45 PM 12th Apr 2015
edited by MorningStar1337
I'll report the posts on that page

Edit: is Self-Deprecation really grounds for reporting or did these posts already get reported and removed
ChrisX
05:14:20 PM 15th Apr 2015
Uh not really, but this guy doesn't play by the rules, continue to act obnoxious to other friends instead of contributing healthily and not respecting others. I think mostly everyone was pretty much done with his shits and ignoring him after the breaking point at page 545 and he's just using Self-Deprecation to make himself look... 'pitiful' so deserving attention. And even then, when it's just a few words, it's just lazy.

His latest post? Seems like just unnecessary SPAM.

This is why I'm hesitant to just blatantly hit the Report button. This isn't severe crime like vandalism or flame war, but this guy is so ignorant about the surrounding, doesn't listen to others and he just feels like spamming when his myopic and bare opinions-thrusted-as-facts get ignored.

But please, CMIIW, because I don't want to end up doing something bad to an innocent person.
Candi
05:56:56 PM 15th Apr 2015
On TV Tropes, that behavior IS worth reporting, because it's showing a refusal to play nice in the community and bad, self-centered behavior.

Rule #1 is "don't be a dick", and that guy is tapdancing the line at best.
rodneyAnonymous
06:33:02 PM 15th Apr 2015
"This is why I'm hesitant to just blatantly hit the Report button."

Starting an ATT comment thread is way more drastic than Hollering about a forum post.
ChrisX
07:20:03 PM 15th Apr 2015
Then you're saying I should just hit the Report button the next time he does things like that?
crazysamaritan
07:24:11 PM 15th Apr 2015
Yes
ChrisX
08:12:22 PM 15th Apr 2015
All right, I'll give him one more chance. If he does that again, I'll just hit the button.

It's up to you mods if you would continue watch, or just wait until I hit that button...
rodneyAnonymous
09:03:45 PM 15th Apr 2015
What?! I am not sure what you think the Holler button does. It just tells the mods that a post should be looked at. "I'll give him one more chance" doesn't make sense.
ChrisX
08:37:46 PM 17th Apr 2015
Well, exactly what you think of about the Holler button. I understand that.

When I said 'I'll give him one more chance', it means that I will just wait until he posts again and see whether he mellows down and then plays by the rules and getting along with others instead of doing self-centered behaviors. If he doesn't do that, then I will hit the Holler button.

Which, speaking of that, he just did. And from the look of it, it's just spamming nonsense instead of getting back to the good graces. So I'm just gonna press it.

Have mercy on me...
wrm5
08:47:38 PM 17th Apr 2015
edited by wrm5
...again, not sure what you think the "Holler" button does. "Have mercy on me?" You're talking like you just put a bounty on his life...

The holler button is not harsh. You're NOT "doing something bad to an innocent person." Literally ALL it does is request the mods take a look at it and the mods here are generally lenient compared to most places on the web. Worst case scenario they take him to Edit Banned, talk with him for a bit, and let him go.

(Well, unless he does something to convince them to perma-ban him, but in that case he's not innocent.)
rodneyAnonymous
09:04:45 PM 17th Apr 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
"Mercy"? Just trying to help :)

Whereas only mods can see (and respond to) a Holler, many other tropers see ATT questions and discussion. There aren't even any moderator comments so far in this "thread". It would be more effective to report forum misbehavior with a Holler than by posting in ATT. Sometimes there is mod response here, but that's not guaranteed; generally it's for answers and comments from fellow tropers, and there is some reporting of wiki-related (that is, non-forum) issues like vandalism.
ChrisX
09:37:49 PM 17th Apr 2015
Uh, I said 'Have mercy on me' because I am hoping that I'm not accusing the wrong person undeserving. So it's more like it's my head that is in danger. After that time I was edit-banned because of innocently not knowing the rules about using the mod's name, I got a little too careful.
wrm5
09:53:33 PM 17th Apr 2015
...wait, what rule is there about using a mod's name?
SeptimusHeap
02:04:03 AM 18th Apr 2015
Also, keep in mind that different moderators focus on different parts of the site. Thus, forum side issues are best reported with the forum side tools.
wrm5
08:15:38 AM 18th Apr 2015
edited by wrm5
EDIT: Nevermind, it was explained to me over PM.
ChrisX
03:51:52 PM 20th Apr 2015
... So I was looking at the Edit/Banned topic and saw that the same Penguin used to get suspended and then lifted (for other reasons). Does this mean he didn't learn the previous lesson or he was hitting some new problem?
Candi
05:15:28 PM 20th Apr 2015
Doesn't matter. Multiple suspensions mean he'd better make a very good argument for reinstatement. That applies to everyone.

close replies  

Larkmarn
Medium: Videogame
02:44:42 PM 20th Apr 2015
Weird edit-warring going on here.

Weird because they're not really reverting each other, but seem to be more talking over each other. Though I really don't think Heteronormative Crusader counts if he's not actually "crusading," but that's just me.
see/hide 1 replies  
SeptimusHeap
02:44:42 PM 20th Apr 2015
Stepped in.

close replies  

lalalei2001
Medium: Videogame
02:37:25 PM 20th Apr 2015
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CanceledVideoGames

I thought our policy on canceled games was to not have pages for them?
see/hide 15 replies  
gallium
07:59:31 PM 19th Apr 2015
If it isn't it should be.
MorningStar1337
08:14:04 PM 19th Apr 2015
I;d add "moving the names to Unpublished Works" to that policy
SeptimusHeap
12:04:35 AM 20th Apr 2015
Wow, no! Some games do have enough published information for a proper work page.
Candi
12:45:48 AM 20th Apr 2015
So if there's enough information for a proper page, they get a page?

And if there's not enough information, do they go on Darth?
Adept
05:09:05 AM 20th Apr 2015
^^ Hold on. How would "canceled" works actually be any different from the "unpublished works" in this very wiki? When a troper posts their story draft to this site, isn't it technically a "published" information to the work, and could warrant a page if there are enough entries?
SeptimusHeap
05:19:58 AM 20th Apr 2015
Not different, but also not on topic. Published information can justify a proper work page if there is enough material.
Fighteer
05:38:44 AM 20th Apr 2015
Canceled is unpublished by definition. Isn't it?
JapaneseTeeth
05:46:59 AM 20th Apr 2015
Not necessarily; even if the game itself is never published there may still be promotional material floating around. I'm not sure if that would justify creating a page, but there could still be game-related content published (e.g. a demo, gameplay trailer, etc.)
GnomeTitan
06:41:43 AM 20th Apr 2015
In some cases, the game is cancelled when it's almost finished, and playable copies may be circulating.
SolipSchism
07:35:12 AM 20th Apr 2015
^^^^^ I'm pretty sure we're not cool with people posting story drafts to this site. I thought we had an Administrivia page on this, but I'm not finding it; either way, I'm reasonably sure folks have pointed out numerous times that TV Tropes is not a place to host your work. We comment on stuff and analyze it; we don't host it.
AceOfScarabs
08:23:00 AM 20th Apr 2015
Sonic CRACKERS was never released as it self (ending up being the precursor for Knuckles Chaotix), yet the ROM dump exists and is playable. I would not deny that a work page, personally.
Fighteer
08:32:25 AM 20th Apr 2015
edited by Fighteer
^^ I'm pretty sure he meant creating an article about a draft story, as we have in Unpublished Works all the time.

Our requirements for a work article don't include notability, as we've said many times, but it should be possible, at least in theory, for someone to access the work and verify that the tropes in question are valid. We also support copyright and IP laws here, meaning that a work article should not be based on hacked or leaked material if a legal source for that information is not also available.

On a personal note, I don't see why anyone would want to read an article about something that was never released. It seems like a dogged insistence on completionism, as if TV Tropes should have articles about everything that ever might have existed.
GethN7
12:27:42 PM 20th Apr 2015
edited by GethN7
Fighteer, respectful disagreement. Fallout Van Buren was basically the prototype of Fallout New Vegas and has a playable demo. Parts of Van Buren are considered canon to the series as a whole or has such an influence on New Vegas that they warrant coverage in some form.

Also, Van Buren's production information has been made publicly available by the developers in various forms, so the information on it is legal to discuss, and since the game it inspired mined the cancelled game heavily, I see no reason not to cover it.
Fighteer
01:20:19 PM 20th Apr 2015
If it has playable components, then it's "published", even if the finished product was never released.
lalalei2001
02:37:25 PM 20th Apr 2015
edited by lalalei2001
I was asking because when someone made a Sonic Xtreme page a while back, it was deleted because it was Vapor Ware. (Someone else tried to make a page of the canceled Sonic Sat AM game, which... was only seen as a very short demo.)

close replies  

Virodhi
Medium:
02:21:07 PM 20th Apr 2015
edited by Virodhi
Could someone higher up the food chain please nudge xxlogos about their spelling and grammar?

I feel kinda bad about it, since I just sent them an automated PM earlier today after one of their (completely incomprehensible) edits turned up on my watchlist, but then I checked their edit history and it's... not great. Extensive, but kind of riddled with errors, random capital letters and so forth.

Judging by at least one of the edit reasons after others have fixed/deleted their work, it looks like it's not the first time they've been asked to go to Get Help With English.
see/hide 2 replies  
SolipSchism
01:58:45 PM 20th Apr 2015
...Oh my goodness. There's no need to feel bad about that. This is terrifying.

Admittedly I'm unfamiliar with most of the works they're commenting on, but even so, it's crazy that I can only begin to understand around half of anything they've typed.

Seconding the request for a nudge.
Fighteer
02:21:07 PM 20th Apr 2015
No need to feel shy about reporting that. My eyes hurt. Suspended.

close replies  

MegaMarioMan
Medium: Videogame
01:28:04 PM 20th Apr 2015
I have a WMG that applies to video games, but not any specific video game franchise. Where would I post such a thing?
see/hide 5 replies  
SolipSchism
07:38:52 AM 20th Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
It sounds like you might want WMG.Real Life, if it's about video games as a medium. If it's about multiple video games and that's why it doesn't fit, you can probably get away with posting it on any and all of the applicable video games, if it's specific to those games (i.e., if your WMG involves Ace Combat, Kingdom Hearts, and Fable, you could post it on all three).

But if it's about video games in general, like, "All video games are actually an interpretation of the Bible" or something, it could probably go on Real Life because it's more RL than VG.
Fighteer
08:19:50 AM 20th Apr 2015
I'm not sure where that suggestion comes from, SolipSchism, because we explicitly do not want "general" examples of anything, be it WMG or tropes.
SolipSchism
08:25:55 AM 20th Apr 2015
edited by SolipSchism
^ Well, I have no idea what his WMG is, and that was an off-the-cuff example that was never meant to be taken seriously. But have you looked at WMG.Real Life? "Many fictions have the potential to be real"? "One of these 'We're part of a fictional universe' WMGs are true"? "Our world is filled with ditzes"?

I mean, almost everything on the page being an utter waste of space is most of the reason I stay away from WMGs in the first place, so take my advice with a grain of salt. But I'd like to see the actual WMG before any of my advice is taken as solid.
Fighteer
11:10:08 AM 20th Apr 2015
We haven't canned that page yet... /sigh

Faith in troper body diminishing...
SolipSchism
01:28:04 PM 20th Apr 2015
^ Fufufufufu. I feel your pain. Well, probably not as keenly, since I am totally okay with willfully ignoring that entire namespace most of the time.

close replies  

lalalei2001
Medium: Videogame
12:25:44 PM 20th Apr 2015
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Characters.SuperMarioBrosAssortedNasties

leetroper deleted all entries regarding Birdo's ambiguous gender.
see/hide 5 replies  
SeptimusHeap
02:06:41 AM 19th Apr 2015
Well, is it correct? That edit reason makes me suspicious but I don't know anything about that work.
Sigge
02:32:48 AM 19th Apr 2015
edited by Sigge
The (NA-version) manual of SMB 2 confirmed that Birdo is a man but Super Smash Bros Brawl used gender neutral pronouns and Nintendo has since refered to Birdo as a girl so... I have no idea http://www.mariowiki.com/birdo#Gender
crazysamaritan
07:57:36 AM 19th Apr 2015
Nintendo and reviewers of Nintendo are confused on Birdo's gender. That should be enough to say Birdo's gender is ambiguous.
shimaspawn
09:54:17 AM 19th Apr 2015
It's been taken care of. Thank you all for the input.
bwburke94
12:25:44 PM 20th Apr 2015
Should a comment be added in Birdo's section to explain the source of the gender ambiguity?

close replies  

Viira
Medium:
11:35:46 AM 20th Apr 2015
megamike15 has serious problems with grammar. I sent a PM some time ago, but they didn't respond.
see/hide 1 replies  
SeptimusHeap
11:35:46 AM 20th Apr 2015
I've shut down their editing.

close replies  

hollygoolightly
Medium: Live Action TV
07:13:00 AM 20th Apr 2015
Is it really Put on a Bus when a character's arc is by all appearances over? They've gone through the plot, they survived and they leave. I always thought Put on a Bus was more for the cases where the character would still have business in the narrative, but is written out for whatever reason.
see/hide 11 replies  
GnomeTitan
01:10:24 AM 19th Apr 2015
The trope description doesn't say so explicitly, but the trope is about where a character is written out of the show in such a way that they can easily return. If the character has fulfilled their role and leave becuase they aren't needed any more, they aren't really written out, are they?
gallium
01:31:17 AM 19th Apr 2015
^Yes they are. Unless it's a case of Chuck Cunningham Syndrome.
GnomeTitan
02:36:23 AM 19th Apr 2015
Well, of course they are in one sense. What I meant was more writing out like "We don't want this character any more. Let's come up with a way to get rid of them."

But that aside, I think there's a problem with authorial intent here. Without Word of God, we can't know whether the character's really "used up" and as it were naturally retired (the visiting vampire hunter has caught the vampire, so, mission accomplished, she leaves - that's not what I'd normally call "written out") or whether the authors just made it look that way, but intend to bring her back (that is, they are putting her on a bus in a clever way).

hollygoolightly
04:19:43 AM 19th Apr 2015
Written out in the sense of "this actor has another show," I'd say, but with a specific arc closed. So the character could come back, but wouldn't have to, necessarily. Personally, I wouldn't use Put on a Bus for that, because at some point, it becomes Put on a Bus for every supporting character who hasn't shown up for a while (for whatever reason).
wrm5
09:59:13 AM 19th Apr 2015
I think the confusion here is Gnome seems to be under the impression that Put on a Bus is a negative trope... that the character is written out because people don't like them and want to get rid of them.

That's not the case at all.

Put on a Bus can be for any reason. It could be because the character is disliked, or it could be because the actor has other obligations, or because the writers can't think of anything else to do with them... regardless, the point is that a RECURRING character (not just a one-shot minor character) is written out in such a way that they can easily be brought back if the situation that drove them away in the first place ever changes.
hollygoolightly
10:04:16 AM 19th Apr 2015
Ah, okay, then it fits perfectly. Thank you!
GnomeTitan
11:38:08 AM 19th Apr 2015
^^No, I'm not under that impression at all. Sorry if I expressed myself badly. The impression I was under (which was apparently wrong) is that it's a matter of dramatic necessity vs arbitrariness.

Say, for example, that the protagonist, Alice, is shown as happily married to Bob in the first season. Then Bob is drafted, sent off to war and goes MIA.

If this was done by the writers because Bob's actor wants to pursue a stage career, then he's put on a bus, we can agree on that (and if the producers don't want him back and have him outright killed, then they may be dropping a bridge on him).

However, if the intention all the time was that the second season should deal with how Alice copes with his absence and her fear that he's dead, I wouldn't say that Bob has been put on a bus, I'd say that his absence is dramatically necessary because they show just wouldn't work with him around.

That's the distinction I had in mind. There's nothing negative or positive about it; it's a matter of dramatic necessity.

But this may very well be a misapprehension.
Fighteer
03:08:10 PM 19th Apr 2015
edited by Fighteer
Put on a Bus is a very broad trope for whenever a character is written out of a show in such a way that they could easily return. There are more specific tropes for what happens afterward: does the character die, does the actor die, do they come back, do they start popping in whenever the writers feel like it, etc.?
hollygoolightly
01:40:11 AM 20th Apr 2015
edited by hollygoolightly
Gnome Titan: that totally makes sense to me! In my case, it was a recurring character who didn't have to stick around necessarily, but could technically come back at any time, so by wrm5's explanation, Put on a Bus fits really well.

Fighteer: Thanks for the more in-depth explanation! We'll see what - if anything - happens to my guy.
GnomeTitan
06:44:52 AM 20th Apr 2015
Just bear in mind that even though what I wrote makes sense, it seems not to reflect the way the trope is actually used :)

Also, as I wrote earlier in this thread, it also makes sense to let the trope inlcude the "dramatically necessary" cases, because in the absence of Word of God we can't really tell whether the writers put somebody on a bus because they considered it dramatically necessary or because the actor wasn't available. We want to avoid making the trope subjective.
hollygoolightly
07:13:00 AM 20th Apr 2015
Absolutely.

In my specific case it's fortunately quite clear, since the actor did have another show. Whether or not he would be no longer needed is probably more subjective, since fans of him likely thought he should have stayed and started a new arc.

close replies  

jormis29
Medium: Western Animation
05:38:42 AM 20th Apr 2015
Just noticed that Rhapsody Rabbit (a Bugs Bunny cartoon) is a redirect to The Cat Concerto (a Tom and Jerry cartoon).

I assume that is because of the similarities between the two but what is the policy on that?

see/hide 2 replies  
Fighteer
05:38:14 AM 20th Apr 2015
Why, why do people do that? Don't do that.
SeptimusHeap
05:38:42 AM 20th Apr 2015
It's an inboundless Main/-to-work redirect, so after dewicking it can be cutlisted.

close replies  

MorningStar1337
Medium: Western Animation
02:14:43 AM 20th Apr 2015
edited by MorningStar1337
Can there be Image Pickin' links for recap pages? the one for Recap.My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic S 5 E 4 Bloom And Gloom dosn't match the caption (I've seen the episode and I know there's a screen that better fits the caption than what's on the page)

Related is the Heartwarming entry on the YMMV page...or rather the fact that there is no Heartwarming page (it might had been meant to be Heartwarming Moments instead)
see/hide 4 replies  
wrm5
03:53:47 PM 19th Apr 2015
I don't know all the rules for that forum, but I would think it'd be okay.
MorningStar1337
08:15:14 PM 19th Apr 2015
I dunno, I checked the board and there seems to be no threads for recap pages (course, that might because this is a very specific and esoteric case)
MrL1193
10:05:09 PM 19th Apr 2015
I haven't seen any IP threads about Recap pages myself, but IP is mandatory when changing images elsewhere on the wiki, so I suppose the same would apply for Recaps. You'll definitely want to come up with an alternate image to suggest beforehand, though.
rodneyAnonymous
02:14:43 AM 20th Apr 2015
It's not mandatory. There may be a note saying to start an IP thread before changing or removing an image, but they don't all have a note.

If you want a change to "stick", though, start a thread.


close replies  

Discar
Medium: Videogame
05:39:54 PM 19th Apr 2015
Edit war over on Fridge.Mass Effect Fridge Horror General. Zaptech deleted an entry for being factually inaccurate, Craverguy added it back saying "If you disagree with someone's YMMV thoughts, post a reply. Don't delete them. Rudeness is not cool." I deleted it citing Repair, Don't Respond and suggesting taking it to discussion or WMG, he added it back again, citing a few other examples on the page (which may or may not need to be deleted) as proof that his can stay. So here we are.
see/hide 3 replies  
Fighteer
03:04:12 PM 19th Apr 2015
Re-deleted and suspended.
wrm5
03:58:58 PM 19th Apr 2015
And again, just because someone else did something wrong and escaped notice (and punishment) doesn't mean it's okay for someone else to do wrong...
MorningStar1337
05:39:54 PM 19th Apr 2015
As the man who launched Precedent Excuse (which OP invoked) I'd have to say that the examples Zaptech cited must be looked into.

close replies  

AgProv
Medium:
03:57:25 PM 19th Apr 2015
edited by AgProv
Hi! looking for a trope to describe a situation where:

An author, writing today, puts himself in the position of people fifty years ago who are trying to accurately predict their future based on knowledge they can reasonably be said to have at the time. We know what happened as we're looking back on it. But the characters in the book are trying to make intelligent guesses as to events in their future.

The context is in the book I'm currently writing a works page for. In the novel, in early 1962, intelligence officers from Britain and the USA are speculating on whereabouts in the world the two power blocs will have a major clash that might lead to all out war. They identify three possibilities: post-imperial spheres of influence in Africa (who gets control of the strategic raw materials necessary for industrial domination, as African countries become independent). Persia: too near Russia for comfort, and both superpowers need oil. And Cuba. Which they discount as an ineffectual nuisance. Any rational American government would realise it's an irrelevance and at most a minor embarrassment and leave it alone.

Fifty years on we know the flashpoint was going to be Cuba, the country those intelligence planners dismissed as a minor irritation. Which makes the situation deeply ironic based on our hindsight.

The novel (About Britain's nuclear defences in the Cold war) also has an incident where Swedish planes chase British nuclear-armed jets out of Swedish airspace. This is explained by a throwaway line about the Swedes being irked that any nuclear incidents nearby to them would deluge their country in fall-out, despite their neutrality. Again, the author could be seen as alluding to later nuclear accidents such as Chernobyl - which did throw lots of fall-out into Scandinavia.

but - what trope do I use? This doesn't seem to fit as Funny Aneurism Moment or Humour In Hindsight as it seems to describe the total opposite - a writer in 2012 writing about events in 1962, with full awareness of how the history panned out, and using his knowledge to write about it with deep irony. The tropes deal with things not known at the time of writing which only become apparent later. so... what fits here?
see/hide 2 replies  
wrm5
03:49:07 PM 19th Apr 2015
edited by wrm5
Lost and Found is the place for this sort of query. (But since you're here... Harsher in Hindsight?
AgProv
03:57:25 PM 19th Apr 2015
Thanks! My bad - picked the wrong forum. apologies!


close replies  

gallium
Medium:
01:04:15 PM 19th Apr 2015
I just made a new page for a film called The Son of the Sheik, and I can't find the tool to select the page type. It used to be in the Tools drop-down menu, didn't it?
see/hide 6 replies  
SeptimusHeap
01:59:30 AM 18th Apr 2015
I'll swat it during my page maintenance course.
SetsunasaNiWa
04:38:58 AM 18th Apr 2015
And after that it moved to an open area right under the column of drop-down menus, now it's gone and Untyped pages tool is the closest thing to do something for new pages. If the type gets set to wrong, then, well, it looks like things get screwed. note 
sgamer82
07:16:55 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by sgamer82
I just noticed this myself when I was doing a Light Novel/Anime migration from Japanese to English title. Can't set the page type to a Work.

For the moment, I'll leave a null edit explaining why it's untyped but otherwise continue with the migration normally.
gallium
01:31:48 AM 19th Apr 2015
OK, so it's a bug. I was wondering if the link had been moved somewhere or something.
SeptimusHeap
02:05:33 AM 19th Apr 2015
Just so to be clear, we don't take any action against people who omit the page type.
sgamer82
01:04:15 PM 19th Apr 2015
I wasn't really worried about that so much as thinking better to mention it and not have to them vice versa

close replies  

MrL1193
Medium:
03:20:40 PM 18th Apr 2015
Could someone give Queen Marine a tap on the shoulder about his habit of Nattering? I'm pretty sure that I already brought this up once some time ago, but I was assured at the time that the mods had just finished talking with him. However, it occurred to me today to check his edit history again, and it doesn't seem like he's learned anything. He's still adding natter under second bullet points, under third bullet points, and even internally (within the same bullet point).
see/hide 2 replies  
wrm5
03:12:40 PM 18th Apr 2015
So PM him or her?
SeptimusHeap
03:20:40 PM 18th Apr 2015
Already tried six times. Edit banned them.

close replies  

DracMonster
Medium:
01:42:57 PM 18th Apr 2015
Could a mod zap some of the excess tags from this? Don't know why people are tagging motion to discard without bothering to explain in a reply.
see/hide 4 replies  
SeptimusHeap
09:53:53 AM 18th Apr 2015
Zapped them until someone adds a supporting argument.
DracMonster
09:59:26 AM 18th Apr 2015
Thanks.
wrm5
12:26:33 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by wrm5
EDIT: Upon reading the YKTTW... this trope is basically just "Fat and Proud, But Complaining." I'm motioning to discard myself... with a reason, of course.
MrL1193
01:42:57 PM 18th Apr 2015
edited by MrL1193
EDIT: Wrong place, disregard.

close replies  

SatoshiBakura
Medium:
05:35:55 AM 18th Apr 2015
edited by SatoshiBakura
Paul A believes that stand-alone movies can't have Bigger Bads despite nothing in the description saying as such. He believes that they need to be a series. This is the argument I'm having with him on Film.The Rocketeer.
see/hide 6 replies  
MorningStar1337
08:31:22 PM 17th Apr 2015
Well...The Man Behind the Man is a thing...
SatoshiBakura
08:33:10 PM 17th Apr 2015
But Neville Sinclair is the Big Bad, not Hitler, but Hitler is superior, so Hitler is a Bigger Bad.
wrm5
08:49:36 PM 17th Apr 2015
Bigger Bad does NOT mean "he's the Big Bad in the sequel."

It just means that he's The Man Behind the Man to the Big Bad.
Zyffyr
08:52:11 PM 17th Apr 2015
First, BOTH of you are engaged in an Edit War, so expect a tap on the shoulder from the mods...

Second, I tend to agree with you on this - especially since there is an ongoing TRS thread that clearly is OK with the idea that Films can have a Bigger Bad, given that specific examples have been discussed within it without a "Nope, its a standalone film so it can't count" showing up.
Fighteer
10:57:31 PM 17th Apr 2015
edited by Fighteer
The Bigger Bad is a villain who does nothing to move the main plot, yet is shown to exist in the larger context of the work's universe. It doesn't matter if the work is a serial work or a one-off; if it presents the fight against the main villain as a prelude to or a skirmish in a larger conflict, then the villain behind that larger conflict is the Bigger Bad.

To clarify: the Big Bad is the villain who is in charge of the evil plot, the head honcho of the evil organization, the character who has to be beaten for the work to have a positive ending. The Bigger Bad is the figure behind the scenes who doesn't get defeated, nor does he do anything particularly important, but we are left knowing that someday the heroes may have to face him.

In Guardians of the Galaxy, Ronin is the Big Bad, and Thanos is the Bigger Bad. This is true even if there are no more films in that franchise.

In A New Hope, Tarkin is the Big Bad and the Emperor (who was unnamed at that point in the series) is the Bigger Bad. (Vader is The Dragon.) This would have been true even if the film had flopped and no sequels (or prequels) made. In The Empire Strikes Back, Vader is promoted to Big Bad. In Return of the Jedi, the Emperor takes his place as the Big Bad, demoting Vader to The Dragon once again. Complicating things a bit, in the context of all six films taken as a whole, Palpatine is the Big Bad.

In The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension, Lord John Whorfin is the Big Bad. Hanoi Xan is the Bigger Bad, as the story acknowledges Buckaroo's lifelong struggle against him without ever showing him or his actions on screen.
SatoshiBakura
05:35:55 AM 18th Apr 2015
^^ That's why I decided to come here. I realized that I would get involved in an edit war. Should someone PM Paul A, or is that not necessary?

close replies  

lexicon
Medium:
01:57:26 AM 18th Apr 2015
Dark Oleander edited The Cousins War Series to add Zero Context Examples in improper Example Indentation in Trope Lists. I sent P Ms about the issues but he's getting defensive.
see/hide 3 replies  
Fighteer
09:56:47 PM 17th Apr 2015
Suspension issued.
lexicon
11:57:56 PM 17th Apr 2015
So I should restore it to the way it was?
SeptimusHeap
01:57:26 AM 18th Apr 2015
Yes.

close replies  

MorningStar1337
Medium:
11:55:28 PM 17th Apr 2015
edited by MorningStar1337
I wish to revive the Romanticism Versus Enlightenment thread in On-Topic conversations. However I rather not do it by means of necromancy. What do I do? Should I introduce a relevant video? give my stance on the topic? Or is there something else I can do to revive the thread? Or do I have to wait until it gets locked and start one from scratch? (the last post was in Febuary)
see/hide 2 replies  
Fighteer
10:53:09 PM 17th Apr 2015
If you have something new to add that stimulates the conversation, go right ahead. Just acknowledge what you're doing.
MorningStar1337
11:55:28 PM 17th Apr 2015
Alright I posted and bumped on the thread, gave my 2 cents, asked some question. I hope its enough to avoid the necromancer accusation

close replies  

Morgenthaler
Medium:
08:20:47 PM 17th Apr 2015
Aren't Even the Girls Want Her and Even the Guys Want Him about characters reacting this way In-Universe? There are quite a few examples on both pages which are basically "Gendered fanbase finds same-gender character hot", making those examples Audience Reactions.
see/hide 13 replies  
Adept
03:30:19 AM 16th Apr 2015
Then those are example shoehorning and should be removed.
MyTimingIsOff
03:34:05 AM 16th Apr 2015
Yes, they're supposed to be in-universe. Audience Reaction examples should be nuked on sight.
GnomeTitan
04:55:33 AM 16th Apr 2015
Especially since in this case the reaction is gushing about somebody's hotness.
wrm5
03:43:18 PM 16th Apr 2015
On a related topic, I originally listed those tropes on the page for Age Of Wonders 3 on the grounds that female units with Seduce/Charm can still seduce/charm other female units, and it got removed.

Is that right?
rodneyAnonymous
03:54:19 PM 16th Apr 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
Zyffyr
06:39:33 PM 16th Apr 2015
Assuming sufficient context in the writeup, seems legit to me too.
NemuruMaeNi
04:04:17 AM 17th Apr 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
Legit which? There's nothing about hotness or character relationship in Age Of Wonders 3. What happens is assumption of direct control for a limited period of time. An invoked ability of a characterless mook unit. They have a skill, you'll need to speculate to tie that to universal appeal taking effect. It's more like a brainwash, drastically different pattern in terms of narrative function.

(what I've removed went as " Even the Guys Want Him / Even the Girls Want Her: The Seduce and Charm abilities here do not discriminate by sex. Female units like the Bard and Succubus are perfectly capable of seducing and charming other girls, and if you manage to get Seduce or Charm on a male (usually by giving a Leader or Hero an equip item with the ability) they will still be capable of seducing or charming other guys.", a dual trope entry, too. That's also bad.)
wrm5
11:43:07 AM 17th Apr 2015
Aside from the fact that it was a dual trope entry, which I admit is a problem, I think it still counts. I think we need a discussion. Does it count? Or does "Even The __ Want __" HAVE to be a narrative trope?
SolipSchism
01:08:30 PM 17th Apr 2015
^ I don't think it's about it being a narrative trope, it's about it being a matter of Alice being so sexy that Beatrice falls for her even though she has an Incompatible Orientation. Any gameplay mechanic that is implicitly or explicitly a special ability like magic or brainwashing or whatever shouldn't really count.
crazysamaritan
03:11:31 PM 17th Apr 2015
Some magics fail when there is an Incompatible Orientation.
wrm5
04:05:32 PM 17th Apr 2015
^ For example, Attract in Pokemon. Charm Person doesn't ALWAYS ignore orientation.
Fighteer
05:34:39 PM 17th Apr 2015
That's not really the point here. Units having a charm ability is not this trope by the slightest stretch of the imagination.
GethN7
08:20:47 PM 17th Apr 2015
I concur with Fighteer. Charm abilities are a form of brainwashing, and thus fall outside the tropes, which are instances where the attraction is willing.

close replies  

DracMonster
Medium:
11:28:44 AM 17th Apr 2015
edited by DracMonster
On iOs Games, the description starts with:

"This index is for the iPhone platform only, because iOS users want to be able to use it to find games they can play. A game must have an iPhone/iOS version to belong on this list (iPad-exclusive games don't work on iPhone, but vice versa does)."

That's incorrect right? The rest of the description mentions the iPad, and the page is named iOs Games, not iPhone Games. Excluding the iPad seems silly.

EDIT: Never mind, I think that's just badly worded rather than a specific attempt to exclude the iPad. I'll just adjust it a bit.
see/hide 1 replies  
Fighteer
11:28:44 AM 17th Apr 2015
It seems pointless and arbitrary to exclude iPad exclusive games from that index.

close replies