• 0 Aug 26th, 2016 at 9:09PM
    Gentlecoldafterdusk asked a question in Headscratchers.Mass Effect 3 (By the way, that page is getting too big and needs to be split.) that basically amounted to "Why doesn't the hero just let everyone die?" I answered his question, but his retort gives me the impression he's just looking for an excuse to complain. Reply
  • 2 Aug 26th, 2016 at 9:09PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 09:22:14 PM
    How do I look at mine or another user's edit history? Thanks. Reply

      Go to Recent Changes by clicking on tools then on New Edits and enter the tropers title in the "Search By Troper" or go to http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/el.php?findfor= and enter the title after the = sign in the address bar. If you leave it blank it will show your own history.

      To look at your own edits, simply go to your profile page and on the black bar along the top, click on "My Edits".

      For looking up other troper's edits, click on "New Edits" under the "Tools" menu on the side bar. Then, type in the troper's username on the search bar right next to the Recent Changes title.
  • 3 Aug 26th, 2016 at 7:07PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 09:03:35 PM
    I've been meaning to ask, if there is/what the rquirement for notability on this website? As in, if it is an artist: do they need to have a standard of the work they produce, what notable works their art is featured in, etc.? For a YouTuber, do they need to produce a specific set of content, a minimun fanbase, etc.? Or a webcomic, does it need to meet a standard for installments, critical value? Or is it truly you can chronicle any form of content produced that doesn't breach TV Tropes rules of appropriateness? Reply

      There Is No Such Thing as Notability

      As long as it's a work of fiction that has actually been made available to the public in some form, it's tropeable. Even if it's just some obscure fanfiction that only ten people read.

      Assuming, as you said, that it doesn't break the Content Policy.

      Thanks for the help, fellow Tropers!
  • 1 Aug 26th, 2016 at 6:06PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 07:37:32 PM
    On August 26, Tin Man made the following edit on the Advise & Consent page:

    • Harsher in Hindsight: In the later novels Capable of Honor and Preserve and Protect, the strawman liberal media does everything they can to steer the course of the presidential primaries, including writing outright lies about Orrin Knox, covering up violent acts by the supporters of Ted Jason, and colluding with Jason's campaign. Seemed like a typical Strawman Political rant by Allen Drury, until the 2016 election rolled around and documents leaked by WikiLeaks proved collusion between the DNC and the media to undermine Senator Bernie Sanders' campaign for the Democratic nomination, while giving favorable coverage to Hillary Clinton.

    That *really* doesn't seem to pass the smell test to me, not least because covering up acts of violence is not the same as giving one candidate favorable coverage. And wasn't discussion of Clinton supposed to be taboo anyway? Reply

      Big stretch there. A "thumb on the scale", so to speak, is hardly the same.
  • 2 Aug 26th, 2016 at 3:03PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 03:55:32 PM
    What was the picture you guys had in mind for the Nausea Fuel page that you had to make Ame react to, and the picture you planned on putting in the Anime and Manga section that you made Haru react to? I think I might know what the latter is - that thing the Elric brothers created in FMA Brotherhood.

    And why'd you remove the hentai and porn tropes, y'know, Naughty Tentacles and the like? I know it's because of PC parents, but TV Tropes was never meant for kids in the first place. My Toonami Spatial Absolution project feels incomplete without some of these. I know. It's a toughie. I'm the only one in this project, and I've only began to write the scripts. But some of those tropes are in the project... Reply

      The Content Policy page covers the reason why various porn-related tropes and articles were removed or pruned. Questions or issues with article images may be taken to our Image Pickin' forum.

      ^^I suspect that those images work off the Nothing Is Scarier concept. There probably never was a specific picture for either trope. Feel free to let your mind fill in the blanks.
  • 2 Aug 26th, 2016 at 2:02PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 03:22:35 PM
    I noticed that the trope redirect "Ultimate Showdown" causes the YMMV bullet point to appear on work pages, even though the trope it redirects to, Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny, is not YMMV. Reply

      That's because it used to be YMMV, most likely.

      I suspect it's because it's on the YMMV Redirects index.
  • 3 Aug 26th, 2016 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 01:57:17 PM
    I was going to add some info about the hat-wearing Kong family members on the Nice Hat page, but I've got a small problem. The hat Wrinkly Kong wears, what do you call those? Reply

      A bonnet

      Dare I ask, what is "Nice" about the hat? Nice Hat isn't just a list of characters who wear hats. They have to be significant on their own and / or emphasize something important about the character.

      Thanks for the help, and I won't add the info just because they wear hats.
  • 3 Aug 25th, 2016 at 11:11PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 12:43:53 PM
    Just want to make sure I'm getting this right. I know if there's one trope with multiple examples then it's supposed to be indented like so:

    But occasionally I come across an instance where a general description of how the trope applies is written, followed by specific examples, like so:

    Should the general description of the trope be indented too, or is it fine as is? Reply

      Either way works, in my opinion. Although the comment in the second variant needs to be pertinent.

      I think what he's asking is which is better:

      • Anti-Hero: Because the series is based on Gray and Grey Morality and set in a Crapsack World, there are a lot of these:
        • Auntie Hero is one. She saves the world by punching kittens in the face.
        • Uncle Jerkwad is another one. He spits at old people but donates his paycheck to orphanages.


      • Anti-Hero:
        • Because the series is based on Gray and Grey Morality and set in a Crapsack World, there are a lot of these:
        • Auntie Hero is one. She saves the world by punching kittens in the face.
        • Uncle Jerkwad is another one. He spits at old people but donates his paycheck to orphanages.

      The answer is that the first is correct, the second is incorrect. But the first is only correct if the "general description" part is relevant and informative. In this example it's okay, because it gives some context about how and why the trope is used in this work that's (presumably) equally applicable to everything that follows. If it had been,

      • Anti-Hero: There are two of these:
        • Auntie Hero is one. She saves the world by punching kittens in the face.
        • Uncle Jerkwad is another one. He spits at old people but donates his paycheck to orphanages.

      Then it would be bad, because it's not giving us any real information: we can see that there are two examples by the fact that there are two sub-bullets. This would also be bad:

      • Anti-Hero: Because the series is about saving the world by punching kittens in the face, there are a lot of these:
        • Auntie Hero is one. She saves the world by punching kittens in the face.
        • Uncle Jerkwad is another one. He may not punch kittens in the face, but he spits at old people.

      This is bad because the information under the top-level bullet ONLY applies to the first sub-bullet and not the second, so it should be under the first sub-bullet.

      A good rule of thumb is that if you're not sure whether the stuff in the top-level bullet belongs there, try working it into the applicable second-level bullets instead. There are a lot fewer ways to go wrong that way.

      Yeah, HighCrate is correct in what I was asking about. Apologies if my first post wasn't clear enough. Thanks for the inputs!
  • 2 Aug 26th, 2016 at 12:12PM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 12:40:31 PM
    i love that tvtropes is pure madness as I am a mad person- but i think i want to take this all in order- why? because I donuts what to miss anything- i also thing is really cool that the creators of this place all look like a bunch of Malibu surfers who live in Bali and are Harvard hedge fund/ oxford (why doesn't spell check as for un uppercase oxford but does for one when I write Harvard?) literature dudes (or Santa Cruz? I can't tell) anyway I'm just an old boogie boarder from West LA.. Reply


      While there have been proposals to publish a "book of tropes", no printed format could possibly capture more than a tiny fraction of our content without being as long as some of those old-school encyclopedia series.

      Also, if you'd like to chat with tropers socially instead of talk about wiki business, our forums are a better place: specifically, Yack Fest.
  • 2 Aug 26th, 2016 at 10:10AM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 12:16:36 PM
    Eastern or Western? It's made by an American, but it plays a lot like the former. However, it's listed in some pages as Eastern and in others as Western. Reply

      It has elements of both. The divide isn't really as strict as people like to think.

      Personally, I've usually seen RPG's in the folder of whatever country they originated from (Eastern for Asian, Western for American/European).

      For example, Dark Souls is almost always listed as an "Eastern RPG", since it was made in Japan, despite the fact that it plays much more like a "western" RPG. So, by that logic, Undertale would be a Western RPG.
  • 4 Aug 26th, 2016 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 12:03:50 PM
    So how do you give one of the (Main list) articles a new title? Reply

      That depends on what you're trying to rename and in what context.

      Well, what if you think that a trope article needs a new name? How do you propose a title change? I assume permission is needed.

      You can get explanations and start the process in the Trope Repair Shop

      To get the name changed, you'll have to prove that the current name is causing misuse or underuse. Disliking the current name is not considered a valid reason to change.
  • 1 Aug 26th, 2016 at 12:12AM
    Lastest Reply: 26th Aug, 2016 06:56:25 AM
    To what extent are "Out-of-Universe" headscratchers allowed? Reply

      You mean like, "Why is the author such a ponce?" The answer is: not at all. If it's something like, "Did the author make the character depressed because he is also depressed?", then it is considered gossip and not something we want. If there is Word of God to back up such a claim, then it goes on Trivia, not Headscratchers.
  • 3 Aug 25th, 2016 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 09:02:17 PM
    I've been wondering this for awhile. A troper named Ego Man 25 provided a DMOS example on the One Piece DMOS page, but then wrote another comment in the DMOS example that was added by Cheap Sunglasses. It's not him providing a second example against the rules, Ego Man 25 is just pointing out that he's in agreement with Cheap Sunglasses.

    I'm just wondering if this is allowed or not. Reply

      It is not allowed.

      See Natter.

      Well, in the end, I deleted his agreement example. Thanks.
  • 2 Aug 25th, 2016 at 6:06PM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 07:45:23 PM
    On DesignatedHero.Live Action TV, there is an Agents Of Shield entry that uses Alternative Character Interpretation to as justification for the entry. Never mind that there are intentionally morally grey spots for the heroes as well as the fact that they do prove themselves as heroic, as well as the fact that some parts of the entry are kind of wrong, is Alternative Character Interpretation allowed to be used as justification?

    The entry in question. Keep in mind that it gets things wrong, so don't take it at face value.
    • If one uses Alternate Character Interpretation, the agents on Agents Of Shield are seen like this, still working for a possibly corrupt organization while teaming up with shady characters like Rosalind Price of the ATCU whenever it suits them. They also have tendency to go to extremes for their revenge, yet put themselves on the moral high ground. They constantly preach about redemption, yet only offer it when either it benefits them in someway or towards someone whose actions never affected them personally, no matter how bad. Finally, they only stopped seeing the Inhumans as a threat due to the latter's connection to Daisy/Skye. They are only really justified in their treatment of Ward, which even then borders on the extreme (they really hate traitors), and even violates some of his human and civil rights, nor do they have a problem with Simmons's sudden xenophobic attitude towards powered people.
      • Not to mention SHIELD's treatment of Kara, which is probably the most egregious example: a loyal SHIELD agent who was sold off to be tortured and brainwashed by HYDRA, and which is understandable given that it was for the lives of 20 other agents. The problem comes afterwards; when SHIELD makes jokes about the Kara's predicament and even have Koenig refer to May electrocuting Kara to the face as "awesome", and only track her down when they need her help to save Skye. At another moment, May says that Bobbi shouldn't feel any remorse or sympathy for Kara given that she was working for HYDRA and then May's main reason of disdain for her said to be because Kara wore a mask copying her face, despite it being common knowledge that Kara was brainwashed by HYDRA, and is stuck with a mask that has May's face because of the former incident where May electrocuted the mask to her face in the first place. And yet, Skye still says "SHIELD never leaves a man behind", despite that being exactly what they did to Kara, and she and SHIELD are portrayed as correct.

      I would say no. An entry needs to be able to stand on its own, not rely on other entries to be justified.

      Yeah, no. That's just cherry-picking and misuse of Alternate Character Interpretation. SHIELD acts far too heroically on a consistent basis for their occasional moral failings to qualify.
  • 1 Aug 25th, 2016 at 5:05PM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 05:48:43 PM
    DarthWiki.The Simpsons Wallbangers. That is all. Reply
  • 1 Aug 25th, 2016 at 5:05PM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 05:39:58 PM
    How do I add something to Wild Mass Guessing? Reply

      It's just like editing any other page. Use this markup for each theory: [[WMG:your text here]], and write some text below it without a bullet point,
  • 4 Aug 25th, 2016 at 3:03PM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 04:25:24 PM
    A friend and I are compiling a document of tropes that fit our characters and stories, for funsies, but I'm a very organized person, so it comes complete with a table of contents that divides it by story, and by character, not unlike this website. However, I am unsure what tropes belong in the character sections, rather than the overall story section. Would a protroper be willing to hand out a tip or two on how the plot vs. character trope divide should be handled? Reply

      If it belongs to a specific character, it's a character trope. If it refers to the story, it's a main page trope.

      If you and your friends ever decide to make a page here for your work, please read the relevant pages to get it right the first time. :)

      We're just doing it for fun, since nothing is published right now. Where might one find the relevant pages?

      Wait, I think I found them. Hopefully.

      Basically every Administrativia page.
  • 3 Aug 24th, 2016 at 8:08PM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 03:04:39 PM
    I've never done anything with images before, but is it okay to use a work's logo as the picture? About Images and Copyright doesn't say anything about it. Or is it so obvious I should already know? Reply

      Yes, you can use a logo.

      In most cases it's better to have something more illustrative, like a movie poster or a book's cover art. Unless the logo is iconic on its own, like Star Wars.

      Thanks for the answer. I was using a logo because there aren't that many other pictures.
  • 1 Aug 25th, 2016 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 10:15:12 AM
    Chosen is shamed in front of the entire image. He has to make up, but after his actions the entire village will probably disown him, not to mention his family. So he only has two choices-leave in shame and never return or spend his life hunting down Daniel. OK, Daniel's still alive in the sequel, but that's only because Chozen was making himself stronger, and eventually he located Daniel (Miyagi was training Hilary Swank and so couldn't rescue Daniel)...what do we think? Reply

      Feel free to post just about anything you want (within site policy obviously) to WMG. That is kind of the point, speculation about things that can't be proven. If you are asking what we think about that scenario it strikes me as plausible.
  • 5 Aug 23rd, 2016 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 10:00:48 AM
    Maybe I'm a little late to the party since these tropes got their name changed years ago, but I noticed that EVERY SINGLE TROPE that has an "everything's worse with" title got its name changed.

    I understand that you want to avoid snowclones, but I feel like there should be at least ONE page besides Everything's Worse with Snowclones that has that prefix, otherwise the latter page's title won't have any meaning. Reply

      That's still a snowclone, though, of Everythings Better With... which honestly we should begin to phase out as well.

      "I feel like there should be at least ONE page besides Everything's Worse with Snowclones that has that prefix, otherwise the latter page's title won't have any meaning."

      Are you seriously suggesting renaming a trope for the sake of preserving the humor in an Administrivia page title? And not just any Administrivia page, but the one that exists solely to explain why naming tropes to perpetuate this form of humor is bad?

      If we did that, the actual page wouldn't have meaning, because we'd be going against all the guidelines it lays out. The page itself explains where the name came from as part of its explanation of the dangers of snowclones, and, as snowclones go, it's one that is fairly self-explanatory even if you don't recognize the pattern—Everything's Worse with Snowclones, i.e., Snowclones = bad. The only obscure thing about that title is the word "snowclones," and that's the part that wouldn't be clarified at all by having a pattern of "Everything's Worse Than..." pages.

      It's like how when Crowning Moment of Awesome was renamed to Moment of Awesome, Awesome Moment of Crowning stayed the same.

      if we are suggesting renames for anything, I'd start with Everything's Worse with Snowclones. I don;t think Hypocrisy, even of the humorous type should be on an adminsitrivia page.

      I think you missed the point of the admin article. Its not poking fun at the phenomena, its saying "This shouldnt even be a thing" Its there so that people will never use snowclones again. This goes for the Topic Creator and the post above mine.
  • 1 Aug 25th, 2016 at 8:08AM
    Live Action TV
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 09:17:51 AM
    I have two plot lines with unique characters set in two different regions. THEY WILL NEVER CROSS OR MEET. Is it acceptable to have the two plots occur at different seasons of the year? Each plot has a linear chronology, but I can't find a way to intersperse them coherently, so it would be best if they just each have their own timeline. Acceptable???? Reply

      Ask The Tropers is for questions about the TV Tropes site; this would be better asked in the forums.
  • 8 Aug 24th, 2016 at 3:03PM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 01:00:21 AM
    Mark Wilder is constantly re-adding examples of War Is Hell and What Do You Mean, It's for Kids? to the Sonic Sat AM page, even though it doesn't fall under either trope. Reply

      And YOU are deleting YMMV items, which is ALSO against the rules. YMMV tropes, by nature, are opinions, and must be FACTUALLLY incorrect, not simply the 'incorrect opinion' to be deletion worthy, I expect the mods will deal with you both soon enough.

      What Do You Mean, It's for Kids? entries can be changed if they don't qualify as being "kid-unfriendly".

      Which is largely an Opinion. Deleting YMMV outright is against the rules, as is edit warring. Really, your best chance is to just wait patiently, and not try to argue this when a mod comes. Frankly, you are displaying agenda based editing around that particular trope, which is something I've noticed that most mods don't take lightly.

      They actually organised a cleanup thread for that very trope, as people are shoehorning it everywhere. No one had a problem with what I did.

      Removing a YMMV entry is okay if you have a good reason for it (and not for just being factually incorrect, since there are other good reasons, like not fitting the trope or not meeting requirements that certain tropes, like Creator's Pet, have). After he added it back a second time, you should have started a discussion or brought it up here immediately instead of engaging in an edit war with him.

      Yeah, I agree i should've started earlier. But do you think it should stay or be deleted?

      Hey, sailing, calm down a bit. You're coming across as very ticked off.

      Removing YMMV tropes for misuse of said trope is perfectly fine. Just report to the mods if someone's repeatedly making bad edits, okay?

      Pulled one example to the discussion page.
  • 1 Aug 25th, 2016 at 12:12AM
    Lastest Reply: 25th Aug, 2016 12:56:02 AM
    All of PicoBags's edits are ads for paper bag company of the same name

  • 14 Aug 21st, 2016 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 24th Aug, 2016 10:32:34 PM
    I noticed on The Force Awakens that Clint Rider deleted a bunch of articles/commentary criticizing the identification of Rey as a Mary Sue as well as added some equivocating language that "In general, there are valid argument that can be made either way, but are likely to still attract criticism."

    In general, he basically deleted everything criticizing criticism of he movie, especially if directed against MRA types. And changed some entries to be more critical toward the movie.

    His edit reason is "What "controversy?" Glorified muckrakers making clickbait headlines aside (And the Fury Road boycott never happened, the only evidence of its existence was said muckrakers who are known for lying), Furiosa got next to no criticism. Also, I don't see the point of actually including Waid and Del Toro's comments as their own thing- the point is already made enough as is."

    Edit- Incidentally, was looking at some of their recent edits and while the example itself probably violated The Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement, on Ghostbusters (2016), there was an entry about how the attacks on Leslie Jones by Milo Icantspellhislastname and his followers finally got him kicked off of twitter, he deleted the entry and gave this edit reason: "Debatable, given how Leslie Jones has a lot of skeletons in her own closet, especially in relation to doing the exact same things Milo did. If you wanna say stuff like that, then politely take it to your tumblr."

    So yeah, my MRA alarm is going off.


      Seconding. Was just about to bring that up.

      Mary Sue is Flame Bait, so those particular deletions were probably fine (especially since TFA is the reason it became Flame Bait in the first place). The rest is definitely troubling.

      Yeah, this guy sounds like trouble. Though a nitpick:

      "(especially since TFA is the reason it became Flame Bait in the first place)"

      I'm pretty sure that it was Flame Bait way before that. There have been many discussions on the forums about how the Mary Sue "tropes" are nothing but excuses for complaining.

      It is likely that the Force Awakens that the spark that ignited the powder keg that was Mary Sue as Flame Bait

      On-topic: The Milo Yianopolus/Ghostbusters one definitely raises some red flags for me too. I feel like the mods needs to have a talk with Clint about this

      Thanks for the feedback. Re the Mary Sue related edits, it's possible that what he deleted was Flame Bait (I don't think so necessarily though), but it's not cool to add Weasel Words about there being good arguments either way about Rey being a Mary Sue because she isn't- and as noted, people's insistence that she was is actually why that trope became Flame Bait.

      I don't see how 'actually did a useful edit' cancels out 'strong indications of agenda issues'.

      ^If his agenda is removing things that could develop into flame wars I doubt you will see many mods up in arms over it.

      However, it might be worth mentioning that the username (intentionally or not) comes across (at least to me) as an offensive "The Problem with Pen Island" joke if you were to write it in all caps.

      From the OP, it seems that he did a lot more than just removing potential flamebait. It does sound like agenda-based editing.

      ^^I was referring to the potential MRA agenda the first poster appears to have observed.

      Hmm... definitely skirting the line considering he's sticking to the rules for the most part. I don't see disciplinary action as being needed quite yet, but someone should bring the agenda thing up to him directly. If he doesn't explode right then he should probably be fine.

      I noticed Clint Rider because he occasionally makes edits to the Critical Role pages, which I watch because they regularly attract bad entries. His first edits to the YMMV page were to restore a contentious (non-MRA related) Base Breaker entry without comment (which I changed my mind about and left on), and though I was slightly wary because of that, his name, and the fact that it was a bit strange that a brand-new editor would dig through the history to restore an entry, I didn't think much about it.

      However, seeing the MRA stuff mentioned here reminded me of another MRA-type who used to make edits to the Critical Role page and argued for the same Base-Breaking Character entry - GoneRampant.

      Along with Critical Role, the accounts share edits on Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Uncharted, Mass Effect: Andromeda, and several Batman pages. I also found out that the Gone Rampant account was suspended, meaning that Clint Rider is breaking rules by trying to get around the ban.

      Impressive catch. Clint Rider is Gone Rampant ban evading. Zorched them.

      Good catch. Should we revert the TFA page?

      @supergod: That is impressive detective work.