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

ShorinBJ
Medium:
06:12:19 AM 30th Jun 2015
I'm looking for a trope that's something like a Shaggy Dog Story, but more...short term. See, I'm playing Dark Cloud 2, and after you fight your way through a sewer and all the hassle that implies, Cedric immediately shows up in a train. He just rode it out of town, and WTF? It's not even like you got out of town and found a quick, easy path that could be opened only from the outside — the story renders your journey through the sewer pointless, except for the experience gained.
see/hide 1 replies  
muddycurve424
06:12:19 AM 30th Jun 2015
This isn't really the place for your query. Try Lost and Found instead. They'll be more than happy to help.

close replies  

MyFinalEdits
Medium: Videogame
05:31:01 AM 30th Jun 2015
Whispering Wilde is deleting a huge bunch of examples without explaining why. Most of them are related to games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect.
see/hide 8 replies  
lalalei2001
08:02:46 PM 29th Jun 2015
I was just about to add that!
WhisperingWilde
08:05:11 PM 29th Jun 2015
Because the "examples" are factually false, fuelled by blatant Hate Dumb.
gallium
08:40:04 PM 29th Jun 2015
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.MassEffect3

"All of this stuff is bullshit. If you think of restoring it, please consider blowing your brains out instead of supporting terrorists who want to kill people over a video game."
nrjxll
08:51:13 PM 29th Jun 2015
Looks like another incarnation of the ME3 vandal. I assume the mods will deal with it soon enough.
phoenix
09:10:13 PM 29th Jun 2015
Huh. I had just come here to mention that, in addition to his/her seeming vendetta against The Witcher 3.
Fighteer
09:15:36 PM 29th Jun 2015
Bounced. Pretty sure I reverted everything correctly.
calmestofdoves
09:16:40 PM 29th Jun 2015
edited by calmestofdoves
Ah yes, the ever-popular "suggesting suicide to demonstrate one's moral superiority over those suggesting murder" gambit. Working about as well as always, I see.
GnomeTitan
05:31:01 AM 30th Jun 2015
An odd thing, which I'm not sure if it's a bug or not: Trivia.The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt has been reverted, but the reversion doesn't show up in the edit history; instead the newest entry is Whispering Wilde's vandalism.

close replies  

mega-dark
Medium: Videogame
03:04:09 AM 30th Jun 2015
edited by mega-dark
First time using this so please go somewhat easy on me.

I'm having a small edit war (4 edits 2 of them mine) concerning Fire Emblem Fates Second Generation. In this game, when 2 characters reach a certain Relationship Values with the opposite sex, they get a new stage and the possibly to unlock their child. Except for 2 characters. 2 characters can be gay married with the main character. One for the males and one for the females. With gay marriage now available this throw into question what about the kids.

Today an answer showed up with this reddit post. Believing I had reasonable information and video proof I went an edited the page (with the reddit link in my reasoning) saying that getting the kids in question (Kanna and Éponine) wasn't possible with gay marriage (edit 1). A few hours later someone edits behind me with no explanation saying it was still possible through adoption (edit 2). I reverted back my edits asking if there was any proof than I would change my edit back but until then I believe my edit should stick (edit 3). Then someone comes behind me saying that the another Wiki says it's possible so they edit my edit (edit 4).

Now here's where I'm stumped. I checked the Fire Emblem wiki and unless my search foo is weak, I can't find confirmation of this. So I'm here to ask, what do I do? Do I just wait for more people to confirm the reddit post then edit again? Thank you in advance for your help.
see/hide 3 replies  
Candi
03:22:54 PM 28th Jun 2015
edited by Candi
First of all, add-remove-add or remove-add-remove constitutes an edit war. So please don't do that again.

Second, is that Word of God, Word of Paul, or Word of Dante? The first is proof, the other two not so much.

Since I'm not familiar with the game mechanics, does gay marriage create an unlock option in the game for the child, or does the coding still restrict that to heterosexual couples? That's the important part. If the coding hasn't been changed, then same-gender-couple kids aren't possible in-game. (It's up to the developers to patch it.)

You can also take the entry to the discussion page for the page in question, or go to the forums and see if there's a thread there for the game to discuss the entries.
mega-dark
03:42:52 PM 28th Jun 2015
Thank you for the reply Candi. I'll try my best not to get into an edit war situation again.

First off, this is a giant Wordof Dante situation. As of right now, the game does not unlock the stages for the 2 characters (or 1 if it's the female gay marriage) in question if you gay marry. The reddit link that contains the video and time stamps prove this. Hense the reason for my edits. I'll move this to the discussion page but if we reach an deal on what to do but it gets edited again then what?
bwburke94
03:04:09 AM 30th Jun 2015
The same shipping war rules from Awakening should apply for Fates.

Also, there's the hitch of gay marriage here, so a quick note "this character's stage is not unlocked if you gay marry" is enough for the Characters/ page.

close replies  

MagBas
Medium:
03:01:27 AM 30th Jun 2015
edited by MagBas
I noted a discussion about the name of a character that suffered an Orwellian Retcon in the discussion page in My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic S5E9 "Slice of Life".

Opinions?
see/hide 6 replies  
sgamer82
02:05:50 PM 27th Jun 2015
Is this in reference to Derpy/Ditzy/Muffins?
MagBas
03:03:51 PM 27th Jun 2015
Yes.
sgamer82
04:09:31 PM 27th Jun 2015
I can see why the voice issue from her first speaking appearance would cause issues, so changing it is understandable. It's the same voice actress now either way. The name thing I'm not fussed over. The did that ep for the fans and THEY know exactly who they mean with the name.
bwburke94
04:54:27 PM 28th Jun 2015
edited by bwburke94
The pony in question has never been referred to as "Muffins" outside the credits - so there are multiple questions here.

  • 1. Which takes precedence, dialogue or credits?
  • 2. If dialogue takes precedence, how are the multiple versions of "The Last Roundup" handled?
  • 3. Why are we arguing over the name of a pony?
MorningStar1337
05:40:35 PM 28th Jun 2015
edited by MorningStar1337
  • well usualy we take All There in the Script as the source in cases where the name isn;t known in the dialouge.
  • In the case of The Last Roundup, that was where the Orwellian Retcon began, so I think using the Mullins name there owuld be appropriate (with a disclaimer on the respective page, trivia page and Derpy's charatcer entry about the fan name being prevailent)
  • For number 3, the reason is the same as part of our Non-Vandal answer to Lord Voldemort; people thinking that political correctness has gone too far, (that and Grandfather Clause, since the name was used since the fandom's inception, even though the Confederate Flag was used since the end of the civil war before the shooting on a similar reason).
bwburke94
03:01:27 AM 30th Jun 2015
We shouldn't be trying to determine which version of "The Last Roundup" is canon, because that goes into the "Han shot first"-type arguments. The better course of action would be to determine whether Morning Star 1337's first point applies to a character whose name was only given in dialogue in one of the two versions of "The Last Roundup".

(As a sidenote, why is the Confederate battle flag being brought into this discussion?)

close replies  

gallium
Medium:
10:50:10 PM 29th Jun 2015
edited by gallium
interMission is displaying some weird custom capitalization, when it should just look like "Intermission". It seems there is a film called interMission with a custom capitalization.
see/hide 4 replies  
rodneyAnonymous
08:47:35 PM 29th Jun 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
I think custom titles erroneously apply to all other pages with the same name, in all other namespaces. Limitation of the current system.
gallium
09:30:33 PM 29th Jun 2015
Then this would be a judgment call, I guess—but if a trope shares a title with a work, then I would think that the trope name would get priority. Because as it is interMission just looks weird on a lot of work pages.
rodneyAnonymous
09:41:09 PM 29th Jun 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
Perhaps the article about the film should be named Intermission2003, so its custom title doesn't affect other pages. (What are the other articles about, anyway? Maybe a different page should be renamed, or they all should, or something.)
gallium
10:50:10 PM 29th Jun 2015
As near as I can tell all the other sub-pages are referring to the 2003 film.

close replies  

Ramidel
Medium:
09:18:46 PM 29th Jun 2015
TheGoodDoctor has continued to have an indentation issue on Psionics: The Next Stage In Human Evolution (standalone double bullets) after I hit the guy with an indentation notify.
see/hide 1 replies  
Fighteer
09:18:46 PM 29th Jun 2015
Suspension issued.

close replies  

GnomeTitan
Medium:
09:16:58 PM 29th Jun 2015
Am I correct in assuming that tropes on an actor's creator page should be typical for the creator and not just things he/she does in one movie (unless that "thing" has turned iconic and is very strongly associated with the actor)?

I'm asking befcause some of the tropes on Pam Grier are things that only apply to a single film. Is it OK to remove them?
see/hide 15 replies  
DracMonster
05:16:41 AM 29th Jun 2015
If we don't have a page for that particular film yet it can be left, otherwise yes.
Candi
06:48:38 AM 29th Jun 2015
We don't trope real people ever. The tropes on the Creator page should be for their works that don't have a page of their own yet.
GnomeTitan
07:01:32 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
^I know that we don't trope the creators themselves, but I think you're wrong about tropes on the creator page only being for works that don't have their own page.

To quote Creator Page Guidelines, under "what can go on creator pages":

"Tropes that appear frequently in their works. If a creator has a Signature Style, their creator page is a good place to talk about it."

This is of course not troping the creator as a person, so I think you may have misunderstood me.

Also, that page says that tropes appearing in individual works should not go on the creator page, which answers my OP. Sorry for that, and shame on me for not re-reading the guidelines before posting!

GnomeTitan
07:10:39 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
A follow-up question (and I'm posting this separately instead of editing my previous reply, since it's unrelated): the guidelines for creator pages specifically says that it's OK to list trivia about the creator, and that what's not allowed is troping the creator as a fictional character.

However, the way I've seen the policy against "troping the creator" applied is that no examples whatsoever may have to do with their background or personal life.

As a concrete example, if you look at the history for Pam Grier you can see that Rape as Backstory was removed on the grounds of being "troping the actress", even though it can be argued that it is relevant for influencing her creative work (playing strong women who fight back).

Now, I'm not particularly eager to add that example back, I'm just wondering how the "don't trope the creator" policy should be interpreted, since the guidelines page seems to be at odds with consensus.
NemuruMaeNi
07:26:56 AM 29th Jun 2015
That trivia example can be added without linking to or otherwise mentioning the trope. Tropes are tools in hands of creators. Who would be the creator that wielded Rape as Backstory there? Not a funny thought.
GnomeTitan
08:17:56 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
It's not quite as clear-cut in the general case, I think. This site tends to use "trope" in a rather wide sense.

What you say holds for what we call narrative tropes, tropes that require a plot. Maybe Rape as Backstory belongs to that category.

However, there are "tropes" that can apply to real people. A creator obviously has a backstory even if that backstory wasn't scripted by anybody but just happened. To take a less loaded example, appearance tropes can apply to real people.

As I understand it, the policy against troping real people is only partly about "tropes only happen in fiction", but also about things like "we shouldn't call real people evil", and, on a more fundamental basis, "this site isn't for gossiping about real creator's personal lives".

So, I guess the question here boils down to: is it OK to mention a creator's personal life if it has relevance for their creations (the guidelines seem to say so), or is that still "gossip" or "troping the creator" (there seems to be some consensus for this view)?

SolipSchism
10:05:50 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by SolipSchism
^ It's okay to mention a creator's personal life, in the context of the real world, in appropriate places, with exceptions.

"Appropriate places" pretty much amounts to in the description of the creator (but not in the trope list, because that list should be for their work) and on trivia pages. Again, only when the tropes in question are appropriate in the first place, and NRLEP tropes generally aren't.

There's a grey area for biographical and autobiographical material. If Alice writes an autobiography in which the Rape as Backstory trope applies to her, then it applies—to the autobiography, not to the author, as oxymoronic as that may sound.

Those exceptions include any tropes that are NRLEP—such as Rape as Backstory. Generally, any trope that is inherently sexual, moral (i.e., Good or Evil tropes, especially Evil), or otherwise problematic, natter-magnets, gossip-magnets, and so on, gets made NRLEP.

Also, on a related note, a real person can't have a "backstory", because to have a backstory, a person has to have a frame of reference that they can exist outside of. By definition, a character's backstory consists of events that happened before the events of the main story, and which involved that character directly. The events may be shown through a flashback, or a prologue, or simply be alluded to, but they aren't part of the main story.

A real person's entire life is their story. Therefore, a real person having a backstory would mean they would have to be directly involved in events happening before their birth. That's obviously impossible. Even if time travel were possible, having a backstory would still be impossible because the frame of reference would be shifted—if I traveled back in time to before my birth, the period of time before my birth would no longer be "before my birth", at least, not from my perspective, which is the only perspective that matters in determining the frame of reference for a backstory.

tl;dr a real person having a backstory is patently impossible.
Fighteer
11:06:45 AM 29th Jun 2015
It is not appropriate to list tropes about a creator's real life, ever. If the issue comes up, just say no. Now, if the creator makes a point of including Rape as Backstory in all their works due to an incident in their lives, then yes, it can be listed, but as part of the trope entry about their work.

GnomeTitan
11:30:15 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
Teh first part of that is a very definitive answer, thank you. Perhaps Creator Page Guidelines should be modified since it's somewhat ambiguous about the matter?

As for the second part: in your (hypothetical - it doesn't apply to Pam Grier) case, I take it you mean that the connection to the creator's real life can be mentioned in the context of the works? It seems to me that the difference can be quite small here, viz.

Case 1 (using a made-up trope) which is disallowed:

  • Afraid Of Cats: Creator X was scared by a cat as a child and could never resist having scary cats in his movies.

Case 2, which is allowed:

  • Afraid Of Cats: A common theme in X's work is the morbid fear of felines. According to X himself, this is because he was scared by a cat as a child.

Or am I misunderstanding you?

As usual, the simple cases are simple - for example, applying a characterization trope to a person's real character is clearly not kosher - but when a creator's personal life starts to get entwined with their work it gets tricky.

For the record, I agree that it makes sense not troping creator's lives and I wasn't proposing that that particular entry should be added back - I was just using it as an example. I have no intention of discussing creators' personal lives here - I'm more interested in what to do when I see that somebody else has done it.

GnomeTitan
11:35:13 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by GnomeTitan
^^^SolipSchism: I may have been using backstory in a different sense than you are, to refer to events that happened before I knew the person in question and to which he or she has only hinted. On a philosophical note, talking about the "story" of a person can only be a metaphor anyway, but it is a very common metaphor. If somebody says "let me tell you my story" you don't expect them to literally tell you everything that's happened to them in their entire life, do you, or make the conclusion that they really believe their lives have been scripted by some deity?
Fighteer
11:39:52 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by Fighteer
^^ The second case is better, because it talks about their work first, and only incidentally about the creator's life — it's also worth noting that "according to X, ..." is a perfect example of Word of God. We can consider updating Creator Page Guidelines if they aren't clear.
SolipSchism
12:33:42 PM 29th Jun 2015
edited by SolipSchism
^^ Certainly I don't expect them to tell me their entire story—but more importantly, the "story" they'd be telling me would not be a literal recounting of their Real Life (the only way it could be literally Real Life would be if they had had every event of their entire life recorded for posterity, and were showing me that, and even then it wouldn't be a firsthand experience, and thus a literal Real Life, so a case could still be made for that merely being a limited retelling—for instance, a video recording of my entire life, even from my firsthand perspective using cameras implanted in my eyeballs and microphones in my ears, would not include my inner thoughts, or my emotions, or the smells or tastes involved, or any of countless other things that were undeniably part of the "Real Life" experience), hence, any tropes applied to such a story (or recording) would still not, in the truest sense, be troping real life. Again, that would fall under the autobiographical/biographical case I mentioned (and would thus be totally okay, as long as you made it clear that you were troping that story, and not simply stating that the trope applies to the actual person).

^^^^Fighteer, I know we don't trope Real Life as a rule, we only allow listings of situations which "approximate" tropes on sufferance, but that's really just a difference in perspective/terminology. The fact is that a number of our articles have Real Life sections, which are allowed under our current rules. It makes sense that some of those Real Life examples are of Creators, and there's no reason I can think of why those are any less legitimate (setting aside, for the moment, just how legitimate they actually are) than a Real Life example of someone or something that isn't a Creator.

In other words, no, we don't trope Real Life, officially, but we do wink-wink-nudge-nudge-unofficially and very visibly trope Real Life when it doesn't involve NRLEP tropes or other related issues (like topics that are verboten). If that were not the case, NRLEP itself would be pointless because everything would be NRLEP.

I mean, maybe we don't allow trope examples about Creators or inline Pot Holes to the same effect on a Creator's page, in which case, I was mistaken above; but we certainly allow Real Life examples on trope pages, and I'm not aware of any rule, or any reason for such a rule, as to why Creators should be excluded from that.
Candi
05:53:07 PM 29th Jun 2015
"I'm not aware of any rule, or any reason for such a rule, as to why Creators should be excluded from that."

Gossiping about RL people.
rodneyAnonymous
08:59:33 PM 29th Jun 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
"A creator obviously has a backstory even if that backstory wasn't scripted by anybody but just happened."

That is trivia, though, not a trope. Tropes are, by our definition, something that happens in fiction. Real-life events can resemble tropes—quite strongly, and some tropes are based on stuff that really happened—but if we're being really specific, no, there aren't any tropes in real life. They are storytelling devices.

It would make sense if everything was NRLEP and there were no RL sections at all anywhere, but writing and reading RL "examples" is fun, so it's tolerated if it isn't causing a problem and isn't on a Creator page.
Fighteer
09:16:58 PM 29th Jun 2015
SolipSchism, we have a specific rule that trumps the general rule about RL examples: we do not list tropes, of any sort, about real people on their articles.

close replies  

Blue96
Medium:
05:49:36 PM 29th Jun 2015
I've just became a troper and I was wondering (I don't know if this is understandable or I just sound like an idiot.) how do you add a fanfic rec to the fanfic rec page?
see/hide 2 replies  
DracMonster
03:19:18 PM 29th Jun 2015
Just edit the page, same as any other. Use the standard format used for the other recs.
Candi
05:49:36 PM 29th Jun 2015
And around here, it's always considered better to ask for guidance. :)

close replies  

Tarlonniel
Medium:
05:34:04 PM 29th Jun 2015
justanotherrandomlurker has ongoing problems with example indentation (everywhere) and This Troper (on Headscratchers pages). I've P Med them and begun cleaning up their edits, but there are a LOT to check and my time is limited - I'd appreciate some help if anyone is willing. Also, they add a lot of what I'd normally call natter to Headscratchers entries, but I'm not sure if the rules are different about such things on those pages, so I'm just leaving those entries alone.
see/hide 4 replies  
SeptimusHeap
12:11:04 PM 28th Jun 2015
Suspended them for the Example Indentation and natter problems.
randomsurfer
08:11:39 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by randomsurfer
^^Headscratchers allows first person though, doesn't it? It's what scratches "my" head, not "one's" head.

Also, if you're gonna fix something fix it right. Specifically, on The Odd Couple you changed:
  • Chuck Cunningham Syndrome: Roy (one of the poker players) as well as Cecily and Gwendolyn (the Pigeon sisters) disappeared after the first season. Later it was the turn for Miriam and Nancy (Felix and Oscar's respective girlfriends).
to
  • Chuck Cunningham Syndrome:
    • Roy (one of the poker players) as well as Cecily and Gwendolyn (the Pigeon sisters) disappeared after the first season. Later it was the turn for Miriam and Nancy (Felix and Oscar's respective girlfriends).

I'm not saying I know the series well enough to fix it myself but if you're going to indent, then Roy, Cecily (could be combined with Gwendolyn since they're always together?), Miriam, and Nancy should each have their own sub-bullet. A single sub-bullet means you're doing it wrong.

PS. Despite the similar names, I swear on the grave of Fast Eddie I'm not justanotherrandomlurker's sock. (It has been brought up before.)
Tarlonniel
05:14:41 PM 29th Jun 2015
First person is not allowed anywhere on the wiki.

Yes, a single sub-bullet means you're doing it wrong. That's why I turned the original entry into another bullet - then lurker's entry was no longer alone. I didn't pay enough attention to what he'd actually written to realize it was more of a Repair, Don't Respond issue.

randomsurfer
05:34:04 PM 29th Jun 2015
edited by randomsurfer
[redacted by randomsurfer]

close replies  

Eagal
Medium:
03:28:59 PM 29th Jun 2015
For Ensemble Darkhorse how minor need the characters be? Can secondary characters count?

Relevant examples: Fergus from Brave and the raptor squad from Jurassic World. Not main characters but definitely prominent secondary characters.
see/hide 0 replies  

close replies  

nombretomado
Medium:
02:45:36 PM 29th Jun 2015
So if there is an English-title redirect to a Japanese-titled work, it's my understanding that the English title should be the main page, and the Japanese-language title should be the redirect.

Of course, this is assuming that the English-language title is the official English-language title.

For example, Anime.Kinnikuman Nisei should redirect to Anime.Ultimate Muscle. Correct?
see/hide 15 replies  
sgamer82
06:30:20 PM 24th Jun 2015
Yes. The official English takes precedence.
SolipSchism
09:36:04 AM 25th Jun 2015
Remind me, if there is no official English title, but there is an unofficial and generally accepted English translation, do we prefer the unofficial English or the official, original non-English?
SetsunasaNiWa
10:23:16 AM 25th Jun 2015
edited by SetsunasaNiWa
The indecisive answer (I think, moderators would pick it) would be to go with "more recognizable" one.

Decisive answer (my answer, not intended to sound as self-praise) would be, "you don't get to decide what is and what isn't generally accepted; thus the original should be retained."
SolipSchism
10:30:08 AM 25th Jun 2015
Personally I'd say go with what's official, and tend toward English if possible. So there are really only two options: The official English translation, or if there isn't one, the original title. No unofficial translations.

Very rarely, a work gets officially translated more than once, in which case it'd probably be best to go with whichever one is most recent (since that translation is most likely the "currently" official one).
sgamer82
04:22:00 PM 28th Jun 2015
I ran into a situation like this with Shinozaki-san Ki wo Ota Shika ni!. I'm always wary of untranslated Japanese titles because they don't always mean much to someone who isn't already fan of the series or anime in general.

I asked about using the titles English translation, Don't Become an Otaku Shinozaki-san. Since there's no official release (and title to go with it), I couldn't migrate it over as I'd prefer (and typically do when there is an official English title). Instead I got the suggestion of using the translated title as a redirect (to tend toward English) and use it or a pothole to the Japanese title instead, kind of the inverse of your Kinnikuman Nisei/Ultimate Muscle example.

In my case, outside of an admitted personal bias, if the title does get released it potentially saves on wick-fixing if the official English uses the same title. If not, it doesn't necessarily create any extra work that wouldn't already be there outside of probably Cutting the redirect.
crazysamaritan
09:43:08 PM 28th Jun 2015
SolipSchism, I want to point out that the Japanese title is impossible, because our URL does not use kanji or katakana. What is used is a romanization of the Japanese characters, which can vary depending on who does the transation.

So even the romanization of the Japanese is almost always an unofficial translation.
sgamer82
11:36:50 PM 28th Jun 2015
I can't help but feel that's really just splitting hairs, since a romanized title is more of a phonetic spelling, really.
Candi
06:50:32 AM 29th Jun 2015
There's officially translated romanization, and there's fan romanization. The first is usually standardized and as close to the actual pronunciation-spelling-whathaveyou as you can get. The latter can vary. Widely. Wildly.
crazysamaritan
09:51:18 AM 29th Jun 2015
Mostly because Japan has different phonemes than America does.
SolipSchism
09:57:58 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by SolipSchism
^^^^ Er, well, yes, in the strictest technical sense, that's true, but while "romanization" does refer to the general concept of "rendering a language that does not use the Roman alphabet using the Roman alphabet", what we look at with romaji is not just an ad hoc "phonetic spelling" of whatever is being translated. Most often you're looking at something that was romanized using Hepburn romanization, a standardized, widespread system. What is most commonly used may change over time (revised Hepburn is a little more unambiguous in certain cases, making it more reliable, and there are still other systems that may gain or lose prominence), but it's disingenuous to suggest that "romanization" just means "sound it out and write down your best guess".

Not to mention, when there's literally no other option but using a romanization of some sort because, by your own admission, we can't use the original kana/kanji (and arguably more importantly, most of our userbase wouldn't be able to read it even if we could), the whole question becomes a really pointless one.
Larkmarn
01:17:25 PM 29th Jun 2015
This may be a question for another topic, but at what point do make have separate pages for the English and Japanese versions? I mean, obviously Macross and Robotech and even Gatchaman and G Force, but I'm sure plenty believe that some of the 4kids dubs are basically separate works.

Does Works Pages Are a Free Launch apply to different translations?
SolipSchism
01:25:15 PM 29th Jun 2015
You know. That's actually a good question (not that I can answer it). I would make a new thread for it, though.
Discar
02:16:19 PM 29th Jun 2015
Short version: When they're distinct enough to deserve their own pages.

This applies to any adaptations, not just translations. For example, most anime are adaptations of either a light novel or a manga. But since they traditionally hew very closely to the source material, there's no need to make an entirely separate page; just note the differences and move on. Western animation, on the other hand, are either original works or adaptations that are so different from their source material that they're practically In Name Only, and thus need distinct pages.

Of course, there are exceptions on both sides. The cartoon version of Batman: Year One is basically a beat-by-beat animation of the comic, so they can share a page easily. The first Fullmetal Alchemist anime, on the other hand, diverges from the manga very quickly, and needs its own page. Conversely, the second anime (Brotherhood) is a near-exact animation of the manga, and thus can share a page without difficulty, just mentioning a few scenes that were added or removed.
crazysamaritan
02:36:55 PM 29th Jun 2015
the whole question becomes a really pointless one.
The question at hand is "Do we use the romanization or the English translation of the work?"

The answer is always to get as close to the most recent official English translation as possible. Sometimes that means using an official romanization. Sometimes it means using a fanmade translation.

The "original title" could very well be a fanmade romanization, which isn't quite as good as a fanmade english translation.

Another course of action in these situations is the "wait and see" strategy, where we watch to see if the copyright holders negotiate English translation deals.
SolipSchism
02:45:36 PM 29th Jun 2015
^ Okay, that's valid. I was interpreting your comment as equating translations and transliterations and suggesting that they're all equally unfaithful to the original.

In any case, I'm not remotely interested in debating the merits of any given translation; the original question was about policy, not the reasons behind it.

But yes, your post here sounds legit.

close replies  

Larkmarn
Medium: Music
12:07:35 PM 29th Jun 2015
SheezusQueen has twice pulled the same Unfortunate Implications entry from YMMV.Taylor Swift with no edit reason, despite them having citations.

One of the entries was pulled in November by Haruka 69, who almost assuredly is the same person.
see/hide 1 replies  
SeptimusHeap
12:07:35 PM 29th Jun 2015
Ban evading. Here comes the bounce.

close replies  

saynickelwebsite
Medium:
10:12:17 AM 29th Jun 2015
I'm looking for a specific trope (or perhaps i'm looking to create it if it doesn't exist).

When the journey begins for the hero taking out one bad guy is tough. An example would be from an anime, Knights of Sidonia, Season 1 saw it taking an entire squad (and one ridiculously good hero) to take out a single gauna (Tentacle monster of the week). By the end of season 2 they are taking on hordes of them without even batting an eyelash. Obviously the tech got better, but stil...hedonic treadmill on overdrive.

TL;DR: TV trope where the hero struggles to beat a bad guy then the next episode is taking 10 or more like its another day
see/hide 2 replies  
MyFinalEdits
10:52:08 PM 28th Jun 2015
Take your question to Lost and Found.
SolipSchism
10:12:17 AM 29th Jun 2015
^ ...please.

close replies  

lakingsif
Medium:
08:20:51 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by lakingsif
I've seen for a while comments in YKTTW by Nemuru Mae Ni and Setsunasa Ni Wa that are forcefully asserting that who I know are experienced tropers are doing things wrong and instructing them to do things the complete opposite of how yk is run and what tropes are. For a while, given the similar barely-comprehensible writing style and handles, I've suspected it's the same small-minded individual with a lack of understanding of quite what a trope is. They then confirmed that is the case.

Then, in this discussion, there is the second comment under the username Nemuru Mae Ni. Given that I also seem to recall cleaning up their mess of English in main articles, I propose a discussion with the person and perhaps an edit suspension so they can learn to read all the Administrivia, some English, and to play nice.
see/hide 12 replies  
DracMonster
08:04:25 AM 28th Jun 2015
edited by DracMonster
It is the same person. They've always been public about that.

I'm scratching my head over these incoherent shenanigans. They've been around here a while.
lakingsif
08:10:55 AM 28th Jun 2015
edited by lakingsif
Not that long? The second handle was only created a few months ago.

There's some good cleaning up, I remember that, but then much of his "cleaning up" is getting rid of acceptable stuff that he seems to just not like, and writing stuff himself isn't always correct (the mistakes not usually simple typos, either). I've seen the inflammatory and plain wrong comments before, but ignored them because everyone else did.

What got me to come here was the comment about "this place doesn't accept people who don't know everything about it as soon as they get here and they need to all go die", with a bit of It's Personal based on the sheer extent taken (going through the history pages of the pages in my recent edits list) to try and say that I had no leg to stand on by telling them that Zero Context Examples aren't the most popular of examples (still not sure how he figured that, but clearly there's something very... fiery... in his head).

tl;dr: The person who has these handles does seem to know the rules, but (maybe because of this) they are refusing to listen to other people about what tropes really are and how yk works, as well as being horribly offensive and in broken English, too.
MorningStar1337
09:26:44 AM 28th Jun 2015
It is said that the intelligent are easier to fool because they are so smugly convinced of their intelligence.

That said the troper(s) in question does seem to frequent ATT (its where I found out they are the same person) so I think we should ring her/him/them up for their side of the story
lakingsif
09:30:17 AM 28th Jun 2015
Yeah, but enter any yk discussion and you can see their unwarranted contributions. I just went to a different one to see if the example I had in mind was listed, and half the comments are their deliberately rude, obtuse, and argumentative reactions to people asking genuine questions. I want us to try, but it doesn't seem like they're willing to be reasoned with.
nrjxll
11:34:00 AM 28th Jun 2015
While I haven't considered it particularly problematic, it has struck me in the past that some of their posts on Ask The Tropers have sounded unnecessarily hostile.
SetsunasaNiWa
02:00:42 PM 28th Jun 2015
edited by SetsunasaNiWa
Fundamental things first. I plead all personal attacks to be misinterpretations done by the offended party. People behind troper handles are of no interest to me. This is not a get-to-know-each-other site. Neither derision, nor a compliment is ever thrown at people, in comments, posts, messages. Any contempt, pity, awe and envy only exist aimed at the contributions, further tamed by the fact that tropers online personas can fake things or act in ignorance.

Next, everyone here deals in text. In text, pointing out contradictions can look like ridicule. Pointing out blank spots can look like obtuse behavior. Emotionless matter-of-fact wording can look snobbish. A text without a single exclamation mark can feel like a hysterical tantrum. This reply is not exception, but it's about YKTTW exchanges at the moment. So when do things go wrong? One possible time for all those is when a troper "owns" the criticised write-up and takes jabs at it as jabs against him-/herself. I'm aware of such possible feelings of offense, and am rather calm about those. Why worry, if I can't do pretty much anything about it.

Not critisizing is an option, but a counter-productive one in the long run. If nothing else, remember there being over 170 pages of 50 items each of non-discarded ykttws. Backlog only increases with time. Again, if anything, it calls for people to be open about their problems with proposed drafts. Without that, patterns in flaws can get due attention only by random chance, among other things.

Neuro-linguistic programming and other spinning so as to gloss over potentially taken-as-bitter comments is another option, but that one is boring and disgusting to use "for offense". Pleasantries consume time, take up space and distract. The whole approach lacks respect for people as sentient individuals. I'd rather know those petty tricks only to recognize them when I'm at their receiving end.

I've seen different criticism-receivers playing differently with identically composed texts, which corroborates all of the above. There's even more to it, a vast topic of (un)acceptability of certain moves in logical arguments. One way to sum up, for a long time I've entertained a grand decisive question. How exactly would they expect a not-offending way of pointing out a fatal flaw in their work to look like? Getting someone to admit a fatal flaw is hard. Not like they would let that flaw in in the first place, if they could easily see it.

Query starter's post begs checking against Logical Fallacies index. My "targets" are respected by him? Irrelevant to whether they can be wrong and whether anyone can make an argument about it. The assessment of my conduct lacks concrete evidence, therefore it can characterise either its target or its author in obscure proportion, not of much use to draw justified conclusions.

The part about me telling everyone to go die is quite a misrepresentation. The actual dichotomy in question can be read in the ykttw linked to and can be discussed separately, if a need arises.
Candi
03:32:50 PM 28th Jun 2015
Setsuna, I really hate to say it, but you do come off as very abrasive and snotty in those posts.

You honestly may not have meant to sound that way, but you do.

Written text is one of the easiest things to misinterpret. The whole point of using smilies or /action is to make it clearer what we intend. Here, we also use potholes to clarify our meaning.

You can also have a terribly bad day, or be tired, or stressed, or distracted, and not realize the possible meanings of what you write.

And you do need to work on your English grammar. It's good, but does contain mistakes that need work.
rodneyAnonymous
05:39:24 PM 28th Jun 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
Note that in systems of communication, the meaning of a signal is almost always determined by the receiver.
calmestofdoves
05:40:21 PM 28th Jun 2015
This is not a get-to-know-each-other site.

So you're saying you're not here to make friends?

Pleasantries consume time, take up space and distract. The whole approach lacks respect for people as sentient individuals.

Expecting people to accept rote social formalities as genuine consideration is perhaps presumptuous, but being kind to others is hardly disrespecting them. Frankness can be admirable; callousness never is.

You don't actually have to notice who you're talking to to say something that functions as a personal attack. In fact, being rude is much easier when you approach personal interaction that way. The people behind troper handles should matter to you, because they're people, not simply whatever comment they're making at the moment.

Also,saying that lakingsif's analysis lacked concrete evidence is kind of hilarious when he included multiple links to your comments.
Candi
06:20:40 PM 28th Jun 2015
Cracked's main forum and comments rule is "Be nice", the other side of the coin of "Don't be a dick."

Both mean, in their most basic interpretation, use basic manners. Please, thank you, consideration of others. All that stuff you learn as a little kid. The stuff that transcends geography and culture.

And really, there are a lot of problems that would never happen, or be resolved quite a bit faster, if basic manners and empathy were routinely used.

The main thing to always remember is "Would I want to be treated this way?"
NemuruMaeNi
07:14:55 AM 29th Jun 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
<SetsunasaNiWa's sockpuppet>

^^ On the matter of I'm Not Here to Make Friends. If that pothole is meant as relevant reference, then, no, I'm not troping myself and I'm not troping real-life and I'm not modeling my behavior after the idea of said trope.

If that was just a Sinkhole, just to note how the word combination coincides, then, yes, things like TV Tropes' ykttw drafts and forums repair threads are decidedly not a place where I'm going to look for friends.

If it's neither or a mixture of the two, then I'll argue that we have different ideas of what a friend is.

^^ On the matter of "Concrete evidence". For me concrete evidence means to point specifically at an instance and describe the problem with it. Like, "Look at that recent quote-upgrading edit *link provided*; the troper has put a sinkhole into page quote. And over there *another link provided* he added a zero-context sub-bullet and Nattered, even though he'd claim Zero-Context Example policy is an enforced thing".

For cases like those two draft discussions, each apparent turn for the worse can and does have a maliceless different explanation. From my side things sometimes look like this. I leave a criticism point. Someone asks for more details. I reply. Back comes a reply which causes mixed feeling. It could be honestly product of misunderstanding, it could be built on different premise, or it could have been winged, or it could be an unjustified demand for an easy way out. Could. I can't know for sure. I can't know what else it can be. And then exchange can continue for a while like that. At such times there can be a ton of signals that the other party does not understand first thing about the problem cause and form. Suspicions and signals are just that. You don't get a license on interpreting them, assumptions can be wrong. So when the said party comes back for more without openly describing what goes on in their thought processing, it means that by not continuing along I would assume bad faith.
Fighteer
08:20:51 AM 29th Jun 2015
Wow, I don't think I've seen a clearer example of someone committed to being a dick at all costs. Suspensions issued.

close replies  

rin14100
Medium:
03:44:10 AM 29th Jun 2015
Is there a trope for a character who spends ridiculous amounts of money for selfish purposes?
see/hide 1 replies  
shadowblack
03:44:10 AM 29th Jun 2015

close replies  

jormis29
Medium:
01:46:24 AM 29th Jun 2015
I think matchfinderbm may be a spammer, his/her comment here is a non-sequitur followd by a link to a match-making business
see/hide 2 replies  
wrm5
07:49:41 PM 28th Jun 2015
Pretty obvious spammer. Kill it with extreme prejudice.
SeptimusHeap
01:46:24 AM 29th Jun 2015
Zapped and bounced.

close replies  

phoenix
Medium:
01:44:50 AM 29th Jun 2015
The Chromebook Beater made some bizarre changes to Sidetracked by the Gold Saucer, such as changing "Literature" to "Titerature". I've already fixed that page. His/her other edits seem okay, aside from the creation of the stub page Virtual Doll.
see/hide 2 replies  
MrL1193
11:00:46 PM 28th Jun 2015
"Larry Butz dared me" is not a very reassuring edit reason, to say the least.
SeptimusHeap
01:44:50 AM 29th Jun 2015
Aye, calling them in for a question.

close replies  

nombretomado
Medium:
10:26:08 PM 28th Jun 2015
Where was it decided that Series.Battlestar Galactica Classic and Series.Battlestar Galactica Reimagined would be renamed into Series.Battlestar Galactica 1978 and Series.Battlestar Galactica 2003?

Additionally, will all disambiguations be (re)named into year distinctions?
see/hide 6 replies  
Zyffyr
05:13:39 PM 26th Jun 2015
Year designations are objectively better than things like classic and reimagined, as the year is an absolute unambiguous (and more importantly - unchanging) way of telling them apart (as is Author). Unofficial subtitles on the other hand are arbitrary and subject to change. What would we use if someone came along next year and made a third BSG series? Classic, Reimagined and Re-Reimagined?

As for your second question, I can't help but think it is one of those pointless "But you can't change it unless you change everything else at the same time" arguments.
nombretomado
05:33:15 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by nombretomado
I'm not questioning the logic of why the change occurred - I would like a link to where the decision was made, so in case this is part of a bigger discussion I can participate in it.

As for the second question, I'm asking because I do a lot of namespacing, and inevitably some of those will have disambiguations built into them, and I'd rather not put in the time for namespacing something that will be affected by a bigger, ongoing change.
muddycurve424
10:38:12 PM 26th Jun 2015
It's been stated several times here on ATT that dates are to be used to distinguish between works. It IS, as you said, an ongoing change.
nombretomado
07:36:00 AM 27th Jun 2015
Thank you.
bwburke94
05:24:49 PM 28th Jun 2015
Does Galactica 1980 deserve its own page, or should it be considered part of the original 1978 series?
Zyffyr
10:26:08 PM 28th Jun 2015
Properly speaking 1980 is a separate sequel series.

close replies  

Berrenta
Medium:
08:58:17 PM 28th Jun 2015
edited by Berrenta
Someone created Quotes Bad Hair Day Rated R For Retelling Of Cave Story in main, when it's supposed to be a work page (specifically, Fanfic).

Can someone move it? I was going to, but it's rather late for me. Thanks.
see/hide 0 replies  

close replies  

Morgenthaler
Medium:
08:08:53 PM 28th Jun 2015
Another author attempted to delete their work, this time on The Final Fantasy. Can a mod revert this, please?
see/hide 2 replies  
SeptimusHeap
03:30:56 AM 26th Jun 2015
Reverted by Kyle Jacobs.
KyleJacobs
08:08:53 PM 28th Jun 2015
You're welcome.

close replies  

TheNerfGuy
Medium:
03:28:27 PM 28th Jun 2015
Are Creator pages allowed to have WMG subpages?
see/hide 1 replies  
Candi
03:28:27 PM 28th Jun 2015
Only if a) it's about their works and b) the works in question don't have their own work pages yet. Once the works get pages, the WMG goes on the subpage for the work.

And WMG about the creator is no. Nope, nu uh, no.

close replies  

MarqFJA
Medium:
01:33:26 PM 28th Jun 2015
What's the procedure to follow if I wanted to gather image examples for an Image Links subpage to give a good idea of what a trope and some of its notable variations tend to look, e.g. Fairytale Wedding Dress?

PS: The thing is, I don't really know what differentiates a Fairytale Wedding Dress from the "average" pimped-out Western-style wedding dress, and the image doesn't really do a good job of clarifying it for me. I'd make a Does Not Illustrate IP thread for the trope, but IINM I need to propose at least one alternative image, else it gets shut down.
see/hide 1 replies  
lakingsif
01:33:26 PM 28th Jun 2015
Maybe propose Cinderella as an example, say you're unsure, and follow on. The trope description doesn't really distinguish that much, so maybe it needs TRS?

close replies  

PDL
Medium: Western Animation
01:58:36 AM 28th Jun 2015
This YMMV page appears to be glitched or something, since the bullet points seem to indicate that they should go to a YMMV page... even though it IS a YMMV page.
see/hide 7 replies  
Chytus
05:50:45 PM 27th Jun 2015
That is because it is marked as an examples page instead of a subpage. Someone should fix the page type.
PDL
06:06:03 PM 27th Jun 2015
So how do I change the page type? I'm looking at the instructions... and they're showing it in the old format from several months ago.
Candi
07:47:28 PM 27th Jun 2015
Make the request in this thread.

Short version: Buttons in new layout causing merry fun with Google search results, so hidden from sight. Mods and admins can still access.
Karxrida
10:35:29 PM 27th Jun 2015
I thought recap pages didn't get their own YMMV pages?
Candi
10:38:13 PM 27th Jun 2015
I can never remember the policy on that... if I'm wrong, the mods or a knowledgeable troper will point it out. :p
SeptimusHeap
01:28:46 AM 28th Jun 2015
Recap pages can get their own subpages. Changed the page type, anyway.
Candi
01:58:36 AM 28th Jun 2015
Thanks muchly! (Makes note.)

close replies  

Morgenthaler
Medium:
01:26:45 AM 28th Jun 2015
ErikModi has a whole bunch of issues with their edits, including indentation, zero context, natter, adding YMMV items to main pages, adding 'arguable' examples, and shoehorning tropes. They're ignoring notifiers and apparently started edit warring on Jurassic World.
see/hide 1 replies  
SeptimusHeap
01:26:45 AM 28th Jun 2015
Aye, needs a talking to.

close replies  

harryhenry
Medium:
01:23:12 AM 28th Jun 2015
edited by harryhenry
The examples for Pauline Kael and Armond White on Caustic Critic (They're in the "Literature" section) both have problems with being very complain-y towards their subjects. Both of them also have confusing example indentation. It's so bad, I'm not sure how to rewrite them so they aren't as complain-y.
see/hide 2 replies  
harryhenry
01:15:40 AM 28th Jun 2015
Bump.
SeptimusHeap
01:23:12 AM 28th Jun 2015
Put them on the discussion page, I'd recommend.

close replies  

randomsurfer
Medium:
09:42:48 PM 27th Jun 2015
edited by randomsurfer
Probably I should post this to a forum but I don't know which.

I just restored the page Macragges Honour from being blanked (almost a year ago) but it is unindexed. It should go on the Comic Books index but I don't know which country of origin it should be listed under, or any other indices that it should be listed in.
see/hide 0 replies  

close replies  

WooftheWolfie
Medium: Anime
05:32:12 PM 27th Jun 2015
edited by WooftheWolfie
For the YMMV page of Naruto, can someone who can get pass the lock add base breaker? It's because a lot of people think differently about Sarada. What I mean is that some people think Karin is her mother, while others think Sakura is the mother.

Therefore, because of the this debate there should be a trope about base breaking.
see/hide 1 replies  
jormis29
05:32:12 PM 27th Jun 2015
Requests for edits to locked pages should go here

close replies  

lalalei2001
Medium: Western Animation
04:28:41 PM 27th Jun 2015
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.TinyToonAdventures

Man, people must really, really hate Elmyra and love Fifi to the point where they use Creator's Pet and Ensemble Darkhorse instead of their names.
see/hide 7 replies  
Candi
05:08:04 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by Candi
Well, you're supposed to hate Elmyra. She's a satire and (mild) exaggeration of the reason animal cruelty laws exist. I think the "Creator's Pet" comes from her being given her own show, Pinky, Elmyra & the Brain, even though the demographics didn't really indicate it was a good idea, and it flopped spectacularly. And Pinky & the Brain's own show did moderately to very well, sooo...

I don't see where Fifi is an "Ensemble Darkhorse", though. She got more screentime as Tiny Toons progressed, but she didn't become really popular to my knowledge. She's mostly seen tagging along in episodes that feature more first-level protagonists, playing second fiddle to them.

Edit: In the Tiny Toons "origins" episode, Elmyra is explicitly introduced as a villain, as well. A pathetic one by Buster and Babs' calculations, but a villain.
Ramona122003
06:27:45 PM 26th Jun 2015
From what I remember, Elmyra had a lot of Executive Meddling since the creators didn't really like her, but was forced to include her so they made the best of it. So, she isn't a Creator's Pet in the classic sense.

Since I am active in the Creator's Pet discussion forum, Elmyra fails to steal screen time from the main characters and she has no Character Shilling, she's widely disliked by the cast even compared to the other villains, so she isn't a Creator's Pet base on the requirements for this site.
Candi
06:52:08 PM 26th Jun 2015
Ah, okies. Sounds like she could use whatever trope has the execs shoehorning in disliked characters, though.
Ramona122003
06:56:03 PM 26th Jun 2015
Is it a trope like that? If so, we can move most Creator's Pet's entries to it.
Candi
07:12:21 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by Candi
I have no idea. That's a question for Lost and Found aka Trope Finder.
lalalei2001
04:23:08 PM 27th Jun 2015
Maybe a variation of Adored by the Network?
Ramona122003
04:28:41 PM 27th Jun 2015
edited by Ramona122003
I asked, seems a straight Scappy is correct.

close replies  

emeriin
Medium:
02:21:22 PM 27th Jun 2015
I'm going to put the words back in, but agentskybluem7 seems to have a nannybot, as they take out things like "bastard", "cum" and even bizarrely "betrayal" and "blame".
see/hide 6 replies  
DracMonster
05:53:55 AM 27th Jun 2015
Um, which page was "cum" on? I suspect that should be reworded.
emeriin
05:57:11 AM 27th Jun 2015
cum laude, not the bad context.
DracMonster
05:59:36 AM 27th Jun 2015
Oh, heh. Ok.
emeriin
06:16:58 AM 27th Jun 2015
Okay I think I've got most of them, as well as taking care of some other justifying edits and natter.
SeptimusHeap
06:29:40 AM 27th Jun 2015
Suspended.
rodneyAnonymous
02:21:22 PM 27th Jun 2015

close replies  

YasminPerry
Medium: Film
02:16:18 PM 27th Jun 2015
Is it possible to put a note in a image caption? It won't work when I try it.
see/hide 7 replies  
DracMonster
07:33:43 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by DracMonster
Sure is. Double check you have all of the markup correct. Nested markup like a note inside a caption is easy to misconstruct.

Edit: Tomokazu Seki has one. Might help you figure out any errors in yours.
YasminPerry
08:33:13 PM 26th Jun 2015
What if I also have a Pot Hole in there? (I'm pretty sure that's why it's not working properly.)
YasminPerry
08:33:33 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by YasminPerry
Double post
calmestofdoves
11:51:50 PM 26th Jun 2015
copy your code in here?
SetsunasaNiWa
02:14:54 AM 27th Jun 2015
Dont Do This Cool Thing has a caption with a note. You could yoink its markup as a template.
Adept
03:48:43 AM 27th Jun 2015
Potholes should work fine with Labelnote. Plenty of collages does that. Most Common Super Power is a good example
rodneyAnonymous
02:16:18 PM 27th Jun 2015
edited by rodneyAnonymous
The Sliding Scale of Anthropomorphism has potholes in its image caption note, too.

close replies  

RippenFan33
Medium: Western Animation
02:09:33 PM 27th Jun 2015
I've noticed that some recap pages for animated shows (I.e. My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic) have more detailed recaps than others. Is that a decision by the site, or can anyone expand the recaps?
see/hide 5 replies  
crazysamaritan
08:44:57 AM 27th Jun 2015
Any can expand the recaps. Please cut any recaps that turn into scene-by-scene adaptations, though. A recap is supposed to be a short summary of the events in the story, not a copy of the work. :-)
TrollBrutal
10:35:02 AM 27th Jun 2015
Yes, I've noticed this trend lately that it takes more time to read the recap than to watch the actual episode, Game of Thrones is a major offender, but it tends to happen with works with a big following in the present day.
SeptimusHeap
12:20:21 PM 27th Jun 2015
The other issue is the synopsis/recap merge. There is no place other than recap to put extended synopses nowadays.
crazysamaritan
12:34:59 PM 27th Jun 2015
You call it an "issue". I do not think that word means what you think it means. Synopsis was not supposed to hold a recap longer than the actual episode even when it was a supported namespace.
rodneyAnonymous
02:09:33 PM 27th Jun 2015
"Is that a decision by the site...?"

No. If a page doesn't exist, 99% of the time it's just because no one has created it yet. If a series has more recaps than average, that just means there are more people interested in writing recaps for it than average.

close replies  

bwburke94
Medium:
12:33:10 PM 27th Jun 2015
How are continuity tropes treated on the pages of fan works?
see/hide 16 replies  
calmestofdoves
10:15:05 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by calmestofdoves
Continuity like a Continuity Nod to canon? Continuity within a fanwork series? Continuity like whether or not a fanwork that's labeled "canon compliant until SE2E7" is an Alternate Continuity?

(Regardless, I have no idea what the answer to your question would be.)
SolipSchism
10:32:37 PM 25th Jun 2015
Fan works are works like any other. If a trope applies, it applies. I concur with calmestofdoves—I'm not really sure what you're asking.
bwburke94
10:49:41 PM 25th Jun 2015
OK. My question is: how are Continuity Nods to the source material handled?
calmestofdoves
01:38:59 AM 26th Jun 2015
edited by calmestofdoves
Note: This response is heavily colored by my own fanfic-reading habits, so it may not be helpful to you.

I'd treat Continuity Nods more or less like the fanwork is an installment of the original work, I guess. If it's a reference to canon that wouldn't make any sense in canon itself — say, an Everybody Lives AU where a character jokes about dying in exactly the same gruesome tragic way they did in canon, or an AU in which a line or two from the script gets recycled word for word in a drastically different context — then it's more likely a Shout-Out, or a mix of Shout-Out, Exact Words, and Ironic Echo.

I see a lot of Continuity Cameos in fanworks too... Star Trek fic based on the recent movies that nevertheless brings in Gary Mitchell from TOS (or Number One, which, seeing as she's from the failed original pilot, is also kind of a Mythology Gag without the gag); MCU fic that pulls in 616 characters; BBC Sherlock fic with Sebastian Moran or Victor Trevor, etc. etc.

I'm curious as to what specifically prompted you to ask this question.
MorningStar1337
06:22:50 AM 26th Jun 2015
Mythology Gag is a better fir than Shout-Out
crazysamaritan
07:11:53 AM 26th Jun 2015
I agree with morningstar; a fanwork making reference to the original work is a mythology gag.
SolipSchism
08:44:14 AM 26th Jun 2015
Mythology Gag sounds right in this case, I'm gonna throw my hat in with crazysamaritan and Morning Star 1337 here.
calmestofdoves
10:06:47 AM 26th Jun 2015
I must protest — a Mythology Gag is, by definition, a reference to something that isn't in the canon. (For example, naming minor characters in fanfic after the actors who play the main characters.)

What fanworks are you guys reading that Mythology Gag makes more sense than Continuity Nod or Shout-Out? Asking in all seriousness.
SolipSchism
10:27:23 AM 26th Jun 2015
edited by SolipSchism
...Wait. Yeah. calmest is right. We're looking at Continuity Nod. Which, according to the page itself, is a sort of Shout-Out, so don't list an example as both.
Larkmarn
10:57:27 AM 26th Jun 2015
edited by Larkmarn
  • Shout-Out: Reference to an unrelated work.
  • Continuity Nod: Reference to an earlier work, or earlier part of the same work.
  • Mythology Gag: Reference to a part of the franchise not canon to this work.

So it would depend. A High School A.U. fic where bad boy Char Aznable's motorcycle is called a Sazabi-model? That's a Mythology Gag. But a sequel fanfic where he says his new mobile suit is faster than his old Sazabi? That's a Continuity Nod.
calmestofdoves
12:11:45 PM 26th Jun 2015
So the issue is whether we're supposed to treat fanfic as an entirely separate work, or as a kind of continuation of the canon that uses an approximation of the same metrics to judge the applicability of a trope as one would for canon itself.

I think it would make sense to use "this is all part of the same work" canon metrics on canonverse futurefic and other sorts of canon compliant fic, but use the metrics one would use for a reboot or remake for AUs/fusions/etcs.

This would allow for canon-compliant fanworks to have Continuity Nods to canon. It seems an incredibly broad interpretation of Mythology Gag otherwise.
Larkmarn
01:52:28 PM 26th Jun 2015
Right. If the fanwork treats the original as canon, they're continuity nods. If they're an AU, they'd be a Mythology Gag.
calmestofdoves
03:07:12 PM 26th Jun 2015
I feel like this ought to be codified somewhere.
crazysamaritan
06:59:01 PM 26th Jun 2015
My disagreement remains, but that's because I would restrict Continuity Nod to only "earlier parts of the same work". When you have a work explode into a complex franchise like Comicbooks often do, continuity gets very complicated. If the work isn't being discussed under the same title, (and sometimes even then) then it isn't the same work, and references to the previous work would be a Mythology Gag.

For example, The Simpsons image on Mythology Gag references The Tracey Ullman Show style of Homer, where the series started airing. That would qualify as "an earlier work", and generally accepted as canon to the fans.
calmestofdoves
11:31:39 AM 27th Jun 2015
Canon-compliant works are meant to function as continuations of the original work, so, in practice, canon itself is "an earlier part of the same work" relative to a fanfic. Like, people will write fic about what happened twenty minutes after the end of an episode, you know? It's supposed to be as close to canon as possible.
crazysamaritan
12:33:10 PM 27th Jun 2015

close replies  

RippenFan33
Medium:
12:20:56 PM 27th Jun 2015
Who does one talk to about editing recap pages for certain shows?
see/hide 1 replies  
SeptimusHeap
12:20:56 PM 27th Jun 2015
Oneself? Unless stated otherwise, anybody has the right to edit anything.

close replies  

calmestofdoves
Medium:
11:27:43 AM 27th Jun 2015
How do we feel about the simultaneous existence of Beneath Suspicion and The Dog Was the Mastermind? If the latter was really only about the identity of The Chessmaster being a Shocking Swerve, I could at least credit it with being The Same but More Specific. As it is, though, they seem to be exactly the same trope except one has such a wacky name that no one noticed.
see/hide 3 replies  
phoenix
08:38:15 PM 26th Jun 2015
Beneath Suspicion looks like it's specific to mysteries and crime dramas, whereas The Dog Was the Mastermind is more general. I can't really tell if there's any other sort of distinction between them, though.
SeptimusHeap
01:40:57 AM 27th Jun 2015
This is a question for Trope Talk, I would say.
calmestofdoves
11:27:43 AM 27th Jun 2015
Thanks! Moved there.

close replies  

RippenFan33
Medium:
10:19:24 AM 27th Jun 2015
Are there any administrators or higher-ups that need to be consulted before recap pages are expanded?
see/hide 1 replies  
DracMonster
10:19:24 AM 27th Jun 2015
edited by DracMonster
If you mean expanding a too sparse description or adding more tropes, no, you can dive right in.

Like crazysamaritan said below, just be careful not to turn it into a scene by scene transcription of the entire script.

close replies  

GundamY
Medium: Videogame
09:56:47 AM 27th Jun 2015
If any of you guys played Marvel Puzzle Quest, please help out this troper in any way possible. I already established the foundation of the trope page, so feel free to insert whichever tropes that apply the game and its characters too.

Also, Character Page Needs Some Love
see/hide 1 replies  
DracMonster
09:56:47 AM 27th Jun 2015
What's with all the Bold Inflation? Excessive bolding or italics is discouraged. Other than that it's looking good.

close replies  

MagBas
Medium:
08:24:59 AM 27th Jun 2015
username2527 added again a Dude, Not Funny! example in Gravity Falls with the following edit reason: "Readded due to removal for invalid reasoning. This is a YMNV trope which by nature is opinion based."
see/hide 4 replies  
Karxrida
07:07:35 PM 26th Jun 2015
This is why In-Universe Examples Only tropes should have their YMMV banner removed. Or at least give it its own banner to avoid confusion.
MyFinalEdits
07:48:36 PM 26th Jun 2015
If you ask me, IUEO pages should have their own banner. One in the style of the YMMV, Flame Bait and Trivia ones.
crazysamaritan
08:08:41 AM 27th Jun 2015
/upvote
MorningStar1337
08:24:59 AM 27th Jun 2015
In addition to the new banners, I'd also support making Dude, Not Funny! a No Examples, Please trope.

close replies  

Berrenta
Medium:
06:11:57 AM 27th Jun 2015
A user undid a link that I did, and messaged claiming that it is a sinkhole. I don't think so. Is my edit really creating a sinkhole?

Here's the history in question.
see/hide 4 replies  
phoenix
10:48:15 PM 26th Jun 2015
Sinkhole lists "Changing the display text of a trope in a list" as one of the bad sinkhole practices.
lexicon
11:08:19 PM 26th Jun 2015
In other words, "Do Not Pothole the Trope Name" as per How to Write an Example. I would question the Potholes you make in general.
MorningStar1337
01:28:07 AM 27th Jun 2015
Shoulden't Evil Matriarch be more appropriate?
Berrenta
06:11:57 AM 27th Jun 2015
Thanks for the replies, and seconding Morningstar1337. I'll go and change it.

close replies  

harryhenry
Medium:
01:40:13 AM 27th Jun 2015
edited by harryhenry
username2527 readded Dude, Not Funny! on YMMV.Gravity Falls. Here's his reason: "This is playing with's description on the trope. 'A joke or comedy routine is poorly-received by the audience, usually because it breaks some sort of taboo.' It says audience not characters or story. It being listed as In-Universe when the trope by nature is subjective is what needs to be changed."
see/hide 2 replies  
MorningStar1337
11:27:56 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by MorningStar1337
Okay if that's the game he;s gonna play, then I have two fixes:

  • Make Dude, Not Funny! NEP
  • Give NRLEP, NEP and IUEO tropes their own banner, they are not YMMV tropes so they should not have that banner
SeptimusHeap
01:40:13 AM 27th Jun 2015
Re-removed it. Discussion ongoing to the discussion page.

close replies  

MrDeath
Medium:
05:13:02 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by MrDeath
Can we get a revert here? http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Awesome.JusticeLeague

themisterfree changed every reference to Brainthor (the gestalt of Brainiac and Lex Luthor) to Lexiac. As far as I know, Brainthor's the name commonly used here and in other places, and I've never seen Lexiac before, so a unilateral wholesale change doesn't sit right.

Edit: Also here http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Fridge.JusticeLeague
see/hide 5 replies  
SolipSchism
02:13:35 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by SolipSchism
Frankly, if neither one of them is an official name used in the series, we shouldn't be using either one anyway, for the same reason Alice!Bob stuff is frowned upon: They make no sense to people who aren't already engaged in the culture that uses them. It doesn't matter how "commonly used" it is, it's not actually part of the work.
Candi
02:23:41 PM 26th Jun 2015
Brainthor at least makes sense if you are familiar with DC in general. Lexiac sounds like a car or medication.
SolipSchism
02:24:47 PM 26th Jun 2015
Problem: Do not write a page on the assumption that the reader is already familiar with the material.
MrDeath
04:13:26 PM 26th Jun 2015
Isn't there still a problem with making a big unilateral change to something nobody else was using?
Candi
05:13:02 PM 26th Jun 2015
edited by Candi
Yes, there is a problem with making such changes without consensus.

And Solip, you are correct. :)

close replies  

Khantalas
Medium:
02:30:21 PM 26th Jun 2015
If we want to make an edit to a page, should we read the whole page to see if there are any other edits we want to make first, or should we make the edit and find others afterwards?

And if we do make the edit and return to the page, only to find another thing that can be corrected, do we wait for another edit, or can we edit it immediately?
see/hide 4 replies  
mlsmithca
08:37:54 AM 26th Jun 2015
edited by mlsmithca
I suppose the ideal thing would be scanning the page while you're editing it and making as many changes as you see fit while you've got the page checked out, but there's a page about what it means to be Serial Tweaker for a reason. It's not against the rules as such - not the best editing practice, but there's nothing that says you can't do it. (Which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned, as I've been a Serial Tweaker many a time myself.) Also, if there are enough changes that need to be made, you might not be able to manage it in one twenty-minute session, so you may find yourself needing to check the page out twice in succession anyway. (Just don't go too far overboard.)
SolipSchism
08:42:27 AM 26th Jun 2015
I dunno, if the edits are unrelated (like, two unrelated examples that have different errors to fix), I'd almost prefer you do them separately so that I don't have to puzzle out what part of your 20-part edit reason applies to which of the 20 separate edits.

Even so, that's just me, and I've never had a problem with Serial Tweaking myself.

I guess I would just say this: Being a Serial Tweaker is okay when you are correcting quantifiable errors, because every edit stands on its own merits and is verifiably productive.

It's less okay when you are really just tweaking something because it doesn't feel perfect, because then every edit except the last one ends up just being useless fluff.

I don't have a problem with either, but I'd discourage the latter.
Larkmarn
08:54:38 AM 26th Jun 2015
If you're going to make a lot of edits to different parts of the page, I find it better to do it in several edits. This is for a couple reasons:
  • Edit Reasons. I've seen people make edits to various parts of the page and try to explain them in the edit reason, but it winds up being confusing.
  • Timer lockout. Taking too long means that the lockout will expire, and someone else can edit the page. Which creates more work for both of you.

But yeah, repeatedly editing the same entry to get it "just right" is a bit annoying.
Candi
02:30:21 PM 26th Jun 2015
I used to read the page, do an edit when I saw a mistake, save, keep reading, do another edit, etc., sometimes racking up twenty or more edits on a page -and no one ever called me on it as long as I left edit reasons.

I would say that, instead of trying to write a long edit reason for objective editing -namespacing, punctuation, spelling, letter switching and so on- to just write what you did, especially if it's just a quick pop-in-and-out edit. It's pretty obvious whether it's correct or not, especially with the way the history page isolates where the edit was done.

close replies  

ryanasaurus0077
Medium:
11:55:24 AM 26th Jun 2015
I must complain about a glitch that's severely affecting my ability to create a recap page. The page in question is Rhythmic Pretty Cure 07 Pretty Cure In A Pinch The Inquisitive School Newspaper, which is inevitably rendered as Rhythmic Pretty Cure 07 Pretty Cure In A Pinch The Inquisitive School Newspa for some reason. Oddly enough, the history page for the latter shows that I created the recap page, but neither link produces any visible results, instead acting as though the page had never been created! What is up with that?
see/hide 2 replies  
TheOneWhoTropes
11:34:04 AM 26th Jun 2015
You're going to have to leave the title out, because we are limited to 255 characters in the title of the page.
ryanasaurus0077
11:55:24 AM 26th Jun 2015
In response to that limitation, I redirected all the recap pages to use the shorter "dub" titles and took to the Cut List. I managed to put six of the affected redirect pages in successfully, but the same page I was having problems with? The Cut List basically told me "verboten, nicht, no queremos" while saying the exact opposite, as though neither version of the page existed to begin with!

close replies  

Larkmarn
Medium: Music
07:39:39 AM 26th Jun 2015
Question: Would behind-the-scenes stuff about bands go under Music or Real Life? I was under the impression that it'd be real life, and Music is for the content of their songs, but on Overshadowed by Awesome someone made a move to the opposite.

And speaking of that page, it's indexed as YMMV but there's no banner. So is it YMMV or no?
see/hide 5 replies  
bwburke94
08:37:35 PM 25th Jun 2015
We usually don't trope real people as works. I'd say Real Life, but I'm not sure.
NemuruMaeNi
11:04:44 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
Wicks don't help establishing whether it's YMMV...
SeptimusHeap
12:12:17 AM 26th Jun 2015
It's an issue with the banner assignment mechanism. It's done by the YMMV page despite Home Page being the main index. I don't know if it should be YMMV.

I'll need a concrete example to answer the question in the OP.
Larkmarn
05:28:10 AM 26th Jun 2015
Take a look at the history of the page. The entire music section is about artists who were good, but overshadowed by their contemporaries. Which seems more like Real Life examples to me.
NemuruMaeNi
07:39:39 AM 26th Jun 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
^ Made me remember having asked about YMMV item Face of the Band here on ATT. They told me it's about onstage personas, so I shouldn't worry about applying ymmv to creators (which applying would be a no-no per Creator Page Guidelines). There may be an option to stretch things into the same realm here. Judge this Overshadowed by Awesome to be YMMV. As band members should be not able to be popular among fans in a bypassing-the-stage way, maybe their awesomeness is to be constrained similarly.

close replies  

lalalei2001
Medium: Videogame
07:34:01 AM 26th Jun 2015
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=VideoGame.TheLegendOfZeldaLinksAwakening

This person argues that Link is a villain in Link's Awakening.
see/hide 5 replies  
tryrar
11:59:31 PM 25th Jun 2015
Ummm, huh? How does THAT compute?
sgamer82
04:55:09 AM 26th Jun 2015
Well, he does play a very direct role on Koholint's destruction. Then again, it's also a dream world the dreamer itself wants to awaken from.
SatoshiBakura
05:01:30 AM 26th Jun 2015
Link had a dream of destroying a place. That means Link is evil!

Donald Duck had a dream of working for Hitler. That means Donald is evil!
Larkmarn
07:03:07 AM 26th Jun 2015
Hilarious, but not an issue unless they try to add it in.

Because it's ridiculously shoehorned. And this is someone who genuinely believes Marche in Final Fantasy Tactics Advance is a Villain Protagonist.
MorningStar1337
07:34:01 AM 26th Jun 2015
^^ In fairness, Yen Sid did single him out for his example on the Heartles in Kingdom Hearts II

Jokes and Godwin's Law aside Link as a villain is a pretty crazy assumption. Especially since even if he didn't wake up the Sugar Apocalypse would be inevitable

close replies  

Kurtis
Medium:
03:07:56 AM 26th Jun 2015
I recently made an edit to the main Majora's Mask TV tropes page, in which I expanded on the "darker and edgier" bullet point. It was later completely altered by another contributor, who described my expanded version as "word cruft" and "bragging". You can see the two revisions here: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=VideoGame.TheLegendOfZeldaMajorasMask

I'm somewhat minded to re-add my original changes, but I wouldn't feel comfortable doing so without the support of other Tropers. I doubt anyone will take my side in this disagreement, but I don't see how the current revision is any better written than mine.
see/hide 10 replies  
MorningStar1337
07:02:17 PM 25th Jun 2015
In fairness to My Final Edits there is another Darker and Edgier Zelda game (Twilight Princess) and I think there is a broken base on which is darker (read: better). Regardless I feel this belongs on the discussion page.
phoenix
07:06:12 PM 25th Jun 2015
You shouldn't re-add them, since that would be the start of an Edit War. The first half of the example as previously written was sort of word crufty because it doesn't really tell the reader why it's an example.
Candi
07:09:56 PM 25th Jun 2015
Take it to the discussion page for the work and talk it out there. Don't just add it back; that'd would be the third step of the start of an edit war.
Kurtis
07:16:35 PM 25th Jun 2015
I've just checked the discussion page - it appears to have been completely dormant for over a year. I have no confidence that any post of mine on that page will receive any attention.
MorningStar1337
07:18:04 PM 25th Jun 2015
You could PM MFE, but I have a feeling that would be seen as a declaration of war
Kurtis
07:25:39 PM 25th Jun 2015
MFE actually already did PM me earlier, explaining that I should try to avoid word cruft.
JoieDeCombat
07:48:45 PM 25th Jun 2015
Looking over the two versions of the entry, I feel that the example as previously written is a bit crufty and overly emphatic. Phrases like "It's hard to believe that Nintendo ... would release such a thematically mature adventure" and "takes it up to eleven" are less about what makes it an example and more about pushing an impression of how much of an example the game is, which really isn't necessary. And the main detail provided which does explain what makes the game an example is about what happens if you lose the game, in which case tragedy is only to be expected.

The rewritten example does a better job of cutting out the verbal Bold Inflation and giving information about what makes the game dark in comparison to other games in the series.
MyFinalEdits
07:49:29 PM 25th Jun 2015
Morning Star: There's no such thing "declared" when the matter is discussed off-page (either on a talk page or privately). I'll drop a post in the MM talk page to explain in detail the issue in question.
jamespolk
08:02:22 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by jamespolk
I think this is a pretty good example of how TV Tropes is sometimes kind of terrible at conflict resolution.

  1. Someone makes an edit.
  2. Someone else changes that edit. Because the first person can't change the edit back, lest they be accused of an edit war, the second person's edit sticks. Not because it's any better, but because they were second.
  3. The first person could take it to the discussion page. It is of course well known that discussion pages are ghost towns.
  4. So the first person has to come here, where 3-4 people or so out of the thousands that edit TV Tropes add their opinion, which is hardly definitive.

....that said, Kurtis's entry is a lot of Word Cruft.
Kurtis
03:07:56 AM 26th Jun 2015
I've written out a very lengthy reply to this thread, but my internet disconnected as it was being posted and I lost everything I had worked at. The important part is that I've been working on a new revision that incorporates aspects of both revisions (sans the "word cruft" and grammatical errors).

close replies  

calmestofdoves
Medium:
12:09:26 AM 26th Jun 2015
edited by calmestofdoves
Is there any sort of penalty for launching a YKTTW without adequate hats? It's Vapor Queen, which has been discussed here before for having an incredibly dense description and no examples. The description is now slightly less dense and there are a handful of examples, but the only wicks are indexes and overall I can't really say that its brief stint in YKTTW polished it much. Admittedly I personally promised the sponsor that I would give their YKTTW a more conclusive concrit session than I did, but it was published before I could get around to it!

I'd just go ahead and message the sponsor myself, but it would be the second time I've done it — the first time was to tell them to make a YKTTW instead of just launching a page — and I would kind of like some official guidance on this before telling them again that the page should be taken down and banished back to YKTTW, especially as they, y'know, tried to give YKTTW a shot and apparently just didn't really enjoy the introduction of a review board into what is ostensibly a freely-editable wiki.

Please advise.
see/hide 9 replies  
SolipSchism
11:05:22 AM 23rd Jun 2015
edited by SolipSchism
There's no built-in hard-and-fast rule, but the real question should be is the page ready.

I just took a peek at it and I don't think it's ready, mostly due to lack of examples.

It's also been launched for 9 days and, as you said, has not been crosswicked at all (7 wicks right now, five of them indices, one of them a self-reference, and one of them Condensing Vapor Queen, a Sub-Trope(?) with no examples, no indices, and only one wick—from Vapor Queen).

So we actually have a twofer here: gwennie-chan launched two tropes that weren't ready, and has failed to follow-up and finish the launching process.

I would PM them but I would also do your best to be polite and respectful. Not that it wouldn't be totally understandable to get frustrated, but at this point I'm kind of expecting them to continue being a pain, so as long as you're super polite and respectful, they'll have no one to blame but themselves if they do cross the line. Don't give them an excuse to get snippy.

EDIT: I dropped them into the YKTTW Crash Thread. Vapor Queen is at least questionable, but Condensing Vapor Queen has no business existing in its current state.
Elmo3000
12:01:28 PM 23rd Jun 2015
edited by Elmo3000
Vapor Queen looks like a practically identical trope to Broken Bird. Are there enough differences to justify two separate tropes?

Not to mention Condensing Vapor Queen is even more identical to Defrosting Ice Queen.
calmestofdoves
12:43:08 PM 23rd Jun 2015
Admittedly a Broken Bird is supposed to have fairly fortress-like coping mechanisms while the Vapor Queen is supposed to be over-sensitive, which is an interesting difference, but I just couldn't see it a recurring character archetype. Apparently it's common in anime?

Agree on Condensing vs. Defrosting — they're both so obviously about a withdrawn character getting more human that even if you could easily distinguish a Vapor Queen from an Ice Queen you still probably wouldn't need Condensing in addition to Defrosting.
SolipSchism
12:45:10 PM 23rd Jun 2015
More importantly, the write-up wasn't ready, and even if it was, it wasn't launched properly.
calmestofdoves
02:24:40 PM 23rd Jun 2015
edited by calmestofdoves
So — should I submit these to the Cut List myself? Or just assume some fastidious launch-reviewer will? I think she might've even cut them herself at my urging last time, IIRC...

ETA: Just saw Condensing Vapor Queen pop up in YKTTW again, so, yay?
wrm5
02:27:55 PM 23rd Jun 2015
I've known a lot of people like that in real life, but... I really can not think of any examples of it in MEDIA.
SolipSchism
02:31:00 PM 23rd Jun 2015
We're talking them over in the YKTTW Crash Rescue Thread. I don't really expect much, though. I wouldn't have a problem with it, but you should pop over there so no one throws a fit about cutting pages unilaterally.
gwennie-chan
11:37:35 PM 25th Jun 2015
Vapor Queen sponsor here. You're free to unlaunch it if you want. I'm just aggravated by all this. The little help I had disappeared and I did my best to progress before anything else.
SeptimusHeap
12:09:26 AM 26th Jun 2015
We'll see what the current YKTTW conversation will bring, I think.

close replies  

Rhapsody
Medium: Music
12:05:59 AM 26th Jun 2015
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.Hyuna was the last edit reason re: Crowning Moment of Awesome and the song "Oppa Is Just My Style" good or no?

Basically whoever started the YMMV page for Hyuna listed the success of that song as an Awesome Moment, then another troper added a sub-bullet underneath which started off with "your mileage MAY vary" and mentioned how it got a lot of negative reviews. For the sake of cleaning up the page I edited that sub-bullet out and said in my edit reason there's no point in saying that in the YMMV section since everything there is already subjective. Then the troper edited the example out altogether with their edit reason saying it's not successful because "popular opinion was VERY negative, especially from international fans".

Firstly I don't know if the example was legit in the first place (is talking about the success of a song allowed to be counted as an Awesome Moment?) since it lacked context anyways (which I did fix in my edit). I only edited it for cleaning up at the time, so fine with me if the example isn't allowed and axed. If it still counts, then there was no point in that troper making that edit + edit reason, was there? Since bad reception is a subjective/audience reaction thing and doesn't affect how "successful/popular" it actually was (which is also subjective). But do correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't know if me editing that example again counts as starting an edit war which is why I'm laying off for the moment. But yeah, good/bad edit reason, good/bad example?
see/hide 3 replies  
Candi
07:15:48 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by Candi
"The thing about Your Mileage May Vary; the mileage varies."

Replying subbullets violate repair, don't respond, so you were right to remove it.

Removing a YMMV item because you don't think it's the trope is strictly verboten. "Popular opinion" doesn't really mean anything unless it was overwhelming popular opinion, since a work can be crazy popular in one town and get a 'meh' reaction at the next.

For the record, Awesome Moments go over on Sugar Wiki now, so it should at least be transferred there.
NemuruMaeNi
11:14:34 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
That Love It or Hate It is In-Universe Examples Only, so it should be purged. There are things like Broken Base for the intended sort of things anyway.

The fact that a singer's song was successful is not a viable Awesome Moment. Those Moments are Sugar Wiki material for pointing out impressive parts of a work of fiction. Audience, critics' (re)actions are not parts of a work.
SeptimusHeap
12:05:59 AM 26th Jun 2015
Removed that LIOHI entry.

close replies  

Eldrake
Medium:
08:38:52 PM 25th Jun 2015
There is this Troper, Nick98, who I need to get in contact with for reasons I don't believe to be relevant right now. However, it turns out that Nick98 refuses to read his P Ms (which he admitted before in a thread because he's afraid that they're mean, even though I just want to help him) and attempts to get his attention in other ways has not worked out. Are there perhaps any alternate ways I could get his attention when P Ms are not an opportunity?
see/hide 13 replies  
SolipSchism
12:52:02 PM 25th Jun 2015
Not that I'm aware of, but refusing to read PMs is problematic in and of itself because it means they won't see any notifiers if they're making mistakes in editing, or just flat-out if someone needs to reach them. I'm not sure it's tap-worthy, if they're not actually making mistakes that they aren't seeing notifiers about, but a mod might be able to say with more certainty.
Fighteer
01:46:49 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by Fighteer
We would need more concrete information about whatever problems are occurring. Not reading PMs is not bannable in and of itself, but if a user is ignoring warnings about problems with their wiki activity elsewhere, it's a serious matter.
gallium
01:59:25 PM 25th Jun 2015
If it isn't a message from a moderator, people have the right to not be bothered, or to not read their mail.
wrm5
02:10:37 PM 25th Jun 2015
It's dumb, I think, to avoid all interaction because you're terrified it might be negative... but yeah, technically he has the right to do so.

You said this person does visit the forums, you could try contacting them there. Aside from that the only surefire way to grab their attention is to suspend them and force them to go to the Edit Banned/Suspended thread on the forums.
gallium
02:51:45 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by gallium
They don't technically have the right, they have the right, period. Not everybody is a social animal or puts their whole life on the internet and there are probably more than a few tropers who edit the wiki and whatnot without really engaging in the forums or the more social aspects of TV Tropes.

Conversely, moderators or admin do not have the right to help a third party troper find another troper who does not want to be found.
SolipSchism
02:59:19 PM 25th Jun 2015
^ That's a little dramatic. Nobody has the "right" to edit this wiki while refusing to be receptive to corrections. By the act of editing, they're also accepting a choice between being a perfect editor who never makes mistakes, being a flawed human being who makes mistakes and accepts criticism, or being a flawed human being who makes mistakes and gets banned because they ignore criticism.

I have no idea if that's remotely the case here, but saying the PM system is an optional thing for editors is not correct.
gallium
03:11:36 PM 25th Jun 2015
^We'll have to agree to disagree, then. I don't think any troper has any obligation to answer a PM by someone who isn't a mod/admin. I (or anyone else) am free to blow you (or anyone else who isn't a mod) off. Then you contact a mod as required, and they proceed as necessary.
SolipSchism
03:32:23 PM 25th Jun 2015
^ I guess that's fair (and I say that in full Sincerity Mode), but a troper who behaves that way can't expect to be shown any leniency if they do end up ignoring important messages. Nor make many friends.

I mean, not everyone is here to make friends, so, eh.
wrm5
03:43:47 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by wrm5
^^ It's not about being a "social animal." No one is saying that he has to spend all day socializing and working as part of a team, and all night partying with the "it" crowd. I mean, I don't do that. I wouldn't expect anyone else to.

What we're saying is that you can't live in a society, partaking of the pleasures that society has to offer, and yet refuse to be a part of that society.

You just can't.

If you choose to live as a part of society, then you are a part of society. You have an obligation to contribute, to be helpful, to be receptive to criticism, to own your mistakes, and so on.
Candi
04:51:48 PM 25th Jun 2015
You need to at least review P Ms, even if you don't reply.

I ignored P Ms early on for the simple reason I kept getting natterfied (the only message available) on edits where I had done simple fixes, like letter switching (recieve/receive, braek/brake, the kind of mistake that's easy to make and miss). I had no idea why I kept getting messaged, and then why was I getting messaged for not cleaning up someone else's mess when I had no knowledge of the work in the first place. Didn't know about ATT then.

It was several months before I realized that not all of those P Ms were natterfies, and some of them were rather important.
calmestofdoves
08:02:53 PM 25th Jun 2015
Still learning troper slang —what's "natterfied," precious?
Candi
08:16:54 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by Candi
Natterfy was the original auto-editing-critique PM. Now we have whole bunches for a variety of situations.

If someone "natters" -adds extraneous material to an entry, or replied to an entry without adding anything to the relevant information, that is Natter, and a huge-don't-do-that. (Replying to an entry isn't to be done, anyway.)

Sending someone a auto-PM telling them they were doing that was called "Natterfying" them.

I just objected to being told I was nattering when the mess was there when I arrived. At first I didn't know I could fix it if possible, later I wasn't always able to fix it because lack of familiarity with works.

Once I knew of ATT I would ask for help on the most obvious issues, natter and other.
SolipSchism
08:38:52 PM 25th Jun 2015
^Tiny addition: It's a pun on "notify". In other words, notifying someone that they have nattered.

close replies  

MorningStar1337
Medium: Live Action TV
08:26:52 PM 25th Jun 2015
Okay what should we keep for YMMV.The Addams Family > Series > Fanon Discontinuity. The first example or the sub-bullet below? I;m asking because I'm not certain of that sub-bullet is Natter or not and because both seems a little complainy IMO
see/hide 4 replies  
Karxrida
04:06:54 PM 25th Jun 2015
The comments are conflicting in such way that it's better to just axe it, imo.
MorningStar1337
05:31:29 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by MorningStar1337
I do not know what grounds are there to remove YMMV items apart from mentioning GG or or being nonfactual (In fact I'm pretty sure entries on YMMV pages shouldn't be removed without falling into either criteria), the conflicting examples seem to be the latter, which is why I'm asking to see which example in that entry should we keep and which one should we axe
Karxrida
06:53:53 PM 25th Jun 2015
YMMV can also be removed for misuse, even if the opinion does exist. I've deleted Broken Base entries that didn't present multiple opinions and were basically negative opinion shoehorns.

Conflicting statements on popularity need something to go because only one can be right, and those statements conflict. Both should be deleted because the first one is conflicted by the second one, and the second one is a Zero Content Example on top of being Flame Bait as it's written.
bwburke94
08:26:52 PM 25th Jun 2015
Fanon Discontinuity, when on a work's YMMV page, applies only if a significant portion of the fandom does not count part of the work as being in continuity. For example, The Matrix Reloaded is often considered Fanon Discontinuity by fans of The Matrix. Judging from the wording of the Addams Family example, the reunion episode does qualify as Fanon Discontinuity.

There is no requirement for the majority to consider it discontinuity, only for a significant portion to do so. There is no set definition of "significant", so there's a little wiggle room here.

close replies  

calmestofdoves
Medium:
08:05:35 PM 25th Jun 2015
edited by calmestofdoves
A few weeks ago I launched a trope called Rear Window Homage. Prior to this page's existence, people would announce a Rear Window Homage by adding Rear Window Witness or Rear Window Investigation to a works page, OR they'd add a link to the actual movie under Shout-Out or Whole Plot Reference.

It wasn't a great system — Rear Window Witness and Rear Window Investigation aren't supposed to be doing double duty for the (now-extant) Rear Window Homage because they're tropes that show up in works that have nothing to do with Rear Window. (The heroine's Rear Window Investigation in Northanger Abbey, for example, predates Rear Window by nearly 200 years.)

But people have been without a Rear Window Homage trope page for so long that a rather large number of examples on the related "sub"tropes are just Rear Window Homage examples that, by virtue of being homages to Rear Window, just so happen to contain examples of Rear Window Witness and/or Rear Window Investigation.

On Works pages I've mostly just been "upgrading" to Rear Window Homage where appropriate, letting the -Homage link supplant the -Witness or -Investigation link. I'm a little worried about on the subtrope pages, though. When should I leave Rear Window Investigations that are part of Rear Window Homages on the Rear Window Investigation page, and when should I take them off Rear Window Investigation entirely to move them to Rear Window Homage, if ever? When should I include both on a works page?

Thoughts?
see/hide 11 replies  
NemuruMaeNi
11:39:15 PM 23rd Jun 2015
Hello, Fan Myopia mess.

Unless Rear Window Homage is a Sub-Trope of Rear Window Investigation and Rear Window Witness, the "upgrades" you mention are an incorrect course of action. Is it a sub-trope? That is the question.
calmestofdoves
12:14:17 AM 24th Jun 2015
What? No. It's more like a supertrope, but not directly - a Rear Window Homage generally features a Rear Window Witness and a Rear Window Investigation, for reasons that should be obvious, but not all the examples of plot elements named after Rear Window are taken from RearWindowHomages. It's like squares and rectangles, kinda?

Basically, if the previous work page editor included the trope named for a single Rear Window plot element but then went on to describe how the rest of the plot mirrored Rear Window too, I swap the single plot element trope for the homage trope.

The more pressing question is how to edit the "single plot element named after Rear Window" pages to best reflect the existence of a the new homage page - remove the homages, keeping only the single plot elements unrelated to any sort of homage? Or edit homage descriptions on single-plot-element pages so that the homage part goes to the homage page while the stripped-down mention of the single-plot-element stays behind?

I guess it IS kinda important to understand these tropes before giving specific advice, but i think they're fairly understandable even for those who read the works page instead of seeing the movie.
SetsunasaNiWa
03:41:09 PM 24th Jun 2015
edited by SetsunasaNiWa
<Nemuru Mae Ni's sockpuppet>

To straighten things out, rephrasing the question. Which "Rear Window 'somesuch'" tropes do not necessarily happen in instances of Rear Window Homage? For example, can that Homage be present without a Rear Window Witness?
SolipSchism
03:50:39 PM 24th Jun 2015
A Rear Window Homage is a stock reference to a classic movie. And more importantly, it's a Super Trope like any other, so hypothetically, you *could* have a RWH without any specific Sub-Trope being present. The reverse isn't true, though.
SetsunasaNiWa
04:04:03 PM 24th Jun 2015
edited by SetsunasaNiWa
^ It reads "Whole Plot Reference" on RWH page, so it doesn't look like such explanation works.
calmestofdoves
05:25:27 PM 24th Jun 2015
edited by calmestofdoves
It's possible to pull off the homage without one or the other but typically not both. For example, the homage in Person of Interest doesn't have a Rear Window Witness because those characters always get all their initial information from the near-omniscient Machine, while the homage in Mathnet's "The View From The Rear Terrace" doesn't have a Rear Window Investigation because rather than breaking in while the suspect is away, George simply invents a reason for the supsect to let him in and only needs to "investigate" items that the suspect is willing to freely discuss with him.

Actually, now that I think about it, Rear Window Witness mandates that the witness see something they think is a crime, but in the original Rear Window, Jimmy Stewart doesn't actually witness a crime! He just witnesses all of his neighbor's shady behavior after a crime and makes the inference on his own.

So, if you combine the not-actually-witnessing-a-crime part with the only-investigating-while-they-are-looking-right-at-me part it wouldn't be too hard to make a Whole Plot Reference to Rear Window even without its eponymous subtropes. I just haven't seen any examples of that yet.

Also, SolipSchism, you've got it wrong as well. I made a point to say that many examples from tropes that happen to be named after Rear Window are not themselves automatically shout-outs to Rear Window! (Remember the Northanger Abbey RWI that predates Rear Window by 200 years?)

That's why I don't really think Rear Window Homage is a parent trope to the other two. It can and often does encompass them both, and that's about all that can be said.
NemuruMaeNi
11:27:14 PM 24th Jun 2015
edited by NemuruMaeNi
^ Well, at least you've confirmed having misinterpreted what my reply said. Sub-tropes aren't always things smaller than super-tropes. Depending on tropes specifics, the RWH trope could have been better off as a sub-trope to Rear Window Witness (nowhere did it mean the other way around).

Well, that should settle it. If all they do is overlap from time to time, you just list separate tropes by their separate criteria. Not indented, not upgrading, not taking precedence. When there's a witness and a homage, two separate tropes with their separate contexts are required. If those non-homage Rear Window somesuch tropes aren't supertropes to RWH, and aren't shoehorns, then there is no double-duty you mention in the query opening post.
SolipSchism
09:31:13 AM 25th Jun 2015
edited by SolipSchism
Er, yeah, I was wrong. It seems like RWH is less of a Super Trope and more of an aggregate trope that requires some components to make it, but not necessarily both a RWI and a RWW. It kind of sounds like RWH is specifically a reference to Rear Window, but a RWW and a RWI are just tropes with a bad case of Trope-Namer Syndrome.

I will say, though, that on the subject of sub/super-tropes, I've contested and had it confirmed multiple times by moderation that a Sub-Trope is wholly encompassed by its Super Trope, and if that's not the case, then it's not truly a Sub-Trope.

^ Your second paragraph pretty much sums up my thinking now. If there is no explicit sub/super relationship, and it doesn't seem like there is, then there's no real problem listing both a RWH and a RWW or RWI.
calmestofdoves
12:34:30 PM 25th Jun 2015
I don't mind having both RWH and RWI on works pages, as RWH can cover setup while RWI covers a specific climactic scene, but RWW covers setup too because the witnessing of the crime starts the plot, so the descriptions for RWH and RWW are generally really really annoyingly redundant if they both show up on a works page. Typically they both go something like "X character has injured their leg and is passing time looking out the window at their neighbors when they see Y suspicious thing and begin trying to investigate" — and they're right next to each other alphabetically. Hence my "upgrading" approach.
SolipSchism
12:41:21 PM 25th Jun 2015
Well, I mean, sometimes tropes are so similar that that's going to happen. The inverse (one trope on multiple works) often happens in a similar way—like lists of Pokemon are always full of very similar descriptions of their elements, i.e., An Ice Person or Playing with Fire and so on. There are only so many ways you can say "This Pokemon is a Fire-type and has a moveset that includes throwing fire at people".

Similarly, sometimes tropes are just so similar that the context explaining them overlaps significantly.

It's annoying as a troper, but I don't think the majority of casual readers will really see an issue with it, as long as the examples do at least highlight the key parts of the trope, to make it as clear as can be (which may not be all that clear, unfortunately) that this isn't just a duplicate trope with a different name.
calmestofdoves
08:05:35 PM 25th Jun 2015
Okay, in the future I'll rewrite context to hew more closely to the appropriate tropes but leave them all in.

close replies