• 3 May 21st, 2018 at 12:12PM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2018 01:17:42 PM
    I'm attempting to start a TV Tropes page on the anime/manga series 'magical taluluto', but unfortunately whatever episodes I've found haven't been subbed in English. I was wondering if there was anyone here who's knowledgeable enough in Japanese to help? Reply
  • 4 May 22nd, 2018 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2018 01:11:24 PM
    Who do I warn that some of the ads on this site are being caught as viruses by Mc Afee Live Safe? I've had to turn on my adblocker again because of it. This is ONE OF THE FEW sites worth turning it off fo, but not if you guys are going to be spreading malware with it (unintentional, I'd wager, but still). Reply


      We've got a forum thread on the subject.

      The ads in general have a lot of issues, there is a thread somewhere for this. I presume they only spread malware when clicked, though, and since nobody does then it’s not too bad

      I keep getting a massive pop up ad for holidays in Barbados, but there is no report this advert button attached to it and I don't know how to get info on it.

      ^ I've had that one, too.

      For when they read this, I'd also like appeal to moderators to bring it up with admin if there's a more secure and less intrusive way of financing?
  • 14 May 19th, 2018 at 5:05PM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2018 01:02:31 PM
    Shouldn't Sarashi be only about, well, sarashi? Its current format is used for bandages in general. Reply


      Some parts of this wiki are overly Japan-specific. If the premise of the trope can function with bandages as well as special Japanese bandages, it should not be limited, and after reading the page it's fine.

      It should also be re-named to something that isn't Japan-specific.

      Sarashi are pretty different, physically and historically, from other bandages from what I've heard.

      Gonna have to disagree with the consensus on this one. This is Japan-specific because it's a Japanese-specific trope, and should be kept as such. The only way "basic bandages" should count is if they're intentionally done in a manner to evoke the trope (for example, at the climax of the film Yakuza, the hero is injured and treated. He gets bandages across his body. It doesn't fall into this trope until his shirt dramatically comes off and said bandages are clearly done to evoke this trope as he is a Japanese hoodlum).

      Losing the Japanese-specific connotations turns this into people have bandages. We have Suppressed Mammaries and Bandage Babe for other uses, but "Japanese symbol of toughness and frequently tied to either Samurai or Japanese Delinquents" seems pretty fine to me.

      ^Then all non-Japanese examples should be stripped and links from non-Japanese works should be deleted. And probably a note should be put on the trope description that it's a Japan-specific work.

      That's a favorite drum for Japanophiles to beat, but tropes are universal — or rather, good tropes are written to be as universal as possible. Don't get caught in the "It's different in Japan" trap.

      ^^ The work needn't be Japanese, but the trope would be.

      For example, I'd imagine that Mythbusters example has to go. By, say, RWBY, which isn't Japanese nor is it set in Japan, is aware of the Japanese connotations.

      In this case, the trope being Japanese cultural thing is enough of a thing that it's a plot point in a Chinese film. The Chinese Connection hinges on it, and if it's Japanese-specific enough that Bruce Lee is willing to kill a guy for having a sarashi, then it's good enough for me.

      ^If the trope is used in non-Japanese media, it shouldn't have a Japanese name.

      That's pretty absurd on a lot of levels.

      I'm also against the argument that we need special Japanese tropes (in general this is a sign of fan myopia more than cultural differences), but here is seems the trope deals with a phenomenon in Japanese culture. That is, the trope may not (and perhaps should not) be exclusive to Japanese media, but it may only apply to works in a Japanese setting or referring to Japanese culture - for the reason that bandaging of this kind has different connotations in other cultures, nothing else.

      As for the name: is there a better English name? Or should "Sarashi" perhaps be considered a loan word in English (like "katana") so the trope name actually is English?

      I think because of the cultural origins, keeping the name is OK, but if the examples are representative of the trope despite not explicitly using sarashi, then bandages can count.

      That's pretty absurd on a lot of levels.

      Not at all. Giving tropes with general applicability names from Japanese anime fanspeak serves only to confuse people who are not anime fans and are not familiar with anime fanspeak. Most of the users of this wiki probably would not know what "Sarashi" means if they read it, and of course about 99.9999% of the general public wouldn't.

      If it were a trope dealing only with anime and Japanese culture, that would be a different matter.

      Just from looking at the page it seems like a confused definition and a confused list of examples. It's conflating the use of body binding to protect the body from injury and the use of body binding to make breasts appear smaller. The definition also calls it "a traditional symbol of masculinity" but also talks at length about how it's used by women to flatten their breasts.

      A rename to something like Body Binding would be appropriate.

      Definitely with you on the examples, they're a mess and especially with overlap on Suppressed Mammaries and Hidden Buxom they're really problematic.

      The issue is that sarashi is a word that A: Doesn't really have an exact English counterpart ("binding" is not only incredibly vague but really confusing) and B: We've got plenty of trope titles with loanwords in them and C: It's not a Japanese-media exclusive trope, but it's exclusive to media with ties to Japan and Japanese cultural significance.

      That said, I would be amenable to a rename to something like Rugged Sarashi "wears a sarashi" isn't a trope, and it would curb misuse of it.
  • 2 May 22nd, 2018 at 7:07AM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2018 12:07:56 PM
    Saveelich and patriciovalencia117 are swapping one entry on YMMV.Solo back and forth between Audience-Alienating Premise and Internet Backdraft without so much as communicating with each other or bringing it to discussion. Saveelich in particular fails to comprehend what constitutes an Edit War and even has the gall to tell me off about it. Reply

      Because it's Star Wars related, I say lock it.

      Both will be called in. Please bring the entry to discussion.
  • 1 May 21st, 2018 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2018 10:22:21 AM
    Not sure if it's against the rules, but it's certainly annoying: MLPAndFriendsComic301991 invariably makes dozens of null edits every time they edit, burying the history. I know some people in the past have done this to hide bad edits, but frankly I'm not up to digging out their actual edits. Reply

      Bump. Edits don't look bad, but the null edits are both weird and annoying.
  • 11 May 20th, 2018 at 7:07PM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2018 05:59:10 AM
    Can a trailer for something have a Big-Lipped Alligator Moment? On the BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle YMMV page Mummy Ga Ga added this entry:

    "The Persona 4: Arena trailer has a line about Ragna wearing the Yasogami High School uniform. It's never brought up again, and thanks to that as well as how strange the line was within the trailer, the line becomes this trope."

    I removed it since I didn't think this trope can ever quality for a trailer due to the fact that trailers are usually made up of various out of context lines/scenes and don't have an actual narrative capable of referencing previous events. The line will likely have its context when the game releases so it won't be so random when viewed properly. However, Mummy Ga Ga put the entry back, saying that since this one line was more out of context and bizarre than any others, it counts for this trope. As such I'm bringing this here to decide. Can one line in a trailer that is very strange by a BLAM or can the trope only apply to a full work? Reply

      I would agree that a trailer wouldn't count. Especially a quote.

      For the record, Mummy Ga Ga is now Edit Warring because they redid what you undid.


      They would get a suspension. It's still isn't an example.

      Remove it as its just a trailer which is a bunch of stuff spliced togther, so of course some of it will be random.

      Am I allowed to remove it now that it has reached an Edit War? Would that not count as Edit Warring of my own?

      Bumping to see if anyone can answer my question about changing it again constituting Edit Warring on my part.

      ^ If you're worried about setting off an Edit War, then you should wait for a mod to render a decision first. Better safe than sorry. You can post the contested item to the game's YMMV talk page to open discussion in the meanwhile while you wait for a mod decision.

      ^ So will a mod just answer this thread and give a decision or do I have to contact one myself?

      Mods usually have a tendency to answer posts at degen hours (at least in EST) so it'll probably be morning tomorrow or so by the time you have an answer.

      ^ Also sometimes mods need time to discuss certain matters among themselves to come to a consensus on an issue. It's just going to take time.
  • 5 May 21st, 2018 at 2:02PM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd May, 2018 05:34:29 AM
    Ive posted quite a few starters, but only one ever got any attention, and that petered out quickly. Im fairly detailed with premise, so how do I drum up interest? Reply

      There's no real good way. Whatever happens happens. If they're interested, they'll post. if not, that's just what it is.

      You keep at it and eventually you'll get something that everyone is interested in.

      Thank you. I’m trying to bring back one of my old ones because people have necro’d it.

      There's a looking-for-players thread in the signups.

      Offer punch and pie.
  • 5 May 21st, 2018 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 10:13:26 PM
    Is Jonesase a puppet of Malcolm Belmont S?

    Jonesase's first forum post

    MalcolmBelmontS' final forum post Reply

      Why do you ask? That seems like a pretty huge leap unless I'm missing something.

      Other than similar types of posts, um... I don't get what you're saying. I know he's ban evaded in the past. What's his last username, and when did he post it last? That'd be most important.


      The reason I'm suspicious is because Jonesase's way of posting reminded me of Malcom and their puppets, plus they were the only ones who were overly interested in the prediction blog.

      Could be possible. He takes a while to come back, while posting the same style. Guess it's up to an ip check now.

      Also, bump. But yeah, I think it could be a coincidence, but considering we had nothing more to go off of to catch the evader beforehand...
  • 3 May 21st, 2018 at 6:06PM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 08:53:21 PM
    New user Deep Deen may be a sock of Coolguy31 (I think it was dotheroar). He/she is making a lot of strange edits about animals Reply

      There's a lot of overlap in terms of editing history and the edits are badly written, but the edits I checked while skimming didn't contain any claims of toys and parrots being sentient in real life... so far, anyway.

      Edit: I see several instances of changing references to one kind of animal to refer to another kind, which at the very least is Single-Issue Wonk stuff.

      Yeah, that was his main thing.

      Lone IP is a proxy one, so if behavior matches, then it's indeed them.

      Thus, bouncing. I'll see if I can revert their edits.
  • 7 May 9th, 2018 at 3:03PM
    Live Action TV
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 08:38:09 PM
    In Kamen Rider Build, there is a character named Evolto. This is the only official spelling of his name. Even though the series is Japanese, his name was given as EVOLTO on screen multiple times in text written in Surprisingly Good English. Here is an Imgur gallery of screenshots in the series where the name "Evolto" appears in plain English. There are no subtitles in the screenshots; this is all on-screen content present in the original broadcast. The character's name had been erroneously listed on Series.Kamen Rider Build, Characters.Kamen Rider Build Protagonists, and Characters.Kamen Rider Build Faust as "Evolt". Keep in mind that the character's name is entirely made up; it's not a real word, it doesn't mean anything, and there is no official source whatsoever that indicates his name is "Evolt". The spelling "Evolt" exists entirely in the mind of a subset of the fandom. So I corrected his name to "Evolto" on the three pages where I noticed the spelling was wrong..

    The next day, user hellwolf99 reverts the changes on two of the pages, writes "Evolto is a mistranslation" in one of his edit messages (on Characters.Kamen Rider Build Protagonists), and he inserts an angry racist rant into Series.Kamen Rider Build claiming that Japanese people cannot be trusted to name their own characters because three years ago they once spelled a character as "Gord" instead of "Gold" and insisting that Evolt is just a "screwed up" romanization. I've checked other subpages of Kamen Rider Build, and he's also reverted other people's correction of the character's name as well.

    Rather than get into an edit war with someone who has an agenda and an ethnic bias, I'm just going to post here and let the mods deal with this user. Thank you. Reply

      The user has edit warred on these kinds of pages before. Though regardless if he did or not, the other obvious issue is the racial statements.

      I saw those, and I honestly didn't see any racism in what he said. Toei has been known to mess up English transliterations from time to time in various series - they're not native English speakers; we shouldn't expect them to get it right all the time.

      That said, Hellwolf is clearly in the wrong here. It's one thing if Toei was clearly aiming for a known English word and missed the mark in one location; but Evolt(o) is completely made up and they've been consistent in including the O in the few places the name has been written out in English.


      I think their way of thinking could be a problem sooner or later.

      Not a racist rant. The spelling of that name confuses me since I am also seeing "Evol"; I'll pass this one up.

      Yeah, that's... not racist.

      That said, Wikipedia is coming up at "Evol," so... there's that. It looks like the only English release of anything Build is the game Kamen Rider: Climax Fighters. Is the character in that?

      EDIT: Little bit of digging seems to have the character's name on the Kamen Rider wiki as Evolto, with his armored mode "Kamen Rider Evol." So yeah, Evolto seems the way to go until an official English release.

      Yes, the character's name is Evolto, and the armored form he transforms into by activating the Evol Driver is called "Kamen Rider Evol". Evolto is the person, Evol is the suit of armor. In theory, any character who can use the Evol Driver can become Kamen Rider Evol. It just so happens that Evolto is the only character who's used it so far (and most humans can't, since it effectively requires alien DNA to use—though a certain powerup might be able to bypass that).
  • 1 May 21st, 2018 at 5:05PM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 05:45:08 PM
    For the "possible candidates" hidden list on Overdosed Tropes, am I allowed to put in any trope with 2000-2500 wicks? Because that list is clearly incomplete.

    (And if you wanna know why I'm not asking this on the talk page, nobody reads talk pages). Reply

      ^ - Ah, was wondering why you null-edited.

      Yes, that's what I'd do, and I'm the primary editor for now? But hey, why not wait for other voices? Or not?
  • 1 May 21st, 2018 at 11:11AM
    Live Action TV
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 03:17:50 PM
    On Series.Krypton, Troper Ea4g has readded the same speculative HeelFaith Turn entry several times now, ignoring calls to bring it to discussion. Reply
  • 0 May 21st, 2018 at 1:01PM
    • Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy is for works that are so dark that there's no meaningful conflict anymore or the resolution of the conflict is meaningless (like a child molester vs a genocidal slave-trader) and large parts of the audience lose interest. However tropers just keep adding any work that is in the least way dark/depressing/cynical and ignore that the conflict might arise from some other source than just character A vs. character B and has meaning for huge parts of the audience. Also, many examples are just "works I personally think are too dark".

    I have had a question about Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy for a while. If it does have characters who are likable and we want to root for, but they're ineffectual, minor characters, seemingly doomed, or their efforts are made irrelevent, does it count? Or do such characters disqualify a work since it give reason to care? If the latter we definitely need a cleanup. Reply
  • 4 May 21st, 2018 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 12:02:31 PM
    Troper Rndmnbdy has been for the last couple of days derailing the discussion in both the Blazblue: Cross Tag Battle thread as well as the Blazblue General Thread. They seem to have a problem with the game presentation (Particularly the Fanservice aspects and certain female characters) and has been a personal Single-Issue Wonk with them, to the point that other tropers have been trying to tell them off but they keep continuing posting about their dislike for the Blazblue franchise and it comes off as if they were intentionally trolling Reply


      If you haven't been already, be sure to holler the problematic posts. That'll get the mods' attention in the forums more reliably than ATT, I think.

      I did, plenty of times actually. It's just that every single post was problematic so i had to report them here.

      I tossed them. Obvious troll is obvious.
  • 3 May 21st, 2018 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 11:01:08 AM
    Just confirming, because Color A Dog IRL is assuredly CoolGuy31 evading, and given the name (Color A Dog IRL = "Colorado Girl" and dotheroar has used and referenced Colorado in some of their evasions) I assume they're one in the same. Reply

      User's only actions thus far appear to be on TLP.

      Coolguy 31 was confirmed to be a ban evader, and I think it's assumed he was dotheroar, but the mod who posted confirmation didn't name names.

      If Color A Dog IRL became active just today or yesterday or so, it would definitely be suspicious.

      Looks like the account has been given the spring treatment anyway.
  • 6 May 19th, 2018 at 9:09PM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 10:51:56 AM
    We're not supposed to link to character pages as if they were work pages right? Becuase siberia82 has been potholing any references to the movie versions of Professor X and Magneto to, Characters.X Men Film Series Professor Charles Xavier and Characters.X Men Film Series Magneto respectively, as seen here for example. Reply

      Hmm... Potholes are themselves unnescessary, usually, and these ones are more informative than most...

      Looks like business as usual for comicbook fans. Notice how line 19 had a Pothole to the Comicbook.Magneto page before the change.


      That's also a problem with SCP Foundation, and when I asked about it here the answer was just to remove the pothole to the character page. For some reason, many tropers feel the need to link to Characters.SCP Foundation whenever they mention one of the SCPs on a trope page. Especially bad cases will link to the specific sub-page that includes the SCP in question.

      ^ - Interesting. If there were pages for specific skips, then the linking makes sense. As is, it doesn't.

      I think it should be put in Wick Namespace Migration, through the Locked Pages thread.

  • 2 May 21st, 2018 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 10:48:33 AM
    Is there anyway to make the same note/label note have the same text multiple times on one page? Normally clicking on any of the notes just opens the note for the first time it's on the page. The reason for this is that on the BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle page there is a list of playable characters and there are notes next to the names that denotes the DLC characters that are free for the first two weeks of release and the characters that free permanently. There are three of the former and two of the later so I want each note to open next to that name but as it is that doesn't work. I also thought about changing the styling of each type to denote it with a note at top like how the page say italicized characters are DLC but including that there are three different types but only italicized and bold that can be used. Is there any way around this? Reply

      They can't have the exact same content. If you want the notes to be the same, use a subtle alteration, like a period for one but not the other.

      You can also add spaces after your text but before the closing [[/note]] markup, then they will display exactly the same text when rendered into html.
  • 1 May 21st, 2018 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 10:46:38 AM
    So, the Infertility Angst page was cut because a ban evader created it. I understand why but it still seems kind of like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Could we reinstate it with one or more legitimate users making the page?

    Edit: Nevermind, I'll just go edit the Law of Inverse Fertility trope some. Reply

      A ban evader's edits, especially if they're a serial ban evader, are frquently removed on general principle.

      That said, on the off chance they have legitimate edits, another user is free to re-add them, so long as they aren't the ban evader themselves.
  • 2 May 21st, 2018 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 08:55:14 AM
    What do you call the trope where MMORP Gs have "event re-runs / redux" that basically allows new players to play old events that have been updated to meet the game's current quality. The said event has ran before, but on its second iteration, new features are added. Is it Updated Re-release? Reply
  • 1 May 21st, 2018 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 08:19:30 AM
    When removing entries, it's good practice to explain why the removed tropes don't fit. But what if a page has many issues and one wishes to remove multiple shoehorns or ZCEs? Is it better to:
    • Do each edit separately, with a different edit reason. Having a bunch of separate small edits seems spammy to me.
    • Do everything at once, and leave a more general edit reason. Some tropers may find this lack of detail unsatisfactory.

      When I do big edits what I tend to do is make the edit, then use a null edit to add the edit reason above the huge edit to save people who come later some scrolling.

      For multi purpose edits, I've occasionally dedicated one set of edits to one purpose. One big edit for ZCE, one for Indentation, etc.

      When making rule based edits I try to quote the rule and/or link to the relevant Administrivia page

      The shoehorns are a little tricky, since each one may not apply for their own individual reasons. If you do them all together I might suggest the null edit move to add detailed info directly above the actual edit
  • 6 May 15th, 2018 at 8:08PM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 06:38:56 AM
    It's an issue I've came across a few times, involving different editors. I'm citing the latest case, but I would like an idea about mods think about that issue in general.

    When I launched Characters.Blend S, I link to all the voice actors regardless of whether that voice actor has their own article yet. Today Shine Sutella made an edit to that page and unlinked all the red links.

    I want an statement on:
    1. Whether guidelines currently prefers linking to creator pages that have not been created yet, and
    2. if the above is in the affirmative, whether reverting these unlinking edits is a "revert" in the definition of Administrivia.Edit War.

      What you were doing is fine according to the Red Link page:

      "Links to works that don't yet have pages will thus show up as red. However, they'll automatically shift to blue when the page is created, so don't be afraid to link to works this way — it makes it easier for when someone eventually writes it up."

      While it mentions works instead of creators, the idea is the same — the red links we don't want are for things that don't exist at all instead of simply not having TV Tropes pages.

      ^ Noted. But while maintaining links for pages that have not been created is fine, how about unlinking these links? As I mentioned, this happens occasionally.

      When I see it, I send a PM to the offending troper, reminding them of Red Link.

      It is not kosher to unlink red links to things that exist (creators, works, etc) just because they're red, but it's a common mistake.

      ^ Should that Red Link article be moved to Administrivia/ ?

      ^ I don't know if that would make it any more effective though I wish it was more prominent - I can't count the number of times I have come back to a page to find someone else has removed all the links to work pages or haven't added them in the first place despite how useful those are
  • 17 May 19th, 2018 at 10:10AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 04:55:00 AM
    The trope POW Camp has a whole section on concentration camps, and the trope description calls the concentration camp the "evil twin" of the POW camp. That seems wrong to me. Those are different things. Reply

      definitely different things

      ^Then the first thing to do would be to revise the description and take out all the examples of concentration camp. Concentration Camp YKTTW? I dunno, that seems vaguely icky.

      Actually, the trope calls a concentration camp the “evil twin” of the *internment camp*. Internment and POW camps arent two different things at all. All camps are used for prisoners of war/politics. POW is the term used for military prisoners, and internment for civilians. Concentration camps in Germany held both military and civilian prisoners.

      ^....no. Imprisoning civilians is different from imprisoning soldiers in war. For starters, it's **legal** to imprison soldiers in war. In fact, you're supposed to do it.

      ...yes. The trope doesn't care about legality or illegality of specific types of prisoners. It's about camps that hold prisoners during war-time. Asking folks to decide the legal definition of the types of prisoners in various media before applying said trope to a specific example is asking for trouble with ROCEJ. Seriously — at what point does a prisoner become "military" instead of terrorist or civilian, in terms of the trope? What side gets to do that defining?

      As stated, the concentration camps held military prisoners as well as civilians — Bergen-Belsen is the biggest example there; during the American Civil War, the Confederacy refused to acknowledge black Union soldiers as military; ISIS would calls its members military, but to the US they're terrorists (and that's all we'll say on that, other than to ask who gets to define Guantanamo Bay for the trope) and so on and so on. Trying to define what constitutes a "legal" POW camp and what category a camp's inmates fall under is beyond the scope of this wiki and that trope. This is a case where it's best to keep it simple.

      Seems like the trope wants to be a general lager trope but has ended up with a confusing description and concept, to me.

      The trope doesn't care about legality or illegality of specific types of prisoners.

      Indeed. Which is the problem. Which is why the entire "concentration camp" example list needs to be deleted.

      Asking folks to decide the legal definition of the types of prisoners

      Folks don't need to "decide" anything. These are known facts. POW camps for military personnel captured in wartime are legal and sanctioned. Death camps for Jews aren't.

      Seriously — at what point does a prisoner become "military" instead of terrorist or civilian

      When they joined the armed forces.

      What side gets to do that defining?

      See: Conventions, Geneva.

      Trying to define what constitutes a "legal" POW camp and what category a camp's inmates fall under is beyond the scope of this wiki and that trope.

      On the contrary it is extremely easy to do so, as I have shown. Do you wear a uniform? Are you a member of the armed forces? You are a POW. Are you only being detained because you're a Polish Jew and it's 1941? You are a prisoner in a concentration camp.

      Fundamentally, you are stating here that Auschwitz and a detention center for soldiers in the U.S. Army captured at the Bulge are the same thing. This is just flat wrong. Schindler's List and The Great Escape are not the same movie.

      Again, I love you jamespolk.

      Fundamentally, Life Is Beautiful and Schindler's List aren't the same movie, either. The concept behind POW Camp is "war-time prison". If you think it's important to split "military prisoners of hostile forces" and "civilian prisoners during war-time", then I suggest Trope Launch Pad.

      Also, Geneva Conventions do not dictate storytelling conventions.

      The concept of POW Camp is not "wartime prison"; that's the whole problem with this trope as written. POW Camp by definition is an internment camp for soldiers. I referred to the Geneva Conventions because the assertion was made that there's no way to tell the difference between a concentration camp and a POW camp and that's not the case.

      This really isn't ambiguous. This is just a gross conceptual error that's gotten written into the trope description because, as Septimus Heap notes above, somebody wanted to shoehorn the whole lager idea into the POW Camp trope.

      ^ Nor are concentration camps specifically a wartime phenomenon, for that matter. Nazi Germany, probably the example that comes to most people's minds when they hear the term, began rounding up dissidents and "untermenchen" years before the war actually started.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lager Lager?

      ^ It's a clipping of the compound Konzentrationslager. Taken alone in other context it just means camp.

      Okay, yeah. That's been part of the definition since TLP. POW Camp (the trope) is broader than Prisoner of War Camp (the English term).

      I repeat my suggestion; If you think it's important to split "military prisoners of hostile forces" and "civilian prisoners during war-time", then I suggest Trope Launch Pad.

      Is it okay to make a TLP just to fix a trope? Should it not go through TRS, first?

      Then again, this has basically turned into a TRS thread?

      I suggest reducing POW Camp to stories focused on actual POW camps (soldiers captured during war) and make a TLP perhaps for concentration camps, though with the latter I have concerns it may come to be misused as Holocaust Story.

      This discussion is too long for ATT. I suggest locking it and continuing it in a more appropriate place on the site.
  • 0 May 21st, 2018 at 4:04AM

    Edit; My bad igore this. I'll talk to him first.

  • 19 May 19th, 2018 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2018 04:36:05 AM
    If the Harry Potter franchise has been rebranded as "Wizarding World", do we need to move the page to the new title, or is a redirect enough? (Given that it's been known for nearly two decades as "Harry Potter", it may be a while before the new name sticks...)

    And if we need to move this page to reflect the new franchise title, what other pages would need to be moved? I would imagine Literature.Harry Potter and Film.Harry Potter can stay where they are, since they're the Harry Potter series within the Wizarding World franchise, but I don't recall what our actual policies are. Reply

      We do not need to move anything, no matter what cockamamie name Rowling and her people have come up with. And we definitely should not move either the Literature or Film articles for Harry Potter, since those will always be the titles for those works.

      To give an actual answer to why we're not using it: The common name of the franchise (the name it's primarily known by) is still Harry Potter.

      How to Create a Works Page explains this clearly; "we require usage of the official name of the work, not Fan Nicknames."

      Yes, this means if J. K. Rowling wants to rebrand the series as “Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!” and stuff actually gets published under that name, then yes, it is the new official name, no matter what individual fans think. There's the crux; has anything been published under the brand "Wizarding World"?


      Yeah Im pretty sure we are supposed official brand rather than preferred brand. If Rowling wants to change it , then we have to change it.

      There is no work called "Wizarding World".

      It refers to the multimedia franchise as a whole, not a specific book or film.

      Then there is no need to rename any of the exisitng pages, as the titles of the works have not changed. At most the Franchise page might need a rename (assuming that there is a Franchise page - I haven't checked).

      ^^ The rules were quoted to state that a work must be called by the official name. Well, the Franchise namespace by definition is not a work.

      We do have Franchise.Marvel Cinematic Universe. it seems The Wizarding World can be it's own franchise namespace while leaving Harry Potter one alone.

      Im not sure how that would work considering thats a major part of it. It seems Harry Potter would still fall under it.


      I love you James Polk.

      ^I'm doing the Lord's work.

      ^^The book and film pages really should not be in this discussion at all. They are all still called Harry Potter and the Noun Phrase, after all.

      As for the Franchise page, Harry Potter...all a Franchise page is, is a listing of various works sharing a common set of characters, at least, if not continuity. It's a glorified index.

      Wasn't one of the rides or something called the Wizarding World of Harry Potter?

      I read a reason for it is "It doesn't make sense to brand stuff like Fantastic Beasts as Harry Potter, as it happens decades before he's born, even before Voldemort's born."

      I think in this case we ought to move the Franchise page and leave everything else at its place.

      You know what, I'm going to throw out an objection.

      The Other Wiki describes Wizarding World as "a British-American fantasy media franchise... based on the Harry Potter novels by British author J. K. Rowling." This definition excludes the original seven books.

      Essentially, Wizarding World is the expanded universe of Harry Potter.

      Maybe, to be inclusive of the original books and the expanded media, it could be called Harry Potter and the Wizarding World?

      ^ I suppose a forum discussion about the "official names" rule may be in order, because the rule wasn't made for such a situation as this.

      I would agree with the idea of Wizarding World as the "expanded universe". So that might end up leading to two Franchise pages (just as Star Wars, Star Wars Legends, and the current Star Wars Expanded Universe are separate pages): Harry Potter for everything based directly on the seven books (plus Cursed Child) and Wizarding World for everything else. Though I could see some debate forming about what goes where, for instance with the Fantastic Beasts, Quidditch, and Beedle the Bard books.

      This discussion is already too long for ATT and will just get longer. I suggest that it be locked and the discussion be moved to another, more appropriate place.