• 1 May 23rd, 2017 at 5:05AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2017 07:53:46 AM
    I am currently engaged in a debate with ryanisbetter about whether or not Lorde qualifies as a Two-Hit Wonder for "Royals" and "Team". I initially argued that she didn't fit because "Green Light" reached #19 on the Billboard Hot 100. He replied that because it only reached that position due to digital downloads and fell off the chart quickly afterward, it doesn't count as a true hit, meaning that she still fits the trope. I later said that even if one ignores "Green Light", "Tennis Court" is well-known enough to disqualify her. He stated that because it didn't reach a high position on the Hot 100, she should still be listed as a Two-Hit Wonder (ignoring the fact that my argument was about cultural awareness of the song rather than its chart position). I'd greatly appreciate someone else stepping in & settling this debate one way or the other. Reply

      Better question for the pinned thread in Trope Talk, I think.
  • 2 May 23rd, 2017 at 4:04AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd May, 2017 04:34:05 AM
    I accidentally indexed the bands listed on Metal as part of my Sandbox when I was using it to experiment with changing the layout of the page. Obviously, it doesn't look good seeing the bottom index saying "Ultimate Lazer" on all the metal bands. This was because I forgot to remove the "index" tag when copy-and-pasting. I just now noticed, and tried to remove it to no avail. I put it on the Cut List hoping that if the Sandbox is deleted then it will be removed, but I'm not sure. This was a complete mistake and I feel awful for it. Is there any way this can be fixed? Reply


      Thank you! I'll be more careful about it from now on.
  • 1 May 10th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Lastest Reply: 10th May, 2017 10:20:25 AM
    No, this is not for new threads, it's for existing threads that've been locked; especially for the image pickin' ones. Is it possible to unlock an image pickin' thread when making new suggestions or replacing another image, or start a new thread?

    I'm asking with the context about Miley Cyrus and her new look. Reply
  • 15 Apr 28th, 2017 at 2:02PM
    Lastest Reply: 29th Apr, 2017 12:36:44 PM
    Why is the YMMV page for Rihanna is blocked from being created? She's a creator and the YMMV is created to discuss her work? Reply

      YMMV - Rihanna is not blocked at all, and I can edit it...

      I can't create a page for Rihanna (it doesn't save when I hit the Save button) and it stated that the page was cut because "No YMMV for real people".

      The page seems cut and locked to me as well. Not sure why it was cut. Maybe the only tropes on the page were about the person herself.

      That's just weird. Can someone contact the Mod for this?

      You should probably bring it up [[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=gsjp7dldjh2dwdelcha2hu17 here]].

      Edit: Not sure why the piped link markup isn't working.

      I clicked on L Bs link and then 'edit page', got the editing box. So, dunno what's glitching.

      The edit button on the top navigation bar shows the page as locked. The edit button below the title allows me to edit, but, according to OP, edits aren't saved.

      Never mind, Shatterstar is right actually, clicking the Save button doesn't work...

      Never heard of a "No YMMV for real people" rule; searching that phrase on this page only shows that Rihanna's and a few other real people's YMMV pages contain that phrase, but there's not an Administriva page about it.

      On the other hand, there are many real people who do have a YMMV page (e.g. Michael Jackson); if this is a rule, most Tropers probably aren't aware of it. Moderators, could you clear this up?

      That was cut years ago. Unlocked it.

      I'm sorry, what? YMMV for real people has always been forbidden. YMMV for creators is only allowed when there isn't already a place to list YMMV examples for their work. The reason we allow it for Music articles is that they are actually work articles, but the same rules apply: no troping the people.

      Uh... Shatterstar created it and added several items, including stuff about her personal life.

      I would edit them out but should we just burn the page to the ground again? I'm getting the impression it may be difficult to keep the personal stuff off.

      I've deleted the tropes about her relationships.

      Shatterstar, if you're still reading this thread, you need to spend some time in the Get Help With English Here thread in the Wiki Talk forum. The entries that were about her work rather than her personal life all had seriously poor grammar.

      ...Shatterstar put Fan-Preferred Couple back in. Pretty sure it's still verboten no matter how you rephrase it.

      Reverted. Using Fan-Preferred Couple for real-life people would indeed count as troping real people.
  • 2 Apr 27th, 2017 at 5:05AM
    Lastest Reply: 27th Apr, 2017 07:46:55 AM
    Is this song?


    Sampling this?


    If so, how is it sampling? Reply
  • 2 Apr 23rd, 2017 at 5:05AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd Apr, 2017 08:00:11 AM
    On the Dead Artists Are Better page, it lists the following quote from McCartney: "Since his death he has become Martin Luther Lennon." But I can't find this quote mentioned anywhere on the internet except on this page & mirrors of it. Was it just made up? Reply

      It seems fine to remove stuff like that if there's no source available.

      Better give credit to William Shakespeare ;).
  • 1 Apr 12th, 2017 at 11:11PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Apr, 2017 06:20:39 AM
    I know Ho Yay is very subjective and YMMV, but I also know TV Tropes does not trope real people. The writer of the Ho Yay entry for Journey is basing it on Fan speculation about the private lives of two real people, not about anything inherent in any of Journey's music. The links listed are only a Tumblr discussion among fan, not any proof. I don't want to potentially get an edit war going, but would I be correct in nuking the Ho Yay entry in question?

    Edit: by the same token, the main page Journey entry for Bigger Is Better in Bed. The trope doesn't have any warning against Real Life examples (and I'm not intending bowdlerization, mind), but is this wiki really a place to comment on a real person's photographed crotch size?

    Edit 2: never mind about the Bigger Is Better in Bed — I noticed the trope is on the No Real Life Examples index. I'm nuking that entry, but waiting for a third-party judgement on the Ho Yay. Thanks!

    edit 3: Okay, just ignore this post. I double-checked the whole NRLEP index and found Ho Yay on that, as well. My fault, mea culpa. Nuking the Journey entry in question.

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/Journey Reply

      You are absolutely correct to nuke the Ho Yay examples.
  • 2 Mar 21st, 2017 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 21st Mar, 2017 03:13:38 PM
    I just chopped a citationless Unfortunate Implications wick from Led Zeppelin. The problem is that the example the wick was on also cites Mighty Whitey. Is this an appropriate trope to use in this context? Reply

      No, Mighty Whitey is not appropriate. The whole second-level bullet point is natter, and a justifying edit as well as confusing the issue. It sounds like it's saying that Zep's versions of (unmentioned songs) didn't move into the "covered is better known that the original" territory because critics didn't like Zep.

      Actually, the first-level bullet point is unnecessarily judgemental and dismissive, as well.

      I thought so too. I just wasn't sure about it. Thanks for the input. EDIT: it's gone. Taking a second look, that whole page has a natter/gush problem. I'm on mobile right now, so fixing it isn't a good idea (I tend not to do large-scale edits from my phone, like many other users; autocorrect can be a problem.)
  • 1 Mar 4th, 2017 at 12:12AM
    Lastest Reply: 4th Mar, 2017 12:44:40 AM
    The title song from Hair, the musical, was used in a shampoo commercial in Australia. I'm not sure of the decade but probably the late 60's or early 70's when the musical was playing. I can't for the life of me remember what shampoo brand it was - it was a popular one at the time. Thanks in anticipation :D Reply
  • 2 Mar 1st, 2017 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 1st Mar, 2017 01:26:10 PM
    I was looking at Music.The Protomen Tropes and realized it fits a recap page pretty well, plus it isn't indexed anywhere. Permission to cut it and move it to Recap.The Protomen ? Reply

      Recap is a better page than The Protomen Tropes. I'll suggest that each album could probably get their own page.

      I'll put it on the recap page then ^^ Thanks!
  • 3 Feb 10th, 2017 at 5:05AM
    Lastest Reply: 10th Feb, 2017 10:10:50 AM
    Is it okay now to expand his description page without putting in any further details? In my opinion, his description looks to short. And I don't even know if his topic is still banned on Twitter because, that was 7 years ago. Reply

      "Expand without putting in any further details"? Why would we want that?

      We aren't here to discuss controversies surrounding RL people. Take that to other sites.

      Point taken. Keep it as a stub I guess. Not sure about Twitter banning him though. It's been seven years, and people went to other trends like Trump's antics and #Not Today
  • 1 Jan 23rd, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd Jan, 2017 11:43:09 AM
    Belzebong - Witch Rider https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYFHDDlzbb0&app=desktop

    Nadja - Now I Am Become Death, The Destroyer of Worlds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXzSVT0oG7U&app=desktop

    Kevin Sheerwood - Dead Ended www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmEU-Vyps Ho

    Naked City - Thrash Jazz Assassin www.youtube.com/watch?v=H Gkp IQZZN_w

    Bjork - 5 Years Www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhkczZqSZdg

    Brokencyde - Get Crunk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa6qpgLvH30 Reply

      I have no idea why you'd ask here. Trope Finder might be better, but your best bet could be the Music forum.
  • 4 Jan 2nd, 2017 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 3rd Jan, 2017 11:35:04 AM
    As Beatles fans are well aware, the earlier albums, everything before Sgt. Pepper I believe, were released in Cut and Paste Translations in America and other overseas markets, with different titles, cover illustrations, and track lists. All of those albums are now out of print and the original canonical British pressings are what one will find at the music store or wherever these days.

    I am noticing as I scroll through our work pages for the Beatles albums that said work pages include both the canonical British pressings and the off-brand American pressings, and several of the work pages have two illustrations, one being the standard British cover and one being the overseas cover. I would think the work pages should have only the British track lists as they are what the work pages are organized around, and I'm pretty sure that work pages are only supposed to have one illustration.

    Thoughts? Reply

      It may or may not be worth listing the differences between the British and American track lists, but there's no reason to include a second page image.

      I still don't know what the arrows with numbers mean on these comments.

      Anyway, I'm gonna strip the "alternate" page images off of the various Beatles album workpages, if we don't get any more feedback.

      You mean the arrow with a number next to the "X replies" button? It's the number of upvotes the post has received from readers.

      ^^Useful in Bug and Wishlist items to say, "Yes, I want this [fixed]."
  • 2 Dec 13th, 2016 at 4:04PM
    Lastest Reply: 15th Dec, 2016 05:52:08 PM
    I know "Referenced By" pages are Trivia and not Tropes but I want to start one for Elvis Presley that (I hope) will be contributed to by other tropers. That's why I was considering doing it in the "Trope Launch Pad" since more people will see it there. However, if doing this is off-limits, where would the best place be to begin a "Referenced By: Elvis Presley" page before attaching it to the main Presley page? Reply

      Eh, just create the page, add your examples, and let the rest happen naturally. If you have even one example, there's no point in going through Trope Launch Pad for this.

      Go ahead and use the Trope Launch pad. Even though the rules say it's ok to make and launch the page by yourself, very few pages are actually better for being entirely the work of one person. Getting more people involved will generally get you a larger, more complete example list, and may well result in a more polished introduction. Good for you for wanting to make a good page instead of a fast page.
  • 1 Nov 28th, 2016 at 6:06AM
    Lastest Reply: 28th Nov, 2016 12:38:52 PM
    There appears to be an edit-war going on between Swim To The Moon and Scifimaster 92 on Music, here. Reply
  • 6 Nov 20th, 2016 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 22nd Nov, 2016 02:57:22 PM
    I read somewhere that composers are supposed to be in the Creator namespace, not Music. How exactly does one distinguish a composer from a musician? Reply

      Where did you read that? At least composers who perform their own music seem to be in the Music namespace.

      I don't remember where I read it, but most composer pages like Ludwig van Beethoven are in the Creator namespace.

      OK, in that case the rule is probably that composers whose music is mostly performed by other people (typically, as in the case of Beethoven, because they're dead) go in the Creator namespace, while composers who are known as performers go under Music.

      I'm not entirely happy about the latter, since it creates exactly this kind of confusion about what the Creator namespace is for, but I understand the reasoning behind it: that for performing musicians their personality is part of the performance and can't be separated from the music.

      It's also confusing under some circumstances. Beethoven conducted his music while he was still alive. Is the only difference that they're dead?

      More like, there's not enough material on how he contributed to the performance of the music itself. You know, if there was video of him and people had taken pictures while he conducted, we'd probably be keeping him in the Music/ folder. As-is, he's not really known for his conducting ability.

      Yes, that's what I was thinking of - it's not just that he's dead, but that he died before his performances could be recorded. But it's still a rather tricky distinction.
  • 12 Nov 6th, 2016 at 7:07AM
    Lastest Reply: 15th Nov, 2016 08:23:52 AM
    So, back in 2011 maybe I made the page for Music.New Yesterday. A band which is Alternative Indie and formally Latin influenced, with their Signature Song as Industrial Disco.

    Looking for their new stuff, most of the Google results are about another band, apparently formed in 2015, with the same name who are Alternative Pop with a bit of Disco.

    If I were to create a separate page for them, what would the distinction be? Music.New Yesterday Alt Indie band and Music.New Yesterday Alt Pop band? Reply

      Usually the difference between identical names is by year, say the band's founding. Or maybe the year of their first song.

      Year disambiguation for Music/ pages is a horrible idea, because musicians are not tied to release years in the same way as "traditional" works.

      We do have Christopher Priest (comics) and Christopher Priest (novelist). We don't get these sorts of collisions for non-(traditional-)work pages very often. That's the only precedent I've seen.

      Perhaps they could be listed under where they are based e.g. Music/NewYesterdayLosAngeles. Assuming they aren't both from the same place, that is.

      That might be the best one, since defining by Genre can be... a bit fluid. Bands can have a Genre Shift (and these two already started pretty close, it seems) but they can't change where they started.

      EDIT: Oh. Looking at the page, apparently all we know is that they're mostly American. Probably.

      And looking at the soundcloud for both groups, they're from "USA". It was a good suggestion, though.

      One of them is from LA.

      I have to say that I find it unlikely that anyone is going to make a page for the other band. Both of them are pushing There Is No Such Thing as Notability anyway, though the newer one seems to have more of a fanbase.

      Also, the page here is probably the most detailed the older band has ever gotten, and I'm seriously wondering about some of the entries on their YMMV page (such as Broken Base) seeing that there don't seem to be many listeners to begin with. Their Soundcloud page has one like. The Youtube video received 23 views since 2012. I mean I guess they'd probably have local fanbase, but we don't even seem to know where "local" is in this case.

      Uh, There Is No Such Thing as Notability doesn't have a limit. That's the whole point.

      I'm not saying that the page should be cut. I mentioned that for two reasons:

      1) The band is at such an extreme end of lacking of any notability, that lot of the YMMV entries seem iffy, especially Broken Base, One-Hit Wonder (not YMMV), Fanon Discontinuity, I Am Not Shazam, and They Changed It, Now It Sucks. Actually, both the main and YMMV pages need cleaning up regardless.

      2) Unless the troper themself decides to make a page for the other band, I find it very unlikely that anyone is ever going to, so there's little reason to worry about a disambig at the moment.

      Making it a disambig now prevents problems later.

      (In my experience, it's always the problems you don't prepare for that show up. The ones you are prepared for almost never happen! Go figure.)

      Looks like the more recent band, (c.2014) are from LA. lakingsif, do you not know where the earlier band are from, as you created their page in 2011?

      Edit: Just counted 8 ZCEs in the existing page, I don't know enough about the band to fix those but they need filling out or removing. I've commented them out for now.

      Ruddy hell, there's also Susan Mae & The New Yesterday. Is this one of the current two bands under discussion, or yet another one? What is it with the name New Yesterday...
  • 1 Nov 10th, 2016 at 7:07AM
    Lastest Reply: 10th Nov, 2016 08:10:31 AM
    It fees like Justin Bieber's page needs an update, especially with his page image, which I uploaded one on the discussion page. Unfortunately, editing is locked. Reply
  • 4 Oct 21st, 2016 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 21st Oct, 2016 01:42:29 PM
    Is it safe to recreate the Analysis page for Kidz Bop? The one that I want to recreate is completely devoid of complaining and describes why massive hits occasionally get excluded from the franchise instead of complaining about the exclusions. Reply

      Um... analysis is really for tropes.

      That's not always true, take a look at Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

      Star Wars also exists, and Minecraft (which, incidentally, only seems to describe gameplay). And probably a lot more.

      Analysis is supposed to be reserved for tropes, in much the same way as Headscratchers is supposed to be for works. That doesn't stop people from creating the subpages and maundering about in them. Part of the reason we don't like Analysis for works is that they tend to wander off into complaints, arguments for or against some part of the fandom, and other useless stuff that properly belongs on the forums.

      There's no cosmic rule saying that a useful and interesting Analysis page can't be made for a work but Sturgeon's Law applies.
  • 3 Sep 23rd, 2016 at 5:05AM
    Lastest Reply: 23rd Sep, 2016 06:20:23 AM
    Should tropes about a singer's personal life experiences go on their main page or their Trivia page? Also are the Trivia pages for singers limited to facts about their songs and albums? Reply

      We don't trope real life people. We trope their works and roles.

      Tropes about their personal life should be nuked on sight.

      Singers are real life people, you know. I was referring to parts of a singer/artist's personal life that they have been known for; should those go on their main Music page or their Trivia page? Here's an example: Chris Brown's page mentions his incident with Rihanna in a Darker and Edgier trope instead of on his Trivia page.

      It's still gossip having nothing to do with their work. We care about their work, not their personal lives. Axe those mentions, period. You can go read US Magazine if you want gossip.
  • 1 Sep 13th, 2016 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Sep, 2016 11:08:06 AM
    So, I wanted to someday possibly do an album where every song is named after a trope and then is a good example of that trope (e.g. some anvils need to be dropped.) Would this all be protected under fair use or would I get in a deep load of legal Doo Doo if I were to do this? Reply

      It's not just fair use, but public domain. We don't claim copyright to trope titles, as long as you don't copy the articles wholesale. Attribution is always nice, though.
  • 3 Sep 12th, 2016 at 4:04AM
    Lastest Reply: 12th Sep, 2016 05:54:45 AM
    I find it strange that YMMV.Creature Feature no longer seems to be indexed. I also don't know where to go to index YMMV.Rufus Rex. Anyone? Reply

      YMMV pages are not indexed, and as far as I know never have been. Since they are simply a category of tropes for a page and should not appear without a main page (which is indexed itself), no index is needed for them.

      double post

      I don't think YMMV pages are indexed. The YMMV pages of major works like Game of Thrones, Batman, The Legend of Zelda, etc., aren't indexed anywhere.

      Edit: ninja'd
  • 3 Sep 4th, 2016 at 7:07AM
    Lastest Reply: 5th Sep, 2016 01:52:36 PM
    Does it seems fitting to you that Dean Martin is in the Music/ namespace rather than Creator/?

    The content of the page seems more to be about his career than his music. And I'd say it suffers from too much troping a real-life person, too. Reply

      this seems something that could be brought up in the forums; I've personally seen many pages for actor-singers in Music/ who I'd say were more suited to Creator/, but since they are musicians as well as actors I didn't see a need to change them. Because of the content issue you mention, though, perhaps it would be an idea to start a thread

      It can be quite a difficult distinction to make. On the one hand, many actors and voice actors record albums in part to promote themselves as singing actors. On the other hand, there are actors and actresses who first made their names as pop vocalists but later took on acting careers for which they have become considerably more famous, especially in foreign-language markets.

      It's a judgement call, I guess. And sometimes it even depends on context; I've accidentally used the Creator/ namespace for Mitch Benn when I'm talking about his stand-up rather than his music. (And his stand-up has songs in it!)
  • 1 Aug 20th, 2016 at 8:08AM
    Lastest Reply: 20th Aug, 2016 10:08:23 AM
    The Ear Worm page seems like it could be a potential contender for deletion — it basically lists catchy lyrics from an artist's song or overall lists all of the artist's hit songs if they're catchy, seemingly discrediting their less upbeat tunes.

    At first, I didn't think it was a bad idea because it seemed useful to signify the catchiness of a song, but as the trope seems to be inevitable on nearly every YMMV Music page, it seems virtually pointless to keep this trope around (especially since the examples sometimes list every song from the artist).

    EDIT: Ignore my double posts. Sorry. I accidentally posted them (twice I believe) without finishing my sentence. Is there a way those can be deleted? Reply