• 5 May 21st, 2017 at 2:02PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 21st May, 2017 05:17:20 PM
    So I noticed that WatchMojo had its own dethroning moment page, so I decided to create a work page for it. I don't have any examples yet. Since this is the first works page I made, I might need some feedback on this. Some examples I am thinking of adding would be: Now the problem is, that I am not sure if these border around Zero Context Examples. Reply

      Well, on Zero-Context Example, it lists "The entirety of [Episode]" as an example of a ZCE, and that's basically what those entries in OP are.


      The trope has to be present in the work itself. Tropes can't be listed just because it discusses several instances in other media.

      It's like posting The Abridged Series on the work page of what said Abridged Series is abridging instead of the Abridged Series' work page, or posting MST on a page about the work that's being riffed and not the work page for the riffing itself.

      Those examples are definitely ZCEs. They don't say anything about how the tropes are being used.

      I also think you should read the rules for creating a work page. You need at least 3 tropes before a page is launched. Maybe add something about the reviewing style, humor, format, etc.

      I suggest cutting both the page and its Dethroning Moments subpage. The article itself is completely useless and we don't allow trope subpages for nonexistent work articles.

      The YMMV page i added may need to be cut as well, i will take a look at the rules for creating a work page.
  • 1 May 20th, 2017 at 8:08PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 20th May, 2017 09:13:32 PM
    Warriors Official Forum seems to be mostly troping real-life people (namely, members of the forum). I'm not sure if there's anything salvageable here. Reply
  • 9 May 17th, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 18th May, 2017 11:59:48 AM
    Was there discussion anywhere (the pages' discussion pages are blank) about changing the entire pages for history of japan and history of the entire world, i guess to be in all lowercase letters, or was that a unilateral move on The Whistle Tropes's part? Reply

      Oh, I see the post-duplication bug is still here...

      Oh, I see the post-duplication bug is still here...

      pictures for sad children is the same way, though significantly older.

      Oh, god, don't do that. It's so ugly. If someone wants to make a Self Demonstrating version of the pages, that's... well, dumb, but it's up to them. But the main ones need to be in standard style.

      I've unlocked this, because I strenuously disagree with Fighteer. If the official title of the work uses non-standard capitalization, that's what the page should use. It may be ugly, but it's the actual name of the work, the same way we use end punctuation (Theatre/HelloDolly makes Hello, Dolly!) or non-standard notation (Theatre/TitleOfShow makes [title of show].)

      The question here is, is it official that the titles are in all small letters?

      Madrugada, I think you misunderstand the issue. The problem is not that the page titles are all lowercase, it's that every single capital letter on the page has been turned into lower case.

      The title should stay lowercase, and all of the capital letters on the page should be put back on. That's my two cents.

      Agree that the title should use the official spelling/capitalization, etc., and that the text of the article should not.

      However, I've seen a lot of people blindly follow a stylized version of the name from a poster or cover without checking to see if that's how the name is stylized in general. The most common case is when the poster has the name in all-caps. That doesn't (necessarily) mean the official name is all-caps. The Avengers is The Avengers not THE ⒶVENGERS, no matter what the poster might suggest. :)

      No, I did not understand that the whole page was changed to that. In that case, I agree with Fighteer — those go in the Self-demonstrating namespace, only, if they go anywhere.
  • 9 May 17th, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 18th May, 2017 11:59:48 AM
    Was there discussion anywhere (the pages' discussion pages are blank) about changing the entire pages for history of japan and history of the entire world, i guess to be in all lowercase letters, or was that a unilateral move on The Whistle Tropes's part? Reply

      Oh, I see the post-duplication bug is still here...

      Oh, I see the post-duplication bug is still here...

      pictures for sad children is the same way, though significantly older.

      Oh, god, don't do that. It's so ugly. If someone wants to make a Self Demonstrating version of the pages, that's... well, dumb, but it's up to them. But the main ones need to be in standard style.

      I've unlocked this, because I strenuously disagree with Fighteer. If the official title of the work uses non-standard capitalization, that's what the page should use. It may be ugly, but it's the actual name of the work, the same way we use end punctuation (Theatre/HelloDolly makes Hello, Dolly!) or non-standard notation (Theatre/TitleOfShow makes [title of show].)

      The question here is, is it official that the titles are in all small letters?

      Madrugada, I think you misunderstand the issue. The problem is not that the page titles are all lowercase, it's that every single capital letter on the page has been turned into lower case.

      The title should stay lowercase, and all of the capital letters on the page should be put back on. That's my two cents.

      Agree that the title should use the official spelling/capitalization, etc., and that the text of the article should not.

      However, I've seen a lot of people blindly follow a stylized version of the name from a poster or cover without checking to see if that's how the name is stylized in general. The most common case is when the poster has the name in all-caps. That doesn't (necessarily) mean the official name is all-caps. The Avengers is The Avengers not THE ⒶVENGERS, no matter what the poster might suggest. :)

      No, I did not understand that the whole page was changed to that. In that case, I agree with Fighteer — those go in the Self-demonstrating namespace, only, if they go anywhere.
  • 0 May 16th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Web Original
    When browsing the pages for WebAnimation.Dick Figures , in the namespace selector there is a button called "[[Trivia". I'm assuming this was someones misguided attempt at creating a Media Wiki style page, and the page seems to be deleted (and I can't find it in the Cut List, so it seems to be deleted for a while now). Despite that fact, the button still is there. I know for a fact that this is not the only case in which this has happened (I think it happened to some other pages as well, but this one I just stumbled across). Reply
  • 1 May 10th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 11th May, 2017 06:59:43 AM
    Is it okay to recreate the PhantomStrider page if we can put in the tropes he falls under, like Land Down Under, Nice Guy, Caustic Critic, Think of the Children! (in regards to Where the Dead Go to Die), Spell My Name with an "S" (inverted), Dude, Not Funny! (where he thought that cutting joke on Brians A Bad Father was the worst joke ever told), etc? Reply

      A Re you troping the person, the persona, or works?

      The first is a hard and fast don't do that.

      The second is permitted within Rule of Cautious Editing Judgement.

      The third only applies if the works don't have their own pages.

      And if it was cut for massive drama, flame wars, havoc, etc, it's not getting recreated.
  • 4 Apr 29th, 2017 at 4:04PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 29th Apr, 2017 07:03:26 PM
    Digimon World Infamy needs serious help. its trope listings are mostly {{in brackets}} and whoever's adding new ones keeps double-spacing and not using CamelCase. i tried to fix it alone but there's too many.

    Also it kinda feels like they're going for every trope in alphabetical order so A-D have more entries than E-Z combined. Reply

      Sent them a PM.

      Did a little work on it myself, mostly the CamelCase in the D's.

      I've meant to help fix this page, as I have it on my watchlist, but I haven't gotten the opportunity.

      I would agree with the assessment that they're trying to fix in every trope onto the page. And a LOT of them are ZC Es or just them trying to force the trope onto the page.

      It looks like they are making an effort to repair the formatting issues. Please comment out ZCEs and remove forced tropes with edit reasons.
  • 10 Apr 26th, 2017 at 5:05AM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 26th Apr, 2017 11:03:35 AM
    How do I know that this source is a reliable? For my project, I need sources that can be proven to be credited and not just someone typing on their own blog. Is there anything I can tell my teacher about how this is a reliable source? Reply

      Um, it's moderated and used as a reputable reference for specialist media subjects (possibly because it's the only one that exists with such a focus...). It's up to your teacher, it's not like this wiki is more reliable than The Other Wiki, it just focusses on one area in greater detail. There are some experts that contribute, not that you could really prove it, and credit goes to the wiki not the editor.

      Sorry, but as this is a publicly-editable wiki, I do not believe it qualifies as a reliable, credited source as far as academics are concerned. I do not know of any teacher who would accept TvTropes as a source.

      It's not a reliable source for facts, no, because baseically anybody can write anything and it may be a while because anyone picks up any inaccuracy and corrects it. I suppose it can be used as a source for opinions and things like jargon.

      Unless the project is specifically about internet media, I wouldn't use it as a source. This site is more entertainment than academics, and will probably not be seen as being much better than a blog.

      Indeed, TV Tropes is not a reliable source. It does contain errors and no formal editorial mechanism.

      If you're trying to look for sources on philosophical subjects, you're better off using the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy than any of our pages on such subjects. If you're looking for information on writing, you could probably use some of our pages as springboards via the keywords in the articles.

      TV Tropes is not a primary or secondary source; it's a tertiary source. Per standard rules for research, tertiary sources are not acceptable as citations. However, you may certainly use TV Tropes as a springboard for research into the trope content of media.

      In terms of "credited" sources, that is really kind of a meaningless distinction here — if someone says that there's an example of Soft Glass in Terminator 2: Judgment Day, you can watch the original film and see for yourself. The source is the work that the article is written about. As to the "source" for tropes, that's again not a meaningful statement. We are not making a claim of authority as to the nature and existence of tropes, cliches, memes, etc.; we are merely seeking to distinguish them and document their use.

      Hmm...I'm in the same situation (in a way; it's essentially a "pet project" of mine).

      A sort of Ciffs Notes I can use (perhaps with mod approval, and excuse the image, it will be like trying to attract someone to a church, say, yet without the "baggage" (the human, well, bullshit that led to the Crusades, The Fundamentalist at its most "Atheist", and so on).

      Essentially, I'm asking to try, in my own way (PM is essential here), direct as many people here to discover the site without the...prejudice the sort of wounded gazelle ;-) who was ousted "with prejudice" following, say, The Google Incident, to be perfectly blunt. The sort of person who screams "Death to Fascist Eddie!", in a nutshell.

      Thoughts?


      ^Your last paragraph is very confusing. Why do you think that directing people to our site would be negative?

      The only case I can think of is if you were telling people "Go vandalize Tvtropes!" And I assume you wouldn't be posting here if that was the intent.

      ATT is probably not the correct venue, if any, to ask that. The original question's been answered. Requesting a lock.
  • 1 Apr 23rd, 2017 at 1:01AM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 23rd Apr, 2017 01:47:27 AM
    • Update*

    I'm currently working on the Beer and Board Games page. Anyone that has any knowledge of the show is welcome to help out.

    • End Update*

    Ignore the text below.

    I'm interested in starting a page for the Web series "Beer and Board Games", but I don't know how to create pages on this website. Anyone wanna help me out? Reply
  • 5 Apr 9th, 2017 at 5:05PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 9th Apr, 2017 06:32:30 PM
    I recently added an edit towards Popularity Power in regards to Death Battle and some things I've been hearing about it on the net. Almost immidately after I added it, someone deleted the entire thing under the justification of it being natter. I'm not claiming anything but I believe Natter basically means treating the tropes like a Forum, which I don't believe I did. I gave clear, concise examples on the subject. I don't want to get into an Edit War if it's just someone who disagrees with what I added, so can anyone give me an opinion on this? Reply

      The example above the example that you put explicitly says that the series is a explicit aversion- and you put zigzagged trope in the example.

      Given it was a second-level bullet point starting with "however", that's typically a dead ringer for natter. Looking at the removed entry, it is most definitely also a Wall of Text, so that's another reason it could've been removed.

      That page is a mass of Natter and really needs a good scrubbing.


      Okay. I wasn't sure. Would edit the example itself on how there are some arguments about how it can lean into this trope sometimes be preferred? Again, I'd rather not be shot for being the messenger here. I'm neutral on the series but I've seen several arguments being made on this, so I felt like it saying it was a complete aversion of this trope wasn't entirely true.

      Arguments outside what the creators have confirmed counts as speculation on a meta level. We don't really want speculation of that type on the wiki
  • 4 Apr 3rd, 2017 at 11:11AM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 3rd Apr, 2017 12:38:05 PM
    Or something else entirely? It's with Kristen Stewart sponsoring Chanel. Reply
  • 4 Mar 27th, 2017 at 11:11AM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 27th Mar, 2017 01:07:29 PM
    The BBC and a few other organs have carried this story recently, about large scale production of youtube videos which emulate "Peppa Pig" and other children's cartoons but which are fake and, for whatever reason, riddled with terrifying imagery - a knock-off Peppa Pig episode involving an unpleasant and graphic dental operation for instance. Does anyone know why this has been created, whether it is described here, Know Your Meme, or anywhere else? https://theoutline.com/post/1239/youtube-has-a-fake-peppa-pig-problem Reply

      Are you suggesting this is a trope? I'd like to hope not, and we would not want articles for that kind of shock content anyway. We expressly do not want "hot off the press" memes documented here. It's not our purpose.

      It doesn't really qualify as a trope, it's just an extremely bizarre news article that tropers might be able to share insight on. I can't comprehend the motivation behind spending time devising this sort of thing with the apparent purpose of traumatizing children; however, it is interesting as well as horrific, and if there is a historical precedent for this, then tropers are the people to know.

      That sounds like something for the forums. Ask The Tropers is more for questions about the wiki.

      Yeah, it's a forum topic. Ask The Tropers is for questions about the wiki.
  • 0 Mar 27th, 2017 at 11:11AM
    Web Original
    The BBC and a few other organs have carried this story recently, about large scale production of youtube videos which emulate "Peppa Pig" and other children's cartoons but which are fake and, for whatever reason, riddled with terrifying imagery - a knock-off Peppa Pig episode involving an unpleasant and graphic dental operation for instance. Does anyone know why this has been created, whether it is described here, Know Your Meme, or anywhere else? https://theoutline.com/post/1239/youtube-has-a-fake-peppa-pig-problem Reply
  • 1 Mar 26th, 2017 at 9:09PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 26th Mar, 2017 09:41:39 PM
    It's too ridiculously long. I'd like to shorten & reorganize it myself, but I've never had to do something like this before. I don't know where to start. Can someone help? Reply

      (Courtesy link)

      You might only need one or two of these threads, but I figure it'd be helpful to know of them anyway.

      There is a discussion thread for pages that get that length warning. You can find it as the too-long page repair thread. I think they generally split pages, but if the page can be shortened anyway, I think that thread would be the place to start.

      Also, you can talk with the people over on Natter Alert for the effort on cutting down natter (which is probably inflating that particular page). Note that natter is okay on WMG pages, but it may be something inflating the page anyway. I would start with the too-long page repair thread.

      A third place you could go, especially if there is a bunch of useless complaining on the page, would be the removing complaining and bashing thread.
  • 9 Mar 20th, 2017 at 8:08PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 24th Mar, 2017 05:26:20 AM
    Cutiesofly replaced a bunch of legitimate tropes with tropes that don't even exist on Characters.Vinesauce, under the pretense that they were "In accurate information." Reply

      Well, that could be considered vandalism, but I don't know.

      None of the tropes ring a bell to me.

      Someone should talk to Cutiesofly.

      Looks like flamemario12 reverted the damage. And yeah, none of those were tropes.

      Cutie is either a troll or doesn't understand how these things work on this site. Needs a PM, might need a shoulder tap.

      Tapped

      Someone will have to still restore the content that was replaced. I know absolutely nothing about Vinesauce, so I can't say if those examples were justifiably removed or not.

      I think cutiesofly might be a sockpuppet of cyrule, who has a similar problem with false tropes and similar editing grounds.

      Cyrule also edited on the Vinesauce characters page, but that was months ago

      He did edit the Games Repainted page a few weeks back.

      Was Cyrule suspended?

      Possibly. Though they should have given that they made the same mistake twice.

      Cyrule was not suspended, and there's no IP overlap with Cutiesofly

      Ok then. Thanks for telling me!
  • 2 Mar 20th, 2017 at 1:01PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 20th Mar, 2017 02:19:18 PM
    Can't Find Page that I created in Google or this website's search engine but it does exist?

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/WebAnimation/PeopleWatching

    Why doesn't my page show up when searched? Reply

      Because pages aren't automatically searchable as soon as they're made.

      I don't know what the usual timespan is but I'm pretty sure it's more than a few days.

      Thanks for the response, I think I'll check again in a few days.
  • 5 Mar 16th, 2017 at 6:06AM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 16th Mar, 2017 09:51:53 AM
    Later today or tomorrow I'm planning to take some time to do a write up for a page on a new podcast, RABBITS. The issue I have is that the title is presented in all caps. That in mind, should the wikiword be in all caps also (Podcast.RABBITS) or done normally (Podcast.Rabbits) and custom titled? I think there's been issues before in this scenario and I wanted to have it clear beforehand.

    Thanks. Reply

      Technically, I don't think there's a difference as far as the software is concerned. Main.Harry Pot Ter takes you to the same place as Main.Harry Potter. I would make the page the normal way and custom title it to have the all-caps just to stay consistent in case something in the software changes down the line.

      Do it normally and ask for a custom title. If you make the page with the name in all-caps, everyone who tries to wick it will have to remember that it has to be all-caps to link correctly.

      That was my area of concern, because there's also RABBITS' sister show, Tanis, and its wiki word is in all caps.

      Incidentally, I took the liberty of requesting the all caps wikiword for TANIS now that's been answered.

      I made the custom wikiword for Series.MASH work by using all-caps: M*A*S*H

      Internally, the article title is stored in exactly the same case that was used to create it. When you create wicks to it, however, the case of the wick determines how the article is displayed, unless there's a custom title.
  • 4 Mar 15th, 2017 at 4:04PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 15th Mar, 2017 05:33:53 PM
    (Why do the RWBY pages get so much attention here?)

    Skybrigadier, the author of The Reactsverse, recommended Weiss Reacts (the verse's first entry) on RWBY's Fanfic Recs page.

    I've removed it from the page, under the assumption that any following recommendations are in reaction (heh) to the illicit self-rec. Allowing Weiss Reacts to stay on the page despite initially being self-recced would set a very bad precedent for fanfic recs pages. Reply

      That reminds me, until I removed it a few months back, FanficRecs.Steven Universe had this on its page right from its conception:

      "Feel free to add a fanfic of your own to the list, but remember to use the template found here."

      ^I think that message should be changed so that any references to a person reccing their own fic are removed.

      "Feel free to add a fanfic you like to the list, but remember to use the template found here."

      "Fanfic of your own" could have been phrased better, yeah...

      This is the current version, by the way:

      "These are recommendations made by Tropers for Steven Universe fanfics, all of which have to be signed to stay on the page. When you recommend a fic, don't forget to use the template found here."
  • 0 Mar 12th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Web Original
    Okay I know that pages in need of such go into Needs Wiki Magic Love, and I'm planning to place Hanazüki: Full of Treasures for reasons regarding incompleteness. With that said I've a few questions regarding the process.

    • Should I list the show in the subpages of NWML if it has specific problems as well as listing it on the pages, or am I suppose to just list the show there and mention everything it needs help with.
    • One of the problems is recap pages, Mainly that most of the episodes haven't got a page yet (and one of the two that did lacks a trope list. I want to know if okay to mention that when listing Hanazuki in Needs Wiki Magic Love.
    Reply
  • 2 Feb 28th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 28th Feb, 2017 03:34:51 PM
    How can i get my fanfiction analyzed on TV Tropes? Reply

      Typically, you don't. If people like it enough, it'll happen naturally, but asking here generally accomplishes nothing.

      I thought we had a forum thread for this kind of thing.

  • 5 Feb 22nd, 2017 at 11:11PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 27th Feb, 2017 01:16:39 PM
    I still think a YMMV page on William Grubb is fine on the site, as many of the other brony reviewers have their own YMMV pages. Reply

      That is not a question.

      Snark aside, YMMV for creators themselves are not allowed, the page can only be used for YMMV about their work. If those others pages are not like that, they should be removed or fixed and not used as an example of what is acceptable on this site.

      Not sure what a "brony reviewer" is, but the rules apply equally to all creators. YMMV cannot apply to them, only to their work.

      I'm talking about these pages. How come these get a free pass? http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/LilyPeet http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/JoshScorcher

      Good question. Some of them are about their work, some are about them, and the problem is that, as their work is about RL topics, it's hard to separate them.

      For future reference, A brony review likely refers to people who review MLP:FIM episodes.
  • 3 Feb 22nd, 2017 at 1:01PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 22nd Feb, 2017 03:35:51 PM
    Tropers.Orion Pax 09 added this on YMMV.Death Battle:

    • Men Are the Expendable Gender: Some viewers have excused the Death Battle team of deliberately skewing the results of matches that pit males against females such as Gaara vs Toph, Tracer vs Scout, and Lara Croft vs Nathan Drake. Intentionally setting up male combatants to lose.

    Not only is this trope not YMMV, but it's also a repeat of the "Death Battle is sexist" edits that got a user banned before. Reply

      Is there an overlap between that banned user and Tropers.Orion Pax 09?

      Deleted it, sent a rudeness notifier. Which user was a problem before? There's no obvious match for any other banned account.

      It doesn't seem like it. I was just mentioning the ban.

      In case you were wondering, the troper who was actually suspended (my bad) was Tropers.vh1660924. Again, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between the two.
  • 0 Feb 22nd, 2017 at 7:07AM
    Web Original
    Where should one index the character page of a Journal Roleplay? I've seen some people put them on Characters.Play By Post Games, but since according the descriptions Play-by-Post Games and Journal Roleplays are different enough to warrant different tropes and indexes is that a good solution? I'd consider making a separate index page myself, but I don't know how to do so/if it would have to go through the Trope Launch Pad. Reply
  • 13 Feb 16th, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 19th Feb, 2017 02:08:18 PM
    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.PewDiePie is kinda a mess. Reply

      Looks like a permalock is imminent. Sigh... G.I.F.T. is just lovely, innit?

      Frankly, I see only a couple of arguments about this recent "rape" thingy? Nothing that flags the whole page as lock-worthy.

      [up] The most recent edits to the page are pretty bad.

      Not a PewDiePie watcher, etc., but he did recently lose contracts for making antisemitic remarks (both are weblinked articles on the subject for reference - one of them is from Forbes, which probably says something about the significance of this). The incident in general is pretty recent, but thought I'd at least provide some extra context to go with the potential concerns.

      The state of the page isn't too bad so far. Some recent back and forths yes, but no large scale edit war yet. Depends on whether or not we want to trope the recent controversy and how much it has to do with the body of work.

      I only see a few edits, and the most recent ones from after Disney/Maker announced they were dropping him don't look lock-worthy to me.

      The one stickler is the most recent edit that got removed in a reedit. Keep an eye on that in the event of an Edit War.

      http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Awesome.PewDiePie

      and http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Trivia.PewDiePie

      have gotten strange too.

      Um, wouldn't troping the controversy fall under Real Life troping?

      Yes. Please remove any examples having to do with RL controversies about a creator or their work. We are not interested.

      Yeesh, the last few edits are getting rather heated; while no out and out personal attacks that I can see at a glance, there is a definite edge of annoyance with other tropers in the edit reasons. Mods may need to intervene with a note that we're very much not interested in troping the controversy of the hour, and/or lock the page

      Eh, one mention of Overshadowed by Controversy should suffice.

      It would appear that salvadorfranz is editing with something of an agenda (removing anything negative about PDP regarding the controversy and adding in claims of unanimous support).

      ^ I noticed that on the Awesome page as well.
  • 9 Feb 9th, 2017 at 8:08PM
    Web Original
    Lastest Reply: 18th Feb, 2017 05:34:37 AM
    I wrote a fanfiction that's fairly popular on the site it's on, but until fairly recently, I have refrained from making a page about it because I felt like if/when it would be added, it would be added by someone not involved when it finally earned enough recognition to warrant it.

    Well, now it inspired a much more popular audio drama that's on YouTube that I'm taking a much less active role in, and I feel now it warrants a page, especially since a related audio drama by a lot of the same crew has a page of its own.

    I wasn't able to find a rule about it, so that's why I'm here. If there is such a rule, I'll go with it, but I thought I'd ask. Reply

      You can create a page for your own work, but you're limited to objective tropes found in the work. You only aren't allowed to add or remove YMMV and Trivia items, though you should be able to edit or remove stuff that's factually incorrect.

      The trivia thing is up in the air actually because one mod says they 'strongly discourage it" and another says there's no rule against adding objective trivia tropes as long as you're not invoking your own Word of God for stuff that can't be verified/sourced from the published work itself.

      Yeah, there is no requirement. I created a page for my work, and I have... about 4 readers. But the page is there, so hopefully someone will care enough someday ^_^

      What about YMMV's from your readers' opinions, such as reviews (examples: The Scrappy, Values Dissonance, Ensemble Darkhorse, etc.)?

      No is no. Lets readers add it.

      Editing your own YMMV pages is unanimously off-limits, no dissent on that one because it could easily turn into gushing about your work with positive audience reaction YMMV tropes.

      ^ The main reason is actually that authors aren't qualified to judge audience reactions. They're likely to list the reactions they were trying to get instead of the ones the audience actually had.

      But yeah, claiming positive reactions the audience didn't actually have is a problem too. :)

      The only permissible creator YMMV edits are transferring misplaced trope examples.

      And grammatical/proofreading edits (you can edit words that are misspelled, bad Example Indentation, anything to improve the quality of the page without determining content).
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?type=att&status=all&sort=activity&f=Web%20Original