• 1 Dec 14th, 2017 at 3:03PM
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 03:36:58 PM
    [[tvtropes.org/pmwiki/el.php?findfor=Dex-N-Mex 95 Dex-N-Mex 95]] is showing problems like not knowing how to add tropes or how capitalization works. Reply
  • 1 Dec 14th, 2017 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 02:25:16 PM
    farida44 left a weird spammy comment here Reply
  • 3 Dec 14th, 2017 at 6:06AM
    Videogame
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 12:51:34 PM
    A lot of edits in Xenoblade Chronicles 2 have dealt with continually adding and removing mention of a disliked review from Kotaku's Jason Schreier about the game. It started in 8.8 and got bounced around a bit under different tropes, both YMMV and not within the page.

    The most recent removal was done by GKG with the reason "This sounds like a barely-concealed complaint that someone reviewed the game poorly. Nixing it."

    It was re-added by flyingfishcake (the one who originally put it up) with reason of "The previous entry was removed due to bias and hostility towards the reviewer."

    There's nothing in the Discussion page related to this. Reply

      Is it just the one editor pushing for the example? We can suspend them, if so.

      Looks like it. He's posted it under 8.8 at least twice, despite the review itself having been mentioned as outright panning rather than the "Good, not great" that the trope usually applies to.

      Suspended them.
  • 4 Dec 12th, 2017 at 4:04PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 12:50:18 PM
    Rourke in Atlantis: The Lost Empire is labeled as Evil All Along in the Character Entry, saying:
    "Starts off seeming like a tough-but-fair leader, but it turns out that he was after the crystal from the very beginning."

    Yeah, but he didn't know what the crystal was exactly and that the atlanteans are still alive and depends on the crystal to live. Not that he cared when that was revealed. To me, they met a fork on the road. One way lead to not taking the crystal but still gain fame and wealth for discovering Atlantis and the other road, the one he took, would lead to even more wealth while condeming the atlanteans. To me, he sound more like a case of Face–Heel Turn. After all, he came across as reasonable beforehand.

    But what do you think? Leave it as Evil All Along or change it to Face–Heel Turn? Reply

      (Raises eyebrow)

      He stole a page from the Shepherd's Journal that had a clear detailed picture of the crystal on it. That journal was originally retrieved by a team he led. He knew about and was after the crystal.

      Also, when it's pointed out by Helga "there were not supposed to be people here. This changes everything," Rourke says it changes nothing. In a tired, dismissive way, yet. He didn't care about discovering Atlantis, one way or the other.

      I know he tore off that page and knew about the crystal, but since he didn't know the atlantean language, he couldn't have known that the crystal was a living entity. Their god, in Milo's words. That's what I mean with didn't know exactly.

      Bumpety-bump.

      It would definitely be Evil All Along; if he was after the crystal from the get go (which Doctor Sweet confirmed), and he said "it changes nothing" when Helga commented that the presence of people being there "changes everything," then yes, he was planning to steal the crystal, consequences be damned.

      Doctor Sweet mentioned after the Crystal is taken that Rourke had been after the crystal since Iceland, when the journal was found. He ripped the page out, assuming the crystal to be "big, it's shiny, and it'll make [them] all rich!"
  • 8 Dec 13th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 11:06:28 AM
    Sorry if it's a dumb question, but does the Armoured Closet Gay trope still work the character is bisexual and not fully gay? Reply

      Yes

      Bisexuals are not "partly gay". They're their own identity, not "half gay and half straight".

      Should the trope name be changed to something like Armoured Closet LGBT to better encompass what the trope is about?

      ^no

      Tropes Are Flexible.

      And 'gay' is frequently used by bisexuals as a synonym for the alphabet soup. It's fine the way it is.

      Why are you all mad at me because bisexuals are their own identity!? I know that. I'm actually bisexual myself (and I used to be REALLY insecure about it).

      ^ No one is mad at you. They're just saying that there's no need for a trope rename.
  • 11 Dec 11th, 2017 at 4:04AM
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 09:19:51 AM
    The stinger for Rainbow Speak has an ode to an inactive troper and the now-defunct colour markup. What’s up with that? Is that allowed? Reply

      Seems a bit out of place, if nothing else. "Allowed" is kind of an odd question — we don't specifically have a rule against that sort of thing because it so rarely comes up.

      The stinger has no relevance to the trope, only to the page. And I think it's been long enough that it's no longer necessary.

      It's been there since pre-history for the page (pre-2010).

      That said, the troper in question started editing again in 2012 and has edited as recently as March 2016. He has not "fallen off the face of the earth." He hasn't died.

      At first, I was gonna say to keep it because of its age and the whole "memorial for passed tropers" idea. But... he's alive, apparently. So... it may be time to cut the memorial to him...

      ^ So what, do we have a faked death?

      Whatever we have, there's no point to keeping a memorial if there's nothing to memorialize.

      tfw you can't confirm they're dead but you can't deny it either so you put up a memorial and shrug for seven years.

      Seriously, though, I think it can be cut for basically being pointless.

      I say cut the memorial for the troper, but leave in the memorial for colored text.

      Should I remove the troper “memorial”ť then?

      I think you should remove it because the troper returned, so it's both pointless and wrong.

      My (conspiracy) theory is probably that the original CAD died or went missing and somebody else used that username. Much like Gus.

      The troper page pre-dates the last history purge, which was sometime in 2011 IIRC. But the troper has been using the site with that username since 2012, and periodically since then.

      There's little reason to suspect this is somebody else because why would they keep somebody else's troper page without admitting to it archiving it or something.

      I think it's fine to cut the faux memorial.

      Okay, I’ve made the edit so I think we can lock this thread now.
  • 12 Dec 12th, 2017 at 3:03AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 07:31:35 AM
    I see this assertion on the Marilyn Monroe page: 'She was also romantic penpals with Portuguese dictator Antonio De Oliveira Salazar.' This is not only false, it's perfectly ludicrous. There are other false and ludicrous things said about Marilyn Monroe, but I've never even encountered this one before. Just for starters, then, Salazar was aged 50, in 1939. You might as well be saying that Marilyn Monroe corresponded with a pure-blood wizard, Salazar Slitherin. I have a broader question about how much I should hesitate about simply deleting something like this or adding things myself? Reply

      Well, a quick Google search turned up this book which seems relevant: https://books.google.se/books/about/CorrespondAAncia_amorosa_entre_Salazar_e.html?id=JBgUAAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y

      EDITED: It's a collection of love letters and the title says it's between Salazar and Marilyn. It could, of course, be fictional, but the author is given as Salazar himself.


      That... doesn't necessarily add anything to its veracity. Fanfic and romantic idealization of a star didn't start with the net.

      Considering that book and the TVT page are the only results I get on the topic in the first three pages of multiple Google searches -while there's tons of stuff about other people she exchanged letters and whatnot with, I think it should at the very least be pulled to the discussion page for now.


      I mean, it's not people dating others who are way older is that rare. Ashton Kutcher (27) Married Demi Moore (43) in 2005 Madonna (33) and Warren Beatty (53) in 1991 Especially in hollywood

      Like, are there any actual source that they weren't involved.

      Courtesy Link: Marilyn Monroe, history page

      The thing about penpals was added by faunas.

      Is the thing about "geringonça" that they added to InsultBackfire.Real Life real? Or the (Portugese) "reports" saying what faunas is claiming they say on Series.The Crown 2016?

      Candi: That's why I was being cautious about the book. The fact that Amazon lists Salazar as the author doesn't mean that it's genuine - however, it shows that the assertion that such letters exists is not as ludicrous as the OP claims. It may eb false, but there's been a book published about it.

      Anyway, I merely wanted to provide an entry point for people interested in going deeper into the issue.

      Whether that book exists or not is a bit dubious. It's "out of print" on Amazon with no description, no cover, and very little information on the physical characteristics of the book. I don't think Lightning Source or Create Space has ever gotten their hands on a copy. They may simply have copied from some old archive that Google did. This google search comes up with plenty of entries for that one book, but for something published in 1997, there doesn't seem to be much information on it.

      Also the fact that it was published in 1997 even though the guy who is credited as the author (not the same as who published it) died in 1970.

      The Other Wiki doesn't mention anything about it on either the Monroe page or the Salazar page. As for the book, the fact that it's allegedly a collection of love-letters means it makes perfect sense for it to have been published after both parties had died. But there's also a lot of literary hoaxes out there. And the book doesn't seem to have attracted the attention of Monroe scholars—which is a bit surprising.

      I'd say we have two options: first, say that a book makes this claim, without asserting that the book is correct, or, second, remember that we're not here to trope real people, and simply cut it and perhaps other irrelevant information from the Monroe page. We're not a gossip site! Our pages should be about works, not people.

      (As you might guess, I lean towards the second solution. But then, in the interest of fair disclosure, I also don't think we need most actor pages. If it were up to me, we'd only have pages for actors who improvise or write—actual trope creators, in other words.)

      Actors are creators (acting is creating, not just aping) and I think actor pages are useful as long as they discussthe actor’s work.

      But I agree that this exampke should be cut because it’s troping Marilyn’s personal life, and gossip to boot.

      Where the edit to Series.The Crown 2016 is concerned, it seems a bit nitpicky - isn't Artistic License – History the shuffling of historical fact in the interest of advancing or simplifying narrative? I admit to not having seen the episode in question, so someone who has done is better placed to offer a verdict on this, but how important is it that they showed it as raining when it didn't rain, showed the airline involved as being BOAC instead of BEA, and didn't mention the Anglo-Portuguese Treaty? (The 600th anniversary of which would be 1973 anyway, not the era covered by the second series of The Crown.)

      Perhaps I'm the one who's being nitpicky...

      I agree with cutting it as gossip, regardless of any truth value it may hold.

      @Gnome Titan. Sorry, I wasn't being clear. I was referring to the (much more likely now) possibility the book was essentially fanfiction, whether written by Salazar or someone else.

      Done cutting.
  • 1 Dec 14th, 2017 at 1:01AM
    Western Animation
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 06:18:23 AM
    Character Varian from Tangled the Series is a Walking Spoiler. Many of the entries in his folder on the Characters.Tangled page are completely spoilered-out. Of course it's against Handling Spoilers policy to completely spoiler-out an entire example. Also, many of the Trope Names (which are NOT spoilered-out) applying to him are spoilers by themselves already (such as Anti-Villain and Face–Heel Turn) which makes whiting-out the rest of the entry pointless. His folder also already has a "SPOILERS!" added to its title, so readers are warned.

    Administria.Handling Spoilers doesn't say anything specific about Character pages, but I thought usually on Character pages spoiler mark-up is discouraged, is that correct? And if there's significant spoilers on such a Character page, to put a "Warning: unmarked spoilers below" warning on top of the page.

    With all of that in mind, would it be o.k. to remove most or even all of the spoiler markup on that page, leave the "SPOILERS!" in that particular Walking Spoiler character's folder title, and put a "Warning: unmarked spoilers below" on top of the page, instead of using so much spoiler mark-up? Reply

      The same spoiler rules apply on Characters subpages as anywhere else. Trope names, headers, folders, and character descriptions may not have spoiler tags ever, under any circumstances. Entire examples should not be tagged. If it's impossible to avoid ruining the work utterly for anyone who so much as glances at the article under these restrictions, then put a SPOILER WARNING at the top and remove all the tags.
  • 8 Dec 7th, 2017 at 4:04PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 06:14:50 AM
    JulianLapostat spends a lot of time on the YMMV pages of works, sometimes adding super-long entries with hyperlinks for quotes or evidence. The problem, besides being very long and on the bashing side, is that sometimes the links are to places like Cracked.com which isn't always a reliable source and is a comedy site. While an earlier edit by this troper on the YMMV.Its A Wonderful Life page removed one such link, a huuuuuge paragraph on the YMMV.Star Wars page does link to Cracked, which they added. (They also insistently call the final segment of IAWL the "unborn sequence" which I've never heard anywhere else but it peppers the YMMV page, more so in the edits to said page.)

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/el.php?findfor=JulianLapostat Reply

      Doesn't quite look kosher to me. It also looks complainy. Should I message him?

      Cracked is generally reliable.

      But

      Their writing guidelines also insist on links out the wazoo supporting their points. Which raises the question of why those sources weren't used instead.

      Then there's linking to editorials and opinion pieces, which raises the point of supporting something subjective with... something else subjective?

      Wall of Text, Natter, and Complaining are right out.

      More YMMV.Star Wars stuff is going on, including triple bullet entries as follows and a really long double bullet one...

      "*** Many have also cited the fact that Lucas can't write dialogues, citing the complaints made by many actors, such as Harrison Ford and others deprecating it as corny. This again ignores the context of the production of A New Hope. What actors were deprecating was not merely the dialogue but the very nature of the project itself. The reason Lucas had so much trouble on A New Hope is that the very concept of the film, i.e. a B-Movie Serial Genre Throwback but done with higher production values was considered absurd, as did most of Lucas' collaborators and producers, and what upset many of them was that Lucas was playing the genre straight rather than submitting it to a Mel Brooks' style parody. Lucas' Homage to Flash Gordon serials was seen with bemused contempt because those films were highly disreputable and Lucas was the only one who envisioned that the Serial could be revived via Reconstruction and higher production values. And this by itself is more than enough among auteurists to make Lucas the main creator of Star Warsnote . It's also important to note that the most famous lines of dialogue in the entire Star Wars media, which most would argue is the least corniest moment in the entire series, was written entirely by Lucas alone. "

      "*** Likewise, some Some have even claimed that Lucas can't direct films based on remarks that Lucas gave only vague remarks and didn't discuss motivations with actors on set or so on. This is likewise standard among all film-makers, for instance, Alfred Hitchcock during production never discussed character motivations, and would prefer to shoot the breeze with his stars in-between takes rather than discuss the scenes. The usual stock response for directors is that issues of motivations and characterization happen in script and rehearsals but not during the shooting of the film, since it's an expensive process racing against a ticking clock, and that stopping a production so that an actor can get in the mood has created more nightmares than you can shake a fist atnote . Furthermore, Lucas made a name for himself directing THX 1138 and American Graffiti, meaning he had the best profile of all directors to work on Star Wars until the Disney Era."

      "** The Disney Star Wars films have also gotten criticism. Rogue One was a Contested Sequel because it more or less provided an Obvious Rule Patch on the "flaw in the Death Star" plot of the first film, while also re-contextualizing important scenes in A New Hope (i.e. Darth Vader's first meeting with Leia) in an unintentionally absurd light. It's a fact the producers behind the series openly admit that they don't really have a full long-term plan for a single story to tell, with actors admitting that they don't entirely plan to reveal all mysteries for the characters so as to maintain and increase Fanfic Fuel, Fanfic Fuel. Even Mark Hamill, the only actor to believe in Lucas' vision from the very beginning, and one of the few cast members intimate with George Lucas admitted that he struggled with The Last Jedi over Rian Johnson's vision of the character which he saw as entirely different from his. As such a number of viewers believe that Star Wars is no longer a real saga or mythos, but merely a set of wheels to spin until the well entirely dries."

      Okay, my brain is officially breaking. Those need a trim, badly.

      On YMMV.Game Of Thrones, they added Spiritual Antithesis (a regular trope) from most of the Spiritual Licensee entry but they didn't finish the job and move the trope to the work page. That may have been a fluke, though.

      Still going on YMMV. Star Wars.

      "Many of the edits to the original trilogy are so infamously derided by the Vocal Minority who can actually notice it that many other viewers, especially newcomers who didn't see the trilogy in the original run, don't really see what the fuss is all about.note  Some speculate that one reason the edits are so reviled is due to the Internet giving people who care about these changes a larger platform to make their views heard, and by George Lucas' anti-fan attitude and alleged mockery towards such fans note  causing unnecessary escalation and poor synergy between which didn't of course affect the creator and fanbase. Some box-office take of either the prequels, the home video releases of the Special Editions, or the sequels. Other fans, even old-school fans have even cooled down about Star Wars fans, feel the issue; they note that issue is moot with Disney owning Star Wars, as Lucas cannot make any more edits to the originals (thus quelling fears of future tampering), note , and some of them admit Lucas' changes to be minor:"

      Still going.

      "** One of the models for the entire Star-Wars saga is the fall of The Roman Republic, as well as the fall of the Weimar Republic which happened in real-history out of a series of polarizations, outbreak of political violence, decay of institutions, voter-intimidation and economic crises (in both, but especially in Germany). The prequels could have ideally given us a truly great epic that makes its setting as dense as the Hollywood Epic Movie at its best made the Ancient World, but instead, Lucas makes it entirely about how one Big Bad was secretly responsible for every bad thing that happens. In addition to making for simplistic storytelling, it more or less makes the Jedi and other political figures who would eventually form the Resistance into a bunch of chumps on the run, and the entire ideology of the Resistance in the original trilogy, and the Disney movies, hollow, since the system they are fighting to restore and uphold fell to a single cunning operator, rather than long-term real issues that audiences can buy that the heroes would tackle. Likewise, the romance between a Jedi Knight and the Queen of Naboo ends up becoming a teen-YA melodrama rather than an epoch-transforming romance on the order of Caesar-Cleopatra and Cleopatra-Antony."

      "** A number of observers see Anakin's fall into the Sith in the prequels as an example of how individuals are brainwashed and gas-lighted into cults by charismatic leaders who shrewdly and carefully manipulate, mould, and force them into following a way of life entirely different from their set of beliefs and ideas. "

      Well, they've been forum banned for this sort of thing, now they have escalated to the wiki. Can't say they didn't have their chances.
  • 7 Dec 13th, 2017 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 05:52:21 AM
    Could someone please explain to me what makes something worthy of being listed on a YMMV page as Epileptic Trees as opposed to just being something for Wild Mass Guessing? I'm asking mainly because Kingdom Hearts X's YMMV page has a load of entries under Epileptic Trees and I'm not sure if this is appropriate for the page. The first part of the entry sounds fine because it just explains the confusing nature of the game but the rest seem like just Wild Mass Guessing to me. Basically, what is the difference between the two and should the examples from that page be removed? Reply

      Bumping this in the hope that it will get seen.

      Wild Mass Guessing is the page for posting crazy speculations.

      Epileptic Trees is the trope that covers them.

      Thanks, but that doesn't really answer whether or not the Kingdom Hearts X page is using Epileptic Trees properly.

      Bumping again.

      Gonna try bumping this one last time in the hopes of getting an answer.

      I'd say: Change that to Mind Screw as it's not about the content of the theories but the confusion that led to the out-there theories. Also 'cause it mentions MS at its very beginning.

      Could take it to Is This An Example thread in Trope Talk, if needed??

      I'd assume that Epileptic Trees should only be listed on YMMV if there's common theories that are really out there?

      It'd catch WMG entries if the WMG page is found to be too short? Not sure if that's ever happened, though.

      YMMV is to note the feelings of the fandom. Epileptic Trees doesn't do that?

      In general, Epileptic Trees is for widely-known examples of "wacko" theories — ones the fandom has kind of embraced. The WMG page is for people to post their own personal ones.
  • 7 Dec 14th, 2017 at 4:04AM
    Videogame
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 05:25:41 AM
    Angels With Scaly Wings is being vandalised by Moldylocks, he also put a troll comment on the discussion page. Reply

      There's also a vicious edit war going on about it.

      I repaired TwoKinds from similar vandalism from the same troper

      No, that's just me fixing it. I wanted to see if he knew about the "history" button, since he'd respond if he saw it. Apparently he does not.

      Even if you are in the right and repairing, this is beyond your ability to fix. Leave it to a Mod. Don't get involved in an edit war.

      ^ Exactly.

      As soon as you engage in an edit war, you're edit warring no matter the reasons. You may be in the right in this case, but it's better to post a query here (or notify a mod directly if the issue is really bad) and wait until they act.

      Banning; will revert.

      Edit: Also deleted their comment.

      Ah, and there's a mod I know for sure now...honestly never noticed you were before. Noted for the future.
  • 3 Dec 13th, 2017 at 11:11PM
    Videogame
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 04:34:39 AM
    garthvader on YMMV.The Legend Of Zelda Ocarina Of Time removed the Water Temple from a Base Breaker entry,citing that "You see nobody dislikes the water temple because it's *hard*, the dislike it because you're constantly farting around in the menu". I put it back as the WT has become shorthand for 'hard Zelda dungeon', the master quest version and remakes made it easier because of its notorious difficulty. and the level designer even apologized for how hard it was, and the BB entry cited positive thoughts on the level as well, with some really loving it.

    They re-removed it, saying " No, it's NOT notorious for being difficult, it's notorious for the fact that every time you mess up you have to repeat a sequence of annoying steps and menu transitions. Lying about why people don't like it makes a poor example. As an addition, the level designer did not apologise for how hard it was, quote: "I am most sorry that it was not easy for you to put on and take off the heavy boots, that all the time you had to visit the inventory. I am very sorry about that. I should have made it much easier to switch to the heavy boots," Aonuma said."

    However, right before that Aonuma said "“The Water Temple in the Ocarina of Time was notorious for being very tough to conquer," implying he was being sarcastic about the boots, and even if not he does say the temple itself is difficult. I found the edit reasons a bit rude as well ^^;

    But even more than they they added this to the YMMV page, which seems questionable. "**Naming Link as "Hitler" also results in a, um, interesting new interpretation of the story." Reply

      Navigating the place ended up being hard enough that I got stuck for a while when I first played the game years ago. I don't remember even paying attention to the boot-switching thing back then, but it is something people dislike about the Nintendo 64 version.

      Man this garth person's rude.

      Suspending
  • 4 Dec 14th, 2017 at 12:12AM
    Literature
    Lastest Reply: 14th Dec, 2017 01:42:24 AM
    I was looking at a fanfic page for South Of Oz and noticed it provides the page quote for Cue the Flying Pigs. Upon checking said page out I noticed said quote has a spoiler tag in it and the troper who replaced the original quote curates the Oz page pretty faithfully.

    The original quote was:

    "Holy crap!! They TALKED! They actually TALKED! The Apocalypse has finally begun! Pigs are learning how to fly! Satan is skating his way to work, and I'm pretty sure that I just became a monkey's uncle!"
    The Nostalgia Critic, upon hearing Tom and Jerry talking during his review of their Big Damn Movie.

    The new quote is:

    Ozma: Did any pigs fly when you came back?
    West: No, Suprisingly enough.
    South Of Oz, when West and Glinda safely freed their mother from Isolation Island.

    Is it kosher to change a page quote without asking? Reply

      I dont think so. But Im not a mod so....

      The General Page Quote Discussion tread would be the best place to bring this up.

      That's using spoiler markup in the "description" part (the part above the example list) of a page, which IIRC is a no-no. Even leaving that, and the one-sidedly changing of a page, aside: the Nostalgia Critic quote seemed to better illustrate it, really. The South of Oz one is dull. Vote to revert.

      Anyone can change page quotes. If there is disagreement the aforementioned Quotes thread is where to settle it.
  • 11 Dec 11th, 2017 at 1:01AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 11:34:01 PM
    Starting this to avoid an Edit War about Dragon Tropes and Avian Tropes. I say they should be listed as related to each other, not listed as a sub index to one or the other. Reply

      The description of Avian Tropes is simply "tropes about birds". Then it has a list of "categories" with two entries: Corvid Tropes (entirely kosher) and Dragon Tropes.

      Since dragons aren't birds in any folklore, mythology or fiction I've heard of, Dragon Tropes simply don't belong there.

      Either the dragon tropes page should be Sister Tropes to all indexes that contain the original components, or should be Sub Tropes to all of them. Not anything between

      Perhaps someone confused "avian" with "aviator", and thought it was an index about flying? Agree, dragons don't belong—they should be moved to Winged Tropes.

      (Some dragons don't have wings, but that's pretty darn rare.)

      Agreed that dragons aren't birds and so shouldn't be listed in relation to Avian Tropes. Some dragons have wings, some don't. But they're all mythological reptiles.

      I agree that they could be listed in relation to Winged Tropes.

      Xtifr: I had the same thought - probably somebody thought ”avian” meant flying creature in general, and thought dragons belonged.

      I am the one who had the dispute, and I put it in avian tropes, because most dragons have avian traits, and it was reptile tropes, so I think that it should be in all indexes for the original components. For example, asian dragons can appear as creatures with the parts of only fish, birds and mammals. (as a creature with a lions head, hawks wings, carp scales, eagles feet, eels body and tigers legs)

      ... okay, what is with your weird wonk with these tropes?

      Seriously, you got banned for this once before. And now you're committing bannable offenses about it again. And then pitching a fit about it.

      And anyway, you're wrong. I'm with DQZ, they don't belong there. At best, they're related sister tropes, but definitely not subtropes in either direction.

      Yeah, I'm done with you, reptoherp. Bye, peddle your weirdness somewhere else.

      (Looks at Gems if War dragons)

      Just in this bunch, there's avian, demonic, reptilian, centaur and mystic types. Definitely a sister trope; on a Venn diagram, there would be a lot of overlapping circles.

      So is it okay if I fix the pages?

      Okay, went and fixed them, since the consensus was that they were just related.
  • 8 Dec 13th, 2017 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 11:20:20 PM
    Are indexes title-only or can the examples have descriptions? I want to launch a TLP soon but I'm thinking that it should be an index. But that would mean deleting the entries, right? Reply

      What is it?

      Descriptions are optional on most indexes (though not all). But I'm not aware of any where descriptions are forbidden.

      Correct. It's generally considered acceptable to add brief descriptions of the items on a trope index, which can help greatly with finding the desired article. For work indexes, it can look a bit cluttered.

      ^^^ Life Simulation Games.

      That looks fine

      ^^ Isn't that kinda redundant with the Simulation Game page?

      ^ No, it's a subgenre of simulation games, similar to Dating Sim and Raising Sim.

      "Correct. It's generally considered acceptable to add brief descriptions of the items on a trope index"

      And for fun, I now try to make such descriptions fit the theme of the index (so the same trope can be described differently on each index it fits).
  • 6 Dec 12th, 2017 at 8:08PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 11:19:44 PM
    So, I'm trying to make a page but it would let my write the link in the hyperlink and i'm not sure what to do. How i do edit a page so it comes up as a legit link? Reply

      What are you trying to link?

      If the title begins with a number, you have to write out the word.

      Special characters aren't allowed in UR Ls. Ditto for dashes.

      What's the title of the work?

      I tried making a page for the Dennis Lehane novel World Gone By. I got the ability to make the page but I can't make the page an actual link. If that makes sense...

      It's on the sandbox wiki currently


      Ok click on this link - World Gone By (''Literature/WorldGoneBy'') and it will take you to a blank page, then click edit and copy your draft into the page

      By the way you need to capitalise a namespace like Creator/ or it won't work

      Ok now that you made the page, there are some minor formatting problems - you might want to look at other pages for how the example sections are set up and single word links require Curly Braces to link so your Squick example would link like {{Squick}}
  • 1 Dec 13th, 2017 at 9:09PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 10:27:27 PM
    Why does One Steve Limit forbid examples that are played straight? Reply

      Because the list would be way too long if it allows straight examples. Most works don't reuse names unless it is done for intentional confusion or to show relatives.
  • 2 Dec 13th, 2017 at 9:09PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 09:45:23 PM
    So I'm not sure if this is the place to put this so if it's wrong please direct me to the proper destination. I have been having trouble with using TVTropes on my phone. Namely, whenever I go to a page it will automatically redirect me to some kind of spam advertisement. This is happening more and more frequently to the point where I sometimes have to reload the page 3 times in a row to actually see it. Can anyone solve this? Reply
  • 5 Dec 13th, 2017 at 3:03PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 08:55:17 PM
    Say yes, say yes! Reply

      No.

      No.

      NO

      NO.

      Request a lock, please?

      I never saw the pages in question pre-cut, so I guess I'll take the request with many grains of salt?

      Here's some courtesy links for the curious: JustForFun.Pocoyo and JustForFun.Wow Wow Wubbzy. The pages aren't on the Internet archive, by the way. There's really no "getting it back."

      That said, the cut reason makes me think recreating those pages isn't worth it.

      Also, has anyone taken a look at WesternAnimation.Hey Duggee? The OP started that page with incorrect formatting (none of the examples had the asterisk). Mentioning it here because the aforementioned pages were cut in part for poor formatting issues. OP, have you checked out Text Formatting Rules?
  • 1 Dec 13th, 2017 at 6:06PM
    Live Action TV
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 06:50:16 PM
    So I remember watching this at least 4 years ago and I know it was real despite not being able to find anything on it. It's a TV show and it starts off with this sort of scholarship girl getting in to this elite university or college and when she gets there it's all rich kids and endless amounts of sex and drugs and stuff and I think she gets propositioned by this smarmy arrogant guy and at some point one of the characters gets killed with rowing equipment. Possibly stabbed with an oar? I originally thought it was by BBC or itv but now I don't know. Reply
  • 7 Dec 12th, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 05:19:50 PM
    number9robotic did this for five of the six Black Mirror series 4 pages. Personally, I think some of the old pictures were better as well as it being unorthodox etc. Since they just did it without so much as an edit reason, should I go and revert the changes? Reply

      This needs to go to Image Pickin'. I'll start a thread on the series as a whole.

      Good call reporting it here, though. Did you send Image Change notifiers?

      Edit: I think they changed the images on all 6 episodes, based on page histories.

      I did send notifiers. I looked at the pages before the histories, and didn't notice a difference for Black Mirror: Arkangel. I now see they changed it to a supposedly higher quality version of the same one. See, that shows they understand image guidelines (just make the original image better, leave an edit reason explaining), but the other actions are out of line.

      Started a thread in Image Pickin about this as well. Thread is here. I've removed the Arkangel images from my OP in that thread because they are identical, but the rest are posters.

      Should I PM the offender here and to the Image Pickin' thread?

      Did they ignore existing IP comments?

      No, there weren't any on the pages because we just moved series 4 from one page to individual recaps. But they have ignored my pm's.

      I'm going to PM the user to this query and the IP thread.
  • 6 Dec 12th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 05:19:02 PM
    There's Periphery Hatedom examples being listed on these YMMV subpages...

    Reply

      Apparently, it's on 17 YMMV/ pages. I think they can all be cut.

      It's indeed a Flame Bait trope. Torch them all.

      I've torched the uses of Periphery Hatedom as examples on the pages listed by the OP. From what I've seen thus far, the other uses have it either potholed, or it's being used In-Universe. I'm leaving the In-Universe uses alone.

      Edit: All of the OP's pages may be a bit complainy. Should we trim that?

      I need clarification: I thought potholing/sinkholing Flame Bait tropes was also not allowed?

      Potholing/sinkholing of Flame Bait is definitely not allowed. I was under the impression that In-Universe examples were allowed, though. As far as I know, In-Universe is acceptable for anything which hasn't been banished to Darth Wiki. But our guidelines aren't entirely clear, so I'm not 100% sure.

      I'll zap any uses of Flame Bait I'll see, then.
  • 1 Dec 13th, 2017 at 4:04PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 05:05:09 PM
    Is there any way I can request the character page for Fate/Extra Last Encore to be cut and instead linked to the Fate/EXTRA character page? Last Encore is an anime adaptation of the game so there is no good reason for a character page exclusive to the anime when it's all characters from the game. Reply

      Copy any content worth copying, then replace the content with [[redirect:Characters/FateEXTRA]].

      That said, anime adaptations can vary, and characterization in one may not necessarily jive with the other. You could always recreate the anime sheet later if need be, but it's something to consider.
  • 3 Dec 13th, 2017 at 12:12PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th Dec, 2017 01:49:11 PM
    Every single audience reaction page for Fanfic.Citadel Of The Heart has been entirely created by the fic's own author, MightyFan217, without exception. YMMV/, Awesome/, Heartwarming/, HoYay/, Funny/, NightmareFuel/, TearJerker/, every single one has only ever been edited by the work's own author (apart from a few cleanup edits by other editors; no other editor has added content to the pages). Permission to cutlist the lot?

    EDITED TO ADD: Oh, and there's a gargantuan tree of entries for Word of God on the Trivia/ page. Also all added by the fic's author. Reply

      Yeah, obviously, cutlist all of that mess. I think we may need to have a chat with this author.

      All seven audience reaction pages are now on the cutlist, and the Trivia/ page has been scrubbed of the Word of God example tree as well as a number of entries that were written wholly or partially in first-person voice. It's probable there are other entries on there that need to be axed, but I'm not sure I'm the best judge of which ones. The page for Fanfic.Citadel Of The Heart has some of the same problems (most notably a tendency for first person voice to creep into the entries), but I don't have the time to fix them right now.

      If the author is being called in, they should also be directed to the pages on Text Formatting Rules (every single free-standing pothole on every page they've made is formatted {{Like This}} instead of LikeThis) and Example Indentation in Trope Lists (they're often guilty of putting the first example in a list as a first-level bullet and then every other one at second-level).

      He's going to sprain his wrist from jerking himself off so much.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?type=att&status=all&sort=activity&page=2