• 0 May 14th, 2013 at 4:04PM
    tgycen vandalized the Characters.Homestuck Trolls Two page. HUNRonin changed it back, but I wasn't sure if anyone addressed tgycen, especially seeing as this was their only edit. Reply
  • 1 May 14th, 2013 at 11:11AM
    Lastest Reply: 14th May, 2013 12:06:14 PM
    Are we under DDOS attack again? I've been getting a lot of problems with pages coming up as "temporarily unavailable". Reply

      Just an usually high level of traffic due to some links on reddit.
  • 2 May 13th, 2013 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 12:50:00 PM
    Pasta711 made a rude edit here. Reply
  • 5 May 12th, 2013 at 5:05PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 10:39:56 AM
    Sponge Bat 1 just added a Sonichu example in Fanwork Ban. Most of it seems to just be a Take That! at the author. I'm not sure if it is enough grounds to remove it though.

    Edit: I edited the example to be more neutral. Reply

      Isn't this guy handicapped?

      No. I actually have the same disorder that he has and while it's not a good thing, it's not really a handicap or a justification for his behavior.

      Didn't Sonichu stop updating about two years ago? I'm surprised that people still give a damn about this.

      ^ I have yet to hear of a Hatedom where rationality is a defining trait.

      For the most part, people moved on and found greener pastures. I suspect this is someone playing catchup.
  • 3 May 13th, 2013 at 7:07AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 09:47:20 AM
    Anti-semitic editing by Nukestein. Pretty sure this is (the banned?) tf2 back under a new name. Reply

      Yikes, that was harsh. Bump for justice.

      EDIT: Looks like Ultimatum Vandal-zapped him so, I guess we're ok.

      boom.


      Thanks.
  • 2 May 13th, 2013 at 6:06AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 09:15:39 AM
    I've seen article titles in articles (e.g. Oblivion (2013) and trope articles also) bolded and italicized for some strange reason. Should I unbold them? That's what I've been doing, 'cause you don't bold and italicize work titles, you just italicize them.

    I thought that was old formatting no one corrected, but then someone added it to Oblivion (2013) and now I'm not sure. Reply

      That's excessive emphasis. Work titles (Like Star Wars or what-have-you) are supposed to be italicised, but the bold is unnecessary. You can remove it.

      'Fraid I contributed to some of that (though not that instance). In my case it's mostly force of habit from my days on certain wikis where bolding the first appearance of an article's title in the description is the accepted format. It's that coupled with italicizing the work title because it's a work.
  • 2 May 12th, 2013 at 6:06PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 06:29:58 AM
    I've put Index of Solutions on the main index page, but the tropes I've been going to didn't show the index. Reply

      Indexing is a little glitchy. Giving the page a whack on the head (in other words, saving an edit to the page, which you can do without changing anything) usually fixes the problem. Took care of it for you and it's working now.

      Thank you.
  • 45 May 1st, 2013 at 2:02PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 05:47:47 AM
    Something I brought up a while back and wanted to raise again (given an additional concern):

    There is this page Stationery Voyagers that has been entry-pimped all over by Bulldozer Begins, who seems to be the person behind the site.

    As far as I can tell (apologies if I am missing something)this work doesn't seem to actually exist in any form except their head.

    An additional concern, one aspect of the "work" is apparently a presentation of homosexuals as evil, and that troper has made entries, including one for Life Imitates Art (on the work page and elsewhere) to say that those aspects are Truth in Television.

    The "work" apparently has a group of evil gays called the "Crooked Rainbow"- if you search for that, you will find a lot of examples (for a direct illustration, see the example on Life Imitates Art). Reply

      If it doesn't exist anywhere, then it's not supposed to have a trope page afaik- the fact that they depict homosexuals as evil is kind of questionable, but the only thing we can really do about it is remove the entries the troper's made saying it's Truth in Television (since it obviously is not). We have a page on Mein Kampf, after all; you don't have to agree with it to trope it.

      There's an Unpublished Works section in the darth wiki, unless that's been removed since last time I heard about it- so actually it can have a page. Don't think unpublished works are supposed to be entry pimped, though.

      (Wasn't there a case like that before? Paul somethingorother and his nonexistent book.)

      There's an Unpublished Works section in the darth wiki, unless that's been removed since last time I heard about it- so actually it can have a page. Don't think unpublished works are supposed to be entry pimped, though.

      (Wasn't there a case like that before? Paul somethingorother and his nonexistent book.)

      Unpublished works are not supposed to have examples outside of Unpublished Works, let alone be entry pimped.

      That's DarthWiki.Unpublished Works. And works that are in that index are supposed to be placed in Darth Wiki not in the Main namespace (or Literature, as the case were). Character pages for those works tend to be "DarthWiki.WorkTitleCharacters" and not "Characters.WorkTitle" (though that doesn't appear to be set in stone).

      What I want to know is why someone moved it from Main to Literature if it doesn't even exist.

      If it's "in-production" then shouldn't it be allowed to get a works page? I mean, we have pages for movies, games, and books that are currently in-production, how is this any different? There are even works pages for some cancelled video games (Fallout: Van Buren comes to mind).

      Keep in mind I'm super okay with cutting it (the page is just... bizarre), but I just want to make sure that a fair precedent is established.

      Now, of course there's the fact that it will probably never leave production ("hopefully TV series"? Really, guy?), but we should just decide at what point that we decide something isn't actually a work.

      I'm also seeing that there's a lot of natter is his entry-pimping.

      The page reads like a gigantic troll entry

      Hmm, it seems like this person has a couple of works (identified as connected with a "Dozerfleet Productions"- they even have their own wiki.

      There's also pages for Blood Over Water, Ciem Webcomic Series, and Q-BasicGorillas.

      The first of them isn't really a tv show (but at least it has a youtube video posted, which I haven't watched yet), but the others, as with that Stationery Voyagers, seem to simply consist of imagined plots or characters that might be organized into a story at some point, but haven't yet.

      Basically, I think that all of it probably belongs on the Dark Wiki.

      Edit- for the record, here's the anti-gay stuff that stands out (he seems to dislike Muslims too):

      • Life Imitates Art: Virtually everything the Crooked Rainbow does to make the Voyagers' lives miserable has really happened. Events before 2004 were the author's commentary on Real Life events. When other events planned for the show started happening in the news in real life, in 2012, when production was on hiatus, with chilling similarity to production notes, the author was slightly freaked out.
        • The Crooked Rainbow of course wants to recruit kids, regardless of what the writers of the Rape and Switch and All Gays Are Pedophiles pages say to the contrary. In "Choice After All, " they try to recruit Oceanoe with a poison gas. However, the author did not predict them ever openly admitting to wanting to recruit children. This resulted in the wiki developing an entire campaign dubbed "Stop the Crooked Rainbow, " exposing real-life cases of gay activists committing terrorism, as well as engaging in seduction of minors.

      • Ripped from the Headlines: A judge in Braldon bans Oceanoe from visiting that country solely because Oceanoe can legitimately testify against the Crooked Rainbow organization for kidnapping him. And that would be bad for political correctness. Later, the judge tries to make it illegal for anyone to adopt children in Braldon if they take the Minshan writings seriously, especially in regards to their heteronormative views on sex. Muhmmaldians are somehow exempt from being called out for having similar views against homosexuality.
        • When the Voyagers refuse to promote the judge's transparent act of religious persecution, he bans all of them from visiting the country, and even declares them enemies of the state.


      ...Yeah, I think we're better off without this guy, honestly. It's not even the homophobia so much as the pretentiousness about his own work that really does it.

      That's the word. Pretentiousness. I was trying to figure out the right word to describe why the entries bugged me so much.

      Though honestly it strikes me as really depressing. He thinks he has a fantastic epic starring things from his desk.

      There's stuff in this guy's edits that makes me extremely uncomfortable, beyond the constant political agenda. The description for Blood over Water insults the film teacher of the class the film was made for. Also, the examples are almost universally poorly written, with lots of natter and "examples" that aren't actually about the works themselves — when they even exist.

      ETA: Yeah, pretentious is the perfect word. There's this constant undercurrent of "Ha, ha! I'm so clever. Look at how much more clever I am then [insert whoever I'm disliking in this comment]."

      Thanks for the feedback. Btw, I see that the Blood Over Water actually has some anti-gay stuff too- see the example for The Faceless. And I find too that searching for "Crooked Rainbow" uncovers a lot of "interesting" stuff.

      Scary.

      That... is an impressively deep rabbithole of crazy. Kind of amazing what can grow in the dark, unsupervised corners of the wiki.

      When a troper makes a page for an incomplete work or a work that has been cancelled, that's one thing. When a troper makes a page for their own work that has not been published yet, that is another.

      That is how I interpret the difference between having pages for things like Fallout: Van Buren and that guy's not-published work.

      So, what steps exactly should be taken here? As noted before, massively entry-pimping a nonexistent series (or several) in the normal wiki is against policy even without the author being a smug eccentric.

      The examples on the tropes pages need to be cut, the works pages for anything that can not be verfied to exist as a free standing work needs to be moved to Unpublished Works (Blood over Water seems to be the only one that I can find as a real thing) and the troper should be suspended from editing until the mods are sure he understands how the wiki works. Finally, the pages for real works need to have a massive cleanup, as they're a mess.

      Excuse me while I murder some of these wicks. I have no idea how to move pages, though.

      There have been examples from Ciem Webcomic Series that are not wicked to Ciem Webcomic Series (found on Artifact Title).

      Eeeesh. Those homophobic "examples" are ugly... Is it okay to start moving the page/cutting the examples, then?

      (By the way, the guy I was thinking of before was Paul Robinson with Instrument of God. In completely unrelated news, I may have been a troper for too long.)

      Edit: Dun Dun - This is how. :)

      Eeeesh. Those homophobic "examples" are ugly... Is it okay to start moving the page/cutting the examples, then?

      (By the way, the guy I was thinking of before was Paul Robinson with Instrument of God. In completely unrelated news, I may have been a troper for too long.)

      Edit: Dun Dun - This is how. :)

      Before, I was joking when I said "murder some of these wicks," but this is disgusting.

      There's also Fanfic.Becka Rangers Nemo Thunder. Is this real? Is this something that also needs to be dealt with? I'm not going through that if it was made by the same person; I have never been "disgusted" by someone over the Internet, but holy shit is this messed up.

      ^Also, thank you. I will look at that later, but I'm not doing anything but deleting things in relation to that article. If we want to cut it (and I don't think we do since we're already handling it), I will gladly put it on the cut list.

      Most namespace moves I've seen had a redirect placed in the old page, rather than anything being cut.

      Edit: Copied the page over to Stationery Voyagers (someone had already made a redlink for it on Unpublished Works) and hollered to get the discussion moved. Went ahead and put a redirect on the Literature/ one too, because it felt weird having two copies of the same page.

      Did a quick google of it, and the only relevant results in the first few pages were from here, the Dozerfleet wiki, and the author's deviantart. Also one youtube "test audio" thing which just comes up as "This video is unavailable."

      Edit 2: Edit Harder: Something weird's going on with the "related to" lists: The one for the Main/ version appears normal, and I'll go direct that to Darth Wiki now. The one for the Literature/ version says it appears 165 times but only shows one. Is this because of the redirect (I never saw that happen when I was namespacing pages, though), or the memory issues, or something else?

      Most namespace moves I've seen had a redirect placed in the old page, rather than anything being cut.

      Edit: Copied the page over to Stationery Voyagers (someone had already made a redlink for it on Unpublished Works) and hollered to get the discussion moved. Went ahead and put a redirect on the Literature/ one too, because it felt weird having two copies of the same page.

      Did a quick google of it, and the only relevant results in the first few pages were from here, the Dozerfleet wiki, and the author's deviantart. Also one youtube "test audio" thing which just comes up as "This video is unavailable."

      Edit 2: Edit Harder: Something weird's going on with the "related to" lists: The one for the Main/ version appears normal, and I'll go direct that to Darth Wiki now. The one for the Literature/ version says it appears 165 times but only shows one. Is this because of the redirect (I never saw that happen when I was namespacing pages, though), or the memory issues, or something else?

      The related to of Literature.Stationery Voyagers shows zero wicks and brought two people to the wiki. Main.Stationery Voyagers used to show 170 wicks, but I've gotten that down to 120. It also says the article has brought 173 people to the wiki... somehow.

      I'm cut listing Literature.Stationery Voyagers since it has no more wicks. I think the Main one should be left as a redirect since... well, the inbounds.

      Edit: I'll do more tomorrow. I'm surprised I dewicked all that I did...

      Thanks again. Just to be totally clear, I am understanding correctly that these works (except for maybe that one with a Youtube video) don't exist except in the author's head, right?

      Because I wouldn't want to cut something (even if crazy) that is actually a fanfic or (self)published work.

      It's obvious from the examples that SV is totally in his head. Other ones that appear to be solely in his head (from the examples alone) are Ciem (not all the examples of Ciem are wicked anywhere) and the Q-Basic Guillera thing.

      The one with a youtube video goes to a deleted video. I'm not sure if I've already taken out the link you're talking about, but I did delete one link to a youtube video (that went nowhere).

      Edit: I forgot to mention that Blood over Water is likely real. I'm not sure about that, though. Someone mentioned it above.

      That's why I googled it. (Edit: Google results through page 10 for Stationery Voyagers don't appear to indicate it actually exists- other than a couple of deviantart results, it's just trope pages, and the guy's own wiki.)

      And the issue with the related was the redirects- it started showing zero wicks after I fixed the Main/ redirect. I just figured I'd edited my post enough, heh.

      That's why I googled it. (Edit: Google results through page 10 for Stationery Voyagers don't appear to indicate it actually exists- other than a couple of deviantart results, it's just trope pages, and the guy's own wiki.)

      And the issue with the related was the redirects- it started showing zero wicks after I fixed the Main/ redirect. I just figured I'd edited my post enough, heh.

      In case anyone was wondering: We don't owe any display space to homophobic propaganda. I'll ban the guy.

      In that case, should we even bother moving anything to Unpublished Works?

      (Also... good riddance.)

      I'd be happy to see it all cut, since the examples and pages are all a mess in terms of their readability and the idea of trying to make anything useful out of them gives me a headache. However, should the mods chose to come down on the side of allowing any of the material, it looks Blood over Water exists at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-P4MReSb-s, as does the "webcomic" Ciem, which can be found at http://modthesims.info/article.php?t=337623.

      While I'm definitely glad to have the guy gone, I can't help but feel like banning him is just going to rile him up further. And he clearly has plenty of time on his hands...

      It cloned my post.

      Meh. He can get in line.

      Also, anything left I can help with?

      I don't think it takes much to get this guy riled up. I suspect that the removal of examples from his unpublished works would be enough. Banning will hopefully slow him down a little bit; sadly, I suspect that he's the type that may make a new account to ban evade.

      Probably. Plus I'm betting he'd be the type to think of himself as a martyr, believing himself censored for boldly stating his views rather than simply banned because, well, he's not really following the rules or contributing anything to the site.

      Like I said, he can get in line. If he comes back, the admins will swat him again and we'll fix any damage done, just like we do with every other troll. In the mean time, worrying about it is pointless. If everything is good with this issue, we just keep on troping.

      Thanks to everyone again for all of the help.

      One question though. As (I guess) a student film project, where should that Blood Over Water be listed? I don't think it belongs under tv series, where it is now. Maybe Web Video?

      I'd put it under film, since it wasn't developed for the web but for a college tv station (which is probably why he stuck it under series). So, it's a made-for-(student)tv movie.

      One final question that I ran across in the cleanup. He put a note on the film The Human Centipede that it shouldn't be confused with his webcomic Ciem: The Human Centipede. It just strikes me as unnecessary, since the subtitle doesn't appear in the url for the webcomic. Anyone think otherwise?

      Yes, I would agree that that's unnecessary. Disambigs on pages like that are for cases where confusion is likely to happen. It is unlikely someone is going to confuse a fairly well-known film with an obscure webcomic.

      So, as I asked before, do any specific steps need to be taken here? Or is this taken care of already?

      I believe that the issues have been taken care of. Unless someone else knows of something still outstanding?

      The main things got moved to unpublished works, and I think they've been dewicked as well.
  • 1 May 13th, 2013 at 12:12AM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 03:14:08 AM
    Matthew Guy 6131994 has been going around and creating, then cutlisting, blank pages for something called The Call. Reply

      Film.TheCall is a real work. I don't know about the rest of the pages, though.
  • 1 May 12th, 2013 at 11:11PM
    Videogame
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 12:04:06 AM
    Why is the YMMV page for the game Fez locked? I know it's a work made by a controversial man, but many other works with far more controversies still have their own YMMV pages. Reply

      I assume that it was cut and then autlocked. You may ask for an unlock here
  • 4 May 12th, 2013 at 11:11PM
    Lastest Reply: 13th May, 2013 12:01:40 AM
    Can I get a mod ruling on the Mood Whiplash entry on Cranford? Here is the page history. I've seen similar notes on various other pages on the site, but I don't want to start an edit war, and discussion doesn't look like it'll be productive.

    If I'm in the wrong, I'll certainly accept a mod ruling to that effect, but I'd like to avoid bashing my head against a brick wall to no productive purpose. Reply

      The cut section is writer bashing. Just sort of negative. Like the note says, not really our mission.

      ...erm, if you say it doesn't belong on the page, I have no problem with that, but I'm a bit at a loss as to how noting that Heidi Thomas has been praised more than once for her ability to handle dramatic storylines without sinking into melodrama qualifies as 'writer bashing'.

      I just skimmed it. Either way, though, it isn't a writer review, it is an example of a trope.

      Duly noted. Thanks for putting an end to that particular headache.
  • 1 May 12th, 2013 at 10:10PM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 11:33:17 PM
    Nike Cages' picture is 404. Reply
  • 4 May 11th, 2013 at 7:07AM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 09:32:01 PM
    Got a PM from Electrical Lass with the subject "Unessesary Name Change." and the text "HOW DARE YOU CHANGE THE NAME OF EYES OF GOLD!"

    Not really sure where that came from. Reply

      She doesn't even seem to have made any edits anywhere...


      Actually, they have.

      Bump.

      Probably mad that one of their examples has been invalidated. Troping is Serious Business, dammit.
  • 2 May 11th, 2013 at 10:10PM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 09:25:51 PM
    Pardon, please?

    "Markup Help" and "cancel edit" aren't working in the edit page.

    When you get a minute, could you look at this please? Reply

      Hit CNTRL-F5 (on windows, most browsers) to reload the page. You'll want to do this on the edit page.

      Thank you very much.

      Edit: It worked very well; that one command lined up my browser with the updates. Through a couple edits. Thank you again! :)
  • 2 May 12th, 2013 at 4:04PM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 05:05:07 PM
    Viewers Are Morons seems to be quite the bitter, complainy page. Just excised a chunk from the Video Games section, but thanks to the weird database enforcement, I can't view who decided to have five bulletpoints' worth of complaining.

    Can anyone assist in cleanup, or at least take a look? Reply
  • 5 May 12th, 2013 at 1:01PM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 04:08:12 PM
    Two things:

    I. I was coding up an image for Fear Agent when I noticed that, apart from having no tropes listed, it's under Main, and not Comic Book. How do we fix that? The namespace part that is. As far as tropes go, I've never read the comic so I guess I won't be of any use there.

    II. The Pro doesn't have any tropes listed either but I have the book and I can flip through it and get the job done. So, don't cutlist it just yet, I'll get to it.

    That's all. Any thoughts on Part I of this here query? Reply

      Bump.

      I. How to Move a Page; it also should go in an index or two (but I'm not sure which). Isn't there the option of bringing it to YKTTW to get examples? I've seen one or two works in there to help, but that might have been after discussion in one of the forum threads.

      II. Same as "I", as far as I can help.

      Also, I'm moving the page...

      Update: Moved Fear Agent to ComicBook.Fear Agent and indexed on Science-Fiction Comic Books and Needs Wiki Magic Love. Should Fear Agent be cutlisted? Also, I added the one wick the article had (Space Western) to the example section. I don't think it has as much issues as cutting and drafting in YKTTW requires now that I've looked around a bit more, but

      Thanks DunDun! You kinda single-handedly took care of moving the Fear Agent page, and thus greatly reducing the amount of work, so, thanks again. (I'm pretty sure I would have botched it, in some way or another, if I had attempted it myself) I'll try to look for some more examples.

      As for The Pro, like I said, don't worry. I have the book, I can take care of it myself. I just reported it here in case someone wanted to cutlist it.

      EDIT: How do we go about looking for wicks that exist in trope pages but aren't listed as tropes in work pages?

      Hit the "related" button - the blue-and-grey oval on the farthest right. Unfortunately, that only works if the example on the trope page is Wiki Word-linked to the work page, but it does help. Otherwise, just put "Fear Agent" in quotes in the search bar. :D

      Wow! The hivemind is mighty helpful tonight! Thanks R&H!
  • 5 May 3rd, 2013 at 8:08PM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 02:35:39 PM
    MattTheFurry's grammar doesn't seem to be very good and they also have a tendency to make nattery additions to trope pages. Reply

      Or downright incorrect, such as the addition to CowboyBebopAtHisComputer.Live Action TV citing the "Ken Jennings says 'ho'' on Jeopardy!" incident as an example because "hoe" is "the correct answer" and "rake" is "truely (sic) incorrect". Evidently said editor has never heard of William Hogarth's A Rake's Progress (or the Stravinsky opera based on the paintings)...

      bump?

      Bump x2. Last three edits have included numerous grammatical and formatting mistakes and one Thread Mode-style response.

      Bump x3. This guy is really starting to get on my nerves.

      PM'ed and warned. Let us know if it continues.
  • 4 May 11th, 2013 at 5:05PM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 01:25:43 PM
    Some of the tropes listed under Audience Reactions fit better as YMMV or vice versa. To move them, is there anything required to do prior to it? Reply
  • 2 May 11th, 2013 at 10:10PM
    Lastest Reply: 12th May, 2013 04:48:25 AM
    Found this in Know-Nothing Know-It-All

    Many writers in video game journalism come off as this. The reason is often because people who are knowledgeable about game design or the game industry have more lucrative jobs, and most competent journalists have better-paying opportunities writing about other subjects. Some of the worst examples include the writers of Kotaku, Game Trailers, IGN, Game Informer, Jim Sterling of Destructoid, and The Escapist Magazine.

    I'm not sure...but is this a little too flame-ey? Should I remove it? Reply

      Sounds like trouble, I'd suggest modifying or removing it.

      I removed the Real Life section. We only retain those unless they become trouble.
  • 9 May 7th, 2013 at 2:02AM
    Videogame
    Lastest Reply: 11th May, 2013 08:33:47 PM
    Edit: Fixed misspelling of Troper Name from "Shaokun" to the accurate Shaoken. In case anybody else is seriously in doubt of my fallibility...

    Related to the one directly below me, I would like to know overall opinions and knowledge on Shaoken. This way, I hope we can at least get a better understanding of each other to resolve this. Hopefully on a high note.

    It started out after I noticed this line of commentary on the Assassin's Creed III Headscratcher site, when I saw Shaoken's response to this point.

    • SPOILERS. Anybody who does not want to deal with ACIII stuff please stop reading.*

    • Regarding the attack on Connor's village near the beginning, was Charles Lee responsible for that? Haythem seems convinced Lee didn't do it. Even during Haythem and Connor's final battle, Haythem says that he's proved to Connor that the Templars were innocent of that attack. Yet Connor is still determined to kill Lee anyway. So who's responsible for it? And if it's not Lee, why does Connor concentrate on killing Lee rather than finding the true perpetrators?

    To which Shaoken responded:

    The above troper is forgetting that the Templars have been rewritting history for centuries. Obviously in the AC universe Washington wasn't retired at this point (since he is responsible for the order and never denies it), and the Templars saw some sort of advantage of him not being associated with the attack on one of the most influencial assassins of the time. Why they did this is a mystery, but that's more because we don't know much about what the Templars get upto outside of their interactions with the series' protagonists.

    End of posts.

    Now, this struck me as being more than a little bit presumptuous. While history does not work the same in the AC 'verse as it did in real life, this is a well known feature of the series and something that any regular would know. In spite of this- and as I confirmed in P Ms with Shaoken- he automatically assumed that A: the above troper was making a broad generalization because he forgot the Assassin's Creed universe was an Alternate History in general (as opposed to a specific comment regarding they were going for an Alternate History approach in that instance particularly*) and B: That there are absolutely no other alternate possibilities for an event that happens offscreen and whose evidence we get (at best) by secondhand accounts in a series whose other hallmark is insane conspiracies.

    In light of the offensive nature of the reply, I erred in deleting it- and for that I was wrong- and did not oppose its' reinstation, but after which I responded to clarify the technicality. Currently, this has resulted in a stalemate where Shaoken appears to be claiming that "The Templars Rewrote the History Books" somehow does not translate to "Alternate History" in the layman's terms, and to claiming his reply does not constitute a jump to an extremely offensive conclusion about the prior troper or a conclusion that is far too shaky to be certainly true.

    As such, I appeal for more knowledge about this, perhaps to end this all in a satisfactory manner to both involved even given our hostilities. I am willing to divulge all relevant data regarding our Private Messages- and the edit history- warts and all- on a medium acceptable to any interested and Shaoken in the hopes of helping that. Reply

      OK, I can't help with the information problem, but with the tone problem...

      I personally would not address a troper in such a way. I also note that your edit on the 6th May '13 5:40:18 PM is not helping, either.

      I can understand indeed, and I will never claim to be guiltless or flawless. I wasn't and am not, but Shaoken did- at least from my perspective- seem to be saying in no uncertain terms that he was. During my repeated Private Messages with him and even the more recent edits he continued to claim that there was nothing offensive in said original edit, even as we both agreed- through the process of discussion and debate on the Headscratchers page- that the scenario he was claiming to be "obvious" was merely one amongst many possibilities (even if (personally I find it by far the most convincing along with him), thus undermining the central claim of it.

      This was on top of a few very odd things like abusing edit lock merely to keep me from editing in that final edit, and still stubbornly sticking to a highly dubious claim to know a fellow troper's intent without (to the best of my knowledge; I even asked him if he had any) evidence.

      This hardly erases my own issues, of course.

      I don't think it's rude. A tiny bit presumptuous, but not rude.

      This was on top of a few very odd things like abusing edit lock merely to keep me from editing in that final edit,

      Can you prove something like this? It's a dubious claim to make.

      That was a fuck up on my part, I went to edit and hit the back button. I didn't realise that didn't cancel the lock or that Turtler was trying to edit something since he had already posted. I own up to that.

      Firstly, my apologies for the delay in responding. Life has been a pain.

      Secondly, In spite of our issues I thank Shaoken for explaining, and will trust his explanation. I just had no way of knowing, and event sent a PM off asking about it which did not receive a reply.

      Thirdly, we may have to agree to disagree on this, but it is rude precisely because of how fundamentally it assumes the prior troper was illiterate on the very franchise he was commenting on (to explain to those who may not be familiar with the franchise, claiming that the original troper has "obviously" forgotten about the Templars rewriting history is akin less to not knowing Darth Vader is Luke's father and more to not knowing there is a Galactic Empire, Force, or Darth Vader at all, that device is so omnipresent in the Assassin's Creed franchise) and how stubbornly he refused to consider anything about the wording off at all and continued to assume the prior troper's actions with absolute certainty in spite of the ambiguity.

      Fourthly, while this has served a helpful tool in obtaining outsider feedback on this issue, I would still be deeply indebted to know what can be said about Shaoken.

      What exactly are you trying to achieve here? Ask The Tropers is not a gossip-den, you're failing to even consider that you may have simply over-reacted and saw rudeness that wasn't there, and you're overstating the important of the Templars rewriting history part by comparing it to a major plot Twist in a Saga compared to two lines in the first game that was only mentioned in optional side-quests in II and Brotherhood.

      I'm mainly seeking to bring about an end of this little standoff, hopefully on agreeable terms. Normally I'd happily have let it rot once we'd reached consensus on the Headscratchers page, but your recent P Ms (which again were unprompted since the last I had had was days before and about the aforementioned lock issue) have led me to believe that there is still a quarrel that will outlive the Headscratchers issue.

      I believe that continued suspicion and apparent hostility means there's still a problem here (not necessarily from your side alone, mind) and that allows me to inquire for more information so that I can better inform my actions. And hopefully end this on good terms.

      If you really wish to continue this issue here (and if the Tropers here would have no objection to me publishing a rebuttal here), I did not overstate the importance of the Templar rewriting. It's one of the essential building blocks that the entire saga was set up on. It's not just mentioned in one or two lines, it's very evident if you ever read the database, and it's the narrative glue that handwaves why the "real" history in the games's universe is different from the real history we know. It's as much a part of the setting as the Rebel Alliance, the Galactic Empire, and the Force is to the original Star Wars trilogy; you might be able to get through the first movie without knowing Darth Vader's identity but you certainly can't without knowing about the Force or the Rebels.

      EDIT: Issue resolved (hopefully) via P Ms.

      (EDIT: Ohhh dooops. My bad. Confirmed that the conflict is resolved. While I am still legitimately interested in Shaoken and not just for partisan clubbing, I've accepted to sacrificing my inquiry as a condition of peace. So please ignore.)
  • 3 May 11th, 2013 at 9:09AM
    Lastest Reply: 11th May, 2013 01:36:41 PM
    I have a question about the Creative Commons License thing. Specifically, it only apply to the wiki itself, right? Not things like liveblogs or reviews? If I want to repost a review or liveblog that I first wrote here, I don't have to mention the CC license, do I? Reply

      Pretty sure that the CC license applies to everything on the site.

      You should always say when and where something was originally published when moving your work. For one thing, it builds credibility that the work actually is yours. For another, it dates the work—so if there are any edited differences or errors in the review (e.g. making a statement that was true when it was written but falsified later on), they can be explained.

      Whether the review is yours or the wiki's may be another question, though, since such rights can be withheld or given. It looks like anyone may copy, distribute or transmit any article so long as there's proper attribution. Are you trying to repost something you are paid for (e.g. a magazine, employed blogging, or Web site management)? 'Cause that's a big do-not-do-that-thing.

      Edit: Obviously, you shouldn't try anything until a mod comes in with that phenomenal yellowy-orangey "moderator" badge under their username.

      Everything on the site is under CC license. No big deal to mention it was posted here first.
  • 2 May 10th, 2013 at 4:04PM
    Lastest Reply: 11th May, 2013 11:38:30 AM
    What should be done to make a locked description only page an index? I wanted to see if Subtext could be made into an index of the multiple subtext tropes, then unlocked. Reply
  • 1 May 10th, 2013 at 6:06PM
    Lastest Reply: 11th May, 2013 01:35:51 AM
    In YKTTW we have one with four hats, but... several motions to discard and a split between tropers who think it's redundant and those who don't. Can we get a mod or something to chime in and determine whether it should go through as-is?

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=1udttz5gmoa4hr9nzcxbpmpe Reply
  • 6 May 9th, 2013 at 5:05PM
    Lastest Reply: 10th May, 2013 09:52:59 PM
    It feels like the entire trope The Ophelia is an example of What Did You Expect When You Named It ____?. It seems that pretty much every character named "Ophelia" will go crazy at some point, even if it isn't permanent. Reply

      Huh? I am not sure what you want to say about this.

      You're misunderstanding the trope. The Ophelia is simply the trope's name itself; the trope is describing a lovely, beautiful young woman who happens to be explicitly and obviously batshit. And also ethereal. The character itself can be named whatever.

      ^ And it just so happens that, because writers are subtle as bricks, they like naming these characters Ophelia.

      Which would probably fall under Meaningful Name?

      Which would probably fall under Meaningful Name?

      Insanity Prelude, that would be my interpretation. It's not so much that "characters named Ophelia go crazy" as "naming a character Ophelia is shorthand that this character will go crazy".
  • 1 May 10th, 2013 at 6:06PM
    Lastest Reply: 10th May, 2013 08:38:43 PM
    Despite everything being intact, the edit history for Bronies: The Extremely Unexpected Adult Fans of My Little Pony aside from the last change seems to be blanked out. Is that a glitch or something? Reply

      Possibly something related to the site's memory woes and the resolution of such. I noticed a lot of pages lost most of their edit histories.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?type=att&status=all&sort=activity&page=658