Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- • General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- • Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- • Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- • Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- • Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- • Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- • Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- • Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- • Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- • Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- • Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- • Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openCharacters.MogwaiAndGremlins ... Why was this blanked?
Characters.Mogwai And Gremlins ... Why was this blanked?
openPossible Edit War on That One Achievement
So a few months ago, I made a revision to one of the examples on That One Achievement (more specifically, the Mega Man 10 example on the Mr. Perfect achievement) to be focused on Mega Man 9 instead, since that's where the achievement appeared first and MM10 only brought it back as a "legacy" achievement and has ways to make it much easier. I still included a note about the MM10 version, at least.
About 4 days ago, however, Decaf Grub 47393 rewrote the example to be about MM10 instead, completely removing any and all references to MM9, and did not leave an edit reason. I have not sent them a message yet in hopes of not acting too reactionary.
I would revert it immediately, but in fear of causing an edit war, what's the best way to go about this situation?
Edited by CasualChrisopenWhat was this? Web Original
I got this from random button, description brings up for questions then answers and repair shop link was dead.
Talent Bomb Bizarre YMMV article about movies one particular Video Review Show didn't like.
openMaking Redirects
Er... how, exactly, do I create a redirect for a page? There are two new books in a series I adore (Dragaera), and they don't have redirects yet. I've looked at the Administrivia pages related to Redirects, but it's unclear precisely how, and where, I can go about adding new titles to the series' alternate-work-titles list. :-(
openProblematic WMG entry
This is from The Jonas Brothers:
Considering that this entry is about the ex of a real-life person, and Dollhouse is about " an illegal offshoot of a corrupt medical conglomeration" where women have their memories wiped and reprogrammed to suit the needs of male clients, I'm almost certain this entry defies ROCEJ.
Edited by Shadow8411openTroper making Questionable Character Pages
Squid Roofan 4 Ever has made two character pages of dubious quality, Characters.Free Birds and Characters.BorderTown, that are so bad and riddled with errors (both grammatical and factual) that they might need to be cutlisted. Not to mention the frequent ZCEs. I've already sent them a notifier, but looking at their edit history, almost every edit they made is terrible and sometimes skirting into sexual territority where it doesn't belong. Just reading some of this stuff makes me cringe.
For instance, here's their edit on a The Loud House recap page:
- Getting Crap Past the Radar: After Lincoln and his friend got beaten up after the bus stops, you can clearly see Stella's Pantsu pulled up from her skirt.
This is a good example of the general tone of their edits. Keep in mind that most Loud House characters are young children, so showing a girl's underwear for a brief moment was probably not meant to be sexual and not an example of Radar.
From Characters.Free Birds:
- Rape Is a Special Kind of Evil: Attacks Reggie with his glutes.
- Stalker with a Crush: Reggie is his bullying target.
- Vile Villain, Saccharine Show: His tactics on Reggie makes him a villain.
- Villain Protagonist: He bullys Reggie to make him do his dirty work.
- Why Don't You Just Shoot Him?: Is Reggie really that cowardly to stand up to a bully?
They have a tendency to exaggerate things to seem sexual and makes out most of the protagonists in this children's animated film to be villains and/or rapists. From what I can tell from the actual film (because I've actually seen Free Birds, unlike Loud House) one of the characters is kind of a bully, so they equated it to full-blown villainy and a scene where he bumped the main character with his glutes as sexual assault.
I just don't really know what to do about this, so I was advised to make this post and alert the mods about this troper's activity.
Edited by antenna_earsopenNo Title Western Animation
What in God's name is up with the Character page for Free Birds? Tropes like A Date With Rosie Palmes, Karmic Rape, A Nazi by Any Other Name, etc... in a movie made for kids. Unless this all happens, which I really doubt, I think the person who troped this either A) does not know how these tropes work or B) was over-exaggerating everything on the pages.
openVoice Actors Film
Halo. I tried multiple times to add his name here; https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Characters/TipsWorksheet but unfortunately, I can't. Any idea of how I can do that?
openSlow-burning Edit War / Potential Single Issue Wonk on RWBY Web Original
Back in January 22, Horsea deleted an entry without any edit reason, prompting Zaptech to restore it. Just now, Horsea once again deleted the Adorkable entry in question, and once again they've left no edit reason.
Edited by AnoBakaDesuopenIncorrect octopus fact on Into the Spider-Verse character page? Western Animation
From Characters.Spider Man Into The Spider Verse:
- Animal Motifs: The Octopus, natch. Once it's revealed that she's an Alternate Universe version of Doctor Octopus, she ties her hair up in a way that noticeably resembles an octopus' mantle, her goggles resemble bulging eyes, and her tentacles are plastic/rubber instead of metal, making them look and move in a more unpleasantly organic way. Also, while Otto's traditional fighting style is to use his tentacles to crush and impale his opponents Liv prefers to strangle them, just as a real octopus is able to suffocate their prey.
I have never heard of octopuses strangling their prey with their tentacles - at least, not in real life. They usually drape their entire bodies over the prey and then eat it, since their mouths are in the middle of their undersides. I looked it up to be sure, and the closest thing I found was this story about an octopus strangling its mate - not prey.
Can we delete the last sentence of this example?
openEdit reverted in YMMV.MonsterHunterRise Videogame
Some time ago, I deleted this entry for Author's Saving Throw:
- Author's Saving Throw: Glavenus has sometimes been regarded as a Spotlight-Stealing Squad, due to how much more focus it got compared to other members of the Fated Four. In Generations, it was the only one of the four flagship monsters with a Deviant. While it was DLC, it was the only one of the Fated Four to be in Stories. And in Iceborne, it was the only fourth-generation mascot featured at all... and got a new subspecies on top of everything else. Come Rise, however, Glavenus's return has yet to be confirmed, while Mizutsune has gotten front-and-center treatment in early promotions.
Steam was the one who originally added the entry, I removed it on the grounds it was too soon to tell that Glavenus was returning, since he added it before the game was release. Then today, PC Awesomeness went and readded the entry with no changes whatsoever.
Also, Mizutsune is one of the Fated Four, which would disqualify it from being an Ensemble Darkhorse.
Edited by PlasmaPoweropenScreenshots
Is it alright if I take screenshots of some of tropes on the site to store on my phone? I'm not sure if that's allowed or if it's a copyright infringement.
openHow long is a new account new?
Is it about a week? A month? I'm mainly curious as to when these restrictions on my posting will disappear.
openRecreating some of the YMMV pages for White Dark Life. Webcomic
About a week or two ago all YMMV pages on the web comic White Dark Life were deleted because "Ymmv page created by creator of work".
I was never aware of such a rule so I apologize for breaking it, but losing the Awesome, Heartwarming, and Funny pages hit pretty hard since it helped to keep track of years of RP that had been going on under my comic. So I was hoping that these pages could be reopened for others to work on. From what I understand, as long as I personally do not edit those pages everything should be fine, right?
openIs this salvagable? Videogame
Three tropes, two are ZCE. Not counting clean up and null edit by Septimus, the last edit was in 2016, adding page image. Not counting that or pothole to publisher's name, the last actual content edit was in 2013 by Tiggers Are Great (who's no longer active).
openTroper with a bad single-issue wonk
Dongwa Chan seems to have a Single-Issue Wonk when it comes to Dr. Squatch advertisements.
Earlier this month, they added an entry for the ads on Horrible.Advertising. The SBIH thread agreed to remove it, noting the lack of any evidence of the ads being widely-hated.
However, it was then re-added with Reddit as a citation. The thread once again agreed to cut it, as for this upload has a large like-to-dislike ratio.
Dongwa themselves then came to the thread, stating that they think the like-to-dislike ratio doesn't count as "good reviews" and that any positive "reviews" were left by astroturfers. While the thread once again disagreed with them, they popped up again just yesterday, seemingly desperate to find more sources in order to prove that the Dr. Squatch ads are SBIH. According to this post, Dongwa has been arguing back and forth with another user through DMs, with Dongwa supposedly stating that the fans are "too stupid to realize they are awful and not funny". They also added an example about the Dr. Squatch ads to Critic-Proof that reeks of personal bias:
- The Dr. Squatch ads are reviled for their unfunny humor and failed attempts to be edgy, yet many uploads of their ads have more likes than dislikes and have many positive comments.
So yeah, there's clearly some sort of Single-Issue Wonk going on here. I'll note that this isn't the first time Dongwa has had some sort of Single-Issue Wonk; last year, they tried to scrub all usages of British slang and pop-cultural references off the wiki.
Edited by jandn2014open Wikipedia Citation/Legal Issues
I was looking through Wikipedia's page on alternative outlets, and I found that TV Tropes is no longer cited. Looking through the talk page, TV Tropes was apparently removed for "distributing the work of its pre-2012 contributors in violation of copyright" after switching to the "non-free CC BY-NC-SA license" in July of 2012. Two questions:
- Our page on Wikipedia still claims that this site is cited as an alternative. Should this be deleted, or should it be changed to reflect that TV Tropes used to be cited?
- What's up with the copyright thing? Are there any actual legal issues with this site?
resolved Editing Drafts without permission.
Tvtropesfan234 has edited other people's Complete Monster Drafts without permission despite being suspended from the projects thread.
This has been added and removed by various tropers, the most recent of which is rva98014:
For some context, the hero accidentally causes a crossbow bolt to kill a supporting character who could have saved the world. The person who she made accidentally shoot said character blames her, and the animation supports this.
Can we get a consensus, here? For the record, I really do think it was solely Namaari's fault, but it's not supported in the movie itself, and Word of God hasn't said anything on if both characters were in the right/wrong.
Edited by FishiousRend