Why can meanings not evolve? Why is it that words can not pick up additional implications aside from the original use? The names give the implication that they wish to give. On top of that, many of the examples feel like examples from elsewhere. The Silurians thing is just a failure of research, Magnus is a case of Steven Ulysses Perhero, everything else looks like it was stolen from You Keep Using That Word. Except You Keep Using That Word accepts that there are varying levels of pedanticism and levels to whihc we shouldn't worry about it.
The content of the page can be covered by other Did Not Do The Research tropes. The one that works as its own distinct problem is the dactyl one where you can have a name that uses a word in one context that gains its implications from its use in another context. That is not Hollywood Style, it is not a bad thing, it is not a wrong against the world, it is not necessarily something to be slated.
Edited by SomeSortOfTroper
I'm not entirely sure which Did Not Do The Research page the former example for Galbatorix falls under, as it's literally a genuine error with a meaningful name (assuming it wasn't made up). One could cram it into Blind Idiot Translation, but it's a bit off an odd fit there.
"That's ridiculous. What would a walrus do with a magic bag?" Pokeamida
(The end of the archived discussion seems to be relevant to the cut...)
Anyway, the Galactus example is bad, but that just means you should remove it. That's not a reason to delete the page. And "dactyl" doesn't just bring to mind pterodactyl, it brings to mind "why in the world are they calling them that?". Notice that in the Elfquest example the meaningful name was retconned away because someone seemed to have figured out the name doesn't mean what they think it means.
Edited by arromdee Hide / Show Replies