Archived Discussion Main / SearchWiki

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

Describe Search Wiki Discussion here.

This is a fascinating site. There is a preponderance of topic titles from the Joss Whedon stable, and a curious emphasis on anime. Many of the topic titles describe TV techniques used 50 years ago, and the titles are simply too 'trendy' or obscure, or linked to a contemporary sub-culture, for this to be a really useful reference database. I even think 'jumping the shark' is something many interested readers will not understand. (The purpose of this site is certainly to educate). This problem is borne out on the series page where several of the most important series in the history of television do not have a link or are not even mentioned, while some effectively straight-to-dvd short cult series enjoy in relative terms copious notes. I understand that the site is still developing, but don't let this this early, skewed emphasis determine the all-important categories that organise this important resource.

Gus No way anonymous guy. Haul that serious crap over to wikipedia, where they want to be dull. This site is by, about, and for fans. //A later note: If you think something is not here that should be, add it. Lurking off in the dark lobbing in critiques anonymously doesn't really improve anything.

Kendra Kirai: Especially not in a completely unrelated discussion entry. I'm surprised you didn't mention that, Gus. Though it's not as if we pay by the entry. :)

(Later) Also, Gus is right, we like to have fun here. We snark at things from time to time in the entries we make. Sometimes it gets removed later, sometimes it persists for eternity. I just made an entry about the pointlessness of the character type The Ditz, for crying out loud. Darth Vader is an example under Scary Black Man. The Olsens are under Creepy Twins! If that doesn't show you we like to have fun here, then you, my friend, don't know what fun is. ....Or have a much more interesting life than we do. Either way, Don't you judge me! Don't you judge me! I will cut you, sucka!

Janitor: <wipes the foam off KK's chin > There, there. Don't let the creepy academic get you worked up, so. You know they just come around to learn about popular culture. They can't help being creepy.

Tabby: My God, it's like being back in college. Excuse me, I have to curl up in a corner and whimper until the Advanced Literary Analysis flashbacks go away.

Ununnilium: Plus, the names of the tropes may have obscure derivations, but the terms themselves are actually quite useful in discussion and analysis. I find myself using them all the time when talking about something new I've seen or heard about or done.

Looney Toons: Huh. Sounds like a new entry for Characters as Device: The Creepy Academic. Like the Creepy Child, but with a graduate degree.

RedBeardSean: The Olsens are creepy. Guesss Who: REALLY creepy.

Guesss Who: I was looking around, and THERE IS NO PAGE FOR THE MATRIX!!! Jesus!

Seth: Then make one. Any entry you made would pick up really quickly. The Matrix

Dark Sasami: Think we could get a discussion search? Maybe a check box, "search within discussion pages?"

Seth: We can do that. Use the google search and tack on discussion.

Ununnilium: We need a way to search for Final Fantasy V without searching for Final Fantasy VII. Indeed, adding Boolean operators to the search would be doubleplusgood.

Solandra: Ununnilium is a goodthinker. I plusbellyfeel. (Sorry, couldn't resist...)

Shire Nomad: I've discovered that the search engine can only search for one word or phrase at a time; it can't handle multiple nonconsecutive words. For instance, say I was trying to find Medieval Stasis, and my search terms were: stagnant technology. Both of those words are in the article, but since the phrase "stagnant technology" isn't there, it finds nothing. This has given me a huge amount of hassle in my searching: either I have to give a single word and hunt through 100+ article names, or two words and get zero (because they aren't in any article back to back). There's no good way to narrow down the search parameters.

Cort Jstr: the best solution appears to be using Google with the site: parameter. Wikipedia's built-in search is pretty sad as well, and at least for a while they recommended using Google in this way as well. It not only tends be more accurate but is less taxing on the server. The downside is that Google doesn't become aware of edits as quickly. I was just able to pull up Medieval Statis using: stagnant technology site:tvtropes.org

Janitor: There is now a link on search results that will save a step for you when doing a google site search for your term. Google site search implements boolean operators and will also search discussions.

ralphmerridew: Links produced in a search are of form "Main.Whatever", while the rest of the links are "Main/Whatever".

jytjey: Who the hell is it that keeps on deleting Metal Gear from the list?

Sci Vo: What list? (confused)

Avib: Looking for a trope, namely "Killing me won't bring her back." Is it here under another name? Or should I make a new page for it? How do I do that anyways?

Sci Vo: Our YKTTW page is the best place (aside from search) to find out what our name is for a particular trope, or else decide on a name for it if we don't have it yet. I can tell you that something like that would probably be under Stock Phrases or Other Stock Phrases.

Drow Lord: The search engine has a discussion page? This feels kinda like falling off the edge of the world into the Negative Dimension...

Octal: Oh man, I know. Pretty cool, though. I also kind of love that it apparently started when some random anon decided to put their critique of the site as a whole on the discussion for the first page that came to hand... probably when they were searching for one of those difficult-to-search-for pages and got frustrated. As one does.

Zephid: Y'know, if you capitalize every word in a search, you tend to get more results...

Cassy: I have the same problem, I can confirm... Does anybody have any idea why it does that?

Stm177: Fast Eddie fixed that — he talked about it in the forum. Basically, there was a mistake made when recovering from the Great Crash

Kat Merack: Hi! New troper here, I guess. Can anyone explain why the heck there isn't an entry for the show 'Fighting Foodons'? Seriously! Oh, and... Sorry if this's the wrong place to put this. Just point me to where I should put it. Thanks!

Rogue 7: If there isn't an entry, just make one. The Wiki Sandbox can get you a red link (Wiki word it) and then click that and start typing. This is a...different place to put questions. Try the Forum or Ask The Tropers.

KiTA: Huh. Who knew searching for Tropes got you an easter egg.

Begoggled Fox: Okay... Just tried to search today (12 Sep 2008) and found the search engine broken, in a bizarre fashion. The site keeps trying to search for "searchsearchresultsWhateveryoutyped". I don't think it's fixable from our level. Eddie? What's going on?

• Scratch that, it doesn't even include anything you type in. It just seems to spit back the contents of the search markup at you, as if that were your form entry.