At issue:Merge Barefoot Funny Animals into Half Dressed Cartoon Animal? Pros:
- Appears to be The Same But More Specific of Half Dressed Cartoon Animal since both trope pages describe the same narrative use (garments being selectively omitted from an animal character so the character appears more animal-like) and differ only in that one specifies what is not worn (shoes).
- Out of a sample of 70 wicks, most also/already referred to a Half Dressed Cartoon Animal.
- Half Dressed Cartoon Animal already contains a note about how these characters commonly do not wear shoes, regardless of what else they are wearing.
- Applies to not just Funny Animals but also Petting Zoo People, which we consider a distinct trope.
- If we reach an unwieldy number of examples, we can soft-split, since the tropes can easily share a description.
- Barefoot Funny Animals has the larger number of examples.
- Barefoot Funny Animals appears to be a distinct trope in that it clearly delineates that it is only about otherwise-fully-clothed shoeless animals, while Half Dressed Cartoon Animal is about partially clothed animals omitting those that are fully dressed but shoeless.
- Half Dressed Cartoon Animal and Barefoot Funny Animal trope pages are both pretty long already.