TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Notable at last!

Go To

Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#1: Jan 8th 2011 at 2:27:32 AM

Well, we've finally made it - TV Tropes has an entry in Schott's Almanac.

Yes, this has been added to the appropriate page.

What's precedent ever done for us?
Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
FastEddie Since: Apr, 2004
#3: Jan 8th 2011 at 11:11:28 AM

Cool. Weird, a little, how a catalog of current happenings is only in a dead-tree edition. Sort of contradicts the whole 'current' theme.

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#4: Jan 8th 2011 at 11:26:02 AM

[up][up]Details, chief.

It's a spin-off from Schott's Original Miscellany, a collection of strange and interesting little factoids compiled by a writer and photographer named Ben Schott that became a runaway publishing success. Matter of fact, I'd say that he's got quite a troper-ish mentality, given his work and very particular sense of humour.

[up]Yeah, modern information delivered in an archaic manner is sort of Schott's thing.

edited 8th Jan '11 11:27:45 AM by Iaculus

What's precedent ever done for us?
DrStarky Okay Guy from Corn And Pig Land Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Staying up all night to get lucky
Okay Guy
#5: Jan 8th 2011 at 12:46:16 PM

[up][up] I totally love the word "Dead Tree Edition"

Put me in motion, drink the potion, use the lotion, drain the ocean, cause commotion, fake devotion, entertain a notion, be Nova Scotian
Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#6: Jan 8th 2011 at 3:57:13 PM

Notable enough to be mentioned in a once-a-year thing? Tres cool.

SomeSortOfTroper Since: Jan, 2001
#7: Jan 8th 2011 at 4:24:06 PM

Just you wait until we're mentioned in Burke's Peerage.

chihuahua0 Since: Jul, 2010
#8: Jan 8th 2011 at 4:26:38 PM

So when will someone expain the TV Tropes page at Wikipedia?

Tzetze DUMB from a converted church in Venice, Italy Since: Jan, 2001
chihuahua0 Since: Jul, 2010
JapaneseTeeth Existence Weighed Against Nonbeing from Meinong's jungle Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Mu
Existence Weighed Against Nonbeing
#12: Jan 9th 2011 at 10:40:27 AM

We should totally note it on the Wikipedia page to prove that we have notability. Then we have an excuse to make the page longer.

Reaction Image Repository
SomeSortOfTroper Since: Jan, 2001
#13: Jan 11th 2011 at 11:21:14 AM

So here's a question:

If we're on wikipedia and we're notable enough for them and our page is fine, then we would be fine as a piece of information on other pages? For instance, the pages they have on tropes (e.g. their page on Big Bad) where they'll have a couple of example, it would be appropriate to have a point about tv tropes (what we call the trope, or in the external links or possible even to make a point (e.g. there is no reference for Big Bad deriving as a term from Buffy (omg, recursive parentheses))).

Tzetze DUMB from a converted church in Venice, Italy Since: Jan, 2001
DUMB
#14: Jan 11th 2011 at 11:32:21 AM

That already happens.

Well, as an external link. I don't think we're academically rigorous enough to work for citations.

edited 11th Jan '11 11:33:54 AM by Tzetze

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.
CaissasDeathAngel House Lewis: Sanity is Relative from Dumfries, SW Scotland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
House Lewis: Sanity is Relative
#15: Jan 12th 2011 at 10:41:02 AM

Agree with Tzetze, it's not just "any old citation" it's about verifiability. Wikis generally aren't great for that, and they themselves are aware that they're in themselves treated as a questionable source. Thus they try and make their own sources as high quality as possible, and people will investigate and remove sources that don't come up to scratch.

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.
SomeSortOfTroper Since: Jan, 2001
#16: Jan 12th 2011 at 11:59:16 AM

I'm not talking about any old citation, I'm talking about the fact that if TV Tropes is notable then "TV Tropes calls this Missing White Woman Syndrome" should also be notable.

FastEddie Since: Apr, 2004
#17: Jan 12th 2011 at 1:50:49 PM

Why are we discussing Wikipedia's policies? Seems like this is a discussion better held on Wikipedia.

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
chihuahua0 Since: Jul, 2010
#18: Jan 12th 2011 at 5:57:51 PM

Well, apparently we don't have much dicussion there.

Apparently, we have over a million accounts and yet Wikipedia thinks we're not notable enough to have a full-blown article? This is madness...

INUH Since: Jul, 2009
#19: Jan 12th 2011 at 5:59:11 PM

I don't think that's how they define notability. In fact, I don't think anything found on this site itself would make us notable on its own. Just information on us found elsewhere.

Infinite Tree: an experimental story
Willbyr Hi (Y2K) Relationship Status: With my statistically significant other
Hi
#20: Jan 12th 2011 at 7:55:16 PM

Basically, you have to have had someone reputable publish something about you to be considered "notable". It's the main reason why RE-TAKE never could get an article or be used as a reference for anything Eva-related...no one had ever written an article about it in a public media outlet that could be sourced, so it was considered non-notable.

edited 12th Jan '11 7:55:56 PM by Willbyr

Add Post

Total posts: 20
Top