Wait, something about sharks, and voodoo, what?: Voodoo Shark

Yeah, I get the Trope Namer, but it's a pretty lousy name. The trope has nothing to do with voodoo or with sharks; it's just confusing to the uninformed. If I'm looking at an index under a work, and see "Voodoo Shark", how the hell am I supposed to know it means "the answer to a question that just creates more questions"?

I see "That Just Raises Further Questions" in the ptitles. Why don't we just go with that? It's far more to the point, and won't confuse anyone who sees the trope on an index.

misuse?

I'm gonna want to see some serious misuse before opting for a rename.

edited 12th Feb '11 11:27:10 AM by SeanMurrayI

Isn't the term from outside the wiki as well?

A google search for "Voodoo Shark" brought up about 5,500 pages, the first two being from TV Tropes.

"That Just Raises Further Questions" brought in 13,700.

edited 12th Feb '11 11:52:43 AM by ThePope

So what? You just proved Voodoo Shark has a wide use outside in the Internet as the name of the trope. "That just raises further questions" is not a name, it is the explanation and common phrase. It also has more uses then describing the trope. It could be used outside media, which Voodoo Shark can not, for example.

Anyway, no broken, not fix.

Nah, he strongly suggested that Voodoo Shark's external use is primarily because of the tvtropes entry.

I don't think it's a very good name, personally, but it's probably too firmly entrenched to do anything about it...

How so, just because the TV Tropes page is the first one? This doesn't mean it is where the term originated. That is not how Google works. And even if it were, if there are people using the term elsewhere we lose the liberty to change as we please. It would only create confusion.

That wick count and inbound links count is beyond the significant level; the name is obtuse but it's one of those "here's an example to always think of" ones, from a well know work, which is probably what helps it to spread. So that obtuseness isn't enough to make me want to to overthrow the links because I think it is related to the success.

Over 3000 inbounds for the main title, 0 inbounds for the redirects. And it's already got good redirects, so unless there's heavy misuse, I think our hands are tied here.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Yeah, sometimes stupid names are also good names because they are stupid. It makes them memorable.

Note that I said, strongly suggests, not directly proves. If an otherwise relatively obscure site tops the google search results for a phrase, I think that would suggest that the phrase was not widespread until that site picked it up.

Of course, I have since found out that tvtropes isn't as relatively obscure as all that, by doing a test for the phrases Seen It A Million Times and You Know That Thing Where.

I understand how google works, thank you oh so very much.

I'm inclined to leave this one alone as "entrenched".

Fight smart, not fair.

Wh...

Seriously. That a phrase appears linking to us first only says enough about how the phrase is linked to us; it does not make us responible of its popularization. This is a well-known preexisting term and a pretty concise one at that, so I think unless there is heavy misuse it should stay as it is. Maybe a redirect if you feel so bad about it, since those are free.

Fanfic Recs orwellianretcon'd: cutlocked for committee or for Google?

The term was coined by SF Debris, TV Tropes probably popularized it. Eitherway, need to see some misuse to even consider a rename

That was SF Debris's name for it and it comes from something very specific, yes, but it makes sense in context and I like the name.

Voodoo WHAT? Plot? Whoever coined the term, isn't a good trope namer.

Considering how well it's working, I kind of think they were.

Creed of the Happy Pessimist:Always expect the worst. Then, when it happens, it was only what you expected. All else is a happy surprise.

Newcomers might have a difficulty though.

I'm still going to want to see clear, widespread misuse. At least then we'd have an observable, objective reason for changing a trope name  ^*

and not some vague "Circumstance X might happen" line of nonsense.

edited 16th Feb '11 6:55:25 AM by SeanMurrayI

The argument that Voodoo Shark is a non-indicative title is solid.

The argument that it was coined by someone else is solid as well.

An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.

Redirects Are Free - and it already has some good ones. The title works, people recognise it, ultimately those three things mean no change is necessary. A name being innately bad is one thing, and I could argue that. But it's also subjective, and all the objective measures of a name's effectiveness (or nearly all anyway) come out in favour of it.

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.

So let me get this straight, Big-Lipped Alligator Moment gets a free pass, but Voodoo Shark doesn't?

SF Debris defined a term that we didn't already have. It's not like we renamed a preexisting trope with fanboyism as the sole concern.

mudshark: I don't expect Nate to make sense, really.

And it also helps a lot that it has a good description which clearly states the definition and explains the Trope Namer. If you were confused initially, it's hard to stay confused after reading the page.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Sure it is, but the argument is not exactly valid (at least, not on its own—not with that many wicks and referrals).