![]()
That seems to suggest that "readers" and "tropers" are in opposition in some way. There's no reason why they can't be friends
In any case, explaining this to me is a start, but what about the tropers — and future tropers — who are going to complain about changes without seeing this conversation, or even knowing it exists, but are going to read a whole bunch of Administrivia pages that suggest anything goes, or at least a much loose standard than we have?
Well, I certainly can't object to getting rid of the Comic Sans.
Fiction itself is a commentary on the world, so if TV Tropes is to be about fiction a little of that would rub off. I find Real Life sections interesting, but I wouldn't mind seeing them restricted as to placement and content in ways other media aren't. I don't think existing in real life makes something Not A Trope, but I might feel/have felt differently had I shown up in 2006 rather than 2008.
The child is father to the man —OedipusI've been around for about 5 years now (scaaary), and I don't really feel like the mission has changed all that much. I do feel that rule enforcement is becoming far more apparent and restrictive, and I can understand why that would bother people that were here before the shift from "general guidelines, self moderation" to "specific rules (even if we don't call them that), more moderation." There will always be people who think that anarchy can work, but the truth of the matter is that it can't in any large group.
It's apparent that that group of unknown size is becoming disenfranchised by the changes in the wiki, both real and imagined. I'm not sure we can do anything about that, however, since all things change over time and it is quite impossible to please everyone with any change.
I don't like or agree with all the changes that have happened (and not only from a selfish viewpoint), but the good still vastly outweighs the bad. I love this site and I feel it fills an important need that no other site does.
As for Truth in Television / Real Life, at first I regarded them as trivia, but as my understanding of tropes matured I see them now as more of the inspiration for/mirror of fictional tropes, which makes understanding how a trope may appear in Real Life important for understanding the trope itself.
edited 10th Apr '11 8:00:47 AM by ccoa
Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.
I don't think tropers and readers are opposed to each other; it's just that they seem to have different ideas about what's important to the wiki.
I agree that we need to have an official The Mission Of Tv Tropes page or something that clarifies exactly what we want to accomplish. The closest thing we have is the Administrivia page, but most of that is "how this wiki functions" rather than "The purpose of the wiki is X".
Reaction Image RepositoryLaconic:It's not so much that we're directly opposed as that not everything that's fun to write is fun to read.
edited 10th Apr '11 10:07:41 AM by INUH
Infinite Tree: an experimental storyHow about: we want to avoid being a niche site that's (on its face) for fandoms to crack inside jokes at each other and have conversations about stuff. It's fine to do that behind the scenes but not on the wiki's public face - that is, the main articles.
edited 10th Apr '11 10:10:08 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Well, yeah. Perhaps I should've said "for the general public to read."
Infinite Tree: an experimental storyI think this sums it up pretty well.
Reaction Image RepositoryOn not having rules what about this stuff?
from the pinned section
Most of it I know is aimed at the forum, but I would also assume this applies to editing as well. I could have sworn there was something somewhere that had a list of editing do's and don't s but I can't recall where.
I don't see why we don't already have a mission page. the home page gives you a pretty brief summary of what we're about but there's no reason we can't get more in-depth on a separate page.
Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?
That's what I'm saying. I looked at the homepage, and it gives a cursory description of what the wiki is, but it's vague enough that we can really say much other than "We catalogue tropes". Which is of course completely accurate, but I feel like we should have something that clarifies it more, for both editors and readers. Like have an official "The Mission of Tv Tropes" page that the homepage links to.
We do have Welcome To TV Tropes, Tips Worksheet, and How To Write An Example.
I gotta agree, I think we need to make the mission of this site more clear and concise for new editors so that they can get a sense of what they need to avoid (i.e. conflicting opinions, useless filler, writing in the wrong perspective, etc.) I know those rules are there, but I feel like they're not understood well enough for new people. A concise, clear way to show our mission and what we must do to reach that goal (and perhaps a link to the rules).
Also, thanks for sticking up for Darth Wiki, Eddie. Made my morning.
A mission statement is a great idea for noobs, but I don't think it will deal with the people already here who feel disenfranchised, but otherwise choose to stay. These people have put a lot of effort into this site, and they are unlikely to give it up. The mission statement will still feel like a list of rules that were made without them being involved, which is the same problem we are having now.
I think we need to do out best to get other people involved. People who are disenfranchised don't feel that way because things have changed, but because they don't feel they had any say in how it changed. I think these people need to discover something they can do to help the wiki, too. If they get to add something to the mission statement, that might help.
I think you'll find that the majority of people here want this place to be a good place. No one wants this place to suck. But these people need to know that their contributions are valued, rather than being the people we need to "fix."
Everyone Has An Important Job To DoIf we haven't abandoned the Tips Worksheet entirely, this would make a good addition to that list.
she her hers hOI!!! i'm tempe
Agreed.
![]()
The basic issue (as far as I can tell) is that while the wiki's mission hasn't changed, per se, over time it drifted a bit, and now that we're trying to bring it back, people don't want it to change. From the beginning the wiki's primary goal was to clearly describe and catalog tropes and make a record of their uses in fiction. Everything else is secondary, and it seems that some tropers want to focus on the secondary goals to the detriment of the primary goals.
I.e. the people who want to keep natter, injokes, stuff like that. There's nothing wrong with discussion or injokes, but some people want to keep that stuff on the main page, even though it's unhelpful for that 99% of non-troper readers, as well as a good chuck of the tropers themselves. We need to shift emphasis off of "what tropers want" to "what will make this wiki helpful to anyone who reads it, troper or not".
edited 11th Apr '11 11:18:27 AM by JapaneseTeeth
Reaction Image Repository
What I mean is that the stated goal has remained constant, but fewer people are aware of it, and as such the wiki as a whole hasn't been pursuing that goal as vigorously. Now that we're trying to push it back in that direction, people are complaining about the changes.
Take the example of Natter. The wiki has always been officially opposed to natter, it's just that in the early days we were willing to tolerate it more. Now that it's becoming more of a problem, we have to crack down on it, which causes people who don't mind the natter to complain about its removal, even though the natter was never supposed to be there in the first place.
edited 11th Apr '11 2:59:48 PM by JapaneseTeeth
Reaction Image RepositoryThat's exactly it. I think the vast, vast majority of complaints would never have been made if the wiki had been on-mission this whole time. If subjectives and audience reactions had been shunted off to the side from the first, editors who wanted them on the main page would have decided TV Tropes wasn't for them and editors who had no opinion wouldn't have gotten used to them being on the main page and felt like it was a new — and for many, wrong — direction when they finally were moved. Similarly Complaining About Shows You Dont Like.
The child is father to the man —Oedipus
Yup, pretty much. I think that there is a place on the wiki for YMMV stuff, but if we had realized the distinction earlier and kept it off the main pages, most of the arguments that have been going on wouldn't be happening.
edited 11th Apr '11 4:14:02 PM by JapaneseTeeth
Reaction Image Repository@Big T: I think a part of this is because they haven't felt very welcomed at times when the administration got a little harder. We should let them know straight up that, yes, you can be subjective, but we need to keep most of it in a different area. We gotta make it clear that we're not trying to belittle their opinions or discouraging them from continuing; they just need to keep that work in a different place to keep conflicts or edit wars off the page.
While I agree that in retrospect the wiki should have cracked down on natter harder from the start (and certainly sooner than it did), I can't agree with this:
I think that's part of the problem; the point of the wiki was always to categorize the different tropes, but in this case we didn't make the separation until it became a problem. We should have made the distinction between objective tropes and YMMV tropes earlier along. If we had, people wouldn't be complaining about moving them despite the fact that it's completely within the purpose of the wiki to do so. There are valid arguments about whether specific tropes are YMMV or not, but I think that having the YMMV/objective distinction in place helps avoid natter and flame wars.
Like I said about the natter; the problem isn't that the wiki ever wanted it there. Official policy has always been against it. Its just that earlier in the wiki's history we let it slide because it wasn't nearly as much of an issue as it is now. Then the problem got worse and came back to bite the wiki in the ass.
edited 12th Apr '11 7:24:26 AM by JapaneseTeeth
Reaction Image Repository

A little late, but: The works pages have existed as long as I've visited TV Tropes. And I remember when the wiki looked like this
.
Darth Wiki used to be a Just for Fun space to, jokingly, do things we couldn't do on the main wiki. Then someone got the bright idea to move problem pages to Darth Wiki, and then we decided to create Sugar Wiki as Darth Wiki's "good" counterpart, which wouldn't make sense without the Trope Decay of Darth Wiki, and that's how Darth Wiki became a Wretched Hive Of Scum And Villainy. This
is what Darth Wiki used to be like. (Yes, Unpublished Works, Ultimate Troll Entry, and Complain About Shows You Dont Like are on there. You see the roots of Darth Wiki's decay starting early.)
Once, yea so many years ago, I got into an argument with Ununnilium over the role Real Life plays in trope formation, in which I pretty much state (my version of) the mission of People Sit On Chairs pretty succinctly. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be on the wiki anymore, given my lack of success with Google searches, and since the Internet Archive doesn't have a proper search function I don't know enough to not have to go through gazillions of saves of gazillions of trope discussion pages looking for it.
I'm finding myself wanting to dredge it up recently, not only because of the overuse and misuse of PSOC, but because I almost wonder if I would modify my position in that argument today (or at least a year or two ago). Real Life sections do not feel as out of place on the wiki as they may have once been, since the move to "media tropes" has led to a perception (even among longtime tropers like me) that the wiki is about documenting various phenomena that happen in various places, fictional or no. In other words, the wiki is a sort of commentary on the world, sort of like a more benign Encyclopedia Dramatica or (I'm very hesitant to say this for obvious reasons) a more opinionated Wikipedia. This may also help explain the popularity of Subjective Tropes and Audience Reactions (and thus the ongoing controversy surrounding the YMMV ghetto) and the backlash whenever a natterfest or complaining page is deleted or an "overly negative" work page gets purged.
Back when I had that argument, my perception was that most of the pages listed in Truth in Television had been troped-up under the assumption that they didn't exist in real life, only for the existence of real-life examples to be revealed. Now a trope that is more well-known for its presence in real life than in fiction wouldn't be out of place in YKTTW, and in fact regularly gets proposed (and dismissed as PSOC).
Whether this reflects the evolution of the wiki, or is a badwrong form of decay that must be purged, is left as an excersize for the reader.
edited 10th Apr '11 12:25:48 AM by MorganWick