The Analysis Namespace.

Analysis.Moral Event Horizon is... um.

I admit, I'm still not even sure what the Analysis namespace is for, but... I'm at least 70% confident this isn't it.

The page has been edited twice ever, by ~Shelton TV Tropes. ... That handle strikes me as significant, but I can't recall why ok i remembered why and it's probably irrelevant to this discussion.

Edited by wingedcatgirl on Jul 1st 2020 at 1:22:47 AM

I can barely tell what that page is trying to say. At best, it looks like a Laconic page that uses South Park to demonstrate the trope. But it's so poorly worded that I'm not sure if it's trying to make some other point.

Either way, I say that page can be cut. It doesn't really add anything too important.

Yeah, there's absolutely nothing of value there. Cut.

Edited by Serac on Jul 1st 2020 at 3:44:51 AM

So I just found Analysis.Isaac Baranoff... what even is this page? It just seems like a bunch of gushing.

Yeah, we can cut that just for misusing the namespace.

The Analysis subpage for Alien looks more like a Fridge Brilliance entry that was moved to it's own page. Here's the page in its entirety:

Should I cut the page and move this info to the Fridge subpage?

Analysis.I Carly is just complaining about how characters are Mary Sues and offers nothing else of substance.

LOL, what the hell? Cut it faster than Freddie can count from 5, omitting the 1.

I'll go ahead and cutlist it.

For that matter, Analysis.Nickelodeon is a long essay about how shipping makes certain jerkass characters more palatable than others in the fandom, and it feels like an example of Hypocritical Fandom (which was cut for a reason). It also has a bullet point at the bottom that reads like a YouTube comment rather than an addition to a wiki article.

Edited by Serac on Jul 20th 2020 at 3:20:31 AM

Cut it, then.

I just wrote Analysis.Getting Crap Past The Radar to help with its TRS effort. I'm hoping some others will help me with how different radars treat different types of content and hopefully aid in finding a solution for this trope.

Coming from this ATT Thread, but the Analysis page for Blue Is the Warmest Color is chock full of first person writing beneath that wall of text written by someone years ago.

Edited by alnair20aug93 on Jul 30th 2020 at 4:42:59 PM

Done editing it to be less first person yet still retaining the introspection.

What are the guidelines for Analysis pages? I'm thinking because I deleted this real life general example from the "Video Games" folder on Crack is Cheaper:

• The main source of fan outrage from microtransactions in games. Sure, spending extra money on a game you shelled sixty bucks on to purchase new content that took the developers extra time to complete makes sense. Spending money to buy something you could (and probably should) earn with a few hours of play, or even gamble away your money with loot boxes (which may cause gambling addictions to develop when played by children)? You could spend thousands of dollars just to stay 'ahead' of the players who earned their fun through hundreds of hours of dedication, which also breaks the feeling of accomplishment and cheapens the game. And when the game eventually shuts down servers or is no longer fun, all those in-game items you spent your money on are worthless.

I asked in the real life section maintenance thread if any of this could be salvaged for an Analysis page (because I believe this may be the inspiration for the trope), and I was told "no".

Is the analysis page for Tweeny Witches good enough?

The analysis for Neopets is just a list of random trivia...

Analysis.Sponge Bob Squarepants is just complaining about Seasonal Rot.

Yeah, that page can be cut.

I would like to know some guidelines and rules for analysis pages in case I want to edit them, please.

Just added Spongebob Squarepants to the cutlist.

... And the cut request was declined. Is it because the page accumulated over 2000 inbounds? I feel like that's an even stronger reason to cut, as a ton of people were brought here by a link to a very complainy page, which would probably give some people the impression that we're all about complaining.

Not too different from the review section of this site, in all honestly.

But the review section is supposed to be for giving opinions. Analysis/ is not.

Is why I made the comment a joke, I'm well aware.

So... what now? Should we try cutlisting it again? Should we ask the mods about why it wasn't cut? Or should we accept that popular complaining pages should stay on the wiki just for being popular?