The Analysis Namespace.

I say we ask the mods directly as the next step.

Conventionally, comments to declined cut requests occur on discussion pages where I have put the denial reason. Personally I think the page is not quite appropriate but the inbounds need to be sent somewhere.

The Analysis page for Avengers: Age of Ultron reads more like an essay describing why Tony and Steve's character arcs were underdeveloped and not executed to their full potential. I'm pretty sure the Analysis subpage isn't supposed to be for stuff like reviews, so should this page be cut?

Analysis.Space Fighter:

The A12 entry seems out of place, and several entries are self-admitted rebuttals to other entries, so the page looks like it's arguing with itself.

I don't know enough about the subject matter to make corrections, so what do we do?

Analysis.Metroid Prime Trilogy needs the first-person writing removed.

I just found Analysis.Star Wars. While the page misused the namespace, as for it just describes the history of the franchise and doesn’t “analyze” it, there’s a lot of content on the page. Is there another page type that the page’s content could go on?

I don't think that page is out of scope for Analysis/, actually. Discussing how the franchise developed is certainly analysis. The current description at Analysis is a little work-centric.

But Not Too Black has some use of "I" and using personal examples (I'm not sure those are allowed, even if they do illustrate the point).

FPW is not allowed, you can remove the FPW, as most of the tropers are no longer around, but you could also retain the introspectiveness.

Done rewriting the Analysis page for But Not Too Black.

It's as if I'm the only one addressing the rampant First-Person Writing on wiki pages.

Analysis.Alien seems more like Fridge Brilliance to me.

Edited by jandn2014 on Sep 26th 2020 at 10:46:31 AM

I posted that on the thread a few months ago, but no one responded. I also recommended that the page be cut and the entry be moved to the Fridge page back then as well.

Analysis.Trials Of Mana is practically stillborn with the analysis of one of the six playable characters despite the release of the 2020 remake.

Edited by Nen_desharu on Sep 26th 2020 at 11:56:34 AM

Hi. I'm working on a Sonic 2006 analysis for Tv Tropes. I'm doing the analysis to explain why Shadow's story is an Author Saving Throw from the screenwriter's part, regarding Shadow's characterization and story in the previous game.

Right now is only a draft. I worked on it on Word, and then pasted it on the sandbox. Due to a lack of internet, I couldn't verify certain information and names, but most of the information is presented.

Could you guys check, and see if it works?

Tomodachi Sonic Analysis

Analysis.Hunter X Hunter consists of only a link to a youtube video, is that ok?

Nope. The analysis namespace is for analysis, not links to other people's analysis.

Ended up lengthening the Analysis.Play Station Vita page after I saw it was just repeating info on the main Useful Notes page by removing said info over and expanding on it. I then saw it fit to do the same for the Wii U, and made so Analysis.Wii U. I feel like both pages work and feel more or less objective after spending the past few days tweaking them, but I wanted another opinion.

I just uploaded Analysis.Foundation Series, and this is my first analysis page, and the third major page I've uploaded to TV Tropes. Just want to check if my analysis is proper, and in what ways I could improve the quality.

I'm not 100% sure what Analysis.Brooktown High is trying to do (apparently it's a list of sources, which doesn't feel appropriate for the namespace), and it also has first-person writing.

Analysis.The Worf Effect gives two examples of "how to do the trope badly". I agree with the points made, but (not watching either show) I'm not sure the specific examples are needed (or possibly could be moved to the description, minus the examples).

Analysis.The Smurfette Principle has huge amounts of examples, like a trope page to itself.

This is the only thing on Conviction By Counterfactual Clue:

There are numerous sites that catalogue the errors, but the one at http://brownencyclopedia.tumblr.com does a pretty comprehensive job.

No clue what Analysis.Comforting Comforter is trying to say.

Edited by Chabal2 on Mar 8th 2021 at 11:42:28 AM

Should the Analysis subpage for Family Guy have a look at?

The page is kind of a rambling essay about Stewie's Flanderization on the show. It reads more like somebody's personal rant, as there's a lot of first-person writing, grammatical errors, and it personally ends with the person admitting they just wanted to vent. It's also followed up by a bunch of sub-bullets of people adding their own two cents, which makes the page feel more like a mini blog post or forum thread.

So, do we cut this page? At the moment, it has over a thousand inbound links, but I'm not sure what could be salvaged.

I created Analysis.Alternate Continuity which isn't great; cut it or rewrite it entirely?

I'm not sure what to do with this page.

Content that was previously on Zack Snyders Justice League was moved to the analysis page, but there's some discussion on whether that's the appropriate place.

Yeah, I posted that ATT then went to sleep and when I woke up people had already agreed to move it to Analysis, which I disagree with. Crossposting what I said in the thread:

Yeah, that's fair - I only posted it there because at that moment that was the suggestion offered. Feel free to cut away.