Removing Gushing from the Wiki

Calvin and Hobbes has some really gushy paragraphs about Watterson's philosophies in the description and it's drowning out the actual information about the comic's content. There is interesting meta stuff about the comic, I get that, but some of this could go on an Analysis subpage.

Edited by mightymewtron on Sep 6th 2020 at 11:30:38 AM

Or perhaps under trivia?

Now I think about it, maybe we should have something like a creator subpage for things like this.

Creator Pages shouldnt have gushing either...

Food Network is in need of cleanup for gushing and YMMV-like sentiments on the main page. Some of it is easy enough to purge, but some of it might have actual information of value worth keeping after some rewording.

Edited by AlleyOop on Sep 10th 2020 at 8:17:19 AM

That Author's Saving Throw bullet needs to be on a YMMV page.

It's a Creator page though, and we're not supposed to have YMMV for Creator pages. Unless we change the namespace, or find an alternative trope, or a way to rationalize it as one of the invoked trope categories non-frivolously.

Aren't we allowed to have YMMV for creators to document reactions toward specific works by them if those works don't have their own page?

We don't trope real life people, and that extends to YMMV.

Yes, that's the only thing that creator YMMV pages should be used for.

The Simpsons: S11 E5 "E-I-E-I-(Annoyed Grunt)" claimed that Ralph saying "this tastes like grandma" is "one of the greatest lines of the entire series." I removed it.

After reading through a few of the subpages for Unbuilt Trope, I'm starting to wonder if it's even salvageable. Despite the very clear warning in the description that Tropes Are Not Bad, the examples are just paragraph after paragraph of how the "original" works were so much more nuanced and interesting and 'realistic' than their imitators. It honestly got painful to read.

This example on Wholesome Crossdresser :

• In season 2 of Infinity Train, Jesse and Alan Dracula (or at least the guy in his mouth) put on dresses for a fashion show themed car. It's probably the one of the few Western shows along with Steven Universe that doesn't present this as embarrassing or odd (in fact a lot of the edits on here seem to do so). The only part that can be considered funny is that Jesse has to wear the dress over his regular clothes.

Does the part I bolded count as gushing?

Yikes. It's a weird combo of gushing and using that to bash other tropers. You could maybe rewrite the first part to not mention other shows or namedrop Steven Universe (the entry should stand on its own) and just focus how it's not treated as odd in-universe. Ax the parenthesized part.

A mix of gushing and complaining on YMMV.South Park. The entry talks less about how nobody can criticize the show for various reasons and instead uses the platform to seemingly justify how it shouldn't be criticized.

• Sacred Cow: Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the series' creators. Despite the fact that not everyone agrees with their political views, most people agree that their methods and messages are very difficult to criticize due to the surprisingly intelligent and over-the-top methods that they do so through South Park. It helps that they will often criticize all sides of an argument in a hilarious manner, unlike similar shows such as Family Guy that often reduce political issues to a one-sided Black-and-White Morality depiction and are more sloppy in their satire.
  • Parker and Stone have also proven that they are not so concerned with their own celebrity that they are unwilling to fight for their works. The popular and critical acclaim they got came after being ready to burn bridges. This sometimes reached dangerous levels, as they fought to depict the prophet Muhammad (whose likeness being depicted is a massive taboo for Muslims, particularly Sunni Muslims) and were listed as targets for terrorist groups, and Comedy Central personally censored the various episodes out of societal pressure (The Simpsons did a Couch Gag with the chalkboard reading "South Park- We'd stand beside you if we weren't so scared."). They later did a similar thing criticizing American corporations being desperate to appeal to the Chinese government despite obvious human rights crimes being reported, which got them Banned in China several times over.

I’ll just say that I’ve seen and partook in criticism levied against those two for what that calls “criticizing all sides of an argument.” The circles I frequent call that “false equivalency.”

Any more I could say violates the ROCEJ.

Um, no, it is perfectly easy to criticize their methods.

I know quite a few people who think the bothsiderism is bullshit so that entry is a stretch.

Indeed, them panning both sides is a weakness, not a strength, and the show is far from a sacred cow, at least not any more.

I do think the show has been a Sacred Cow at least before about 2016 or so, because any time I criticize the show even as a fan, I get told I shouldn't watch the show if I find anything I don't like about it. It seems that fans get extremely defensive about the show while non-fans just shrug it off because they assume South Park makes fun of everything so it's not worth fighting it. Not sure if that counts as Sacred Cow.

Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 1st 2020 at 2:25:39 PM

I think that is true, the show used to be much more of a sacred cow, but it is starting to lose that status. As I have talked about elsewhere, the show is past its prime, and its comedy is no longer of this time. And the creators know this, too.

I think in that regard we should perhaps rewrite the entry as being true for prior seasons, but increasingly downplayed these days.

Here's my attempt; I hope I didn't go too far in the opposite direction and bash the fandom.

• Sacred Cow: For many years, criticizing the show was very difficult to criticize due to the original, over-the-top methods used to satirize certain subjects from multiple angles and the amount of intense controversy and censorship it's managed to survive. Being offended by South Park is often considered laughable by fans and non-fans alike due to its reputation as an Equal-Opportunity Offender, especially since the show is likely to double down and make more fun of its detractors. Even if you're not offended, criticizing the show's satire is enough for fans to get heated. While many fans continue to be extremely defensive of the show, believing anybody who gets offended at anything shouldn't watch the show, non-fans and even some fans have become more critical of the show's plot choices and centrist approach to social issues, making it less of a sacred cow.

Edited to reflect that. (The only current fans I see who are critical of it are the people on this wiki and some Tumblr fans who are younger than the show and were never on board with the offensive humor to begin with. Reddit, Twitter, and part of Tumblr seems to still defend the show hardcore.)

Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 1st 2020 at 3:53:03 PM

I don't think it is just non-fans, fans are getting more critical of it as well.

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse might need some looking at. Like these entries from the YMMV page for example.

• Author's Saving Throw:
  • The film is essentially Sony's latest attempt at making a Spider-Man movie of their own (and hoping to expand it into a movie universe) now that they share the live-action Peter Parker with Marvel Studios under the latter's creative control. As such, choosing Miles Morales as central figure seems like a logical, less risky and more original option than the "cash grab Peter Parker reboot" image that was their burden with The Amazing Spider-Man Series, and it is without a doubt a much more ambitious and much less embarrassing project for their animation studio than The Emoji Movie.
  • The whole "Spider-Verse" concept shows that the movie itself is acknowledging that it's an Alternate Continuity from the Marvel Cinematic Universe even if MCU Peter Parker doesn't end up making an appearance, which makes the concept of multiple cinematic Spider-Men easier to swallow and sets up the movie's real-life relationship with the MCU to be one of friendly synergy rather than rivalry (especially given how the Amazing Spider-Man movies were made mostly to keep the character's rights out of Marvel Studios' hands).
  • On a bit of a different wavelength, just the fact that Miles Morales is getting the recognition of being the star of a cinematic film, as Spider-Man and not just a side character of some sort, is enough to earn a lot of good will from Miles's fans who have been waiting for some time for such a thing.
  • The original Spider-Verse event as a whole was effectively seen as a series of good concepts with some very flawed executions. The film's smaller, much more lighthearted scope along with using the Kingpin as opposed to the Inheritors as the main villain is seen as paying the concept its best due, especially as it borrows more from Brian Michael Bendis' more well-received Spider-Men (which was also on the lighthearted side focusing on different versions of Spider-Man hanging out with each other).
  • In the event comic, many fans were disappointed that the different mediums having different rules was only used once in a quick aside and never explored. Each of the Spiders from another medium in this film have the differences acknowledged and used for both awesome action scenes (Spider-Ham giving Scorpion a Toon Physics beatdown) and hilarious jokes (Noir's fascination with a Rubik's Cube due to color not existing in his universe and the other Spiders being weirded out by Peni's anime art style).
  • On a bit of a larger scale, there's the fact that there's finally a Spider-Man movie that is animated. Despite being Marvel's most profitable character, no one in Spider-Man lore has ever gotten an animated film, theatrical or otherwise, until this point. And it features an adult Peter Parker, when every previous Spider-Man adaptation has refused to (or in one case, was unable to) take the character any further than college.
  • Many comic book fans praise the film for its re-characterization of Miles Morales from his original Ultimate run. While Miles has never been unpopular, his character has received criticism for essentially being Peter Parker again but with a few aesthetic changes (to the point where the MCU Peter adopted some of elements of Miles). Spiderverse goes to great lengths to redefine Miles and his struggle, as well as better characterizing him in regards to the world around him. This is especially important given his relationship with his uncle Aaron, whose original antagonism with Miles is completely reconstructed into a much more positive loving relationship, which makes his eventual death significantly more impactful for Miles and his character arc. This video provides an explanation of this change.

Edited by PlasmaPower on Oct 3rd 2020 at 6:16:29 AM

As someone critical of South Park (and it's not my cup of tea), I must say that though there are fervent defenders of it, it's quickly becoming a Franchise Zombie.

Very few people born after the show's premiere in 1997 are fans of it.

Edited by Nen_desharu on Oct 3rd 2020 at 12:31:28 PM

Agreed, I mostly still watch it because of having grown up with it and wanting to see it through to the end.