What it says in the title. EDIT: Link to auxiliary sandbox page
Some trope descriptions suffer from problems. Some possible ones:
- Attention Deficit... Ooh, Shiny!. A paragraph starts explaining element X of the trope, then it wanders off to explain element Y. Two paragraphs after that we're back at element X again. Nary a conjunction is in sight.
- Too long. Stuff that should go in analysis, or maybe in another trope, or maybe nowhere, going in the main space. Too much scrolling required before you can get to the examples.
- Fan Myopia. Some "this is how it happens in WRESTLING!" dissertation is taking up half of the page on a trope about white t-shirts. We already have a thread on that one
- discussion about the general phenomenon goes there, specific candidates to deal with go here.
- General lack of balance and order. Something is emphasized at the expense of the other aspects of the trope, even though it has no right to be. Consequences of the trope come first, then related tropes, then a mention of the Trope Codifier, then common scenarios where it comes into play...
- Failure to answer the fundamental question up front: What is this trope? Not what it "might" be or what can "possibly" happen - what is it?
- Not enough meat. Juicy stuff is missing, like: When is the trope likely to turn up? Why would an author use it? In what ways does the audience often react? Which tropes are related to it and how?
- Spelling and grammar issues.
- The first line which makes honest-to-god sense is below the fold. e.g. Example as a Thesis that makes you go "huh?" instead of "ooooh".
- Bad Writing. Purple Prose, pitching the trope, Wanton Cruelty to the Common Comma.
- Egregiously Fan-Myopic quote.
- Jaywalking.
Bring up trope pages here so we can work on them. If no one does in a while, I'll try to dig something up.
edited 22nd Sep '11 10:48:59 AM by TripleElation
I've removed the Overconsumption disclaimer from I Was Told There Would Be Cake since that was supported.
TroperWall / WikiMagic CleanupBringing up the recent change to the description on The Sociopath page, I think if it's not going to have the original guide to recognizing a trope-fitting character, then it should at least some clear guideline (maybe more concise bulletpoint, or numbering the key traits of a Sociopath in the top paragraph in bold numbers) on how to identify a Sociopath character for editors to use.
This trope honestly does not need more trope misuses on pages, where editors use it to provide a non-trope-specific generalized description of a character being evil.
Edited by Derv0sB2 on Dec 3rd 2022 at 3:16:00 AM
Looking at today's featured trope, Slow-Loading Internet Image, I'm a bit confused by the description. The second paragraph seems irrelevant to the trope. It talks about how bitmap files are the only image types to load bottom-up, but that nobody actually uses them on the internet.
Given that the third paragraph says the images can load in whatever direction makes sense for the scene, does the second paragraph actually contribute to the definition?
ediT: I'm very tired and read "isn't" as "is", making this post completely useless lmao never mind it
Edited by wingedcatgirl on Dec 6th 2022 at 1:54:13 PM
Suddenly I'm... still rotating Fallen London in my mind even though I've stopped actively playing it.Does Amoral Attorney need that digression on how Real Life attorneys operate?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanThat seems to have been added over time. The oldest version of Amoral Attorney in the Wayback Machine is from 24th December 2007
. Not only was there very limited commentary on real life lawyers, the trope description was full of complaining about its existence. It also did not state it was limited to defence attorneys. By the 28th February, 2008
, limiting the trope to defence attorneys (with Ambulance Chaser being cited for the other side), and introducing real life information had begun.
It looks like all this real life analysis bloat has been added over time by many different tropers. One troper did remove two paragraphs in June 2019, which was restored by the mods in August 2019 for having been removed without discussion. However, the two paragraphs removed were full of information that had been steadily added over time from 2014... without discussion.
There have been some very big paragraph additions since 2021 (three different tropers), but it's part of a trend over time of massive rewriting and information addition by many tropers without discussion. The trope we have now only contains remnants of the oldest trope description we have access to, which itself seems to have been created with complaining in mind.
I therefore think this trope description needs a big overhaul to get to the original point of the trope, decide whether later additions of things like the aversion and subversion paragraphs are valid parts of the original concept, and to use the rest to create a coherent analysis page for a comparison between the fictional and real life legal worlds.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Dec 13th 2022 at 11:34:43 AM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.Just noticed Avoid the Dreaded G Rating has a rather long description,does it need to be that long?
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverNot to be annoying by bringing this up a lot, but can I get any input on what to do about the paragraph I mentioned here
? The last time I brought it up resulted in a discussion about the trope itself. But not what to do with the page. Is it alright for me to just zap the paragraph mentioned, since it seems unnecessarily complainy.
Edited by GenericGuy2000 on Dec 18th 2022 at 3:23:04 PM
I’m gonna put some Gloom in your eye.And Your Reward Is Infancy says it's an Ending trope while Rebirth and Reincarnation Tropes doesn't say so?
Which is right, and what relationship with Back to the Womb, a.k.a Reincarnate to a baby / fetus?
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576I was wondering, if the part on Butt-Monkey about most examples being dudes should be tweaked. This is because I feel it's at least somewhat inaccurate. For the record, while I believe male examples are more common, I don't feel female Butt-Monkeys are as uncommon as the description implies.
I'm bringing this up because I've been dealing with many females who are Butt-Monkeys, and in some cases similar tropes like Karmic Butt-Monkey (which is also a sub-trope of it). For the record, this happened as part of wick cleaning Slapstick Knows no Gender.
On Magical Girl Genre Deconstruction, I noticed the last line of the description states this:
In another comparison to the '90s Anti-Hero, it seems to have begun to burn itself out, with no new Anime entries in the genre in 2020, 2021 or 2022, and the ones that do pop up (in Manga or Light Novels) being held up to greater scrutiny.
Given that we still haven't finished 2022 yet, I had a look through the history to see when it was added.
It was first added on the 8th November 2021 as "In another comparison to the '90s Anti-Hero, it seems to have begun to burn itself out, with no new entries in the genre in 2020 or 21."
It was then modified by a different troper on the 28th July 2022 as "In another comparison to the '90s Anti-Hero, it seems to have begun to burn itself out, with no new Anime entries in the genre in 2020, 21 or 2022, and the ones that do pop up being held up to greater scrutiny."
It was then further modified by the original troper on the 24th September 2022 to its current form (the addition of the parabomb).
Given that we've officially been in a pandemic since early 2020, it seems to me that it's very premature to make such sweeping judgements about an entire genre of work so soon. Does anyone mind if I remove this sentence?
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.My understanding is that Brought Down to Badass is purely for characters who lose powers but remain a badass - i.e. they are now a Badass Normal.
It's strongly implied that a character whose powers are reduced, not removed, doesn't count (which is very directly stated under BadassNormal). And BadassNormal is also clear that characters with Powered Armor or other items that effectively grant powers don't count if they're still using those items.
Any objection if I add this clarity to BroughtDownToBadass, to keep it consistent and reduce misuse? If that sounds ok I'll work up a draft to post here.
This is on Animals Lack Attributes:
It’s not an omnipresent trope, so aversions are banned period. Editors must not know this because, like, half the page is aversions. I’m cutting it.
Edited by PurpleEyedGuma on Dec 20th 2022 at 3:00:47 PM
![]()
I agree to cutting that part because Animals Lack Attributes isn't used enough for aversions to be listed.
Because several days have passed and this is getting buried, what do you all think about my suggestion here
Edited by RandomTroper123 on Dec 20th 2022 at 4:47:43 AM
Regarding Butt-Monkey, I did some digging on the Wayback Machine to see if I could find out if the original concept envisaged male-only.
The oldest reference to the page can find is from 2006
, where the trope description was very simply this:
The character who is always the butt of the demeaning joke or "put him through hell" plotline.
Generally doesn't do anything to earn the pains inflicted on him/her, other than being a recurring target that's easy to mess with and not wreck the show continuity.
So, the earliest version I can find doesn't make it gender-specific. A year or so later, the description was rewritten and the him/her reference removed, but it still seemed to be pretty gender-neutral. Somewhere between September-October 2010, the following first line was added, and the second was added between June-July 2011:
If a female Butt Monkey is regularly used for slapstick and it is Played For Laughs she is probably also a case of Slapstick Knows No Gender. If every conceivable misfortune happens to the Butt Monkey, regardless of it's illogical, you got yourself a Cosmic Plaything.
The "Almost Always Male." line was added to the beginning of the above in November 2017, and the sentence about the female Butt-Monkey was recently removed because Slapstick Knows no Gender was merged with Slapstick.
Looking at the examples from the oldest page I could find, "Almost Always Male" isn't wrong as an observation. However, it probably is a good idea to mention in the trope description that this trope isn't specific to one gender, but male examples are by far the most common.
I'm not sure the female reference to slapstick was ever necessary, given that Butt-Monkey tends to lean comedic and slapstick regardless of gender.
Anyway, that's just my thoughts on the matter.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Dec 20th 2022 at 4:46:48 AM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
How about changing it from "Almost Always Male" to something like "More commonly male, but female examples are not unheard of." or maybe cutting it altogether?

This particular joke passes qualification one, sort of passes qualification two, and, in my opinion, fails qualification three.
Delete all of them.
Bigotry will NEVER be welcome on TV Tropes.