TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Trope Description Improvement Drive

Go To

What it says in the title. EDIT: Link to auxiliary sandbox page

Some trope descriptions suffer from problems. Some possible ones:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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...
  5. 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?
  6. 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?
  7. Spelling and grammar issues.
  8. 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".
  9. Bad Writing. Purple Prose, pitching the trope, Wanton Cruelty to the Common Comma.
  10. Egregiously Fan-Myopic quote.
  11. 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

ozchess cat bastard (she/her) from quadling country Since: Jun, 2024
cat bastard (she/her)
#5901: Apr 13th 2025 at 2:01:20 PM

the section of Children Are Innocent talking about child labor is worded really strangely.

"After several decades the grassroots belief in and support for "childhood" became so strong that children under certain ages were actually forbidden from doing certain types of work despite the dedicated lobbying of business interests [...]"

it's beginning to look a lot like christmas...
AegisP Kindhearted SSSSSNAKE Man Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
Kindhearted SSSSSNAKE Man
#5902: Apr 13th 2025 at 2:49:41 PM

[up] That's just so gross.

As long as this flower is in my heart. My Strength will flow without end.
Theriocephalus Amateur Veteran from gimme a map and a moment and I can tell you Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: I made a point to burn all of the photographs
Amateur Veteran
#5903: Apr 13th 2025 at 4:07:10 PM

As a quick history check, the description seems to have been rewritten into its mostly present form in 2014-

Victorian-era Europeans invented 'childhood'. Inspired by the ideals of The Enlightenment and an interpretation of The Bible's New Testament based on them, they came to the conclusion that the time people spent between being a baby and being useful in mines and fields was special and precious - that people this age were innocent and full of wonder and beloved by God, and that they should be loved and protected and cared for by society in general. They came to believe that there was a stark contrast between the innocent and instinctual goodness of children and the cynical evil of adults. After several decades the grassroots belief in and support for 'childhood' became so strong that children - or, failing that, just the girls - under certain ages were actually forbidden from doing certain types of work despite the dedicated lobbying of business interests who didn't want to lose their smallest and cheapest workers (e.g. smaller coal-miners mean smaller mineshafts). By 1900 only a fifth or so of British and US children (under 16) were in full-time employment and even the world's most pro-corporation and rabidly-antisocialist state, the USA, banned child labour entirely in 1938.

The age European culture has assigned to the end of 'childhood' has grown over the years and an 'inbetween' period was added in the 1960s or so - 'teen-age'-hood - but the meme remains: a child is a Blank Slate not yet sullied by the evils of the world. Only upon coming of age do they lose this innocence and the protection it confers. A child's death, even that of a boy, is a tragedy; but a young man just a year older than him is in the most expendable demographic in the world.

-replacing this previous paragraph:

Victorian-era Europeans are the direct inspiration of a dominant view of children, inspired by the New Testament and stretching to the present day. In this view, there is a sharp transition between innocent child and little adult. The conventional age Western culture assigns to this tradition has grown over the years but The meme remains: a young child is a Blank Slate not yet sullied by the evils of the world. Only upon coming of age does the child lose this innocence.

The bits about the US in particular were trimmed off in 2023 per ROCEJ discussion and the bits about girl children in particular were cut later that year.

BeerBaron from Pennsylvania Since: Mar, 2012
#5904: Apr 13th 2025 at 5:36:33 PM

That whole description seems needlessly long and winding, too. Does a deep dive into child labor laws even really need to be there? Whole thing feels like a mess.

ozchess cat bastard (she/her) from quadling country Since: Jun, 2024
cat bastard (she/her)
#5905: Apr 14th 2025 at 7:24:04 AM

yeah, i'd support just reverting back to the short version.

it's beginning to look a lot like christmas...
Veanne Since: Jul, 2012
#5906: Apr 15th 2025 at 10:07:27 PM

The short version could be polished a bit, but the long one is kind of too long. Hmm. Compromise?

Tylerbear12 What you see is what you get, just a guy. from The Green Hills. Since: Apr, 2015 Relationship Status: Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free
What you see is what you get, just a guy.
#5907: Apr 17th 2025 at 4:02:30 PM

Is it okay if I add this to Bait-and-Switch Lesbians? Namely as a preventive measure to prevent certain fans (including myself) from adding any ships they view as "bait" regardless of canonicity.


Do note that there is a fine line between this trope and a popular gay pairing simply not becoming canon, even if that pairing's relationship was never intended to be romantic in the first place; as tempting as it can be to add any semi-popular gay ship that is sunken by the narrative in favor of the hetero option, there has to be concrete and objective Homoerotic Subtext and/or Ship Tease between the two characters before the switch happens for it to qualify for this trope.

Also, as the name indicates, there has to be a switch, if there is no actual switch (e.g. the relationships being kept open-ended and/or two same sex characters simply staying friends and not hooking with each other or the opposite sex), then it doesn't count for this either.

Edit: Trimmed things.

Edited by Tylerbear12 on Apr 18th 2025 at 11:27:38 AM

Veanne Since: Jul, 2012
#5908: Apr 17th 2025 at 10:06:36 PM

I see your point - people (me included) do have a tendency to read trope descriptions for what they want, not what is there. But I'm not sure if simple addition will help. Might need to trim some bits that are already there.

TMH-Sir-Iron-Vomit The clown of STEEL from Ichnusa Since: Mar, 2024
The clown of STEEL
#5909: Apr 18th 2025 at 12:59:09 AM

[up][up]Looks good; the only correction you should make is replacing that "than" with a "then". "Than" is used for comparisions.

Oo oo ah ah
Nejiiuyn Kaiser der Anonymität from The Mysterious Beyond Since: Jul, 2015 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
Kaiser der Anonymität
#5910: Apr 20th 2025 at 9:00:54 AM

As has been pointed out in these two Ask the Troper threads, the trope description for Neglectful Precursors is very confusing to read and understand because the description is written as if it were a court case. In addition, because the description is written as a court case, the majority of the examples are also written as court cases, which also makes it hard to read and understand if they actually count as examples or not. The description of the trope should be rewritten to remove the court case writing and replaced with a more clear and concise description of the trope in line with Clear, Concise, Witty

My treasure? If you want it, you can have it! Search for it! I left in that place!
Azorius24 Knight of Solace from the bonnie, bonnie banks o' Loch Lomond (Five Long Years) Relationship Status: love is a deadly lazer
Knight of Solace
#5911: Apr 20th 2025 at 9:29:16 AM

[up] I 100% agree with a revamp of the description for that trope, it's a weird gimmick that makes it difficult to read and understand.

"The only thing which is certain, is that something will happen".
TMH-Sir-Iron-Vomit The clown of STEEL from Ichnusa Since: Mar, 2024
The clown of STEEL
#5912: Apr 20th 2025 at 9:58:38 AM

That's a weird gimmick for Neglectful Precursors to begin with.

Oo oo ah ah
Amonimus the "Retromancer" from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the "Retromancer"
#5913: Apr 20th 2025 at 10:05:22 AM

I've always advocated that the page as-is fits JFF more and it needs to be completely rewritten.

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
NotGonnaDoALot4 Man in the Yellow Hat from God knows. Since: Feb, 2018 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
Man in the Yellow Hat
#5914: Apr 23rd 2025 at 1:41:32 AM

Not Quite Starring's description sounds incredibly snarky. Here's an excerpt as evidence:

After all, celebrities are busy people, right? They're going places, doing things, making appearances. It would be downright rude of you to ask them to actually record their own voices for their cartoon show, wouldn't it? Especially when the draw of the celebrity name is expected to make up for lack of decent writing and animation. Plus you would have to pay them!

Yes, all you need is a licensing fee, a barely reasonable voice impersonator, plus a dirt-cheap animator, and you've got a cash cow the whole family can enjoy!

There's so much I wish I could take back.
Theriocephalus Amateur Veteran from gimme a map and a moment and I can tell you Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: I made a point to burn all of the photographs
Amateur Veteran
#5915: Apr 23rd 2025 at 10:18:49 AM

Yes, that seems a little overly sarcastic. Seems to be a holdover from the original version of the page in 2006.

Edited by Theriocephalus on Apr 23rd 2025 at 12:20:27 PM

themayorofsimpleton Short-Term Projects Herald | he/him from the Island of Koridai (Captain) Relationship Status: I won't say I'm in love
Short-Term Projects Herald | he/him
#5916: Apr 23rd 2025 at 10:20:03 AM

If it were about In-Universe portrayals I'd be OK with it, but since it deals with real-life stuff I agree that it's too snarky.

Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper Wall
ozchess cat bastard (she/her) from quadling country Since: Jun, 2024
cat bastard (she/her)
#5917: Apr 23rd 2025 at 12:57:52 PM

[up]x11 circling back to this.

The short version could be polished a bit, but the long one is kind of too long. Hmm. Compromise?

i'm not very practiced at writing for descriptions, but how's this?

The modern view of children is directly inspired by that of the Victorian-era Europeans motivated by the New Testament. In this view, there is a sharp transition between innocent children and young adults. The conventional age Western culture assigns to this tradition has grown over the years, but the idea remains: a young child is a Blank Slate not yet sullied by the evils of the world, only losing this innocence upon coming of age.

it's beginning to look a lot like christmas...
ozchess cat bastard (she/her) from quadling country Since: Jun, 2024
cat bastard (she/her)
#5918: Apr 23rd 2025 at 1:52:26 PM

whoops, double-post.

the quote & first line of Faux Symbolism seem to imply it's an Audience Reaction for seeing symbolism that isn't there, but the rest of it says it's about symbolic imagery being used for no clear purpose. skimming the examples, i see a little misuse, but none of that sort specifically, so should they be cut?

it's beginning to look a lot like christmas...
Veanne Since: Jul, 2012
#5919: Apr 23rd 2025 at 10:41:23 PM

Umm, I wouldn't say it looks like Audience Reaction - tropes are, well, symbols. And ingrained ways of seeing the world, cultural - intersubjective, not purely subjective, like Audience Reactions (which may be see as tropes that are not yet codified properly, sort of). The quote in the trope page comes from New Testament, which fits the description.

As for your version of the paragraph, it's short and to the point and I like it.

NotGonnaDoALot4 Man in the Yellow Hat from God knows. Since: Feb, 2018 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
Man in the Yellow Hat
#5920: Apr 24th 2025 at 1:55:13 AM

[up][up][up] Rewrote Not Quite Starring's description to sound less snarky. Is this appropriate?

Every now and then, a celebrity in the business will become extremely in demand among audiences, and marketeering suggests that a piece of media requiring voice acting — films, cartoons and/or video games — with them in it will be profitable enough to be worth investing in. And the thing is, sometimes, you don't actually need the real-life celebrity.

After all, the celebrity may be busy with other commitments, such as tours, performances and/or participating in events, and be unavailable to voice themselves. Or you may be able to pay them royalties for their likeness, but not their voice.

So for quite a few promotions willing to pay the licensing fees, they turn to soundalikes, voice actors whose job is to imitate the celebrity. Thus, the star is not quite starring.

Sometimes, this is unavoidable regarding the license to a celebrity's likeness. They may be aging and thus too old to sound like how they did in their prime, or may have passed away and be obviously unable to voice themselves. In those cases, a soundalike is the only option available.

There's so much I wish I could take back.
Veanne Since: Jul, 2012
#5921: Apr 24th 2025 at 9:13:01 AM

Aside form "marketeering", looks fine to me.

Amonimus the "Retromancer" from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the "Retromancer"
#5922: Apr 25th 2025 at 9:31:15 PM

Jump Scare says there are no examples because we may get sued for scaring someone to death. I feel that's too much of a hyperbole.

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
MyFinalEdits Delete message from Parts Unknown (Spin-off Series) Relationship Status: Cast away
Delete message
#5923: Apr 25th 2025 at 9:44:44 PM

Going by No Video Examples, Please!, maybe that part could be reworded into: "Especially No Video Examples, Please! Such videos are banned due to health and safety concerns."

Edited by MyFinalEdits on Apr 25th 2025 at 12:45:01 PM

135 -> 180 -> 273 -> 191 -> 188 -> 230 -> 300 -> 311
Amonimus the "Retromancer" from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
petersohn from Earth, Solar System (Long Runner) Relationship Status: Hiding
#5925: Apr 26th 2025 at 5:17:32 AM

Godwin's Law of Facial Hair has a really long description. While I think a large part of it is necessary, it goes into a two paragraph long tangent about the toothbrush mustache's real life popularity, which can be shortened significantly. I'd rewrite the the following paragraphs.

Before its severe Fashion Dissonance, the toothbrush mustache was a fashion trend during the 1920s and 1930s. The toothbrush mustache was also popular with working-class men because it was considered industrial, modest, and neat. It also countered Imperial mustaches, which were seen as striking due to their upwardly curved edges. In the United States, the toothbrush mustache was popular because It was considered a neat, uniform, low-maintenance mustache that echoed the standardization and uniformity brought on by industrialization.

The toothbrush mustache has a long history with silent comedies and comedians because it was famously worn by Charlie Chaplin and Oliver Hardy. Charlie Chaplin had this mustache for his role as "The Tramp" in 1915 because he always thought it was comical, and some sources claimed it allowed Chaplin to be more expressive with his face during performances. Oliver Hardy had the toothbrush mustache since "The Lucky Dog" in 1921.

To simplify, I'd just keep the first sentence of each paragraph to get the main point across and cut all the unimportant rambling.

Before its severe Fashion Dissonance, the toothbrush mustache was a fashion trend during the 1920s and 1930s. It has a long history with silent comedies and comedians because it was famously worn by Charlie Chaplin and Oliver Hardy. Nowadays, Chaplin and Hardy are the only ones exempt from being punished for wearing the toothbrush mustache.

Fjón þvæ ég af mér fjanda minna rán og reiði ríkra manna.

Total posts: 6,230
Top