Trope Description Improvement Drive

Sure go ahead. That comet thing has always confused me tbh as I don't think we have any forces of nature listed as a Big Bad since their not actually a character.

Re: Big Bad — I agree.

Btw I already started the thread. If I had known you had had a better plan for the clean-up, I would have waited.

No problem! I didn't see that you'd already made the thread, but I've found it now. (Courtesy link.)

Checking out your OP now, and other than the description tweak I've suggested here, you're pretty much doing everything I was planning to do. Great minds!

Edited by HighCrate on Feb 15th 2019 at 11:39:05 AM

I like this description tweak.

The Speechless has the line "They are intelligent; they do show signs of sapience to us, the viewers — just not to the other characters."

I don't think "seemingly non-sapient to the other characters" is part of the trope. Probably we can just cut out "to us" and on?

The Time Management Game description seems too bare-bones and specific. It's true that many time management games, like Diner Dash and Cake Mania , revolve around female characters doing "domestic" things, but I don't think that's a necessary element of the genre. It's just a common trend.

Edited by Pichu-kun on Feb 16th 2019 at 3:28:38 AM

I wasn't sure where to take this, so hopefully this is the correct place!

Symbolic Blood is in need of a better description; the current one limits it to spilled liquids underneath a person, but the examples are much broader than that (many of which seem to exemplify symbolic blood better, e.g. red liquids). The page image is also rather poorly illustrative.

I don't think we have any other blood symbolism trope so I'd tentatively suggest rewriting the description to cover that topic in general and how it is often used as a storytelling tool.

Amazon Brigade's description and Playing With a Trope subpage defines it as an elite fighting unit that is all-female in composition; this would imply that the unit exists within a greater force that is normally of mixed sex or even predominantly/exclusively male composition. However, some examples on the page and off-page usage interpret the trope as extending to cases where an entire service branch of a military (if not the whole military) is all-female.

Is this usage correct, and thus the description and playing with subpage should be altered accordingly? Note the alternate definition basically sits on the extreme opposite to the real-life situation (i.e. the military is predominantly/exclusively male), with the trope Gender Is No Object sitting more or less in the middle point between the two.

There is a lot of misuse with Amazon Brigade. The trope is often interpreted as 'any all-female group that can fight must be this trope', which completely ignores the 'elite' aspect of the trope. Whatever the all-female group is defined as, the trope seems to indicate that the all-female group must one of the top fighting units of the setting.

Two Words: Added Emphasis...

Is the Added Emphasis part, usually a Punctuated! For! Emphasis! enough to crosswick them?

Alphabetical Theme Naming is a supertrope of Alliterative Family? The former doesn't say so directly...

Brainwashed should get a more clear Sub-Trope list, and wick cleaning, like how SailorMoon has both Brainwashed and Brainwashed and Crazy for the same example...

Edited by Malady on Mar 4th 2019 at 5:14:06 AM

The following was added recently to Canon Discontinuity:

"While fans are usually glad that this happens, it is not always the case, there are times where a work that was liked by fans and critics or was just divisive instead of universally disliked, gets axed and leaves the fanbase unhappy with this decision, and there are many examples when something is discontinued because it was universally disliked and everyone agrees, but the new story meant to replace it and become the "real" follow-up turns out to be just as bad or even worse, making the fanbase prefer the old version or ignore both, or even make this story to be discontinued too."

Opinions?

Edited by MagBas on Mar 3rd 2019 at 4:36:20 AM

This has been removed before via Ask The Tropers and a search of the edit history for being blatant complaining. The troper whose re-added this has now committed an Edit War.

Reverted, suspended.

@Wyldchyld: Well, to be fair, the name doesn't indicate the "elite" part at all. It's part of a not-uncommon problem with many older tropes' names that I've noticed over the years: Whoever chose the names and whoever subsequently gave them the seal of approval didn't consider the fact that they're too broad for the tropes' actual definitions, which was just begging for the Trope Decay that did happen to happen.

Okay, spawning a new post for Conspicuous Trenchcoat, since it's really important:

The name doesn't match its description of "a concealing trenchcoat, fedora and occasionally dark glasses"

Which it discusses, possibly more than the trechcoat alone?

TRS for a namechange to something like Glasses Fedora Trenchcoat?

What you said is already Coat, Hat, Mask.

Conspicuous Trenchcoat is when someone wearing a longcoat = hiding secrets.

The description for Technician Versus Performer is too heavy on the performer's side, even though it's about "the show between 2 different approaches in doing something" in general. It should be more neutral. It's also too heavy on Example as a Thesis.

Naked People Are Funny seems to suffer from having what really should be an analysis page as the main description.

It's like ungodly long and rambly.

I support motion to move part of description Naked People Are Funny to Analysis, or remove altogether.

I'm going to repeat that Decisive Battle sounds like it's too specific to Space Battle cases, as if the writer thinks too much of space literature.

Denied Parody has this paragraph:

Framing it as "the denials are plausible" seems too broad for the exception we're trying to describe here — the trope is "it looks like a parody, but the creators say it's not", not "it's absolutely obviously definitely a parody, but the creators are just lying and saying it isn't anyway". Can I change that to something like "situations where the parody was implausible to begin with"?

Yeah, that makes no sense. Even the specifically naval use of the concept circa the World Wars (which is where I assume the description's coming from) is not its origin.

Shouldn't Denied Parody be trivia, since it relies on Word of God?

Is Cool Crown just "X Wears A Crown"? But it's fine since crowns are special all by themselves?

"Crowns are Cool and So Are The Wearers", I think?