Confusing title. Possibly two tropes and/or reactions?: What Do You Mean Its For Kids

The Laconic defines it as "A work made for children attracts a Periphery Demographic that insists that it's not just a kid's work", although it's usually (mis)used as "Works are marketed to children despite containing questionable content". What to do?

I personally think we should do something like this: We split this into two pages, the first of which is the second trope and keeps the current name, the second of which is the first trope and is moved to a new page with a new name (or, alternatively, is listed as a new variety of Fan Dumb on that page).

What do you think we should do?

EDIT: The title should read "two tropes". I thank whoever fixed the title, as it originally read "to tropes".

edited 5th Nov '11 4:37:14 AM by Spinosegnosaurus77

The entire What Do You Mean, It's Not an Index? snowclone family is basically broken, and this is no exception. I would recommend a split into two new tropes (although the Periphery Demographic Fan Dumb one is best without examples), and not using this name for either of them.

For the record, laconics are quite frequently wrong, but I've seen that definition used enough that it's worth having something on it anyway.

Yes, this is a terrible title. The opposite trope is What Do You Mean, It's Not for Kids?, but good luck remembering which one's which.

^ The opposite name is What Do You Mean, It's Not for Kids?. There is no opposite trope, which would be "a work intended to appeal to a broad audience instead has only a very narrow demographic of fans".

I second nrjxll's suggestion. I was under the impression that was the definition of the trope anyway; the page makes this sound like an audience reaction; i.e. Periphery Demographic but with 'ego'. It should be specifically about kid-marketed works that attract a Periphery Demographic because of material intended to cater to said demographic, such as the heavy plotting, Shout Outs and Getting Crap Past the Radar.

Oh, like that definition isn't going to be subjective at all. And the last thing we need is more of that kind of gushing-prone subjective tropes.

Wasn't there some Special Efforts thread to clean up this whole index? I'm fairly certain every single trope on there is messed up in some way, and in no small part because of the atrocious snowcloning.

^^^ You're right. I thought What Do You Mean, It's for Kids? = "It's meant for kids, but people don't think it is," while What Do You Mean, It's Not for Kids? = "It's not meant for kids, but people think it is." The actual definitions are more complicated.

Let's fix both!

Are we going to actually DO anything?

I'm another one who Thought It Meant "a work that is marketed to children despite containing questionable content." I guess I went by the title and examples and didn't read the description.

The actual definition of "a work made for children attracts a Periphery Demographic that insists that it's not just a kid's work." doesn't sound like a concept worthy of it's own page. I don't think we need whole pages with examples to document every possible way fans act irrationally. We can just have a little blurb on Periphery Demographic page that mentions that teens and adults who are fans of a kids show often insist that it wasn't made just for kids.

edited 12th Nov '11 9:50:52 AM by djbj

Good suggestion, but I was thinking of putting the blurb on the Fan Dumb page.

Once again: are we going to actually DO anything??!

edited 5th Dec '11 12:40:05 PM by Spinosegnosaurus77

Keep your pants on and just say, "Bump." Or something that doesn't involve so much emphasis and punctuation.

This needs a rename badly and I suggest that the trope is redefined as the "questionable content" one. As for the split suggestion, I don't really think that's necessary because the trope as it's currently defined (Vocal Minority of fanbase insists that a work intended for children isn't because it's just too cool and sophisticated for that) seems to border on "Periphery Demographic, but religious," or maybe "Periphery Demographic Unbeknownst To Itself." I could be wrong about that, but it would definitely cause gushing.

There is now a page action crowner for this trope here. Feel free to add options as you see fit.

Personally, I think that a rename could be justified based off of how one could pretty easily confuse this trope for the opposite of What Do You Mean, It's Not for Kids?. However, a wick check might be a good idea given the significant number of wicks for this trope.

I added "redefine" onto the crowner. The current "incorrect" definition is how I often see this trope used, and it's certainly a less problematic definition than just another Misaimed Fandom/Periphery Demographic audience reaction.

I'm for redefining and splitting.

The "redefine" option is 15 points in the green. We may as well go with it.

Calling in favour of a redefine.

I wonder if a rename would be a good idea. I would have no suggestions as to the new name, though.

Something like Surprisingly Not For Kids or Falsely Marketed To Kids could work.

I'm not quite sure about those two, but What Do You Mean, It's for Kids? is probably worse. I'm thinking of Supposedly For Children or Dubious Kids Show, but I'm not sure about those either.

We're looking for titles for WDYMIFK, not WDYMINFK.

Let's try Supposedly For Adults.

Actually For Kids, Not Only For Adults, Really For Kids

I know. I guess that just means they're really bad names for this trope.

The Show Has Content That Seems Unsuitable For Children Yet The Show Is Actually Aimed At Children. Fails 2 and 3.

Silly Adult This Show Is For Kids?