Since we have a thread for improving the descriptions for tropes
, I thought I would make one for improving descriptions for works. This is also a good place for requesting creator page cleaning.
Here are some common problems with many work descriptions:
- Over-analytical Walls of Text: Many works that have a high Troper Critical Mass have egregiously long descriptions, and could use some trimming, possibly moving some of it to the Analysis page.
- Critical reception/audience reaction cruft: "Edit Tip #12: We are not interested in whether or not something is or was popular. Whether or not it was liked has nothing to do with tropes." In other words, work descriptions should not contain paragraphs nor any mention at all about how the work was received. Zap it.
- Editorialism: A similar issue to the above, some tropers have a tendency to try to sneak stealth reviews into works' descriptions. This is obvious deletion fodder - Kill It with Fire.
- Plagiarism: Copy-pasted text from another source, such as Wikipedia.
So just post any work or creator page descriptions that are in need of cleanup and we'll see what we can do.
edited 23rd Dec '15 8:06:12 PM by MyTimingIsOff
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
Hey, is it just, or does Project M's work description needs some serious trimming down?
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
Whew. It's faaaaaaaaar too long.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
.
edited 23rd Jul '17 2:20:11 PM by Jicragg
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
Sorry to bug you guys, but is the description for this page alright? Also, do anyone else think the Project M page's description need a trimming?
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
Sorry for the double-post, but the description for Bruno needs a lot of help.
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
.
edited 23rd Jul '17 2:12:19 PM by Jicragg
Ancient Domains Of Mystery I think doesn't have a very good description. It feels too much like a review, duplicates a lot of points from the roguelike page, and even contradicts itself ("well-written" vs. "drawn from the Big Book of Fantasy Clichés"). The only reason I haven't touched it is because it's entertainingly written.
This post was thumped by the Shillelagh of Whackingness
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I removed the review crap. Entertainingly written or not, reviews belong in the reviews section, not the main trope page.
Tsundere pet.
Looking through the pages that link to Needs A Better Description turns up a lot of stuff that could use a looking at that isn't listed on the page. Like The Ugly American, which is kind of cutlist-fodder in its current state.
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
Speaking of pages that link to Needs A Better Description... trope and work pages should not be linking to Needs A Better Description.
Tsundere pet.
For some reason it's being used as a holding pen for pages that need a better description; if that's valid, then links back are perfectly fine. Personally I think the page should just be the Predefined Message and all the stuff on it be moved off onto a sandbox or something, but that's not how it's currently being used..
They're not fine. "Needs A Better X" messages meant for discussions. It's considered bad form to have them in actual trope or work articles.
Tsundere pet.
Have you looked at the Needs A Better Description page recently? It's not set up as just a predefined message, it's a "stuff that needs fixing" page like Pages Needing Wicks. As I said, I don't think that's the best use for it, but that's what it currently is.
Maoyuu Maou Yuusha has a giant wall of text as the first paragraph.
"Learning without thinking is labor lost. Thinking without learning is dangerous."
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
Havenwood needs a lot of help. It doesn't even have a work description; it's literally just a list of tropes.
edited 14th Apr '12 3:25:05 PM by Komodin
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
(Coming back here after a while...)
How To Create A Works Page does mention "good things," but it doesn't say how necessary each of them is. Probably the most troublesome thing to write is "a brief and spoiler-free overview of the plot." It seems we don't like to have that be too brief, but we also hate overly involved descriptions.
Septimus Heap is basically only about the first book, Magyk. Now, while I know the series well, I have no idea how to expand the description.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Bumping to get some help on and also to strip off all the "reception" nonsense off Attack of the Clones and replace it with a true description.
Dimmu Borgir needs an actual description
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
Havenwood still has no work summary. Does it even exist?
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
Miracle Girls is a stub article with only a handful of tropes (most of which are Zero Context) and a one-sentence description.
Almost every Disney Animated Canon film has a paragraph, sometimes more (*cough* Pocahontas *cough*) on its reception. I know that we're not aiming to see if something's popular, but I'm wondering if this is a Disney Canon-only exception, in order to better track their Renaissance or something.
edited 14th Jul '12 11:44:24 AM by LargoQuagmire
I would chop that page and just add an entry and redirect on the Shining Force page. (with bullets for each game made and Wiki Worded to those that have pages if they exist.)
No Export for You pretty much kills the game getting many tropes.
edited 4th Mar '12 4:42:31 AM by Raso
Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!