How does it differ from Sick and Wrong again?
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.Well that trope was redefined after this launched. As it is right now, I think we can merge.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Anyone else have some input?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Agree with the sentiment that "something so disturbing that characters fail to describe it" is a trope, but perhaps we could have a crowner.
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.And I just remembered a lot of the examples aren't really about something "sick". There's a Family Guy example where Peter gives a sentences loaded with inaccuracies, and Lois is just at a loss to list them all.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.I was thinking we could define it to something like 20% More Awesome. As in that's about making up percentages over numbers you can't track, while this could be about being unable to describe how something is wrong, so we just make up numbers or layers.
Might need a rename though.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.I was under the impression that the point of this trope/phrase/whatever was that the thing that is wrong is wrong in multiple ways.
Though right now all it really is is "people say something is wrong in multiple ways". Which is better than most Stock Phrase pages, but still not trope-y enough, is it?
she her hers hOI!!! i'm tempeYeah, that's why we're looking for another definition.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Too Wrong To Properly Describe?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Too Wrong To Succinctly Describe would perhaps be more letter accurate. As I'd interpret it, something being "wrong on so many levels" wouldn't so much suggest that something is so wrong that it's indescribably so but, rather, something so wrong that there are so many (mostly obvious) reasons to reach that conclusion that it isn't even worth taking the time to explain any of them.
This original namespace, though, I don't think it's really good for anything, unless there's a work by that name or something. Even if it doesn't quite strike anyone as an egregious "dialogue title", it's still a complete sentence that's so vague as to what "this" is that the namespace couldn't possibly accurately describe any objective occurrence that isn't a Stock Phrase*.
edited 15th Mar '12 12:38:02 PM by SeanMurrayI
Making it about levels seems to make it needlessly narrow.
And what namespace?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.What I meant was that there's no point in having a page with the name This Is Wrong on So Many Levels!, or, to put it another way, that the url link https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main.ThisIsWrongOnSoManyLevels should not be used for anything (let alone be repurposed).
If you mean cut the old name after a rename, that can be up for a crowner. But "namespace" refers to the "word/" format, not an actual page title.
edited 15th Mar '12 1:43:27 PM by DragonQuestZ
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Clocking due to lack of activity.
Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.What options should be put on the page action crowner?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Redirect or repurpose + rename. No cutting - too many inbounds.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman"redirect" to what?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.OK, I meant merge with ... Sick and Wrong?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanAs I stated in post #6, it's actually distinct from that.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Locking.
Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.
Yes, there is a possibility this could get cut outright, but I want to make sure there isn't a legitimate trope in here first.
The trope, aside from the phrase, seems to be something so wrong, that someone is at loss to really describe it properly, so uses some way to do it.
I know that's not much, but that's what this discussion is for.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.