Inspired by this thread
, I've noticed that this wiki doesn't have a dedicated cleanup thread for negativity.
As we all know, Complaining About Shows You Don't Like, Creator Bashing and other negativity isn't desired on the wiki, except in a few selected areas like reviews and several Darth Wiki pages (and even then, with limitations). And yet, it's one of the most common sins wiki contributors can make.
So, if you find a page, TLP or discussion whose content seems like a straight-up insult or any other bitching - including complainy soapboxing -, you might ask here for help with removing said content.
The sandbox for this project is located at Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining.
Edited by MacronNotes on Apr 27th 2022 at 5:36:47 AM
Here's an entry on the Simpsons episode that I think has gone way overboard The Simpsons S 27 E 9 Barthood
- Jerkass Ball: Whilst it usually depends upon the story or writer, this episode gives us a pretty good insight into Bart's relationship with his father and sister. Needless to say, Homer and Lisa are not portrayed in a positive manner
- Homer refuses to try and seriously bond with his son, even when a doctor and his wife order him to do it. When he later tries to justify his actions, claiming that Bart reminds him too much of his younger self, it comes across as a very selfish and lazy excuse that holds no real value. It comes as no surprise that Bart never truly forgives him and views Abe as his real father figure.
- Lisa however, is even worse. Throughout Bart's childhood, she was always stealing the glory from him, no matter what the occasion, never gave his due or an opportunity to do better than her. When Bart finally calls her out on this, all Lisa does is claim that she understands what it means to be second best; because she had few friends growing up and did not go to the top university. It is perfectly clear that she does not understand one bit and has no real regard for her brother's feelings, nor how much she hurt him, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Whilst this does lead to a "Eureka!" Moment for Bart, it is clear to the audience that Lisa is the real villain here and that worst of all, she cannot see her own flaws and will never change.
How does the troper who wrote this even know Bart has never truly forgiven Homer. As for Lisa, to call her a "villain" is really a stretch. And how could she have been lying when she said she understands what is feels like to be second best? And to say she "never change" I feel is a pretty unfair condemnation.
![]()
![]()
A lot of tropers seem to be under the impression the show is always on Lisa's side, even when it's clearly undercutting and mocks Lisa's beliefs. There's two separate Treehouse of Horror segments ("Night of the Dolphin" and "The Fright to Creep and Scare Harms") where Lisa does the right thing, and it results in horrific and deadly consequences.
As for the Barthood examples... yeah, the Lisa one is going way too far in making assumptions about her character.
Edited by harryhenry on Aug 20th 2022 at 9:37:40 AM
![]()
![]()
Is it just me or it can expand to industry dark sides beyond things related to Contractual Purity? It's getting a lot more prominent with controversies flying here and there. I mean, I'd be willing to try and remove the complaining and bashing, but that's just my two cents about that.
I'd like to ask for support and reeling back in case I get off the handle in trying to fix the negativities around, some of them are touching my issues. If I go too far, then please kindly warn me. With that said, after I receive reply, I will start putting some queries about this.
That said, the Simpsons thing is something I can try to modify without getting too much of my issues. Here goes nothing on Lisa:
- Throughout Bart's childhood, Lisa was always stealing the glory from him, no matter what the occasion, never gave his due or an opportunity to do better than her. When Bart finally calls her out on this, all Lisa does is claim that she understands what it means to be second best; because she had few friends growing up and did not go to the top university. However, for a lot, it just makes her look like refusing to understand and not taking her brother's feeling with regards, unaware that it may hurt Bart's feelings. Whilst this does lead to a "Eureka!" Moment for Bart, in the eyes of the audience, Lisa instead comes off as an uncaring Jerkass that cannot see her own flaws and won't change.
All right, here's the changes:
- Remove the first sentence and re-arranged it to be a better structure. 'Being worse than Homer' is subjective and trying to paint Lisa even more negatively.
- 'It's perfectly clear that'... seems like overly pushing how she doesn't understand Bart's feelings. So... I re-arranged that.
- Agreed on the 'villain' part being removed, so I decided to modify the sentence to saying that she looks like an uncaring Jerkass.
Fair?
Hmmm... in hindsight I think 'won't change' or 'can't change' seems to be extra bullet to put on the negativity and justify hatred on Lisa. Either remove that, or just change it to 'cannot see her own flaws nor change her ways'.
That being said, since I noticed that Jerkass Ball isn't supposed to be a subjective trope belonging to YMMV... Maybe I would change that to something that doesn't really touch audience reaction. How about something like...
- Throughout Bart's childhood, Lisa was always stealing the glory from him, no matter what the occasion, never gave his due or an opportunity to do better than her. When Bart finally calls her out on this, all Lisa does is claim that she understands what it means to be second best; because she had few friends growing up and did not go to the top university. It's like Lisa comes off as an uncaring Jerkass who doesn't take Bart's feelings into consideration and is blinded by her own flaws just so Bart can have his "Eureka!" Moment.
I hope that sounds as 'neutral' and 'not baiting hatred'. And isn't Jerkass Ball about 'someone usually nice acts like jerkass so the plot can move forward'?
Edited by ChrisX on Aug 21st 2022 at 3:16:40 PM
I found this on the Western Animation subpage of Blind Idiot Translation (in the German folder)
:
- Ivar Combrinck is quite possibly the ultimate blind idiot translator. He single-handedly ruined The Simpsons, Futurama and Family Guy for German audiences.
Shouldn't a statement saying that someone ruined something get rewritten? I think so!
An excited Wally Walrus for everyone! (Check out my troper wall if you can!)It's a Zero-Context Example anyway. What did he do with his translations that was so bad?
Suddenly I'm... still rotating Fallen London in my mind even though I've stopped actively playing it.![]()
![]()
It's probably not an example, either: a "Blind Idiot" Translation isn't just one that's low quality.
On second thought I think I want to work on the whole Jerkass Ball entry rather than just Lisa's part. I dunno, I just feel a little itchy at the things I saw as negativity. I don't mean just parts. I'll do the whole opening text and the sub bullet for Homer too.
- Jerkass Ball:
Whilst it usually depends upon the story or writer,This episode gives us a pretty good insight into Bart's relationship with his father and sister, and it's not that pleasant as the two had to be a little meaner than usual (as a reminder, Homer is already a Jerkass).Needless to say, Homer and Lisa are not portrayed in a positive manner- Homer refuses to try and seriously bond with his son, even when a doctor and his wife order him to do it. He later tries to justify his actions by claiming that Bart reminds him too much of his younger self, but considering Homer's usual self, it doesn't really hold much value and instead makes him trying to avoid responsibility.
... Can someone who is by default a Jerkass actually hold the Jerkass Ball? ... I feel like the Homer section might need pruning instead...
Edited by ChrisX on Aug 22nd 2022 at 1:23:16 AM
I checked WTH, Costuming Department? earlier and it needs a cleanup. Lots of examples that are either snarky, complaining or based entirely on links that are long dead.
I was told to
bring this example from Cool World to this thread:
- WTH, Casting Agency?: Although he did an adequate job portraying Jack Deebs as a total wuss, Gabriel Byrne isn't most people's idea of what a gonzo underground cartoonist who hates humanity and wants to live in a world of cartoony chaos and sexy cartoon women looks like (someone who looked like or could make himself over like Robert Crumb would be more appropriate). Despite this, it's a lot better than the originally intended idea of Brad Pitt for the role of Jack Deebs, which would have been totally wrong. YMMV because if anyone could sell someone who can and does do cartoon women in real life, it's Brad Pitt.
That should honestly all get cut.
For the record, I'm not sure the average person has an idea what "a gonzo underground cartoonist who hates humanity and wants to live in a world of cartoony chaos and sexy cartoon women" should look like. I would bet good money the average film goer in 1992 couldn't tell you who Robert Crumb was or what he looked like, either.
That last line about Pitt seems like its a weird dig at Angelina Jolie, too. Just yeet it all.
(Been a while...)
I found this under here [1]
, Herald Folder: "Apparently, "Ultimateness" does not include coming up with punchy English translations for your name." Sure, Ultimateness is silly, but there can be better ways of expressing the caption. Then there's the Ghostrick: Ghostrick Succubus' name was changed to "Socuteboss" in the English TCG. Ditto for Ghostrick Datenshi/Spoiled Angel, whose name was going to become the equally cringe-worthy "Dorklord". Fortunately, it seems that Konami has caught on to how terrible the proposed name was going to be and renamed her to "Ghostrick Angel of Mischief" instead. Mostly because 1. Hardly any of the Dub Name Change things are complaining, e.g. Sacred Beasts and 2. I remember reading that Konami really didn't like the idea of who are basically little girls being called Succubus and Spoiled Angel.
![]()
Not to nitpick and I think I can already know what you're aiming for. But can you perhaps separate the texts into paragraphs to clarify which one was the original source and which one is your own input on the case? So everyone else can read it clearer.
Edited by ChrisX on Aug 22nd 2022 at 9:59:50 PM
This entry on UsefulNotes.Prehistoric Life Mammals has all this weird "oh what a missed opportunity" stuff at the end. I agree, but it seems way out of place, especially on a Useful Notes page.
- Prehistoric marsupials were not the only oversized mammals in ancient Australia: monotremes, too, were amazing. Modern monotremes are the most archaic extant mammals, and are well-known because they have preserved the original habit to produce eggs instead of alive newborns. Their extinct relatives are poorly-known in fossil record, and were not different than the modern ones (platypus and echidna). Steropodon and Obdurodon
were ancient platypuses with a smaller beak. However, one member of the echidna group reached the size of a sheep: Zaglossus hacketti
, closely related with modern long-beaked echidnas. It's weird that the astounding fauna which lived once in Australia was totally missed by the Walking With producers. With giant koalaroos, giant rhinowombats, rat-toothed uberlions (Thylacoleo), and giant ancestor of Knuckles available (not to mention Komodo dragons and giant running birds, the "mihirungs")… it's unfortunate that such an episode never materialized.
I found this Adaptational Jerkass:
- She-Hulk: Attorney at Law: She-Hulk in the comics was a generally fun-loving and occasional fourth-wall-breaking superhero who enjoyed the fact that her powers gave her great strength and an awesome bod, and loved to flaunt it. In the series, she is a Straw Feminist who has has a low opinion of men, and after getting her powers becomes a Smug Super who takes every opportunity to tell her cousin Bruce, who had already gone through one Trauma Conga Line after another since his introduction, how much better she is than him.
This is not at all what happened. No where is it said or implied that she doesn't like men and she never actually says that she is better than Bruce other than one tongue in cheek joke.
This just reads like an excuse to complain. Is it just me?
Fan-Preferred Couple cleanup thread

Contractual Purity is an article I've been looking over. It attracts misuse of "actor does not do risqué things" rather than "actor is forbidden by employers from doing them". Also bad indentation from how it's sorted sometimes by country, sometimes by company, sometimes by actor. I have removed some bad entries but it needs input from someone knowledgeable in the industries concerned.
Stories don't tell us monsters exist; we knew that already. They show us that monsters can be trademarked and milked for years.