Removing complaining, bashing and other negativity from the wiki

This better?

• Multiple flashbacks and instances of Ash reminiscing about his battle with Alain leave out Ash-Greninja, to the point that a scene of his battle with Mega Charizard in Journeys was redrawn to make base Greninja confront Charizard instead. His battle with Mega Gardevoir during Ash's rematch against Diantha is also implicitly left out when Ash mentions that he fought her only once instead of twice.

That seems pretty good.

Found some drama importation on Writer on Board:

• The infamous Dark Fic All He Ever Wanted is a ridiculously obvious case of this. A good part of the fandom does NOT like how the authors's personal opinions keep seeping into the characterization and the plot (re: Prussia the monstrous villain vs. Austria the Designated Victim vs. Hungary the Chickification victim whom Prussia needlessly tortures and rapes to show off his power to Austria; plus Austria is Jewish despite canon all but stating that he's Catholic, paralleling how one of the authors is Jewish too), as well as their rather... arrogant behavior during certain wanks. How the authors both wrote the TV Tropes page for their fics (particularly blatant when comparing it to one of them's page on her X1999 epic) and later were caught monitoring what other people said about the fic online and bullying any dissenters at the height of the wank days does NOT help their cases.

I think this needs a complete rewrite. Anyone familiar with it?

So, having skimmed the full America (2017) series for that Anvilicious example -

• There's nothing obvious in text that's bashing white men or heterosexual relationships. A white woman is the Big Bad (Oubliette Midas), but she's also a pre-existing villain from the Young Avengers series it spins out of.

• The whole thing has a weird, larger-than-life approach to dialogue and pacing. Whether it's a bold stylistic decision or bad writing is debatable, but I can't believe it's not at least partly deliberate (X-Statix does something similar).

• There is that page of Kate gushing about how wonderful America's relationship with her girlfriend is, as linked in the previous post. It's immediately followed by America being betrayed by her girlfriend and stabbed with a hypodermic while they're kissing, with Kate realising Magdalena's a Love-Interest Traitor just too late to warn America.

• I didn't spot any other big speeches praising same sex relationships, although they're accepted as absolutely normal and homophobia (aside from villains, iirc) isn't a feature. America's relationships are as flawed as anyone else's, with the whole series starting when a communication breakdown triggers an avoidable breakup with her girlfriend.

None of which persuades me the original example was valid. Might be scope for a rewritten one, but I'm not sure what it would say.

Writer on Board says that the story needs to start going off the rails in order to pander to some specific agenda of the author's, but that entry doesn't speak to any agenda reflected in the story. It's just a fanfic that people didn't like and an author who was possessive of the trope page and fought with critics. I'd say cut.

Removed.

The description of VideoGame.Dungeon Lords is full of complaining, so much so that I don't even know how to rewrite it. Could anyone help me with that?

Avatar by Butterscotch Arts. Used under license.

Limited Animation has plenty of complaining. So much of it that I cant actually bring up the examples that stood out to me most. I will try after I come back from the doctor.

Discord: Waido X 255#1372 If you cant contact me on TV Tropes do it here.

Wasn’t sure if this was the right place to bring it up, but I noticed that the Fallen Creator entry for that Ivan Reitman refers to him in present tense (“ but he still faces a lot of work if he's ever going to fully restore his reputation.”) when he is now deceased.

Feel free to bring it up to the Locked Pages thread. Show an updated writeup of the example with the appropriate tense so a mod can use it to replace the current writeup.

135 - 169 - 273 - 191 - 188 - 230 - 300

Here's how one of the entries in YMMV.Faerie Tale Theatre is written:

• Values Dissonance: If the show came out today, they couldn’t cast white actors as Chinese characters in "The Nightingale" and as Arab characters in "Aladdin" without there being controversy.

Is it me, or does this entry feel like it's complaining about PC culture? This trope in general tends to attract "it would never fly today"-type sentences that give off such a vibe, but it feels too obvious here. Should I rewrite the entry or remove it completely?

I think the entry is fine, but it could use a rewrite. Make it focus more on the importance of minority representation.

Also, for the record, there is a thread dedicated solely to Values Dissonance and similars.

Valdo

OK, I gave it a shot at a rewrite.

From Satellite Love Interest:

Edited by nanakiro on Mar 16th 2023 at 6:49:25 AM

Feed the lions with those examples. They're unsalvageable due to their negativity.

135 - 169 - 273 - 191 - 188 - 230 - 300

Found this entry on BrokenAesop.The Simpsons that's particularly complainy.

• "The Cartridge Family" presents the stock aesop of "guns are bad and gun owners are stupid violent nincompoops". Lisa even gets on her soapbox to preach about the Second Amendment being "irrelevant in today's society". Then, the second Homer uses his gun recklessly in front of the NRA, they suddenly switch personalities from 'guns are unconditionally awesome' to 'guns are dangerous tools that need to be treated with respect'. Then at the end the NRA gets a Big Damn Heroes moment. This all happens without abandoning the "guns are bad" aesop. The episode ends with Homer asking Marge to get rid of his gun for him. She then decides she likes the way she looks holding it and keeps it. The utterly schizoid delivering of aesops in the episode is partly linked to the fact that the writers themselves were divided on the issue of gun ownership. They then tried to show the issue of guns in a neutral way... and coming out with that. Word of God says if you take anything out of it, it's that reckless people (like Homer) shouldn't own guns.

Edited by SkylaNoivern on Mar 16th 2023 at 4:43:10 PM

I've removed this from YMMV.RWBY

• Sacred Cow: Fans of the series can range from defensive to outright rabid when it comes to criticism. The discourse became so bad on reddit with constant fights that a completely separate subreddit for criticism (/rrwbycritics) had to be made.

A variation of this entry was removed by other tropers a while ago for misusing Sacred Cow. This entry is also drama importation; bad faith critics got drummed out of the original a few years ago and set up their own sub-reddit. The two sites don't get along and a quick dig shows engagement with criticism in the original, so the entry does not appear to be accurate.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Mar 16th 2023 at 8:34:09 AM

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.

I say cut.

I remember removing a similar entry from the Clueless Aesop entry ages ago, so I say remove this one too. A troper disagreeing with the episode's aesop "People like Homer shouldn't have guns" doesn't mean the aesop is broken.

Edited by Edgar81539 on Mar 16th 2023 at 2:13:02 AM

~Wyldchyld:

I believe you might have to take it to Ask The Tropers, because the same troper who added the Sacred Cow entry that you later deleted has added a Flame War written in a similar tone:

For starters, Flame War doesn't allow any examples, and directing to other YMMV entries is a bad look. Send a complaining notifier to the concerned troper first, and assess how they'll react.

"They played us like a DAMN FIDDLE!" — Kazuhira Miller, Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain

Okay, thanks for flagging. I've sent a notifier.

It looks like someone else has removed the entry, so I'll see how they respond.

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.

Found several bashing/complaining examples on the main page for Titanic: The Legend Goes On (an animated film considered by most to be So Bad, It's Good).

• Captain Obvious: In the uncut version, when the ship is sinking: "We're on a ship in the middle of the ocean." More of laziness from the film makers. That same line was used earlier, when the Nanny points out to William that the girl he is looking for can't just disappear as "We're on a ship in the middle of the ocean!" Could be an attempt at an Ironic Echo, if it weren't such a terrible line.
• Makes Just as Much Sense in Context: It's hard to overstate just how completely out of nowhere "Party Time" is. It's about ten minutes into a film which has given zero indication of being a musical in the first place. And the song is not set up at all. Fritz just responds to Maxie thanking him for saving his life by launching into a song. The fact that it's in a musical style that wouldn't be invented for another six decades just adds even more layers of ridiculous.
• Spaghetti Kiss: Sort of. We see the Dalmatians sharing link sausage in the "Mucho Gusto" scene. We don't actually see them kiss, but it's pretty obvious it was meant to invoke this trope. There's a good chance that they didn't know how to animate dogs kissing, so they just gave up.

The first and last just seem to need their last sentences removed, though I think the middle one isn't even proper usage; I think the correct trope would be That Reminds Me of a Song and all that would really need to be said is that "Party Time" came about without really being prompted or relevant.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Some time ago, I posted an entry about RWBY on Franchise Original Sin:

It was cut here by one Troper who accused it of being a complaint born out of Misaimed Fandom, because the show was always intended to have an ensemble cast, and they considered naming it "Remnants" but decided on RWBY as the catchier title.

• More than one reviewer has pointed out that the "Jaune Arc" in Volume 1 foreshadowed another problem that never truly went away: tons of characters taking screentime away from the titular team. Said arc is the second in the entire series, lasts roughly a third of the volume, and focuses on Jaune, a character who, while undoubtedly a main character, isn't part of the titular team. At the time, this could be forgiven because the stakes were relatively low, the arc helped make good on the series' initial premise of a magical warrior high-school, and they had practically the whole series ahead of them still plenty more time for team RWBY. Things initially seemed promising when Blake got her first story arc next, and later on the end of the high school part of the series suggested that anyone in the massive cast would be killed off or Put on a Bus once they were no longer strictly relevant. But then Volume 4 would introduce Oscar Pine and Blake's parents, make previous secondary characters Qrow and Sun main cast members, and gave Jaune, Ren and Nora character development, but Ruby herself little to none. The issue is largely seen as having reached it's zenith with the Ace Ops in Volume 7, who, while fairly popular as characters, get sizeable amounts of screentime and action even during the climax of the Atlas story arc, which is ostensibly about team RWBY saving all of Atlas' people and then being defeated by Cinder.

I understand that Troper's position, but my counterpoints as to why the entry should be reinstated are:

1. I did not invent the complaint; many prominent RWBY YouTubers (and non-RWBY YouTubers) have made it. Not everyone has to agree on whether or not something is a problem for it to count here.

2. Roosterteeth treats Team RWBY as the main characters. I was fully aware that "Remnants" was floated as a possible name for the show when I first posted the entry; I even considered acknowledging it, but decided against doing so, because Roosterteeth didn't call the show "Remnants," they named the show after four characters primarily, one of the four secondarily, and other characters or the world not at all. Plus, the merchandise, the trailers, spin-off material and even content from the show itself treats Team RWBY as the most important characters, and all that colors audience expectations as to who's going to be focused on in the show.

3. Deliberately being an ensemble piece does not excuse a cast becoming bloated or a plot unfocused. The Walking Dead has an entry for a similar issue. Whether or not you personally think that happened as the series went on, many do.

Is it just me, or are these examples in Fandom Heresy under Video Games - General complaining about complaining?

• Most likely just in the Western areas of gaming, but saying that you're okay with Mobile Phone Games (or being okay with microtransactions, as in only using it sparingly or in minimum amount) within a mainstream fandom will get you lambasted and accused as one of the factors are destroying the sanctity of gaming by supporting bad, predatory business practices found in mobile gaming like microtransaction, pay to win factors, even if you actually ran your mobile gaming experience without it or just doing them in minimal manner or just stays the hell away from the ongoing platform war. You might even be called a CCP-shill and supporting their censor-crazy policies (or other inhuman things the CCP was accused to do, regardless of the truth), considering many mobile games were made by Chinese developers. Ironically, while some Easterners might see you as an elitist for a console/PC gamers while not doing mobile, they won't give you heretic bashing for it.
• Amongst video game companies, several companies have been notorious enough in the fandom to be called 'the most evil'. Examples include Electronic Arts, Konami, Activision Blizzard (sometimes just Blizzard Entertainment), and Ubisoft. While sometimes you can call out other companies when they goofed up or praise them when they do good in the same time, it's practically an unwritten rule within the fandom to ALWAYS bash the hell out of those put onto the 'most evil' list, you have to Accentuate the Negative, make sure they never live down their worst moments or pretend they're still doing whatever bad thing they did in the past without proofs, and when they actually do something good, do not acknowledge or voice support of them on 'moral grounds'. If you fail to comply or even try to find something positive about them (even while also acknowledging their goof ups), prepare to be considered corporate shills (or being insinuated that those companies paid you to say something nice about them) that supports abuses towards workers and human rights or Gullible Lemmings that are destroying the sanctity of good gaming. (Though you can get away a little from it if you speak to a non-Western (English-speaking is optional) community, they usually don't make it as such a big deal as those in the West).

One of these days, all of you will accept me as your supreme overlord.