Removing complaining, bashing and other negativity from the wiki

We actually have a cleanup thread for Uncertain Audience.

• Velma has sparked many debates as to who the hell it's aimed at. The graphic violence, cursing, frank discussions of drugs and sex, and other such content make it inappropriate for the Scooby-Doo franchise's traditional child demographic, while the nostalgic adult fans it's supposedly written for find the Audience Shift either poorly handled and unnecessary or cowardly and limp, and won't appreciate the rather extreme changes to characterization and tone. People who aren't Scooby-Doo fans, meanwhile, will just see yet another mediocre-at-best Animated Shock Comedy crammed full of obnoxious Self-Referential Humor. Furthermore, its status as an origin story for the gang naturally makes it fall into the void between its potential audiences: newcomers don't have an attachment to these characters and thus don't care what their origin is, veteran fans don't want such a bleak and meanspirited story to be these characters' origins, and to everyone in-between the numerous changes to the cast and tone render it incompatible, and thus pointless, as an origin in the first place. Finally, even people who want a Darker and Edgier take on the Scooby-Doo characters aren't hurting for options: official entries like Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island, Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated, Scooby Apocalypse, and Scooby Natural already exist as earlier and better-received examples, tons of grotesquely dark skits done by the likes of College Humor, Robot Chicken, Family Guy, The Venture Bros., and The Scooby-Doo Project have done the concept to the point of Stock Parody, and even the fan project Mystery Incorporated (2022) which tackled the idea of a serious adult Scooby-Doo, all of which left Velma with quite literally nothing to offer anyone.

This entry is from Uncertain Audience

Is this actually a personal vent in disguise? (Raid Code spoilers)

I mean, the edit reason straight-up says "coping rn" so yeah, it seems overly personal at best.

if it's just one person "coping rn" (i.e. other people don't think this DLC is hampered by its short length) then it can be yeeted.

Edited by worldwidewoomy on Jul 28th 2023 at 4:57:11 AM

Yeet it to the depths

This line on Celebrity Resemblance's description feels more like someone's personal complaint/dislike of the trope than anything else:

Cut?

Edited by Zanreo on Jul 28th 2023 at 1:49:02 PM

(disregard, found a solution to this!)

Edited by N64Hylian on Jul 28th 2023 at 11:19:09 AM

Cut that line from the description.

The page image for Critical Dissonance seems to be just there to bash Tyler Perry and his works, and the page caption especially makes it obvious. Should we take it to Image Pickin' and see what they think? And to add to that, I don't think a film's Rotten Tomatoes or similar site score should count as an image, because it can be used to stealthily sneak in bashing.

...But the trope is literally "fans liked it, critics hated it (or vice versa)". The image depicts this perfectly and I don't see how it's sneaking in bashing of the work, the RT numbers are what they are but nothing about the image (or caption, for that matter) claims that the movies suck or something.

Also, this is the second time you've brought up images here instead of taking them to Image Pickin. This thread has no power over page images.

Edited by WarJay77 on Jul 28th 2023 at 11:28:33 AM

I confess that I have yet to see the film, but as someone who hasn't, the way things are worded here gives bad vibes. The same editor, ~stankykong, also added defensive natter to the Avengers: Endgame entry directly above it. BrokenAesop.Live Action Films, if you are wondering.

• In Barbie (2023), Barbieland is presented as a matriarchy that treats the male Kens as second-class citizens, claiming that America in the real world does the same but inverted. However, the entire comparison is rendered moot by Barbie choosing to be human and live in the real world in the end despite the film repeatedly claiming that society wouldn't allow her to succeed. Furthermore, while it was covered up with Condescending Compassion the discrimination against the Kens was much more severe than anything women face in the modern West, making the whole situation a false equivalence from the start and the film ending with a restored status quo that only vaguely alludes to any attempts at equality.

The point isn't rendered moot by Barbie choosing to be human though. She is told how hard it will be, and that she will lose her (more or less) immortality, but the decision is still her's. She'd rather be a person in the flawed and messy real world than exist as an idea; the movie presents this less as the correct choice and more as her choice. It's also the only time she actually has a choice because earlier in the movie it's made clear the two options Weird Barbie lays out for her are actually just one option.

This just seems like a way to say "wah, the movie was too mean to the Kens" without actually bringing up what aesop is being broken.

×7 Cut it.

×3 I also don't think the image is complaining.

"the discrimination against the Kens was much more severe than anything women face in the modern West" the things I'm thinking are not suitable for a public forum, so I'll just say cut it.

oh that's yikes. please nuke.

From YMMV.Virtua Racing

• Porting Disaster: By contrast, the Saturn port is widely considered a disappointment, in large part because the developers had no access to the source code and were given little support from Sega throughout development. On its own, it doesn't look too bad, and next to the other versions it even might look better...but when the limitations and capabilities are taken into mind, the Saturn version falls flat. Where the Genesis and the 32X versions push the consoles to their limits and provide a very serviceable result, the Saturn version hardly even attempts to take advantage of the hardware and should, for all intents and purposes, have been close to an Arcade-Perfect Port. It's only a marginal improvement over the 32X version and looks like a complete joke next to the likes of Daytona USA and Sega Rally Championship on the same system.

The port is far too functional to count — people's main problem is its lack of accuracy to the arcade. The video linked actually has evidence that the Saturn port's quality is a Broken Base situation since the creator dug through old forums to find posts of people arguing about it.

Found this on EndingFatigue.Video Games (Some of the potholes don’t help); Originally posted of the Wall of Text cleanup, but I’ll bring it up here since I feel like this entry is kind of bashy.

• The developers clearly never learned from this as The Legend of Heroes: Trails into Reverie has, just for the final boss fight of the main game, taking up to at least 2 hours to finish the game (more if the RNG hates you thanks to a certain Soldat fight). First, after entering the control room at Retributive Tower, players are treated with a long cutscene just introducing who was really behind all the events of the main story. Then the first phase of the Final Boss fight happens that requires both Rean and Lloyd to be in the party. Then the next phase starts where players now have to use the soldats to fight off against the boss who summoned the completed version of the Seven Divine Knights which consists of four phases with the first three phases having the boss delivering a Curb-Stomp Battle after reaching certain damage thresholds. After finally defeating it, the players are then treated to a very long cutscene and when that scene is over, players still have to fight one more fight where Lloyd is a required party member but players aren't allowed to use Rean, Crow, and Rufus for this fight. And once players think this is over, the player has to traverse through the final dungeon again and reach the boss room before the game is over. Thankfully for the last portion, no enemy will spawn in allowing players to just head straight over. Only after the player finally reaches the room is the main story finally over. Also, there is post-game content which adds even more floors to the True Reverie Corridor and a new Daydream stone that serves as the Sequel Hook for the future Calvard arc.

Edited by Ayumi-chan on Aug 1st 2023 at 9:20:52 PM

That really needs a full rewrite (the only other option is simply cutting it). It starting with "The developers clearly never learned from this" is a red flag on its own. Even if whoever adds the example feels very passionate about the example in question, restraining those feelings is important so the writeup doesn't end up being so bashy.

Edited by MyFinalEdits on Aug 1st 2023 at 11:08:28 AM

I was going to bring up the Barbie entry on BrokenAesop.Live Action Films but seeing as it was decided not to keep anyways I cut it with a link here.

That needs a big rewrite.

I found this on The Complainer Is Always Wrong:

• In Avengers: Endgame, Rocket Raccoon gives Captain Marvel a What the Hell, Hero? for being absent for the fight against Thanos in the previous film. Carol retorts that she was busy fighting guys just like Thanos all over the galaxy and Rocket backs down, in spite of the fact that nobody else was able to cause destruction on a universal scale like he did.

I admit that I don't know much about this trope but this seems like complaining to me. Though I could be wrong. Thoughts?

Edited by Bullman on Aug 1st 2023 at 10:37:16 AM

It is... although that's essentially synonymous with being a The Complainer Is Always Wrong example in the first place. (It's definitely an actual trope but its presence on this site has pretty much always just been for tropers to bitch about it.)

So I should leave it alone or cut?

Edited by Bullman on Aug 1st 2023 at 10:51:29 AM

Correction, it was Rhodey who asked where she was. Rocket’s argument with her was after the time skip, concerning a lead she told them about that turned out to be a dead end.

It's also misusing What the Hell, Hero?. I think it's complaining. It's strawmanning the point she was making (that Earth has plenty of heroes willing to defend it from a powerful villain, but there are many worlds out there that have no-one to protect them, which is what she's doing). The context of what she's saying is clear, so this entry acting like she's saying the universe is full of villains on the same level as Thanos is a little misleading.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Aug 1st 2023 at 10:30:25 AM

x5 Any possible rewrite?