Ambiguous Name: Plot With Porn

Thanks.

Bumping this too, for votes.

Also, are Gratuitous Sex Scene and Plot With Explicit Sex good contenders?

edited 5th May '12 12:51:17 PM by SeptimusHeap

I think "Gratuitous Sex Scene" is better here at capturing the idea of the trope - a work that is complete without explicit content and can stand on its own with minimal rewriting, but which contains a small number for... Sex Sells, and I'll leave it at that.

I definitely think that PlotWithPorn needs to be scrapped since the word "porn" has a particularly loaded definition in the wake of recent policy changes - not every work with explicit content is pornography, and our trope titles should reflect this.

I definitely agree with your last statement. "Pornography" is usually defined as "a work intended purely to arouse the reader". Sex scenes in otherwise plot-filled works aren't porn, they're just sex scenes.

Gratuitous Sex Scene sounds like it's a description of a single scene. Not a work. With that name, I would expect to quickly see misuse for things like the famous scene with Night Owl and Silk Spectre in Watchmen.

Gratuitous Sex Included is closer, but runs the same risk, to a lesser extent.

Plot With Explicit Sex works for me, but I'd like to see more suggestions along this line.

Calling crowner.

edited 6th May '12 6:17:46 AM by ccoa

OK, course of action seems to be:

1. Pull the current page to Porn with Plot
2. Make a definition for a new trope
3. Pull an alt-names crowner for that
4. Split Plot With Porn wicks and subpages according to the belonging to the new trope and Porn with Plot

Did I miss anything?

Doubleposting for not knowing better:

• Sex To Plot Ratio sounds like the name for a supertrope, or a policy page to me. It isn't probably part of the crowner proposal, but it doesn't contradict it either.
• Plot With Explicit Sex is good to me, or Plot With Pornography
• May Contain Sex sounds like something else, almost like a Stock Phrase
• Gratuitous Sex Scene is not a genre, it is its own trope that is worth being YKTTW'd, but not strictly what we are going for here.
• Plot With Porn is, as mentioned before, problematic due to the "porn" in the name.

Bumping to get opinions and action on

edited 7th May '12 12:16:30 PM by SeptimusHeap

I like the idea of simply having a mark on work pages that simply says "Contains Explicit Content" for the previously denoted "Plot with Porn" trope.

I really think the word "plot" is a little overbroad here. Contains Explicit Content is succinct and gets the point across well, I think. We can simply make such a page which will be example free (we don't want to be a porn repository by decree of the Fast One), and have something analogous to the banner system where certain works can be flagged as such.

I can agree with that.

My only concern is that due to the rules of the wiki, most if not all of the examples that would go under the definition of Porn with Plot would be gone. Should we make it a a No Examples Please kind of thing.

edited 7th May '12 12:33:15 PM by encrypted12345

I think that Explicit Content might become the Plot With Porn trope rather than Contains Explicit Content, which sounds a tad bit more like a porn directory. Besides, Explicit Content seems to be both a trope and a genre name.

Anyway, I am going to make an alt-names crowner for this.

I think you mean Porn Without Plot

edited 7th May '12 12:34:07 PM by SeptimusHeap

That's a reasonable point. I feel that No Examples Please should be placed on whatever page gets created out of this (though it can be listed on the work page).

Aren't the things with more porn than plot getting removed (Most of them anyways.) The new definition would cover mostly those kinds of works.

Correct. But there are works that contain explicit content which also have enough literary/artistic/historical merit to get a page.

Alt-names cronwer up here.

Now, the genre we want here is clearly "a story with explicit stuff in it". That's how I made the crowner, and proposed Explicit Content as a possible name since it seems to be the same thing. I will need some more description for such a genre, though, probably more than what is on Sandbox.Explicit Content.

After this, the point is to split Plot With Porn between Porn with Plot and the "story with explicit stuff in it" genre that we are going to make.

Optionally:

1. (I would leave it to 5P though) We might need to cut examples from these.
2. Make a trope Gratuitous Sex Scene
3. Make a policy page Sex To Plot Ratio as suggested by shimaspawn earlier here.

I thought we were splitting the examples with a lot of explicit content and those with only a few sex scenes. The most in the former category would be gone by the new rules while the latter would be safe.

You are correct there as well.

Crowners swapped.

A few further thoughts:

1. If Explicit Content is going to be the page, it will have to stay exampleless - it was cut for inviting this sort of thing through the examples, it seems, and deemed restoration-worthy only if left exampleless.
2. Is Sandbox.Explicit Content a good start for the description of the new trope?
3. What do we do with Plot With Porn afterwards? Redirect or disambiguation?

Also, will redirect Porn With Excuse Plot to Porn Without Plot

PlotWithPorn as a redirect to Explicit Content seems reasonable. In which case, the pothole to the above in the third paragraph should be removed.

Obviously, there needs to be a big bold No Examples Please on the page, and once it gets finished, Mr. Lock seems like a good way to keep it that way.

There are plenty of pages that are deemed exampleless and work well without a lock. So no lock here. And the No Examples Please thing belongs into the page source - it's not for readers.

Well, I will respectfully disagree that a lock isn't necessary - this seems like the sort of page that's going to attract examples, and since there's not really going to be any reason to change the page once its up, I don't think there's much downside.

I will keep an eye on it. If it becomes troublesome, lock will be requested. OK? We don't need to litter up Locked Pages with purely speculative locks.

That's fine with me. It seems like it'll be a magnet for unsavory fellows, but an approach of vigilant monitoring with lock backup seems not unreasonable. I raise no objections.