Note: If a newly launched trope was already given a No Real Life Examples, Please! or Limited Real Life Examples Only designation while it was being drafted on the Trope Launch Pad, additions to the proper index do not need to go through this thread. Instead, simply ask the mods to add the trope via this thread
.
This is the thread to report tropes with problematic Real Life sections.
Common problems include:
- Conversation on the Main Page
- Flame Bait
- Squicky content
- Impossible in Real Life
Real Life sections on the wiki are kept as long as they don't become a problem. If you find an article with such problems, report it here. Please note that the purpose of this thread is to clean up and maintain real life sections, not raze them. Cutting should be treated as a last resort, so please only suggest cutting RL sections or a subset thereof you think the examples in question are completely unsalvageable.
If historical RL examples are not causing any problems, consider whether it would be better to propose a No Recent Examples, Please! (via this forum thread) for RL instead of NRLEP. If RL examples are causing problems only for certain subjects, consider whether a Limited Real Life Examples Only restriction would be preferable to NRLEP.
If you think a trope should be No Real Life Examples, Please! or Limited Real Life Examples Only, then this thread is the place to discuss it. However, please check Keep Real Life Examples first to see if it has already been brought up in the past. If not, state the reasons and add it to the crowner.
Before adding to the crowner:
- The trope should be proposed in the thread, along with reasons for why a crowner is necessary instead of a cleanup.
- There must be support from others in thread.
- Any objections should be addressed.
- Allow a minimum of 24 hours for discussion.
When adding to the crowner:
- Be sure to add the trope name, a link to where the discussion started, the reasons for crownering, whether the restriction being proposed is NRLEP or LRLEO (and in the latter case, which subject(s) the restriction would be for), and the date added.
- Announce in thread that you are adding the item.
- An ATT advert should be made as well (batch items together if more than one trope goes up in a day).
In order for a crowner to pass:
- Must have been up for a minimum of a week
- There must be a 2:1 ratio
- If the vote is exactly 2:1 or +/- 1 vote from that, give it a couple extra days to see if any more votes come in
- Once passed, tropes must be indexed on the appropriate NRLEP index
- Should the vote fail, the trope should be indexed on KRLE page
Sex Tropes, Rape and Sexual Harassment Tropes, and Morality Tropes are banned from having RL sections so tropes under those indexes don't need crowner vote.
Crowner entries that have already been called will have "(CLOSED)" appended to them — and are no longer open for discussion.
After bringing up a trope for discussion, please wait at least a day for feedback before adding it to the crowner.
NRLEP tag:
%%https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13350380440A15238800
LRLEO tag:
%%The following restrictions apply: [list restriction(s) here]
%%https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13350380440A15238800
Notes:
- This thread is not for general discussion regarding policies for Real Life sections or crowners. Please take those conversations to this Wiki Talk thread.
- Do not try to overturn previous No Real Life Examples, Please! or Limited Real Life Examples Only decisions without a convincing argument.
- As mentioned here, the consensus is that NRLEP warnings in trope page descriptions can use bold text so that they stand out.
- The [[noreallife]] tag doesn't currently work. This is a deprecated tag that was introduced many years ago — originally, it would have displayed a NRLEP warning banner when you edited the page. However, there's been some staff conversation (Feb 2024) about what a new technical solution might look like, so we'd advise against deleting these from pages, at least until we have a decision as to whether it'll be fixed or replaced.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Mar 8th 2024 at 10:49:13 AM
Angry babby
Lady Looks Like a Dude has real life examples, despite its inverse Dude Looks Like a Lady being in-universe examples only. It's gossiping about real women's appearances and might have Unfortunate Implications (like talking about Wendy Williams being mistaken for a man in drag or trans woman due to wearing a lot of makeup and having "manly features").
Edited by mightymewtron on Apr 1st 2021 at 4:21:31 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
she/her
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Yeah, that should probably also be on IUEO, but I don't think that's what this thread is for, and I don't really know which category of NRLEP it would go under.
Anyway, I have a candidate of my own: Sugar Bowl. It's obviously impossible, and the RL folder is 100% zero-context examples.
Angry babby
I don't see why it can't be both IUEO and NRLEP. To me, it falls under "gossip and stereotypes" as it involves people remarking on celebrities' appearances, not characters doing so.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Sounds good on paper (he/him)
Lady Looks Like a Dude, like Dude Looks Like a Lady, already has to be pointed out in-universe. If it isn't pointed out in-universe, that's Viewer Gender Confusion.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 2nd 2021 at 2:22:07 PM
Patiently awaiting the release of Paper Luigi and the Marvelous Compass.
Angry babby
It's not listed on In-Universe Examples Only, though.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Aren't tropes IUEO by default?
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
she/her
Technically yes, but some tropes that are about reactions need the extra reminder that it's about character reactions, not fan reactions.
I just removed the real-life example folder for Reverse Whodunnit . I don’t think it’s possible in real-life due to the trope relying on the audience having knowledge that the main characters do not. Key word being audience, of which there is none in real life.
The examples within the folder were just about needing evidence to prosecute someone even though it was certain they did the crime. Of course you need evidence to prosecute someone even if you’re sure it’s them, that’s just how the law works, and not this trope.
So should/can I add it to the NoRealLife.Narrative Characterization And Plot Tropes index?
Edited by antenna_ears on Apr 3rd 2021 at 12:52:06 PM
Angry babby
You have to add it to the crowner so we can officially vote whether it should be NRLEP.
Ic, thx. Do the crowners work the same way as in IP?
Angry babby
It's more comparable to the Image Suggestions thread. The rules are explained at the bottom of the page, but basically you add the trope to the crowner that's hooked at the bottom, with a short explanation of why it should be NRLEP, and then after a few days, if it has at least 10 net positive votes and a stable ratio, it's confirmed NRLEP.
Edited by mightymewtron on Apr 3rd 2021 at 4:09:59 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Sounds good on paper (he/him)
The currently blank new crowner hasn't been hooked yet, so I'm guessing the mods missed my holler.
Here's the crowner, anyway.
Edit: I hollered this post just in case.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 3rd 2021 at 8:49:42 AM
Patiently awaiting the release of Paper Luigi and the Marvelous Compass.
she/her
So... any thoughts on whether I should add Sugar Bowl to the crowner?
I removed the RL Sugar Bowl examples as they were all zero-context. Otherwise, yes, go for it.
Industrious Incisors
Roguish Poacher has a couple of real-life examples, neither of which do anything to suggest the poaching was respectable, and honestly, I think the whole thing hits a morality pitfall by trying to claim it would be ok for real-life people to perform the controversial act.
Also going to mention Slowly Slipping Into Evil from the last page again.
Edited by ShinyCottonCandy on Apr 4th 2021 at 7:50:20 AM
SoundCloud
The Draftsman of Doom
I think the slowly slipping example can just be cut for ROCEJ reasons, and the poacher examples too.
Edited by SkyCat32 on Apr 4th 2021 at 8:56:49 AM
Feels good, don't it?
she/her
Yeah, those can both go on the crowner.
For Reverse Whodunnit, I believe due to its narrative-based nature it isn't possible in real-life. To me, the examples in the real-life folder were ill-fitting, so I deleted them. I can see that I have a couple downvotes in the crowner, so it occurs to me that maybe I didn't explain my reasons well enough. Here are the real-life examples I deleted:
- Former Attorney General Robert Kennedy once formed a task force known as the "Get Hoffa Squad" whose sole purpose was to find incriminating evidence on Teamster leader Jimmy Hoffa. Three years later, they secured a conviction.
- Another example was the case against Al Capone. It wasn't a question of proving he was behind any particular crime, as everyone knew he was. It was a case of finding a case where his direct involvement in illegal activities could be proven since he could otherwise claim any particular crime was one of his minions getting out of hand. Eventually, they got a conviction... for tax evasion.
I think the first example is definitely incorrect and is just an investigation formed with the intention of finding someone guilty finding someone guilty, and not a Reverse Whodunnit.
For the second, it was just about knowing that a known criminal is guilty and needing to find evidence to prosecute him. That's just how the law works, you can't incarcerate someone without evidence of a crime. In a Reverse Whodunnit, the detective need not know who the perpetrator is initially (though the audience always does), but need to figure it out and catch them in the act. In this case, everybody knew that Al Capone was guilty, which (in fiction) would equate to everbody in-universe knowing that they're guilty, which is not the trope. While I can see where whoever wrote the example was coming from, that's just not what the trope is about.
I put Reverse Whodunnit on the crowner to prevent misuse like this from happening again. If anyone has a good reason the trope should include real-life examples, I would genuinely like to hear it.
Edited by antenna_ears on Apr 4th 2021 at 7:18:57 AM
Industrious Incisors
Any thoughts on relocating Cute and Psycho and Psychopathic Manchild from Morality Tropes to Gossip and Stereotypes?
Edited by Tehrannotaur on Apr 6th 2021 at 4:35:19 AM
she/her
I'm going to add Sugar Bowl to the crowner.
Calling Reverse Whodunnit (8-3) for NRLEP
The remaining 3 items all meet the time threshold, but none have the minimum 10 votes.
Slowly Slipping Into Evil (7-2) - needs at least 1 more vote.
Sugar Bowl (6-1) - needs at least 3 more.
Roguish Poacher (6-2) - Needs at least 2 more.
Angry babby
Abomination Accusation Attack has real life examples. The trope is about accusing someone of some sort of impropriety, usually sexual, despite it being obviously untrue. You can see how this is way too controversial. Naturally, all the examples are either too general or mocking controversies (there's an entry about Tumblr "SJW"s for example).
- Blood libel is the term for the practice of accusing social, ethnic, or religious groups of ritualistic crimes such as cannibalism, human sacrifice, or the poisoning of wells. The specific term originates in such accusations being made against Jews (mostly in the Medieval era, though some of them still crop up now), specifically the idea they murdered Christian children and used their blood in matzo balls (in fact, eating blood is forbidden by Jewish law, not that the people who said this likely knew or cared). Unsurprisingly, it led to numerous Jews across the centuries being falsely convicted and executed for the murder of any Christian children near them (after being tortured into confessions) or in some cases full-scale pogroms. This blood libel myth is repeated in some literature of the Medieval era, like The Canterbury Tales. Antisemitic Muslims unfortunately continue to make it occasionally.
- When someone is accused of being a pedo or a rapist, they will usually be Convicted by Public Opinion and become a pariah for the rest of their lives (particularly if they're a man). And if they're tried and found not guilty, they've got a high chance of being despised even more, because now they're considered a Karma Houdini. Inversely, if a woman accuses a man of rape and cannot prove that he did it (and proving that right or wrong is almost impossible, as there are usually no witnesses except her) she is branded a false accuser and hated by the general public. There's some overlap with Slut-Shaming, as a woman's previous sexual experience is typically used against her, to "prove" that she must by default have consented because, hey, she had sex before (rape shield laws are meant to prevent this, but often it gets in anyway by more indirect means, or the news media if it's a high-profile case: they aren't always bound by the same laws, and not to mention the Internet now with anonymous bloggers sure aren't).
- As mentioned, the subtrope All Gays Are Pedophiles, which is, despite being repeatedly disproved, still seriously professed by some anti-gay activists.
- Slut-Shaming runs on this—in societies where women who have sex for any purpose other than procreation/with anyone but their straight male husband are looked down upon, the accusation/implication that they are having sex for enjoyment/outside of marriage/with women/with multiple partners is a vicious form of it.
- During the 2003 Ontario general elections, then-incumbent premier Ernie Eves's campaign referred to his opponent Dalton McGuinty as an "evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet". This backfired epically as was easy to predict, but the phrase itself went memetical.
- WAY too common in social media due to GIFT. One user has a grudge against another; maybe a political opinion, maybe they ship a pairing the accusing party finds distasteful, maybe they drew a character in fanart the "wrong way" (ie, a dark-skinned character half a shade lighter because they paid attention to lighting conditions or with the wrong cup size). Cue the grudge holder laying into the object of their grudge with accusations of every "-ism" and "phobia" in the book, especially phrased in a way the accused can't debate without it being "proven" true. A particular incident of this came about on Tumblr due to a disagreement over Steven Universe fan art, and ended with the artist attempting suicide.
- Of course, this also works on the opposite side of the spectrum. Rather than calling the accused an "ism", instead they'd call them an "SJW" — meaning the type of condescending person that talks over marginalized groups and accuses everyone else of doing so. Take the Steven Universe fanart discourse for example: the argument was over weight rather than skin color, and the suicide attempt turned out to be unrelated to the argument at all. The user even mentioned that they didn't want anyone to use the two incidents as ammunition for Fan Haters of the series to blanket-accuse the rest of the fandom of being venomous Soapbox Sadies and bullies, yet...
- When a cave diver named Vern Unsworth, involved in the effort to rescue a group of Thai boys trapped in a cave, told Elon Musk his plan for using a submersible wouldn't work, Musk infamously called Unsworth "pedo guy" on Twitter, with nothing to back it up. It backfired on Musk. He was widely mocked, and Unsworth later sued.
Misidentified Weapons has a very poorly formatted Real Life section, some of which comes off like political editorializing.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Crown Description:
Vote up to either forbid all real life examples (No Real Life Examples Please) or forbid real life examples for specific subjects (Limited Real Life Examples Only); vote down to Keep Real Life Examples. To add a trope to a No Real Life Examples Please index or the Limited Real Life Examples Only index, its crowner option must meet the following criteria:- Stable 2:1 ratio needed for NRLEP or LRLEO
- Must have been up for a minimum of a week
- If the vote is exactly 2:1 or +/- 1 vote from that, give it a couple of extra days to see if more votes come in.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]")
I assume "their real name isn't public knowledge or they go out of their way to suppress knowledge of it" could be special circumstances here.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.