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
I fix my examples all the time
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Agree with your take on Freudian Trio, The Kirk, The Spock, and The McCoy.
Am I a weirdo?
I agree that Monstrous Cannibalism is a problem. I suspect Deadline News could just do with a cleanup (As Miss Conduct said, there is a fair bit of misuse). I'll try to get to it some time this week.
Bigotry will NEVER be welcome on TV Tropes.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
After it got brought up in ATT, I want to crowner Washington D.C. Invasion. The description focuses on villainous invaders, and, as we all know, we aren't supposed to apply these morality concepts to real life events and people.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Just a guy.
Poke the Poodle has a RL section, despite it being a morality/narrative trope (villain committing laughably minor evil acts).
I feel this is definitely a trope that shouldn't have RL examples, since what constitutes as a minor laughably evil crime in one area, culture, or time period, might be a big no nonsense one in another.
Edited by Tylerbear12 on Jun 20th 2023 at 2:46:14 PM
Washington D.C. Invasion: The only problem is that the War of 1812 example is pretty valid - maybe it's a better fit for No Recent Examples instead?
Poke the Poodle: No issues with your arguments.
Don't want this to get lost: Black Comedy is similar to Irony - as a Narrative device, it's Narrative, and people saying things that are darkly comedic is Too Common. And like Irony it's attracting troublesome examples, ROCEJ problems, and generally jokes that fall into the Dude, Not Funny! Zone, at least to me (like the Challenger disaster jokes), as well as a generally "edgy teenager" vibe (like the example calling feminine stuff, and I quote, "that sappy, saccharine crap") and almost by design a majority of examples are "anecdotes" (I still need to find a better term for those), mostly of the "stuff I overheard at the pub" variety.
Edited by MissConduct on Jun 20th 2023 at 10:19:54 AM
Agreed, black comedy is too common.
Real Men Wear Pink, Unmanly Secret, and their inverse Pink Is for Sissies are all Too Common and Characterization.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
How is the War of 1812 an example when I've already explained that the trope is centered on villains? Making it NREP won't fix the problem I have.
Your favorite storyteller and artist
Since NRLEP Impossible With Explanations has its trope has been all explained, does all the other tropes in the other NRLEP sections could be all explained as well?
Yes, feel free to fill in the other sandboxes. Might I suggest starting with NRLEP Sex With Explanations, I'm having trouble with that one.
I know but saying "it's just for villains" didn't work for Playing with Syringes and that trope had (still does have) a way worse RL section, I just feel like it would fail the crowner.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
I still want to try.
Also, Playing with Syringes is more about mad science and torture, not necessarily "villainy". It's basically a villain trope but I can see the logic there even if I think the RL section should have been cut.
I can't say the same for Washington D.C. Invasion, which spends the entire time talking about villainous invaders until it gets to the Truth in Television section, which shouldn't be there at all.
Edited by WarJay77 on Jun 20th 2023 at 3:43:19 PM
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
I'm not entirely convinced Washington D.C. Invasion actually should be for villains in the first place. The description's oddly barebones.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
That gets into TRS territory. If the description only talks about villains, that's all I have to go off of and we can't just decide to ignore that part. I don't go based on examples or anything since they're very often wrong.
Edited by WarJay77 on Jun 20th 2023 at 3:48:19 PM
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Okay, fair.
Off topic - Gaslighting is Too Controversial as an abuse trope and Too Common.
The Enforcer
Agreed on Gaslighting; we don't need to be tracking specific examples of abuse and the overall concept is better covered by Useful Notes or the other wiki.
Bizarre and Improbable Ballistics is a close cousin to Improbable Aiming Skills and they're both impossible in real life and being misused by way of being artistic license tropes in all but name. They refer to projectiles behaving unrealistically. Behavior in real life is, by definition, realistic. The RL section's examples summarize to the following:
- Projectiles in real life don't behave like they do in artistic license. Not the trope. Also not a proper example.
- Projectiles in situations they aren't designed to be in behave in odd ways.
- Whatever this extremely long series of subbullets troping a conspiracy theory is.
- The most common interpretation of the Magic Bullet Theory of the Kennedy assassination requires one bullet to move like a gymnast doing floor exercises during its trajectory. This is largely due to a misunderstanding of who was where during the shooting — assuming, for example, that everyone was sitting upright and facing straight ahead, rather than twisted around in their seats to talk. Don't even ask about the necessary trajectories for some of the other theories.
- A Discovery Channel documentary actually took Oswald's rifle as well as ammunition from the same factory lot that was found in the book depository, and duplicated six of the seven wounds. The seventh would have occurred as well had the bullet not expended extra energy striking and breaking two rib bones of Governor Connolly compared to only one in the original incident. Striking all debate about the surroundings of the assassination, the Discovery Channel's accomplishment in catching a single bullet on high-speed cameras striking seven separate targets and doing so within half an inch of the bullseye certainly qualifies for the trope.
- The same show demonstrated why the "magic bullet" disbelief caught on as well. The show took the injuries to the dummies and used them to produce a fake forensic report (which was supposedly a shooting that occurred in a stadium), with the rough description of the position of the victims, and gave it all to an experienced medical examiner; his opinion was there had to be more than one shooter. When the examiner was told he was actually looking at a JFK assassination recreation, and given the video showing that it had been only one bullet, he was downright stunned.
- Another interesting hypothesis including Kennedy's assassination says that there had to be a second sniper, shooting from the opposite direction, as Kennedy's head was pulled towards Oswald (i.e. forwards), and should be pushed away from him if he shot (backwards). However, Reality Is Unrealistic (also incredibly gory) as Kennedy's brain absorbed a lot of the bullet's energy and flew forwards out of the exit wound and acted like a... rocket engine, pulling the head backwards.
- Actually, that's just Newton's 3rd law of motion: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The bullet went very fast one way. His head went slightly slower in the opposite direction.
- Multiple specials have shown that when everyone sits like a statue, eyes forward, the "magic bullet" angles are very hard to believe. However, the more honest ones show that simple, reasonable, realistic shifts in pose that would represent people talking or ducking in a car can make those angles rather easy to believe. Keep in mind too that a total of three shots were fired. The first shot missed after being deflected by an obstructing tree branch, the second was the "magic bullet" shot that injured Kennedy & Connolly, and the third was the fatal headshot on Kennedy. After the first one's miss (as shown in the Zapruder Film), everyone in the presidential car reacted to hearing the shot, where they moved within their seats as the second one was fired. In fact, taking into account Kennedy & Connolly's positions, the second bullet did travel in a near-straight line as it traveled through its targets.
- A Discovery Channel documentary
In conclusion, I think Bizarre and Improbable Ballistics should be crownered as impossible and narrative as an artistic license trope and attracting misuse and ROCEJ violations.
Edited by NonexistentYeets on Jun 20th 2023 at 7:37:23 AM
they/them pronouns. Look at my Neocities.
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
Someone brought me here. So I just stumbled upon seeing Real Life Examples of Naked Nutter about Bjork's stalker. While the other real-life examples are good, I am just shocked that there are at least four sub-examples one example that's about the infamous Bjork's stalker. I'm feeling kinda sick to the stomach that someone is troping real life person's mental illness like it's a fictional story and acted fascinating. Here are the example and its sub-examples (Trigger Warning: Suicide):
- The Bjork stalker Ricardo Lopez spent a lot of time either half dressed or completely naked; what's interesting is that during his several hours long Apocalyptic Log his level of derangement can be measured by the amount of clothes he wears:
- At first he usually just has his shirt off, during this time he was planning on killing Bjork but wasn't fully committed to it and still had a job.
- Then he gets a worried call from his mother, which temporally brings him back to reality and he decides to try and live a normal-ish life, even considering just letting his obsession with Bjork go, during this time he is fully clothed (although admittedly still doing bizarre things while doing so).
- Then he gets into a workplace dispute and quits his job, this leaves him with no income whatsoever and continues his downward spiral, during this time he's usually seen only wearing underpants or a towel, sometimes stripping completely.
- And during the final tapes he completely sheds all his clothing and shaves his head; wearing nothing but some black and red face paint before he Ate His Gun
Should this example should be removed and make this trope a No Real Life Examples, Please! or should we tone it down?
Note: This trope is about someone becoming naked because they're crazy but IMO, this one example shouldn't be described too long about a real life person. Also sorry if I over-exaggerated things.
Edited by Bubblepig on Jun 20th 2023 at 5:14:49 AM
“What is that? It's The Unknown!”
The Enforcer
I'd support crownering Naked Nutter on grounds of gossip about mental illnesses and being a stereotype. And also, I don't think we need descriptions of real people going around naked.
they/them pronouns. Look at my Neocities.
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
How to crown this trope?
The Enforcer
Crowners happen around every week with several tropes in batches. If there's enough consensus, it'll be added to the crowner sometime soon (we have a bit of a backlog so it might not be the next one) and be put up to vote.
Agreed on Bizarre and Improbable Ballistics and Naked Nutter. Naked Nutter is also a nudity trope, so it might also be crownerable as Sex-adjacent as well as Gossip?
I also forgot to ![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_up_emote.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
the suggestions for Real Men Wear Pink, Unmanly Secret, and Pink Is for Sissies.
Intelligence Equals Isolation seems like Characterization, Gossip, and Too Common.
Agreed, it's also related to Loners Are Freaks.
If we're doing the Screw the X I Have Y tropes why not crowner the big daddy of them all Screw the Rules, I Have Money!? The RL section is an unrestrained ROCEJ nightmare that tries to enforce terrible rules (that get ignored anyway):
NOTE: Please restrict yourself to either (a) general classes of behavior or (b) specific instances only when either (1) the trope is well documented/undisputed or (2) all parties to the incident have all been dead for at least fifty years.
Why is it promoting general examples? We don't want those! It also has plenty of examples that don't fit either of its self imposed rules, specific and not undisputed recent examples. It's defintiely too controversial.
Yeah... yikes.
Stalker Shrine is related to other stalking tropes like Stalker with a Crush and Yandere, it's also probably Too Common.
I’m thinking about proposing The Insomniac to be crownered. It is Characterization, as in, characters who are characterized by their inability to sleep. It’s Too Common because, many, many people have trouble sleeping, with “Insomnia” even being the medical term for it. It could also count as Gossip, since sleeping is usually a private matter.
Screw the Rules, I Have Connections! seems like another Too Common/Controversial trope.
Adora, the High Priestess
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.
Bizarre Taste in Food - Yep, another food characterization trope.
Deadline News - I agree on principle, but this is one of those death tropes I could see failing the crowner. It might be a bit like Dirty Cop - certainly a lot of NRLEP supporters but the crowner keeps failing because the detractors say it's a trope that can be proved objectively. And unlike Dirty Cop, I wouldn't really say Deadline News is Too Controversial. I would call it Too Common - you could argue it's a field reporter's job to put themselves in harm's way - and it's being misused - someone getting murdered on camera is not the same as getting hit by a baseball.
Monstrous Cannibalism - yeah, it's supposed to be for monsters, not real creatures.
I also don't want this to get lost:
So I wanna talk about Freudian Trio. Although I think we can all agree on principle it's Characterization, it doesn't have any RL examples. Neither does one of its three participant tropes, The Kirk. But not only do The Spock and The McCoy, the rest of the trio, have RL examples, many of them also characterize a third person/group/animal species as The Kirk, but also refer to them as a Freudian Trio. I'm curious - despite not having on-page RL examples of their own, Freudian Trio and The Kirk are still getting RL misuse, and as well they're inexorably linked to The Spock and The McCoy, would it be possible to crowner them all anyway?
Edited by MissConduct on Jun 19th 2023 at 8:57:52 AM