Is this an example?

Word of Straight (as in, when a character perceived as gay is confirmed to be straight) is a redirect to Word of Gay, though.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Mighty.

Edited by MyFinalEdits on Oct 14th 2023 at 4:41:07 AM

Weird redirect to me given Word of Gay says LGBTQ+ specifically and not just sexuality confirmation?

Edit: ...Forgot about Inverted Tropes for a moment...

Edited by Serilly on Oct 14th 2023 at 2:00:32 AM

So, there would be no problem if I changed from Word of Gay to Word of Straight? I believe that in this case it would be appropriate.

Got it, thanks.

Edited by SoyValdo7 on Oct 14th 2023 at 3:40:19 AM

I don't personally think it's necessary. I forget the exact rules on non-gendered redirects in trope lists but I think it's discouraged anyway.

I mean, if Jossed still allowed examples, then the example would be repurposed as that (I admit I never agreed with the decision of pulling a full ES on that page, but meh).

I just don't see any other option besides just cutting the example. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Edited by MyFinalEdits on Oct 14th 2023 at 6:02:15 AM

But it fits the item. It's Word of God on a character's sexuality. Word of Straight isn't a redirect for nothing (you can link it in wicks and use it as a search).

What's wrong with listing Word of Gay for Tingle? The character's sexual orientation is not divulged or only vaguely hinted at in-work, and the creator gives an official statement outside the work.

Personally, I've never seen Word of Gay used to deny that a character is gay, as it is typically used to confirm it.

Edited by SoyValdo7 on Oct 14th 2023 at 6:45:08 AM

Rugrats S 4 E 4 Spikes Babies Chicken Pops

• Noodle Incident:
  • Betty mentions that when she was a kid, her mother would expose her and the rest of her family to diseases every week.
  • When Lucy comes to Tommy's house with Susie and Chas tells her that his son has the chickenpox, Lucy claims that there's a strain of it going around and that half the kids at Susie's daycare have it.
  • Stu asks his dad, Lou, if he already had the chicken pox as a kid. Lou says he did, which Stu is relieved about, until Lou says it might have been his older brother, Drew, who already had the chicken pox as a kid. It's never revealed if either Stu or Drew already had the chicken pox. It's possible they both had it, perhaps at the same time.

I think only the first one sounds like Noodle Incident. The others don't leave enough to the imagination. I also think the third one misuses The Unreveal.

A bump from a few weeks ago when no one responded.

On the previous page here, no one seemed to respond to my inquiries. Sorry for the treatise.

Big Bang Theory episode: The Excelsior Acquisition It feels some people are drinking Sheldon's insane logic in this episode. Sheldon is being fined by traffic court for running a red light in a previous episode when he was driving an injured Penny to the emergency room. He took her urging to ignore a red light and drive through it, but otherwise she doesn't force him to break the law. When the State sent her a ticket, she corrected the assumption she was driving and told them Sheldon was driving. The court date happens to fall on a day when Stan Lee is coming to a local comic book store, meaning Sheldon is likely to miss meeting Stan Lee. I believe each one of these should be cut or amended.

• Dirty Coward: Penny selfishly plants her $533 fine on Sheldon for driving her to the hospital in her car in "The Adhesive Duck Deficiency" in which Sheldon's court date causes him to miss out on spending the day with Stan Lee. In other words, Penny saves her own ass and throws Sheldon under the bus.

Counter, Penny didn't force him to drive through the red light. He is responsible for his own actions. How was she to know he would put the letter in his desk drawer and not open it for weeks or months after getting it? And he could have paid the ticket by mail, thus avoiding the need to miss Stan Lee. Sheldon chose to fight it on court. Now, would it be Dirty Coward with her running after Sheldon escalates the situation at Stan Lee's house and gets Stan to call the cops? Maybe. I am not sure on that.

• Karma Houdini: Penny very much gets away with her moving violation by having passed the blame onto Sheldon and doesn't pay a penny to Sheldon as compensation or lose her driver's license. The worst that's happened to her is that she got forced by Sheldon to tag along with him to court, but she thinks even that is undeserved punishment. She also runs away before Stan Lee's guards can get her when she takes Sheldon to his house without an appointment.

Note, again, Penny doesn't force Sheldon to commit a crime. She answered the court honestly that she wasn't the driver. Now, she did not inform Sheldon of this notice, but rightly assumed they would alert him in due course. Sheldon just ignored the letter. She also didn't force Sheldon to run inside Stan Lee's home pissing the man off to call the cops on them. Sheldon escalated that situation himself and she left. So, maybe switch the point to that?

• Idiot Ball: It never comes to Sheldon's mind that the judge has the authority to throw him in jail for contempt of court.

Sheldon has shown a consistent pattern of ignoring or disparaging any authority figure who says things he disagrees with. In one of the first episodes, he was fired for a few weeks from the university for bad mouthing his new boss thinking him to be a lesser scientist. So, it isn't him acting out of nature.

• Ungrateful Bastard: How does Penny try to compensate Sheldon for driving her to the hospital? By 1) denying it ever happened over and over, 2) making Sheldon earn the points (that she obviously deserves) on his driver's license that has yet to come into fruition, 3) offering to write him a bad check after Sheldon is required to pay $533 and apologize to the Judge for impertinence, and 4) taking him to see Stan Lee at his house, which gets him another court date for trespassing.

Penny is apologetic about telling the authorities the truth. She didn't force Sheldon to run the light, she just asked him to. He is responsible for his own illegal actions. She doesn't make him antagonize the judge and be held in contempt. She doesn't force him to run inside Stan Lee's home that causes Stan to call the cops on Sheldon.

A bit of Big-Lipped Alligator Moment issue on The Rocky Horror Picture Show

• Big-Lipped Alligator Moment:
  • The only thing that could keep "Hot Patootie - Bless My Soul" from being a BLAM is the fact that the dinner scene calls back to it. With little or no warning, Meat Loaf rides out of a walk-in freezer on a motorcycle, sings a song, and gets murdered. That's about as BLAM-tastic as it can get.
  • In the original play, Eddie is mentioned by Columbia before Riff & Magenta (and the Phantoms) else tells them to keep quiet... Which foreshadows Eddie's inevitable appearance, musical number, and death. However, this foreshadowing (for some reason) was cut from the film causing Eddie's appearance and musical number to be totally out-of-nowhere. It's a bizarre case of the character's scene being a BLAM, yet having the character being important to the plot. The 2016 film remake, however, shows Eddie riding a motorcycle in the way of Brad and Janet driving their car in the pouring rain in the night.
    • The modern stage shows still keep the Eddie Namedrop - and shushing at every mention of Eddie is still a frequent audience callback. It also explains some things about Eddie - he was a delivery boy whose delivery "wasn't good enough".
  • The Zen Room Dr. Scott speeds by. Why's it there? Who cares?!
  • Not to mention Frank dressing most of the characters like him and proceeding to have an elaborate floor show with them. It makes sense from a character standpoint that Frank would treat all of them as his personal play things, dressing them up and making them put on a show for his own entertainment, but ^note WHERE DO YOU MASTURBATE??in an empty house?^note WHEN DO YOU MASTURBATE?? In the middle of the night?

The first point counters its own BLAM-ness by saying the thing is a boarder line example. The BLAM page says if it is boarder line, it isn't a BLAM. Given the second point and its subpoint are a response and not repair about how the adaptation omitted some details, wouldn't that make this fall more under the Adaptation tropes for missing context?

Third example, I must have missed that room when watching the movie. But given the nature of Frank and the Transylvanian Transvestites, wouldn't it be worldbuilding in the fact they have a room like that and probably a room to have sex in?

Fourth, for what given level of plot the movie has, Frank putting on a floorshow is said in the example that it is in line with Frank's perverted and warped mind. It also shows how this night has warped and twisted these people into expressing their deeper sexual desires. So it doesn't count.

Permission to remove all four?

Edited by isoycrazy on Oct 15th 2023 at 6:48:01 AM

Sure

I agree. They're all either too relevant or not that bizarre (a zen room is not that weird in a castle owned by a crazy alien)

Thank you for the responses on the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Re: Rugrats, I agree with all of your points: only the first one is weird and unspecific enough to be a Noodle Incident, and The Unreveal is misused. (The Unreveal even specifically says "this trope does not apply if something is simply never revealed to the audience".) I think the closest thing to "question you would expect to be answered is not" is Riddle for the Ages, but I don't know if "Did they have chicken pox as kids?" is a big enough question to qualify for that.

I just moved this from UnreliableNarrator.Webcomics to Unreliable Expositor:

• In Ménage à 3, the trope is briefly and explicitly but stylishly demonstrated by Senna in her description to Gary of her falling out with Sandra, starting here. (She claims that Sandra used supernatural powers. Compare and contrast the true story here.) Senna, who evidently loves her telenovelas, isn't the sort to let the truth get in the way of a melodramatic story that shows herself in a much better light than reality.

But now I'm having second thoughts, since Senna's side of the story is depicted visually for the reader, and not merely described by her. Can the two tropes overlap?

This was added on Trivia.Spider Man Into The Spider Verse by Nunouno 1

• And You Thought It Would Fail: Prior to release, there was little overall enthusiasm for the film, as many dismissed it as another desperate attempt by Sony to create their own competing Spider-Man cinematic universe after their plans with The Amazing Spider-Man Franchise failed, which was an effort that was increasingly seen as unnecessary after Sony and Disney successfully found a way to bring Spider-Man into the MCU. Not helping matters was the less-than-stellar track record of Sony Pictures Animation, which, outside of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, had failed to impress audiences and severely soured their reputation the previous year with The Emoji Movie. Some Comicbook fans even found it hard to be excited as they feared that this film's existence could detour any live-action appearances of Miles Morales. To say that these concerns were proven wrong would be a massive understatement. Into the Spider-Verse was a massive box office and critical success with audiences and critics as many heralded it as one of the greatest Spider-Man, Comicbook and animated films ever made. It instantly legitimatized the credibility of Sony Pictures Animation and its success would have a massive impact on the animation industry not seen since the days of Toy Story, as it inspired many animators to innovate beyond the realistic art styles of PIXAR and produce films with more stylized art styles such as Puss in Boots: The Last Wish.

Now, I've already cut it on the basis that it's a YMMV trope, but I don't know if I should move this to the YMMV page (albeit make it less of a wall) or keep it cut.

From what I recall and looking at threads from back when the film was announced, people were pretty excited (or at least, interested) about the film since the teaser was uploaded, which only grew as more trailers and marketing came out. But what do you think?

Edited by Tylerbear12 on Oct 15th 2023 at 9:57:25 AM

Let's imagine a series of films (nine for example), and now let's take a villain who got away with atrocities in eight, and then in the last he is finally stopped. So here's the question: on the villain description page, is it marked as "Karma Houdini/Karma Houdini Warranty", "Karma Houdini: Subverted" or only "Karma Houdini Warranty"?

Edited by Kuprin on Oct 16th 2023 at 8:55:07 AM

I think KHW only. It will be a long example, but his comeuppance finally hit. After all, KHW is the definition of KH subverted.

Yes, I might have probably come close to bringing this up, but again I was almost considering to add a subversion of Perpetual Frowner entry case on Bang Dream Morfonica [Tsukushi] under this description: "Subverted, despite her default chibi art style in Girls Band Party is depicted with a frown, she's actually open to smiling confidence frequently enough, fittingly for her confident, hard-working type of person she actually is."

I honestly don't feel confident this would be even in technically a case of subversion. If this is pretty much clearly an aversion, then I won't be adding this entry to the page at all. I could use some help identifying if just the seemingly default expression from early artworks (and in-game) can be considered a subversion case.

From Critical Backlash:

• A character example is Katejina Loos from Victory Gundam. By the time most people discover Victory and watch the show, they will have been told that Katejina is "The Queen of Evil" in the Gundam verse. They will have been told repeatedly that she is more evil than any Gundam villain ever. While Katejina is undoubtedly a horrible person, there is simply no way for her to be as revoltingly awful as the fandom makes her out to be, and many people watching Victory for the first time (years after it aired) find themselves actually noticing her good points, mainly in the first half of the series, if only because the fandom's bashing of her, makes her bad ones something you just sort of accept. It doesn't help that everything Katejina has ever appeared in since (the novelizations, manga, video games) has her significantly more sympathetic.

This entry predates the creation of Character Perception Evolution, so I'm asking if CB can/should be used for characters as opposed to works now that we have CPE.

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on Oct 16th 2023 at 11:00:18 AM

I'd like to bring up an example that I disputed in my very early troper days, when I didn't know my way around and so when it was disputed, I let it slide. The example is on ArtisticLicenseGeography.Literature and has at some point gained a Justifying Edit (not by me).

So the writer takes issue with the phrase "a mist was blowing in from the sea" and thinks you couldn't tell which direction the mist was coming from. But if it's blowing, there is a wind, and it should not be hard to tell the direction. Is it okay to remove all this, or is there some reason it's a valid example?

I found this on YMMV.Wish 2023:

• Fandom Rivalry: With Puss in Boots: The Last Wish: Both films are about a wishing star that will make your dreams come true and have a villain who wants said star for himself just to have all the magic, with fans of The Last Wish seeing the Disney film as a worse version. It doesn't help that both films utilise Painted CGI for a storybook effect, and feature Harvey Guillén in a supporting role. The main difference is that in Wish the star is a character that comes to the heroine and they have to go on a quest together to defeat the villain.

Does this movie even have a fandom to rival anything yet? Plus, this entry doesn't mention how the Wish fandom feels about the Puss In Boots and just seems to mention that the latter thinks it will be a worse version.

Typical "Fandom Rivalry = one fandom just hates another movie for dumb reasons" misuse.

Okay in that case I removed it.