Is this an example?

That said, the overall description of Values Resonance seems to be focused on the passing of years than the difference in cultures.

Edited by sgamer82 on Mar 7th 2020 at 12:02:06 PM

Any thoughts on my Badass Adorable post on the previous page? I think Winston, Lúcio, and Mercy definitely don't fit.

Keet cleanup

I don't know much about the games but by looking at their profiles, I would say no they don't. When I think Badass Adorable, I think of D.va

Macron's notes

A Recap.RWBYV 7 E 6 A Night Off situation.

I removed the following example a while back for being trope misuse, but another troper added it back. So, I commented it out and took it to the Discussion Page to avoid an Edit War. That was on the 9th December. No-one responded to the request for discussion and it remains commented out on the page.

The reason it's trope misuse is because the trope requires there to be an in-universe third party who is able to see that both sides of the argument have merit. This entry is merely the audience feeling like both sides have good reason to mistrust the other, which means it's not a downplayed trope, it's simply not in effect at all.

Is it okay for me to remove it? Or would that be an Edit War?

• Both Sides Have a Point: Downplayed. There is considerable tension between the Atlesian military and Robyn's Huntresses, with neither side willing to admit that the other has valid reasons to mistrust them.

Edited to add:

It suddenly occurred to me that there might possibly be a candidate for this trope, but it's potentially not 'third party' enough to genuinely count. So, for anyone who has seen the episode in question, do you think it's possible this entry could be rewritten from Nora's perspective? She points out in the episode that she feels both Robyn and Ironwood are trying to protect the kingdom, which would technically mean she's an in-universe character pointing out that both sides have merit.

However, the problem is that Nora isn't neutral. While the heroes are technically supposed to be on Ironwood's side, they mistrust him and instinctively lean towards Robyn's side — it's a plot point that Nora, in particular, is unusually aggressive in her support of Robyn from the outset (leading the fandom to speculate that her Mysterious Past hides an origin story in Mantle to explain why she's so instinctively on Mantle's side against Ironwood).

Her comment here also has a caveat to it — while she says she thinks both sides are trying to protect Mantle, she promptly adds 'as to who's doing a better job...' and leaves it hanging. Given her bias, the obvious conclusion is that she feels Robyn's doing a better job. But the heroes are technically supposed to be on Ironwood's side at this point, so they keep trying to convince him to give Robyn a chance.

I therefore don't know if it's valid to rewrite the entry from Nora's perspective, given that she does have clear bias, and the trope description goes out of its way to indicate that the third party in question doesn't see both sides by favouring one side or the other or by engaging in any kind of mental gymnastics to turn arguments on their head.

If Nora doesn't count, then the trope really isn't in effect for the episode.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Mar 7th 2020 at 11:04:02 AM

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.

That doesn't sound downplayed and fails explain how both sides are acknowledged as valid in-universe. Go ahead and cut citing this thread.

I've got an ATT about possible Character Derailment misuses. Relating, why do we allow examples if Derailment is Flame Bait and no other Flame Bait pages allow examples? I think they were aeed before we disallowed Flame Bait examples. Should they be cut or what?

I had a sudden thought about a possible rewrite, and added some extra information into the post.

Sorry about that, but it was only as I was leaving the thread that I thought of it. What do you think of the Nora situation? Would she be valid, in which case, the trope entry can just be rewritten and kept. If not, I'll remove the trope from the page.

Wow. I didn't realise Character Derailment came under Flame Bait. I agree it should be treated the same as other Flame Bait tropes and be example-free.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Mar 7th 2020 at 11:06:19 AM

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.

Was thinking of adding this to Cthulhumanoid

• Lost Kingdoms 1 and 2 both have a water type monster card called Mind Flayer,in the first game it's fought as a boss in an Absurdly Spacious Sewer called Shavel Passage.The appearance and attacks of the Mind Flayer are typical of Mindflayers in the Dungeons & Dragons setting

Edited by Ultimatum on Mar 8th 2020 at 2:32:25 PM

New theme music also a box

Periphery Hatedom and So Bad, It's Horrible are also Flame Bait and allow examples. I assume it was already decided to keep the examples.

Keet cleanup

SBIH is only allowed on the Horrible/ pages and nowhere else, and has been strictly moderated lately to remove bad examples that keep getting added; we keep it because having a place to discuss bad works is just as valid as having a place to discuss, say, Everyone Hates Fruit Cakes, but Everyone Hates Fruit Cakes isn't used to bash a work, and nor can it's inclusion cause fights.

Periphery Hatedom... I think that one is a bit more objective, as in, "there is a hatedom that exists but is a different demographic than the work's main audience", but since Hatedom is Flame Bait... it makes sense that Periphery Hatedom is, too.

Anyway, these aren't reasons to keep examples on Character Alignment; they're just special cases. This needs a thread of its own, anyway.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

You're mixing up Character Alignment and Character Derailment. The former is a special case because it's actually an objective trope within some works, but that also attracted bizarre Serious Business fan shoehorning and flame wars. Character Derailment is the one that allows examples despite being flame bait for no currently stated reason.

Sorry, it's because Character Alignment was also discussed recently as a Flame Bait trope that allows examples.

Still, my point stands.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Yeah, I figured it was a typo - I just thought the point was worth raising because Character Alignment is a very odd case.

Reposting from the previous page.

From WesternAnimation.The Lion King 2019:

• Foregone Conclusion: By far, this remake is the most faithful out of all of Disney's remakes. Those who seen the original film know what will happen such as Mufusa being killed again.

Is it a valid example or should it be removed?

He/His/Him. No matter who you are, always Be Yourself.

Remakes are not Foregone Conclusion by virtue of being remakes. There needs to be more to it than that.

Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.

The fact that the remake is “the most faithful” implies that remakes can be less faithful. People don’t go into a remake knowing how faithful it is.

CharacterDerailment.Film:

• Star Wars: In The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, it was initially implied that Rey had no relation or connection to anybody from the original trilogy, and was simply abandoned at a young age. For many fans, the fact that she was just a random nobody thrust into the rebellion conflict (as opposed to being The Chosen One or a main character's daughter) was her most appealing trait, showing that anybody can be The Hero. Unfortunately, The Last Jedi does a complete 180 by revealing that she was Palpatine's granddaughter this entire time, and she was abandoned by her parents so that he couldn't find her, despite the massive logical leaps to justify why he was even still alive by that point, thus ruining a central aspect of Rey's character.

Derailment is about characterization, not backstory. I'll remove unless I hear anything.

Seconded.

Thirded.

135 - 169 - 273 - 191 - 188 - 230 - 300

Fourthed.

---

Do these examples from FanFic.The Nowakverse have enough context?

• Badass Cape: Widget wears one. It's not flowing freely, though; she wears it to hide her mechanical left arm.
• Battle Ballgown: Widget's wedding dress is made of Kevlar.
• Big "NO!": Dale in Under the Bridge.
  "No," gasped Dale. Then, a howl: "NOOOO Oooooo!"
• Everyone Calls Him "Barkeep": At least during the first chapters of Under the Bridge, nobody aboard Albacore knows Widget's name, not even Jürgen; they all call her "The Gray Mouse" (which refers to her gray hair). In fact, neither do readers who haven't been filled in on the story before reading it.
• Foreign Sounding Gibberish: Appears in Sovereign.
  "Ich bin Muenster von Kublewagen-Nebelwerfer, der family solicitor."
• Gibberish of Love: Chip falls victim to this in his afterlife dream sequence involving Gadget in Under the Bridge.
  He had to say something to express his love. "Hominahominahomina..." That wasn't it.
• Gratuitous German: Despite speaking English fluently, Jürgen keeps slipping back into his native German.
  • Widget also isn't immune, shouting the German command (Los!) right after specifically reminding herself not to do that.

Edited by Crossover-Enthusiast on Mar 10th 2020 at 4:22:52 AM

Jawbreakers on sale for 99¢

Everyone Calls Him "Barkeep" is fine. Gratuitous German I'm not sure is the right trope, since the characters in question are actually native German speakers? It needs to follow proper Example Indentation, though.

The rest don't have enough context.

Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.

I don't think Widget is German? Haven't read the story so I don't know, but I think it's just one of those examples where it responds to one example with another example. Should be rewritten anyway since it's written in response to the example it's subbulleted to.

Jawbreakers on sale for 99¢

I would like some advice on the following trope as while I think it is one, I am not sure it is the one it is listed as:

• Do Not Taunt Cthulhu: Despite being unarmed, imprisoned and starved, Mannfred still tries to attack and mock the armed and numerous Stormcast Eternals when they find him. One hammer in the gut later and he's talking civilly to them, and when they threaten to leave him behind he's suddenly helpful and co-operative.

For Context: Mannfred is a powerful vampire who would usually be able to kill all but the highest ranked of Stormcast Eternals (the warriors of the Big Good created from the souls of dead and dying heroes) had he not been weakened by his imprisonment.

Knowledge is Power, Guard it Well

Yeah, that's definitely not that trope.

Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.

Cool, I thought not. Thanks. I'll put it into trope finder to what the trope actually is.

Knowledge is Power, Guard it Well

If two characters have confirmed Ship Tease together, but one of those same characters is later confirmed to be aromantic, do the previous "hints" still count as ship tease?

Jawbreakers on sale for 99¢