Is this an example?

Oh. Okay; I love Spiderverse, too, but I'm not familiar with its fandom, and the entry about it doesn't say what you just said :)

About ROTG, I know that there are ugly shipping wars, but they concern only one character and not the movie as a whole.

That ROTG entry is incoherent. Cut it.

Spotted an example on Unfortunate Names that reeks of Fan Myopia to me:

• Similarly, the name Deirdre will, because of the power of TV, for a long time be associated with a drab, dowdy, middle-aged woman in Coronation Street. Its original mythological meaning of the most beautiful maiden in all Ireland - a sort of Celtic Helen of Troy who caused a war for pretty much the same reasons - can't really compete.

My knowledge of Coronation Street begins and ends with "a TV show, I think." Saying that it's the defining association for the name "Deirdre" is laughable.

Edited by nrjxll on Oct 6th 2020 at 7:35:30 AM

So I was browsing through The Stockholms character page and I find a character Sniper's file where I think it is misused. Spoiler warning.

• The Hero: Kills Jasper in the end.

Edited by Bubblepig on Oct 6th 2020 at 6:42:43 AM

I've been doing some looking around Actor Allusion and Shout-Out, occasionally doing a bit of cleanup up examples that are just surface-level similarities, when I came across these Actor Allusion entries under Avatar: The Last Airbender:

• Mick Foley voices The Boulder, a parody of The Rock. The Rock and Foley's character Mankind formed the popular tag team The Rock and Sock Connection. I'm not too familiar with wrestling, but this seems like a reasonable enough connection, so perhaps there's a decent chance this was intentional.
• One reason Zutara was such a popular ship was that we've already heard Mae Whitman and Dante Basco hook up before on American Dragon: Jake Long. Since this is related to a popular fan ship and not anything that happens in canon, by definition that can't be this trope. My guess is that this entry simply wanted to highlight the fact that both Mae Whitman and Dante Basco were in both shows, which may be a different YMMV trope altogether.
• Inverted: Ozai, who's voiced by Mark Hamill, is both the Archnemesis Dad of one of the heroes who maims his son and an Evil Overlord who can shoot lightning from his fingertips. That's right, Luke Skywalker is voicing a composite of Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine. I can definitely see the similarities, but nothing to indicate that Ozai's traits were a deliberate Shout-Out to either Star Wars antagonist, neither of which is even played by Mark Hamill.
• Small one from Robert Patrick when he voices Piandao. When Piandao describes swordsmanship, he says the sword is like a "extra long, really sharp arm". Robert Patrick's most famous role was as the T-1000 in Terminator 2: Judgment Day, and the Terminator he played was fond of making his arms long and sharp to use as swords. I haven't seen Terminator 2, but unless T-1000 actually said something along the lines of a sword being a long, sharp arm, it seems like just a coincidental similarity. I'm not 100% certain though.
• One of the first things Aang says in the first episode is "Will you go penguin sliding with me?". He's voiced by Zach Tyler Eisen, first voice of Pablo the Penguin. I think it's safe to cut this; basically the only relation is the mention of a penguin, which seems pretty tenuous.

But I'd like to know what others think about these.

Edited by PacificGreen on Oct 6th 2020 at 6:59:55 AM

Axed the Deirdre example, then.

The Mick Foley gag is definitely intentional. I also support the Terminator, as while the character doesn't say "long sharp arm" he does have long sharp arms. The rests seem like they can go.

Edited by TheMountainKing on Oct 6th 2020 at 12:17:43 PM

I found a dubious example from Matched on Do Not Do This Cool Thing. I have never read the book or been involved in the fandom, but judging from the relevant TV Tropes pages, I doubt that the example is valid.

• Matched is a dystopian trilogy about an evil totalitarian government that arranges the matches between its citizens. It has as widespread and ardent a shipping fandom as any Star-Crossed Lovers story.

What is this trying to say? It looks like "shipping fictional characters is basically the same as supporting Bureaucratically Arranged Marriages", which is a stretch. It may also be going for "fans who ship Cassia and Xander, the bureaucratically-arranged pairing, think BAMs are good", which I'd also question — that's just one bureaucratically-arranged pairing, and I'm inclined to guess that fans ship them because they like the idea of the characters being together, and not because Xander was chosen by the government.

Edited by MathsAngelicVersion on Oct 7th 2020 at 2:31:17 PM

I think what it's trying to say is that by shipping characters fans are engaging in the same "choosing a pairing" thing as the government in the book, as if fans saying X and Y should be together is the same as actually forcing people to be together in real life as a dystopian government. Like I can understand the link (fans are "deciding" who should be together) but fans can't exactly oppress fictional characters.

Reads more like it was intended for Hypocritical Fandom.

Edited by WarJay77 on Oct 7th 2020 at 10:09:39 AM

Is Heathcliff of Wuthering Heights an example of The Sociopath? He ticks many boxes (and I've no intention to whitewash the bastard) but The Sociopath is "physiologically incapable of experiencing a deep emotional attachment towards others," while Heathcliff is a shiny example of Love Makes You Evil. Though I guess it's a matter of Alternative Character Interpretation if his obsession even counts as love. So, I'm not sure.

Here's the entry from Characters.Wuthering Heights:

• The Sociopath: He's manipulative, sadistic, and devoid of empathy.

Edited by Tenebrika on Oct 7th 2020 at 9:59:36 PM

Could maybe be Misaimed Fandom, but only if the fandom romanticizes the arranged marriages. Fans coming up with love stories for fictional characters is not the same as a government forcing people into relationships whether they want to date or not.

Should I just delete the example then? I think the difference between shipping fictional characters and supporting Bureaucratically Arranged Marriages is so large that it shouldn't count as Do Not Do This Cool Thing. There might be a valid case of DNDTCT somewhere in the series, but that's not a reason to let a bad example stay — Matched fans can add valid examples themselves.

(Also, if deciding which fictional characters should be together oppresses the characters, isn't the original author guilty of that as well? Or does it somehow not count if you're doing it to your own characters?)

Even then it would be misuse. Hypocritical Fandom was intended for fandoms that like to complain about flaws in a rival work while ignoring the similar flaws of their favourite work, e.g. a huge fan of the New Super Mario Bros. series attacking the Pokémon games for being too similar. (To be fair, "Hypocritical Fandom" was a poor name that suggested a broader definition.)

(I got 'd): Maybe, but the example at no point mentions that the fans romanticize the Bureaucratically Arranged Marriages themselves. I think I'll just delete it and leave an edit reason explaining why. I don't feel like reading a bunch of fanfics of a series I have no interest in just to check if there's anything salvageable in the example.

Edited by MathsAngelicVersion on Oct 7th 2020 at 11:09:27 AM

Isnt this example on Unintentionally Sympathetic too general. I mean it is true but no specific work is being cited.

• Practically every Western actually written during the frontier times portrays the Native Americans as inhuman savages who want the heroes dead just for being there, and the characters and the narration will always remind the readers that the Indians are evil at every opportunity, even when they aren't actually doing anything at the time. (This is particularly bad in dime novels.) Yet modern readers would probably side with the Indians over the settlers, even when they actually are being villainous, because of how they were the victims in real life and the settlers struck first. This is also true of colonialist fiction in Darkest Africa, just replace "Native Americans" with "black people" and "settlers" with "Bold Explorers".

Examples Are Not General. Examples of tropes are meant to illustrate how this work is an example of the trope; a broader trend of many works using the same trope is called a trope.

tl;dr yes remove it

Edited by wingedcatgirl on Oct 7th 2020 at 1:40:52 AM

I get the sentiment, but yeah, too general, especially since it tacks on a different genre in that last sentence.

Re: the Dresden files post, what I was trying to say is that because of all those things, if you don't know that Dresden is a good man trying to do the right thing, it's very easy to see him as a dark wizard in waiting.

And, after Peace Talks and Battle Ground, everyone (not without reason) thinks that Harry and Lara are in a relationship thanks to Harry's poor communication kills. Plus there was how he knows all about the White Court and even speaks ancient Etruscan in White Night (again, due to Lash, but Ramirez doesn't know that).

Don't we like not know anything about what's going on their yet. Plus Morgan who was also not the most pro-Harry character was depicted as sympatheticiss and having a point. Isn't it kinda soon to be adding stuff like that.

Can someone please check my previous post here? Thank you

It's an Zero-Context Example. "Kills a guy" is not enough context to know if he is The Hero or not. Is he the focal point of the story? Does he have heroic traits?

Also, Actor Allusion: that's actually all misuse; 'the role heavily mirrors something the actor did previously' is Casting Gag. But only the Mick Foley one looks non-coincidental enough to be an actual example.

Edited by Synchronicity on Oct 7th 2020 at 6:22:34 AM

He is not a focal point of the story rather a running joke character, which is why I got confused with this example I found. Also his heroic point is to sniped a main character who is a robber. I'll remove it.

Edited by Bubblepig on Oct 7th 2020 at 6:04:34 AM

I'll keep the Mick Foley one and give the Terminator one the benefit of the doubt, but I'll go ahead and cut the others.

Is the following example from Batman Begins being used correctly, as Critical Dissonance is supposed to be when critcs and audiences have the complete opposite reactions to a film, where as this example is describing a dissonance between critics and an even smaller group of critics?:

From the same page should Epileptic Trees still be kept even if they've been effectively Jossed?:

And again from the same page, does the following example have enough context?:

I was going to expand on the following Empty Promise example but, after reading the description, I am not sure it fits the "Saying things are OK when the situation is bleak" definition.

• Kazuki of Buso Renkin promised Tokiko they'd fight Victor together, even if it meant they would be killed. Ultimately he valued her life too much, and broke the promise to fight Victor one-on-one.

Couple Bomb has a list of aversions that seems redundant to Creator Couple. Can they be cut?