Do you have trouble remembering the difference between Deathbringer the Adorable and Fluffy the Terrible?
Do you have trouble recognizing when you've written a Zero-Context Example?
Not sure if you really have a Badass Bookworm or just a guy who likes to read?
Well, this is the thread for you. We're here to help you will all the finer points of example writing. If you have any questions, we can answer them. Don't be afraid. We don't bite. We all just want to make the wiki a better place for everyone.
Useful Tips:
- Make sure that the example makes sense to both people who don't know the work AND don't know the trope.
- Wrong: The Mentor: Kevin is this to Bob in the first episode.
- Right: The Mentor: Kevin takes Bob under his wing in the first episode and teaches him the ropes of being a were-chinchilla.
- Never just put the trope title and leave it at that.
- Wrong: Badass Adorable
- Right: Badass Adorable: Xavier, the group's cute little mascot, defeats three raging elephants with both hands tied behind his back using only an uncooked spaghetti noodle.
- When is normally far less important than How.
- A character name is not an explanation.
- Wrong: Full Moon Silhouette: Diana
- Right: Full Moon Silhouette: At the end of her transformation sequence into Moon Princess Misty, Diana is shown flying across the full moon riding a rutabaga.
Other Resources:
For best results, please include why you think an example is iffy in your first post.
Also, many oft-misused tropes/topics have their own threads, such as Surprisingly Realistic Outcome (here
) and Fan-Preferred Couple (here). Tropers are better able to give feedback on examples you bring up to specific threads.
For cleaning up examples of Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard, you must use their dedicated threads: Complete Monster Cleanup, Magnificent Bastard Cleanup.
Edited by Synchronicity on Sep 18th 2023 at 11:42:55 AM
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
that's a ZCE in disguise. it has a lot of words next to it, but it never explains how Sinestro turned from the heroes' side to the side of evil. it would be better suited as an Obviously Evil entry.
also, it's all white - not allowed as it makes the spoiler worthless; you have to click on it to see whether or not it's safe to click on it. plus it references two other list entries at the end, which is also not allowed; those entries might get changed or deleted, and then it's directing people to look at nothing. every entry should be written as if it's the only entry on the page.
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
Yeah, sounds like Obviously Evil to me. Also here's the thing: I didn't white out the whole example.
Edited by Bubblepig on Oct 19th 2021 at 7:23:43 AM
“What is that? It's The Unknown!”
From Fan-Disliked Explanation:
- Several fans didn't like the reveal that Lusamine, the main antagonist of Pokémon Sun and Moon, used to be a morally decent person, before a combination of grief over the disappearance her husband Mohn, (all but outright stated to be the same Mohn running the Poké Pelago mini-game, having lost his memories in said disappearance) and neurotoxin from the Ultra Beast Nihilego drove her insane. This basically boiled down to them feeling that this reveal whitewashed her actions, up to and including emotional and verbal abuse, robbed the story of any real villain apart from Faba, and/or was just a lazy attempt at humanizing her. This only got worse when every future appearance of Lusamine (the anime, the Ultra games) gave her Adaptational Heroism.
I was always under the impression that this trope refered to reveals that occured in SUBSEQUENT installments not the same one. As otherwise couldn't basically any red herring in a mystery occur for this trope? I know several Ace Attorney cases where people would've prefered the Red Herring to be the culprit
i looked at the page and saw you didn't add it, no worries - i was just breaking down all the problems with it.
The Ultra games are NOT adaptations, and it is way too whiny.
Edited by Delibirda on Oct 19th 2021 at 4:49:21 PM
"Listen up, Marina, because this is SUPER important. Whatever you do, don't eat th“ “DON'T EAT WHAT?! Your text box ran out of space!”
Something about this entry feels iffy:
- Vindicated by History: Despite their initial divisiveness, Apollo, Trucy, Klavier, and the adult Ema eventually found love within the fanbase, particularly in light of Trucy being Flanderized, Klavier being sidelined into irrelevance in Dual Destinies and Spirit of Justice, Apollo's abrupt replacement as central protagonist by the similarly divisive reinstated Phoenix, and Ema's Divergent Character Evolution setting her firmly apart from other pre-timeskip characters like Pearl and Maya, who would later be shown to have barely changed at all even after nearly a decade of in-universe time.
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
So I tried to talk about Kitchen Nightmares example in Real life Cleanup forum but it might take a while so I thought I can talk about it here since it counts as "Is this an example?". In Kitchen Nightmares, they are troping what happens to restaurants crew who are real life people outside the show. I was even astounded by a Downer Ending example about The Canpania because they are potholing some details that happens in real life. Bold words to highlight.
- The Campania episode has since become a massive retroactive Downer Ending. Things initially went well for the owner, but then his wife discovered he'd been having an affair with his pastry chef; she immediately divorced him and took custody of their children. In September 2010, he sold the restaurant, and days later, took his own life by jumping from a bridge.
Downer Ending is No Real Life Examples, Please!, actually, so the whole example can go.
I would say no: none of that happened on-screen, so its irrelevant to the episode itself and should be removed.
Edited by Orbiting on Oct 19th 2021 at 4:20:30 AM
Angry babby
On Nice Character, Mean Actor:
- Mom from Futurama has the public image of a sweet, kindly old grandmother, but offstage is a malevolent Corrupt Corporate Executive who routinely beats her three sons into submission.
I don't really know if this fits because IIRC, Mom's friendly persona is what she sells as her public persona, i.e. the outfit she wers in public to interviews and such. It is a character, but it's not meant to be a character in the public's eyes, it's meant to be her. It's closer to something like Bitch in Sheep's Clothing.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
♀ | Small ripples lead to big waves
So a while ago, I added an example of The Dog Bites Back to Eleutherophobia about the beginning of the series, where the protagonist kills his abusive Puppeteer Parasite. Problem is, I just remembered that the trope is about villains retaliating against other villains. Is this example still valid, or is this a case of Missing Supertrope Syndrome, or...?
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
Can someone cleanup Downer Ending example in Kitchen Nightmares or can I open a cleanup forum for this show?
“What is that? It's The Unknown!”
Angry babby
Is the entire page that bad or just that one example? As for the one example, it should only trope what's presented in the episode, so if the episode ends sadly then it's valid, but not if it's just what happened afterwards that makes it sad.
EDIT: Didn't notice that you already got feedback... did you notice that you got feedback? Cuz they said to cut it, not clean it, if the actual episode isn't sad.
Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 19th 2021 at 5:28:53 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
My main point is asking if the defintion of "Fan Disliked Explanation" is about only subesequent installments or not. And if it's able to be used for an explanation provided in the same installment as the question: what's stopping us from including every red herring in a mystery as an example?
Went through the Kitchen Nightmares Downer Ending bullet really quickly and this is the conclusion I've come to. Posting here for further feedback, especially with the opening paragraph. Do we need it?
- Downer Ending: In truckloads. Even though the concept of the show is to try to prevent this, it doesn't usually succeed, usually because the financial damage has been done long before Ramsay's arrival, and/or the owners simply do not have the business skills to keep it going after he leaves. Originally, the biggest difference between the UK and US versions of the show was that the UK series is unafraid to admit when a Nightmares reboot hasn't succeeded in turning around a restaurant's fortunes. However, it should be noted that restaurants are inherently a risky business, with only a 50% of them managing to stay in business for any length of time. To put it in perspective, out of the 44 restaurants from the first four seasons of the US series, only seven are still open.
- Two restaurants in the UK version, D-Place and Piccolo Teatro, ended up closing even before the episode ended — the former because the landlord had already decided to evict them before Ramsay arrived, the latter due to the laziness of its owner. And Rachel, the former owner of the Piccolo Teatro, is rumored to be "servicing" her customers as a prostitute. Good but I think the last sentence should be cut.
- The US version seems to be more willing to admit when a relaunch hasn't entirely worked as of Season 3; aside from the incident with Bazzini's dessert chef, the episode featuring PJ's ended with the owners admitting they weren't up to the task of running a restaurant and subsequently selling it. Maybe? I think it needs more context with PJ's actually happening during the episode or if this is information afterwards
- The Cafe Tavolini episode had perhaps the biggest downer ending of any Kitchen Nightmares episode until that point, with the possible exception of the UK pilot. At first it had the usual ending, with Ramsay telling the owners that they now had everything they needed to make the restaurant a success, and the owners appearing optimistic about the future. Immediately afterward, the epilogue revealed that the owners never got behind Ramsay's changes or tried to do a better job of managing the place — consequently, the restaurant closed, everyone lost their jobs, the owners lost their house, and their marriage collapsed. Maybe? It is epilogue, but still part of the episode.
- The "Amy's Baking Company" episode ends on an incredibly negative note: the toxic, abusive behaviors of Amy and Samy, topped by their refusal to accept any sort of criticism, is enough for Ramsay to completely give up on helping their business. No redemption, no restaurant makeover, Gordon just leaves, concluding that he "can't help people that can't help themselves".
- The owners of Chappy's undid all of Ramsay's menu changes almost the second he left, and a short time later, the restaurant closed when the property was seized for nonpayment of taxes. The owner and his wife subsequently skipped town, screwing all of their staff out of thousands in unpaid wages, and in 2018 the building was demolished. Happened after episode ended
- Barefoot Bob's looked as if the restaurant would survive - Ramsay had gotten the couple running the restaurant back together, got the attention of the restaurant to the town, and remodeled the restaurant to remove the tacky tiki theme. However, the bar manager Robby hates the new decor, which causes a small fuss between him and Ramsay, although the relaunch ultimately goes well. Eventually, they went back to their old menu and decor, which caused the reviews to go down. The restaurant managed to stay open until December 2016. Happened after episode ended
- Blackberry's saw a very promising remodeling and relaunch, despite Gordon nearly leaving after being falsely accused of planting a dead mouse. That is until the owner/head chef received a phone call during service and focuses on that above all else, and then promptly phases out and loses interest in doing anything afterwards. Regardless of the relaunch being overall successful despite this, she declines to join the staff meeting the next day and bluntly refuses to meet with Gordon. The restaurant closed down shortly after. Maybe this could stay, but I'm leaning towards cut because the restaurant did stay open for some time afterwards
- Averted for many of the employees, especially those who were mistreated onscreen. When the restaurants closes down, they manage to find better jobs. Even some of the owners survive and stay afloat as employees in other restaurants. Not an example
- The Campania episode has since become a massive retroactive Downer Ending. Things initially went well for the owner, but then his wife discovered he'd been having an affair with his pastry chef; she immediately divorced him and took custody of their children. In September 2010, he sold the restaurant, and days later, took his own life by jumping from a bridge. Happened after episode ended
- According to YouTube comments, this was the fate of Finn McCool's. Ramsay's relaunch was a complete success and the restaurant remained open for almost 5 years, until the owner of the location decided to double the rent out of nowhere. They decided to close down instead. Happened after episode ended
- Bonaparte's at least lasted until the end of the episode, but Ramsay's attempt at a revamp proved a total failure, in no small part due to the useless head chef. ZCE
Musician/Composer
So a while ago, I added an example of The Dog Bites Back to Eleutherophobia about the beginning of the series, where the protagonist kills his abusive Puppeteer Parasite. Problem is, I just remembered that the trope is about villains retaliating against other villains. Is this example still valid, or is this a case of Missing Supertrope Syndrome, or...?
The Dog Bites Back doesn't have to be a strictly underling example.
He/His/Him. No matter who you are, always Be Yourself.
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
I think it's more of Happy Ending Override for the incorrect examples but since it happens in real life, I say cut it.
Edited by Bubblepig on Oct 19th 2021 at 5:10:45 AM
“What is that? It's The Unknown!”
That actually isn't entirely clear. It's often used that way, but the definition pretty much focuses on the "mistreated minion" version and I can see arguments for both.
Hello, what’s the difference between Comic-Book Fantasy Casting and No Celebrities Were Harmed?
Having trouble classifying a Dream Sequence where the character is awake and experiencing it in the moment. Right now I have it as All Just a Dream - Averted but I'm not sure about this. It is also the first scene in the episode so I also have it as a Dream Intro (perhaps subverted?).
Edited by jordanar30 on Oct 20th 2021 at 9:47:59 AM
can you clarify a little? how is this person experiencing the dream while being awake? what's the mechanism?
Fantasy Sequence if they’re imagining it.
It is not a dream. They are awake but experiencing an event in slow-motion, and the event is presented as if they were dreaming, with inner monologue.
Edited by jordanar30 on Oct 20th 2021 at 2:05:52 PM
Edited by Bubblepig on Oct 19th 2021 at 6:59:29 AM
“What is that? It's The Unknown!”