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
Not sure, honestly. The definition and examples seem kinda vague when not referring to musical cases.
@Unexplained Recovery: No, I don't think that counts. The description seems to be for No One Could Survive That! cases where we have no explanation at all. Whether or not "getting turned into a plant" counts as death/near-death I will pass on since I haven't read the work, but Persephone finding a way to do it is an explanation, even if we don't know the exact details.
@Self-Adaptation: Is the OVA an adaptation?
@Boss Warning Siren: Without more details I'd say yeah.
@In the Style of: I think In the Style of needs at the very least a description rewrite but those are more clearly straight-up homages (specifically we have Sitcom Homage Episode) than anything In the Style of is trying to be.
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
Can someone please check on my post asap before it gets lost? Here's the link: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13543987200A54420100&page=811#comment-20270
^It's low on context for both. Are "you" supposed to be heroic? (What the Hell, Hero? forbids Designated Hero callouts.) Are "you" supposed to be enjoying letting Sara die, or is it meant to be a tragic choice? (The former is necessary for You Bastard!)
Edited by Synchronicity on May 22nd 2022 at 11:59:18 AM
[[Willy's Chocolate Experience The Unknown]
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I don't get it either. It's more like complaining then What the Hell, Hero? . I think You Bastard! fits better if rewritten. But I'm not sure.
I'd just cut it with a good edit reason. No harm no foul.
Edited by Synchronicity on May 22nd 2022 at 1:35:46 PM
This one from VideoGame.Dragon Ball Xenoverse? The emphasized "possibly" is what's concerning to me, as I have no familiarity with the work
- Stealth Prequel: Possibly. The end of the game establishes Trunks' decision to stay on as part of the Time Patrol, meanwhile Towa takes the core of the surprisingly alive Mira and departs, swearing revenge on those who stood in their way (I.E. Trunks and company). This would make sense, as it would set up the Time Patrol vs. Time Breakers plot that Dragon Ball Online had during its run, as well as establishing just what set it off to begin with. To make a long story short, either we're seeing a sequel, that will replace/retell DBO's story, or this was the prequel to that plot.
I'd cut with a link to Examples Are Not Arguable and Speculative Troping.
In The Book of Boba Fett S1E4 "The Gathering Storm" the example of Karmic Death has the Sarlacc listed as dying from eating a bomb after it has eaten people for years.
Does that real count as it is just an animal eating to survive like any living thing does.
Edited by Lord-Jaric on May 22nd 2022 at 2:12:10 PM
And it's gone.
Karmic Death points out the villain must be human (or universe's human equivalent) so no, that particular villain doesn't count. It might fit under Death by Irony though.
Edited by Hello83433 on May 22nd 2022 at 3:16:24 PM
CSP Cleanup Thread | All that I ask for ... is diamonds and dance floors
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
...Yeah, that rule doesn't make any more sense to me a second time hearing it, but whatever.
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
- Star Trek: Phoenix: The conflict between Sunset and Twilight following the former's return was originally intended to last for the bulk of Season 2. However, a number of issues — chiefly centering around the author overestimating how familiar the readers would have been with the behavior of someone suffering from severe emotional trauma, and thus how well they would understand Twilight's thought processes based on the textual cues present in the story — led to Sunset and especially Twilight's performances during it to receive strongly negative responses from the readers, which eventually convinced Dewdrops on the Grass that the best way to handle the situation would be to just quickly end the arc several chapters early and move on.
This sounds like misuse as the arc does get resolution and payoff, just differently than intended. Cut and move to What Could Have Been?
As written, it's not an example as it admits the arc was concluded. Also it's quite complainey (towards the fans). Cut away.
Insert title here
This was in the YMMV page for Ghostbusters: Afterlife:
- Genius Bonus:
- One of the "Apocalypse dates" listed inside Gozer's lair is 1945. At first glance this refers to World War II, but WW2 was already happening and nearing its end by then. It actually refers to the detonation of the first atomic bomb, and the subsequent atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki all of which took place during that year.
- One of the "Apocalypse dates" listed inside Gozer's lair is 1945. At first glance this refers to World War II, but WW2 was already happening and nearing its end by then. It actually refers to the detonation of the first atomic bomb
That's weird that the example writer thought that WWII and the atomic bombs were somehow separate events and that this was some obscure historical tidbit and not one of the most discussed aspects of the war. Cut away.
If you're asking how to link to forum posts, you can just right click on the timestamp and copy/paste it. Like so: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13543987200A54420100&page=812#comment-20290
Tangled Family Tree: (bolded comments mine)
- Chrono Trigger has this, and is only exacerbated by Chrono Cross:
- Marle is part of the Guardia royal family. During her travels she meets Doan, her descendant from the Bad Future, and Ayla and Kino, her ancestors from Sixty-Five Million BC. She also has a pendant identical to Schala's, which implies a connection to the Zeal royal family, making Schala and Janus possible relatives as well. No tree, no cigar. About the pendant, even though it is an heirloom for Marle's family, that does not make its original wielder (Schala) part of Marle's family. The pendant could have been bought by or donated to Marle's family from unrelated people after being lost in between Schala's time (12000 BC) and 0-1000 AD for all we know.
- And at least one ending suggests that Frog/Glenn may be her ancestor as well. Specifically, Frog replaces one of her ancestors (his king). But again, no tree, no cigar.
- Lucca helped revive Robo, and her research eventually culminates in the supercomputer FATE a.k.a. Lynx, making her their mother in a figurative sense. She also adopted Kid, Schala's daughter-clone created while Schala was merged with Lavos in the form of the Time Devourer. Lucca raises or creates 3 characters. Too simple.
- To top everything off, all humans are descended from Lavos in multiple senses, as the parasite's planetfall wiped out humanity's competition in prehistory, and contact with the Frozen Flame accelerated human evolution and imbued the magical powers that led to Zeal. Not a family relationship, doesn't count.
- Marle is part of the Guardia royal family. During her travels she meets Doan, her descendant from the Bad Future, and Ayla and Kino, her ancestors from Sixty-Five Million BC. She also has a pendant identical to Schala's, which implies a connection to the Zeal royal family, making Schala and Janus possible relatives as well. No tree, no cigar. About the pendant, even though it is an heirloom for Marle's family, that does not make its original wielder (Schala) part of Marle's family. The pendant could have been bought by or donated to Marle's family from unrelated people after being lost in between Schala's time (12000 BC) and 0-1000 AD for all we know.
I just want to delete all these because they don't certainly look tangled.
Edited by Albert3105 on May 22nd 2022 at 10:47:00 AM
Agreed, does not sound like an example.
Lord of the Blue Star
In The Big Bang Theory's "The Dead Hooker Juxtaposition" there are two examples of "Hypocrite" that I think either one needs to be removed, or both do as they self-contradict. In this episode a new girl comes into the building and leads most of the guys on into doing her favors but sees them nothing as disposable tools, while Penny who does ask for things treats the boys with some respect and friendship. These are the examples.
Hypocrite: Penny has no right to call out Alicia for how she treats Leonard when she takes advantage of Leonard all the time too. When Alicia points this out, Penny stays silent for a bit (being unable to think of a suitable comeback obviously) then says Alicia is way out of line. However while Penny may accept Favors for the Sexy she does genuinely see the guys as friends, while it's established Alicia is a Gold Digger quite unapologetically taking advantage of them.
- Straw Hypocrite: Penny straight-up. She complains that Alicia is taking advantage of Leonard with her good looks. Sheldon points out she does the same thing as well and that it all started back in the pilot episode where she asked Leonard and Sheldon to retrieve her television. Penny complains that's "not" related, commenting "Apples and oranges, Sheldon!" Later on in the episode Alicia calls out Penny on her hypocrisy. The main difference is that while Penny may accept Favors for the Sexy she does genuinely see the guys as friends, while its established Alicia is a Gold Digger quite unapologetically taking advantage of them.
It is my thought these two are mutually exclusive. And both explain that in the end, there are key differences between Penny and Alicia, such as the aforementioned Penny actually sees the guys as her quirky friends who she sometimes mooches from. It seems more fitting to call Alicia an evil counterpart to Penny, which is already on the page.
- Deep-Immersion Gaming: The story jumps back and forth between the real-life tabletop game and the actual in-game world.
Does that have enough context? From the trope page image, it sounds like it has to be that the game characters have to be acting out what the gamers are doing, instead of having their own storyline?
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
The Straw Hypocrite entry can go. It's straight-up misuse. The regular Hypocrite entry seems fine though.
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
Yeah, that example is lacking the context of the characters looking and acting just like their players.
Is this an example of Naked on Arrival or a shoehorn? The scene occurs in a Start of Darkness flashback episode for a character who is already well-established, but it is a sort of "rebirth" scene (she enters the pool as one thing and emerges as something new).
- Naked on Arrival: A downplayed example. While we first saw Salem's story wearing her princess dress, concept art of her model after jumping into the Pool of Darkness revealed that her first appearance corrupted by the Grimm's essence was that yes, she was indeed naked, despite the viewer only seeing her face and hands.
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
That looks like it's using "Downplayed" to mean "not actually an example but it kinda fits some parts of it".
Officially intimidated
I don't think it fits either.
135 - 169 - 273 - 191 - 188 - 230 - 300
Do the "sitcom" episodes of WandaVision qualify for In the Style of?
The cold never bothered me anyway