Prematurely launched pages and pages that weren't fully fleshed out at the point of launching, are a big problem. Since these usually share several problems at once, this thread is aimed at re-running them through the TLP for fixing - the usual fix - or cutting them if they are too bad.
Problems this thread deals with include bad names, not enough/bad examples, unclear description, etc.
For the interested, here's a list of recently created pages
. Launches
Note: Please do not request a mod to unlaunch drafts that don't have any issues besides lacking a launch notice/24hr launch notice. While 24hr launch notices are mandatory, there are a few exceptions to the rule. If you see a draft's sponsor launch a TLP without an announcement, it's best to remind them of our TLP Guidelines first. If they continue to repeatedly launch drafts without a launch notice, you can report them on Ask The Tropers or the TLP Community Issues
thread.
Edited by MacronNotes on Jun 24th 2023 at 12:24:55 PM
The first subbullet is copypasta alright. Don't do that, please.
Anyhow, worklist:
- The Beautiful White Lies: ~Isabel Loves Bunnies, I've moved this to a better namespace. Remember that it needs Crosswicking and indexing.
- Prophecies of Nostradamus: Stub work page; creator messaged.
- Starling: Stub work page; creator messaged.
- Starriors: ~Baconsavior, why is that page in the Franchise/ namespace? It does not fit the Namespace criteria?
- Tony Williams: ~Mr Matt, I would write Music.Tony Williams Drummer and Music.Tony Williams Singer (with reference to the question in the page history "There are two Tony Williamses - Miles Davis' drummer and the guy who sings on Kanye West albums. Dunno how to organize it.").
- VS Battles: Why was this page made without a YKTTW, ~Lusty Venusian Juuza? We don't like stub articles like that.
- Ys: Memories of Celceta: Stub work page; creator messaged.
Sprite Survivor page and sub-pages
Okay, weird problem. I'm trying to fix that Sandbox sub-page, but every time I try to make a link to the "work" page by making a link to Web Animation - Sprite Survivor, it just brings me to the Home Page.
Today's worklist:
- Darkest Dungeon: Stub work page; creator messaged.
- The Kings of Summer: Stub work page; creator messsaged.
- The Knife That Killed Me: Stub work page; creator messaged.
- Savant: Stub work page; creator messaged.
- Single Dad: Stubby trope page without YKTTW by ~spyglass; I favour a cut.
~Inlumino, I see you have been making a large number of FanWorks/ pages with nothing but a link to the FanficRecs/ pages. What is up with that? It's not a proper usage of the namespace.
~Kindle 4 Light, you were a wee bit fast with creating all these Pantheon/ subpages. Did you get consensus in the Pantheons thread?
I am getting no opinions on Creator.Jimmy Savile or Crowd Pleaser. I am inclined to cutlist the latter, given the shortness and poor elaboration.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman~ Septimus Heap Yep. I was the one who suggested the subpages in the first place.
~ Septimus Heap Greetings, I added a few tropes to Darkest Dungeon, and apparently 1 or 2 tropers have added more, thanks for keeping the wiki cool man. I'll let this be a lesson for me, to never create a page way too early.
edited 11th Jan '15 11:41:08 AM by YoKab
Hey, I've just launched The Cat in the Hat, and am in the process of crosswicking migration. Right now I've got kind of a problem - the text isn't underneath the image. It looks very ugly. I'm not sure what I did wrong - is this a bug? Does anybody know how to fix this?
I don't talk soft, that's the other guy.The wiki software downsizes the image automatically. But the caption isn't and thus ends up being larger than the image.
Otherwise, worklist:
- Barbarians At The Gate: Stub work page; creator has been messaged.
- FanWorks.Fairy Tail: This page is supposed to go into FanficRecs.Fairy Tail, yes, ~Sarcasticgirl777?
- Creator.Roosh V: ~shinobhi, what is this page about? It is not about works, tropes or fiction, from what I can tell.
- Subverted Pun: Stubby trope with no crosswicking or YKTTW, by ~MF Luder.
...if Subverted Pun is any kind of trope (which I doubt), there's probably something that already covers it. And since when is "gaydar" a pun? It's a compressed phrase.
Nuke that thing. He can take it through YKTTW if he wants.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry Pratchett~Septimus Heap, as I'd told you the other day, the warning text for adding a hat (or the relevant policy, but most likely the text) needs to be changed.
"You are saying that you think this draft is ready to be published. That means the description is not ambiguous, it doesn't duplicate an existing trope, there are at least three examples, and the title makes sense."
This is what you currently read when you're about to add a hat to a YKTTW. It's in direct contradiction with the guidelines that set the minimum to six IIRC. I suspect many pages that end up here were hatted by well-intentioned people who thought three examples were enough.
I thought the minimum for everything was Three.
TV Tropes's No. 1 bread themed lesbian. she/her, fae/faer![]()
Exactly.
To clarify: The written rule says that the minimum is three examples, but I've been told publicly and privately that six is not enough (this was when I launched a trope and it was cut because, among other things, it "only" had six examples).
I told Septimus in a private message that the written rule should be changed to reflect this consensus, so that people wouldn't be hatting tropes that would have to be cut for lack of examples. It was not changed, so I decided to comment on it again.
(EDIT: Also, I'm puzzled because that trope, Writing About Your Crime, seems to be up right now. A database glitch? Something only I can see? What gives?)
edited 12th Jan '15 2:03:30 PM by elbitjusticiero
I was under the impression that the Three Rules Of Three include a guideline of having three examples when you create a YKTTW, but as for launching, it's just whenever everyone in the discussion reaches a consensus (maybe not unanimous, but a consensus nonetheless) that it's ready. I agree that six is a bit paltry.
One thing that is not a hard-and-fast indicator that it's ready is the "five hat" rule. You know what you need in order to get five hats? Four sockpuppets. Even suggesting that five hats means "go" is inviting that kind of thing. Even the less horrible people go around begging for hats instead of actually having a discussion or improving the page.
A page is ready to launch when it's ready to launch, not when it has 3 or 6 examples or 5 hats or 4 Tropers commenting "Just Launch It Already" or two clowns yelling "Works Pages Are A Free Launch" or what-have-you.
I think people are too wrapped up in seeing their contributions to this site as some sort of CV or resume. It's not. No one cares how many pages you've launched. Rushing one out because you saw five hats doesn't help anyone. In fact, if anyone is looking at your "TV Tropes CV" and sees that you've hastily and prematurely launched numerous pages, it just makes you look like a crappy, lazy editor, whether or not the YKTTW got enough hats or it has 3 or 6 examples.
.../rant.
Also, this isn't directed at anyone in particular. I'm not looking through your TV Tropes CV and judging your work. Just in general, I don't see the point of people arguing about "how many examples a YKTTW should have before it's launched". Launch it when it's ready. There's no hard, statistical rule that will tell you when it's ready. When you have a complete, well-written, Clear Concise Witty, well-defined trope, with enough examples to make it clear that it's not just your personal apophenia
(I learned that word from Septimus :p), than launch it. Not before.
edited 12th Jan '15 4:35:42 PM by SolipSchism
My opinion is that there's too much focus on the number of examples. What about the writing?
Many of the stubs that show up here, whether launched or bypassing YKTTW, have crappy descriptions that don't define a situation, much less a trope. Often examples are ZC Es or poorly thought-out.
You could have a dozen possible examples, and if the description is worthless, the examples will be fool's gold at best.
One of the launching requirements must be "Are they well-written?" referring to both description and examples. To do otherwise makes the wiki look bad, and I see it as doing harm to the wiki.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry PratchettI agree with you all. That's why I think that little bit of text should be changed. It's kind of counterintuitive (in my case, the page had more than three examples, but less than five hats, which ~Solip Schism would have liked, perhaps, but it was not very well written either), and it might encourage people to rush launches (as I did).
EDIT: Also, yes, I checked while logged out and Writing About Your Crime IS live, though it shouldn't be. What do we do about it?
edited 12th Jan '15 10:29:49 PM by elbitjusticiero
Half the examples are Real Life examples, and one of those violates "Keep It An Example" by saying "This happens all the time in social media"... The description needs a smack with the Good Writing Stick and the comparison with Copycat Crime needs to be revised as well, since that's not what Copycat Crime is. (Also, Copycat Crime is a redirect, which suggests the author didn't care to actually look up the page and just linked it assuming it was an article.)
I'd say cut it with extreme prejudice if the core idea didn't seem solid enough. It just needs to have more fictional examples and be... written better.
EDIT: No offense intended, though that was a bit rude considering that it looks like you wrote it. I know I can get snarky sometimes. Please don't take it personally—I'll trash talk an article all day long, but it's never directed at the editors themselves.
![]()
![]()
No, no, no—we do not need to just change the "magic number", because the magic number is is just a big flashy light to keep you distracted from the important stuff, like good writing and actually tropeworthy ideas. What we need is for Tropers to stop rushing to make a page fit some arbitrary "rules" about launch-worthiness.
If the page looks like it's going to end up here after launching, then it shouldn't be launched.
I'm generally not one to advocate willy-nilly punishment, but maybe bad page launchers should be held accountable. With multiple offenses, maybe, so we're not just stringing up newbies. The first time one or multiple bad launches (and I mean multiple tropers can agree that it was a bad launch) are discovered, the Troper in question is pinged by Security. The second time, suspension. The third time, edit-banned.
The problem with that is I can see people throwing tantrums about the standards used to judge the pages. But to be perfectly honest, we have wiki policy for a reason, and people have been suspended and edit-banned for violating it in the past. Adding a new rule isn't exactly revolutionary.
edited 12th Jan '15 10:59:07 PM by SolipSchism
Regarding that private message: To be honest, rearranging the guidelines page is not a solution. Whether a page is ready for launching is to some degree a judgment call that cannot readily described in written form. Also, 3 is the absolute minimum, but a healthy trope does require more than that. It's cutting corners to launch a trope with only 3 examples.
Otherwise, worklist:
- Dame Edna Everage: ~Mr Jean Brodie, I've cutlisted the article because not only do we not make pages for singular characters, it's in the wrong namespace regardless.
- Spirit Circle: Stub work page; creator messaged.
- VS Battles: Still need input; it is a stub article.
Maybe the change needs to be cultural and constant.
I noticed that the mods over the past couple years dealt with wiki rule and guideline violations by targeting one particularly bad area -ZC Es, spoilers, example formatting, and so on- and concentrated primarily on that area until the community got into the habit of straightening things out. You can see the pattern in Edit banned/suspended.
Maybe what's needed is to create an environment where it's hammered in again and again that you do not launch a YKTTW just because it fits the letter of the rules. Constant, consistent, everyone under the same guideline, until it is a habit to double-check that YKTT Ws aren't just ready for launch technically, but factually as well.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry Pratchett
I see a good idea here.
I've seen a few YKTTWs that were managed with clear defensiveness over the trope in question; comments questioning the validity of the trope were either dismissed, ignored, or responded to with vitriol. The curators of those pages took criticism personally in a way that is in no way conducive to actually creating a good page.
Granted, sometimes tropers commenting on YKTTW can be dicks, but I think that's less common and generally addressed by others (at least, I confront it when I see it). If we could remind tropers that they don't own their content and they need to be open to criticism of poor writing and bad ideas—and that not all criticism means you are a bad writer or have bad ideas, but simply that something could be tweaked or improved, and that's not an insult but an attempt to help—maybe that would go some way toward addressing the problem. But as Septimus suggests, that's a nebulous idea with a poor sense of how to implement it.
I tend to emphasize community consensus. If you have eight tropers actively commenting on a YKTTW and seven of them think it's ready to launch, it's probably good. But if five of them think it's good and three of them are still discussing it, it really, really, really needs to stay in YKTTW.
Some YKTTWs just get more attention than others. I don't know why. Maybe the titles are just sexier. But if you have thirty tropers commenting on a YKTTW and it gets five hats, that means nothing. That means one out of six tropers thinks it's ready. On the other hand, if four tropers are commenting on it and it has four hats, that doesn't mean it's not ready—though it does mean maybe the idea is too specific to appeal to a wider number of people, and it Needs Wiki Magic Love before it can be definitively said to be ready.
edited 13th Jan '15 7:57:00 AM by SolipSchism

read my post in Ask The Tropers, that should work.
Keeper of The Celestial Flame