That is an issue I was expecting - tagging systems always start getting abused in a "hit-and-run" (and don't explain) fashion if they don't have a removal, let alone a documenting mechanism. I usually try to post a reason, though, unless someone has already posted one.
The "Crash Rescue" issue is something I have noticed for some time. I do not have a patented solution here, though.
edited 30th May '13 11:03:34 AM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanIt's always easier to say that something is wrong than what is wrong, which in turn is much easier than what it should be. That's why I always try to only bring up what I can solve myself, or at least put some work into.
Would it work to have a requirement that you've actually posted in the YKTTW to tag something? That would at least catch those who just tag and don't say anything. If it's someone who's already posted it's probably far more likely they'll also have some manner of explanation for it, even if the comment is not directly tied to the tag.
Check out my fanfiction!If there were a voting mechanism on the tags, the legitimacy of that specific tag can be addressed. I mean that if a tag—say Tag X—has two buttons next to it (for up or down), then people could vote on how accurate that tag's placement was. So if Tag X is actually just wrong to be on that draft, it can be dropped after a certain number of down votes—like if the total is (-5) then the tag is dropped. Maybe have a minimum number of hours for the tag to be up (like 24 hours). And if someone were to try adding the same tag, instead of the tag showing up multiple times, their attempt to add just counts as another up vote.
As they are right now, one tag just means one person thinks it's appropriate. With a voting system, multiple people can easily denote whether they agree or disagree with the tag. Maybe "legitimacy" is the wrong word, but I think it could help with tags added without any reason given (that is, if enough down votes can make the tag be dropped).
There's been scuttlebutt over adding crowners to YKTTW; this sounds like applying the crowner system to the tags. Turned on its head, this could actually serve as a more precise, more accurate version of the hat system, but that might require a larger overhaul of YKTTW that could add more complexity (and we all know how much Fast Eddie has on his plate already).
It's funny; the tag system was originally introduced to improve throughput in YKTTW because people were just throwing out examples and not working on what actually needed to be worked on, and it's failing because people are just throwing out examples and not working on what actually needs to be worked on.
edited 31st May '13 7:11:07 PM by MorganWick
@6: You are assuming that the legitimacy of a tag is measurable by the amount of people agreeing with it. I do not agree with that.
@7: The crowner idea was mostly about Alt Names crowners.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanI think the "Needs Examples" tag needs to die in a fire. When 90% of YKTTW activity is (and has always been) just suggesting examples to the exclusion of description/title discussion we do not need to be actively encouraging it.
edited 1st Jun '13 5:00:58 AM by Stratadrake
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.TRS already feels like pulling teeth to get something done a lot of the time with people doing the talking but none of the work ever. It is hard to satisfy folks if you can't see how they would word something or would organize something and just vageuly hint at it.
YTTW this sounds like the tag system is being abused by lazy editors and commenters. This should probably be nipped in the bud before it grows into larger problem down the road.
Suggestions are good but backing them up with an actual written example or useful input goes a lot further in fixing issues. Folks need to remember no one is a mind reader and you need to tell or show them what is wrong with some degree of specificity.
The vote system sounds like another narrow group issue waiting to happen like what happens in TRS.
What would you guys think of a system that requires actual input as to what they would like see fixed if they put up a tag like an edit reason. Any tags that are too lazy to actually write anything can get chopped.
I have to agree with Septimus. It is kind of hard to gauge the value of an attempted YTTW entry without some examples to back it up.
edited 1st Jun '13 8:31:35 AM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?@8: I would like to know your criteria for legitimacy of tags.
Another suggestion, which I think was already suggested but worded differently, would be to make it so when one wishes to add a tag, they have to concisely write out why they chose that tag, and when someone puts their cursor over the tag, the tagger's reason pops up in one of those little text boxes. If the tagger doesn't put anything, then the tag isn't added.
That said, I understand that sometimes there's something wrong that you just cannot put your finger around
; sometimes there's something wrong and you don't know how to accurately say what you're trying to say. There's also people not familiar with English (or well enough with English) who would have a difficult time with the suggestion I gave in this post.
edited 1st Jun '13 5:30:25 PM by DunDun
That is all well and good that someone somewhere can see something wrong. But if you cannot convey what that is those kinds of comments are at best next to useless. Like I said no one is a mind reader. You need to demonstrate, show, or somehow convey it, even if it is not executed well, what the problem is in order for meaningful action to be taken.
Also I am quite well aware of his post my point still stands.
Who watches the watchmen?How about:
- Issues that clearly violate agreed wiki guidelines (i.e. if the YKTTW was launched as is — which may happen — would get it "unlaunched" on sight). E.g:
- Eddie's "no lines of dialogue titles" rule.note
- Issues with a high priority of landing the new page in TRS or YCRS immediately upon launch. E.g:
- Confusion with sister tropes
- Too much overlap / duplicating examples of another trope
- Title brainstorming, especially when several editors agree that it needs a better title (e.g. snowclone concerns)
- Tropability concerns (including No New Stock Phrases)
- Issues with the article's writeup, but not its core definition or tropability thereof:
- Self-Demonstrating or Example as a Thesis
- excessive Analysis
- Word Cruft
- Zero Context Examples and/or Fan Myopia
- Failure to write about it in a neutral tone
- Ownership issues
- Last and least, "repair, don't respond" level issues which can be easily fixed after launch.
edited 2nd Jun '13 6:39:15 PM by Stratadrake
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.I think the main thing he was looking for was a situation where a tag is legitimate but would get downvoted, or conversely, where a tag is not legitimate (or at least not an issue) but would get upvoted. The post he was responding to claimed that "the legitimacy of a tag is [not] measurable by the number of people agreeing with it." My guess is, one example of such a situation would be fans of Show X claiming a name that references Show X is fine when it suffers heavy Fan Myopia and Trope Namer Syndrome.
edited 2nd Jun '13 6:47:49 PM by MorganWick

In the thread about how dysfunctional TRS has become
, Nohbody wrote:
Unfortunately, this sort of madness is creeping into YKTTW, which makes it easy to add tags like "Description Needs Help," often without even specifying what exactly needs fixing. ("Needs A Better Description" is often a prayer that goes unanswered, no matter how justified; most tropers just want to add examples, not rewrite the description.)
The "YKTTW Crash Rescue" thread, like Trope Repair Shop, has become a forum for complaining about tropes that fail to meet people's arbitrary standards, only worse in that it isn't interested in repairing them: tropes that are recommended for "unlaunching" (sometimes tropes which weren't created remotely recently) get cut from the wiki and sent back to YKTTW, where they can get ignored and buried far easier than in TRS.