Before making or posting in a thread, read the Trope Repairing Guidelines to see whether a thread you're considering making actually should be made, as well as what is and isn't allowed in an open thread.
This thread is a metathread for Trope Repair Shop discussion. Things like TRS policy, what is needed in a TRS opening post, questions about whether a certain topic is TRS-worthy and questions about why a thread wasn't opened go here.
Some guidelines for when/whether to use TRS:
- If the trope is fine, but has some bad examples, feel free to clean them up or to start a cleanup project at Projects: Short-Term
. Trope Repair Shop is for when cleaning isn't sufficient.
- If you think there's something wrong with the trope that systematically attracts improper examples, start a discussion at Trope Talk. Use a Wick Check to see whether there's an issue present (and if there is, what the issue is). The following methods are two possible ways to do a wick check (though not necessarily the only ways):
- You can go ahead with the Wick Check without a discussion if you know what you're looking for. While it's not mandatory, feel free to ask someone for help confirming that you got the issue and the numbers correct.
- Consult the Wick Check Project thread
to collect evidence if you need help.
- Depending on a trope (or non-trope) in question, a wick check may be determined to not be required, such as for tropes that are not thriving (per the standards for trope health listed on the Wick page). However, there is no problem if you want to do one anyway.
For a more detailed introduction to this forum, click here.
For related projects, see Wick Cleaning Projects and the Wick Check Project.
For a list of wiki pages related to thread outcomes, see the following:
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 12th 2025 at 11:35:13 AM
It might.
I just realized we might want to be having this discussion at the actual thread
. Oops.
Edit: Oh, that was Sync's removal? Okay. I remember removing one like that, but I guess it was a pothole and not a whole example.
Edited by WarJay77 on Jan 17th 2022 at 9:49:05 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
I posed the question there.
Edited by Arawn999 on Jan 17th 2022 at 6:54:56 AM
Well, I think it’s easy to assume that Fanspeak can’t be linked anywhere at all. I made that mistake before and other editors have as well. If you think a wick was cut overzealously, you can just PM the troper who made the edit to get their reasonings.
Macron's notes![]()
![]()
Yes, the page's thread would be a better place for this conversation.
Cycling back to the concern that brought me here, what should be done in cases where fundamentally important information about a character or setting — i.e. a character's name, how their powers work — go unrevealed in the work itself (or are at least left unclear) and are only revealed/clarified via Word of God and/or All There in the Manual?
I listed a few examples that I've seen included in works pages here
, but — especially when it comes to anime, manga, and visual novels, which often rely on supplementary databooks and/or interviews with the author to clarify or reveal things — there's a lot more where those came from.
I think Trope Talk is a better place for that conversation. That forum is for discussing and refining tropes and trope usage; this thread is more for discussing what's going on in TRS itself.
Edited by Synchronicity on Jan 17th 2022 at 9:37:55 AM
I'd raise the issue on TRS, but that's full up. ATT could work, I suppose.
I've been concerned about Official Couple lately. Is it for any time two characters are together in canon? That feels very, very broad and bordering on chairsy, but it's such a high profile trope that I wouldn't be surprised if this has been discussed and I just missed it. But I see a lot of character page entries that just have a zero-context "Official Couple: With [X]" entry and it feels odd.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.That's... a good point.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallI know that this has been brought up before a while ago. I always thought it made more sense for it be limited to the defining main couple of the work if tropes like Beta Couple exist.
Edited by MacronNotes on Jan 17th 2022 at 12:59:33 PM
Macron's notesWell then the name isn't as accurate...
I'd think it'd have more significance if restricted to a multiple Love Interests but one of them wins, situation...
All others presumably get together during the work with no drama? Or start already together?
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
Yeah, I never checked the trope page but if you asked me, it would be the couple that is set at the end of a story where there was a question of whether or not Character A would get together with one of several characters. Like, it's an official designation for works filled with Ship Tease and Will They or Won't They? dynamics
Edited by amathieu13 on Jan 17th 2022 at 1:37:36 PM
Yeah, if it's limited to couples with payoff in the narrative, then it would make more sense, though we kind of have They Do for that.
Official Couple feels like something that'd be Fan Speak or something. As for the "limited to the main couple" point, well, Alpha Couple is a redirect and would work better with that definition.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
If it's just "the main couple of a story" then Alpha Couple would work better, but it could get complicated. I was going to write, "description should make it clear that a work then should only have ONE Alpha Couple: the one in which the protag is in." But there are works with multiple protags and deuteragonists.
That said, since They Do exists, I would generally be ok with making Official Couple a Fan Speak term since they cover virtually the same ground
Edited by amathieu13 on Jan 17th 2022 at 2:09:05 PM
I noticed ~𝕋𝕒𝕓𝕤 completed a wick check for Mailer Daemon that they posted to Tropes Needing TRS.
Tabs, out of curiosity, are you interested in being added to the TRS Queue with Mailer Daemon?
Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper WallNah, this is a little trope, and I'm in no hurry to repair shop it. I might start a thread when the queue has moved a dozen spots or so.
We're still discussing TNTRS cleanup here
. Please stop by if you want to pitch in- right now we're trying to figure out what to do with tropes that need a wick check to prove the problem exists. I also went through deep-dives of two folders that have yet to be cleaned out.
![]()
That’s fine. I was a little too quick to post that anyway-something really stressful happened to me today and I’m going to be less active for today at least.
Please take care.
I don't plan to do this just yet (I'm very busy with my little crosswicking project
), but in a month or two I'll plan to do a wick check for The Lost Woods for an eventual TRS thread. My wish, as always, is to salvage it, though whether in a manner of adjusting the description to allow non-magical examples or migrating them to more appropiate tropes (so TLW only preserves examples of enchanced forests) is something that cannot be determined yet until the wick check is done (so the misuse can be properly gauged).
Helping with wicks for You Have to Have Jews, and I'm wondering if we should look at Nice Jewish Boy in the future. The laconic reads like "Nice Guy who's Jewish".
The description suggests more context behind it (as Wikipedia has an article on it), but I think there's definitely a more specific archetype that isn't really reflected in our definition, which at a glance seems to be applied to any vaguely nice, vaguely Jewish character.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.I just did a wick check for Plot Hole which you can see here. Before I add it to the queue or something though I just want someone to double-check and make sure my sorting looks accurate, particularly with the second folder, as I feel like a lot of things were a bit of a judgement call on my end. I basically tried to limit folder one (correct) to things that are inherently impossible not just because of continuity but also because of the pre-established rules of that universe, in such a way that it fundamentally alters how the plot should actually go. But I might've been too strict in some areas.
Edited by WarJay77 on Jan 18th 2022 at 10:24:31 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall

Gwen: I know, right? Somehow in yours I'm Peter Parker's dead girlfriend. Fridged off a bridge.
Does that work?
Edit: Hang on, Synchronicity was the mod who removed the example from Spider-Gwen citing the cleanup.
Edited by Arawn999 on Jan 17th 2022 at 6:58:00 AM