Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment - Violations, misuse, and other issues

The Lego thing is inaccurate, per Snopes: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/lego-police-toys/

it does say they pulled advertising for said sets, so it still seems like an example, just needs to be rewritten.

bwburke94: Do we know for certain that the DLC was going to be announced during the June 2 livestream?

I haven't been actively following it, so I'm not 100% certain.

on UsefulNotes.The Falkland Islands, under the list of its appearances in media:

• Fuckland (aka F***land), a 2000 Dogme 95 film that centers on an Argentinian man's attempt to start a "sexual invasion" by seducing and impregnating a Falklander woman during a week-long stay there.

is, uh, is this a porno? this sounds like a porno.

The Wikipedia page doesn't make it sound particularly pornographic.

on Trivia.Disco Elysium, ~Dirtyblue929 reworded the following entry:

• Irony as She Is Cast: Felix Biederman, one of the hosts of the very left-leaning Chapo Trap House, voices Raul Kortenaer, a bloodthirsty and authoritarian mercenary who proudly boasts of committing war crimes.

to:

• Irony as She Is Cast: Felix Biederman, one of the hosts of the radical left-wing podcast Chapo Trap House, voices Raul Kortenaer, a bloodthirsty, racist, authoritarian mercenary who proudly boasts of committing war crimes.

nothing was wrong with it as it was worded, and "radical" seems like more weighted language to me.

Admittedly I don't have much of a dog in this race; I thought the original wording was perhaps a little too vague about the politics involved but I can see why it'd be reverted and I'm cool with it if y'all decide it's out of line. I'll also admit that most of my knowledge about Chapo Trap House comes from the reputation of their subreddit.

Edited by Dirtyblue929 on Jun 12th 2020 at 11:04:53 AM

I don't really see a difference, TBH. I personally wouldn't be insulted by being called a "radical", and the italics of the original version seem more judgmental to me, but those are both subjective idiosyncratic takes. I think objectively it's fine either way.

I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I just wanted to give a heads-up regarding Sonic the Hedgehog (2020) and its subpages; a popular member of the Sonic fandom gave a hot (read; not at all correct) take regarding the character Tom, a police officer, in particular misinterpreting a short gag to be a joke about police brutality... somehow. I think you get where this is going?

I'd look through the YMMV page myself if I wasn't planning on seeing the movie.

The issue with The New '20s and its sister pages still persist. Here's a crowner with possible solutions (anything I've missed?). For now, I've included only The New '20s and its Useful Notes subpage. The COVID article is not only the subject of another, more detailed thread, but there is also the issue of retooling it for Release Date Change and Troubled Production per High Crate's suggestion.

Crowner hooked.

I would probably say yes to both cutting and locking the page, probably because someone's gonna try to recreate it to soapbox about social issues.

For The New '20s, I voted "yes" on "get rid of the trope list". TV Tropes isn't a news site.

However, I only think we should get rid of tropes that were added to describe real-life current events. I think we should still keep a list of tropes that became popular in fiction produced during that decade, which would require mentioning the events that inspired the resurgence of that trope for context. Even if the event is controversial, as long as the example focuses on how it has made the trope more popular rather than how the event itself fits the trope, it's relevant to our mission.

So for example, adding something like

• Politically Incorrect Villain: The rise in political tensions have caused more people to view right-wingers as this.

would be wrong, but something like

• Politically Incorrect Villain: More authors have started to use this type of character in their stories due to increasing awareness of racism.

would probably be okay.

Might it be considered speculative, though? Assuming these things are going to stay popular and aren't just a flash in the pan?

Oh yes, I should have pointed this out: locking and cutting are not mutually exclusive.

I was thinking on writing an entry on Misaimed Marketing for PAW Patrol, specifically the incident that lead to the whole current controversy, but since it revolves around George Floyd, I don't know if it should be posted. Would this be OK to put on there, or would I be better off not posting it? I'm trying to play by the rules and do not want to get in trouble for something like this.

• On June 2nd, the social media accounts for PAW Patrol, a show featuring a police dog as its' protagonist, went dark for a week in memory of George Floyd, who was killed at the hands of police. This did not go unnoticed by the show's fans and detractors.

Edited by mimitchi33 on Jun 14th 2020 at 6:21:24 AM

I don't think that's an example. Misaimed Marketing is for marketing that's at odds with what the work actually is about (for example, toys aimed at children for adult-oriented franchise).

This is pretty much the exact opposite of marketing, since it's the show's social media accounts going dark due to the recent protests. They're specifically not marketing there. It might fall under Too Soon, but definitely not Misaimed Marketing.

Edited by chasemaddigan on Jun 14th 2020 at 10:06:06 AM

Too Soon also concerns things being censored, cancelled, delayed or pulled (in the case of reruns) in wake of current events. For it to be Too Soon, the platform would have pulled the post because it was offensive, like the case of the Power Rangers and The Ugly Barnacle examples. The post that started the controversy is still up unlike those two, but they haven't posted anything new since then. Would it still count?

Edited by mimitchi33 on Jun 14th 2020 at 7:46:50 AM

It seems that the PAW Patrol account hasn't posted since the incident where they caught flack on social media (the post said they were coming back on June 7th, but that didn't happen due to the controversy), so I added it to Too Soon.

Edited by mimitchi33 on Jun 15th 2020 at 3:39:03 AM

Yeah, I'm on locking The New '20s. Some troper just shoehorned a quote from Warhammer 40k, saying this and that, and I deleted it because of how would it be relevant to the overall decade. I would say that added works, planned and released will be added on the Edit Requests thread in the meantime.

Edited by alnair20aug93 on Jun 17th 2020 at 6:25:11 PM

The same person just added a different, yet equally pessimistic, quote to the page.

I removed the quote.

Yeah, that page desperately needs a lock.

I've asked the locked pages thread for a lock the two pages that are crowned.