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

I think the Eldritch Abomination page for Myth and Religion can stay, provided it's limited to things that are portrayed as eldritch in the original context

I also don't think "being invisible" is a disqualifier for an EA, personally

The page has been there for years without causing issues, so I think keeping it should be fine. The eternity, transcendence, and unknowability of God is a huge part of Abrahamic traditions, so I don't think there's anything objectionable about having a section talking about that. I know way less about East and South Asian religions, but at a glance they seem fine except for including Buddha as an example without context.

The most I'd change is adding a disclaimer at the top that the term "abomination" isn't a moral judgement and removing some incendiary term (like Mind Rape) with some less charged language.

I mentioned the EldritchAbomination.Mythology And Religion ATT query to the other mods.

If the page hasn't been particularly problematic throughout its history, I don't see anything wrong with keeping it, but yeah, that formatting's a mess.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 1st 2021 at 9:29:04 AM

Thanks!

This may all be true regarding the page being there for a while and that the trope doesn't have moral judgement connotations intended. Problem is, the trope is No Real Life Examples, Please! and the trope description does have a notable judgemental slant to it. Quoted excerpts:

"The Alien. The Other. The Inconceivable. The Eldritch Abomination is a type of creature defined by its disregard for the natural laws of the universe as we understand them. They are grotesque mockeries of reality beyond comprehension whose disturbing otherness cannot be encompassed in any mortal tongue. Humans suffer Brown Note or Go Mad from the Revelation effects just from witnessing their Alien Geometries. Reality itself warps around them. Any rules that they do follow are beyond our understanding, as are what motives they might have for any of their actions."

[snip]

"Physically, the Eldritch Abomination is only defined by seeming somehow “off”, hinting at their incomprehensible nature. They can range from humanoid to animalistic to physically impossible to inconceivably bizarre. However, common physical characteristics include similarities to internal organs, genitalia, animals with tentacles, or celestial bodies.

"The power of these beings can greatly vary. Some of which can be defeated by mortals, usually via a special weapon specifically meant to kill them, some of which are more powerful than gods, but are often still able to be defeated. In the Cosmic Horror Story genre, however, these beings are usually unbeatable, or are technically beatable, but will result in a Pyrrhic Victory with an incredible cost. The most often used element for a Cosmic Horror Reveal, at which point, expect such a creature to be the Final Boss.

"Subtrope of Our Monsters Are Different and Our Monsters Are Weird. Though note that a monster being really powerful, weird or ugly is not, in and of itself, an example of this trope. The monster must break the established internal logic of the work."

Sure, tropes are flexible, but there are also ties to things like "monsters" and "grotesque mockeries of reality" and similar things in the trope description. They seem part of the total package somehow. Fitting deities from existing religions into this kind of box seems a little worrisome — either that, or the trope description might need soft pedaling.

In short, it may indeed not be an issue — but I'm really, really unsure.

The main reason it's NRLEP is because it's impossible in real life and the real life subpage was being used to list animals that are merely unusual, not because of flamebait. Our Monsters Are Weird was made NRLEP because it was being used to list the same sort of examples.

Edit: Here's the TRS thread that made Eldritch Abomination NRLEP.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 1st 2021 at 9:59:46 AM

Can I propose that any religious and mythological Expy tropes be restricted to fiction? Calling other people's religious figures "rip-offs" of other figures sounds like a big ROCEJ violation.

That's downright blasphemous.

blasphemy only really matters if you believe in the religion. If you think it's potentially offensive that's a better way to phrase it

Huh?

I think what Emma meant was that you could've written it as "This could be potientally very offensive to people who believe in these religions" if you're not a religious person.

Edited by Cutegirl920fire on Dec 1st 2021 at 10:36:30 AM

Blasphemy is the act of "speaking sacrilegiously against holy things". The idea that it would be blasphemy to (random example) call Zeus a knockoff of Odin assumes the offence is towards Zeus, when there's no reason for any non-hellinist to care about Zeus. Religious Rocej/nrlep decisions are about the followers of that religion, which doesn't get the blasphemy listing

Edit: whoops, 'd

Edited by Libraryseraph on Dec 1st 2021 at 1:38:27 PM

Well if you’re being blasphemous towards someone’s beliefs it’s a massive ROCEJ violation. I think, at the very least, examples from commonly practiced religions in the modern age should be cut.

Edited by TheLivingDrawing on Dec 1st 2021 at 1:38:22 PM

On a different note, I added pit bulls to Big Friendly Dog a while back, stating that most are friendly contrary to their reputation. Someone else came and edited it with a far more negative slant with the comment “fixed it” which came across as a Take That!. I fixed it to compromise that some may be dangerous if poorly trained but most are friendly, especially if well trained. Does his edit count as a ROCEJ violation?

Edited by TheLivingDrawing on Dec 1st 2021 at 1:45:20 PM

It's not ROCEJ but it does strike me as being an inaccurate change; speaking as a former pit owner myself, my pit was great with kids and other dogs- she only started having issues with dogs when she got really old, and that was probably more of a defense thing than actual aggression since she was still sweet with people. I know that's not true for every pit, but a lot of online sources also back up your initial post, and the controversy surrounding the breed usually comes from situations where they're raised specifically to be mean fighting dogs, or from situations where another breed was mistaken for a pit.

To cut a long ramble short, I don't think the change was necessary or all that accurate, but it's also not a ROCEJ thing.

That whole RL section feels kind of repetitive. Every large dog breed seems to be mentioned.

Admittedly, yeah, that's true too. It might just be worth cutting the whole thing for being too common, and mentioning in the actual description that a ton of real life breeds fit the description.

I own a pit bull puppy named Blue, and my last dog was a pit-boxer mix named Lexi so I have a soft spot for pit bulls. Both are/were sweethearts (though Lexi hated other dogs for understandable reasons). And maybe we should cut it. Most dogs are friendly, that’s kinda what they were domesticated to be towards humans.

Edited by TheLivingDrawing on Dec 1st 2021 at 2:02:38 PM

This discussion regarding Big Friendly Dog would probably be better suited to the Real Life cleanup thread, which deals with general real life section cleanup even if it doesn't mean banning real life examples entirely.

okay i've brought this from the real life examples thread, i believe we need to completely remove the entire real life section of Would Be Rude to Say "Genocide". it literally reeks of ROCEJ violations.

adding to my previous statement i also believe that Misplaced Nationalism is literally a ROCEJ minefield. So much so that i think it should be cut all together.

Oh my God. Please cut those. Like holy hell.

Not unless they're all misuse. To cut them for being controversial we need to go through the Real Life cleanup.

i actually brought this up in the real life cleanup and they told me to come here.

for misplaced nationalism the page is so unsalvageable that it's better to cut it all together. On top of that it is already on Administrivia.Tropes needing TRS so we might as well bring it there before deciding to cut.

Edited by namra on Dec 4th 2021 at 11:51:27 AM

It's actually UsefulNotes.Misplaced Nationalism, but I have no idea why it's a Useful Notes page when it's seemingly just talking about nationalist flame wars.