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

I would say cut the example. It's basically saying it's an Averted Trope, but aversions are only notable in certain instances, and I don't think this is one of them.

Also, it's weird saying something like "I wish this had prison rape".

Just because it says something doesn't happen as much as it could does not imply that someone wants to see more of something. If I say an RPG doesn't have as many random encounters as it could, that doesn't mean I want to have more random encounters, and maybe just want to point out how it found a way to avoid this issue. I know those things are not even comparable in terms of subject matter and the entry is screwed up in general and should probably be cut as not notable aversion. But seriously, people need to stop assuming (as there was a similar problem with assumptions about someone wanting more rape on the P5 subforum).

Edited by Piterpicher on Jul 20th 2022 at 6:48:26 PM

Keep the offscreen mention as a Discussed Trope. I'm assuming the entry actually meant that Superjail (from what I can tell) has a lot of edgy sexual humor but somehow avoids Black Comedy Rape in the prison most of the time?

I already deleted the example, but if anyone knows the context of the joke feel free I guess. I haven't seen Superjail so I don't know the context.

And I also agree that pointing out a trope's absence isn't the same as saying you want the trope to be present.

Edited by GenericGuy2000 on Jul 21st 2022 at 5:54:09 AM

Has enough time passed since Gina Carano's firing from The Mandalorian to add this to the Memes page?

• Grogu knew the truth about Cara all along.^Explanation When Grogu attempted to Force-choke Cara in Chapter 7, some viewers guessed that he sensed darkness in her; after Lucasfilm fired Gina Carano, her detractors referred to her Role-Ending Misdemeanor as the darkness.

Edited by dsneybuf on Jul 25th 2022 at 10:31:15 AM

My vote would be to let sleeping dogs lie.

Some of the entries on The Wiki Rule seem like things we don't want here, such as (links deliberately removed):

• Bad Webcomics Wiki: Consists of reviews of bad webcomics. Obviously, YMMV on each review. I'm pretty sure we don't allow linking to it on the Horrible pages, so why here?
• Fandom Wank wiki: Internet drama. Now defunct, but this is what it looked like. The link goes to an Internet Archive version of the site. Drama importation is not allowed, and this is probably a violation of that.
• CWCki: An entire wiki about the life and work of C.W. Chandler, the author of Sonichu. I know we're not allowed to talk about her on the wiki anymore, so this should probably be deleted.
• Murderpedia: How else are you going to learn about murders and those who carry them out? Seems dangerous to have here.
• Social Justice Wiki, the wiki for social justice warriors.
  • Not to be confused with The Complete List Of SJWs, which is Vox's enemy list. (Vox Day, for the uninitiated, is a sci-fi author and publisher who got hurled bodily out of the SFWA for using its Twitter to hurl racist insults at N. K. Jemisin.)

Do I even need to explain these last two?

Does anyone else have thoughts on these?

I... am incredibly concerned about who put Murderpedia on there...

Good thing Vox is clarified in that section as vox.com (progressive news website that has many sister websites) and Vox Day (ultra-conservative author and personality) have completely opposite ideologies and strongly detest each other, despite their similar names.

Edited by Nen_desharu on Jul 26th 2022 at 2:44:56 PM

Eh, Murderpedia just seems to be a true crime thing. Some people enjoy that sort of thing.

Still off-mission, though.

TBH though The Wiki Rule in general has always seemed like nonsense to me and I wouldn't mind just scrapping it entirely. Through TRS, of course.

i feel like it's valid trivia but would be cool with the page itself being definition-only. examples can go on trivia pages. we don't really need an index of offsite wikis.

I agree. I actually thought it already was definition-only until today.

Edited by KUnlimited on Jul 26th 2022 at 10:38:18 PM

I mean, all the trivia links are also just "here's the wiki". I can see why some wouldn't mind it but I just find it pointless.

Maybe that's worth making a Trope Talk thread about?

I think those examples of The Wiki Rule are safe to cut. I'm tempted to lock the page because at least one of those was added this year, but I'm not going to do that without asking the other mods whether it's a good idea.

I'll just throw The Wiki Rule on my endless TRS to-do list and, assuming someone else doesn't do it first, I'll wick check it and bring it in eventually maybe.

I'm wondering, would Hindsight examples involving Trump still be considered untenable if they are openly discussed by a work's creators?

Personally I would consider that okay as it proves it isn't one troper's agenda, but then again, I do wonder if we would extend the same courtesy to authors biased against other presidents. I guess it depends a lot on the example.

Edited by mightymewtron on Jul 26th 2022 at 5:17:17 AM

It's brought up in this video by the writers of Breaking Bad regarding Walt's Misaimed Fandom and how he's a toxic narcissist who surrounds himself with neo-Nazis. He specifically brings up the way his previous show The Lone Gunmen accidentally predicted 9/11 and jokes that he doesn't want to be blamed for calling it a second time. Probably a bit too partisan in my opinion, but I figure openly creator-acknowledged Hindsight examples tend to have the most objective validity regarding their Hindsight nature.

Edited by AlleyOop on Jul 26th 2022 at 5:46:32 AM

Ehhh, that does sound a bit dodgy, but maybe as long as you specify it is the opinion of the creator.

But I think we also got creator-acknowledged COVID hindsight examples cut and I thought that was even less inflammatory.

I'm not sure if this is the correct thread for this, but I found this example on one Simpsons episode under Unintentional Period Piece

I'm not exactly what this is supposed to mean, how is the issues with Putin make this less far-fetched (if anything, it is even more far-fetched, as we see they DON'T want to be linked to Russia again). Seems just like a shoehorn.

Edited by ElBuenCuate on Jul 29th 2022 at 11:54:53 AM

I'm not sure if you could consider that a ROCEJ violation per say, but more a heavy inaccuracy considering that Putin is compared more to a czar than a Soviet premier by analysts. Either way, it can probably go.

This entry in DethroningMoment.Web Original seems iffy (bolding mine):

• Alex D. Large: In Jukebox Harry's review of Kung Pow! Enter the Fist, he superimposes the French Council over the plane that struck the Twin Towers. It reminded me so much of when Cinematic Venom did the same with his review of Jingle All the Way that I immediately clicked out of the video in anger just like I did with CV. I don't know what is it with Britons (CV) and Australians (JH) (and presumably other English-speaking countries) and being edgy and controversial to the point of going so far as to anger Americans, but these guys are the reason why I'm starting to become a xenophobe. There is no reason for non-Americans to treat Americans like this. It's vile and completely disrespectful.

Woah that's uh pretty bigoted and ironically xenophobic ?

Is this allowed?