This is a thread to discuss those Administrivia pages in need of a little updating- you know the ones. The ones that still cite rules we've long since changed, or the ones that don't properly cite our current standards. Some of them are even scattered in Main/!
So, this is the place to take those pages and fix them up with the help of the community.
For a list of current projects, see Outdated Administrivia Pages.
Note: This thread is not for asking mods to make one-off edits to Locked Pages, Administrivia-related or otherwise, such as requesting additions to an Example Sectionectomy index. Please use this thread
for that.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 21st 2023 at 9:12:02 AM
Shouldn't Sandbox.Future Works be in Administrivia? It's been used as an official index for years and has the Admin page type.
TroperWall / WikiMagic CleanupYeah, that would be more suitable.
Currently mostly inactive. An incremental game I tested: https://galaxy.click/play/176 (Gods of Incremental)
I agree. Septimus said recently that sandboxes are supposed to be for temporary projects, and since Future Works isn't temporary, I think Administrivia would be more suitable.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 21st 2021 at 10:35:46 AM
I got a rock for Halloween.Indeed.
Currently mostly inactive. An incremental game I tested: https://galaxy.click/play/176 (Gods of Incremental)Should the section in Example Indentation in Trope Lists about grouping works in the same series have a part added saying fan works do not count as part of the same series? This is mainly an issue for video games, but I've seen some for other work types too. I'd just like to be able to point to something when I clean those up.
Edited by ShinyCottonCandy on Nov 4th 2021 at 6:09:57 AM
My musician pageWould be good to explicitly specify that somewhere, yes.
One might be inclined to think that's too obvious to need saying. But people can be remarkably inattentive.
Suddenly I'm... still rotating Fallen London in my mind even though I've stopped actively playing it.Speaking of indentation, there are two commonly accepted things I've noticed, but I don't think Example Indentation in Trope Lists says clearly if it's the correct way or it's just a style choice:
1. Trope lists on work pages follow the "* Trope: Example." formatting, but work lists on trope pages instead follow the "* Happens in Work when." pattern.
2. When examples of the same trope occurs for a similar reason, typically both the trope and the examples get elaborated.
- Trope: Some grouping comment.
- Case A.
- Case B.
- Case C.
1 is a style choice on trope pages. 2 is incorrect.
Edited by wingedcatgirl on Nov 4th 2021 at 8:06:33 AM
Suddenly I'm... still rotating Fallen London in my mind even though I've stopped actively playing it.I've cooked up a scratch draft of a theoretical Single-Issue Wonk rewrite, this more specifically relating to TV Tropes.
(The short list of things people have wonked over was mostly added for my own amusement, and I'm not going to cry over it if people want to axe it.)
Generally speaking, being passionate about something is considered a positive, or at least neutral, trait. It's also something most of us have in common: almost everyone is a fan of something, and "fan" comes from the word fanatic. Sometimes, however, a person's affinity for one single thing — be it a piece of entertainment, a social issue, or anything else you can imagine — goes from passion to zealotry, obsession, or even monomania. When this happens, the Single-Issue Wonk comes into being.
The Single-Issue Wonk isn't necessarily a bad person at first blush. In most situations, they may be quite friendly, benevolent to newbies, and contribute productively to discussions. However, when that one subject comes up, they undergo a shocking transformation: they start aggressively pushing their position, sometimes to the point of starting a flame war, edit warring, or even vandalizing wiki pages. They might keep this up for days, until everyone else gives up, a moderator shuts them down, or they flame out in spectacular fashion. Needless to say, such people are also primo targets for malicious Trolls who want to pour gasoline on a fire, if they aren't actual trolls themselves.
The Single-Issue Wonk may take a number of forms. On the more benign end, you may have a person who's simply really opinionated and doesn't know when to let the matter drop. Others may assert that only they are right and only their opinion is valid. Yet others may be so convinced of their own "rightness" that they desire to punish anyone who disagrees with them, whether or not they actually have the power or ability to do so — if they do, the result is often horrifying.
Given the nature of this site, we've had Single-Issue Wonks wonking over all kinds of inconsequential things, some of which beggar rational description:
- Complete Monsters and Magnificent Bastards
- Shipping Wars
- Censoring Profanity
- Joel Vs. Mike
- Which fictional character would win in a fight
- Seriously contending that slightly bratty children in children's shows are actually sociopaths or Complete Monsters
- Troping and/or gushing over non-existent works
- Crusading against all mentions of using the bathroom on the wiki
Regardless of which form they take or what their Berserk Button is, Single-Issue Wonks are at best annoying and disruptive, and such behavior is naturally discouraged on this site.
What's much less amusing, however, are the Wonks who insist on Righting Great Wrongs or injecting their real-life sociopolitical opinions into almost every single thing they do or say on the site, whether it's warranted or not. A handful of these users may be genuinely well-intentioned (if misguided), but the fact is that TV Tropes is about storyteling devices used in fiction. The site is not, and was never intended to be, a soapbox or platform for any person's or group's ideology.
Unfortunately, a certain percentage of the Wonks determined to push sociopolitical agendas tend to push ideologies with intent to cause harm to others, with vulnerable minorities such as the LGBT population being perennial targets. Needless to say, we do not tolerate this site being used as a weapon against vulnerable groups. In cases such as these, it's generally best to avoid engaging the offending poster directly, and notify a moderator via PM or posting on Ask The Tropers.
While this page primarily discusses Single-Issue Wonks as relates to TV Tropes, they also appear on The Other Wiki and pretty much everywhere else, both online and off.
Edited by Graveheart on Nov 6th 2021 at 11:11:55 AM
A mention of the people who are obsessed with nonexistant works or episodes is probably also warranted.
![]()
I don't think we should mention RWBY outright; given the nature of the fandom, that will only encourage them.
(Plus, to my knowledge, there's only been one major incident in the last eight months, the Downer Ending vs. "Ray of Hope" Ending issue.)
2025: the year it all ends?If anything, the bigger issue is... children's TV shows. Not joking.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallI'm gonna suggest this for the Edit War page since I feel it would better fit there than the proposed rules for Edit War reports in ATT
.
- What constitutes as an Edit War? Note that the below points are just a general overview and can apply to any situation, not just to adding or removing entries. The bolded text is the instigation threshold.
- Add (Troper A) > Remove (Troper B) > Add (Troper A)
- Add (Troper A) > Remove (Troper B) > Add (Troper C) > Remove (Troper B) - Note that Troper A can be excluded in this case since their only "contribution" is just adding the initial entry. If you don't see Troper A participate at all, they can be left alone.
- What doesn't constitute as an Edit War?
- Add (Troper A) > Remove (Troper B) > Add (Troper C) > Remove (Troper D) > Add (Troper E) - Unless sock-puppeting or meat-puppeting is involved, multiple editors getting into a dispute over one entry is generally considered not an Edit War and would be best left to discussion to resolve this.
- Cases where the same entry gets altered with improvements or multiple editors add their own version of the entry without borrowing from the previous one. It depends on nuance, but if you're unsure, you can always leave a question to see if it qualifies.
- Adding context to commented-out Zero-Context Examples.
I guess that Single-Issue Wonk rewrite is fine. Can't come up with anything.
As for Edit War, I've provided a sandbox Sandbox.Edit War. Pretty sure I've already mentioned that part, but your rewrite may be clearer and is certainly more comprehensive.
Currently mostly inactive. An incremental game I tested: https://galaxy.click/play/176 (Gods of Incremental)I've made the suggested adjustments: Sandbox.Single Issue Wonk Redux
Does About Images and Copyright need a sentence or two about self-plagiarism? Last few weeks showcased that most fanfic writers may have heard of "plagiarism", but have no idea "self-plagiarism" is a thing that exists.
TroperWall / WikiMagic CleanupSure. We need more guidelines since we enforce this strongly now. IMO the page should just be renamed "About Copyright" so people know it isn't just about image copyright anymore.
Edited by mightymewtron on Nov 7th 2021 at 11:13:02 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Yeah, I'd prefer it to be "About Copyright" too. Current title can be a redirect.
The self-plagiarism thing is tricky, because it boils down to the idea that while one person might own their work, so would the wiki they publish it on. This means that someone can't just copy and paste their example from this wiki to All The Tropes to their favorite fansite without the copyright getting messy, especially when the websites don't share the same copyright.
Edited by WarJay77 on Nov 7th 2021 at 2:35:25 PM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Walli definitely think drawing attention to the licensing issues would help. a lot of people don't realize that's a problem and think it's fine to c/p as long as they cite and/or get permission. there was a poster in ATT who was being combative about the whole thing until i explained about licenses, and i think that's probably fairly indicative.

Added War Jay's rewrite to the draft and edited a section for clarity.