Duplicate Trope: Divorce Is Temporary

Not gonna lie, I'm a little disappointed that so many voted for the merge and against my idea, but I can live with it if it's truly what the majority wants. I'd just like to know what makes you think it's better to merge than to come up with a defined split.

Mostly to avoid redundancy — splitting off the subgenre will not be a healthy page since the genre hasn't been in vogue since the mid-20th century; splitting off the plot might result in confusion between that and Divorce Is Temporary OR might be the same but more specific as that. Since Divorce Is Temporary is so integral to the comedy of remarriage plot, I would rather just have the latter incorporated into the former (as noted, we have a similar case with isekai and Trapped in Another World).

Comedy of Remarriage was already defined as a genre and in two genre indexes, and the confusion led to this TRS thread. I am much more in favor of describing the Comedy of Remarriage genre on Divorce Is Temporary, like Isekai is described on Trapped in Another World.

I see your point, but there's an argument to be made that examples of the genre are still being made. For example, some film critics have called Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind a 21st century Comedy of Remarriage. And there's a The Legend of Zelda fanfic that fits into the genre.

Also, can The Same, but More Specific really be said to apply when one's a trope and the other's a genre? I say no, because they're two fundamentally different categories. Nobody would say a work is just a more specific form of a genre, for example.

Edited by ImperialMajestyXO on Feb 18th 2020 at 2:23:31 AM

I think it is, just because every example of this genre would also be an example of the plot itself, because the plot is what makes that genre. So, breaking it down into "works of the genre" and "works that use the plot" functionally leaves us with no real difference, except that the plot can be used in more than just the genre itself, such as part of a bigger story.

That is, unless there are somehow Comedy of Remarriage examples that wouldn't also be Divorce Is Temporary examples...? Which I'm not even sure is possible.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 18th 2020 at 5:30:24 AM

That would be an impressive feat.

Frankly, I don't agree with the argument that "this genre is only possible because of this trope, therefore the genre page is redundant". There are numerous genres that are only possible because of certain tropes, too many to list. Or am I just not seeing something that's staring me right in the face?

...You know, we really should've had this discussion before the votes were called.

It's because the genre is the trope. Sure, there a lot of genres requiring specific tropes- but those genres usually aren't made out of one specific trope. It'd be like having an entire genre of horror based solely around the concept of people taking a Deadly Bath. The genre is the trope, but the trope can be used in more than just the genre.

In other words, if there's no way to have that genre without using that exact trope every time, and there's no other interesting twist on the idea...

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 18th 2020 at 5:48:06 AM

This — take Screwball Comedy. It's formulaic, yes, but the definition and formula rely on many tropes: there has to be a Manic Pixie Dream Girl who pursues an uptight masculine man, and zany Farce ensues. You can have a Manic Pixie Dream Girl and an Uptight Loves Wild romance outside of a Screwball Comedy, but it is this specific combination of tropes that define the genre.

On the contrary, as defined, Comedy of Remarriage is a couple breaks up, fools around with other people, and realize that they want to get back together. Which... is Divorce Is Temporary. There's nothing tropeworthy in Comedy of Remarriage that Divorce Is Temporary doesn't cover without minor expansion by itself.

Edited by Synchronicity on Feb 18th 2020 at 5:02:32 AM

Took care of the subpages, and converted Comedy of Remarriage into a redirect.

We don't have much wicks to go through; only 68.

Again, I see the argument, but I think the logic it's based on is flawed.

Still, I suppose we can Agree to Disagree as I bow out of this thread (and maybe TRS altogether).

You don't need to bow out of TRS just because people keep disagreeing with your arguments; the whole point is to find good solutions and if people aren't convinced by an argument, it's no big deal- as long as the consensus can reach a solution. Just keep trying though and eventually you'll be able to better decide the outcome of a TRS thread; though to do that you need to be good at debate and supply a lot of evidence, just because, well... we can't use a solution if we don't know what it'll fix and why, ya know?

But yeah, don't bow out just because people keep disagreeing with you, or you'll never be able to get to the point where people do agree with you.

If you have a solid argument against our points, and can explain why you think our logic is flawed, I want to hear it so we don't make a flawed decision.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 18th 2020 at 8:13:35 AM

I added a sentence about the comedy of remarriage as a genre. It's bare, so feel free to mention the Production Code, rephrase, etc. if needed.

Edited by Tabs on Feb 18th 2020 at 7:37:46 AM

... Seriously, ~Imperial Majesty XO, please don't leave it hanging like this. The wicks haven't all been changed yet, so if you still think you can tell us the problem with our logic, please do.

I'm not trying to bog the thread down in debate, but leaving without thoroughly attempting to defend your argument and give us a reason to take your side only leaves us with the possibility that we are making a flawed decision and don't realize it. If you have more to say, please say it.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 19th 2020 at 4:05:08 AM

I have some reasons to believe this decision is flawed. Not sure if you'll agree, however. Still, here goes nothing:

1. This is a genre notable enough to have its own Wikipedia page, so is it really wise to reduce it to a redirect?

2. Like I said, I don't think that calling a genre a more specific example of a trope makes very much sense.

3. Removing pages is something we should try to avoid, IMO. Sometimes it's necessary or even unavoidable, but I don't think this is a case that justifies page removal.

4. What harm is there in keeping the pages separate?

5. Is merging them really the best solution, or just the easiest?

I can answer with my two cents for why I voted against keeping the split:

1. That the genre does exist (tropers didn't just make it up) is great. We Are Not Alone. But not every Wikipedia page needs a TV Tropes page. People finding TV Tropes via the redirect will still see an article tied to the comedy of remarriage.

2. I agree that a genre is not a trope...

3. However, I lean towards the practical here. Can't have a comedy of remarriage without a temporary divorce. They are closely linked. And so the temporary divorce page should mention that it is a trope used in the genre.

4. The pages were separate to begin with — Comedy of Remarriage being the younger — and because of the trope's tie to the genre, editors were confusing one for the other. I don't really know what differentiates a genre from a narrative instance. What makes the comedy of remarriage a genre and not a piece of media "merely" being comedic and containing Divorce Is Temporary? If this is a bygone genre, then there aren't modern viewers to trope it. This is a matter of TV Tropes's user base, too, and I don't think many users understand the difference, either. That the initial proposal for this TRS thread was "one of them's redundant. Merge them" describes the problem of separate articles well.

5. I'd say easiest and best. We are giving up an article, but I think if kept separate, there's going to be another TRS thread in the future again proposing a merge.

I posted a notice on the discussion page and took care of the rest of the wicks. I think everything's done here. I didn't cutlist Main.Comedy Of Remarriage since I wasn't sure if we were deleting it or keeping it as a redirect.

Since it's classified as a genre, I feel we can leave it for now.

Time to close.