Follow TV Tropes
Prodigal is listed on You Keep Using That Word under "meaning has started to drift in popular use". But I don't remember if that trope can be used to ding writers or if it's restricted to in-universe.
Prodigal is one of those words that is basically only used as a biblical allusion and not for its literal meaning. At most this is an extremely pedantic example of You Keep Using That Word, but it is certainly not CRF. Cut.
for kicking out the "prodigal" example.
Edited by Albert3105 on Dec 10th 2019 at 7:49:35 AM
Anime & Manga, the example from Detective Conan:
In Serinox' opinion, it isn't an error:
Edited by Ai-Fan on Dec 11th 2019 at 6:16:45 PM
These examples on SMG4's Mario Bloopers seem more like nitpicking than actual CRT:
As all of those are about works, they belong under Cowboy BeBop at His Computer anyway, not Critical Research Failure.
Comic Books entries appear to be inspired by Linkara remarks. Let's fix it.
I can confirm Marville's author made these wrong claims, but I think the entry needs rework. What about the Superman example?
Isn't this Series Continuity Error or Continuity Snarl?
Edited by Tomodachi on Dec 13th 2019 at 9:38:24 AM
The last one is definitely misuse. I should also mention that one of those examples is Ape Shall Never Kill Ape; not sure if this is grounds for cutting.
From Sonic X.
Critical Research Failure: The series is supposed to be set between the anime's Chaos and Shadow sagas. However, it depicts Station Square as being in its prime, even though it was supposed to be in ruins following the former saga's events. When fans brought up this massive continuity error, the writer admitted that the reason for it was that he hadn't watched the episodes, so he was unaware the city had been decimated. Eventually, the comic came into its own, with more influence from the mainline comic books than the anime.
Should I cut this and put it on Continuity Snarl on the main page?
Yes. Anything regarding continuity errors and the like can be removed without needing to ask.
Examples from YMMV.How It Should Have Ended
From YMMV.The Simpsons S 2 E 4 Two Cars In Every Garage And Three Eyes On Every Fish
The example seems to argue with itself. Think this can safely be cut.
Let's run a little thought experiment I like to call "if only the writers had researched [blank]." If the resulting sentence is ridiculous nonsense, that's a pretty strong indicator that the entry is shoehorning and should be cut. Ready? Let's go!
The Aquaman entry argues with itself, and I wouldn't consider the exact marketing terminology used by Disney to be a matter of common knowledge, so let's cut those as well.
The Spider-Man thing seems more like Artistic License Played for Laughs to me than an actual error, based on the writeup.
Yeah, all the examples seemed iffy. Removed theme all. Wanted a second opinion just to be sure.
YMMV.The Nostalgia Critic S 3 E 26 has similar examples of reviewers missing things in the film, which I don't think fits the definition of the trope.
Edited by costanton11 on Dec 19th 2019 at 7:14:51 AM
Seconded. Those both look cutworthy to me.
Edited by HighCrate on Dec 19th 2019 at 5:20:43 AM
Here are the other Nostalgia Critic Subpages with CRF wicks.
From a cursory view, most seem like shoehorning. Only the first two seem to be about real life things that are not the subject of reviews, but I'm not sure if they're common enough knowledge to qualify.
Edited by costanton11 on Dec 19th 2019 at 7:47:20 AM
Yeah, those all look pretty bad.
To finish up this topic, here's the examples in the main YMMV page:
Basically more along the lines of what was already discussed.
Yup, all bad.
Those research failures are legitimate - just badly worded and too opinionated, like trying to justify Doug's mistakes or calling him worse than he is.
Edited by Tomodachi on Dec 20th 2019 at 5:03:45 AM
They still don't meet CRF criteria because some, like the Tom and Jerry example are about a work instead of the real world, and others, like the CGI example are not something the bulk of the audience would be expected to know.
But it is not wrong to point out the error. Or is it?
Perhaps not, but they don't fit Critical Research Failure. Cowboy BeBop at His Computer exists, though, so there is a place to put errors regarding knowledge of other works.
Edited by ShinyCottonCandy on Dec 20th 2019 at 9:10:38 AM
Right, CRF is not "person gets something wrong ever", it's "person gets a basic fact wrong, or gets something wrong that they could've learned with a quick google-search".
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?