Headscratchers Cleanup

The show is a review show without any overarching story, so it can probably be cut.

Edited by costanton11 on Oct 5th 2021 at 8:08:11 AM

I could see some value in Headscratchers for a review show, to ask clarifications about, say, the use of academic jargon. But I agree this one has little value, or little of value that would not belong elsewhere, like on TNG's pages. The only entry that looks valid is about his schedule. So do I have permission to cutlist it?

Maybe see if anyone else says anything.

On Headscratchers.Indiana Jones, there’s an entry regarding the various mooks that seems more like a relic from when it was called Just Bugs Me. It’s the third entry on the page.

Edited by costanton11 on Oct 12th 2021 at 3:31:25 AM

I see you deleted it. It started with "INFURIATING", so it's very much a thing of the IJBM days.

I removed some other entries that had similar issues.

What do we do with this one from Portal ?

I've launched the game and checked, AFAIK, that the double orange portal thing is untrue.

If it's false, we can probably just cut it.

I found this on Psycho:

• Why didn't Norman call the cops when he was a teenager and his mother was abusing him (aside from that there would be no movie(s) if that was the case.)

Maybe it's just me, but this seems a bit snarky.

That Headscratcher is just a nitpick that more or less answers its own question. It reminds me of one Headscratcher I saw that went "Why did X happen, apart from Rule of Funny?" (The answer, of course, is Rule of Funny). I'd have no problem with cutting it.

Well can we cut entries just for being nitpicks? My issue was the way it was written with the "otherwise the movie wouldn't happen" bit, it came off as snarky to me.

It would sound less nitpicky if you just cut out the parenthetical part. "There wouldn't be a movie otherwise" is the answer to, roughly, 100% of Headscratchers questions.

Go ahead.

Edited by Tabs on Oct 28th 2021 at 9:59:03 AM

Would it be okay if I just cut that part?

I found a super long headscratcher on the Fairy Tail page (I would post it here, but it's literally a good page and a half long). I've already been advised to just cut the whole thing, but I'd like to get a second opinion on the matter. The headscratcher in question is the first entry under the Tenrou Island folder.

Edit: After careful consideration, I've decided to simply delete the entire entry.

Edited by SubversionStation on Oct 30th 2021 at 9:39:00 AM

The entirety of Children Of The Mind reads as follows:

• Why does Children of the Mind end exactly at the point when it was finally getting interesting? What's the thought process? "Well, Ender's obnoxious adopted family who don't do a goddamned thing but argue about stupid shit are finally shutting up so we can meet the potentially fascinating aliens and find out the answers to several ongoing mysteries. I think we're done here."
  • I wrote the exact same thing in They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot. And if the Shadow series has taught us anything, it's that Card can write a series without Ender. Maybe now that the Shadow series is done he'll finally get back to it, though I'm worried about the quality.
    • According to Wikipedia, the next shadow book "Shadows in Flight" will take place after Children of the Mind, with Ender's and Bean's children meeting up for the first time; that is, apparently Bean's children pulled the same trick Ender and Valentine did, skipping 3000 years (plus the few years for the sequels to play out) and showing up after Children of the Mind ended.
  • Also, one way of looking at it: The story is about Ender. Ender just died. Story ends.
    • Actually, no. He didn't die.
    • Depends on your definition of "death". His soul survived and fled to another body, true, but Ender's body died and his personality, thoughts, memories, etc. vanished along with it. For all intents and purposes, Ender's dead.

This seriously reads like it was copied from an It Just Bugs Me page (and it probably was, given that there's only one edit on the page and all of this text was added at once). Also, "why does this end just as things start to get interesting?" sounds like both meta and complaining.

I found this entry on Red Dwarf:

• I honestly don’t know why Red Dwarf fans adore and praise Rimmer as a character. He’s a misogynist (and technically a borderline rapist), and it’s heavily implied (if not outright stated) that he’s a fascist as well. He certainly has a superiority complex. He’s the manifestation of everything unlikeable in a person. In universe, he’s disliked for a reason. In fact, that’s the central theme of his entire character. He’s a smeghead, he’s a git. Chris Barrie himself even says this. You like him, because you like to hate him. But romanticizing him as you call yourself ‘Rimmer’s girl’ or ‘Arnie’s lass’ or similar things like that is extremely problematic. Admire Chris Barrie as an actor, sure (without being creepily obsessed of course), but you’ve got to remember the point of the Rimmer character. He’s supposed to be a smeghead.
  • Draco in Leather Pants, I guess.
  • It's probably his backstory and his refusal to give up on his dreams that endears people to him. As he said to The Inquisitor, "Yes, I admit I'm nothing. But from what I started with, nothing is up."
  • Not to mention both versions of him showed considerable growth. One grew into a reluctant but genuine hero, and the reborn one managed to go into a mirror universe where his life was excellent, and didn't hesitate for a moment to leave it to go help everyone else, even though apparently they all went into the mirror universe after him.
  • There's sort of two questions here - why Rimmer might be regarded as a character in general, and why specifically the fanbase like him. As for the first. Rimmer is a great character in the sitcom mould (and in a great sitcom relationship). Without getting too deeply into hierarchy/four-clown band stuff, sitcom protagonists tend to work best when they are strongly motivated but by venal desires. Rimmer's pride, vanity and lust motivate him and makes plots happen. The dynamic of these as they but up against his foil, Lister, is the engine of the show. The really tricky thing is making a character all of those things but still watchable and enjoyable (even likeable). That's partly format: you can make your character pretty despicable as long as the premise of the show includes them being called out by other characters, and/or circumstances always foiling their plans. As long as the universe hates them, the audience doesn't have to. As for the fanbase, the way in which devoted fans relate to something is its own thing with its own rules. The attitude of the casual viewer is ruled by broad impressions formed on a straight-forward fairly surface reading of the text as presented. Fandom chews up and spits out a franchise, introduces fanon, becomes overfamiliar with things that were only meant to be viewed fleetingly or at a surface levelde- and reconstructs ideas to suit itself etc. Casual viewer consesus is based on a conversation between text and viewer. Fandom consensus is based on a conversation between fans. So more personal responses like headcanons and crushes come to the fore. Hardcore fans probably like Rimmer a lot because he has a lot of potential to mine for this kind of fandom consumption. He works as a character to the normal sitcom viewer because he's a driven, venal man redeemed by his buttmonkey past and present, and played by a talented and charistmatic actor. The fandom loves him because there's enough there to turn him into a lot of the things fandom loves - cute, troubled, redeemable etc.
    • You do have to wonder if Rimmer would be quite so popular if Chris Barrie looked like the back end of a bus, or if episodes like Terrorform didn't exist.

This sounds like a hold-over from the It Just Bugs Me! and on top of that, it feels a bit bashy too, even if the points raised are valid.

Plus it's meta (talking about the fandom which isn't allowed )

Both of the last two entries should get the snip.

Found this on the Headscratchers.The Legend Of Zelda Breath Of The Wild; compressed in folder form because it's a bit of a behemoth:

Edited by Wafer on Nov 9th 2021 at 3:44:59 AM

Bumping because I have no clue what to do with this

Bumping again...

It is an honestly-asked headscratcher... just a really, really long one. If you're willing to dice it so it's the actual questions and answers and not first-person natter, go ahead.

Edited by Tabs on Nov 20th 2021 at 9:03:37 AM

At the very least, in the 11th bulletpoint I would get rid of the examples given of kings jure uxoris and consort, those bloat the entry to a ridiculous degree to the point where it's unreadable.

That's a good suggestion. Unfortunately, I have a really hard time reading things that are too long (which is why we're here) so I need someone to point me to the right direction(s). Any more ideas on how I can chop this one down?

I think you can combine bullet points 11 and 12. I'd also get rid of the arguing and then apologizing in the first few bullets. Here's my attempt at cutting down bullet point 11 (combined with 12):

Edit: You obviously don't have to go with this, it's just my attempt.

Edited by NervousShark on Nov 21st 2021 at 2:02:44 PM