Follow TV Tropes
Has existed since 2008, but has only 10 wicks. That means Starving on Wick, so it's not performing well enough. Most of the examples on the page don't appear to come from works, just mentioning jokey sentences.
Opening this. This just looks like a pointless stock phrase that can be cut.
Yeah we can toss this one.
Cut. This is just something you see on people's bumper stickers and nothing with narrative significance.
Honestly, I don't think our first solution to a wick-starved trope should be to cut it.
It's not even a trope. It's a Stock Phrase.
Like, is there any reason to not cut it? Any value it brings?
Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 14th 2021 at 10:20:30 AM
This is not a trope. It's a stock phrase that appears on bumper stickers, and it would be completely meaningless even if you could find three fictional examples of it.
There's a reason Stock Phrases Are Not Tropes redirects to No New Stock Phrases — stock phrases made before the ban on stock phrases are not covered by a Grandfather Clause. (Dialogue-based trope names were grandfathered in, though, such as Why Did It Have to Be Snakes?, which is a trope I don't think I've ever seen misused.)
Edited by GastonRabbit on Feb 14th 2021 at 10:27:44 AM
~Imperial Majesty XO, if you object to a cut, then how do you think we can salvage it?
I'll give you until Wednesday.
Just so you know, I did suggest to merge Why, Thank You, X!, another trope that didn't meet the Standing wick total. I plan to cut/merge more tropes that are not performing well enough. At least I go for an objective numerical metric.
Edited by Piterpicher on Feb 15th 2021 at 4:38:16 PM
Yeah, some stock phrases you could theoretically retool to be about the situation the stock phrase is said in. That is not the case here so it has no troping value.
Nuke it with a Tsar Bomba.
Merge with Stock Jokes?
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?