The page for "Froghand" is a gigantic mess and i don't know what do with it

I found the page about this blog, Froghand while looking at some random tropes, and, to put it in simple terms, the page is a mess. I'm not going into personal opinions regarding the blogger itself, since i never heard about him before and he seems to be a blog version of Zero Punctuation who suffers heavily from Delusions of Eloquence, but my opinion on him and his articles are, frankly, irrelevant. My actual problem with the page is how the tropes in his page are portrayed and the presentation made there.

Starting with the introduction, who describes his writing as "it manages to be inspirational and sincere while still maintaining a good sense of humour, even when going deep into topics that would normally bore even the most interested reader." This not only comes as off as, for lack of better words, as blatant pandering, but feels like the writer of the blog itself is writing the article to boast about his work, or as seen later in the introduction, saying that "His audience is few but his acclaim is great!", which again feels like complete pandering to the man and pure Natter. The entire introduction could be cut in two paragraphs at least and honestly nothing would be lost.

Them comes the tropes, and good lord the formatting is terrible. Most of the tropes are a short, one line sentence describing the connection between the blogger and the trope followed by entire paragraphs who were copy-and-pasted from the blog without any modification. Not only does this writing feel lazy but it ends up filling the page with useless information that one could access through the link to the article itself containing the trope, which happens in every. damn. example. By the half of the page you will notice it feels less like a TV Tropes article and more of collection of Author Filibuster - it specially bothers me since the Zero Ponctuation page also deals with a reviewer with caustic opinions and yet does not fall into this problem by instead describing the relation of the tropes with Jim and his reviews in detail - instead of just copy-pasting what Jim said and filling the article with copy-pasted content.

Probably the worst section of the article is the one on Digital Piracy Is Okay - you know it's bad when i share the same opinion as the blogger on that and i still want to bash his head in for the horrible formatting that has been made in that section. It contains not one, not two, not three, but ten freaking examples of his opinion on the subject. A single example (Or two if they needed to elaborate more deeply on the reasons behind that view) would have been enough but instead they copy-pasted a bunch of his arguments, barely giving any meaningful commentary on them and the entire section feels like a gigantic Anvilicious opinion shared between both the blogger and the writer of the article - and whose message is as subtle as Atlas Shrugged .

Now comes the big question: What to do with this page? This isn't like Stonetoss and the blog is clearly within the scope of works that can and should have an article on TV Tropes. However as it stands the current page is little more than a copy-paste collection of Author Filibuster with practically no effort in explaining the tropes relations to the blog with very un-subtle pandering towards the blogger's opinions. Which means that the page either needs a culling of it's tropes and copy-pasted content or a complete rework from ground-up. What do you think?

Edited by Lalapolpolpol on Jul 6th 2021 at 11:13:06 AM

I took one look and my first thought was

1)Sandbox what's salvageable,so a brief sentence or paragraph describing the reviewer

2)A bare minimum of three or four tropes that actually apply

3)Purge everthing else

4)Lock for the foreseeable future, might have to have a word with whoever is responsible for the page's current state ,we can soon check

edit,having looked up page creator they are called 'froge' and only did edits in 2006,which includes creating that page,I would be tempted to dismiss as a troll page and cutlist it in all honesty

created a sandbox

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Sandbox/Froghand

Edited by Ultimatum on Jul 6th 2021 at 7:23:17 PM

It is a severe violation of Auto-Erotic Troping and can just be cut.

That is a logical conclusion based who created the page,though if we were going to save it I have created a sandbox

added to the cutlist

Edited by Ultimatum on Jul 6th 2021 at 8:17:02 AM

Well, i'll contribute to the sandbox page and see what i can salvage from the page. There are very few examples that don't suffer from TL;DR in the page but with some modifications there are tropes that can still be applied without the current problems that the main article has.

I figure this page could be improved by cutting all the examples that rely on quotes, if the topic is actually work-like.

It's a blog with no creative content. Doesn't appear like there's anything worth keeping.

Yeah, this is pretty clearly just some guy talking about his life and misusing the Blog/ namespace. It's not for just any blog you find on the internet, it's specifically for blogs that are used to tell a fictional story. And I feel like if it hadn't been done by the author himself, the excessive amount of quoting on the article could be considered plagiarism.

Cut.