Misused: The One With

When I brought it up to Wiki Talk discussions, I've found issue with the fact that it's a trope page and behaves like one, and yet there are work pages that rotely insert this in the description. While the subject of the trope is supposed to be that something is referred to as "That one with..." in-universe, some of the examples appear to lack any evidence even in official material that the work (or an element within a work) is referred to as such (could be one critic's or troper's opinion for all we know). And then one post pointed out that this is overlapping with In Which a Trope Is Described. That page seems to better encompass what The One With is meant to cover, and has a better written description to boot. I propose that we merge the two and make The One With strictly JFF (since it has that tab anyways).

And speaking of In Which a Trope Is Described, may as well talk about this too, possibly rename it since it's one of those early trope pages with "Trope" in the title.

Anyways, for my Wick Check:

In all:

• Four looks to be in proper use
• Three refer to Friends episode names or shout outs
• A staggering forty are not used in trope contexts
• I have no idea what to make of the remaining three

For something with more than 600 wicks, it's not good at all. The fact that 16 of 50 alone are laconic entries (and of the exact same series) should tell you something.

Edited by GrafVonTirol on Sep 29th 2021 at 6:46:40 AM

That other work pages insert it in their description is a harmless gag and In Which a Trope Is Described is a different naming pattern, but using the trope for something other than the name pattern is a problem. So opening and renaming.

I asked this in the previous discussion, but is there genuinely any usage of this trope that isn't a Stock Shout-Out to Friends? Because I don't see a need for a separate naming convention for that.

And like I said there, I'm not too bothered with using "the one with..." as a harmless gag, but it probably shouldn't be in Main/ if that's the case.

I'm okay with moving The One With to JFF and preserving it as a gag.

As am I.

Just for Fun sounds like a good option, though I wonder what are we going to do with the pages that use this in their opening like the James Bond franchise.

I imagine that some like that could be cleaned up. I favor more creative gags, like what various work pages do for Describe Topic Here to make it work-relevant.

I am fine with whatever solution which means it can't be used as a trope.

I'm in favor of moving The One With to Just for Fun, and I think In Which a Trope Is Described should be renamed (I think In Which A Subject Is Described would work if it doesn't sound too much like a stock phrase).

Edited by GastonRabbit on Sep 29th 2021 at 4:10:43 AM

Assuming there's indeed consensus to make this JFF (looking that way), what shall we do with the Main/ then?

for that

Edited by GrafVonTirol on Oct 2nd 2021 at 11:02:42 AM

Disambiguate between JustForFun.The One With, In Which a Trope Is Described, and ReferencedBy.Friends?

That sounds good. Also, I didn't know JustForFun.The One With already existed. (I still think In Which a Trope Is Described should be renamed due to the use of "trope" as a placeholder being deprecated.)

Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 2nd 2021 at 5:30:18 AM

Made a crowner, going to holler to hook it.

Hooked.

Is renaming In Which a Trope Is Described outside the scope of this thread?

Edit: Advertised the crowner on ATT regardless.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 5th 2021 at 2:46:14 PM

I suppose we can get to renaming, shortly after the crowner even. Even while it uses a discouraged naming convention, it's not a high priority.

Edited by GrafVonTirol on Oct 6th 2021 at 7:45:30 AM

Just for the record, there are a couple of examples that use "the one with..." naming scheme that don't seem to be references to Friends. Examples include this Seeking Sato example, The Harvey Korman Show, That '70s Show, Die Sendung mit der Maus, MLP, and Adventures in Odyssey. A few others, like the Fables or Frasier, don't fit this trope, but are still have self-descriptive titles. Should these be moved to In Which a Trope Is Described or does that trope not really cover titles as pithy as this?

For posterity, I edited the crowner so it says "The One With" instead of "Main.The One With." The latter is a broken link.

Edit: So apparently the crowner wick is broken either way for some reason. Reverted it for now.

Edited by Karxrida on Oct 5th 2021 at 11:29:33 AM

I guess just a few hours before the three day mark, and it's looking like one of the choices is rather emphatic. I suppose we'll have to do something about the more than six hundred wicks then. Whatever is used in descriptions could simply have the JustForFun/ namespace for example.

Well...I don't know about that. That'd be the case if we voted to merge, but we're cutting. Presumably, people don't think those little jokes are really worth keeping.

I mean, we'll see I guess, but I've never even seen this "trope" used in any other context.

It looks like we're past the three-day mark with overwhelming (though not unanimous) consensus, so it might be safe to call.

All wicks to The One Where have been changed/removed, and that redirect has been cutlisted.

I hate doubleposting, but just below 330 wicks left to either cut or JFF. At work right now, so can't go on dor a while.

Edited by GrafVonTirol on Oct 8th 2021 at 11:02:13 AM

What do we do with the Sonic page headers? I've just been cutting the ones I got to outright while the others I missed were redirected to JFF.

Edited by Karxrida on Oct 8th 2021 at 11:09:39 AM