There's been a lot of talk lately about how Tropes Needing TRS is getting too long and backed-up, as well as about how many of the tropes added might not even need TRS action at all. It was decided we should make a short-term project thread to clean out the page before we take any more drastic actions.
Some potential guidelines for what might need to be removed:
- Tropes added without enough discussion or a prior wick check (does not apply to issues such as Not Thriving)
- Entries that either misunderstand the trope or require more consensus about the trope's usage first
- Things that already have open or finished TRS threads
Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 23rd 2022 at 1:49:23 PM
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Anyway, any opinions on the tropes brought up here
before I do something with them?
Also, would we need wick checks for the Actually Subjective / Actually Trivia folders?
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
(she/her)
I think trivia items might not need wick checks for every case but I'd still prefer to have a wick check for subjective tropes because I think gauging usage would be still be helpful because there would be more to gauge than just non-Trivia/Trivia. (but that probably doesn't make any sense..)
Anyways, I think it's easier to go case by case.
Edited by MacronNotes on Apr 21st 2022 at 7:22:53 AM
Macron's notes
Angry babby
Sometimes you can get away with a "glance" wick check just by counting how many wicks are on Trivia or YMMV pages.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Of course, that assumes all of those wicks aren't just potholes... I don't typically trust glance checks because it's always possible there's something we're missing.
I'm not sure what to do for a "case by case basis", so I guess I'll leave them all without an asterisk? I can't be the one deciding what does and doesn't need one...
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
(she/her)
When I said case by case I meant via discussion but I probably hit ahead of myself with that. Thinking about it more. Personally, I would do a wick check anyways because it's standard procedure. I guess leaving them without an asterisk would be easier but I would prefer further discussion still.
Edited by MacronNotes on Apr 21st 2022 at 11:24:48 AM
Macron's notes
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
A'ight, works for me.
Should I remove anything in the "duplicate" folder, or leave it? I still feel like some of them are stretches and based on a misunderstanding of the tropes...
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
HoMM Fan
Well, I'm taking Dynamic Character to the repair shop, but that's mainly for it being Omnipresent rather than a duplicate of Character Development.
"Grandmaster Combat, son!"
Berserk Button: misusing Berserk Button
Any opinions on my idea here?
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
- Well, one example from Green-Eyed Monster that doesn't talk about acting on it:
- In Pinball.WH Odunnit 1995, Trixie sees Victoria as a threat to her (one-sided) relationship with Tony.
I assume that it's Love Triangles which have it the most, when they're not Murder the Hypotenuse and stuff.
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Maybe you could add it? It's something that needs a wick check to prove, though, so why not do that part first?
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
(she/her)
On the the duplicates folder:
- The Chick: I think we need a stronger argument than gender specific The Heart variant. The trope has been through the TRS many times for the same reasons to no avail. Remove
- Gun Kata: If only one of the types is a duplicate to Gun Fu then we can't argue for a complete merge. Remove but maybe move to a different folder?
- I Can't Dance / Sucks at Dancing: The entry for this one isn't written well and I think these two tropes are distinct for the reasons War Jay stated earlier. Remove
- This Is Wrong on So Many Levels! / Sick and Wrong: Poorly written entry but I do see the problem. The former trope is for any dialogue that stresses how wrong something is while the latter is a specific variant of of it. I don't see the need to have both (especially since they are stock phrase based tropes). I think this can stay but I'll try to add more meat to the entry so it's as barebones as it is now
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Alright, I'll remove the first three (but find another folder for the second if possible) and let the fourth one sit.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
It's either real or it's a dream
Should I add Toyline-Exclusive Character to Actually Trivia? It once again seems to rely on knowing a show's external merchandise to work.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Cleaning up now.
~Tonwen, I went ahead and just deleted Dynamic Character from the sandbox since it was out of place for the folder and you're already planning to bring it in, so it'll get done regardless now. Feel free to put it back though if you care, if you can figure out what folder it actually belongs in ![[lol]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/lol2v12_4863.png "[lol]"){kind=small}
HoMM Fan
Sounds like a plan, although I doubt it will need to go back once it finally reaches the TRS.
Now a lurker. Thanks for everything. | he/him
Question: can something be on TNTRS if it's already on the Appearance or Badass tropes sandboxes? I'm planning to add Badass Adorable, which is on the Badass sandbox, due to the trope being possibly too subjective and vague as brought up in this old ATT query and on the Badass sandbox itself. I'm mainly adding it to remind myself to wick check it at some point (or inspire someone else to). Is that allowed?
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Both of those threads don't exist anymore, so you might be fine.
Thanks for bumping this, btw. I'll see about doing another folder-analysis later.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Now a lurker. Thanks for everything. | he/him
Thanks. Sorry I haven't been as helpful with analyses of the tropes on the Administrivia page—some of them I'm not 100% familiar with and don't have a lot to say about.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
It's cool. A lot of it is a judgement call.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
How sweet it is
I recently added The Tetris Effect under Subjective or IUEO. I feel it doesn't affect the physical work itself, just the psyche of the player. Is this suitable? I could check wicks if needed.
Edit: Added to the WCP queue.
Edited by Berrenta on May 19th 2022 at 3:42:18 AM
she/her | TRS needs your help! | Contributor of Trope Report
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
In the sandbox I actually split those folders because lumping two wildly different concepts together makes no damn sense. So I don't mind you adding it, just remember to add it into the sandbox too so it doesn't get wiped when a swap is made.
I'll try and check another folder later when I have time.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
How sweet it is
Consider it done; it's under IUEO, as it's my first option of fixing it.
Edited by Berrenta on May 19th 2022 at 3:45:19 AM
she/her | TRS needs your help! | Contributor of Trope Report
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Here's another analysis. As always, I'm only talking about the ones that I feel are questionable.
- Acceptable Targets: The trope is supposed to be about the issue of which groups are okay to mock and which ones aren't. The trope is listed on YMMV pages, but most examples describe objective statements about the group being mocked in a work, not how the audience thinks the group is an acceptable target. If the creator thought the group is an acceptable target (which may not have been the specific intention) then that may be redundant with Take That! and Author Tract. It also seems like a Trope in Aggregate, but this is not very-well defined, since it relies on comparison with targets that are not acceptable, which are usually not specified by the examples either. A previous TRS thread resulted in no consensus. Is this a description issue, though?
- Boom, Headshot!: Description is quite clearly "headshots deal extra damage in this game", but examples are both that and "person dies of being shot in the head in any context", so there seems to be some Missing Supertrope Syndrome going on here. Not an issue with the description, just with misuse.
- Can Only Move the Eyes: The title sounds like it's about characters literally only being able to move their eyes, but the laconic says it's about characters being conscious while immobilised. The latter is also how And I Must Scream is commonly misused, so there's a lot of overlap. Did this only use the laconic? I can't trust it if it doesn't even describe the actual description.
- Care-Bear Stare: An attack powered by positivity, or anti-Mind Rape? While there's heavy overlap because an infusion of positivity is usually treated as mentally positive, the two are functionally different. Doesn't mention the description.
- Cut And Paste Translation: The title and laconic states the trope's meaning is supposed to be "slapping different parts of a work together in translation", while the description and examples make the trope look like example-allowed Macekre. I know there's gonna be a thread on this soon-ish anyway, but I still want to say that this feels misplaced or at least poorly written. Again, laconics aren't trustworthy and shouldn't be used as evidence.
- Development Hell: When this applies is clear for most types of works, but the same is not true for video game examples. It's been claimed that Vaporware is its counterpart for video games (and software in general), but it's also been argued that video games can go through Development Hell without being Vaporware. Is that a description issue, tho?
- Drop the Cow: The scope of this trope has been noted as being ambiguous. Notably, while the Laconic states that the trope is about "a spontaneous, silly event" breaking "a lull in the plot", the description seems to imply that only cows being dropped qualify. 50 wicks need checking. Again, don't trust the laconic.
- Editing Works: Nonstandard design. The concept (applying edits to raw footage) is very broad, like "hand-eye coordination." "Broad concept" alone isn't a problem, certainly not a description one.
- Fatal Method Acting: The given definition is, "A performer dies suddenly while on the job." There's some ambiguity as to whether the performer has to die as a result of their job, as the title implies, or if this extends to health mishaps not proven to be caused by their work, which includes many medical examples on the page. There's also some confusion as to whether the "creator" vs "performer" distinction is clear enough to separate it from Died During Production. Discussion. While there's definitely concerns here, I'm again not sure it qualifies as a "description issue" as described.
- Giant Flyer: Description is currently divided into five different sections, based on what role a giant flying creature has in the story. Should be looked at to see if these need to be merged or split into separate tropes. Why not look at it first then, to decide if there's even a problem? Otherwise it's just your bogstandard soft-split.
- Glamour: Description should be something that discusses how this is about any spell called a "glamour" because they share similarities, but they're not all the same. Or get a rename and a changed description to fit an idea of Our Glamours Are Different. This is making a statement on what the trope should be, but doesn't say what it currently is.
- Good Is Impotent: The definition used on the page is when a character is split into their "good" and "evil" halves, and the evil one is more effective than the good one. However, many examples describe good-aligned characters in general being ineffective. Misuse issue
- Higher Self: The page describes a superego type concept, but combines both "moral" and "objective" judgements. Listed on Definition-Only Pages due to the lack of examples. Really starting to wonder if we need a separate category for overly-broad tropes...
- History's Crime Wave: The page describes it as whenever a work uses historical villains. However, its title, image, several of its examples, and this discussion suggest that the actual definition of the trope might be about historical villains teaming up. The said description is unclear on that aspect. Misuse issue??? But the last line might save it.
- Human Notepad: This trope is simply defined as "a character is covered in writing", but the description states that it covers two distinct concepts: helpful notes written on one's arm/hand, and plot-relevant tattoos. These concepts don't seem to have enough overlap (aside from "text on people") to justify them being under one trope, and neither of them requires a character to be covered in writing. Another one that just seems unhelpfully broad, rather than outright problematic or confusing.
- If You Ever Do Anything to Hurt Her...: Description very clearly states that this is a method for one character (rival love interest/family member usually) to formally give up their "claim" on the titular "her". Examples both on- and off-page ignore this in favor of focusing on the "you hurt her, I hurt you" aspect. Misuse
- Instant-Win Condition: Examples cover two different concepts, based on either the trope's title, or the trope's definition. The title and image imply that the trope is about a rule, mechanic, card, etc. that allows a player to win without having to accomplish a game's normal win conditions. The definition instead describes a situation where once one player wins, the game ignores anything that could nullify that victory, no matter how little sense it makes. There are also a few examples that seem to be about victory conditions in general. Misuse
- Lead Bassist: Soft-split into four types, with at least two traits being distinct enough for a hard split - 1) The bassist is the lead singer, and 2) The bassist is the Face Of The Band. While the former concept is objective, the latter is obviously YMMV (Face Of The Band is already YMMV), so this is the exact same issue Stop Helping Me had before Annoying Video Game Helper was split off of it. Additionally, the description and on-page examples have a problem with Type Labels Are Not Examples, and there's often overlap between the types — for example, Paul McCartney is listed under three types at the same time in both the description (to illustrate overlap between the types) and the example list (regarding his musical career). Feels like something a bit messier than just a description problem.
- Like Is, Like, a Comma: The page looks like just a list of people who say "like" a lot, with no defined narrative purpose for doing so. May be redundant with Verbal Tic. Sounds more like it goes in the chairs folder. Or the redundancy one.
- Mean Brit: Does this refer to any British character with a bad attitude, or specifically expies of mean British reality show judges like Simon Cowell and Piers Morgan? If it's the former, then it might be redundant with Evil Brit. Discussion here. Is the description unclear, tho?
- Most Fanfic Writers Are Fans: The description is trying to say why people write fanfiction, but doesn't describe a trope. It's been suggested that it could be moved to the Analysis subpage of Fanfic instead. Seems more like a tropeworthiness issue.
- Mysterious Animal Senses: It only allows aversions and subversions, yet it's not listed on No Straight Examples, Please!. All of the on-page examples are about animal senses being portrayed realistically, which could be redundant with Shown Their Work and Furry Reminder. I'm not sure where this would go, but it doesn't belong here.
- Name-Meaning Change: The description says that this is when something's name is retroactively given a new meaning by its creators or other people in charge, but other examples are when it has a new meaning in an adaptation (which may fit better under Adaptational Context Change), and In-Universe instances of people deciding to change the meaning of a name. Also has a lot of overlap with Reimagining the Artifact. Misuse
- Power Creep, Power Seep: As currently written, this is specific to crossovers. However, the concept it describes (preexisting character's power level is adjusted to match the new work) is more about adaptations in general and has little to do with crossovers specifically. This restriction can probably be removed. More of just a minor change and not a massive description issue, but it might be fine.
- Set a Mook to Kill a Mook: The "status effect" variant and the "circular firing squad" variant are different enough that they should be split, or at least made internal subtropes. Another candidate for my proposed new folder.
- Spell My Name With An S: Used for a mixture of varying official spellings and differing fan spellings of names from works, particularly from works originally in a language that doesn't use the Latin alphabet (such as Japanese). Since it's an objective trope, it would ideally be used for official spellings only (i.e., official materials giving different spellings of the same name at different points). Fan spellings would probably be a better fit for a separate Audience Reaction. It also tends to be misused for any unusual spellings, even when applied to real-life individuals where there is only one correct spelling for a particular person. There was an attempt at a TRS thread to clean up fan spellings, but it was locked in a New Year's purge during the cleanup phase. Note that accidental fan spellings go under Viewer Name Confusion, which wasn't launched until after the previous Spell My Name With An S TRS thread was closed. This is a lot of text, and I don't think it's mentioned the description once.
- Superpower Lottery: Random power allocation, or just getting really good powers? The latter would be Winning The Superpower Lottery (which is a redirect to the trope). Description?
- Telepathy: Lumps together Mind Reading and mind-to-mind communication, which are two different concepts. Might need a split (the former is a redirect). New folder?
- Three Chords and the Truth: Examples don't seem to agree about whether the trope has to do with minimalistic songwriting or deliberately low-fidelity recording techniques. Misuse?
- Timmy in a Well: Examples seem to follow a broader definition than one specific "Stock Plot" involving some child in trouble (which is mainly associated with the Heroic Pet genre), though a significant number do parody that. Misuse
- "Tokenism" tropes, such as The Smurfette Principle or Token Black Friend. There seems to be confusion about what being a "token" actually means, and it gets confused for when there's only one/two/etc minority characters in a work, regardless of why they're there or how the narrative treats them (for example, a lone female character in a work where the casting wasn't gender-based wouldn't count, as it's just incidental that the character happens to be a female / the only female. Meanwhile, if in that very same work one character was made gay specifically to be more progressive or representative, that character would be a Token gay character.) Would need an extensive wick check for at least a few of the tropes, if concerned over the whole batch. This is definitely a thing, but IDK if it's a thing that belongs here.
- Youth Is Wasted on the Dumb: Description is unclear, seems to be "teens pressuring each other into dangerous pranks and other acts", but the examples don't bear this out and the title is way too broad for that. Trope talk thread Misuse?
- Zombie Advocate. The page is a mixture of three distinct concepts: humans advocating for actual monsters (as the title and description suggest); humans advocating for any non-human (as the page image suggests); and non-humans advocating for their own race (e.g. a goblin campaigning for goblin rights). And another for the new folder.
This... might've been the worst one I've dealt with so far. Not kidding. It feels like half the things in here are completely misplaced or are just complaining about soft-splits.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Now a lurker. Thanks for everything. | he/him
I added Drop the Cow. There had actually been discussion about the unclear scope—I believe amathieu13 was the one who told me TRS was a good idea. I remember it coming up in the Everythings Better With Cows TRS thread.
Maybe my writeup just wasn't good.
Edited by themayorofsimpleton on May 20th 2022 at 7:45:53 AM
TRS Queue | Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper Wall
Eh, up to you I guess.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness