Tropes Needing TRS cleanup and discussion thread

See, I was considering that too. It just feels like a lot more work. It might be best to make a sandbox and edit that as a group, and then swap it out when we're satisfied.

I was the one who added Sound-Effect Bleep. The description mostly describes what it was originally supposed to be, up until that small line that starts with “In television...”. Also, all the folders and links have sound effects in their titles.

The folders and links are just average Self-Demonstrating jokes. I'm not sure otherwise what your issue is, since it seems like the other usage is allowed? That or that sentence just needs to be axed as misuse, and you'd need a wick check if you do want to TRS this.

Why not move the ones without a wick check to the Wick Check Project folder for "tropes needing wick checks"?

I could do that, but the Wick Check Project gets much less traffic over all. I suppose I could add tags saying where the trope got moved to, and that a wick check needs to be completed before they get re-added...

I guess I just don't want to make any big moves without having consensus on that specific action. There's a lot of different ways to handle the cleanup.

Within those folders and pages, there are plenty of examples referring to regular bleeps. And yet, the definition of the original meaning is so precise as “the audio equivalent of a Scenery Censor”. A regular bleep is not heard by in-universe, so it is nothing like a Scenery Censor.

Alright- you still need to do the Wick Check though. And maybe reword the entry? It didn't give a good summation of the issue.

Edited by WarJay77 on Jan 18th 2022 at 5:15:00 AM

The real issue, which I think we've discussed elsewhere, is that a Missing Supertrope for the regular bleep would probably suffice better, so Sound-Effect Bleep could refer to the more specific version.

I'm probably going to go ahead tonight and make a sandbox to sort out the examples that need to be removed, and then we can figure out a plan for the blue-text ones. As for Sound-Effect Bleep, I think rewriting the entry and performing the wick check is all that's needed to keep it on the page.

A TRS thread for No Straight Examples, Please! wouldn't be a batch thread. It would be about cleaning up the list itself (such as moving listings for pages that belong on a different Example Sectionectomy index or removing listings for pages that don't belong on any Sectionectomy index); we wouldn't be touching the pages that are on the list.

The Definition-Only Pages TRS thread (link to thread) worked the same way a thread for No Straight Examples, Please! would work. This would be closer to how the threads for Scrappy Index and Writing Pitfall Index worked than the one for Wiki Tropes; the Wiki Tropes thread actually was a batch thread.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Jan 20th 2022 at 3:03:33 AM

TBH, the Definition Only one was also hard for me to keep up with, so even if it's not a batch I personally wouldn't be able to partake in it. But fair enough.

Edit: Wrong thread, ma bad!

Edited by WarJay77 on Jan 20th 2022 at 12:28:31 PM

I added Idiosyncratic Difficulty Levels to the list as I was looking at it and from a quick glance, most of the misuse is actually Easier Than Easy and Harder Than Hard. The trope is supposed to be for games where most or all difficulty levels are labelled contrary to the default "easy, normal, hard".

I can do a wick check after I finish Ill Girl, but I think it'll be a quick one. There's definitely misuse on-page.

I wouldn't mind merging all three of those difficulty tropes together, partially because Easier Than Easy is often misused to mean "incredibly easy" and Harder Than Hard is often used to mean "incredibly hard", and partially because proper examples of those tropes sometimes have names other than typical names like "Very Easy" or "Very Hard".

That said, it looks like the Tropes Needing TRS entry for Easier Than Easy and Harder Than Hard was added under the mistaken impression that Idiosyncratic Difficulty Levels's current definition is broader than it actually is (i.e., it was added under the impression that it allows a small amount of non-standard names counts, rather than most or all of them being non-standard).

Edited by GastonRabbit on Jan 22nd 2022 at 9:27:01 AM

Regarding @38 I'm totally fine with just cutting everything in pink.

Fair point, but I'd say that "some of the difficulty names are unusual" and "most of the difficulty names are unusual" shouldn't be distinct tropes; so that would be a matter of broadening Idiosyncratic Difficulty Names.

If ETE and HTH are not just about the names, then they are either (1) PSOC, because in any game with difficulty levels one of them has to be the top or bottom one; or (2) too vaguely defined, and examples should be moved to clearly defined tropes like Sandbox Mode, Nintendo Hard or Final Death Mode. Either way there's just not much of a trope on these pages.

Edited by Spark9 on Feb 2nd 2022 at 8:17:09 AM

I do agree that we should get wick checks done for them though and determine the actual problem we're fighting.

Was directed here. So, Berserk Button has misuse far behind being mistaken for another trope- some wicks are about a character snapping ONCE, and others are about them snapping in response to a threat/harm to their loved ones, which is completely reasonable and not really a trope (at most, it can be Beware the Nice Ones if the character is known for being a mellow Nice Guy). So I do think a wick check is necessary.

Orbiting and I have added a few wicks to the one you started, actually.

I added a commented-out note with a link to this thread, just asking people to stop by before adding things. I'll remove it once we're not actively doing cleanup, but this way at least people know.

I'd like to contest with your comment on The Cameo: in my experience with the site, I've only seen it used for the "character makes brief appearance" misuse. I didn't even realize it was supposed to be for celebrity cameos until seeing it on that page/in your analysis.

I mean, both of our experiences are entirely anecdotal. I only added that part because it caught me off guard. I've always known and heard The Cameo being used for celebrity appearances. The main point though was still that a wick check is going to be needed to verify how common the misuse is.

If we require a wick check to list these on Tropes Needing TRS, then isn't it now redundant to the Wick Check Project sandbox?

That's the thing. I don't know if we're supposed to remove those ones or not. I only listed them because without having a wick check done there's no concrete evidence of an issue, and it's usually but not always indicative of someone just having a hunch. But, there seems to be no real idea of how to handle the things that don't yet have a check done- comment them out, move them to a new folder, delete them entirely, leave them be? All things that have been suggested.

I wouldn't mind just scrapping the entire "completed wick check" folder from Wick Check Project and instead moving all "completed and problematic" checks to TNTRS, but that's a bit complicated. The push for having checks though makes sense because the page is super bloated right now, and if evidence of the issue isn't a requirement it just allows anyone to add anything without knowing if it's actually a TRS issue.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 3rd 2022 at 5:38:12 AM

I like to leave them be cuz that page is more visible than the Wick Check Project sandbox, so people may use the page as inspiration to do wick checks. I also used TNTRS as a sort of "check this potential issue out more thoroughly when I have time" thing back when it was a sandbox. (And maybe it should ha e always stayed a sandbox...)