The main reason I'm iffy about making it an "official" rule is because I do think it would force us to reorganize older pages. Not like we'd have to go on a massive spree, but suddenly it would mean that noticing an unalphabetized page and not spending the time to fix it would be like noticing a page with bad indentation or a ZCE issue — You don't technically have to do it, but it'd be strongly encouraged.
People will be more or less expected to start enforcing this rule as much as possible — which takes time and effort away from other cleanup issues and again does put some expectation on people to fix these pages when they notice them, lest they be contributing to the Bystander Effect, and forcing more cleanup later on.
I just don't want people to feel like they're forced to clean up all these pages, which is what will happen if alphabetization becomes mandatory. Again, it won't exactly be a big enforced cleanup effort, but that doesn't mean people won't still have to clean these pages, while currently it's optional and the people who are doing the alphabetizing are doing it because they legitimately want to.
Edited by WarJay77 on Nov 22nd 2022 at 3:52:54 PM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallEncouraging consistency sounds like a positive thing to me, and people not being able to manage their own time between multiple interests is imho their problem.
As with ZCE, or any maintenance really, if people don't have time for it, they don't have to do it, either they can do it in freer time or ask someone who specializes in it.
TroperWall / WikiMagic CleanupEhhhh, I really hate the idea of the "ask someone who specializes in it" stuff. People pull that trick on the ZCE thread all the time by posting pages that are extremely simple jobs and expecting everyone else to do the work. If you want a job done, it should be your job to do it, not to just ask someone on a cleanup thread to fix it for you. It's unfair to ask people to do the work if you're too lazy to do it; obviously there are exceptions (like if you're busy or need help), but if it's just because "you don't feel like it", that's a you problem and you shouldn't just make other people do it.
And there's a difference between "encouraging consistency" and "requiring that all old trope pages are updated to fit a current standard" which is a massive, time consuming undertaking that, yes, I feel is much less important than things like wick cleanup, ZCE cleanup, and natter cleanup. Maybe that's just me, but I don't think it should be a priority, which it'd become if it's an actual rule (since leaving up the older unorganized pages for too long will only lead to issues down the road in the same way that older work pages lead to issues if they're not cleaned).
Like, if you want to go and start alphabetizing older trope pages, go for it. More power to you. I just don't like the idea of making it a requirement, because the current system is fine and adding a new rule will only demand more effort and time.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wallsince this was brought up in ATT, came here to restart the convo because I agree with Amonimus. Going back to fix older pages will be time consuming but that only gets harder if we don't enforce alphabetization of new pages, since more pages will launch unalphabetized.
I also don't see it all that different from any of the other massive undertakings we do, like when big tropes get reworked or split or disambig'd and need to be wick cleaned. yeah it takes time, but...idk the site isn't going anywhere. There wouldn't be a deadline that we need to meet, it's just a standard that should be met in perpetuity. I don't think it needs to be more complicated than "don't launch new pages un-alphabetized and if you see an unalphabetized page in the wild, fix it if you can or add it to this index for 'pages that need alphabetization' and just like 'pages that need wicks' etc, it'll eventually be gotten to."
Edited by amathieu13 on Aug 29th 2023 at 5:58:54 AM
Most new pages I see are already alphabetized and people often bring up alphabetization on TLP so I don't really see new pages being added to the pile.
Alphabetization is already preferred as it is but if it's to be mandatory, I still don't think it's something worth reprimanding/suspending people for and I am personally neutral about non-alphabetized pages as they don't bother me. As a mandatory rule, I don't really think there's a need to make it one. It's more or less a preference thing and doesn't really effect the quality of trope pages.
Edited by MacronNotes on Aug 29th 2023 at 9:05:55 AM
Macron's notesI mean, I just don't see it as a priority that requires fixing. Unlike with the other rules, a page being improperly alphabetized is not inherently bad (it's messy and unappealing but some people prefer to just be able to plop their example at the end and move on). I object mostly to the idea of setting up strict standards for things that are not yet causing serious harm, because it makes those issues a priority despite them not actually needing to be one.
IDK if I'm explaining it well but to me it's much like how we don't rename tropes unless there's provable misuse. We don't want to spend time and energy on efforts that aren't actually necessary when we can instead focus on the stuff that is. Like, we already allow people to alphabetize pages if they want to anyway so what's even the point of making it a rule, if the people who care about this are already working on it because it's a free action?
Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 29th 2023 at 9:06:57 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallI mean, alphabetization issues do keep popping up, though. We can't link ATT queries, but just search "alphebetization" and a long list of queries relating or citing alphabetization issues and questions shows up. And there's an entire Long Term Project thread dedicated to alphabetization [1]
. If pages don't have to be alphabetized then I'm not sure what the point of our alphabetization policy is. I'm assuming the goal is to one day have a site that's fully alphabetized no? The only way we even start making progress to that is if we stymie the creation of non-alphabetized pages.
I don't think fixing alphabetization on older pages should be the focus, in the same way a troper coming across a page with ZC Es or indentation errors and not fixing them isn't bannable or a major concern. It would be nice, but it's not punishable. However, a troper creating and writing ZCE or using poor indentation is an issue because we have standards that are enforced. Similarly, creating pages that aren't alphabetized should be mitigated since poor alphabetization can cause issues with readability and unnecessarily adding duplicate tropes to pages. The policy would be directed at limiting future offences and to be a guideline to those who do wish to help site-wide alphabetization.
Edited by amathieu13 on Aug 29th 2023 at 6:23:38 AM
Usually those questions pertain to indexes and the like though; obviously they extend to alphabetized trope pages but I think sorting it into an index is the priority for most people.
That said I can't even remember the last time a trope page launched from the TLP without being alphabetized first; granted I haven't exactly gone and checked but I think people tend to just do it anyway, so it really is just the older pages.
Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 29th 2023 at 9:23:52 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallYeah, How to Alphabetize Things is specifically for indexes and work pages because alphabetization on those pages is mandatory.
Macron's notes
The pinned post is misleading, then: "On this site, I've often ran into the problem of not being able to find anything from a giant list of examples on a trope page because it wasn't alphabetically ordered (this is a bigger problem with example pages because they are so large)."
![]()
So I don't really get the logic of "most new pages launch alphabetized anyways so not having a policy is fine". The ATT
that re-started this convo came from a discussion on TLP about alphabetizing pre-launch. That's what the new policy would be geared towards: eliminating the need for those convos and ensuring future pages are alphabetized from the outset so that the long-term goal of alphabetizing the site can actually be feasible.
Edited by amathieu13 on Aug 29th 2023 at 6:34:39 AM
I mean, to be fair the OP was specifically asking if it was a rule because they were erroneously told that it was. And as of now it's not. So it wasn't a discussion on if these pages should be alphabetized but if they must be alphabetized, and eroock even responded to that post at the TLP by explaining that they were already planning on alphabetizing it later on anyway, just after-launch instead of pre-launch.
The fact that it would mostly only be the old pages is part of why I'm concerned over making it a rule; such a rule wouldn't do much more than require the older pages get converted, because newer pages are almost always going to be alphabetized anyway. So the rule would only be retroactively saying that the older pages are doing it wrong, not actually making sure the rule is being enforced on new trope pages because no such enforcement is necessary because it's already the standard.
Do you get what I'm trying to say?
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
Not really. I'll try to pinpoint where I'm having issues.
- Purple: I don't see why this is an issue. Or put differently, this is as much of an issue as ZCE, indentation, and other formatting issues on older pages. People are encouraged to fix them on older pages, but very few (if any) are being banned for 10+ yr old ZCE and indentation mistakes. As in, they made an edit 10 years ago that had those issues, someone found it today and reported them, and they got banned. At best, they'd get a notifier, but in most cases people don't even bother and will just comment them out/fix the indentation issues and move on. Because the point isn't really about punishing tropers for past mistakes as it is about preventing newer mistakes from happening to establish a uniform and easily readable/navigable page. No one is being forced to fix or correct them and no one is being retroactively punished.
- Pink: "Almost always" means there are situations when they aren't. And so the policy would apply for them. I don't see why we wouldn't want to reduce that to completely 0 by having a policy people can point to and reference out the gate. Because again, if the goal is to one day have the site alphabetized, 0 launches w/o alphabetization >>> few launches w/o alphabetization.
if people are already treating it as de facto policy, then it'd help curb any further confusion by just making it into policy.
Edited by amathieu13 on Aug 29th 2023 at 7:04:58 AM
I mean, I'm not even sure if it is a goal. Or at least, it's not a goal everyone finds necessary. It's a goal some people have and everyone else is more or less apathetic to it. So your argument is based around the idea that it's something we're aiming for when in actuality it's not something that's ever really been solidified as a "thing we want". Meanwhile I'm just going from the perspective of "is this something we actually want to actively enforce, especially if not everyone even finds it to be a problem?".
It's not really being treated as de facto policy, it's just a preference people tend to have, and one that people are allowed to enact if they see fit. People would like the pages to be alphabetized but it's not enforceable and nobody actually treats it like it is (save for the lone troper who claimed it was a rule).
Speaking personally? Yes, I like the pages being alphabetized. I think it's a good idea to do so. But I also don't particularly see it as a thing to aim for unless it's somehow necessary for V.2 or something down the road.
Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 29th 2023 at 10:13:33 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
"It's not really being treated as de facto policy." I wrote that not from the perspective of mods, but from the perspective of users. The fact that most people alphabetize pages at creation contradicts that. Most users today operate under the idea that pages are alphabetized since newer pages are created alphabetized and when older pages are alphabetized, we add a note telling people to keep it that way.
"I'm not even sure if it is a goal." Then I'm not sure what the alphabetization policy is for. Why care about indices and work pages being alphabetized if the goal isn't for one day the entire site to be alphabetized? Because the reason why we alphabetize those pages still applies to trope pages: readability, ease of navigation, avoiding duplicates, etc., which as an outward-facing site, that seems like it should be a priority. Making sure the user experience is good is what keeps people coming back.
Edited by amathieu13 on Aug 29th 2023 at 7:40:23 AM
Well, that alphabetization page was made years ago and alphabetizing trope pages was never a strong concern for moderation. If it was, the policy would have already included trope pages and the policy would have been mandatory for them as well. I don't see why it would be a gradual thing. Nothing I have heard from other mods in the past suggests that goal was to make alphabetization mandatory for trope pages.
Personally, I don't see a need for it to be mandatory but this isn't a hill I care to die on. If we decide as a community to make alphabetizing trope pages, mandatory, sure.
Macron's notesI mean, like I said I'm not actually against making trope pages alphabetized, I just don't agree that it should be treated as a priority. Indexes are designed for proper navigation so having things be out of order goes against the purpose of having an index; work pages need to make sure that specific tropes are being added correctly. Trope pages are slightly different in that the organization of specific works doesn't necessarily matter unless it starts to cause confusion or duplication, at which point I'd agree that it should be alphabetized.
I was speaking from the perspective of users too, mind. I just never really saw it as something people treat as a rule and more as something people just like doing, just like how people prefer the pages get folderized with a foldercontrol button or how people like to get a proper image and quote before launching. It's a good thing to have and makes a draft more appealing to people, but as far as I know people do it because they want to, not because they think they need to.
Edit: TBH I'm in the same boat as Macron. I don't think this is necessary at all but if it becomes a rule I'll roll with it.
Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 29th 2023 at 10:48:30 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallPersonally, I see it as a Quality of Life change that clarifies a somewhat grey situation, given that I don't think most people even know that some pages have alphabetization enforced and others don't. I think if you brought this up to the average site user to vote on in a crowner ("Should trope examples on all pages be alphabetized?"), the biggest response would be, "...isn't this already how things are?"
If the community votes against it, so be it, but I think it's worth having the discussion/vote.
Eh, I mean if people want it it's not a hill I care to die on. I think honestly my apprehension may stem from how time consuming and annoying page alphabetization can get, so to me it feels like a lot of effort for little gain unless it's being done by someone who cares about getting the alphabetization done (or who just enjoys doing it). I'm sure others may say the same about indentation / ZCE / wick cleaning / etc though.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallHaven't really changed position over a year, so I'll reiterate that I see lack of alphabetization on pages as a problem (and it causes issues due to making it harder to find examples, with repetitive cases of pages having duplicate examples)
and would rather treat it on the same degree as Zero-Context Example and Example Indentation in Trope Lists, require from certain point, whenever to cleanup past pages is up to whoever reads them.
TroperWall / WikiMagic CleanupMan, I remember when every example list on trope pages was effectively sorted in the order people added examples. I think there are still examples that refer to other examples "above" that are actually listed below, or that are phrased to continue on from examples that are no longer immediately above, as a result of folderization and alphabetization. I bring this up because I think this was the preference of the troper base for a long time and alphabetization was originally imposed by Eddie/the mods, but don't quote me on that.
Would it help to say that alphabetization is required on new trope pages, either on the alphabetization page or on TLP Guidelines? Or even just that "alphabetization on trope pages is recommended, and example lists that are already alphabetized shouldn't be re-sorted, but not mandatory"?

Do we want to formalize alphabetization on trope pages and adjusting How to Alphabetize Things by adding just two words? Arguments:
- How to Create a Work Page and How to Alphabetize Things already ask to alphabetize "All works pages and most indexes", so this just carries on the consistency principle.
- On unalphabetized pages, examples are harder to find, with a risk of accidentally adding a duplicate work wick.
- New tropes are launched alphabetized anyway, and the cleanup thread
has been working with older pages for a long time regardless, so trope pages without alphabetization are now kind of a rarity and keep being reduced.
- If formalized, it would effectively change literally nothing. Nobody will be required or asked to sort older pages. It just gives something to cite when doing cleanup or when someone misplaces an example on a sorted page, because so far it's been done unofficially.
TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup