Old Complete Monster cleanup thread
Welcome to the new Complete Monster (CM) cleanup thread! This thread is where we clean up or cut already-existing entries.
If you're looking to add new entries, please see the approval thread
.
IMPORTANT: Before you begin any discussions on this thread, please see the Frequently Asked Questions and Common Requests List. Here, you'll find explanations of the criteria for the trope as well as our rules/procedures for approving and cutting candidates.
What goes through this thread?
- Cut requests. If you believe a CM has been approved and they do not count, this thread is where you propose their removal. To know how to go about this, please see the FAQ folder on the Administrivia page, where the process is explained in detail.
- If we ever need to consider cutting multiple examples without individually reviewing them (e.g. if we discover widespread plagiarism with a particular troper's CMs), the initial discussion will be on this thread and we'll then escalate to the mod team (as described here
) to get a formal consensus if we decide to recommend a mass cut.
- If an entry was put on the wrong subpage/YMMV page, you may propose where they should be moved to.
- Full rewrites of existing entries, including expansions, trims, and ground-up rewrites. If your rewrite is approved by the thread, feel free to add it to the drafts page so that other users can check grammar and the like before it is included with the rest of the weekly swaps.
- If an entry on a work's YMMV page doesn't match the entry on the media subpage, you can bring it here to discuss which entry works better.
What does not go through this thread?
- New candidate proposals - as stated before, those are done on this thread
.
- Unapproved wicks - if a Troper encounters either of these kinds of wicks, they can be cut with no approval.
- Any CM link on a non-YMMV page - as a YMMV trope, it should not be linked on those pages regardless of any cleanup effort. The only exception is if the wick is being used within the definition of another trope.
- If an CM link on a YMMV page refers to an unapproved character. If it refers to an approved character on any such page, the wick can stay. On the other hand, if the unapproved character being linked to sounds like they might have promise (and you don't feel like checking it out for yourself), feel free to mention it on the approval thread - someone may already know why they don't count, or it could invite a brand new discussion!
- Proposals for images, quotes, and videos of already-approved CMs - quotes and images are proposed on the approval thread
, while videos can be uploaded normally as they are screened for approval by the moderation.
- Crosswicking examples to YMMV pages - if an example has already been approved and added to the main page, you do not require any special permission to add the example to a work's YMMV page (assuming the work has a page already). If a YMMV page doesn't exist yet, then you can make it yourself, but either way, feel free to just add the example without asking.
- Small changes to existing entries - these can simply be done on a Troper's own prerogative with no approval.
- Spelling and grammar fixes.
- Pothole changes.
- Minor rewordings.
- Spoiler tags.
While these changes do not require any kind of approval, it is requested that should you make any of these changes, you do one of the following:
- Make the same changes on the relevant Sandbox page, then add the Sandbox to the list at the bottom of the drafts page. This will add the Sandbox to the weekly swaps and ensure that the edits end up on the relevant locked page. If the Sandbox is already listed, then once you make the edits, your job is already done!
- If you don't know how the Sandboxes work or simply don't have the time to find it, then you can simply post on the thread about the changes you made. Someone else can then make the edit on the relevant Sandbox and add it to the weekly swaps.
- Alternatively, you can simply request that the change be made directly to the locked page on the Locked Pages thread
. Members of this thread keep track of that one, so we will ensure that the changes are made in the Sandbox so that it doesn't get deleted during the next swap.
Again, these changes don't require any approval, but we prefer to keep the entries on the YMMV pages and the locked pages the same in order to avoid any miscommunication or errors between entries, so if you do make the change, we would greatly appreciate it if you could ensure the change is made on the locked page as well.
As a final note, we do not care what other sites have to say regarding whether or not a character counts. We have our own criteria and they have theirs for their CM equivalents; while they are similar, they are not exactly the same and should not be treated as such. Another site removing a character from their equivalent should not be a reason why a cut is proposed here, and if this is the case, it will likely lead to mod intervention.
Other than this, once again, welcome to the cleanup thread, and we look forward to your contributions!
Edited by Mrph1 on Jan 14th 2024 at 11:30:03 AM
Tbh me too.
But I'm okay in the case of The Dividual. Like if a group does a distinct leader than I still think they should only get listed if they are the worst of the worst. Like for an example. I wouldn't be cool with listing anyone but Jordan Chase of the barrel gang (''Dexter since he is worse than the others)
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."I am more inclined to keep it. When multiple people do the same thing it becomes hard to say that any one stands out in terms of heinousness. There often will be problems in assigning responsibility in such cases and explaining how they are all selfish, too.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanEh, my issue is more just a confusion of terminology here. To be clear, I don't think anyone is advocating to remove the group rule, it's more loosening it. We've been putting a hard limit on three at the max and now some people just want to loosen that a little bit more. There's still a restriction on groups - no whole organizations, crimes still generally run back to the leaders/trigger-pullers when appropriate, and if someone among The Dividual is more heinous than another than only they should count. Is that an accurate summary for the people who are voting that way?
Yeah, like, if a group's crimes are shared among, say, 30 people without a clear leader, that's still a no-go. If it's 4 or 5, that's different.
Hmm, I may reread The Punisher MAX and see if the Eight Generals can count now. They're utterly vile.
Speaking of Punisher MAX, I noticed Nicolas Cavella entry describes him as psychotic. Since we are suposed to replace use of psychotic in monster entries because of real life conotations, here it is:
- "In The Beginning" & "Up is Down and Black is White" arcs: Nicolas "Nicky" Cavella may seem polite, but in fact is so psychopathic that even other Mafiosi despise him. Nicky started his career in murder when he was just a little boy by executing his parents and 12-year-old sister, conspiring with his aunt to gain control of the family. Later on, Nicky dealt with a particularly obstinate Chinese gangster by murdering the man's elder sons after having fed the man his youngest son, who was only in junior high school. Upon his return to New York following Frank Castle's rampage amongst the Cesare family, Nicky slaughters multiple people, betraying his own allies and throwing them to Frank to cover his own escape while also having his right-hand psychopath Pittsy torture and castrate a CIA agent for information. When he returns later, Nicky enrages Frank further by digging up the remains of his family and filming himself pissing on them. When his schemes meet a predictable end, Nicky attempts to escape by using a little boy as a hostage with a gun to his head. A Dirty Coward hiding under a tough guy exterior, Cavella was nevertheless the worst of the gangsters Frank had to face.
Edited by EmperorGeode on Dec 25th 2023 at 3:29:53 AM
I think I'm being fair enough with my concession
. I may be fine not drawing a hard limit on shared write-ups, but I think it's entirely reasonable to want to be able to distinguish between character actions at least somewhat if possible.
Yeah, as I described elsewhere: The biggest thing is that, say, 5 thugs are gonna get more personal screentime and actions between them than an entire army. We're not loosening the group rules to let armies or entire organizations qualify who we can't see every single member of; just groups that we are able to see faces and understand individual roles in.
An entire army isn't gonna have all or even half of its members singled out and shown to be raping and killing everyone around them like a smaller group of, again, 5 or 6 could. When you reach a certain number, none of the members can stand out anymore because they truly do just become a "mass" of evil soldiers/cultists/what have you, instead of a smaller group where you'll be able to know the names, faces and actions of each individual member. That's what matters. A cult of 8 who share the same atrocities, no redeeming features, and have no clear leader can now count; a cult of 80 where you can't single out any solitary member of it ain't gonna qualify.
No! That is NOT Solid Snake! Stop impersonating him!Even with the restriction loosened I don't think I'd personally go for a group as high as 8 (more just because the odds of a small group of that size having distinct rules is pretty slim), but I could see myself going for a group of 5 or 6 provided that every member has a unique role in whatever's happening. I don't think that's as much of a loosening of the restriction as people might think given how fairly uncommon such role delegation usually is.
We're talking about removing a hard number at all, not just moving it to 4, though with groups that large they probably won't count anyway
"We'll meet again" | 🏳️⚧️
Yes, this, 100%. We're doing case-by-case, people. We're not setting a hard limit. We're arguing o remove a hard limit and leave it up to discretion in discussions. Just like there's no hard limit to Freudian Excuse existing. That's my vote. A total removal of a hard limit and up to voter discretion if and when such cases come up. If you think it's "insanity" for a certain number, that's your prerogative, but I and others are advocating for case-by-case. Not a max of 4, or 5, or 6. Just "groups can count if each member is properly characterized and given time to shine."
Edited by Ravok on Dec 25th 2023 at 2:43:21 AM
No! That is NOT Solid Snake! Stop impersonating him!I mean, i'm sure that it's only on very rare cases that six people are all equally responsible for the same atrocities, have no obvious leader, and also have enough personalities and non redeeming qualities to count. Which honestly doesn't seem too bad.
Due to unfortunate events, i will continue to exist until further notice. (also i'm fluid now)

I'm fine with removing the group limit