Potential TRS Solutions for CatchPhrase

Alright so after completing a wick check for Catchphrase, there are a few big problems with the trope. Because the wick count is so great, however, I'd like to flesh out potential actions that can be taken. To summarize the wick check, the two biggest issues with this trope are:

• Zero-Context Examples (54%)
• Misuse in the form of the phrase being not unique (either a very common word or phrase or a character cussing). (14%)

The correct usage rate was only 1.3%, so I do not believe there is a way this can be salvaged as-is.

The first solutions to appear were in the Wick Check Project thread and are as follows:

• A long-term cleanup
• Giving the trope an Example Sectionectomy (maybe as a Definition Only Super-Trope?)

Both have their pros and cons that I'm hoping will be discussed here, but I'm also open to other ideas. The second option has received support on the wick check project thread. There are 22K wicks, so this will be a very big project and I think that should be taken into consideration while we discuss potential solutions.

Paging ~@badtothebaritone in case they want to discuss further.

CSP Cleanup Thread | All that I ask for ... is diamonds and dance floors

Depending on how much swearing is an example, Sir Swears-a-Lot exists, btw.

If there's multiple tropes about repeating words, like Verbal Tic and Welcome to Corneria, a Super-Trope could be made and everything moved there if nothing better fits?

Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576

I really don't see the argument for making it an example-less supertrope. It's nowhere near omnipresent, and the existing subtropes only cover a fraction of valid examples.

I also believe some of the examples on the wick check may be miscategorized. I'm familiar with this example under the "Phrase is not unique" folder:

1. Literature.Beyond The Boundary: Mirai's "You're unpleasant" or a variation of it.

Though the example is somewhat lacking in context, this phrase is unique to the character within the context of the work.

I also prefer the supertrope idea because I know some examples that don't fit any of the existing subtropes, but are still unique to the characters in the work and a significant part of their personality. Some of the entries are zero-context examples, but I can expand them.

I'm mainly a fan of underrated media.

It's already a supertrope. It looks like you're proposing to keep examples, as opposed to cutting them (Example Sectionectomy means cutting examples).

Edited by Twiddler on Mar 7th 2023 at 1:14:39 AM

Problem is that this is the sort of trope that lends itself to what we would consider ZCEs, since people go "I know what a catchphrase is, and I know what Alice's catchphrase is, so I'm just going to list it and everyone will know what it means!" Some people might find it hard to imagine what additional context would even be beyond the phrase itself. But the check also seems to show that this is something that can be misused, so it should be important to show that the troper adding an example understands the trope.

However, I emphasize "seems" because there's only one category of misuse that has more than a couple of examples on the check, and there may be a number of cases like what Twiddler identifies where a phrase may be common in real life or other works but is still identified with a specific character within the work. (In fact, I'd dispute that the specific case they brought up is too common even in real life to ordinarily qualify, as it comes off as a rather unique phrasing even if the individual words are common.) More to the point, because "catchphrase" is a well-known pre-existing term, this may be a sign that our definition of it (or the interpretation of that definition used in the usage check) is too stringent compared to colloquial off-wiki usage, as opposed to tropers using it wrong.

I definitely think an Example Sectionectomy would be overkill in this case, but I also feel like being lax about ZCEs here would start us down a slippery slope, which seemingly leaves the long-term thread idea.