Duplicate Trope: Probability Pileup

Note: This thread was proposed by Asterlix.

The gist of this trope is that once an event occurs, is way likelier for it to happen again. Oddly Common Rarity is when something stated as rare is actually quite common. On paper, they are related but different tropes. In practice, however, they are used as if they were the same concept.

The first version of Probability Pileup has four examples. Three of them are about an improbable event becoming common and therefore fitting Oddly Common Rarity better, while the fourth is zero-context. It seems to me that it was conceived as that trope but the creator failed a spot check.

This is the wick check for the current state of the trope:

• Indexes & "See also" sections in other tropes: 8/28 or 28.6%
• "Needs help" pages: 3/28 or 10.7%
• Misuse (total): 14/28 or 50%
  • Fits Oddly Common Rarity better: 8/28 or 28.6%
  • Fits other Probability Tropes better: 2/28 or 7.1%
  • Misuse & zero-context examples: 4/28 or 14.3%
• Correct usage^note defined as an event repeating without an explanation or previously stated likeliness: 3/28 or 10.7%

As you might have noticed from the wick check, the trope is also barely thriving. I'm unsure whether there's a trope-worthy concept there. I mean, it might be something like this — if a mook appears in one episode, it increases the chances of mooks being a common occurrence. Contrasted by a work that never shows mooks because they don't fit the plot, tone, or genre. And even then, it's kinda broad. I'd say move the examples to the appropriate tropes and cut.

Paging ~Asterlix to the thread. Anyway, between the low wick count and the overlap, I'm in favor of merging.

Merge

Merge

Merge.

Merge the concept of Probability Pileup into Oddly Common Rarity, which is a better name for the phenomenon anyway. (Probability Pileup does alliterate, but it just makes me imagine a game where estimating complex probabilities is a central mechanic.)

Merge

Merge.

So that’s ten merge votes so far. Enough votes and a low enough wick count to waive the three day rule?

No, because the wick count isn't low enough. At 29 wicks, it's still technically thriving.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Jun 17th 2023 at 5:53:57 AM

Got it.

merge

I noticed there wasn’t a linked wick check. Is that ok?

Wick check was done in the OP.

They meant that we can't see the exact example sorting. The results are there, not the full picture

Done, so locking up.