Examples "by author"

For some reason, a large number of tropes have their Literature examples sorted between "by author" and "by work." Random most recent example I found: NoodleIncident.Literature. That page also has a general section, which I know is against the rules.

I don't know what started this trend, but I've seen it quite often. Is there any reason to not just reintegrate them into one example list?

Why would you ever list tropes by author? I mean, if it was an author-related trope, sure, but for narrative or story ones, either the author's works are connected enough that they form some sort of universe that can be grouped, or they're a bunch of free-standing stories (or series).

Can't say I see a practical reason they'd be separated like that, and they should definitely be recombined to avoid having two disjoint pools you arbitrarily pick where to put something. I also think it's generally a bad idea to group works by author inside folders because that's also inconsistent and messes with alphabetisation...

Avatar Source

I've seen it on occasion if, say, an author has many stories that all use the same trope, but it's not a standard organization method by any means.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Agreed that this is an unnecessary means of organization.

TRS Queue | Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper Wall

I thought maybe this was a relic of a more free-wheeling era of the wiki, but the example given in the OP was organized this way only in 2019.

Voting to locate and reorganize author grouping.

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

I always found examples grouped by author annoying when I'm alphabetizing pages, so I don't mind seeing that gone.

Victor of HGS S320 | "There's rosemary, that's for remembrance. Pray you, love, remember."

I've seen that happen more often in literature sections, since tropers sometimes make trope pages for authors but not for the books themselves.

The question is, should we break them apart when someone puts in a bunch of entries by author on a trope page? There's obviously author-related tropes where you'd want to keep them sorted that way, like Author Vocabulary Calendar or Author Appeal, but then it gets a little more confusing. On the one hand, it messes with alphabetisation and checking 'is X work listed here'. OTOH, particularly prolific authors on e.g. genre pages can end up with a dozen spread-out entries that could easily be one or two bullet points and be less repetitive.

Avatar Source

Yeah, using NoodleIncident.Literature as an example, Robert A. Heinlein has five works listed under his name. Alphabetizing them individually would be mildly annoying, but alphabetizing them by Heinlein's name would be easy enough. Treat the author as we would a franchise.

I personally think they should be broken apart, just for ease of alphabetizing

Absolute destiny... apeachalypse?

FWIW, I think libraries tend to alphabetize by author before title.

They do, but on TVT alphabetization by works is always done by title. I think that takes precedent

Absolute destiny... apeachalypse?

Libraries sort by author because when you're physically organising books, nobody wants to have a series spread out across ten different locations due to fluctuations in title name. Similarly, I think it's very rare that we don't group together all entries for a series on individual trope pages. It's just whether it's good to combine otherwise-unrelated works on a page because they share an author.

Avatar Source

Found another one: Inherent in the System. Just found it at random. I knew I should have been keeping track of these; I tried doing a search, but no luck.

As for the alphabetization debate, I would vote to alphabetize by author, but I don't feel very strongly about it.

Alphabetising by author consistently would only really work for Literature. Anime and Manga would dissolve into near-randomness immediately depending on the origin and who you even use for author for anime-originals, and the less said about films or video games...

Avatar Source

Ah, I see the disconnect. I don't think anyone is saying "add an author to every work example, then alphabetize by that" (that's certainly not what I'm saying). Rather, there are just some examples where an author has written enough different works that they can all be put under that one umbrella. I just don't see a need to separate them if people want to cluster all an author's works together, but there's also no reason to put all "by author" examples in a separate section.

Listing by Author only makes sense if there's at least two works by them, such that they mandate sub-bullets. Inherent in the System for example, I'd remove Forscyth because we have no works under his bullet, but keep Wildbow.

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

"Two works this author has written with no other connection for being grouped together" is its own issue for locating things, though. It defeats the purpose of alphabetising if you have to scan the whole list anyway because there's never any idea what the existing entry will be under without knowing someone's entire ouevre.

Avatar Source

The problem is that with a lot of works, the author has more of a fan base than any individual work or series, or the works of a single author are lumped conceptually together, such that someone looking for examples may be more interested in the author than the individual works, or may even know the author's name more than an individual work. In effect, the author is the "franchise" that would normally be the top-level bullet. This isn't strictly limited to Literature - William Shakespeare would likely get similar treatment - but Literature is where a creator most obviously has an auteur effect and a personal following across multiple works. But not all creators have this effect even within Literature, and some series with multiple authors (especially Expanded Universe material for larger franchises) make more sense considered as a whole, so there's no real consistent rule we could apply that would work in every case and be intuitive for every troper.

For most examples already in this format, I'd just write the series name and then add "by the author's name" in parentheses afterward. For example, from a section on "Passed-Over Inheritance", I'd convert the Stephen King author group from:

• Stephen King used this a few times:
  • In the Sherlock Holmes short story "The Doctor's Case", abusive husband and father Lord Hull makes out a will disinheriting his long-suffering family in favor of his pet cats. He is promptly murdered, and the will disappears. After the murder is solved, Holmes, Watson, and Lestrade destroy the evidence and allow the family to receive their inheritance.
  • Doctor Sleep: Dick Halloran's monstrous, abusive "black grandfather" (black as in evil, not skin color) knew his family only put up with his abuse and cruelty in the hopes of being put in his will, so he left his entire fortune to an orphanage. Did we mention he was also a pedophile?

To:

• Doctor Sleep (by Stephen King): Dick Halloran's monstrous, abusive "black grandfather" (black as in evil, not skin color) knew his family only put up with his abuse and cruelty in the hopes of being put in his will, so he left his entire fortune to an orphanage. Did we mention he was also a pedophile?
• Nightmares & Dreamscapes (by Stephen King): In "The Doctor's Case" (a Sherlock Holmes short story), abusive husband and father Lord Hull makes out a will disinheriting his long-suffering family in favor of his pet cats. He is promptly murdered, and the will disappears. After the murder is solved, Holmes, Watson, and Lestrade destroy the evidence and allow the family to receive their inheritance.

Most other Literature examples from the "by author" sections can also be easily rewritten into the same format, with the author's name in parentheses after the book's title; it can also be done when simply rewriting and alphabetizing a section if the author's name was already noted in the example (and sometimes for film examples, if a director or other person involved in the production was noted for it).

Until next time...

Anon e Mouse Jr.

IDK, if the author isn't used as a grouping I see no reason to mention their name in the example.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Just saying, if they're already there, why not keep the mention when alphabetizing the section? It's an easy edit.

Until next time...

Anon e Mouse Jr.

- Ditto. I only make Author bullets if people give the name.

- Because the author is irrelevant to whether the trope applies or not. The Internet Is an Ocean only has an author bullet in Anime because it's like a Creator Thumbprint / The 'Verse?

Edited by Malady on Jul 18th 2023 at 2:42:17 AM

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

See, the Passed-Over Inheritance example is a case where I'd advocate for removing the grouping. What purpose does grouping by author serve there? "A prolific author in two completely unrelated series used a trope" doesn't help. If there was a particular tendency or habit to note, then that would contribute something. As it is, it's preemptive lumping just in case.

Avatar Source