That's so obviously chairs it feels like a waste of a TRS slot to need to take it to TRS to get it removed, honestly (especially since the rest of the trope is fine), but I'll defer to mod judgment on this one.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Precedent dictates we do need TRS for this; a similar thing happened with that one chicken trope that had a line at the end boiling it down to "chickens appear in a work" note .
I think it's because lines like this create misuse that should be proactively cleaned and combatted, which requires more than just deleting the line itself. Also doing so changes the trope's definition, which is a TRS action. So... yeah.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Is it really changing the trope definition if it's just removing one "soft-split" category?
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Yes, because said category is lumped into the trope's scope as a result and thus is a part of how the trope is defined on the wiki. We can't really just decide that certain lines or categories don't count for a trope's definition, especially if they may be outright damaging like this one is.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Right. The proper thing for the description to do would be to have a line basically saying that coincidental examples where these two beetles are in the work, but have no relationship whatsoever are simply not examples and shouldn't be logged, not say that they're a rare version of the trope that has no meaning whatsoever.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
♀ | Small ripples lead to big waves
Japanese Beetle Brothers is sorted into three types, the last of which is:
So it admits this isn't a meaningful pattern. Should it be taken to TRS?