I notice that The Four Loves is already on Tropes Needing TRS under "Combines Too Many Concepts."
I don't just Wiki Talk the talk. I Wiki Walk the walk.This page was
created
as a repurposing of I Just Want to Be Loved. You'll notice that that's a blue link to a separate page (not a redirect); the previous page was restored in 2016
because the people discussing it noted that there was no edit reason given for the conversion on the I Just Want to Be Loved page history and they didn't find the threads linked above. I gotta say, even with knowledge they lack, I'm with the people in the 2016 thread in not quite understanding why Fallen Legend thought that trope, specifically, needed to be converted to this one (this
is what it looked like before the conversion, or at least the source of the page at the time, for the record), but it was sanctioned by Fast Eddie (and people in the 2011 TRS thread thought the trope was in a pretty sad state regardless).
Edited by MorganWick on Sep 1st 2024 at 2:18:54 AM
Yeah... The Four Loves is unclear about what kind of trope it's supposed to represent. Since the different facets of the The Four Loves are already covered by other tropes, I think it would work better as a Useful Note, perhaps including an index to tropes that involve the different loves.
I sadly doubt he would like Popeyes, though...
I'm not actually sure how this page can work as a Useful Notes page though. It'd probably end up as a summary of Lewis's book, and that's not something we document around here.

Okay, I really don't want to do bring this us because The Four Loves is one of my favourite books, but I seriously have no idea how The Four Loves is even supposed to function as a trope.
Each individual "love" seem to be covered by other tropes (Thicker Than Water and other Family Tropes for storge, True Companions and other Friendship Tropes for phileo, Love Tropes for eros, and Act of True Love for Agape), so the only way this page seem to be viable is if the work actually compares the four different kind of loves as Lewis's original does—which this page clearly doesn't do.