Edit banned/Suspended - would like to edit again.

~Will B Good: The part where you rogue-launched is correct, as I do not see anything involving Magnificent Bastard in your record.

To make sure you get it: if you do not own a draft, and it reaches three days with the requisite hats, does that give you the right to launch behind the draft sponsor's back?

I would recommend you check out both Zero-Context Example and The Fic May Be Yours, but the Trope Page Is Ours, before we continue on a conversation about your suspension.

Most of the examples commented out have nothing beside the trope name, which is an obvious sign of a ZCE. So, let's take an example that does have some words:

• Fragile Speedster: The average Elvaan in combat... unless Powered Armor is used.

The point of example context is to clearly demonstrate, to a reader unfamiliar with the work, how the example meets the trope described. I read this example - what does an average Elvaan do in combat that shows they are both fragile and a speedster? I should not have to click around elsewhere to fill in the gaps. Can you rewrite it to improve the context?

ETA: Your suspension will not be released until we've worked out all the issues here, and feel confident the issues will not recur.

Edited by nombretomado on May 30th 2020 at 3:10:49 AM

That's unfortunate, as we do have a thread dedicated to zero-context examples, but you could always use ATT for a quick poll, i.e. "Does this seem like enough context?"

Since that's your situation, I think what would help quite a bit is you demonstrating here that you understand the line of something having enough context, vs. not. I'll give you some examples. You rewrite them. I'll let you know if they have enough context. This will give you the practice to hopefully feel more confident in your understanding.

• Chivalrous Pervert: Tucker.
• "Well Done, Son" Guy: Shinji
• Back from the Dead: Alicia

As ZCE's is what you set off you so badly, that's gotten the limelight, but there are some other issues as well, which I will give a quick summary of:

• How to Alphabetize Things: Articles ("an", "the", etc.) should not count towards alphabetizing.
• Handling Spoilers:
  • You don't conceal the name of a trope in a trope list.
  • You don't conceal the entire example.
  • You don't conceal a character name on a Characters/ sheet.
• Example Indentation in Trope Lists: If you have a single example of a trope, it goes on a single-level bullet. If you have multiple examples of a trope, the trope gets the single-level bullet, and each examples gets a double-level bullet. Observe:

• Bathroom Stall Graffiti: Only Example

• Troubling Unchildlike Behavior
  • Example 1
  • Example 2

• Sinkhole: You do not change the display name of a trope in a trope list, ever.

It's also of note that some tropes have the same example text listed twice, which is...unlikely to be kosher. A well-written example should apply specifically to that trope, and not generically enough to be applied to multiple tropes.

If/when your editing suspension is released, these matters will need to be addressed as well. But, in due time. We need to talk about them here first and establish your understanding.

Edited by nombretomado on May 30th 2020 at 3:46:36 AM

Those write-ups look much better. This is a challenge if you are intimately involved with a work - you find yourself assuming everyone gets what you mean, but they really don't.

As for spoiler-tagging, check out How to Create a Character Page. You may personally disagree with the matter, but our policy is clearly laid out there:

• What are the spoilers rules for character pages?
  Spoilers on character pages are exactly the same as every other page on the wiki, as covered under Handling Spoilers. However, many of the rules are more immediately relevant or problematic on character pages. So remember:
  1. Never spoiler-tag the trope name in the example list. If something is so much of a spoiler it can't be under a character entry, it can go on the main page instead.
  2. Never spoiler-tag anything above the example line. This includes folder titles, descriptions, and quotes.
  3. If a character is a Walking Spoiler, the folder title still must have their name or a description. Concealing their name by calling the folder "Spoiler Character" is not allowed. If there are too many Walking Spoilers on the page, then all spoiler tags should be removed from the page, and a warning about spoilers placed at the top of the page.
  4. For ongoing works, it is not uncommon to remove all spoiler tags before the current book/season/movie, in order to cut down on clutter. A warning that all spoilers up to the current book/season/movie are unmarked should be placed at the top of the page.

"Sinkholing" is basically potholing gone wrong. There are many different flavors of it - in essence it is using a pothole to misrepresent, linking something irrelevant, inappropriate, or broadly inadvisable.

The specific flavor relevant to you is that using potholes to change the trope name in a list of tropes. For example:

[[ParasolOfPrettiness Umbrella of Joy]]

Note how the page itself is Parasol of Prettiness, but for readers, they would see the trope name as Umbrella Of Joy.

Edited by nombretomado on May 30th 2020 at 4:26:15 AM

A warning would be fine, as long as it doesn't violate the other rules regarding spoilers.

One last matter. We've gone over all sorts of technical issues so far, but the largest concern is your temper.

Many, many tropers have come through here, struggling with understanding policy. That is generally a matter of information, and, while it can take some time, it's simple enough to lay out the rules - here is where you messed up, here is how it should be. Even if people don't get it right away, if they demonstrate a willingness to learn and take criticism, it's fine. Personally, as long as they show they're trying, that goes a long way.

What is more problematic is personal behavior, and your blanking of a page with a snide edit reason said a lot about your perspective.

Throwing a hissy fit is not appropriate. Finding personal smears in standard website clean-up is not appropriate. Lashing out at others in edits is not appropriate. I can release your suspension for editing mistakes quick enough, but if you comport yourself with this attitude again, you are coming right back here, and this talk will go very differently.

Understood?

Edited by nombretomado on May 30th 2020 at 5:32:09 AM

Ma'am.

Your wiki editing privileges have been restored. Thanks for coming in.

We'll catch up. Most of us are US-based and heavily distracted at the moment.

~Yellow20, your post is violating the pinned header about talking to other suspended tropers in the thread.

Please have patience; we will try to respond to you quickly. Our apologies for the delays.

~SwimToTheMoon, simply put - you may put an item up for discussion, but that does very little if you edit-war simultaneously. It implicitly takes the stance that your position is the correct one.

Look, you were doing fine for a few years, so I'm perfectly alright thinking this is just a minor bump in the road, but you can't have it both ways. Unless you are making an edit to ensure compliance with hard wiki policy, you have to talk things out in full before putting your edit back and making an edit war. Are we good?

~Yellow20, I will give you a choice, since I've seen you swing across the grammar spectrum here.

• You can be sent to the Get Help with English thread to request grammar assistance on your requested edits, and for edits to be made on your behalf by others. If you have little-to-no corrections given, you can come here and request to have your wiki suspension released, or;

• You can have your wiki suspension released immediately. If you choose this, you are held responsible for all of your grammar, so if we find that you are adding errors across the wiki again, you will likely be re-suspended. Note that you can choose to use the Get Help with English thread voluntarily.

The first choice is a little more security, though you'll have to demonstrate patience; the second choice puts a lot more responsibility on you.

~TeamTony, your edit reasons are undoubtedly rude. It's also become apparent, through multiple, separate tropers' reports, that you have a serious wonk about Game of Thrones. We genuinely, 100% do not care about the fandom discourse. Examples should not be written to argue your personal slant on the work.

~Thetropemaster101, we weren't even going to bring up Manny20444, until you did.

I genuinely think you have difficulty understanding how things work around here. Take a break - at least a couple weeks. We can talk again then.

I think that's everybody. Again, thank you for your patience.