Self-demonstrating articles

I feel that self-demonstrating articles pull me out of that great wiki-binge feeling I get, and just generally irritate me. The listings for tropes that apply to a character but that character would disagree with are probably the worst - you can guarantee that every one will start with "Your overly subjective, antiquated system of morality might suggest that I..." or "There are those who foolishly think that..."

I just don't see any benefit to them at all. I imagine they seem like a good idea to somebody - would you mind explaining to me how self-demonstrating articles improve this wiki?

The article describing a concept is itself an example of the concept. That alone is an appealing approach if only for the irony, and helps to make this wiki feel more witty and entertaining.

EDIT: Though on some level it depends on what kind of Self-Demonstrating Article you're talking about.

edited 9th Dec '10 5:00:56 PM by neoYTPism

Because the article says exactly what it's about and gives an example of itself, thus increasing clarity and decreasing the chance of misuse?

And most of us find them pretty clever.

I'd nominate Major General Song for Best Self Demonstrating Article.

In all seriousness, as long as the self demonstration either doesn't interfere with reading the article, or if it does, is limited to just the first paragraph or two, then I have no problems with it.

For an example of it done badly, check the page history for Cluster F-Bomb. The self-demonstration got trimmed to just the first paragraph on that one.

edited 10th Dec '10 1:44:19 AM by Roxor

Not the first paragraphs. Starting out making the reader guess what is going on is a really bad idea. Going into self-demonstration after the reader has been clued in is much, much better.

I dunno, Eddie. I find it seems to work quite well in just the first paragraph, then acknowledging that it can be a problem and switching to normal writing for the rest of the description. Also, it does seem to be the de-facto standard to which our editors work.

It depends on how well people can gain the meaning of a trope from the name. In the case of Cluster F-Bomb, I think it's obvious enough that the trope is about, well, dropping F bombs; therefore, seeing it fuckin' everywhere in the opening paragraph fuckin' works.

If a name isn't that easy to understand, a straight-forward opening paragraph followed by self-demonstration would suffice.

Major General Song ?

It doesn't even scan does it? (the example I mean, I am unfamiliar with the original but given the songs of G&S I do know, I suspect they would use a very strong, possibly rather unusual rhythm, and that this is why the song is so very popular.)

I dunno. I don't like it aesthetically. It doesn't work for me.

EDIT: at the very least the punctuation needs some work.

edited 10th Dec '10 9:31:36 AM by mmysqueeant

I agree with that. Self demonstrating articles are useful exactly because they instantly show a text style, speech manner, etc. Kinda like page images. You are supposed to look at them and they instantly give an idea about the trope's direction. They should be able to do that in the first paragraph.

If they are less meaningful than a "proper" description, we don't need them in the second paragraph either.

edited 10th Dec '10 9:36:48 AM by EternalSeptember

It really depends on the page in question. Ones that do something clever with the format are much better than ones that just address the audience to demonstrate it.

I believe the OP main complain is about self-demonstrating character articles? Like the The Joker page? Or Doctor Doom? If so I sure as hell agree. I don't even think these count as 'self-demonstrating'.

edited 10th Dec '10 10:11:04 AM by Heatth

I guess, like everything else about writing, you can't do a good job of it just following rules. Self-demonstrating right off the bat can work, depending on execution. If the reader is still guessing at the end of the first paragraph, though, it fails to be the exception that proves the rule.

Especially online. You've got about a second to hook the reader, else they are gone, gone, gone. Readers looking for a puzzle to solve are a teeny-tiny percentage of all the people who might start reading the page.

edited 10th Dec '10 12:55:36 PM by FastEddie

@mmysqueeant: Listen to the original, and it will all make sense.

edited 10th Dec '10 1:10:32 PM by girlyboy

I agree, self demonstrating articles are generally terrible. Some of them I've actually been unable to read. Being clever and witty is far less important than being readable.