TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Rename: Headshots Kill Robots

Go To

VampireBuddha Calendar enthusiast from Ireland (Wise, aged troper) Relationship Status: Complex: I'm real, they are imaginary
Calendar enthusiast
#26: Apr 15th 2010 at 4:53:10 AM

Robot Brains Are In The Head has a nice rythym to it.

@Treblain: Because the name sounds like it's about the best way to kill a robot is to shoot it in the head. The trope is about how robots' main processing centres are in their head units. Completely different.

Ukrainian Red Cross
DragonQuestZ The Other Troper from Somewhere in California Since: Jan, 2001
The Other Troper
#27: Aug 10th 2010 at 2:31:44 AM

"Robot Brains Are In The Head has a nice rythym to it. "

It does.

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.
DragonQuestZ The Other Troper from Somewhere in California Since: Jan, 2001
The Other Troper
#28: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:56:34 AM

Bump.

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.
Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
Stratadrake Dragon Writer Since: Oct, 2009
Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#32: Nov 19th 2010 at 10:04:07 AM

Alternative names crowner made and hooked.

girlyboy Since: Jan, 2001
#33: Nov 19th 2010 at 12:31:49 PM

Um, aren't tropes only supposed to be renamed due to rampant misuse or other serious problems? Is there an actual problem here? Is there evidence people are not realising that this trope covers situations that don't necessarily involve shooting things in heads? Is there a lot of mis-use on works pages, or a lot of bad examples? Can we get some numbers?

In short, is there evidence the trope name is actually broken? "I thought of a cool alternative name that rhymes" is not a good reason to rename a trope. For that matter, neither is "I Thought It Meant", unless it's clear that a lot of people are actually using the trope incorrectly due to a misleading name.

Everything You Wanted To Know About Changing Titles.

Frankly, shouldn't this sort of stuff be addressed before a crowner is made? Why make a crowner when there's no actual evidence a rename is necessary at all?

Frankly, this seems a lot like an "I thought Anvilicious meant Anvil on Head, let's re-name it" discussion to me.

edited 19th Nov '10 12:37:06 PM by girlyboy

DragonQuestZ The Other Troper from Somewhere in California Since: Jan, 2001
The Other Troper
#34: Nov 19th 2010 at 12:55:36 PM

"Um, aren't tropes only supposed to be renamed due to rampant misuse or other serious problems?"

You think a name that is almost nothing like the trope isn't a serious problem? There a three parts of the trope name, and only one fits the trope. It's about robots, but not killing them, or shooting them in the head. Problems like that are among the reasons to rename.

edited 19th Nov '10 12:55:45 PM by DragonQuestZ

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.
girlyboy Since: Jan, 2001
#35: Nov 19th 2010 at 12:59:59 PM

If there is a lot of misuse, then yes. I think the name is clear enough. The trope may not be about shooting robots in heads, but the connection is not exactly tenuous. The reason why headshots kill robots is because that's where they keep their minds, as opposed to in their torsos or elsewhere, and I don't think that's a very big logical leap.

No, simply saying "I Thought It Meant" is not a good reason to rename a trope. Not unless you can show that a lot of people are confused by the name, and not just for a moment, but confused enough to actually use it incorrectly with some consistency.

If the trope is being misused, then sure, it needs a re-name. Is it, though? Are there a lot of bad examples? A lot of cases of it being used incorrectly on works pages? Specifically, is there evidence of people thinking that only situations where robots get shot in the head are covered by the trope?

If there's plenty of cases of this trope being used for situations where robots have their "brains" in their heads in general, without any shooting of said heads taking place, then I think that's sufficient evidence that the trope is working. And if it ain't broke...

edited 19th Nov '10 1:02:18 PM by girlyboy

girlyboy Since: Jan, 2001
#36: Nov 19th 2010 at 1:07:55 PM

Can you go through the example section and count the number of times the trope is used to describe situations where robots aren't getting shot in heads, but where they just happen to keep their brains up there?

If there's only a very few such examples on the trope page, then you have a good case. If there's plenty such examples, then there's no problem, and this rename would conflict with the basic rules of when to rename a trope — specifically, that you shouldn't rename a trope unless it's not working.

You really should do this when starting a rename thread, I think, though it isn't often done. It should certainly be done before a crowner is made, IMHO.

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#37: Nov 19th 2010 at 1:13:16 PM

[up][up] I have to agree. I don't really see why this is up for rename at all. Other than "We can make a better title" I've not seen any strong argument for a rename.

That being said:

One COULD make an argument for obscurity (Head Shots Kill Robots found in: 32 articles, excluding discussions. This title has brought 41 people to the wiki. For an article this old (launched 2010-03-08) and rather common in scifi, this is rather low). So I COULD get behind the argument that while the article title is not misleading, it's severely hindering the trope's propagation.

edited 19th Nov '10 1:13:42 PM by Ghilz

DragonQuestZ The Other Troper from Somewhere in California Since: Jan, 2001
The Other Troper
#38: Nov 19th 2010 at 1:15:54 PM

"No, simply saying "I Thought It Meant" is not a good reason to rename a trope."

That's simplifying the name problems to make a strawman of the reasons. And you're still going on that misuse is the only reason for a rename, when that is not the case.

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.
Sackett Since: Jan, 2001
#39: Nov 19th 2010 at 1:34:09 PM

Yeah, I think we are missing a step, there is significant disagreement in the thread about renaming. We should have a rename crowner first before we vote on alternate names.

rodneyAnonymous Sophisticated as Hell from empty space Since: Aug, 2010
#40: Nov 19th 2010 at 1:39:00 PM

Headshots Kill Robots is "about putting the robot's brain/control unit in its "head" even when there's no reason for it to be there"... the name is not obviously about that, but, so? Many tropes have names that do not exactly describe what the trope is all about.

I don't understand why a rename is being seriously considered. Redirects Are Free

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.
Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
girlyboy Since: Jan, 2001
#42: Nov 19th 2010 at 1:53:38 PM

Thank you, Ghilz. Though of course, an actual rename requires something close to a consensus, not a mere majority — important to remember that, too.

DQZ, I disagree with your view on when tropes should be re-named. And in support of my view, let me quote this wiki's policy on renaming — specifically, the wonderful guides for when not to rename a trope:

  • It ain't broke. If the title has good inbound links, it is working. If the title is being accurately used around the wiki to refer to the trope, it is working. (Emphasis added) If the title is a term already in use in the world, it is working. 'In the world', by the way, also means 'in a specific fandom.' If more than one term is used for it, we have redirects to use or we may need an additional article. A lot of times, two terms means two subtly different tropes.
  • The change is not for the community as a whole, but just your own personal opinion. It isn't about you.
  • There is no consensus. Consensus does not mean a simple majority. What does constitute consensus is hard to pin down, but a unilateral action is easy to spot.

The only time the discussion for renaming should move on is after it's been shown the current name is not working. If the current name is working, it's perfectly fine even if it isn't 100% clear right away to every single person who ever visits the page. As long as there's no rampant misuse, it's working.

edited 19th Nov '10 1:58:28 PM by girlyboy

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#43: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:04:31 PM

As long as there's no rampant misuse, it's working.

Nope. That is not the sole criteria for a rename. A trope can be renamed because the name is so damn obscure it's preventing people from actually using the trope. This is the reason why most Character Named Tropes are renamed, and that kind of name is frowned upon. So, for a name to be considered as working, it needs to not only NOT be misused alot, but show itself to not be an obstacle to the trope's accessibility.

This is where I am on the fence about the rename. No misuse, yes, but few wicks and very few inbounds. Now, this could be for quite a few reasons, but it might be that the name is not helping.

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#44: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:06:46 PM

[up] That's the reason I'm pro-renaming in this case. It's not a bad name, but it might be contributing to trope obscurity and it's a bit too narrow for the trope. Giving it a broader name that encompasses the whole trope could help give it a broader acceptance and help propagate the trope. This is far too common to have so few wiks.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
girlyboy Since: Jan, 2001
#45: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:06:57 PM

[up] [up]That needs to be added to the rules page then, because it's hardly clear on this point. It says that a name being extremely obscure can be a problem, but only if it's already been shown that the current name is not working — in theory, an obscure name can work just fine. How does one determine if the name is at fault for a trope being unpopular, or if it's something else?

edited 19th Nov '10 2:07:06 PM by girlyboy

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#46: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:12:01 PM

Part of it is comparing how often you see the trope in media to how often you see the trope in the wiki. As I see this trope almost every time robots are in media, but it only has 43 wiks, then it's far more obscure than it should be. Especially when it's been on the wiki for months.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#47: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:13:23 PM

[up][up]By making sure nothing else can explain it. Is the description legible or is it a rambling mess no one can understand? Does the trope have all the indexes it qualifies for. Are most of the examples on the page Wicked in both directions (From the work page to the trope and vice versa). Also try to figure how widespread the trope is.

Now, in this case, the examples and description and indexing all seem good. And this is a widespread trope, 99% of all Artificial Humans, Cyborgs and Robot Girls follow this trope when the location of their CPU or minds is told at all. So in the absence of anything else being broken, I lean towards thinking that the title is blocking the trope's adoption. Which is a pity coz I like that title.

edited 19th Nov '10 2:14:49 PM by Ghilz

girlyboy Since: Jan, 2001
#48: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:15:56 PM

Hmm. I could argue that a lot of the time robots are seen in the media the locations of their brains isn't discussed at all, but I suppose maybe it does feel like it should be a bit more popular. Still, the question of whether 43 inbounds is "enough" or not seems reasonably open to me. I guess, let's see what the yes-or-no crowner says.

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#49: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:19:43 PM

Let me put it this way: I have a FAR easier time thinking of examples of robots with their CPU/Mind in their heads than of Robots with their CPU/Minds somewhere else.

Try it yourself :)

edited 19th Nov '10 2:22:39 PM by Ghilz

girlyboy Since: Jan, 2001
#50: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:22:34 PM

[up]But you should also compare it to robots for which the location of their CPU/brain/whatever is simply never stated one way or the other.

Also, I linked the single-proposition crowner from the trope page, though, uh, I don't know the proper way to do that. sad

AlternativeTitles: HeadshotsKillRobots
20th Apr '10 12:00:00 AM

Crown Description:

Vote up names you like, vote down names you don't. Whether or not the title will actually be changed is determined with a different kind of crowner (the Single Proposition crowner). This one just collects and ranks alternative titles.

Total posts: 131
Top