During the investigation of recent hollers in the Complete Monster thread, it's become apparent to the staff that an insular, unfriendly culture has evolved in the Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard threads that is causing problems.
Specific issues include:
- Overzealous hollers on tropers who come into the threads without being familiar with all the rules and traditions of the tropes. And when they are familiar with said rules and traditions, they get accused (with little evidence) of being ban evaders.
- A few tropers in the thread habitually engage in snotty, impolite mini-modding. There are also regular complaints about excessive, offtopic "socializing" posts.
- Many many thread regulars barely post/edit anywhere else, making the threads look like they are divorced from the rest of TV Tropes.
- Following that, there are often complaints about the threads and their regulars violating wiki rules, such as on indexing, crosswicking, example context and example categorization. Some folks are working on resolving the issues, but...
- Often moderator action against thread regulars leads to a lot of participants suddenly showing up in the moderation threads to protest and speak on their behalf, like a clique.
It is not a super high level problem, but it has been going on for years and we cannot ignore it any longer. There will be a thread in Wiki Talk
to discuss the problem; in the meantime there is a moratorium on further Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard example discussion until we have gotten this sorted out.
Update: The new threads have been made and can be found here:
Please see the Frequently Asked Questions and Common Requests List before suggesting any new entries for this trope.
IMPORTANT: To avoid a holler to the mods, please see here for the earliest date a work can be discussed, (usually two weeks from the US release), as well as who's reserved discussion.
When voting, you must specify the candidate(s). No blanket votes (i.e. "
to everyone I missed").
No plagiarism: It's fair to source things, but an effortpost must be your own work and not lifted wholesale from another source.
We don't care what other sites think about a character being a Complete Monster. We judge this trope by our own criteria. Repeatedly attempting to bring up other sites will earn a suspension.
What is the Work
Here you briefly describe the work in question and explain any important setting details. Don't assume that everyone is familiar with the work in question.
Who is the Candidate and What have they Done?
This will be the main portion of the Effort Post. Here you list all of the crimes committed by the candidate. For candidates with longer rap sheets, keep the list to their most important and heinous crimes, we don't need to hear about every time they decide to do something minor or petty.
Do they have any Mitigating Factors or Freudian Excuse?
Here you discuss any potential redeeming or sympathetic features the character has, the character's Freudian Excuse if they have one, as well as any other potential mitigating factors like Offscreen Villainy or questions of moral agency. Try to present these as objectively as possible by presenting any evidence that may support or refute the mitigating factors.
Do they meet the Heinousness Standard?
Here you compare the actions of the Candidate to other character actions in the story in order to determine if they stand out or not. Remember that all characters, not just other villains, contribute to the Heinousness Standard
Final Verdict?
Simply state whether or not you think the character counts or not.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 31st 2023 at 4:14:10 AM
No rush, but I saw the other day that Goosebumps has a bad/zero context entry:
- Complete Monster: Many, but not all of the villains, including Slappy, Ahmed from The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb, the Masked Mutant, Mr. Toggle from Piano Lessons Can Be Murder, and the Lord High Executioner from A Night In Terror Tower have their moments (although Slappy is more a Jerkass until Fridge Horror kicks in), but Mr Toggle and Ahmed are the truest complete monsters. But one particularly noteworthy is the Big Bad of Goosebumps Horrorland, called the Menace. When he was completely alive, kids died on his rides but he didn't care, due to his experiments in fear. The park was so scary, it somehow ended up in an alternate universe. Later, he found out Horrorland was made on his park, so he got contact with a horror to invite guests there so he get them to panic park, and make them bring the fear meter up so he can PP back to the normal world. it's implied he's done this before...but the previous kids got so scared they died and he simply doesn't care. He even got several goosebumps villains to follow him, including other monsters like Slappy, and King Tutten-Ra from another GBH book. However, this could also be a case of Blue-and-Orange Morality, since the Horrors had their own set of morals.
- Don't forget Sarabeth (the Cat) from Monster Blood. She becomes this when even if the grandmother sacrifices herself to the Monster Blood, and ultimately eliminate her control over her, Sarabeth still tried to command the Monster Blood to kill the children.
- Alexander in Deep Trouble counts too.
- Vanessa from Chicken Chicken is arguably the series' most horrific antagonist. She subjects two pre-teens to a slow, humiliating mutation into chickensfor knocking over her groceries without apologizing. When they try to beg for mercy, she responds by mocking them, and doesn't turn them back until they've typed out(with great difficulty since their chickens) an apology letter. It's even implied she's done this before! Her claims that she's trying to teach them manners can not justify her sadism, and worst of all, she never gets any comeuppance.
I can't really remember the books much if at all, but a few thoughts:
- The ones that give no context should just be deleted.
- Not sure about the Menace, but seems plausible he counts- anyone recall that book?
- Vanessa doesn't count- she has good intentions (teaching kids manners), she just acts on them in a..... disproportionate way (which could be considered Blue-and-Orange Morality). Also, while authorial intent doesn't really matter, one reason why a lot of people hate the book is because of the implication that Vanessa is supposed to be sort of right.
- I do remember the book in which that Masked Mutant appeared- he's like a Card-Carrying Villain from a comic book that comes to life. Probably wouldn't count because of issues of moral choice/ Generic Doomsday Villain.
edited 27th Aug '13 11:36:10 AM by Hodor
Edit, edit, edit, edit the wikiYeah, most of those need to be deleted. Ahmed, from what I remember, is nasty, but he's just following his religion: that intruders on the sacred temple must be sacrificed in a...nasty way, no exceptions for children. Mr. Toggle apparently murders children to harvest their hands, so there's that.
The Menace...from that entry, I'd say he counts.
edited 27th Aug '13 11:48:23 AM by Lightysnake
Mr. Toggle sounds like a good fit (could someone right up an entry for him?) and yeah, I think the Menace would fit too.
Don't think Ahmed would qualify (I need more context)- it is semi-understandable to kill everyone (and I mean everyone) that disturbs a sacred temple.
Edit, edit, edit, edit the wikiNot generally if it's a Religion of Evil, but Ahmed's just following ancient tenets of the Egyptian pagan religions...and honestly, he's nowhere near the worst the franchise has to offer.
Complicating the matter is that in the story, his religion is technically correct as Egyptian gods/mummies/etc. exist, though he might be misinterpreting things
edited 27th Aug '13 12:07:26 PM by Lightysnake
That second paragraph is what I was wondering about- because of that element, he's Properly Paranoid.
Like as a comparison (although she'd be disqualified for other reasons), Melisandre of A Song of Ice and Fire could be considered a Knight Templar rather than a Well-Intentioned Extremist (although I happen to like her), and does a lot of shady things, including Human Sacrifice, in order to stop the world from ending in an Endless Winter.
Since the world actually is going to end in an Endless Winter, it gives her a justification she wouldn't have if the world wasn't ending.
Edit, edit, edit, edit the wikiNot even Religion of Evil...I'm sure I could find some Christian or Muslim C Ms.
I think part of the reason why a Christian or Muslim CM can`t use the excuse is that they would be ignoring parts of the Bible and Quran that are more charitable and are just using their religion as an excuse for their sociopathy. Whereas Egyptian mythology tended to be somewhat less moralistic.
edited 27th Aug '13 2:51:52 PM by TommyFresh
There's that I suppose.
In this case, what seems important is that this is one of many cases (I forget the trope for it) where the teachings of a pagan religion appear to be literally true.
If they weren't, then in that case, we'd probably view Ahmed as insane rather than evil.
Edit, edit, edit, edit the wikiOkay, I found a few bad examples from Monster/Film:
From what I've heard these two are VERY solid keeps, though the entry is poorly written. And finally:
Is that supposed to be "bumping off babysitters"?
edited 27th Aug '13 4:29:14 PM by TommyFresh
Reading tropes such as You Know What You Did
Underbelly has the real life Victor Brincat and Thomas Hentschel, as well as Bandalli Debs and Jason Roberts listed, which when I asked about before was okay. How about a write up for them on the main page? I'll do one for approval if given the nod.
Currently reading up My Rule Fu Is Stronger than Yours![]()
If we gave the okay, feel free to put out a writeup.
TV rulez:
I would assume it'd be 'bumping off' unless he's raping them and with these entries, I can't be sure.
The other entries I can write up later. Why did we agree to cut the hillbillies? don't want to rehash anything, but they're rapists, attempted murderers and don't have any redeeming qualities. Sure, they have brief screentime, but they use it well.
edited 27th Aug '13 4:50:28 PM by Lightysnake
That wasn't me.
EDIT: Was this
the writeup Ambar mentioned?
edited 27th Aug '13 5:38:46 PM by TVRulezAgain
So far for Silent Hill:
Dahlia, Holloway, Napier, and Christabella are the only examples that have gotten any votes for keep, while Kaufmann and Sewell where conversely the only examples anyone voted cut for. I'm going to wait for a few more votes before doing anything.
In their one scene, they assault the protagonists (two of them) and proceed to taunt them, before stripping one down, with one of the mountain men violently sodomizing him, demanding he 'squeal like a pig.' When finished, he and his friend prepare to orally rape the other one there, as he has a 'real purty mouth' before Burt Reynolds shoots one with an arrow.
It's made absolutely clear they're going to murder them as well and the survivor later attempts to.

Silent Hill:
Sewell and Kaufman seem to fail to meet the heinous standard. Gillespie is an easy keep. On Holloway, am I missing something, or did she inexplicably turn from a sympathetic character who wanted to save the town into some torture-obsessed maniac halfway through her description? Was she actually evil all along? I don't know how to vote on her. As for Napier, doesn't he get, like, zero characterization? I've only seen the beginning of the game, but all he does when he sees Murphy is get nervous, call for the guards, and die. Unless he somehow got fleshed out later, despite being dead, I vote nay. Christabella sounds like Dahlia-lite, but if she's the worst person in her continuity, I guess she counts.
edited 27th Aug '13 11:10:04 AM by Camberf