Why is it locked?: Example As A Thesis

Been awhile since I looked at this page, and apparently it's been locked since then. Why?

If this is a formal guideline / manual of style topic, then it might benefit from mentioning a few things:

Example as a Thesis Is Not Bad:

• Sometimes it actually is easier to describe a trope by example.
• Virtually all YKTT Ws, at least initially, start out this way.

Example as a Thesis Is Not Good:

• Describing a broad trope by example first can make others assume it is artifically limited to that type of example.
• Makes it harder to skim an article and determine the nature (thesis) of the trope, because it appears halfway down the page rather than up top.

Thoughts? It might be worth adding something like "Avoid using Example as a Thesis" to the YKTTW editing tips.

I also removed it from the Self Demonstrating Index, because it's not self-demonstrating anymore.

edited 19th Nov '10 11:46:02 AM by Stratadrake

It was edited yesterday, so if it is locked, it was done sometime since 4:30 yesterday afternoon and now. Are you sure it isn't simply checked out?

Fast Eddie actually said himself that he Example as a Thesis is bad and he doesn't actually want it.

Yeah, Example as a Thesis is just plain bad. Probably because it easy. It might work in YKTTW, which is all about being an early, early draft, but a first time reader shouldn't have to guess what the thing is about for as long as a paragraph or more in posted article.

We can take our time after hooking the reader, not before. A hook requires that the reader be interested in what comes next, not their being puzzled about what is going on now.

edited 19th Nov '10 12:42:25 PM by FastEddie

Would it be better to rewrite those tropes to have one or more hypothetical examples in the middle of the description, and make a new index for descriptions like that?

If so, I can rework the pages I wrote to fit that.

edited 19th Nov '10 12:53:41 PM by DragonQuestZ

Moving the thesis up and the in-description for-examples down is the fix. Not sure what the purpose of a new index would be. It would be kind of like listing "not broken" descriptions. The hope is that they will all be not broken, eventually.

So it sounds like pasting an ugly yet informative Laconic immediately before the entertaining, engaging construction is an acceptible "fix"? Is that what is being said?

I think there are specific tropes for my natural reactions. :)

edited 19th Nov '10 2:41:27 PM by BaronGrackle

Yup. Nothing ugly about getting to the point.

Not necessarily, I guess. I suppose the reason I'm coming off as a grumpy guss is... well, what's the standard? Will there be a new focus next month on rewriting every Self-Demonstrating Article?

After all, a Self-Demonstrating Article can often be confusing. It is generally not the best manner in presenting information. It doesn't get to the point (unless the demonstrated trope is about getting to the point). Therefore, perhaps it needs to be "fixed".

And if you'd disagree with that sentiment... if there's any redeeming value to an article that is not devoted to presenting a concise message as quickly and unadorned as possible... then why would the same not apply for Example as a Thesis? Is there no room for allegory on tvtropes?

edited 19th Nov '10 2:52:09 PM by BaronGrackle

We've been rewriting self demonstrating articles for months. Just saying.

"Not sure what the purpose of a new index would be. It would be kind of like listing "not broken" descriptions."

Including hypothetical examples is not the norm, so there would still be an index for things like that.

No beef with allegory. In this medium — wiki articles — it is not an effective lead, though.

Internet articles in general have the special job of answering the question "Is this going to make any sense?" right away. The question is forefront in the reader's mind because there is so much on the internet that isn't going to make sense, and the reader has been burnt too many times. He gives up almost immediately.

We've got maybe one sentence to assure the reader it will be worth his while to try a sentence or two more. If it isn't at least clear what the piece is about by end of the first full sentence, we've lost him.

edited 17th Dec '10 1:31:36 PM by FastEddie

I agree with starting with the thesis is best. Just putting hypothetical examples in the middle would also help.

Again, should I rewrite some of these articles to be like that?

So shimaspawn, Fast Eddie, are you saying that it's only a matter of time before Shoot the Shaggy Dog is reshaped into something not nearly so awesome? It can find safe harbor neither as an Example as a Thesis, nor as a Self-Demonstrating Article?

Am I the only one who would consider that a travesty?

EDIT: (huddles around the Shoot the Shaggy Dog, protectively) There is so much joy I had from reading this trope description for the first time, that would've been impossible had the article been in pure wikipedia-encyclopedia format. I thought that was one of the appeals of tvtropes.

edited 19th Nov '10 4:45:05 PM by BaronGrackle

Outlier. And yup, we have the freedom to actually do that sort of thing whereas the Other Wiki doesn't. We win. Still, you'll note that the thesis is given in full in the Shakespeare epigram that leads off the article.

It doesn't have to be dull and boring. It has to be a thesis.

Tempting, though, to think we might be able abduct your precious Shoot the Shaggy Dog and hold it for ransom, blue pencil to its throat.    whahaha   

Not getting what you are asking DQZ. If an article can be improved by having a hypothetical in the middle, it should have a hypothetical in the middle. A special campaign to add hypotheticals just to be adding them doesn't make much sense.

edited 19th Nov '10 5:01:15 PM by FastEddie

What I mean is that should we rewrite the articles on this index to start with the thesis, put the hypothetical in the middle, and possible add some more to show the variety of how the trope can show up?

"Still, you'll note that the thesis is given in full in the Shakespeare epigram that leads off the article."

I don't think you really mean that. Because if it were true, then that would make the objective of delivering the thesis of the article fulfilled in the first quote, regardless of whether the quote is followed by an example or a precise sentence. And we could "fix" all of these articles with introductory stories simply by making sure they had an opening quote. But on the contrary; the quotation is much more likely to cause confusion than the example would. And it precedes the thesis.

I know you're the one with the authority. You need neither consensus, nor anything else, true. But you know who else overruled everyone just to have his way? You know who else did that? Abraham Lincoln. That's who.

(Wait. That didn't go exactly how I planned it...)

EDIT: "If an article can be improved by having a hypothetical in the middle, it should have a hypothetical in the middle. A special campaign to add hypotheticals just to be adding them doesn't make much sense."

Yet a special campaign to take away example introductions, just to be taking them away...?

(And as I've made my point and the impasse is clear, I shall stop now. :) )

edited 19th Nov '10 6:43:19 PM by BaronGrackle

If the quote is a thesis statement, it works. That one is. Not making a general statement about quotes. Just saying that we don't want to keep what the article is about a frikkin' secret.

Most tropes don't need examples in the intro text because they already have a perfectly serviceable list of examples a bit further down... plus a quote and a picture that are meant to concisely convey the trope.

The description should be about, well, describing it, first and foremost. People who don't get it from the description can scroll down and read the massive list of examples.

Handwavy "you know that thing where...?" examples are the problem. They tend to appear because people use them at the beginning of YKTTW and then it never gets removed.

To grasp the whole universe at once

Is futile and fails the test of clarity;

Which is why it's easier to be inspired

By tiny-scaled phenomenons and fractal similarity.

To see the world in a grain of sand,

And heaven in a wild flower...

Yeah. I'm not for this. Evocative writing that gets the point across first, prescriptive "should"s second. Cut the writing if it fails, and only if.

As long as the exposition nets a "ah, I can sort of see where this is going" response, it's fine.

edited 17th Dec '10 2:25:26 AM by TripleElation

Lately I've become of the opinion that works articles shouldn't use premise-as-a-thesis either. Trope articles should start with what they're about, work articles should start with what they are.

E.g: "A [year] [medium] by [publisher], about [plot summary...]"

edited 17th Dec '10 7:06:19 AM by Stratadrake

A lot of those can be shortened to Describe Topic Here jokes, and then quickly get to the definition. Not today (as I'll be too busy), I'll start working on cutting some of these from the tropes I wrote up, or moving them to the middle.

edited 17th Dec '10 9:48:28 AM by DragonQuestZ

removed

edited 10th Feb '11 1:06:38 PM by SuperSock

Well, if you're going to make a single sockpuppet for the sole purpose of necroing an outdated thread to whine about how the wiki is Ruined Forever, I don't see much point in handing down a ban on you. I mean, we're not the ones who went out of our way to bitch in a completely useless way. And yes, I did read your post before you edited it.

This is an old thread that should be locked anyway.