Subversions are not good.

I really don't think it does. Averted is just a fancy word for avoided. And to avoid something, you have to know that it is there, and it has to be intentional.

For example, I didn't use the letters x, q, or z above, but I didn't avoid using them. The words I chose just happened to not have those letters (which is actually quite common.)

But, this post is missing that symbol that follows "d". And I had to work hard to do so.

therefore, that first part "averts" using the letter "E"

On the other hand, my post focuses all about me and myself, so you can bet money that the one vowel that'll be constantly referenced would have to be... aye.

-is lost-

anyway, i do think subversions can be well done or badly done. i see the appeal of keeping the main pages neutral, but when it comes to us editors' bad habit of adding opinions to main pages, i'd hardly call stuff like this the worst offender. -shrug-

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with including opinions in entries, including things like "brilliantly subverted." If something is done differently enough than before, then it's fresh and original and deserves praise. And many actual subversions (as opposed to the claimed-to-be subversions that plague TV Tropes) are genuinely original — if they weren't, the original would be a Discredited Trope.

Of course, the obvious problem is that anything people like (including subversions) will get seized by the local Entry Pimp and claimed to apply to their favorite show. But that's not just subversions. Deconstructions are also over-claimed, because tropers like them too, and for much the same reason.

That said, I'm actually puzzled by a comment here. Fighteer said, "We aren't supposed to be writing reviews-by-proxy in the example descriptions. It's okay to be snarky but judging the quality of something borders on subjectivity." I thought that was like 90% of the point of the Fancruft (or as Tropers call it, "examples") on this site. Since when is there a rule that subjectivity — or for that matter, judging the quality of things — is not okay? Yes, there's the Subjective Tropes being separated, but that's different from a rule that no example can have the author's opinion.

People also describe straight examples of tropes with all the adjectives from the original post.

I'd say not to over-edit the enthusiasm of entries unless it's causing the page to be a gush-fest on literally every other entry. Then you can cut some of the offending adverbs just like you would from any novel or short story for readability and flow etc. If there's so many adverbs that it makes the page hard to read from stumbling over them all, prune some. Otherwise, let people do their thang.

Also, this is naturally veeeerry subjective, but if we're talking about a series that has a large population of Sugar Wiki entries it's probably the sort of work that generates hyperbole and so cutting enthusiastic adverbs will end up being a losing battle. You kind of have to work with the fanbase of one thing or another, and if that fanbase really loves to gush they're gonna gush. As a tangentially related example, the Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann page is absolutely rife with excitable edits and over-the-top emphatic italics and bold. This comes off as annoying on pages with a more subdued story, but for that page it definitely is suitable for the work at hand and so those "HILARIOUSLY BRILLIANTLY WONDERFULLY" subverted trope descriptions kind of fit the vibe. Get what I'm sayin'?

EDIT: given that the Crowning Moment tropes have been already heavily corrupted by the fact the mere title of the trope cause people to overuse and abuse them, I doubt it would help narrow down people's enthusiasm when it comes to subversions. Or anything. Geeks gonna geek.

edited 6th Dec '10 7:49:11 PM by devouredbyrobots

It's just an adjective. I know there's a rule which says we're supposed to write entries as if they're all by one person, but removing adjectives from all subversions is going a bit far.

edited 8th Dec '10 10:54:25 AM by halfmillennium