Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- • General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- • Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- • Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- • Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- • Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- • Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- • Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- • Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- • Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- • Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- • Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- • Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openCharacters/Supernatural. Why does Sam have a trope page, with tropes, and an alphabetical split??
Supernatural. Why does Sam have a trope page, with tropes, and an alphabetical split??
openPlagiarized Description
I just saw that VisualNovel.Ciconia When They Cry description are similar word to word to its official summary as shown in this article. This isn't allow, right?
Edited by WhirlRXopenAre these tropable?
1.) I want to make a TLP for when The Undead can do biological things like eat and sleep. I asked if it already existed, but all I got was Our Zombies Are Different and that's not quite it.
2.) That thing where being scared causes a woman to go into labour. It's related to Maternity Crisis but not quite.
openBiased editing Videogame
Troper Scainer64 seems a tad bit biased editing on this page. Now to be fair, the Geth/Quarian conflict is one of the most hotly debated topics among the fandom, but still, he seems focused on trying to shift the entire narrative against the Geth. I undid some of his previous editing, as it contained a lot of natter, bad grammar and weird placing, but now he once again removed big portions without any reasons. Bringing this up here since I don't want to start an edit war.
Edited by Forenperseropen A vague script.
Is there a trope in scriptwriting for when an author gives indications to the artist, like writing all the dialogues and an outline, but the artist has to put everything in between?
openHow Informal Is Too Informal?
Recently, I witnessed a bunch of examples on Punch-Out's YMMV page be altered slightly to make them seem more formal. This made me wonder: is there a set guideline for formal writing that I'm missing? I've read the Clear, Concise, Witty page, but I'm wondering if there's more to look out for, especially since I'm not 100% sure the edits done on the Punch-Out page fall into this category.
My apologies if this is in the wrong area to ask, but I'm a bit worried I missed something when it came to example writing.
Edited by NotAGoodCartoonistopenNo Title
Should the page for VideoGame.Miracle Girls use the English names from Manga.Miracle Girls, even though the game was Japanese-only?
open[Solved] Explanation for red link
Any idea why season 3 episode 1 is redlinked on Recap.Stranger Things?
Edited by eroockopenWeird page
Anyone know what the hell is going on with this page? It's apparently a cypher version of the Home Page, but in the French namespace.
Edited by Chabal2openMore TLP Shenanigans
Another day, another problem. There are two drafts that have been recently made and have gained hats unnaturally quickly, especially considering they aren't...well...good.
Digital Piracy Is The Only Option and In the Pink and Purple.
openNo Title
Disney Conquest and its subpages are strangely formatted in general—almost all of the examples are ZCE, the Creator page tropes the real-life players, and it's only indexed on Needs Wiki Magic Love. I'm unsure what to do about it since it has several pages going, but in its current state I don't know if it can be saved.
Edited by lalalei2001openagenda-based editing
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/el.php?findfor=AlphaEdge
Removed text from The CW with the reason "removing woke crap from the page".
openIs this misuse?
I asked on Is This an Example? but it's on the next page now and no one's answered. So, here's my ITAE post, copy-pasted. I hope I'm doing the right thing:
These examples on Clueless Aesop:
- The Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Ethics" is listed because, to quote, "It seems like there's an Aesop or three in there somewhere, but the whole business is so muddled that it's really hard to tell what they're going for." But that sounds more like a Lost Aesop to me.
- Also, The Big Comfy Couch is listed because apparently one episode had the moral "don't fall over with your hands in your pockets", but as far as I can tell, a Clueless Aesop isn't An Aesop that's weird, it's when the moral doesn't work due to out-of-universe events.
openTime to reach concensus Film
There was a bit of the controversy going on with the Protagonist-Centered Morality on the Spider-Man: Far From Home page and troper HighCrate pulled the contested example to the example thread. It happened at Jul 15th 12:24 AM. Two tropers replied to him there, and six hours later, at Jul 15th 6:25 AM he pulled the example back "per concensus". What kind of concensus can be reached during 6 hours when none of the people originally editing that example got the chance to be involved in the discussion? To be clear, I was not among them but I find it wrong.
The resulting example "per concensus" is factually incorrect. It states that Tony Stark "proclaimed himself a hero" for creating E.D.I.T.H. while nothing like that happened in the film. How do I delete that part when "concensus" was reached?
Edited by AsherinkaopenMispelling and lack of context Film
Troper markband added a rather confusing Brought Down to Badass entry in Darth Vader's character section. It reads…
- Downplayed. Before he was critically injured on Mustafar, Vader had the potential to become the strongest Force-user in the galaxy. While in Legends his injuries hobbled his force potential and his strength in the force to were he was stated to only have about 80% of the strength the emperor had, in canon Vader never lost the raw power he had in the force but was unable to use it to it's fullest given the precarious situation of being reliant on machinery to keep himself alive. Basically, Vader couldn't use some force powers like force lightning because they would obviously endanger the cybernetics keeping him alive and he couldn't use his full power because of the stress tolerances of his bionics. The emporer even called Vader's power "unparalleled" in the Dark Lord of the sith comic.
I had to correct it to…
- Downplayed. Before he was critically injured on Mustafar, Vader had the potential to become the most powerful Force-user in the galaxy. Even after, he was still able to use his Force powers and remained an effective Hero Killer and symbol of fear.
openRegarding the main ''Endgame'' quote Film
There seems to be an Edit War regarding the main quote for Avengers: Endgame but it primarily has to do with satisek repeatedly changing the main quote to "Part of the journey is the end." This happened four times already even after the tropers tried expanding Iron Man's initial quote.
The previous quote before the change is: "We lost. All of us. We lost friends. We lost family. We lost a part of ourselves. Today, we have a chance to take it all back. You know your teams, you know your missions. Get the stones. Get them back. One round trip each. No mistakes. No do-overs. Most of us are going somewhere we know. That doesn't mean we should know what to expect. Be careful. Look out for each other. This is the fight of our lives... and we're gonna win. Whatever it takes."
Which quote do you guys do you think best describe the movie itself? Personally, I like Captain America's quote much better.
Edited by Loekman3openIssues with Spoilers
There are massive issues with the way tropers are using spoiler tags on Characters.Bloodstained Ritual Of The Night.
Bloodstained is a game that has one massive plot twist at the end and that plot twist is later followed up by several other reveals that you can't know about without discussing the big twist first. For example, there's a character who qualifies as a Spanner in the Works, but to provide context, you have to first spoil that there was an Evil Plan, as well as who orchestrated said plan. Because the perpetrator's identity is linked to how it gets foiled.
Several tropers (Tropers.Sally 777, Tropers.Luigifan and a few others) keep either A) spoiler-tagging out the entire text of an example, B) adding so many spoiler tags that it looks like swiss cheese or C) spoiler tagging out even the trope name.
I've attempted to make several edits to fix these problems, and referring them to Handling Spoilers, but today Tropers.Sally 777 fired back with the following:
"Nubian, maybe you should read Handling Spoilers instead of nitpicking on almost everything to almost an insane degree. Some of the stuff left open can lead people to piecing together the plot without even glimpsing at the spoilers"
They did this while completely spoilering out the entire example Spanner in the Works yet again.
Edited by NubianSatyress
Hello, just wondering if it would or would not be frowned upon for the creator of a work to make a works page on TV Tropes for that work?