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.
What I don't like in either version of Piggybacking on Hitler is that the majority of the names dropped are purely hypothetical. Going through the entire example list, there are plenty of examples involving Hitler and the Nazis, several involving Stalin and/or the Soviet Union, and one involving "Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill, who all colluded with Hitler to arrange the war" (from Assassin's Creed). Although that last one seems misuse to me, so I wouldn't count it as a valid example. (It also does not mention colonialism.)
There's no mention of either Christopher Columbus, Hernan Cortez, Francisco Pizarro, Kim Jong-Il or Pol Pot. But there's no point in saying that "this trope also works with [historical person X]" if we can't point to at least one example which actually involves [X]. Probably there are hundreds of popular "historical domain villains" this trope could hypothetically work with; what really matters is which historical figures it has been used with.
tl;dr: We should cut all names other than Hitler and Stalin from the description, because we don't actually have examples for others than these two. We can add other historical figures when we have examples that use them.

Back in February, on Piggybacking on Hitler, Bharjwarj removed an instance of Christopher Columbus and Winston Churchill being described as Evil Colonialist. This was in context of their portrayal in works, not the actual historical people. Bharjwarj changed them to Hernan Cortez and Francisco Pizarro. It smacks of righting great wrongs to me, someone attempting to strike back at the modern perception of Columbus and Churchill by removing them from association with that trope. There was no reason to change it, particularly since it's not troping real people.
Courtesy link
Also, here they are removing YMMV without an edit reason
Something about the addendum they made here rubs me the wrong way...
and it's unnecessary anyway; "popular among a subculture" does not mean "mainstream". it is in fact the opposite of mainstream.
factually incorrect change here
; the song is in fact called "Eddie's Teddy", not "Eddie"
all-white entry
changing non-US to US spelling
, and again here
this person has been on the wiki since 2018 and displays zero understanding of the etiquette of the site. they either have not bothered to equip themselves to contribute positively, or they simply do not care to. either way, this needs addressing.
Edited by ChloeJessica