Ask The Tropers

Yeah. Nuke the whole thing from orbit.

The fact it starts by invoking Worrying for the Wrong Reason makes it much worse. And that's without getting into the copious amount of first-person writing.

It was written by, and pretty much only worked on by, Unkowni.

There were a few others, like Racattack Force and Feohrad. Mostly this is just tiring. It's been eleven years, and everything we could say has been said. Just about every defense of the game has had holes poked through it, and pulling the old "it's better in Japanese" card with a hefty dose of assumption doesn't make for patience.

It's not like YMMV and Analysis in the game's favor couldn't exist, but I just... This is more than a little fawning.

The Magnificent Bitch entry I just cut was less about astonishingly-executed bastardry than gushing about the depth of the MB.

Hang on, you can't just delete a Magnificent Bastard entry like that. Those examples are vetted by this thread, and you can't delete their examples unless the examples weren't added by the thread, or if the thread itself agrees the character doesn't actually qualify. If you think it's too gushy, take it up with that thread, but I guarantee most MB examples are written like that.

Alright, hang on. Here it is.

Hang on, you deleted this:

• Franchise Original Sin: Samus' infamous Heroic BSoD against Ridley mirrors what happened in the Metroid (Manga). However, the manga is viewed as doing this much better thanks to being more clear that the meeting was triggering traumatic flashbacks to Ridley killing her parents when she was three, in addition to Ridley even taunting her over it. And, most importantly, that encounter is also the first time Samus had seen Ridley since she was a child, so she'd never been forced to confront the issue until then. Meanwhile, Other M has Samus panic upon realizing that Ridley, the guy she's killed many times already, is back again (though in her defense, this is the first time he survived an entire planet exploding). The visual metaphor of her becoming a child again is one of the few times the game tries to Show, Don't Tell, but it utterly fails because it just made the entire audience think she was experiencing a relapse in the PTSD she already overcame in the manga... well, the entire audience who even knew that manga existed, since it was never officially released in the West. Everyone else was just plain baffled.

That entry as a whole is quite critical, it only has the little aside about the planet exploding. I do feel it could've stand to be rewritten because it's perhaps too critical, but you're deleting anything with even slightly a positive opinion. You could've just edited that part out.

A few things/questions:

• Common Knowledge was misused for audiences not getting the scene when it is about common beloved about a work that are obviously objectively incorrect to those who experience the original work.
• The Analysis page I'd be fine cutting as it's more about stating what it was supposed to be than analyzing what it was in practice. But what is an Analysis page supposed to cover if not that?

However warranted negativity is to the work, trimming things just because they're positive/defensive of the work is still inappropriate.

And why'd you delete these Fridge entries? You only explained one deletion.

Yeah, the more I look into what you're doing, the more questionable it all seems. For one thing, someone's review can't be "wrong". Reviews are opinion based. YMMV is opinion based. Fridge is opinion based.

They deleted this without explanation:

• Some of the more disliked elements of the story, such as Samus' emotional dependency on Adam, are partly due to the localization, rather than being the fault of the game's writers. In the original, she respected Adam but wasn't as desperate for his approval. See a more detailed analysis here.

I assume this was under Mis-blamed. Any reason not to add it back?

Well partially because it links to the Analysis which I'm thinking should be deleted, but other than that I do think it's fine.

So add back just remove the link.

The Franchise Original Sin was cut citing "This is an example of trying to "explain away" an audience reaction. It doesn't look good or work." The FOS didn't explain away the reaction, it explained why they reacted differently in a prior similar incident. Should it be added back?

Yeah, probably.

Here's a 30-minute critique of Other M, in which the author goes out of its way to tear the game's story to pieces.

For the record, Franchise Original Sin only recently cut the requirement that the older reaction be justified in the example. This example is likely a relic of that time.

Wait, we allow First-Person Writing in analysis?

I don't believe so.

Added the FOS and Mis-blamed examples back. FOS can be tweeked/cut to fit the new use. Should the Fridge be added back as well?

So are we in agreement to cut the Analysis page? If so what is Analysis supposed to be and how is this not it?

Analysis is supposed to provide greater insight to the workings of a trope or audience reaction that cannot be provided on the description itself. For example, going into the history of said trope and breaking down what kind of implications or storied past it may have.

Work analysis pages are much rarer, for exactly the reason this one is getting so much criticism: it often devolves into a review, roast or gush-fest about said work. Analysis pages are supposed to be one of the most OBJECTIVE segments of the wiki alongside Useful Notes and Creator pages — that makes writing one for a work challenging because it's often written as if ONE specific viewpoint of the work is the "correct" one. That's yet another sin this particular writeup is guilty of as well, and it's a problem that has persisted on the Mass Effect Analysis page despite my efforts to clean it up.

I'm one paragraph in and this is clearly a heavily biased opinion piece from whoever wrote it. It's a gross misuse of the namespace and should be cut immediately.

There's an Analysis page cleanup thread, by the way.

The fact that the game has received much backlash makes the analysis page suspect.

It wasn't about removing anything positive; I just tried to snip anything that looked related to the Analysis page's lengthy spiel; it's possible some examples are arguable, so if you see fit to re-add them within a certain bound, go ahead.

I meant it more in the sense that it wouldn't be surprising if people used the page to complain about the game given its reception, which makes me question the page's usefulness.

Well, I go ahead and removed First-Person Writing. And noticed that it even has a shameless advertisement to "a more in-depth" video by unknowni (who launched the page).

Seriously, people should stop the "There's a lot more but stop reading this wiki and come to my website/youtube channel instead." tactic. It's especially bad in Analysis since it's suppose to be in-depth analysing.

So do we still want the Analysis page cut? Or just take to Analysis cleanup for consideration?

This is really a job for analysis cleanup. unknowni has chronic problems with Example Indentation and I've called them in for this reason.