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.
I agree that Narm shouldn't be used for bashing or complaining about personal hangups (hence why I backed down over the Star Wars thing.)
My problem is the majority of Narm entries do not provide any evidence that the opinion is a collective one, and many do seem like one person's attempt to make a work look weaker by citing Narm.
Back to my original question- should Narm examples be supported by evidence, to ensure it isn't just a single troper's opinion? (Much like Unfortunate Implications requires evidence?)
Sadly the wiki is already filled with bad examples, the solution isn't to create more, but to clean up the bad examples where we can. YMMV is for showing common audience reactions, this cuts down on shoehorned in stealth complaining and flame wars.
I didn't choose the troping life, the troping life chose meYMMV pages are meant to document general audience reactions, so yes, providing evidence like reviews or discussion threads is usually advisable.
That being said, Narm is one of the most misused tropes on this website and is often used to complain or nitpick. We have a cleanup thread
for this very reason.
As for your example, sorry, but it's misuse. If the top comment in this clip
is any indication, the voice actor's delivery is indeed considered quite poor, but that doesn't make the scene unintentionally funny. In other words, it's a genuine flaw that makes the scene fall flat, but it's not something that is within the trope's scope.
People seem to think that I'm trying to get my example re-instated; I'm not - I fully admit that I was just venting about something that killed the moment for me big time. It should have been removed, but the reason should have been the one Tanta Monty gave (that it doesn't fit the scope of the trope.)
That wasn't the response I got on the edit- I was essentially told "everyone else thinks this is great, provide evidence if you disagree" and it is this attitude which prompted my question.
^ To clarify, examples don't need to repeatedly note that the opinion is shared by "a lot of people". They just need to be widespread enough that someone can find people sharing and discussing that opinion elsewhere on the interwebs. The more people who talk about it the more likely it is to qualify.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall

I recently added a Narm entry to the Star Wars: The Clone Wars YMMV page regarding a particular line which totally ruined a scene for me due to what I thought was a very whiny delivery from the VA.
Soon after another troper pounced and removed the edit. They had thought I was criticising the whole scene (which I wasn't, I said the scene was very dramatic other than that one line) and that I needed to provide evidence that other people thought it was Narmy.
Now, I'm not going to get into an edit war over this as it doesn't really matter to me, but I was checking the main page for Narm and it doesn't say anywhere that examples must be supported with evidence that others agree. The main page even states that Narm is completely subjective.
I have also seen multiple examples of Narm from other tropers that I completely disagree with and just look like nitpicking to me (which my Star Wars example probably was as well, to be fair) but I have left these in place because, as I understood it, Narm is supposed to be subjective.
What are your thoughts on this? Should Narm examples provide evidence that others agree? Can we delete other tropers' entries just because we don't agree that it's Narm?
Edited by Sinister_Sandwich