Ask The Tropers

Have you tried messaging them about this?

I've done it But they haven't answered

I'll wait sometime if that is what must be done

Following on his other m edit about ridley not being foreshadowed at all... Well there is foreshadowing Other M blatantly has a shot zooming out from Samus's eyes/face when she recounts Ridley dying alongside Zebes blowing up She states it was the end of her longstanding nemesis Cinematically speaking, as I said, it zooms out from her eyes and face when she narrates this When she recounts the things Zebes's explosion eliminated, she states Mother Brain, Space Pirates and Ridley Leaving Ridley for last, and unlike Mother Brain and Space Pirates, she specifically adds on "my long-standing nemesis" for Ridley, suggesting he was the sole most important subject in that statement She immediately follows Ridley up with "the baby", who is also of significant importance to Samus Coupled with the cinematic shot of zooming out from her eyes, this all suggests she thinks of Ridley and the baby Metroid are the most important beings in all of this. Her history with Ridley was then foreshadowed by Samus stating she was so young when she lost both of her parents, and is what made her attachment to Adam so strong

Her entire bond with Adam is completely tied to her "relationship" with Ridley Beyond that, Ridley and Samus's connection was foreshadowed by the Little Birdy and Mystery Creature. Birdy stares at Samus, mysterious creature savagely attacks her

Moreover, in Prime 1, she is shown that upon seeing him, she just looks up at him, and can be seen rapidly clenching her fist (which could be a sign of anxiety) https://imgur.com/a/bn6VZSB

She then shakes her arm and we see a close up of a clearly angered Samus Zero Mission also has a very angry close up https://imgur.com/a/bn6VZSB That look in her eyes tells you this is emotionally affecting her

It's not a look of complete resolve It looks as if she having to CURRENTLY resolve herself

I'm not really sure which page and trope you're even referring to, you just started with an entire screed about how you're right about ... something.

If this is about YMMV tropes, there is no objectively "correct" interpretation. We document common fan reactions (even if sometimes they seem illogical to us), and in those cases it's about what groups of fans think, not the "objectively correct" answer.

It's to avoid an edit war

I understand that, but you've not actually mentioned what page and what trope you are referring to. I get that it's something to do with Samus of the Metroid games, but otherwise all you've done is dumped a Wall of Text here and expect others to weigh in, possibly by doing some telepathy and reading your mind.

Once again, if this is a YMMV trope (I don't know, because again, you've somehow managed to avoid saying which trope you're referring to), then there is no "correct" example. YMMV are about documenting fan reactions, not ascertaining "the truth".

That sounds like a personal opinion. Are these your opinions or actual opinions/reactions held by more than one member of the player base?

I think Peabody Sam has edit warred.

• Addition by Peabody Sam.
• Removal by OP of this thread.
• Re-addition by Peabody Sam. Not the entirety of the example they added, but at least some part of it that was removed, unchanged (specifically, the "It comes out of nowhere" part).

I don't mean to intrude, but I've brought up RAHDRON in ATT before. While PeabodySam has edit warred here, RAHDRON has some editing problems too.

I just got home from work to see that I have seven messages about these YMMV Metroid pages, after I had encouraged you to start a discussion before continuing to modify and remove the YMMV entries that you've been editing on these pages. I've noticed that you've made a lot of edits recently to YMMV Metroid pages, mainly consisting of downplaying or removing criticisms of Other M (or, inversely, downplaying/removing praising of other Metroid games in comparison to Other M). As stated above, YMMV tropes are not objective, so even if you disagree without something, you shouldn't outright remove it without discussion; this is why I had undone some of your edits. But, let's go through this one at a time, and with this Ask The Tropers being public, anyone else can weigh in as well.

YMMV.Metroid Prime: Federation Force

Here, you removed part of Character Rerailment that praised the game for the Federation treating Samus with awe and deferring to her intel, instead of treating her as an outsider like in Other M. Your stated reason for this was that it was "just a myth" (which I had understood as "just a fan misconception", although here in this topic it seems that what you meant to say is "Samus is treated as a myth"); the "outsider thing" was just a literal translation issue, and Samus is derisively compared to Bigfoot in Echoes.

I reinstated that part, but I reworded it to replace "rockstar awe" with "respect" (which is less of an exaggeration) and specifying that Adam and the Colonel are the ones who coldly treat Samus as an outsider in Other M. Yes, Anthony is outright friendly towards Samus and a few others like Maurice and James are respectful towards her, but there's a reason why Anthony is popular while the Federation's overall depiction in Other M is not. It's because Anthony is perceived by fans as the exception, while Adam and the Colonel are major figures of authority and create the appearance that the Federation as a whole is cold and disrespectful towards Samus. Compare this with Corruption, where a few unimportant troopers may not say much to Samus, but the troopers who have more dialogue are never dismissive towards Samus, and Fleet Commander Castor Dane treats her with dignity and respect; again, this creates the perception that the Federation as a whole is respectful towards Samus.

The "Bigfoot comment" in Echoes is just one trooper, not representing the Federation as a whole. And it serves to contrast with another trooper in the same squad who clearly looks up to Samus as a great hero. Therefore, it doesn't moot the point as you claim it does. And if you're trying to say that people treat Samus more as a myth than a real person... well, think about our own myths: Hercules, Achilles, etc. These are myths of great heroes. Therefore, the idea of treating Samus as a myth actually enhances the level of awe and respect surrounding Samus, rather than playing into the hands of cold indifference that fans disliked about Other M.

YMMV.Metroid: Other M

I had just reinstated a Big-Lipped Alligator Moment example (Samus turning into a little girl at the sight of Ridley) that was removed, while also reworking the entry to make it clearer that it qualifies for all three criteria: coming out of nowhere (it has no buildup or foreshadowing), making little sense in context (the visual metaphor confused most fans for various reasons), and having no plot importance (it's never brought up again and has no lasting consequences).

Here, you removed the first criteria because you claimed that Samus mentioning Ridley's demise on Zebes counted as foreshadowing. This is the quote in question: "And the explosion that followed destroyed planet Zebes, along with the remains of Mother Brain, the Space Pirates, and my long-standing nemesis, Ridley." I object to this, because this does not do nearly enough to adequately foreshadow the moment in question (to repeat: Samus turning into a little girl at the sight of Ridley; I must emphasize it because this specific moment is the BLAM).

Let's just pretend for a moment that I've never played a Metroid game before, and Other M is my first foray into the series. When Samus says this quote in the game's prologue, I am given no context behind who or what "Ridley" is, except that he's Samus's nemesis who died. The game violates "show, don't tell" and it doesn't even show me what Ridley looks like, so I'd have no way of realizing that Ridley is a big purple dragon alien thing; therefore, I wouldn't recognize Ridley when he shows up during the game's third act. Mind you, this third act comes after hours of gameplay and cutscenes, during which Ridley is never brought up again, therefore I probably wouldn't even remember Ridley's name from the single offhand mention in the prologue. If that counts as foreshadowing, then it's very weak foreshadowing that fails at its job.

But most importantly, aside from being Samus's nemesis (which, for all we know, could just mean he's a jerk who picks the stronger starter Pokemon and taunts "Smell you later!" every time he sees Samus), nothing else about Ridley is given to us by Other M. We're not told anything about Samus's personal history with Ridley. We aren't told that Ridley killed Samus's parents when she was a young child. We aren't told that Ridley refuses to stay defeated and keeps coming back, making his actual death on Zebes significantly more impactful. We don't know anything about Ridley or why he's important to Samus. Therefore, Other M fails to give enough foreshadowing or buildup for Samus turning into a child when she sees Ridley.

I want you to read this comic that I had made several years ago. It's an alternate take on that prologue, which expands upon the quote that you mentioned. Instead of just mentioning that Ridley is a nemesis who died, this version takes the time to show Ridley himself (ingraining his physical appearance in the audience's memory) and explain his long history with Samus. This would be foreshadowing. This would be building up Samus having an emotional reaction to his return.

Less importantly, you removed a part of the third criteria that referenced the fan mod Maxximum Edition. I brought up Maxximum Edition because it edits this cutscene to remove the "Samus turning into a child" moment. While other cutscenes are modified as well, none are modified to account for this moment's removal. This demonstrates that this scene has zero plot importance, because otherwise removing this scene would have negatively affected the plot in some way, and therefore why it qualifies for the third criteria of BLAM. You removed this mention simply because "maxximum edition does have contrived plot points ot some pople", which completely missed the point that I was trying to make. It's not about whether or not Maxximum Edition has "contrived plot points", it's about this moment being removed without any effect to the plot in Maxximum Edition.

YMMV.Metroid: Samus Returns

You first removed Character Rerailment without any explanation. I reinstated it, while also rewriting it to provide context for the backlash against her portrayals in Other M and Federation Force and explaining that the game returns Samus to conveying her popular established characterization through actions and body language, much like her largely-silent portrayals in previous games. You then removed it again, albeit adding a heavily-reduced version of it under Author's Saving Throw, with your justification being that Samus is only a Silent Protagonist in the first two games and the Prime games while she monologues in Super Metroid, Fusion, and Zero Mission, and that it's just a fan misinterpretation.

You also said the example "feels a bit nattery", but I don't think you understand what that term means. "Natter" refers to conversations in the main page (e.g. "Samus is blah blah blah..." "Actually, she's blah blah blah..."), and this entry was written to be non-conversational in tone and language.

Describing the backlash against Other M and Federation Force is necessary context to explain why this example is Character Rerailment (although Authors Saving Throw works fine enough, I guess). As for the monologue argument, the key word here is "largely"; yes, she had one monologue in Super and two monologues in Zero Mission, but otherwise those games told her story entirely through silence (Fusion and Other M are the outliers, not the other way around). And since people liked her "merciless and stoic" portrayal despite (or because of) her not speaking in those games, then doesn't that reinforce the idea that Samus being silent in this game is specifically meant to appeal to those fans? Remember that YMMV is about fan perception; even if Samus isn't 100% silent all the time, that's what fans remember best about her.

There has to be a better way to settle this without resorting to larger and larger Wall of Text screeds ... nobody is sifting through that.

Be concise.

@UFOYeah:

While you're right that what I did was not exactly proper editing etiquette, please allow me to justify my action. RAHDRON had removed one of three criteria for Big-Lipped Alligator Moment but left the rest of the example. This presented a problem, since BLAM mandates all three criteria to be met in order to avoid misuse; you can't have an example with just two criteria, it has to be "all or nothing", which is why this example had been removed previously (another editor thought that the scene had plot importance; this is why I rewrote and restructured the example to make this clearer). My options at that point were to either reinstate (and, if necessary, correct) the first criteria, or to remove the entire example.

While wikis frown upon "reverting a revert" as edit warring, I also have seen that a general rule of thumb is that exceptions can be made when the revert in question was objectively incorrect. YMMV examples are tricky since they're not objective, but they can be based on objective facts. As you can tell from my wall of text above, my assertion that this moment meets the "no buildup/foreshadowing criteria" is based on the objective fact that the game gives you little to no information about Ridley and Samus's history. In this case, I felt that RAHDRON's objectively-stated reason for removing the first criteria (claiming that Ridley's single mention in the prologue was enough foreshadowing) was incorrect.

Therefore, I opted to reinstate the first criteria, in order to make sure that the BLAM example was properly written and formatted on the page, instead of being left as an incomplete example that would surely be entirely removed due to perceived misuse.

@laserviking42:

Sorry, I use 127 words when most people would use 2.

@laserviking42: I sat through it :v

Generally, what I got from it is that RAHDRON has been removing YMMV entries for Metroid games regarding elements fans criticized about Other M, and is doing so based on very little and/or faulty evidence.

Federation Force: Uses one Logbook entry about a single member of the Galactic Federation Army thinking Samus is a myth akin to Bigfoot as "proof" that the Galactic Federation as a whole doesn't respect Samus as reasoning to remove Character Rerailment, while failing to acknowledge that almost every other member who directly interacts with Samus does have respect for her at minimum.

Other M: Uses the single mention of Ridley in the game's prologue as "proof" that the "Samus turning into her younger self" scene was foreshadowed and therefore not a Big-Lipped Alligator Moment, even though that mention doesn't elaborate on any aspects of her relationship with Ridley that would foreshadow it (like him being her Arch-Enemy and having killed her parents).

Samus Returns: Removes the Character Rerailment example about Samus being mostly known for her role as a Heroic Mime who communicates mainly with her body language, citing her monologues in other games even though those monologues are few and far between (and generally only at the very start of each game). Also described the example as nattery in their removal, without really explaining how it was.

Edit War is forbidden regardles of intent. I'm not sure what gave the "exceptions can be made when the revert in question was objectively incorrect" impression, people get suspended for that too. The exception allows changing back edits that are rule-breaking, like ban-aversion or vandalism.

The community should decide if RAHDRON's edits were unilateral before any reversive actions could be made and if they have wonk/agenda edits targeted against specific opinions.

^^ Now that is concise.

That seems to be the thrust of what I understood about it, that YMMV items were being edit warred (or close to) based on some (non-existent) objective truth.

If a portion of the fandom feels the character is re-railed then it is a valid trope to use.

Since Peabody Sam did edit war regardless of their intentions, they have been suspended.

My apologies I should have added more evidence Even then I was trying to make the critiques more concise in the other m ymmv page But sorry if it came across as just erasing issues people have.