TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Ask The Tropers

Go To

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:

Trope Related Question:

Make Private (For security bugs or stuff only for moderators)

laserviking42 Since: Oct, 2015
2022-05-21 20:56:04

It doesn't seem like an example, but we have a Hindsight Cleanup thread for matters like these. I would suggest taking it there.

I didn't choose the troping life, the troping life chose me
JustaUsername Since: Jul, 2009
2022-05-21 21:24:32

Yeah, I don't see it as Harsher in Hindsight as an event that happened after the film didn't make it feel more uneasy, an event before the film made things more uneasy.

Maybe like a Harsher in Foresight sort of deal.

Edited by JustaUsername Some people say I'm lazy. It's hard to disagree.
JustaUsername Since: Jul, 2009
2022-05-21 22:29:01

Just realised, this fits Unfortunate Implications, considering the Laconic for that page is...

Unintentionally offensive content.

Anyone would object to me linking this to that?

Some people say I'm lazy. It's hard to disagree.
HoloMew151 Since: Jun, 2021
2022-05-22 00:03:04

Well, you would need to find a citation first before you add it in.

HoloMew151 Since: Jun, 2021
2022-05-22 06:33:01

Possibly, but just to be sure, I would advise you taking it over to here.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=15454914480A97304800&page=33

Indeed, that seems to be what they're discussing at the moment.

Avenger09 Since: May, 2014
2022-05-22 07:04:27

Clownfish TV is a clickbait channel. So no, he's not reputable.

Edited by Avenger09
monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 09:36:03

Well, I added an Unfortunate Implications entry, which should be serviceable if Harsher in Hindsight, Funny Annerism Moment or other ambiguous tropes aren't.

Yes, Clownfish Tv are indeed clowns, but the outrage against this frankly monstruous creative decision is real and you can pull a wide variety of sources on the matter.

Edited by monotrematum
dragonfire5000 Since: Jan, 2001
2022-05-22 10:00:49

Unfortunate Implications mentions this:

The citation should be in a reputable source. We'd prefer you cite something a bit more formal than someone's Tumblr blog or Twitter feed. Anyone can write a blog post and then call it a "citation".

I think it might be a good idea to replace some of the Twitter links in that entry with a more reputable citation, if any can be found.

Edited by dragonfire5000 "I squirm, I struggle, ergo I am. Faced with death, I am finally, truly alive."
monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 10:06:59

There's this for example: https://thedisinsider.com/2022/05/18/chip-n-dale-rescue-rangers-review-this-is-my-multiverse-of-madness/

I think some of the threads are extremely poignant however, especially the last one. I'd advise adding more sources rather than removing the eisting ones.

Bubblepig (Apprentice)
2022-05-22 10:26:42

^^^^ Thank you, now I know what You Tube channel I shouldn't watch when it's comes to meta news.

Speaking of Unfortunate Implications, I have to say I think we should wait until what've enough source of how people say it's unintentionally offensive.

Edited by Bubblepig "Now it's starting to feel like a game!"
monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 10:30:07

I believe the sheer amounts of links I and Justausername provided argue otherwise. Besides, lately articles tend to shill Disney, we did not wait for the Mulan controversy and I don't believe we should set that as our modus operandi.

Its clear there's an extremely dominant negative opinion in regards to this frankly incomprehensible creative decision. It is worth troping.

MichaelKatsuro Since: Apr, 2011
2022-05-22 10:41:10

Spoiler warning, dude. I wasn't that excited about this movie anyway, but still, it's only been out for two days.

Arctimon (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
2022-05-22 10:45:42

^^You linked three places, one of which is a clickbait YT channel, and I would also argue the validity of the other two. That is not "a sheer amount", nor is it an "extremely dominant" opinion.

Why don't you go to the thread that Holo Mew linked and make the case there.

monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 10:55:27

Excuse me? I didn't link to clownfish, also please check the sources I posted. They include two veritable articles and a forum thread in addition to twitter posts.

I think it's abundantly clear that this opinion is in fact dominant. Frankly what amounts to desecrating a dead actor's image is not that ambiguous a situation. Plenty of people have voice their opinion + situation pretty clear.

If you're going to dismiss hundreds of people and tolerate immoral actions for no justifiable reason at least bother to see what I've actually written instead of making accusations.

Edited by monotrematum
Edgar81539 Since: Mar, 2014
2022-05-22 11:01:52

You linked a bunch of twitter links. Even after I already put a disclaimer on top of the page that quotes the requirements for Unfortunate Implications, which is "Reputable sources". It's not about us being a bunch of academic assholes that want entries to be as verifiable as a scientific treaty, but the fact that before the entry had these requirements, Unfortunate Implications was just a pothole for "This extremely small and stupid thing offended me".

Everyone is offended by something. That's why we put the requirements, so that the entries would document a genuine phenonemon rather than every little thing that offended someone over the internet. And I say that as someone that found the use of Ugly Sonic to be a bit tasteless, considering that Paramount and Sega was never credited. You guys could simply be a little bit patient and then get an entry that reflects this opinion without trying to force an entry that multiple tropers have already told you can't be used like this.

Edited by Edgar81539
monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 11:05:05

Again, two actual articles and a forum thread, not just the tweets (which again, I find well argumentated and poignant). What is exactly the issue here? A bare minimum of three of the sources fit the baseline requirement, further supported by all else. This is stalling for stalling's sake.

And no offense, but youra analogy is not the best. We're talking about defaming an actual person that Disney ruined, not rights over a fictional character. Empathy, people.

Edited by monotrematum
MichaelKatsuro Since: Apr, 2011
2022-05-22 11:06:43

If you're going to dismiss hundreds of people and tolerate immoral actions for no justifiable reason...
Dude, you're getting very accusatory yourself. Also, "hundreds of people" amounts to roughly 0.00001% of people alive. You can find that amount of people supporting absolutely anything at all.

monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 11:07:50

Please contribute something of value to this conversation.

Edgar81539 Since: Mar, 2014
2022-05-22 11:08:01

It's not about tweets being well argumentated and poignant, it's about the fact that despite Unfortunate Implications specifying that you need to use reputable sources, the fact that I put a disclaimer to prevent this kind of thing from popping up you still choose to just do whatever you pleased. Twitter users are not reputable sources, no matter how well they argument. Worst of all, one of your citations is from Clownfish TV, which is an outrage youtuber that consistently spouts outright lies (Such as insisting that Teela was always intended to be in a lesbian relationship with Evelynn in Masters of the Universe: Revelations) which disqualifies him from being a reputable source.

Edited by Edgar81539
monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 11:10:19

And again with not reading. I did not put Clownfish Tv; again, read the sources.

This is getting nowhere. As I have stated I put three sources that fall within the baseline, with tweets SUPPORTING these valid sources.

So far A) you have consistently refused to actually read my contributions, B) are refusing to acknowledge that there are three valid sources. Please do not derail this converstation.

WarJay77 (Troper Knight)
2022-05-22 11:10:50

Related is this discussion on UI citations and exactly what should and shouldn't qualify.

Put simply there's a lot of controversy, but most people seem to agree that Twitter, YT videos, and the like don't qualify.

Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
MichaelKatsuro Since: Apr, 2011
2022-05-22 11:12:54

Please contribute something of value to this conversation.
This is rudeness for the sake of rudeness. Not cool, IMO.

...are refusing to acknowledge that there are three valid sources.
Their entire point is that in their opinion, there aren't three valid sources. You're basically just saying "Please acknowledge that I'm right and you're wrong."

Edited by MichaelKatsuro
monotrematum Since: Nov, 2021
2022-05-22 11:15:37

Okay, its clear you are not willing to accept the fact that there are non-twitter sources (pretty rude if you ask me). Contacted the mods about this.

Edited by monotrematum
MichaelKatsuro Since: Apr, 2011
2022-05-22 11:18:02

Okay, its clear you are not willing to accept the fact that there are no-twitter sources (pretty rude if you ask me).
...This is not true. To be blunt, you're lying, which is pretty rude. At no point did anybody claim that there aren't any sources except for Twitter. (Well, except possibly Edgar depending on how you interpret his post, but he later mentioned Clownfish TV and it being a Youtube channel.)

EDIT: I realize I'm coming off as a bit abrasive, but if you're saying stuff that isn't true, there's nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade.

Edited by MichaelKatsuro
HoloMew151 Since: Jun, 2021
2022-05-22 11:18:04

Now that I’ve seen this conversation, everyone’s correct, I don’t think your sources are good enough to warrant an entry yet. Calm down and see if any more reputable sources pop up the meantime.

Edited by HoloMew151
MichaelKatsuro Since: Apr, 2011
2022-05-22 11:19:45

EDIT: Ninja'd.

Edited by MichaelKatsuro
mightymewtron Since: Oct, 2012
2022-05-22 11:44:12

The Disinsider article seems like it's a valid citation. They don't need to be NYT levels of credible, just prove that the troper didn't make this up or that it's not just people venting on social media.

v Yes and yes.

Edited by mightymewtron I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Edgar81539 Since: Mar, 2014
2022-05-22 11:45:59

Were you able to open the article? Does it record the opinion of multiple people (as, if saying "However, multiple users/people have been upset about the inclusion of bla bla bla") or does it only say "Some people may be offended by this"?

Synchronicity MOD (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
2022-05-22 11:47:39

Lolwhat even happened here. I agree, don't cite tweets and don't be snippy. Debate the legitimacy of the other citations in the Unfortunate Implications Citation Discussion thread, not in multiple ATT threads.

I'm going to go ahead and lock this, since the original query (is it Harsher in Hindsight) has been definitively answered with 'no'.

Also, the other two threads just so I only have to link to this one in the future: 1 2

Edited by Synchronicity
Top