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.
Relevant discussions: [1]
, [2]. But these edit reasons are unacceptable regardless and I don't think that warning was agreed on.
Still, I'd rather discuss if the example fits "Funny Aneurysm" Moment separately after more people reply to this first.
TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
FAM is no longer a trope, it's a redirect to Harsher in Hindsight. The Hindsight cleanup thread has ruled that no Vic Mignona examples are allowed before he is declared innocent or guilty. I haven't followed his case, but I suppose the example could be restored on the condition the judging is over and there is proof that it has affected the way how people react to the work.
From the legal side of things related to Vic's case:
To clarify: Vic was never on trial over being guilty or innocent of sexual harassment, he sued both Funimation and other fellow voice actors for defamation (since they were claiming he was a predator), Vic lost the trial 0-17 on October 2019, he appealed the ruling and lost again by all accounts on August 2022 and was denied a re-hearing on October that year.
So legally speaking, anyone can claim that Vic is guilty and it would not be defamation.
Edited by matruz
Hindsight is used for actor shoehorns often enough that it's hard to say what is an example.
I'd err on the side of keeping Junpei/Vic off the page for now.
I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.
I'm going to agree with the others and say keep it off the page, especially if there was never officially any legal conclusions.
Opinions are worthless if they're unbendable over time.
^Um... actually there were official legal conclusions that don't look good on Vic as I said in my previous post, I'll just say that.
Edited by matruz
As far as I understand, all you talked about above was Vic engaging in a Defamation of Character suit. You also specifically said that he was never on trial for whether or not he was guilty of harassment. So unless something specific were to come of that, then my point still stands.
Opinions are worthless if they're unbendable over time.
Basically, in the trial Vic failed to prove that Funimation and his former colleagues were lying in their claim of him being a sexual predator. Take that as you will.
Thank you for clarifying. I still think it wouldn't be appropriate for the Persona 3 page specifically, however. If it's not already mentioned on the creator page or something like "Overshadowed by Controversy" though, then I have no qualms there.
Edited by MidnightRun99 Opinions are worthless if they're unbendable over time.
^^To be more specific, by definition a defamation suit alleges that the defendant knowingly and maliciously spread false information that caused the plaintiff to suffer legally actionable harm. But the burden of proof is on the plaintiff (at least in US courts), so while Mignogna losing his case doesn't positively prove that he did whatever he's accused of (the threshold of proof is lower in civil court), it does show he couldn't prove to the satisfaction of the judges and jurors involved that the allegations were false and that the accuser knew it.
Edited by StarSword
I see, that actually makes a lot more sense. Thank you for that very informative piece of insight!
Opinions are worthless if they're unbendable over time.
MidnightRun99: May I ask why you don’t think it’s relevant to the Persona 3 page specifically?
In the English dub of the game’s Female Protagonist (FeMC) route, Vic’s character is directly called “the poster boy for sexual harassment” in his introductory scene by another character.
As I noted in my original post, Junpei’s behaviour is already questionable enough in the original version of the P3 story that we should discuss putting it under Harsher in Hindsight. But the FeMC path specifically adds extra details that really haven’t aged well in light of the allegations.
Edited by ChrisDV
^I haven't played that game but IMHO that sounds like textbook case of Harsher in Hindsight.
Also, I think we should not use the threshold of Vic "being declared innocent or guilty" for deciding to add relevant examples pertaining to his issues. Since it's not applicable to the situation, had he actually been on trial over those then yes it would apply. Otherwise would anyone suggest not talk about allegations against other individuals' until they're settled in a court of law, regardless if they're brought to it or not?
Edited by matruz
I'm really just following along with what Tantamonty mentioned above, in which according to the cleanup thread "no Vic Mignona examples are allowed before he is declared innocent or guilty," and I'm just in agreement of keeping it that way.
If you want an in-game example (I've played the whole game), Junpei being labeled as that is only mentioned once around the beginning, but it's not really lingered on. In regards to the FeMC route, he's not actually a romance option (in fact he wholly supports the FeMC going her own path of love and doesn't interfere), because later on in the game he ends up in a genuinely serious relationship with someone else that ultimately ends in tragedy, which dramatically changes him as a person and makes him more mature as a result. So based on the main, canonical game in which he's from, it just seems like a stretch to have it included is all.
But that's just my take on it, I won't contend against if a majority think it is worth including.
EDIT: Since this topic is starting to derail, I’m no longer interested in participating. I’ve said my piece and if it’s starting to be misunderstood then blame Matruz. Please direct any further questions to him and the others and refrain from messaging me on this, because I will not respond.
Edited by MidnightRun99 Opinions are worthless if they're unbendable over time.
MidnightRun99: I think you’re misunderstanding - nobody is looking at these moments as an assessment of Junpei’s character as a whole.
These are specific moments within the work -canon or not - that have aged poorly specifically because of the character’s association with Vic.
Edited by ChrisDV
Do we apply the prohibition on discussing these kinds of allegations to other people? Fore example, Kevin Spacey has never been found guilty of anything in court, in fact most high-profile instances of sexual misconduct allegations are never criminally prosecuted. Do we take the same cautious approach to all of them?
Edited by TheMountainKing
TheMountainKing: No, we do not appear to. The Hindsight cleanup thread specifically names Vic as the sole person that this restriction applies to.
matruz explained the situation regarding the trial further up the page. If the restriction was in place because of this lawsuit, then it should probably be removed at this point as the outcome has been settled.
Is there a decision on how to proceed?
If we’re allowing the examples under Harsher in Hindsight, then the page should be updated.
If we’re not, then the notes relating to the matter need rewriting.
Yeah, I think that's a valid example at this point.
If the trials are over then I think it fits the criteria . I don't really see anyone mention Vic nowadays beyond the allegations.
The question isn't "is Vic overshadowed", it's "is Persona 3 overshadowed".
I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.
Persona 3 isn't Overshadowed by Controversy in the slightest.
YAWK YAWK YAWK YAWK
People were discussing Harsher in Hindsight, not Overshadowed by Controversy.
I think it's a pretty clear-cut Harsher in Hindsight candidate. The character is a pervert who is described in-text by another character as a "poster boy for sexual harassment", then years later his voice actor's career is more or less destroyed by highly public sexual harassment allegations. Cut and dried.
It's very obviously not Overshadowed by Controversy. Moving on.
Harsher in Hindsight seems to qualify, but this conversation should probably be held in the Hindsight cleanup thread, just in case.
Here's the thread for that, by the way
Asking this here as there's no evidence of any discussion of the matter on the YMMV.Persona 3 discussion page, nor had the matter been raised here previously.
Vic Mignogna is a voice actor who had allegations of sexual harrassment follow him for decades before finally coming to a head in 2019.
In Persona 3, Vic Mignogna voiced the character of Junpei Iori, who makes several lecherous comments towards numerous female characters over the course of the game. Additionally, the Portable version of the game included an alternate story with a Female Protagonist, where Junpei's behaviour is escalated to outright sexism and he is directly called "the poster boy for sexual harassment" by another character upon his introduction, whilst the player is also given the option to call him out on his pervy behaviour.
When one goes to edit YMMV.Persona 3, there is a note saying not to add any examples regarding Vic - however, as noted above, there is no discussion regarding this matter on the discussion page or in any previous ATT. When you check the edit history, it seems that this was decided by one user (Metaverse) and several of their Edit Reasons for the matter include insults towards people for adding "Funny Aneurysm" Moment entries regarding Junpei & Vic. Whilst they do point to Rule of Cautious Editing Judgment in two edit reasons, I cannot find any evidence that they ever brought this matter up in this thread
so it seems that the entire matter has never actually been discussed.
What is the best way to proceed?
EDIT: Removal of red links.
Edited by ChrisDV