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.
Well, I can't say much on the "not actually funny" stuff (I agree that's probably too subjective a metric), but as for the "recurring elements" bit, Narm is very specifically about specific moments, so those do have to be cut.
We do have a general "cleanup thread cultural issues" discussion in Wiki Talk, if you'd like to resurrect it. I myself think some of the cleanups are indeed too aggressive, though others are actually just upholding the rules. (Edit: found it
).
ATT is not for complaining about wiki cleanup, and policy discussion regarding how cleanup is being done belongs on Wiki Talk (which we have a relevant thread for, as previously mentioned). Locking since there's already a Wiki Talk thread.
Edited by GastonRabbit You can't just say "perchance".

So the Narm cleanup thread
has been around for a while, but I'm wondering if it's perhaps recently been taking things a little far. As far as I was hitherto aware, we usually take a fairly light touch on YMMV tropes, precisely because they're subjective, and only delete entries in cases of clear-cut trope misuse. The Narm thread seems to be applying a somewhat more aggressive approach, getting more into the weeds of whether an example is funny enough to qualify (which strikes me as more of a subjective matter than, say, whether it's mislabelled intentional comedy) and applying a particularly strict interpretation of our 'examples are not general' rule that I haven't seen applied to other audience reaction tropes, ruling out any repeated/recurring elements of unintentional comedy in an otherwise dramatic work.
Did I miss a shift in wiki policy towards this style of YMMV cleanup, or is this approach indeed going a bit far in cutting valid/informative entries?