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.
Suspended for belligerence.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I went and removed the justifying edit from the example since it's more Fridge Logic and speculating on stuff never stated in the work.
I usually stick such Justifying Edits on works I'm not familiar with on the discussion page, with an edit reason of "pulled to discussion" and a more detailed reasoning on the discussion entry itself. Sometimes I leave the main entry, depending on what the justifier says. ("This happened because of 'X'" as opposed to "This isn't an example because of 'Y'".) With Fridge Logic that needs to be pulled, I include in the edit reason recommending it be taken to the work's Fridge page.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry PratchettI generally remove any speculation-based entry if it's on a main page. I've noticed that lots of natter and Justifying Edits rely on speculation.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanThe problem has to do with works I'm not familiar with or don't remember clearly, particularly if a source isn't referenced. I don't know if they're referring to something they saw in an episode that explains things , and should be incorporated into the main entry (and just didn't provide the reference to when X happened), or if it's something they're speculating on based what they saw in the work. ("Alice did X with Charlie in Episode #, then Bob did Y with Charlie in Episode other#, so this means Charlie must have done Z to both of them because of X and Y." ) The first might either disqualify an example or be incorporated into it, depending, while the second goes to Fridge Logic, WMG, or somesuch.
It's often easier to put it on the discussion page and let those who know sort it out. Googling can solve some things, but it can also be a pain in the rear, especially if I couldn't care less about the subject or actively dislike it.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry PratchettI just got a PM from Omega complaining about the line of speculation I removed. It wasn't rude, but shows they are still not going to give up on the issue.
Anyway, the line is pure speculation about why a game that's work page describes as being made on acid has a green power up that makes a ship invincible. Perfect on fridge logic pages but not on a main work page.
Edited by ShaokenEdit: I already suspended him, but if he wants to bitch at you via PM, we can turn that off too.
Edited by Fighteer "It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Can someone talk to Omega Metroid about being polite? Here
he/she doesn't seem to understand why I had reverted his/her edit, and instead is trying to find excuses to say I am the villain.
EDIT: Since the troper may appear to overcomplicate a very simple issue, the thing is that he/she had added a Justifying Edit, and upon doing so violated Example Indentation. He/she appears to be upset because I had reverted the edit instead of fixing it myself. But a troper can only fix something when there's familiarity with the work it's being spoken of. And unless someone familiar with that work who knows the wiki rules comes to make the fix, the entry will be left alone and exposed for someone who knows the work but not the editing rules to add yet another justification. The troper in question has to learn to add information correctly, and that extra information could have been put the right way in the first place, I dunno how else he/she will learn to do so if nobody natterfies him/her. He resorted to Stealth Insult wording and claims I vandalized by not giving a "real reason" to revert the edit, when that's not the case.
Edited by MyFinalEdits