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.
Neither are trope examples. General things should go away or be included in analysis or description. Examples have to be stating the source (Administrivia.HowToWriteAnExample). Real-life section being some 99 % blatant shoehorns or uninteresting discussion moments is a given.
Then there's this. An entry about someone somewhere having a specific way of Complaining about Shows You Don't Like, with Agenda. And it cites a discredited taboo aggregator, on top of making it an example in someone's random post or blog.
^^ And saying that that was a valid point is your call? (edit: I mean, as long as that call decides the fate of example) Are there any other saving graces?
Edited by SetsunasaNiWaWhether the point is valid or not is irrelevant; it seems like it's stirring up a Flame War that we're trying very hard to keep off the site.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

The troper Chopshop
recently added examples about the "Galbrush Paradox" to Positive Discrimination and Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. The wiki linked in both examples is a wiki for... yes, Gamergate. Here's the thing: Besides a brief reference to "some internet communities" and the aforementioned wiki links, there isn't any other mention of GG in either of the two examples. Should I just remove the link to the Gamergate Wiki, or should I just remove the examples entirely?
Edited by harryhenry