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.
Basically, something that says that if it's the equivalent of an Appearance Trope ("has red hair and eyes"), it's not a trope?
Maybe a reminder to these tropers that a trope is a story-telling device -it's not something that just happens, it's something that happens with a meaning within the story?
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry Pratchett^ Adding to that, even something like lots of sparkles is there to add a visual flair to the scene, often to draw the audience's attention on what is sparkling.
And People Sit on Chairs says that a trope has to have meaning. Without meaning, the frequency is irrelevant.
Even Tropes in Aggregate is because the meaning of those tropes usually causes them to happen so much.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.This isn't a good idea. Not only is the "non-binary" trope probably a trope - that nonbinary characters are common now does not entail that they weren't a trope in the past when they were more unusual - but there is no reason for having a page dedicated to it. The two typical reasons why an uncommon thing is not a trope are PSOC and Too Rare To Trope, we don't have or need extra specifications.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman^ respectfully, that draft is simply just "This Work Has A Non-Binary Character", not even "This Work Is Being Progressive By Including A Non-Binary Character". And the OP argued that since male/female characters are more common, the mere presence is a trope. Which it's not. There are more male characters than female, but nobody would think to make a trope that is just "This Work Has A Female Character" — the OP scoooool also suggested I was transphobic for saying it needed more to be a trope, which I think is ridiculous and some sort of guilt-shame pandering.
Edited by lakingsif OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!Have found that PSOC does include the passage:
Perhaps this could be made more prominent so people read it, rather than just the parts further up about "It doesn't matter how commonly it occurs" and assume that PSOC is shorthand for that.
Edited by lakingsif OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!^ it's been explained to them in the draft comments. They have responded with: "I could retool the article to "Token They" since non binary characters are usually peripheral characters but i refuse to do so on principle." (Token They as in Token Minority) That's just being a childish dick. They are saying since they've been told to do it, they're not going to.
OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!My issue with a lot of these non-trope TL Ps is that, based on how limited the description, "Character X is Y" is, strictly speaking, sufficient context for the description which indicates to me it's not a trope in of itself.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.@lakingsif: That has a definite ring of "I don't wanna" brattiness to it.
And yep, that kind of attitude completely ignores established rules and guidelines. So a new Administrivia page is useless.
Which makes this an active bad behavior issue.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry Pratchett

Can we make an Administrivia page that explains how just because something is uncommon, it's presence in media is not necessarily a trope. I explicated this just now in a TLP draft with the People Sit On Chickens thing (people commonly sit on different kinds of chairs, this person sits on a chicken instead, is Not A Trope). Like people don't often have Irish Accents, but simply having one is not a trope. There are ways for an Irish accent to be used for storytelling purposes, but just having one is not. I think having an administrivia page to say "Uncommon does not equal Trope" would be useful, because I think a lot of people think both that 1. being unusual in real life makes fictional appearances notable and 2. since Too Rare To Trope implies that things that are uncommon but not rare can be troped, they are automatically tropes.
Also, Too Rare To Trope does not cover this. The TLP I am specifically talking about is called Non-Binary, and is currently "This Work Has A Non-Binary Character" — that is not rare, in modern times it is not particularly uncommon, but the OP is saying that since non-binary characters are not as common as male and female characters, it is a trope. Obviously, how common something chairs is compared to an equally chairs similar thing has no effect on it being less chairs in itself. It's like doing nothing but sitting, but on chickens this time. (Now, if you're doing it to hide the chickens or to incubate their eggs, or because it's a giant mutant that you've trained in order to ride...)