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.
I think Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement applies here, there is no need to drag any current political squabbles onto the wiki. Real life examples only get a place here if it won't cause problems, we're about fiction not reality, and I can see that getting peoples hackles up on all sides of the political divide.
In fact, given the fraught nature of the One-Drop Rule as a trope, I'm not entirely sure it ought to have real life examples at all.
Edited by CrypticMirrorI don't think so. The user who added it in the first place was suspended. See Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement.
You're right. I thought that it could be salvaged if I removed all mentions of affiliation to a specific political party and hacked off the last sentence, but it's still controversial. It's an... iffy subject, which is why I wanted to discuss it first.
@Satoshi Bakura: I saw the thread discussing that user's edits, and I agree that they were reeeeealy dicey and needed to be axed.
@Cryptic Mirror: I wasn't trying to "drag any current political squabbles onto the wiki" (please don't assume a political agenda, thankyouverymuch). As I said, I have no idea about / no interest in American politics; I just thought it'd be interesting to show a case where someone actually embraces their mixed ancestry. (And no, I don't care to continue this discussion on a political level.)
- Fly, robin, fly! - ...I'm trying!Part of the thing is, Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement aside (which it absolutely violates) is that the person in question doesn't so much identify with their One Drop as just say "I do have Native ancestry, and my family has stories passed down in the family."
It is only people attacking Warren that say "she identifies as Native even though she's white!" Or liars claiming she only got jobs because of claiming Native status (a lie parroted by the guy who added this example, btw).
It's a strawman, through and through.
Edited by Larkmarn Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.Hey, there's no need to convince me; I was sold on the "don't add it" as soon as people mentioned the political implications behind it. My only reason for even bothering with this is that I've seen several legitimately valid examples being tainted by political or religious fanatics, which sometimes are salvageable after trimming out all the hate-mongering.
TLDR: Example violates the ROCEJ, which is more than enough reason for me to leave it out.
Thanks for the advice, guys :)
- Fly, robin, fly! - ...I'm trying!Word.
I was mostly making my post because the guy in Edit/Banned was going "but it totally should go there, guys" and, well, I can't reply so I figured here was as good a place to make the statement just in case he tries to readd it.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.

This entry was deleted a while back with the justification of being a barely veiled strawman point (and indentation issues, but that's beside the point).
Anyway, the example itself seems valid (FYI, I'm not familiar with American politics/politicians, I'm just going from context here); Elizabeth Warren claims native American ancestry despite being six to ten generations removed from her native American ancestor. If it's rewritten, could it be re-added? For example:
Courtesy link: One-Drop Rule.
Edited by RoundRobin