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 that handle doesn't exactly promise objectivity.
The discussion said "[Hypocrite] is not an audience reaction; it must be noted in the work". If true, there's probably a lot of clean up to do.
If true then a majority of the page would automatically have to be deleted , yes. Not only in that page but other movie pages as well and movie character pages etc etc.
^ That's fine. It suffered severe Trope Decay and the decay needs to be fixed.
This reminds me of Annoying Laugh, where people were using it as an audience reaction rather than an objective trope.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Do we recommend this to a mod?
Edited by Tuvok
If anything we just take it to TRS and see what happens.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Got a link?
To...what, the TRS? Here.
I mean, I am Team Tony myself, but this guy is extremely biased. The examples should probably be brought back, maybe with a slight rewrite
Edited by Forenperser Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% Scandinavian
You have a very good point. But now I'm torn. If the definitions are incorrect then the examples used on multiple pages should be cut. Thing is 1). It's a HUGE undertaking 2)I doubt my ability to voice the why and how to undertake such a thing and 3) the more I think on it I kind of think the way it's used now while given to interpretation hence discussion and ATT kind of works.
Edited by Tuvok
Maybe ask a mod for clarification?
^^ Look, if examples don't match the description of the trope, it's misuse. It doesn't matter how pervasive the misuse is; something has to be done to fix it, and I'm entirely okay with cutting out huge swaths of examples if it means the misuse stops. If you're not, fine, but that's the way it works here. The entire fact that TRS even exists proves that people will be willing to do the legwork to clean up the trope, even if you personally wouldn't know how to.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
^ I honestly think that this trope should be re-defined, if anything, similar to The Dragon etc. I reckon a good 90% of this particular trope have observable, not in-universe examples. Which is honestly for the better, I mean if a character preaches A, but does B, he IS a hypocrite, doesn't matter if he is called out on it or not.
Edited by Forenperser Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% Scandinavian
^ I personally disagree here (otherwise it'd be a subjective trope calling out bad writing, rather than an objective trope, since if the creator intended the character to be seen as a hypocrite they'd make it obvious by, well, calling it out.), but that's still a discussion to be had on TRS, not here. Either way, we need to take this to TRS, not just leave it because "it's fine".
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Ok maybe we need to flag a mod for input.
^^
- if the creator intended the character to be seen as a hypocrite they'd make it obvious by, well, calling it out.
Not necessarily; perhaps only the audience knows about the character's hypocrisy, and all the other characters in the story are in the dark.
E.g. maybe a character publicly goes on a moral crusade against the evils of porn, and then the audience sees them ogling over a Playboy when they're alone. The character is obviously and intentionally a hypocrite, but none of the other characters is able to call them out on it.
Edited by HighCrate
EDIT: Nevermind, this isn't the time to be joking.
Edited by NubianSatyress
^^ Then in that case it's still obviously intentional. My concern is changing things to allow for subjective interpretation.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Since this seems to have moved away from the initial discussion point, should this conversation be continued elsewhere?
I'm up for a revamp. I don't think limiting the trope to lampshaded examples is a good idea.
Bump for mod attention.
Taken it to TRS for review.
It will increase the likelihood of the TRS thread being opened if you provide a wick check, to quantify just how widespread the misuse is.
I did wiki check Film Hypocrite in the request at least I thought I did.
Have PM a mod for input.
Your TRS thread was rejected for lack of proof.
You have additional options you can explore in the meantime.
Tuvok, if you did do a wick check (and I don’t have any reason to doubt your word), it wasn’t obvious from your TRS post. You need to quote figures, at the least.
I originally just wanted to see if the example was valid for re-adding. Later I was prompted to try and take to TRS as weather if multiple examples in HypocriticalFilm where valid due to misuse. Unfortunately due to unfamiliar territory did not put up a good TRS argument. To be honest I just wanted to see if the example was valid or not for re-adding and ended up in TRS trying to sort it out. I think I better leave at that for now may take to “is this an example?” later.
Edited by Tuvok
Yes, this has become a bulky query. The "Is this an example?" thread is a great place for this.
In Hypocrite Film added an example for Tony Stark in regards to Civil War. It was removed with a reason by editor Team-Tony. It was taken to discussion and have reached an impasse. Have PM Team-Tony taking it to ATT . Checking if valid to readd or leave removed
Heres the link to the discussion.
Edited by Tuvok