TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Ask The Tropers

Go To

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.

Ask the Tropers:

Trope Related Question:

Make Private (For security bugs or stuff only for moderators)

WarJay77 (Troper Knight)
2020-01-22 21:17:44

When would we ever need to say "we" outside of Administrivia?

Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
jjjj2 Since: Jul, 2015
2020-01-22 21:30:46

As they say referring to the tvtropes website itself. A specific example that I know of is on the Tropic Thunder page:

Only Sane Man: Compared to the others, Kevin is a perfectly normal individual. A bit of a geek, maybe, but we, of all people, have no room to criticize.

Edited by jjjj2 You can only write so much in your forum signature. It's not fair that I want to write a piece of writing yet it will cut me off in the mid
WarJay77 (Troper Knight)
2020-01-22 21:34:43

^ That's basically a ZCE... not quite, but it's still a poorly written example, "we" or no "we".

Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
2020-01-22 21:42:30

I've occasionally used "we" in the sense of "we, the viewers" when doing an entry, though I can't think of a specific example off the top of my head.

HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
2020-01-22 22:45:59

Point of pedantry: "we" is still first person, it's just first person plural (as opposed to "I" which is first person singular).

I'm sure there are probably rare cases where it's appropriate, but in most cases I'd consider it suspect. In the Tropic Thunder entry above, for example, it's Word Cruft. Removing it and the bit that contains it renders the entry:

  • Only Sane Man: Compared to the others, Kevin is a perfectly normal individual. A bit of a geek, maybe.

That's already better, although I agree with WarJay that it's a little context-light.

Edited by HighCrate
FridgeGuy2016 Since: Feb, 2016
2020-01-22 22:57:05

So in other words, "we" and other first person plural pronouns are only okay on Administrivia pages?

Also, I would say comment that example out for someone to eventually find it and add context.

Edited by FridgeGuy2016 Limpin' with the bizkit.
WarJay77 (Troper Knight)
2020-01-22 22:59:35

^ I'd say only "We" should be allowed, and only on Administrivia. Administrivia is talking about the wiki as a whole, so it makes sense to use it in that context.

Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
Florestan Since: May, 2015
2020-01-22 23:12:05

^^^^I'd say "we" is fine in the sense "we, the viewers." For example: "Bob is actually the Big Bad Doctor Nefaro, but we don't see this until the third act because in the first part of the film we only see Doctor Nefaro from the back." Or something like that.

WarJay77 (Troper Knight)
2020-01-22 23:21:28

^ Okay, that does make sense. I wasn't considering examples like that.

Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
dragonfire5000 Since: Jan, 2001
2020-01-22 23:35:04

^^ I mean, that can be written without the "we's."

"The Big Bad Doctor Nefaro, who's only been seen from the back in the first part of the film, is revealed to be Bob in the third act."

"I squirm, I struggle, ergo I am. Faced with death, I am finally, truly alive."
Florestan Since: May, 2015
2020-01-22 23:57:09

^To be sure; I was not suggesting my version was the best phrasing; but the use of "we" as in "we the viewers" is still different from "we" as in "we, the tropers" (which I agree should not be used).

Florien Since: Aug, 2019
2020-01-23 00:23:00

The first person "we" can probably be cut from many entries via some judicious editing and rewords. It probably should, unless the sentence construction would be awkward or unwieldy without it. I'll fix that where I see a way to then, should I come across it.

Brainulator9 Since: Aug, 2018
2020-01-23 02:11:33

I've also seen cases of "we, as a society".

Contains 20% less fat than the leading value brand!
AegisP Since: Oct, 2014
2020-01-23 07:59:10

I thought "we" was ok to refer to the wiki editors as a plural mass.

As long as this flower is in my heart. My Strength will flow without end.
HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
2020-01-23 08:20:27

I hadn't considered the use of "we" as shorthand for "we, the audience." While it is possible to rephrase such uses, that tends to involve the passive voice ("we see Alice" becomes "Alice is seen" or "Alice can be seen") and doesn't really improve things. It could also be unclear, in cases where Alice is seen by other characters, but not by the audience, or vice versa.

Of course you can always say "the audience sees Alice" or "the viewer sees Alice," but that can become cumbersome if you have to make mention of the viewer several times.

I concur that "we" is fine in cases like that.

Edited by HighCrate
Top