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'm fine with removing the list. Aside from TV Tropes lacking a notability requirement for works, it seems like Fan Myopia to consider specific works more noteworthy than others.
Patiently awaiting the release of Paper Luigi and the Marvelous Compass.
So get rid of all examples, rather than having it be for comedy works that don't fit into a subtrope?
"It's just a show; I should really just relax"
I say move anything that fits a sub-index and keep the page for other forms of comedy with work pages.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
You've got There Is No Such Thing as Notability backwards. It means that we don't exclude works due to them not being notable enough. It doesn't mean that we aren't allowed to call a work "notable".
And saying that it's Fan Myopia to call certain work more notable than others - well, it could be, but it's hardly fan myopia to, for example, call Shakespeare a notable author, is it?
In this case, though, there may be fan myopia at play, if the list contains various obscure works.
In a way, every time we add examples to a trope page we're saying that the examples are in some way notable, or they wouldn't be worth listing.
Edited by GnomeTitan
I've been wanting to say that ALL DAY. Thank you Gnome Titan.
Discord: Waido X 255#1372 If you cant contact me on TV Tropes do it here.
Idk, I think it should be removed. I mean, who gets to consider what notable comedy? I would add The Marx Brothers and Steve Martin, but I don’t want to contribute because of the previously mentioned myopia.
What if you call it ”well-known” instead of ”notable”, then? The point of the list is just to give examples of comedy and I think you’re reading too much into the word ”notable”. We’d still have too avoid Fan myopia, though, so maybe some of the more obscure works should go.
Took a quick look at the list. The only thing I can see that they almost all have in common is that the work has a blue link, suggesting that there may be a Works Page for it. There appears to be only one exception, and it may have been entered wrong.
Perhaps whoever drew up this index list decided to exclude Red Link entries? Just a guess.
^ There used to be a work page for Tina of the South, but it was cut for being a stub.
Edited by Serac
I'm not sure if we're allowed to call works "notable" anymore given that Notable Campaigns was changed to Advertising Campaigns with TINSTAN cited on RenamedTropes.A To E.
Edited by mightymewtron I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Again, who decides what work is "notable" or "well known" enough to be on the page? What's the metric used? Without one, it's all Fan Myopia and I do agree the list should be cut or otherwise fixed to not be about notability.
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
I just realized that the Super Bowl Special page has essentially the same thing (replace “notable” with “memorable”). Should that be changed too?
^^For the classics, there are various official or semi-official canons of works. For modern movies, you can look at box office numbers. For TV shows, you have Nielsen ratings. I'm not saying these are the best metrics to go by, but at least the box office numbers and Nielsen ratings are objective. You have works that have won the big awards - the awards are subjective, but the fact that a work has received one is objective.
But I think you're overthinking it. What harm does such a list do? Has this site suddenly become so egalitarian that we have to suppress all mentions of notability?
But this is probably the wrong forum for this. I'll not argue the case further here, or I will be told off by a moderator.
Edited by GnomeTitan
We're not trying to suppress mentions of notability but we need a metric of establishing what, exactly, that means. Or else people could put any relatively popular comedy work on the list and argue that it's more notable than the next thing on the list because they personally had never heard of it, and then it'd just be a list of comedy works that have a decent following.
It's way too subjective and abstract, and leads to too many holes. I think it's part of the reason why we have the rule; because what does notability even mean and how is it decided what is and isn't suitably notable?
Edited by WarJay77 Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Bumping because I'm not sure if there was a consensus. Are we:
- Leaving as is
- Changing to a list of miscelaneous, unindexed comedy pages
- Pruning to a more "notable" list of comedies
- Removing the example list altogether
Probably take it elsewhere, such as TRS, would be my call.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Comedy has a small example list under the heading "Comedy of Note". One could interpret that to mean "important" or "notable" comedies, which violates There Is No Such Thing as Notability.
The example list contains a seemingly random mixture of what could be argued to be well-known or influential comedic works, and very obscure works.
I think it makes the most sense for the page to index works that don't fit into a different subgenre or subindex of comedy, but I'd like to get consensus on this and make this clearer on the page.
This would involve keeping many of the music and stand up comedy entries but removing other entries that better fit the subindexes, such as all the TV examples which fit Comedy Series.