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.

Ask the Tropers:

Trope Related Question:

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

21st Dec, 2020 08:08:46 AM

If she's not meant to be sympathetic you are right. Bring them here so we can discuss this.

21st Dec, 2020 08:13:41 AM

I sent them a PM.

And it's not that she wasn't meant to be sympathetic as whole. It's that the entry doesn't explain how she was meant to be in her treatment of Abby or Riley, which they specifically list, and the troper just re added the same exact entry. Though I doubt she was meant to in those cases, from my research, as she apparently apologizes after realizing she was wrong.

Edited by Bullman
21st Dec, 2020 08:40:16 AM

As someone who hasn’t seen the movie, I fully understand why the character of Harper is contentious. There’ll be those who say she’s allowed to be uncertain about when or if she should come out to her family and those who say she’s totally wrong to force Abby into a lie in which she has to hide who she is and constantly have to jump through hoops to do so (and they could totally cross over on the issue too). Sounds more like Base Breaker than it does Unintentionally Unsympathetic.

Edited by futuremoviewriter
21st Dec, 2020 08:56:56 AM

^ I agree it she sounds more like Base Breaker from my research. That still doesn't mean that her treatment of her girlfriend is something the work meant for her to come off as sympathetic on. Especially with her apologizing. Though she might still count and the entry could just be in need of a rewrite. Let's wait for the troper to respond.

Edited by Bullman
21st Dec, 2020 12:29:59 PM

The problem is the example has little context. The only thing I get from that example is that Harper lied to her girlfriend and somehow treated her badly. The entry should elaborate on the later.

21st Dec, 2020 12:54:25 PM

^ It also doesn't explain how her treating her girlfriend like that is supposed to be sympathetic, and considering she apologizes for how she treats, I don't think she was meant to.

Edited by Bullman
22nd Dec, 2020 10:53:39 AM

Going through the convo here, but want to add as well that this trope is on the YMMV page (your mileage may vary), and not on the main page, which acknowledges that the page contains differences of opinion. If this were on the main trope page, then I would wholeheartedly agree this needs far more warranted scrutiny before it's added.

As far as I read from the notes, the tropes were removed due to lack of context, but I found that tropers had added links to sites to support the text they'd added. I also added a link to satisfy the requirement of having at least once source, which is why I added these tropes back. Hope that clarifies the edit process so far. Thanks!

22nd Dec, 2020 10:55:32 AM

oh btw, also fine with changing Unintentionally Unsympathetic to "Base Breaking", which someone suggested. I've seen pages where the line there is ambiguous.

22nd Dec, 2020 11:10:09 AM

First of all, YMMV does not equal "Anything goes". YMMV examples still must have context and must be factually correct. The fact that they are not on the main page is irrelevant.

Second, Weblinks Are Not Examples. People should not need to go to another site just to find out if an example is valid or not.

22nd Dec, 2020 11:15:09 AM

That's fine. Thanks for stopping by. However like ^ said, adding a link to another site does not mean you give more context. The entry as written doesn't explain how she was meant to be sympathetic in her treatment of Abby. The fact that from my research she is called out on it and apologizes leads me to believe she wasn't, but that doesn't mean she can't count as I could be wrong. But the job of an entry like this is to explain why she was meant to be sympathetic and why fans don't find her to be. Give actual context, not rely on other sites.

Same thing with the FPC it's just links to other sites with out explaining why fans feel this way, but even beyond that I am not sure it counts. As from my research there is just as many, if not more, fans who ship the canon couple. Take AO3 where Harby has more fics. But I could again I could be wrong, but we need more info on how other then links to other sites.

Though she might be again more a Base Breaker, but that has a waiting period. I'm not sure how long though.

Edited by Bullman
22nd Dec, 2020 03:20:50 PM

Base-Breaking Character has a waiting period of 6 months after the work releases or the character becomes controversial, whichever is later (if those two aren't the same date, like with a TV series). So you would have to wait until May to post an example of it.

Edited by Serac
22nd Dec, 2020 03:33:28 PM

^ Thanks. So I'm thinking w take the entry down and the add a Base-Breaking Character entry in six months if still applicable. Or rewrite the entries. Thoughts?

Edited by Bullman
23rd Dec, 2020 08:23:29 AM

Anymore thoughts on what to do?

24th Dec, 2020 06:03:49 PM

I agree that we should take the entry down and wait six months.

24th Dec, 2020 06:26:09 PM

My question is if I do that, if that is what we decide to do, would it be an Edit War? Even if I link this thread?

24th Dec, 2020 06:45:36 PM

No, you and York have discussed the issue here. If you link the thread, there won't be a problem. It's only an edit war if you repeat an edit without discussing it first.

Edited by Serac
24th Dec, 2020 06:49:21 PM

^Okay. Thanks.

Should I wait for more opinions or am I good to go?

Edited by Bullman
24th Dec, 2020 07:30:50 PM

Well I'll add my vote and say I think you're good to go.

28th Dec, 2020 04:09:56 PM

"First of all, YMMV does not equal "Anything goes". YMMV examples still must have context and must be factually correct. The fact that they are not on the main page is irrelevant."

Right, I think what you're describing is the WMG (wild mass guessing) page. I hope what I described in my post did sound like it belonged under WMG.

"Second, Weblinks Are Not Examples. People should not need to go to another site just to find out if an example is valid or not."

There seems to be a general conflict among the people editing this page on requiring granular context and evidence but also not wanting cited sources. I don't have time to engage in this, I'm fine with the suggestion given (to wait 6 months) and hope that whoever reviews the thread later will make a decision with the greater context that distance can provide.

28th Dec, 2020 04:13:43 PM

"Right, I think what you're describing is the WMG (wild mass guessing) page."

No, that's also true with YMMV pages. They mustn't say anything that's factually untrue. So you can't say that Luke's song number in Return of the Jedi is Narmy, because there is no song number from Luke.

"There seems to be a general conflict among the people editing this page on requiring granular context and evidence but also not wanting cited sources." Nobody's saying don't add cited sources. What they're saying is that the example text itself must be sufficient, and a weblink isn't a substitute for that.

28th Dec, 2020 04:32:34 PM

If anything, it's WMG that can be factually inaccurate, because the point is to make up silly theories, not to be 100% serious and accurate to canon.

28th Dec, 2020 05:09:58 PM

Yeah the cited source for Unfortunate Implications isn't the context for the example, it's just proof that a significant person or persons feel a purported way about the work. What everyone is asking is for the actual context to be there in addition to the cited source.

Top

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:

/

Media sources:

/

Report