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 it's a misuse of Values Dissonance, and as you say, natter-riffic. You could take it to the ROCEJ thread and see what the consensus might be.
I didn't choose the troping life, the troping life chose meWill do. And I'll link this query as an additional courtesy.
If the character's ideology is never stated (it's been a while since I read the story so I don't know) then the example is false.
In general, for a situation like this where one bullet is adding context a previous bullet lacks, I believe the best option is to combine it two entries per Repair, Don't Respond.
^In this case, the Repair, Don't Respond violation is one of the problems. The other is potential false information being shoved in. As Rust Beard noted, "If the character's idealogy is never stated [...] then the example is false."
I'm currently waiting on a response on the ROCEJ thread where I posted this entry.
^^ You combine the two entries if one is tacking on some extra information. If the nattery bullet point is contradicting the original, then the better solution would be to delete what's being contradicted, or perhaps the whole example (unless the natter is inaccurate).
Edited by ZuxtronI think the whole thing should go. I'm reasonably confident that it wasn't supposed to be value-centric, with Deutscher being described as both "an iron man now, a man with guts" and as "an anti everything man". Even assuming that Deutscher and Keith don't change their political views, they're not being described as conservative/liberal but as opposites. It's pure mudslinging and Keith is supposed to appeal to whatever values you hold precious.
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.Removed, and I cited this query in the edit reason.
^^^ and ^^^^ Hence "in general"
I'm not sure how to handle this. On one hand, we have obvious natter. On the other hand, the single-bullet part appears to be giving details that weren't established in the novel, which is something the second-level bullet is trying to clarify.
The second-level bullet was added by Tropers.The Book Was Better. The initial entry was added by Tropers.AK 47 Productions. Page history.
Problems not withstanding, what should be done about this? This is rather political and there is the real possibility some of the details are false.