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 is for:
- General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openThe Emoji Movie - Narm Western Animation
After someone removed a lot of shoehorned examples, Narm.The Emoji Movie was left with only two examples. Can we delete the page and move the few valid examples to Narm.Film Number To H and YMMV.The Emoji Movie?
openNarm
So Narm is in the normal YMMV index and the banner on the top reflects that. What I don't understand is why the subpages, such as Advertising, have the Flame Bait banner. Anyone know what's going on?
open Is this misuse?
These are currently under the Narm entry in the YMMV
page for Hamilton.
- Although "It's Quiet Uptown" is a Tear Jerker of a song, when watched live, Hamilton constantly being on the verge of tears can come across as exaggerated and cheesy, especially contrasting Eliza's much more subdued sadness.
- Before the fateful duel between Burr and Hamilton, one of Burr's justifications for fearing for his life was Hamilton was wearing his glasses. While there's In-Universe reasoning (Burr says that the glasses scare him because he believes they mean that Hamilton intends to "take deadly aim"), it winds up being rather unintentionally funny since the primary stereotypes surrounding glasses are not indicating "deadly intent" and the idea of fearing for your life because your enemy is wearing glasses is pretty laughable.
- Also in "The World Was Wide Enough", there's Burr's line of "This man will not make an orphan of my daughter!". In context, he's worried that he'll die and Theodosia will suffer from it. With the knowledge that Theodosia was 22 when the duel between Burr and Hamilton happened, it makes Burr look like an Overprotective Dad or simply making up excuses to shoot Hamilton.
Just...I don't know, some parts seem to really be stretching for it, and I've yet to see anyone in the "audience" share these sentiments.
openTroper added narm misuse after it was cut.
There's a troper called Steam_Lord who added shoehorned Narm examples to YMMV.Bill Nye Saves The World, even though they were already cut. I consulted the narm cleanup thread
, and we decided we should ping them so we can resolve the issue. They don't have a Tropers page, though.
openInUniverse tag for YMMV items?
Question about putting YMMV tropes on main work pages when it's done In-Universe—is this no longer appropriate?
In Their Finest, there's a scene where a propaganda film that is supposed to be taken seriously is laughed at by the audience. It had the Narm trope listed with the In-Universe tag (copied below), which was recently removed with the edit reason "Misuse of an audience reaction on a main work page".
Since the reaction isn't of viewers at home, but of an audience in the film watching a badly-made Show Within a Show, calling it Narm seemed appropriate, but has the policy changed on that?
- Narm: In-Universe with the propaganda film shown at the start, a real movie made about women working in a bullet factory. The audience laughs at it, which is why Roger Swain decides they need a woman to write women.
openGunarmDyne and (Lack of) Crosswicking.
Back near the end of January, I sent Gunarm Dyne a Crosswicking notifier regarding the page VisualNovel.Since Memories Off The Starry Sky, which they had just created a couple of days previously. I got what seemed to be a positive response saying that they would work on it, so I let it go for a while. (Hey, everyone has different schedules.)
Just did a quick look over, and found that they did thereafter crosswick 8 of about 50 examples. (The page has 22 wicks, but most of these are Creator/ entries and various indexes linked by other tropers.)
They have since moved on to adding examples to Other work pages, such as Film.Hillbillys In A Haunted House, Characters.Ar Nosurge Ode To An Unborn Star and Characters.Ar Tonelico Qoga Knell Of Ar Ciel, also without crosswicking.
I'm not sure how to approach this, as it appears that they didn't read/understand, or just don't care about proper crosswicking. Thoughts?
Edited by underCoverSailsmanresolved Is Narm YMMV or Flame Bait?
I noticed that Narm has the YMMV banner at the top, but on the subpage for the different media (Narm.Anime, Narm.Film, Narm.Literature, Narm.Western Animation), it appears with the Flame Bait banner.
Is there a reason for this?
Edited by SoyValdo7openPossible edit war? Videogame
Back in August, I removed
a set of Narm examples from The Last of Us Part II after the cleanup thread
reached consensus (my edit reason explained this). In April, Yukianesa added two of the examples back.
The wording is pretty different, and the removed examples were originally added by two different users (EnigmaLobo added the Mel example,
and Connor2107
added the nickname one). This seems unintentional, and if I remember correctly, doesn't count as an edit war.
My question: if consensus is reached and then breached, is it acceptable to remove the offending examples unilaterally, or is that an edit war?
Edited by indigoJayopenUnjustified edit to remove my contribution
Warning: spoilers for the work in question, including a video link to a climactic scene. Discretion advised.
On The Witches (1990), NOYB decided to remove my edit under Narm which read:
- The movie has a bizarre out-of-character moment for Mr. Jenkins. During the dinner scene, he greets the Grand High Witch by saying "Good evening" with a smile which makes it clear that he's got butterflies in his stomach. While he was established earlier as having a crush on her, bear in mind that this is not only in the midst of the witches in various stages of mouse transformation, he's also just witnessed definitive proof of his son being a mouse, not to mention being right next to his traumatised wife who is clearly nearly catatonic on witnessing the very same thing. Given that, his reaction is weird.
with the reason:
"Mr Jenkins is clearly scared of the GHW when he says that."
I'm sorry, but hard YMMV here. And of course, the troper in question made the removal on the movie's YMMV page. That is to say, the foremost class of page where subjectivity is the name of the game. Let me argue my case, as if the paragraph I had wrote wasn't quite enough on it's own, with receipts. Jenkins clearly hits on the Grand High Witch in this earlier scene (there's a bit more to it in the full movie, where he elaborates on how he admires her supposed "RSPCA work" and associated "philanthropy"):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLfb9Zx4ZRQ
Then, in this subsequent scene, check it out (timestamped to the relevant moment where my paragraph was chiefly concerned):
https://youtu.be/QsuIp03FENc?si=bnrp0WmmSRgE4v1y&t=53
I do not see fear in his expression at all. That's not a scared smile. I see a man who was excited by this exotic woman from his earlier introduction to her, and sorry to be crude, but in this latter scene, it's as if he's even hornier. And as I said, given the chaotic context of the scene, it's oddly out of character. The man is not cringing in fear (however his wife is), but instead his inappropriate lust kinda makes the audience cringe. I can't be the only one who sees that, right? And again, if NOYB disagreed and saw fear, they could have instead made an edit underneath to state something like "On the other hand, some viewers see Mr Jenkins as instead being afraid of the GHW in this moment" (such a counter-statement approach being true to the nature of YMMV pages), instead of deleting my example with no real justification.
So, I'm requesting some validation and support to restore the contribution I'd made, as it has some real weight.
Edited by FlashStepsresolved Are Cut Pages Gone for Good? Web Original
I just noticed that the page for my personal channel was cut. Is there any way to retrieve the content so it can be archived elsewhere?
If not, it's not the end of the world.
openClarification on Injury tropes
So for tropes involving injuries (Eye Scream, An Arm and a Leg, etc) what kind of example is it if someone THREATENS to inflict said injury ("Say goodbye to your one good eye!") but is prevented from carrying it out? Is it straight, subverted, or implied?
openBioWare creator's subpage split Videogame
Already pointed out in the other thread
, but I'm posting this for more opinions. This creator page has a lot of subpages for some reason and things like FranchiseOriginalSin.Bio Ware and Narm.Bioware exist here instead of doing that in its actual work pages.
This is highly discouraged by Administrivia.Creator Page Guidelines when the works have pages (and yeah, Bioware games all have pages) and it makes navigation unnecessarily difficult because you have to travel between creator and work pages. So, I want to put them back to the works. Thoughts?
resolved Weird edit reasons
Troper Shinn Bidan made a few edits with a few edits that I consider to be, for lack of a better word, off.
- In here
they added a Blue with Shock entry with this:
- In here
, they added a What Could Have Been entry wishing it was in the final game.
Now, none of these are really eyebrow raising but I firmly believe that personal opinions should not be in the wiki pages and these edit reasons make me unsure we that also includes expressing those opinions on edit reasons.
Any other opinions?
openAvoiding an edit war. Opinions on if this is word cruft.
So on YMMV.The Amazing Spider Man 2 the following:
- Joe Mere added
the following to the Base-Breaking Character tree "All three of the movie's villains are quite divisive to say the least."
- I removed it for being word cruft
, though to my embarrassment I misspelled cruft.
- Joe Mere re-added
it but reworded to "All of the villains are incredibly divisive to say the least, up to the point where they tend to be one of the most criticized things about the film. Either you find them entertaining in spite of their flaws or poorly written and unintentionally goofy."
Now, I don't know if this is still word cruft or not with the rewording. I don't think it is an edit war as they might have believed that they managed to fix the problem by rewording this. So, should it be kept or removed?
Edited by BullmanopenNarm pages for creators?
I noticed that someone recently made a Narm page for Christopher Nolan's movies; not for any particular one of his franchises (though the Dark Knight Trilogy has its own separate page) but to encompass all his films... which it turns out to be only a few otherwise. I couldn't find another instance of a page where someone made a Narm page for an individual creator (except maybe Chick Tracts lol), does this seem allowed? To me, it doesn't seem right.
openPossible misuse of narm Live Action TV
The YMMV page of Superman & Lois has two entries of Narm, both from the pilot, which read:
- The dramatic intensity with which Clark confesses his origin story to Jon and Jordan can be so over-the-top in a "well, when you say it like that, this whole thing is actually pretty silly" kind of way. With the way it's played out, you'd almost expect for Clark to laugh and yell "just kidding!" instead of proving himself by lifting the truck.
- Nobody at the party noticing Jordan using his heat vision during the brawl, even though he's surrounded by dozens of people, some of whom are filming the brawl. Makes the emotional and shocking scene seem unintentionally comedic.
I have to ask, is this valid? Narm only applies for moments that are meant to be taken seriously but instead come off as hilarious, not moments that either fall flat or just don't have the intended effect.
openUnnecessary Japanese English wording in Fan made anime page Web Original
So Nyan~ Neko Sugar Girls has some random Japanese- English words because of the theme of the fan made anime which leads to bad grammar such as "a main character dies of a broken kokoro", "she transforms into a human naked" (From Shapeshifting Excludes Clothing example) and "By the torukku (?) load"(From Narm example). Even though it's a joke. I think that's unnecessary to put Japanese English words because we might not know what it means. So fixed it?
Edited by Bubblepigopen Troper sagar engaging in edit war Live Action TV
The troper @sagar added the below edit to The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power which I removed with an edit reason as it isn't meant to be a funny scene. In the edit reason I explained that if the audience finds this dramatic scene funny (which I've never seen any evidence of other than this particular troper) then it's actually an example of Narm. @sagar has since added it back with the edit reason 'Don't gatekeep another person's lived experience.'
which makes no sense whatsoever.
Do I have permission to change it back?

89pizzaparty vandalized YMMV.Mortal Kombat 11 twice so far. First by adding "Don't act like that shit wasn't fire. Plus the trailer for MKX had Wiz Khalifa." to the Narm entry (the entry as a whole was deleted due to being misuse), then by changing the last sentence of Memetic Mutation to "Unfortunately, none of the mixes have matched the original trailer nor have they made anyone laugh."
Their edit history
Edited by Zuxtron