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:
resolved Page needs renaming
I noticed the page for Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea goes by a translation of the film's Japanese name, when in English it's known as just Ponyo. TV Tropes has a policy of going by a work's official English name whenever possible. The normal solution would of course be to manually change everything myself, but I don't know if I'll have the time or resources to do everything. Is it possible to tell a moderator to do this for me? Thanks in advance.
I should also mention the film has a bunch of subpages that go by Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea and need changing as well.
Edited by SparkPlugTheTroperopen2 Strange discussion posts on Kingdom of Heaven
Chet120 did something weird on Kingdom of Heaven 's page. (EDIT: Its Discussion page)
For context: this is a film set in Jerusalem during the Crusades. It was also controversial at the time it came out, because it portrays the Muslims mostly as good guys and the Christians, except for the main character, as bad(der) guys; and this came out relatively soon after 9-11.
Chet 120's first post was an insanely long list of what they claim is history. Their 2nd post is even more bizarre, and seems to consist of conspiracy theories, and to be politics-based. Also to maybe attract visitors to his website? (because he also states his, I assume Real-Life, name).
None of this has anything to do with the movie itself, or tropes. The user also is quite new, and has made 0 edits of the Wiki.
I sent them a PM, but it seemed serious enough to also mention here.
Edited by LB7979resolved Which folder
I'm trying to figure out where to crosswick an entry for The Scum Villain's Self-Saving System: Ren Zha Fanpai Zijiu Xitong to when it pertains specifically to the donghua. Should it still go under the Literature folder on the trope page or under Asian Animation?
Edited by ZaperexopenHypothetical Casting Literature
I'm wondering if I could make a Hypothetical Casting page for Once Upon a Studio: Version 2.0, with it being a full-scale reimagining of Disney's 100th anniversary short film, but I think I should ask how many credits, roughly, would be needed to accommodate that page. The credits are already listed under Fan Works, but I'm hoping to move them to a dedicated Hypothetical Casting page for the fanfic itself.
Edited by IronSpider24resolved The Ron the Death Eater example from YMMV/SonicX Anime
I wanted to make this discussion because I saw that the Ron the Death Eater example for Chris Thorndyke was deleted. Here it is.
- Ron the Death Eater: Chris Thorndyke is often viewed by fans as a selfish, spoiled brat, who's life isn't all that bad as he claims it is, and being more obsessive over Sonic than Amy is. However, Chris isn't really a bad kid. His whiny moments like in episode 49 were due to his fear of loneliness, which kept him from handling the situation of Sonic returning to his world more positively, especially since the news sprung upon him unexpectedly and was pretty impactful for him, and he was acting more traumatic and in denial than like a spoiled brat. His clinginess to Sonic and his fear of loneliness is due to being neglected by his parents since he was little, as he had to spend most of his time alone inside his huge and empty mansion without friends or siblings, making his life feel very empty and he didn't want to lose the one person who filled that void with his friendship and adventures. This also applies to when Chris shut down the portal to stop Sonic from going back to his world. Chris didn't shut down the portal because he's a spoiled brat. He did it because his emotions and fears got the best of him, that he made a reckless choice without thinking clearly.
I actually agree with this example, but it was deleted because apparently it was added by a ban evader. I am for adding it back because although Chris is not my favorite character of this show (due to some issues with how he was written), I do agree that fans do tend to demonize this kid.
resolved Is this a valid example of Playing Against Type? Web Original
So someone added this to Etra chan saw it!:
- Playing Against Type: In this episode
, Azami, who usually plays an Obnoxious In-Law, gets the role of the abused daughter-in-law and her usual role goes to Akane. Yuzuriha is also cast as a nerdy girl, which is usually Tsutsuji's role, and Tsutsuji herself gets Yuzuriha's usual role as a Crusading Lawyer.
As far as I know, the trope seems to cover only actors that play against what they're usually cast for, and don't include any in-universe examples. (For context, Etra chan saw it! has the characters as actors In-Universe).
Edited by mickey96openAbout the Elden Ring cut content
I've noticed that the Elden Ring pages make liberal use of the cut content that was data mined from the game files, there's even a section on the character page dedicated to the cut characters.
This makes some sense, as some of them help to understand the characters and mysteries of the game, and there is the possibility that they were cut out to save them for later content, such as St. Trina's questline. However, other information seems to contradict what is known, such as a cut dialogue in which Morgott refers to himself as Elden Lord, something that is impossible.
Furthermore, this information is presented as factually correct, although we do not know if this is the case. Bernahl's maiden is mentioned in his folder but is never mentioned in the base game and was apparently cut very early in development, as she was only mentioned in the Japanese version. It's commonly agreed that it was the merchants who summoned the Frenzied Flame in retaliation for being persecuted by the Golden Order, but this is only known thanks to Kalé's questline, which was cut and is not mentioned anywhere else in the game, in fact, Shabriri's Woe suggests that it was Shabriri himself who summoned the Frenzied Flame.
My point with this is not to argue whether everything I mentioned is true or not, what I want to discuss is whether it is right to use content that the creator has decided not to include in the final product and present it as valid, even if we don't know if it is still canon.
I think we should treat all information that is not in the final game as non-canon until the creator releases more content.
Edited by SoyValdo7openTrying to avoid an Edit War
A while ago I added the following example to Family Guy S7E12: "Episode 420":
- Broken Aesop: The episode advocates for the legalization of marijuana by having Brian specifically say that the town's productivity has gone up since everyone started smoking. However, this is contradicted by some scenes that show how those who have used the substance have become almost completely unable to function properly. Tom and Diane can barely form cohesive sentences while reporting the news, and Peter himself struggles to set up one of his trademark Cutaway Gags.
Noob Master later changed
"Broken Aesop" into "Don't Shoot the Message", without making any other modifications. The problem is that, in doing so, this became a Zero-Context Example. The entry is about how events within the work contradict the presented viewpoint, which is the definition of Broken Aesop. Don't Shoot the Message should specifically describe how viewers agree with the message, but dislike the execution.
As such, I would like to ask for permission to revert the trope to what it originally was.
openFanwork-Only Fans questions
I have several questions about Fanwork-Only Fans:
- YMMV.Yu Gi Oh Forbidden Memories has one regarding fan mods (covered by Come for the Game, Stay for the Mods). Practically every other FOF entry I've seen is about the series/franchise in its entirety, not just individual episodes/installments (I assume because being fans of the rest is Fanon Discontinuity instead). Does or should that limit in scope apply to FOF? Or is it just not this game that qualifies as it has a more fitting item covering it?
- YMMV.My Immortal "The fic has reached such huge infamy that many are fans of it without having read or watched the Harry Potter series." I believe this misuse as something that should go under the Harry Potter page as the works subject to such, and that fanworks are exempt as examples are instead Recursive Fanfiction (I might have asked but can't recall). Thoughts about these?
- Sandbox.Enjoy The Setting Ignore The Story was made, then given to me once the creator lost interest. I'm wondering if that's too redundant with FOF (maybe make it a redirect), or worth keeping separate. Thoughts?
- YMMV.RWBY "The series has a vocal amount of fans (and even haters) who adore the setting and characters, but not the show itself. As such, many of them are drawn towards fan works, with some of the most well-known ones even promoting themselves as being improved retellings of the show's narrative." My impression was was FOF requires they never even check out the work, but how can they know enough about it do dislike the canon handling unless they follow/watch enough about it Fanon Discontinuity is a better fit? And/or is this were Enjoy the Setting, Ignore the Story might be a better fit?
While Trope Talk seems the best place to ask, I'm concerned this might be too broad/too many separate questions for a single thread, so I'm being here first to sort out/see if other thread might be the better place to ask some of these questions.
resolved "A time to kill": From Questionable trope entries to a questionable page overall. Film
So...I noticed the page for A Time to Kill was made years ago by erforce, who's account was deleted a while ago. Overall, the way it was all written sounds weirdly apologetic to the two white supremacists while overtly critical to Carl and the protagonists of the film.
I'll be very honest; I'm unfamiliar with the policy in regard to entries with tropes like Black-and-Gray Morality, if any, so I will need the perspective or knowledge of fellow tropers on this one.
I was looking through the page, and then I noticed the entries done for Black-and-Gray Morality, and I noticed this:
* What the men did to his daughter was undoubtedly reprehensible, but did that give Carl Lee the right to take their lives? If it had been a black rapist getting shot, would there be as much discussion? What if it had been your child? Well, much depends on the personal standpoint.
I can't quite put my finger on what's wrong with this entry, aside from the obvious whataboutism, but there's something that seems a bit off.
I'm also thinking, upon second inspection, it's not just the entries for that trope that are the only problematic thing about the way this page was written. Again, alot of this was edited by other tropers, but I do know that it wasn't really altered so much as it was broken up into smaller entries from what Erforce originally had written. There's more than what I've listed here, but that can be seen on the page itself.
Overall, what should be my next step of action with this? More importantly, what does everyone else make of how this page was written?
Edited by Stardust5099resolved Artist intent vs. Audience perseption
So I was thinking about adding a DeviantArt creator named "Femdom-OTS-Fan" to the Fan Work folders of the pages Victory Pose On Person and Over-the-Shoulder Carry since they create a lot of images depicting those two tropes.
They themself have explicitly
stated that they don't consider what they are creating to be Not Safe for Work (except if it is uploaded to a separate account which literally has NSFW in its name) since, according to them, physical female domination and someone being carried over someone else's shoulder appeals to them like sunsets appeal to other people. But I can also certainly see why anyone who is not them would disagree with their assessment of their own work. It is also worth noting that all their images are flagged as "Mature content" though I don't know for sure whether it was them or Deviantart who did this.
Since I of course don't want to violate this website's policy, I would like to ask whether or not in such cases, the creators intent of "This is not Rule 34" overrules any opposing opinions and evaluations by people who are not them?
openFranchise Question
Recently, I created a range for the BBC Books releases of the series Torchwood. With this, the parent show, and Torchwood: The Lost Files, there's enough there to warrant a Franchise page which I am thinking of making as well. However, what makes this case a bit murky to me is that Torchwood is a Spin-Off of Doctor Who, which in of itself is a franchise. Additionally, Torchwood material is already covered by the Doctor Who Expanded Universe. Could the franchise page still be created or what would the protocol be here?
Edited by HoloMew151resolved Is this an example of PhlebotinumProofRobot? Webcomic
Trope summary: most of the cast in a work is being affected by something, except for one... because they're a robot.
So: Schlock of Schlock Mercenary is descended from self-repairing computer memory/storage units. One storyline had the crew finding out some politically sensitive information, and having their memories modified as a result. Schlock was able to bypass this by using his 'biology' to make a backup of his real memories, and restoring them later.
openLinking to Character pages in trope examples
I was asked about this in a PM but since I didn't have an answer and I've been curious about it myself lately I'll ask it here.
Over the past several months I've noticed people embedding links to Character pages in trope examples (Especially Character Specific Page) and while it doesn't feel right to me I'm not sure if that's actually against the rules or not.
Edited by rmctagg09resolved How to make a redirect page. Western Animation
I want to make a Nightmare Fuel redirection for OPAL, so it redirects to the Nightmare fuel page for Jack Stauber. All the examples regarding Opal are already on the Jack Stauber page, and there's no existing page on Nightmare Fuel for Opal by itself.
openTBSC misuse/argues with itself?
YMMV.Carol And The End Of The World
- Too Bleak, Stopped Caring: The world and everything on it is doomed to be destroyed when the planets collide and there is nothing that can be done to stop it. As such, it's hard to get invested in this world and the plot lines when you know how it will all ultimately end in a few months.
- An averted example could be seen from the show as well. Despite the end of the world, people still try to live their lives throughout the show. Rather than despair about their deaths, they live their lives to the fullest and find satisfaction with even trying to do so.
YMMV cannot be played with so the last part is misuse.
My question is does the main entry not apply as it's optimistic despite the bleak premise and/or it fails to give say audiences were turned off by the story? (This sounds more like Audience-Alienating Premise without the required proof given it's the premise so those who wouldn't like it avoided it as opposed to having their interest worn out by the bleakness.)
I asked Is this an example?
but was ignored. The TBSC cleanup has been inactive for several weeks so I'm asking here first.
resolved Reporting self-recommended fanfic
I noticed that on the Zootopia fanfic recs page, a troper added their own fic a few years ago,
then added other people's names to the rec after the fact. I hid it at first, then looked over ATT for precedent, then removed it entirely.
Is there anything else that needs to be done?
resolved Daylight Horror reverted
So, Daylight Horror was made a disambiguation page a while ago because it was determined
that something scary happening during the day wasn't itself a trope.
However, Klaiopoiso
has recently decided to ignore that and restore the page without any discussion. The closest was them bringing up in the discussion page
, but they the only feedback they got were two people agreeing the trope shouldn't have been cut. The decision to restore the page seemed unilateral, and they didn't seem to take it through the TRS. The page is also a stub, with only two entries.
Can I get a page revert please?
Edited by chasemaddigan

So a user by the name of bradyreino recently added some blatantly untrue things to the Total Drama main page (edits found here
) and while myself and another user removed them, is this something we should keep an eye on?