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:
open Capitalizing 'Black Mirror: Arkangel'
Individual recap subpages of Black Mirror have a directory up top. The one for season 4 looks like this, with bolded text for the page you're on:
[[WMG:[[center:[-Recap: Black Mirror Series Four USS Callister | ArkAngel | Crocodile | Hang the DJ | Metalhead | Black Museum-]]]]]
A while ago
I changed the capitalization of the episode title "ArkAngel" to "Arkangel" in the directory of all s4 episodes, citing this trailer
. That's also how it's referred to on Wikipedia
, IMDB
, the BM wiki
, reviews [1]
[2]
and most importantly, the release platform Netflix itself (I just checked).
Nevertheless, the capitalization has been switched back to the old one on all the s4 recap pages by Tropers/rjung (whom I will be PM'ing to come here).
This seems like a clear-cut revert, any objections?
Edited by Synchronicityopen Potential agenda editing
So in Trans Audience Interpretation there's an entry regarding Naoto from Persona 4 being interpreted as trans, which says:
- Persona 4: Naoto Shirogane had an infamous character arc and dungeon level centered on gender issues, complete with a laboratory and gender reassignment imagery. The game confirms that Naoto is actually female, with some Values Dissonance about career-related gender roles that didn't translate cross-culturally. Regardless, many disregard what the game itself says because Naoto being trans has more potential to explore.
(Note that the entry was reworded per the complaining thread
.)
After I edited that entry with the one suggested on the thread, user gorobestboy deleted some lines regarding the interpretation
with no edit reason. So I'm concerned that there is some agenda going on here.
openEdit War on Music.SubstanceJoyDivisionAlbum
Update: after further discussions with David Delony in PMs, I got permission to re-remove the Cover Version point, and did so accordingly. Since the re-adding was simply due to them forgetting that it had been removed, I think the issue here can be considered resolved.
Original Post When I created Music.Substance Joy Division Album back in 2019, I included
- Cover Version: "Dead Souls" would later receive a popular cover by Nine Inch Nails for the soundtrack to The Crow.
Later, David Delony expanded the point so that it reads as follows
- Cover Version: "Dead Souls" would later receive a popular cover by Nine Inch Nails for the soundtrack to The Crow. "Love Will Tear Us Apart" has also been covered frequently, with versions by Paul Young and folk singer June Tabor, among others.
Some time later, I elected to move
- Cover Version: "Love Will Tear Us Apart" has become something of a standard and thus has attracted a number of cover versions in many different genres. It's been covered by Paul Young and folk singer June Tabor, among others.
For reference, the Referenced by… point is exactly as I left it. Edited by bowserbros
open Rape it's actually seduction
Let's see if i get this straigth, forcing yourself on a person that's terrified of you is seduction and not rape? That's what Morrigan Aensland from darkstalkers does, but apparently some users "opinion" is that it's seduction so they called me out for "deleiting someone's opinion" and i assume deleted my edits. I mean don't get me wrong, i respect the opinion of other people, but if you think forcing yourself on someone it's seduction and not rape...
openQuestion about modified pictures
Hello, dear tropers. Currently, I'm working on a russian translation of TV Tropes and I have question about pictures taken from comics(either web or paper, doesn't matter). The thing is that since they content writings in english and they are also illustrations of certain tropes, it's needed that they have to be translated in russian to make viewer understand. Yeah, i can translate 'em in description below the picture, but I thought that it would be better if image itself contains translated text. So i need to erase text in it and then write text in russian. On TV Tropes, is this legal and acceptable?
Edited by DopamineMess-14-qqopenTroping reality TV shows (e.g. Drag Race) - contestants, presenters and judges Live Action TV
So...
Following on from this post
on the Character Page Cleanup Thread, and this earlier Creator Page Cleanup
discussion, there seems to be a grey area with regard to troping reality TV.
Administrivia.Real Life Troping clearly says:
So, looking at something like RuPaul's Drag Race -
- I can see that the competing drag queens (who have very carefully constructed personas) can potentially be troped as characters in their drag identities.
- ...but do we trope the judges and others (e.g. the 'pit crew' teams, who have no alter ego and are scantily-dressed support staff) - we have character page tropes entries for them all, and things like Age-Gap Romance and Token Minority (for the only straight guy) troped for the real people. That feels like a step too far.
- We also have Characters page examples for things like Older Than They Look (no Real Life) for RuPaul, Berserk Button (referencing her Real Life childhood bullying) for judge Michelle Visage and similar examples from the contestants' real pre-show, offscreen lives. In some cases I'm not sure they've even been directly mentioned in the work itself.
I know an awful lot of effort's gone into some of the pages, and I don't want to make major changes without a consensus (which didn't really happen with the previous forum threads, hence this post) - the one comment on the last post seemed to agree that this crossed into NRLEP, though.
What are people's views?
Edited by Mrph1openHaving some trouble indexing a page
i'm trying to add Grand Theft Auto Online to the indexes Grand Theft Auto V appears on, and i've run into a snag trying to get it to appear indexed on The Seventh Generation Of Console Video Games
despite adding it to the list, the index does not appear on the page itself. i don't know if this has anything to do with the fact that the 7th gen console page has a pair of index tags around every IP listed on there, instead of across larger swathes of the page (for reasons i'm not going to begin to understand)
in any case, i'm pretty sure i put GTAO's page between index tags properly, but it's still not working. i'm not sure if i'm missing something incredibly obvious here or what.
openSelf-Reporting Edit War
I've been cleaning the Funny.RWBY page of Moments misuse (specifically: scene summaries, character reactions and using quotes as examples). Because I was cleaning up Moments misuse, and not removing audience reaction examples, I didn't check the History page first. I've received a PM pointing out that I've edit warred on the page.
After double-checking the page history, that's correct; I have.
The Volume 9 entries were originally added
by cybertoy0. I removed
them as part of a larger clean-up of the page for being summaries, character reactions and quotes instead of examples. He added some of them back
, and I removed them
for the same reason, also as part of the clean-up I was continuing to do today.
That was stupid of me, and I know better, but the damage is done.
Edited by WyldchyldopenIs this really Woolseyism? Web Original
I found this in Manga Soprano. To my understanding a Woolseyism is a change that people like but I think this example is just "Blind Idiot" Translation.
In the Japanese version
So what do I do with this example?
Edited by mickey96openExcessive AlternateCharacterInterpretation + troper with an agenda
I'm bringing this up to address an issue of a character being troped based exclusively on Alternate Character Interpretation.
The problem character is Yui Ikari and the corresponding page is here. There have been dozens of edits dating back months
rewriting the character as a Well-Intentioned Extremist and a chessmaster. The issue is you have to subscribe hard to Alternate Character Interpretation and there's now a ton of contradiction in the character page claiming what's ambiguous and what's deliberate. In a nutshell, Yui's character is never given concrete motivations; everything she does is subject to ambiguity. But a lot of these edits are taking a hardline stance toward one specific interpretation of her character that contradicts the rest of the page.
I've seen the anime and most of the tropes that have been added are, at best, problematic, and others who have also watched the anime that I've discussed the matter with agree. Some samples:
- Abusive Parents: She deliberately fakes her death, traumatizing her son and making her husband grow emotionally distant from him, and subjects him to numerous traumas. Thing is, she did it all in an effort to protect his life.
- Cruel to Be Kind: No matter how one looks at her ambiguous moral compass, she is this at the very least, seeing how she did very deliberately inflict a serious emotional trauma on her son by faking her own death right in front of him, which decisively shaped his life and psyche in a very negative direction. However, she did so to enact her plan of allowing him and the rest of humanity to get the right to choose their own fate during Instrumentality, something SEELE would have denied all of them.
- More Deadly Than the Male: In The End of Evangelion, it is made clear that she was a much more shrewd and accomplished schemer than Gendo could ever hope to be, having managed to outmanouvre SEELE even though her physical presence in the world had been severely limited for more than a decade and she only had one unambiguous ally (Fuyutsuki) on her side.
- Soft-Spoken Sadist: She is not sadistic by any measure, but she is willfully cruel to the point of being on the borderline of an Anti-Hero and an Anti-Villain and has a profoundly soft, soothing voice.
- Well-Intentioned Extremist: Her goal is to counter SEELE and The Angels and protect Shinji's life. To do this, she'll emotionally torment both her husband and son by faking her death, make said son's friend die horribly in front of his eyes by refusing to save her and temporarily glass humanity to take down SEELE's potential for regaining power.
All of these tropes are contradicted or otherwise called into question elsewhere on the page in regards to the ambiguity that surrounds most of Yui's character.
Almost every edit seems to be the work of one user, Orangutans who TBH I think is troping with an agenda. I think the culmination was when said user brought up a post
in the Magnificent Bastard cleanup thread that relied, almost exclusively, on said Alternate Character Interpretation.
Other tropers have taken issue with this before, on the page itself; back in October another user wiped a bunch of edits that were equally ambiguous and invited Orangutans to use the Discussion page
, but the offer was never taken up. The other user subsequently added this
Ambiguous Situation trope in an attempt to mollify the situation, but that trope and others like it are still being contradicted by the problem edits Orangutans has left.
Can we take a deeper look at this?
Edited by ScraggleopenNon-"Trope" Trivia, what to do?
Trivia.Pokemon Sword And Shield
Meta
- These are the first games to use an official Japanese version of the famous blue-and-yellow international logo of the franchise. Here's
a comparison of the game's Japanese and English logos for proof, and here's
◊ the new Japanese logo by itself.
I'm fuzzy on if/what items that don't fit Trivia "tropes". Is this allowed and if so how are such to be added/formatted?
Mickey Mouse Works segments:
- UsefulNotes/HighDefinition: This series was Disney's first animated show to be produced in widescreen HD, despite being made years before the format became dominant.
Useful Notes aren't allowed as examples, so should this be cut or is this fine to keep as a non-"trope" item? If keep how should it be formatted as the Sword And Shield formatting wouldn't work here?
openSmall edit war
On SignatureLine.Live Action Film, Dvaderstarlord5 added a few entries over
a
series
of
edits
, mostly MCU films.
Last Monday
, Frankencastle deleted all of it with the edit reason "It looks like some troopers are just adding in whatever lines they like rather than the lines that truly qualify as this trope. Because all of the lines I just deleted definitely don't qualify as Signature Lines."
The following day,
Dvaderstarlord 5 added back a couple of the lines with the edit reason "Also while I do think that I once again went overboard, I would say that these two are signature lines. For Wakanda Forever, Ramonda's line was both involved in a lot of the trailers and was a very powerful line in the movie itself. For Werewolf By Night, I would say that most of the fans I've talked to online have said that Jack saying what Man-Thing's name was is the most memorable line in the special and it was to me as well."
This is an edit war, right? Granted, it is a little lesser than your usual one since he only added back two lines, but it's still an edit war.
resolved Edit war
Reginald Ogron 5 introduced following edit to Hearts of Iron:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.HeartsOfIron#edit34958967
I slashed it, along with citing my reasons for that (and a quarter of all entries from that specific YMMV page are going to support those reasons). Except a few days later, the troper in question put it back without a single alternation
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.HeartsOfIron#edit34998908
So it's a double whammy: not only did he repost the same entry, but the entry itself claims things that aren't true, where stuff listed as supposed praises are widely considered to be Scrappy Mechanic within the playerbase.
openRule of Cautious Editing Judgement wicks
I've been involved with the currently-quiet cleanup effort
surrounding Rule of Cautious Editing Judgment sinkholes, and thus far, I've been adhering primarily to the idea that the "And that's all we'll say about that" and "overwritten euphemism for Broken Base" varieties of ROCEJ wick should be removed on sight.
Looking at the remaining ROCEJ sinkholes, I'm wondering if those could do with removing as well, considering the impetus behind the cleanup effort and the distinction of what is meant by "rule" in this context. Some of the remarks with ROCEJ sinkholes reference the ROCEJ as if it meant "rule" in the sense of something that everyone has to make sure to follow, but the ROCEJ page itself and some of the discussion in the ATT post that led to the cleanup effort
refer to ROCEJ as a rule in the sense of something that happens naturally, therefore tropers shouldn't need to be reminded of the ROCEJ every time something contentious comes up.
Would I be clear to remove any remaining ROCEJ sinkholes with that latter idea of the term "rule" and the subsequent fact that tropers don't need reminders of the rule in mind? It won't be a unilateral removal regardless, since there are some wicks on the related page where the example specifically talks about the rule itself instead of reminding people to follow it, or indexes that ROCEJ happens to be categorised on.
Edited by Akriloth2160openTechnical question
A while ago I decided to exhume an old TLP, Fantastic Display Jar
, that got nuked for unclear reasons. I brought this up in the Trope Idea Sounding Board and feedback was positive. The main question I have is that I'm not particularly clear on how to actually... un-nuke this. The TLP history doesn't go that far back and the draft itself doesn't have a "relaunch" button. Is there some way to revive this or should I just move the contents to a fresh draft?
resolved OK to move "Fanfic Recs.Final Fantsy VII" to "Fanfic Recs.Compilation of FF7"?
Would there be any objections if the FF7 fanfic recs was moved to "Fanfic Recs / Compilation Of Final Fantasy VII", with redirects from the other Compilation titles? It would make a lot more sense given that the fics encompass much of the Compilation, not just FF7 itself. I had asked
, but no response.
openEdit on The Owl House: For the Future
So the Owl House episode For the Future had this trope
- Unintentionally Unsympathetic: With Boscha clearly not having moved on from their friendship, the episode makes it easy to look back at season 1 and see that Amity really did not handle the end of their friendship well. As far as the audience is told, Amity simply ended a friendship of many years with no prior warning, then embarrassed Boscha in public, which is a rather poor way to end a relationship, whether it's platonic or romantic. Of course, many fans feel that Boscha, given her actions afterward, deserves it (her touching Amity somewhat inappropriately lessens the sympathy), but it still reflects poorly on Amity.
Which was just edited out because of this reasoning
This, to me, does not address the actual point, which was that Amity by ditching Boscha suddenly without explanation and then talked shit about her in public handled the end of their friendship poorly. The trope is not arguing that Amity was unjustified in ending their friendship, but that she went about it a bad way which I absolutely believe she did.
I would also like to add that various tropers have a history of overly villifying Boscha, to the point of listing her as a Hate Sink and Even Evil Has Standards (instead of Everyone Has Standards)
Edited by AurelaiOfTheNorthopenRepeated Trope Misuse on YMMV/TheVillainessReversesTheHourglas Literature
I’ve been trying to clean up the pages for the Webnovel/Webtoon The Villainess Turns The Hourglass (which is in the wrong directory but that’s a different problem) and one of the editors
keeps trying to shoehorn the same entry about the protagonist into different tropes that it does not fit. The character is a Base Breaker but the issues related to why are already well documented in the Base Breaker entry, so this just seems to keep veering into Complaining about a character they don’t like.
The trope text that keeps moving:
- As noted by some readers, Aria herself wasn't a good person in her previous life, and while she was unjustly executed, she's not exactly the case of an innocent persecuted person. After being reborn she's basically a 24 year-old woman in a teenager's body (and later, due to Rapid Aging, in an adult body) getting revenge on a teenage Mielle, who had not yet done anything particularly heinous. Even after realising Mielle was just a child manipulated by her nanny and Isis, Aria still continues to bully and humiliate her. The fact that Mielle herself is revealed to not be a very bright girl makes Aria being duped by someone like her in her previous life, and taking revenge on Mielle in her current life reflect rather badly on her.
- In fact, several readers pointed out that Mielle herself would be a prime candidate for a Peggy Sue story of her own, where Aria would be considered an outright villain.
So when I first removed it from the page it was listed as Protagonist-Centered Morality, which isn’t YMMV and this text doesn’t meet. Now it’s at Designated Hero, but I’m this case the main character’s not a hero, isn’t described as a hero except by people who she’s concealed her nature from, is honest with herself that her actions are not heroic, and constantly calls herself “the villainess.” Whether she’s a likable Anti-Hero isn’t this trope (and again, that’s already well-written up in Base Breaker.)
I want to remove the text again but I’m concerned about being accused of edit warring. I sent an indicator to the editor about the misuse with this explanation.
Edited by Rebochanresolved Someone is edit warring on UnintentionallyUnsympathetic/TheSimpsons
On the Unintentionally Unsympathetic page for The Simpsons, there is a header for the examples that belong to the members of the Simpsons family, that would read 'Pretty much every member of the Simpsons family (except Bart and Maggie) has come across as this at some point or another.'.
Two days ago, I noticed that the user Brian KT had removed the mention of Bart that excludes him from being counted as Unintentionally Unsympathetic, claiming that there must have been some episodes where Bart came off as such without even adding any examples of him being so.
I then added the mention of Bart back, pointing out that there aren't currently any examples of him being Unintentionally Unsympathetic listed on the page, hence why he's being excluded.
Earlier today, I discovered that Brian KT has once again removed the mention of Bart, still without adding any examples of him being Unintentionally Unsympathetic and has thus started an edit war. Since I can't change it back again, as that would also count as edit warring, I've decided to bring this here.
P.S. Just wondering, after this gets resolved, will I be able to add the mention of Bart back myself or would it still count as me edit warring?
Edited by CorvusIX

I just signed up and would like to add to this folder. There are several prominant TV shows featuring rangers that are not yet included and I'd like to add them.
The Lone Ranger Walker, Texas Ranger Laredo Trackdown
In movies there is also the Comancheros In Western Animation there is the series Adventures of the Galaxy Rangers.
I'm happy to make the additions myself but don't see a way to do that. Is there a tutorial?