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 Sevens: Jackpot21 deletes all dissenting Opinions: Anti-Climax Boss edition Anime
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Tropers/Jackpot21
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/YuGiOhSevens
User Jackpot 21 has this thing where they really dislike any opinion on Sevens they disagree with, even if it is a YMMV trope and thus is about opinions versus facts. Recently they went after my YMMV opinion on one of the final bosses of a Sevens Arc.
Here be what they removed.
...
- Anti-Climax Boss: Yuga's second duel with Asana, and the climax of her arc, is considered the weakest duel of all the arc climax duels in the series. Reasons for this stem for the aborted clash of the Maximum Monsters (which makes sense in the plot but comes as the expense of the duel), a sense of repetition of plays from the previous arc climax duel with Neiru (Yuga making a similar 'Trick Guard-Stray Familiar move', the second and third turns leading to a mutual Maximum clash, the use of Magical Switch to summon Seven Roads Magician to take an attack for a weaker monster, etc), and the duel's format overall being more akin to a regular Yuga duel than a climactic one (Yuga notably wins not using Seven Roads Magician, a combo with Seven Roads Magician, or his Maximum monster, but a new level 7 monster (Steeltek Diety Mirror Innovator) in a manner that is more akin to how a duel with a minor character would go and not a climactic clash with a final opponent whose duels tend to more closely involve Yuga's signature cards. Asana herself remains a popular character, but her final duel is considered weak by many.
...
Now let's break down why this is wrong. To list a few of them off the top of my head.
1: Anti-Climax Boss is a trope that is usable outside of video games. In fact all Yu Gi Oh Series have used this trope in their YMMV (For both cards and opponents). 2: This was an opinion I did see around and more than just myself. 3: Anti-Climax boss entries list out why the boss was seen that way, and I did list out several reasons including repetition and how it was concluded.
Also of course 'Your Mileage May Vary'
Minor tweaks are perfectly fine: perhaps changing words from 'is considered the weakest duel of all the arc climax duels' to 'many consider it the weakest duel in all the arc climax duels'. But if he isn't going to even give a reason for his removal like the Pokemon Journeys entry in this system at the same time...well either there is something wrong with it that I don't know about or it is good to go back in a manner that can avoid an edit war.
Edited by KrspaceTopenThoughts on a recent edit of mine
So about 4 days ago I cut the opening quip from She Is Not My Girlfriend and transplanted it onto the trope's Laconic page, replacing the one that had been there for the past 11-12 years. I did not provide a reason for the edits, but I felt the descriptor I put in was more appropriate than the one that was replaced. I figured somebody would make an ATT report regarding the edit, but that hasn't happened, so I'm doing it myself. Thoughts?
Edited by JHDopenSliding Scale wicks
Guy removed a link in the description of Powered by a Black Hole to Main.Mohs Scale Of Science Fiction Hardness with edit reason "Mohs scales are not tropes", linked to the TRS thread about it: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1640197422056760800&page=3#comment-54
Obviously we're not supposed to use them as trope examples anymore, but that was just a pothole to the explanation of the term "hard science fiction" (which even the Science Fiction page itself still links to).
So basically should that link actually have been removed, or just re-namespaced to Sliding Scale/ ? (The thread never properly decided this before being closed.)
Edited by StarSwordopenAgenda-Based Edit?
Wolfofthewest recently added a line
to Never a Self-Made Woman with the edit reason being complaining about it being sexist nonsense. Whether it's because they think the description or the trope itself is sexist doesn't matter, we don't care for editorializing of that nature.
openCorrected information because the character was lying?
So, in Critical Role: Campaign Three, Chetney is introduced as a Rogue, and it says so on his character card with stats (but those stats were inappropriate for a rogue, which did not escape fans' notice). Episode 11 reveals that he's not actually a rogue and had been lying to the party (and thus the meta information/the show itself had been lying to the players & viewers from minute one). What he is is a Order of the Lycan Blood Hunter - for the non-tabletop gaming tropers, that has nothing to do with a rogue -, which made his previously incongruous stats make sense.
Should the character then still be credited on the character sheet as Class: Rogue/[actual class], or should I simply delete the "Rogue" class and keep [actual class] spoilered, as the information was untrue in- and out of universe in the first place? The character's player flat out said "I'm not a rogue!" after the big reveal of his true class.
openNo Title
Since this creator page was made by the person the page is about, how do we know they are even popular enough to have a page? What if they are just self-promoting? Can someone confirm that these fics are popular enough to deserve pages on TV Tropes (which were also made by Bolt DMC)?
openDisambig needed, but the main page is already a trope
The Host has a serious issue with subpage collision (the YMMV page alone is seperated into sections for 4 different works). Normally the solution would be to move the individual media pages and make the main page a disambiguation for them... but the main page itself is already a trope.
openIf I wanted to redesign/update Trope-tan, would that be possible?
Trope-tan is a cute concept, but her design has always struck me as busy/outdated/not befitting the Moe Anthropomorphism look. I've drawn the current design
◊ before, and obviously I don't expect to be able to just barge in and do whatever I want—if this is a possibility I'd expect it to be community-approved—but I wanted to get a sense of if it's even feasible before I get ahead of myself.
open In this wiki, is Shout-Out the same as intertextuality?
Intertextuality is the intentional use of elements of other previous texts, which is what the Shout-Outs Index presents itself as. However, Shout-Out is normally conceived as a superficial reference to a work (one of its redirects is Allusion, for example, what is normally considered a different type of intertextuality from, let's say, Parodies, translations, Pastiches etc.). Is there space for a Definition-Only Page about intertext and its academic divisions? Or could the Shout-Outs Index be renamed (only the index, Shout-Out could stay as it is, even more so considering its popularity), get a redirect after Intertextual Tropes or something similar?
Edited by good-morningopenMedieval II: Total War Videogame
So, I have checked the Characters page for Medieval II: Total War, and much of the descriptions are copied from the game itself. Feels like plagiarism, though it needs thorough investigation.
openProblematic troper
sumitkumars has only been here for two days, but they seem to have made many questionable edits to both the Useful Notes.Bollywood and Useful Notes.India pages almost to the point where they blanked the pages.
1. removing a lot of text from the Bollywood page
.
2. Removing a big chunk of the India page
.
5. poor grammar
.
6. What the hell is this edit??
I suggest we have someone revert the edits this person made, but please take a look for yourself.
Edited by YuriHaru567openCan't find my work page in the search engine Literature
Hi! I just posted a new work page (see link below). Yet when I type "That Irresistible Poison" into the search engine, I see a lot of pages unrelated to the book. The search engine does show the history page of my edits at the top of the results, though. Typing "That Irresistible Poison Alessandra Hazard" leads to just the history page of my edits, but not the work page itself. Does anyone know why? I already have the Page Type set to Work, and have Indexed it under Queer Romance, Queer Media, and Literature of the 2010s.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/ThatIrresistiblePoison
Thanks so much!
openHarry Ellis Whitewashing/Edit War Avoidance Film
On Characters.Die Hard, mattc0tter re-added some whitewashing/ACI of Harry Ellis
that I previously deleted on account of the movie never showing Ellis to be anything other than a selfish prick. I do not want to get in an edit war over this, but I want to make very clear that having seen the film, Ellis' benevolent intentions are ACI at best.
openIdiot Plot misuse? (Just one moment?)
- Idiot Plot: The crux of the crossover itself hinges on the fact that Peter and Strange never bothered to properly communicate the details of the spell cast on Peter's memory. It's only thanks to an extremely convenient instance of Exact Words that the MCU Spider-Man isn't rendered helpless and alone immediately after it's cast. You'd expect either Peter or Strange to have considered the implications more than not at all before such a monumental thing was done.
Idiot Plot requires more than one character having more than one moment of separate idiocy. It might hit this criteria with Peter not thinking the ramifications through and Strange not explaining the spell sooner, but it's still one scene and technically the same one moment and idiocy of them not thinking it through.
Thoughts? Should Idiot Plot have a cleanup thread? (I recall examples being brought here a few times and questions over it's fundamentals.)
openPreventing an edit war on MythologyGag.NickelodeonAllStarBrawl Videogame
I've edited MythologyGag.Nickelodeon All Star Brawl on various occasions in the past few months to add examples, some of which include external links to help back them up. (Here
are
some instances of this.) On the 12th of this month, Pgj1997 removed several of these links
, explaining in an edit reason after the fact
that Weblinks Are Not Examples.
While I understand the policy, I made an effort to write all of my examples such that the connection between something in the game and the original series it's based on was evident from the text alone, which means that their edits seem like they're overreaching. Put another way, I tried to abide by what the page itself says:
- It is always preferable to use outside links as additional tools to clarify, enhance, or provide reference to a detailed example's content, rather than using them in place of the detailed example itself. In short, weblinks are to supplement context, but never substitute for context.
I don't want to risk edit warring, so I wanted to bring up the matter here to get others' opinions on this before taking any action.
openIs this kind of trope use okay?
I'm doing gradual editing and clean up on the tropes pages for Housepets!, A-L
and M-Z
which have all kinds of issues. Most of the problems are the usual bad grammar, ZCEs, indentation, natter, and bad examples, but this one is odd, and something I haven't encountered before. There's a trope for Show Within a Show that has sub-bullet points for tropes that only appear in one of the two examples, done this way:
- Show Within a Show: Pridelands, a fictional work of which Grape is fond. Also "The Adventures of Spot (Superdog)", which uses the following tropes exclusively.
- Big "NO!": Spot (Superdog) does this when things don't go his way.
- Clark Kenting: The only difference between Spot (Superdog) and his secret identity as Spot (Professor) is a cape and a pair of glasses. Even the name's the same!
- Get a Hold of Yourself, Man!: Attempted by Stripe.
- Intercontinuity Crossover: In-Universe, Peanut is fond of crossing the Pridelands books with his Super Hero, Spot (Superdog).
- Large Ham: Spot (Superdog) has his moments.
- New Powers as the Plot Demands: This comic
and Spot's last line.
- Terrible Artist: Peanut's drawings are about on par with those of a stereotypical five year old.
- When Things Spin, Science Happens: Touched on here.
- Why Don't Ya Just Shoot Him?: Played with in this comic.
Other issues aside (such as ZCEs), is this acceptable practice? The alternative is to scatter the trope examples in sub-bullets in the main tropes page and note that they only happen in the Show Within a Show in each case.
Thanks!
Edited by BoltDMCopenIndex Correction? Web Original
Several of the subpages for The Magnus Archives (at the very least the characters, heartwarming, funny, and nightmare fuel pages) are indexed under Web Original, while the work itself is a podcast. Do I have to achieve any sort of consensus before re-indexing them, and if so is this a good place to do it?
Edit: I fixed it but I have a follow-up question: while I was moving what pages needed to/could be moved, I discovered that Fanfic Recommendations does not have a Podcast folder but does have an Other folder that includes several podcasts. Can I go ahead and make a Podcast folder, or do I need an okay for that?
Edited by AfterwordopenEdit war on Kingdom Come Deliverance YMMV page Videogame
On December 22nd, Troper The Living Drawing removed these tropes
from Kingdom Come Deliverance's YMMV page with the edit reason of "Removed several examples that, while potentially valid, are very complainy. Have not played the game and have little knowledge on it so if you have, please feel free to rewrite the removed examples to me more neutral.":
- Archery is probably the fakest of all "difficult" things in the game. There is no aiming dot visible, but that doesn't mean there isn't one. In fact, the game simply turns off the aiming dot when bows are drawn with a crudely written script. There is absolutely nothing preventing players from simply marking or memorizing the dot on display and then have perfect aim, regardless of skill, bow type or distance. The absurd sway of bows for first five levels of the skill only adds to how fake it really is, because if the aiming dot is marked (or displayed with a console command), the aim remains perfect despite displaying sway all over the screen.
- The game never really informs how to train, so if natural progress is applied with the plot progression, Henry is going to be constantly and heavily under skilled. However, spending just 30 minutes with Captain Bernhard and whacking him with random Button Mashing is enough to train Henry into formidable fighter, raising half of his stats and generally turning the whole game into a cakewalk with most of enemies unable to even hit back.
- Each and every camp full of bandits can be cleared with ease during night-time, by carefully picking them one by one. Not only does it allow the player to skip otherwise tough (or outright impossible) encounters, it's considerably easier to do than just trying to face few brigands on your own in a sword fight. Of course the game never informs about how stealth or stealth kills work, so unless player figures it out by applying common sense, good luck with all those encounters when trying to face bandits in straight-out combat.
- The entire barter system relies on Henry's relationship with the vendor: he has to lower his bids for a long time to gain enough favour to get better prices (and better bids) in the future. Cue miller Peshek, who via finishing his quest line gains 100% favour. And since he's miller, he buys stolen goods. His merchant list is also scripted to pay premium for a lot of things regardless of favour. And if one particular vendor is constantly fed new items, their cash reserve increases during restocking. Eventually Peshek can easily carry 50 thousand groschen, buying whatever and offering decent prices at that. Just don't expect the game explaining any of this at any point.
- Fake Longevity: The game has few very blatant cases of intentionally making certain trival tasks take extra time. It is so widespread, numerous reviewers pointed this as an outright trick to claim "100 hours of gameplay", despite 20 or so is going to be filled with tedium.
- All the copious, lengthy and unskippable animations. They add absolutely nothing to the game, aside few extra seconds every time certain action is taken. Haggle and horse (dis)mounting is probably most guilty of this and also some of the most repeated actions.
- Fast travel on map can only be done over pre-planned paths and only toward handful of pre-made points of interest. In practice, this leads to Henry taking in-game hours to circle back and forth over particularly twisted path over a hillside or taking a detour over half of the map. And it doesn't matter if he's on foot or riding - the speed of fast travel is exactly the same, so once a mount is acquired, it's considerably faster to just ride manually rather than use the "fast" travel option.
- Additionally with horses, they move much slower on roads than off them. Most of the time, it's better to ride close to the road to keep track of where you're going, but not so close that the horse automatically attempts to get on it.
- Henry can't swim. Period. He can't ford rivers even when on horseback. Said rivers aren't deep and lack rapids of any sorts. Still, it takes to find what the game considers as a ford (where the water tends to be ankle-deep) or a bridge, which means a lot of back-and-forth travel toward nearest pass over river.
- Misaimed "Realism": The game was heavily marketed under "super-realism" flag, but this backfires badly at certain game mechanics, especially since how uneven the application of said "realism" is, breaking the immersion entirely rather than enhancing it.
- Probably the most glaring is just about anything related with inventory management. You can carry around few tonnes of equipment and the only downside will be being forced into the walking pace of movement. Get yourself on horseback and even that no longer applies. Oh, and saddle bags on your horse come with a teleport, since you can move in and out items regardless of where the horse is, unless ongoing quest intentionally disables that option (which only ever happens twice).
- Said saddle bags have a limited load they can carry, but there is nothing preventing Henry from overloading himself and then simply get on horseback.
- The weapons seem to be made out of foil and raw copper, that's how quickly they wear out. They also never really break down, just reach the state of "disrepair", meaning a simple debuff to damage. And you would grind any given blade into nothingness when using grindstone so often as Henry does.
- Probably the most glaring is just about anything related with inventory management. You can carry around few tonnes of equipment and the only downside will be being forced into the walking pace of movement. Get yourself on horseback and even that no longer applies. Oh, and saddle bags on your horse come with a teleport, since you can move in and out items regardless of where the horse is, unless ongoing quest intentionally disables that option (which only ever happens twice).
- That One Level: Needle in A Haystack. Working with the Neuhof bandits, Henry is tasked with infiltrating a monastery in order to track a straggler down, kill him and bring proof to the bandits that the target is dead. What follows is allegedly the most annoying quest in the whole game according to fans. First of all, it's a No-Gear Level, so you can't bring your weapons inside to kill the target. Second, since you're a novice, you're at the bottom of the monk hierarchy, meaning that you live under the authority of the hated Circators, monks who are supposed to keep order in the monastery and punish monks who break the rules. However, since you are being tasked with killing someone in the monastery, you WILL have to break many rules with your time in there, specially if you choose to do the sidequests that the monastery offer, which involves ludicrous amounts of lockpicking and pickpocketing, sneaking in and out of the monastery constantly, missing out on your schedule (and getting punished for that), getting lost and much more. Oh, and did we mention that all of this is done without a single Savior Schnapps in your inventory?
- Thankfully, the quest can be skipped, but it'll give you its "bad ending". There is an ornamental dagger hidden under a paving stone on the balcony next to the dormitory. If you don't mind a bit of collateral damage you can murder all the novices in their sleep, grab the spare set of keys from the pantry and escape within five minutes of the first night without needing any preplanning - apart from needing the Stealth Kill perk. Yes, it skips the whole quest and yes, it gives you a bad ending for it, but admit it, it's smart and it's understandable to do it.
- However, should Henry be a competent thief-type, the entire quest goes from That One Level to the best part of the entire game, as the main obstacle - lack of gear - is meaningless when all doors can be opened and circators avoided with stealth. It still requires overcoming various challenges, but in engaging and simply fun way.
No less than 30 minutes later, troper Stanisz added all of them back and commented them out
with the reason "If you expect people to correct the tone, how about leaving them content to correct, rather than just cutting it?" Around a week later, troper C Dan Red removed the commenting symbol and made the FakeDifficulty entry public with no edit reason.
Seeing Stanisz's reason, I decided to take a look at it myself and edited the entries
, with my own edit reason being "Grammar fixes, removed some entries (Miller seems more like Game-Breaker, Stealth is explained in the codex, and others are not that bad or seem to just be complaining), and tried to adjust the tone a tad to be more neutral." One of those removed entries was this, since most of it seemed to be unsalvageable complaining and one-sided:
- Fake Longevity: The game has few very blatant cases of intentionally making certain trival tasks take extra time. It is so widespread, numerous reviewers pointed this as an outright trick to claim "100 hours of gameplay", despite 20 or so is going to be filled with tedium.
- All the copious, lengthy and unskippable animations. They add absolutely nothing to the game, aside few extra seconds every time certain action is taken. Haggle and horse (dis)mounting is probably most guilty of this and also some of the most repeated actions.
- Fast travel on map can only be done over pre-planned paths and only toward handful of pre-made points of interest. In practice, this leads to Henry taking in-game hours to circle back and forth over particularly twisted path over a hillside or taking a detour over half of the map. And it doesn't matter if he's on foot or riding - the speed of fast travel is exactly the same, so once a mount is acquired, it's considerably faster to just ride manually rather than use the "fast" travel option.
- Additionally with horses, they move much slower on roads than off them. Most of the time, it's better to ride close to the road to keep track of where you're going, but not so close that the horse automatically attempts to get on it.
- Henry can't swim. Period. He can't ford rivers even when on horseback. Said rivers aren't deep and lack rapids of any sorts. Still, it takes to find what the game considers as a ford (where the water tends to be ankle-deep) or a bridge, which means a lot of back-and-forth travel toward nearest pass over river.
Hours later, Stanisz added the above entry back
with the reason of "Come on, mate..."
openSpider-Man: No Way it's being brought up again.
A while ago I removed Rescued from the Scrappy Heap entries about all three Spider-Men from Spider-Man: No Way Home after discussing it on Is this an Example
thread, because it was agreed that it was too early to call it that. Then it was re-added again along with another entry and deleted again here
. Which also had it re-added while the query was going on and deleted by the same query. At the same time, I also removed one for all three Spider-Men here
including Andrew Garfield fallowing discussion here
. Well yesterday Enigmatic_Mastermind added these entries here
:
- Rescued from the Scrappy Heap:
- Those who initially weren't impressed with Andrew Garfield as the web-head in The Amazing Spider Man films tend to appreciate his performance more in this film, probably due to the script being more fitting for him as well as the character being comically self-aware that he was the least popular Spider-Man as well as having several highlights in the film. Like the scene where saves MJ in the same way he tried to save Gwen.
- Jamie Foxx's Electro from the same films as well. Even before the movie hit the theaters there were people who were glad that he was given a second shot at playing the supervillain and he felt more serious and formidable here despite his limited screentime, in contrast to the more cliché tragic loner-turned-villain in his original movies while still keeping that aspect of his character in the end without losing the threat.
What should be done cut or keep? You know this page has been the subject of a lot of ATTs.
Edited by Bullman

Bringing this here since the page's discussion forum doesn't get a lot of traffic.
To provide a bit of context, back in November 2020 images and audio of Voice Actor Quinton Flynn sexually harassing female fans surfaced on social media followed up by multiple accusations from many other women. This led to Flynn losing upcoming roles as documented on the Role Ending Misdemeanor Video Games page. Six months Flynn had sued one of his accusing for stalking him and got a court victory over her, then claimed on Twitter that a judge had found him not guilty of the accusations. This is pretty blatantly a lie; as the plaintiff his guilt or innocence was never under any consideration, he was only suing one woman for stalking him, she defended herself which is a good sign she didn't receive the best legal council, and her being guilty of stalking him does not mean he can't be guilty of harassing her. However some of his fans have taken this as proof that all accusations against him are false and he is 100% innocent since she had to delete her tweets on the matter. So Flynn portraying the decision as him being found not guilty is dishonest and a bit suspect.
Now onto the actual matter; over on his creator page when the judge's decision was brought down Captain Tedium deleted the section on the accusations on April 22 2021 with the following edit reason:
"The sexual allegations have recently been debunked. https://mobile.twitter.com/JasmineDBZking/status/1384605216650059780
Reinstate the detail of what happened in November 2020 only if the proof of Quinton Flynn's innocence is itself debunked. Or if this incident has ended up affecting his career anyway."
On July 4th The Extractor added in a modified entry with the accusations, court victory and the loss of roles with the following edit reasons
"A statement that he alone released, that no one else corroborated, that still contradicts a shitload of visual and audio evidence doesn't remotely absolve him of anything. It also doesn't change the fact that he's effectively been fired from everything and is yet to be re-hired on anything. I'll amend this part so it's more objective and less "hostile", but it stays."
On the 20th I amended the entry to remove the reference to the court case as I felt the way it was written would lead someone to an incorrect assumption of what happened and that to properly explain and provide context would take up a lot of words that in my opinion was largely irrelevant to the point.
There were no further edits to the page until November 6th when Tropers/shaynaynaynot edited the page to add "In April 2021, Flynn tweeted that the accusations came from a stalker
, and he was found not guilty." They also added the same to the REM subpage.
Now what's been added is objectively false (as the plaintiff it is quite literally impossible for him to be found not guilty), but given as this could be described as either the first, second or fourth edit on the matter depending on your definition I'm concerned that reverting it would be considered an edit war, and given that only four of us have been involved in editing there is little hope of getting a consensus. So I'm seeking further input from people who haven't been involved so far.