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:
openSubpages for episodes
What If…? (2021) has two episodes so far, each one with a page in the recap namespace. Those episodes have their own YMMV and Trivia subpages. Is it correct, or should those items be moved to the YMMV and Trivia sections of the series itself?
openOdd edits for a story
I found Fanfic.The Little Lock That Could, and while the page itself was alright, I noticed that the subpages were in... rough shape, to say the least. Some issues include:
- Entries that are just blank bullet points (see here
and here
)
- A page that initially was just framework
(and it still has the templates).
- Pages that don't specify a franchise (Characters.Minor Characters and Characters.Major Characters - probably not an issue, but it's still irritating)
- Pages being updated in real time
(not really sure how to phrase it, but the page description itself gives updates on the story that would be more suited for a trivia page)
- And the subpage that convinced me to make this post, Memes.The Little Lock That Could. Not only is it very short for a subpage (only four entries), but it also has a total of seven images on it (the character pages also have some issues with multiple images in one folder, but this is the most extreme example I saw).
I noticed that most of this was done by one person (Tropers.Divoratore), but they haven't edited since October 2020.
Edited by idonomopenHow do we refer to characters with multiple pronouns?
I recently came across our page for Friday Night Fever, which has a bigender character, Taki. Nearly all of the examples regarding her constantly switch from using she/her and he/him in the same example, and it's honestly confusing. So that got me thinking: how do we refer to characters with multiple pronouns? Do we stick to one set page wide or just keep it consistent in an example itself (like referring to a character with they/he pronouns as he in one example for a trope, and they in an example for another trope)?
openThis Troper talk on Headcsratchers and WMG
Are we allowed to use "I", "me", or "myself" on Headscratchers and WMG pages? I always thought that was the norm since these pages are more subjective in nature than those with trope examples.
openPossible cut
On The Wiz, There's this listed under Older Than They Think
- For one (fairly conservative) online reviewer, The Wiz Live! was apparently tainted with the violence of black culture, thus making it less family friendly from the "original 1939 version", due to Dorothy being prompted to murder the witch (as opposed to stealing her broomstick). Ironically, that only occurred in the 1939 film, which isn't the original Wizard Of Oz. In the original book, the Wizard really does tell Dorothy to straight up murder the Wicked Witch, who at that point wasn't even actively a threat to her. This act of violence wasn't added to the story of The Wiz Live! due to it being a black casted show. It was always there from when the story was originally written.
Would it really count as YMMV if the writeup itself states that it was only one person rather than a group of people and it doesn't even give any names as to who or what said it?
Edited by nwotyzalopenContemplating Cut Lit for this page
The Headscratchers page for ''The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack'' questions nothing about the show itself and rather focuses on its supposed cancellation/ending, in a complaining matter. I'm not sure though if it's completely justified to send to the Cut List, as it does ask questions related to the show, albeit not its in-universe content.
Edited by TVGuy2001openWhat if an AlternateUniverse had an AlternateSelf?
The MCU animated series What If…? (2021) has stories set in alternate universes than the MCU main one. There is an entry for Alternate Self, listing characters with divergences from the originals. I removed it saying "Trope misuse. Original and alternate must meet.", but then it was restored by Asherinka, who said "There is no such requirement according to the trope page. All variants in the MCU are valid examples of Alternate Self."
On a surface reading, he's right, the trope does not explicitly demand original and variant to meet. However, it can be understood by context: the description is about the comparisons and identity conflicts between both, and all the examples are about meetings of original and variant. And besides, just common sense: if "alternate version of a character" was in itself a trope, with no meeting required, it would be completely redundant with Alternate Universe, as everybody in such a universe is a variant of someone from the main universe by definition (barring some limited exceptions, like canon foreigners).
I don't want to start an edit war over this, so I would like to hear someone else's opinion.
openShould "Quietly Cancelled" have a waiting period to prevent pre-mature misuse?
Self-explanatory, really. Since Quietly Cancelled got launched today, I'm concerned that there will be misuse of examples pre-maturally calling works on hiatus "cancelled". I think there should be a waiting period of sorts to make sure the works are actually cancelled before adding examples, but what do you think?
resolved Author's saving throw misuse/concern
So, after talking about it
on "Is this an example?", on the advice of a mod I decided to come here. I'm pretty much echoing what I write over on "Is this an example?" but...here's what's up.
I'm a bit concerned about a trope under the category of Author's Saving Throw. As I was going through the trope page a few months ago, I noticed Misterian wrote the following a while ago:
- The first two chapters of RayFox faced some criticism 4 years later for its narrative expecting readers to sympathize with the citizens and authorities of Meva City for persecuting and vilifying Ray as an arsonist and terrorist despite not knowing (or seemingly not trying to look into) the full story of Ray's vigilante exploits simply on the basis of "he broke the law and destroyed property, so it warrants consequences" with little to no nuance, especially regarding why he did. Chapter 4 shifts the narrative from Ray joining S.O.S. to atone to the authorities extending the offer to him out of recognition for the lives he's saved and sees his help as something desperately needed, with implications that the public have grown suspicious of the accusations against Ray. The S.O.S. is friendlier and open-minded toward Ray in contrast to previous chapters, with some seeking further details from Ray about the Meva Arsenal incident. The end of Chapter 4 fully cemented this with Rayfox upstaging a public speech held by Morales to fully explain who he is, the powers he possesses, and what he's been doing, Making clear his goals to improve himself as a crime fighter he's forming at own request rather than anyone shaming him for his apparent disregard for the law, as if the author has taken to fully embracing the viewing of Ray as an earnest aspiring hero rather than the young careless vigilante the previous chapters tried to portray him as.
At the time, I had tried to trim it down so that it was more laconic, but he added a whole lot more while putting it on the comic page via edit requests, and now I'm beginning to wonder if it actually is valid; almost feels as if it's a bit "braggy" on the troper's part, as if he feels the author suddenly changed the narrative of the story because of 3 reviews on the Tropes page.
Regardless of my gripes with the comic, this seems like a rather inaccurate use of the trope. Unlike with stuff like Unintentionally Sympathetic/Unsympathetic, it would have taken a good chunk of the audience vocally criticizing it for this particular trope in question to count, and given that the audience isn't really that big or publicly vocal in general (with the exception of his fans, and even then, they aren't 100% present from what I've seen), it doesn't feel like it applies. I'm very tempted to remove from both the trope page and the comic page via edit requests, but I dunno.
I can confirm that there is no ill-intent behind this, only a simple misunderstanding of the trope and what it really means. But still, I would like to get this taken down.
EDIT: After speaking with the original writer of the entry, it seems we agree that the entry doesn't fit the trope. As for the comic page, I still have to get a consensus for that to actually be removed.
Edited by Stardust5099openAsking and answering questions in an example--bad formatting?
I realize the question itself might be phrased poorly, so I'll elaborate. Every once in a while I see examples where the writer chose to ask themselves a question then answer it, as seen in this example from What If…? (2021) (spoilered because it's a new show)
The final battle has Captain Carter and her Howling Commandoes assaulting the HYDRA fortress Castle de krake in order to defeat the Red Skull and save the world. Red Skull is able to use the regained Tesseract to open a portal and summon a Kraken to destroy the Earth. The Kraken's first action? Kill the Red Skull!
Is this kind of phrasing okay, or is it Natter? I know it annoys me personally, but I don't wanna go deleting or editing things willy-nilly just because I have a pet peeve.
Edited by AfterwordopenAkiba's Trip H&D trope page editing please Videogame
Hey Y'all,
So Akiba's Trip H&D has been released after a few weeks now and I think its about time someone a bit more capable than me(I am but a measly and lazy troper who is both a little shitty at describing and getting myself to actually do something) can actually try to take a look and update the page a little more if possible. That being said, kindly also take a look at my edits(especially in the character page) and edit them as required because I'm pretty sure I didn't get them entirely right.
Let me know when any one of you who have actually played the game and take a look at it!
I'm also currently collecting Akiba's Trip extra materials to add in extra information that's All in the Manual stuff that elaborates more on the characters themselves and designer stuff(along with a few bits of Word of Saint Paul). When I get that stuff translated(...eventually, I'm having a hard time looking for someone to translate them), I'll prolly let those who help out with editing know.
openEdit war on YMMV.DigimonTamers
Link to the start of the edit chains
. lgcruz proceeded to downplay author's support for the conspiracies via rephrasing it to the tune of "he just talks about them", claiming to having posted "proof" in the forum thread
(with more posts on following pages).
On the page itself, after lgcruz' first softening edit, starjewel reverted it to what it was before and then lgcruz redid their changes.
openA note encouraging use of zero context examples
Spotted this note on Close on Title —
Looks like it was added back in 2015 by someone who was not a mod. Since this obviously flies in the face of Zero-Context Example, would it be cool if I removed it?
open Is there such a thing as a "Trusted Editor"? Western Animation
I've noticed that a troper, in their profile, listed themselves as a Trusted Editor of a specific set of pages here on tvtropes.
I hadn't ever come across that term before. If this a real thing, I'd be curious to know how that role works?
Or is it just a self-proclaimed title chosen by the troper that has no real meaning?
Edited by rva98014openWarning to NOT add context to examples?
Abraxas (Hrodvitnon) has a huge commented out header (takes up almost the entire screen on desktop, which has the instructions "Be aware, trope entries listed on these pages are deliberately shortened, to both keep spoilers to a minimal and actively encourage page viewers to read the actual fanfiction. Please do not extend entries, and try to avoid going into unnecessary details."
Is this kind of thing allowed? It seems like this encourages Zero-Context Examples- the page itself has a number of them, which I've commented out.
openRewrite vs Retcon
Characters.Kingdom Hearts Vanitas Characters.Kingdom Hearts Vanitas
- Re Write: It happens with Vanitas in Re:Mind. He is established in his debut game Birth By Sleep to be the living embodiment of Ven's darkness, extracted from his heart. Ten years later, in III's Re:Mind DLC, he suddenly reveals to Ven and Aqua in a new scene that he is actually a separate being who was merely hidden inside Ven's heart and ripped out by Xehanort (though the line from III referencing himself as a piece of Ven is still left in when he dies, suggesting that he still views himself as a part of Ven). Ven and Aqua don't care enough to get more information before he fades back into darkness. Union Cross supports this with the reveal that one of the 13 pieces of Darkness sealed itself inside Ven to escape on the ark.
I'm having trouble understanding how this is different than Retcon. The Re Write page states it's "A Retcon which directly ignores, contradicts or alters information in the Backstory." So is it a sub-trope of Retcon or The Same, but More Specific? The Re Write page also has examples from Alternate Continuity or changes things that were assumed as opposed to outright shown/stated which seems misuse, so the trope might need cleanup.
openBig Ultraman reshuffle Live Action TV
So… if any of you can remember, a couple of months ago I started the Ultra Series Characters initiative, a humongous reorganization of the Ultra Series character pages to bring them more in line with modern Verse-based structure, rather then the installment-based organization currently in use, I abandoned it a while back, but seeing Vengeful Bale’s Ultra pages (Characters Ultra Series Ultraman Belial and Tregear) renewed my interest in the project, and I intend to return to the project.
Now why did I do this you might ask? Well it’s simple, unlike his contemporaries, Ultraman has a massive Rogues Gallery, and because of his Legacy Character nature, they often reoccur between series, which means that every Ultraman character page has approximately a dozen "See Literally Any Ultraman Show" entries scattered across the Ultrapages, which leaves the Ultra Series a tad disorganized.
So, should I go through with this? I remember a similar Jurassic Park reorganization of mine being rejected because of how self-contained every film is, but can the same apply to Ultraman?
Edited by GeneralGiganopenMisaimedFandom and WhatAnIdiot on ''Guilty Gear''.
I found these examples recently added by Rebelion Roja on Guilty Gear and I'm not sure about any of them:
- Misaimed Fandom: Bridget was considered an LGTBQ icon a few years back, even coined the infamous Trap term, it was told by many people that he was a good representation of an LGTB character... When he's stated that he's straight and he hates dressing like a girl.
- Venom, on the other hand is a tasteful representation of a homosexual character... when he doesn't want to kill Millia.
- What An Idiot: For someone who wants to prove his manliness and wants to be taken serious, Bridget has no hurries to look like a guy, an even moreso when he's told by several characters to stop dressing like a girl for starters.
For Misaimed Fandom, is this true about Bridget? From what I've seen and heard he didn't seem to be all that depressed about looking like a girl, just wanting to prove himself as a man, nor do I remember anything stating his sexual preference. I do feel that What An Idiot seems like it's complaining about a character point regarding Bridget when I think it should be more akin to certain moments like for example, a hero has a perfect opportunity to defeat a villain but doesn't for no good reason. As for Venom, I'm not sure. He started off as a villain, but is known for his relationship with Zato-1, and while he does hate Millia, he only tries to kill her after Zato orders him and only goes after her for personal reasons after Zato's death. Are these okay?

I will be adding this to TooBleakStoppedCaring.Fan Works per Cleanup
.
I was thinking of adding that, despite having a tropes page, it took nearly a year for this wiki to acknowledge its cancelation as more evidence its fans/readers have stopped caring. Would that be OK to add if it is only secondary evidence to the primary out of wiki proof? Or should such be avoided if unnecessary (there's other proof enough) and/or overly myopic/self-referential? (I asked the cleanup but they seemed mixed on it.)