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 Edit War on Hijacked Destiny Film
WalkerBRiley deleted this entry under Film in Hijacked Destiny:
- Happens inadvertently in the Star Wars Continuity Reboot. The Skywalker bloodline ultimately ended having accomplished nothing and The Unchosen One Rey, descendant of the very person it was created to destroy, saves the day on her own and rubs salt in the wound by taking their name for herself in an attempt to honor their sacrifice.
openAdult Swim's Yule Log Knight of Cerebus Film
So, I just recently watched Adult Swim Yule Log and I was wondering if I should add that the Yule Log itself became the Knight of Cerebus for the film, since even though the film started off with Pleatherface and his mother murdering a woman and hiding in the log cabin, the film took a darker turn when the Yule Log comes to life and starts murdering people.
resolved Plan succeeds despite setback Film
Is there any trope where:
- Characters plan something
- The plan is disrupted one way or another, in a truly dramatic fashion
- Yet their original goal is still achieved, despite the fact the plan itself failed entirely
openRemoving Instances of Fan Nickname to Refer to a Character Film
Looks like Film.Warrior Of The Lost World and its sub-pages are littered with references to the title character played by Robert Ginty who has No Name Given in the movie and credited as "The Rider" as "The Paper Chase Guy" as he's called in the MST3K episode that covers the film.
Should the instances of "Paper Chase Guy" be changed to "The Rider" to keep the movie page itself self-contained and consistent while adding a Fan Nickname to its YMMV?
resolved Edit War Film
- Troper Battiste 06 introduced a (faulty) Alternate History entry, which was re-edited countless times until reaching the final form here
- Troper AK 47 Productions cut it here
with a commentary
- Troper Battiste 06 reinstated the entry
without any comment or alternation
On top of that, the entry itself borders on Epileptic Trees, as absolutely nothing in the film even suggests such situation.
openWeird reorganization on What an Idiot!.Saw Film
Recently, Ansongc2000 has done a reorganization process for What an Idiot!.Saw that I find rather weird. To wit, not long beforehand, I had created folders for each film to concur with the first "In General" entry added to the page, especially as some of the film sections were already quite long by then. Then Ansongc walked in and added a decent bunch of new examples (while also removing or rearranging a few existing ones without much explanation other than them being "bad") for the first seven films, while also grouping them in a single folder and leaving Jigsaw and Spiral with their respective folders; they also removed the "Series-wide" and "By movie" headers I added to split the "In General" folder and the movie-specific ones in their own parts. In fact, they relegated the "By movie" name to the new folder for the first seven movies, even though it doesn't make sense when put alongside the Jigsaw and Spiral folders with their respective films' titles.
Even if grouping the movies by major storyline can be reasoned because of Jigsaw and Spiral having time gaps with both the first seven consecutive films and each other, it leaves a somewhat disproportioned and confusing structure for me, especially as plenty of the first seven movies' sections are now as long as the ones that used to be the longest before Ansongc's edits (not to mention to aforementioned issue with the "By movie" name). Even though I did the previous structure myself, I honestly prefer that structure for a movie series' What an Idiot! page over the page's current one.
By the way, I informed Ansongc about this query via private message.
Edited by Inky100openOf crosswicking for The Movie of a series Film
So, I recently made individual pages for both BoBoiBoy movies, BoBoiBoy: The Movie and BoBoiBoy Movie 2, and am gradually crosswicking them.
Let's say there's occurrences of the same trope both in the original series and in a movie. Should the latter's example be a sub-bullet of the former on the trope page? Or should the movie's examples go in the appropriate Film folder?
Example: Height Insult has 3 examples from BBB, 2 of which are from movies, but I was hesitant to move the two movie examples to the "Films - Animated" folder, which I now think would be appropriate since I moved those sub-bullets for that trope example to the respective movie pages
from the BoBoiBoy page itself.
A different example: Mourning a Dead Robot has two BBB examples, one from the series and one from the movie. I haven't edited it recently yet to correct the wick, but I'm uncertain if I should leave the movie example in its current position or move it to the "Films - Animated" folder.
I lean towards separating show examples from movie examples in crosswicking unless they have information that cross-references each other. But I'd like to get more feedback please. Thank you.
open What trope does this fit ? Film
So I recently learned that the actor dog that played John Wick's dog Daisy, then named Andy, is now called Wick after the man himself. So now I'm left wondering if there's any Trivia or Main trope this example belongs to ? Can you guys help me out ?
openPossible Broken Aesop? Film
So, saw that adding a Broken Aesop to The Last Jedi's page would need to be approved first, so I figured to ask if this was acceptable (or if it was already added/removed)
One of the aesops was that your life is too important to throw away. However, it's underscored by not Holdo's Heroic Sacrifice to take out an entire fleet and Luke's sacrifice to hold off the First Order long enough for everyone to escape, but it's also underscored by the person giving the aesop in the first place, Rose, who nearly died to save Finn from having to sacrifice himself in the first place.
openActor Allusion clarification Film
SOLVED: Production Throwback
Can Actor Allusion be also applied to the director or is it strictly for actors?
In Conspiracy Theory, one of the scenes has the characters hide in a crowded cinema, where they are screening Ladyhawke. Both were directed by Richard Donner and he picked the screened movie himself as a joke.
Edited by TropiarzopenWeird character folder quote change Film
On 26th Oct, sapphyblue change the folder quote in Mark Hoffman's character folder on Characters.Saw: Jigsaw and Accomplices from a quote said by Hoffman himself:
To one said by another character to him (incidentally, the one Hoffman told the aforementioned line to):
I find this change rather weird because I've never seen any character folder or character-specific page use quotes said by other characters to describe the one whom the folder/page addresses (even if they give an idea of who the character is). I'm not really sure how I should deal with this, though. Is it best if I send sapphyblue a notifier? Should I bring this issue on a forum thread? Or should I do something else? Perhaps it's better to leave it as it is?
Edited by Inky100resolved Verifiable source for character name? Film
The Characters/SonysSpiderManUniverse page gives the name "Corinne Wan" for the Malaysian EMT that the Riot symbiote takes over in Venom, but to my knowledge her name is unrevealed in the film itself (she has a name-tag but I personally can't make it out) and Michelle Lee is only credited as "Malaysia EMT/Riot Host".
I checked the edit history for the page and the editor who added it cites the SSU wiki as their source, which doesn't provide any sources for that being her name... so is there an official reliable source for the EMT's name being Corinne Wan?
EDIT: Her nametag does say Corinne Wan, but it's hard to make out since her full name is only briefly visible at the beginning of the movie.
Edited by Arawn999openVague edit reason Film
The YMMV page for Die Hard had this entry under Misaimed Fandom:
- John McClane is often seen as an example by gun rights activists of how "a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun." However, this completely ignores how John spends almost the entire film on the defensive, with his very first move being to run away and try to get help. He also spends a good chunk of the second act simply hiding in a remote part of the building and not confronting the terrorists at all apart from dropping C4 on them.
This was deleted by Miracle@St Olaf with the edit reason merely stating "There's plenty someone can say to argue this, which means it probably doesn't need to be here," but it doesn't make any such argument itself. Should the entry be restored?
Edited by Javertshark13openFlypaper (2011) not on TvTropes Film
Note: I don't fully know how Tv Tropes works, so I am not 100% sure if I am at the correct location for this question.
One of my favorite movies of all time is Flypaper from 2011; It's about a bank being robbed by 2 separate groups, and everything goes wrong.
I cannot find this movie on the website, but I am sure that it contains a lot of tropes, seeing as the movie is heavily comedy based and doesn't take itself seriously.
How can I [or, preferably, with the help of other people] create a page for the movie on this website?
resolved Edit war prevention for a problematic edit Film
madorosh removed
this example from Lady Ballers
- Broken Aesop: While a common conservative justification for the type of transphobia seen in Lady Ballers is to protect women's spaces, the film also promotes the idea that women are always physically inferior to men including at sports, which is both misogynistic and condescending and undermines the alleged "pro-woman" bent.
with the edit reason: "doesn't make sense, the characters in the film mention the biological fact that men have specific advantages over women, which in general is true. Not sure what 'transphobia' is being displayed - everything in the film is played for laughs"
I don't wanna cause an edit war, but the example was valid. The film tries to present itself as pro-women but the film very much plays on the supposed belief that men, even the weakest men apparently who are out of shape and washed out and haven't exercised in years, are more physically abled and skilled at sports than the most trained female athletes. Which very much does go against the film's supposed "feminist" message.
Again, I want to cause no edit war so I brought it here.
Edited by AudioSpeaks2resolved "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 Stardust5099openCan overriding other tropers' entries in favor of your own entries count as an Edit War? Film
About a couple years ago, I added this example of Numerological Motif to Saw VI:
- Numerological Motif: Being the sixth Saw film, there are several allusions to the number six throughout Saw VI.
- Overall, there are six traps in the film, including the opening trap and all the five traps in William's trial. This is further cemented by one of the film's taglines: "6 chances. 6 lessons. 6 choices."
- One of the traps in itself, the Carousel Trap, has six victims.
- Jill is seen holding an instruction envelope from the box with the number six written on it, likely implying that there were six of them inside the box.
- The film's "Hello Zepp" rendition, "Zepp Six", clocks at six minutes within the six-minute climax.
Later, on January of this year, Ze Trope Guy 999 added
the following example of Arc Number in the same page, the sub-bullets of which, while fewer and less elaborate, are similar to those of my example.
- Arc Number: Six, as befitting the sixth entry.
- There are six victims on the Shotgun Carousel.
- Jill Tuck’s box is revealed to have six envelopes in it - the sixth one containing a photograph of Hoffman.
I'm planning to combine the two entries, mostly using my descriptions but also including some minor facts mentioned in ZeTropesGuy's entry, into a single example of Arc Number, as I had noticed the latter entry today and realized that Arc Number fits better for the film's symbolism of the number six than Numerological Motif. The end result would look like this:
- Arc Number: Befitting its status as the sixth Saw film, there are several allusions to the number six throughout Saw VI.
- Overall (without counting the Reverse Bear Trap 2.0, an updated version of the first film's Reverse Bear Trap that has considerably less screentime than the other traps), there are six traps in the film, including the opening trap and all the five traps in William's trial. This is further cemented by one of the film's taglines: "6 chances. 6 lessons. 6 choices."
- One of the traps in itself, the Shotgun Carousel, has six victims.
- Aside from the five envelopes she gives to Hoffman, Jill is seen holding another instruction envelope from the box with the number six written on it (revealed in the climax to contain instructions on how she has to set up the Reverse Bear Trap 2.0 on Hoffman, likely implying that there were six of them inside the box.
- The film's "Hello Zepp" rendition, "Zepp Six", clocks at six minutes within the six-minute climax.
However, I'm worried that the fact that I'm overriding much of ZeTropeGuy's entry with mine could lead to an Edit War if I don't address my planned edit properly. Can this edit really be considered Edit Warring, or is it completely fine to do?
Edited by Inky100resolved Alien: Romulus retcons Alien: Covenant? (Spoilers) Film
The page for Alien: Romulus says that it definitively retcons Ridley Scott's assertion that David-8 created the Xenomorphs in Alien: Covenant by revealing that the Xenomorphs contain the Engineers' black goo.
Fox has seen fit to largely ignore Ridley Scott's assertion that David created the Xenomorphs—at least in regards to the official TTRPG, which was written with the intent of integrating and streamlining all the "canon" material—but I'm not seeing anything in the film itself that contradicts what's shown in Alien: Covenant given that David very expressly used the Engineers' black goo to create the Xenomorphs shown there.
What should be done about those claims?
resolved Move, pls Film
I think the real reason why Itsuki No Kimi E has only 1 wick is because the title itself is misspelled. A quick search shows that the title is supposed to be "Itsuka no Kimi e" ("Loving You"). And one of the characters' names is "Noboru Fukami", not "Noboru Funami". How to move a page?

I have recently found at least two "Jerkass Has a Points" on both separate characters from two different films, examples below.
From YMMV / Bad Santa.
- Jerkass Has a Point: When Willie is eating lunch in the food court, a woman encourages her son to climb on his lap and tell him what he wants for Christmas. Willie yells "I'M ON MY FUCKING LUNCH BREAK!", and we're meant to see it as another example of Willie being horrible with kids. While he did go way overboard, he was off the clock, only in partial costume and had every right to not be bothered by a selfish mother who thought it was okay to crash in on his lunch demanding special treatment for her son.
- Also, while it doesn't justify him trying to kill Willie, it's hard not to agree with Marcus that Willie's reckless and unprofessional behavior has made him more of a liability than anything else, and that without him their plans would go nowhere. Willie's actions throughout the film almost caused them both to be arrested on several occasions, almost caused them to be fired, and allowed them to be blackmailed by Gin. The fact that Willie had already sent a letter reporting the job to the police and forgot about it only drives the point further.
From YMMV / The Power of the Dog.- Jerkass Has a Point: Phil may very well be correct that Rose was gold digging and marrying George because she needed a provider to take care of her and Peter, not because she loved him.
Does the Jerkass Has a Point belong to YMMV? Or do they go with the film's main page or character's folder. I thought Jerkass Has a Point is not a YMMV trope, so it's better for me to ask first what you guys think. Do I get any permission to remove or place them somewhere by editing/fixing in different pages? I apologize if my writing is terrible. Edited by YatasumujiSenpai