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:
openNo Title
On FanficRecs.Heavy Rain, ps1fan26 has been repeatedly adding a self-rec for Mystery of the Killer. He's used a number of different handles; the latest is fanficfan29
.
openNo Title
Avatar: The Last Airbender is on the Science-Fiction Fanfic Index. That seems... weird. Looking at the index itself, it seems that all the works that have fanfics based on them get that Index listed on their page.
That seems... weird.
openNo Title
Somebody accidentally blipped most of this page with an edit: Red vs. Blue - Blue Team and I think it might be easier to ask for a revert than trying to figure out what happened and fix it myself.
openNo Title
Hello, all.
As we know, some Troper pages have a 'vandalize' option in its page for everyone to edit. However, I've been wondering... what if the vandalize page is used by a certain people to just troll the Troper in question. In that case... does it fall to the troper himself to put it out? But then again, it'd be like what the troll wanted.
Please tell me what I should do in case such thing happens. Thanks.
openNo Title
Is it really necessary to go entirely Spoilers Off on Death Tropes?
I got the ending of a game spoiled for me recently because I went to such a trope off the launch list to see what it was about. It wasn't even an old game that everyone's expected to be familiar with already- this was only a month after it came out.
It seems kind of unfair to assume that readers are going to know, or want to know, every example on the page- and if the examples list is short or you're scrolling to a category below the one a spoiler is in, it's easy to end up seeing it entirely by accident. Yes, knowing that these tropes occur in a work is a spoiler in itself, but the least we could do is hide the names of the characters they happen to, or the details of an ending.
If it had been because I'd reflexively highlighted a spoiler tag (again), then yeah, it would be my own fault. But getting major spoilers because they weren't tagged at all, when I wasn't even looking for an example about that work, is frustrating and I really considered leaving the site over it.
openNo Title
I recently brought up this Stationary Voyagers and other non-existent works being entry-pimped by some guy.
Well, I found another instance under Captain Patriotic:
- Dozerfleet Comics has Centipede Charlie and the Gray Champion, as well as Anarteq and Becky Ryba. However, they're more like subversions than straight examples.
- The Gray Champion doesn't necessarily fight for America. He fights for those values of America's Christian past in its colonial years that he agreed with back then and continues to into the 21st century - even when a third of the nation itself rebels against those values, and ends up ripping the country apart as a consequence. The seceding states he has the fewest disagreements with are the ones he ends up protecting, letting the others freely choose their own paths to destruction. He reasons that it's a waste of time trying to help those who are that far lost when they're that dead-set against helping themselves. They don't want the truth, especially not from him, in the first place. Any effort to help them would only distract him from offering help to those who'd actually value it.
- Becky Ryba is a patriot without a country. She is impressed into the program simply because she's a Phexo, though she doesn't feel particularly loyal to any nation in the war. She particularly cannot appreciate her native Russia after the Russian Revolution.
- Anarteq is Canadian, but cares more about flirting with women and celebrating his Eskimo heritage than singing the glories of being Canadian.
- Centipede Charlie only fights for America so he can negotiate for his girlfriend's release from an internment camp. He cares nothing for how the military or Phaelites are cynically manipulating him.
Delete?
openNo Title
I noticed this morning that someone had blanked Dragnet without explanation. I restored it, assuming a troll at work, but then I checked the troper's edit history and it seems that (s)he is trying to set up a franchise page for the show. This actually seems like a good idea, but I'm confused by their inclusion of Dragnet as an index/disambig instead of as a redirect to Dragnet. I don't think a disambig page is needed, especially since there's nothing listed on it which is outside the franchise. The franchise page itself seems like the best place for such indexing (though I think it will need some work to fulfill that end). I'm leery of charging into someone else's reorganization efforts without getting a second opinion. Anyone?
openNo Title Videogame
Why is Polished Port a YMMV trope? It says on that page itself it's like Updated Re-release but on a different system, and that trope isn't YMMV.
openNo Title
Um, the page for "A Serbian Film" barely says anything. I know about the Lewdness Policy and all, but if the locked Salo page can show a complete description of its plot, why not the page for "A Serbian Film?" Also, why does TV Tropes not allow a page for that certain video series that mocks the worst of TV Tropes? I know that that certain video series has made fun of us and mocked us, but I watched a couple of those videos and they made me laugh. I really don't think that that certain video series is a danger to the community's "good reputation" at all. I also don't think that the maker of that certain video series is an asshole at all either. After all, Rational Wiki had page on TV Tropes too, remember? It stated out TV Tropes's good points, but also TV Tropes's bad points, and you still have a page on Rational Wiki. Would you put Rational Wiki on the Permanent Red Link Club just because it had a few mean words about you? Well, so far that hypothetical event hasn't happened yet and I hope it doesn't happen. I know that some of the negative criticism of TV Tropes can go too far, but most of the negative criticism of TV Tropes I found was backed up with evidence and was intelligent. Do you know which site some of the legit negative criticism came from? It came from some other notorious site that you guys won't allow a page on. That notorious site is full of unfunny trolls, I know, but sometimes when they got very good points that it would be wise for you guys to listen to. So I think it's okay for TV Tropes to laugh at itself once in a while. So yeah, I guess when it comes to Troper Types, I'm an Ultraconservative Troper, and I'm proud of it. Please don't ban me for any this.
openNo Title
Could any of the mods intervene in You know, that show
forum? Methinks the OP (statetroper) interpreted one answer as much harsher than it really was, and the troper who posted said answer (KE Vp) got upset and angry (for almost no reason). I think both had their points initially, but both should cool down. Now they are not even talking about the work which they tried to identify in the first place and there is even some name-calling. It kind of makes me uneasy, so I didn't post there anything myself. :-(
openNo Title
Something of an edit war going on here.
Which blogs should or shouldn't be referenced is a subject which has come up there before, but that was with regards to "notability". Now Ydobon has twice deleted Preda's addition of one particular blog because it is a "secret". The blog itself is public; as far as I can tell, it being secret is a fan joke.
What should be done — should it be listed or not?
openNo Title
Would it be erroneous to add Five Moves of Doom to the page of a wrestler who doesn't use them, and seems to resent them (averted trope), and even lampshades them at times? Pretty much every big time wrestler has his own Five Moves of Doom, and I think it's considered surprising when one wrestler doesn't, or when another wrestler has his 5MOD countered when they almost always get them off smoothly (that applies to Cena in the entry below).
For instance (actually, the whole reason I'm submitting this), I wrote this entry on CM Punk's page:
Five Moves Of Doom: Averted. Not only does Punk himself not have four or five moves that he does in the exact same order every match, but he seems to actually resent the idea itself. John Cena, perhaps the best example of the archetypal Five Moves of Doom, rarely gets them off in succession against CM Punk. One could infer that this is because CM Punk feels they aren't realistic and doesn't want his matches worked in that manner.
He even Lampshaded Cena's Five Moves of Doom at Night of Champions in 2012. Cena went for his shoulder block combo early, and CM Punk quickly countered, which resulted in a standoff. Punk then tapped his own shoulder twice, pantomimed a missed punch and shook his head while saying something to Cena, seemingly telling him that he's too smart (in kayfabe) to fall for that like everyone else.
In that same match, CM Punk actually did end up getting the two shoulder blocks and then missing a right hand, which Cena countered into an attempted Protoplex. CM Punk countered into a crossbody, however— perhaps (again, in kayfabe) CM Punk purposely threw the punch because he knew it would lead to the Protoplex, which he was prepared to counter.
NOTE: The separate paragraphs were indented, but I removed the indentations since this isn't a trope or a work page.
Anyways, another user removed it on the grounds that:
"If he doesn't have a Five Moves Of Doom move set, then don't add the trope."
The section on "Averted Tropes" in the "Playing With" guide reads:
Generally not worth noting except in cases where this is especially surprising, such as for a nearly universally-used trope or aversions known to have been deliberate; see also Enforced Trope below.
What's the verdict here?
Edited by RayAP19openNo Title
Hello, I'm Geth N7, current administrator of the Tropes Mirror Wiki on Wikia.
I have created an account here because after reviewing the history of the wiki I've been cleaning up for awhile, it seems some of my predecessors have engaged in spiteful actions against TV Tropes or have been very lax concerning Creative Commons copyright, and I just wanted to clear the air on a few things since I've had to clamp down on some plagiarism of current day TV Tropes content (which, as I understand, is incompatible with Wikia due to a different Creative Commons license) and I also wanted to make my position clear on my stance towards TV Tropes.
- First, I have great respect for copyright law, and any instances of plagiarism I encounter will be dealt with as soon as I am aware of them, and we do not encourage it in any form.
- It is also standing policy not to use any content we cannot either create ourselves or is from after June 2012, since the CC licensing changed at some point in July 2012 aside from images that are fair use unless otherwise noted, so we only use page sources from the Internet Wayback Machine or other archives from before July 2012.
- Second, while I personally disagree with many of the things removed or censored from TV Tropes for one reason or another, I respect Fast Eddie's right to run his website as he wishes, and our wiki is a both an archive of what is no longer allowed on TV Tropes (like Tropers Tales/Fetish Fuel/pages removed due to the current content policy), and also an alternative troping site for those dissatisfied with TV Tropes for whatever reason or who want to trope content not allowed by TV Tropes' current policies.
- It is NOT a website for trolling or antagonizing TV Tropes, and I want to make it clear as the current administrator of the Tropes Mirror Wiki, I deplore and condemn such actions and neither myself nor anyone else in any position of authority at the Tropes Mirror Wiki condones such actions in any way.
- We do not prejudice anyone who is still a member of TV Tropes who is also a member of our site as well, and we in fact welcome them, as long as they respect copyright rules and only submit original content or content they originally created here, barring exceptions allowed as decided by the moderation of this website.
- I do not wish to trope here again, though I did so long ago, but I want to maintain a cordial relationship with TV Tropes' members and administration, so if anything needs to be brought to my attention such as plagiarism, please either make an account on Wikia and leave me a message, or leave me a message on my account here.
- Finally, I have no illusions about being a "rival" to TV Tropes, nor do we encourage that perception on our wiki, and while we disagree with many aspects of how TV Tropes is currently run, our wiki is more a "laid back alternative" than a rival.
And, with that tl;dr out of the way, I just wanted to wish everyone here a happy troping experience. :)
Edited by GethN7openNo Title
Is there a trope or a YMMV where someone on TV tropes thinks that the creator of a work is out of his or her depth on a particular subject. Like how someone may argue for the rights of robots with self-awareness and intelligence, but the person is obviously not capable, in the opinion of the troper, of understanding the topic let alone discussing the topic.
Edited by Thecommander236openNo Title Film
Edit war issue. On TheLoneRanger, there has been an ongoing issue on WTH, Casting Agency? with Depp's casting as Tonto. The claim that Depp has Native American ancestry has been repeatedly added to the trope example, only to be removing on the grounds of 1) it is purely conjecture, as Depp himself said it was a maybe and 2) it's discussion/natter. Troper Eagal is aware of its addition and removal, as I spoke to him/her over pm about it, and Eagal was the one to start the discussion on the discussion page about it. Now, after several weeks of quiet, they have reinserted a comment about the issue, with no edit reason and no conclusion made on the issue on the discussion page. In fact, Eagal dropped out of the discussion some time ago. I can only conclude that they waited this long in the hopes that no one would notice.
openNo Title
Okay, this ykttw
has had some very inconsistent hat amounts, as the replies from myself and others have noted.
It keeps going from five, to zero, and other numbers. Either the users are really indecisive about the ykttw (not impossible, but really improbable considering the rapid rate of changes), or there is a bug, or there is a hacker.
openNo Title
I have a general question about WMG and Headscratchers pages.
I realize that the use of "I" or "This Troper" is discouraged in main pages and examples, but can we use them in sub pages like the examples above? They're about our personal guesses and questions. There are times I just can't word a theory or burning question without putting myself in there.
openNo Title
There's been a series of edits made to the Bleach Tropes C-D
page, where the editor appears to have removed random words from a lot of different examples, such as 'out', 'white' and 'pages'. It could be an editing accident. I was going to correct it back myself, but so many examples have been affected, I'm going word blind trying to spot them all.
Is there an easier way to fix the page that doesn't involve ploughing through each example one by one to find the missing words?
Edited by Wyldchyld

randomthefox removed a So Bad, It's Good entry in Silent Hill: Revelation 3D after the removal of their So Bad Its Horrible entry with " implying this movie could even remotely be considered good at all to anyone is flame bait in and of itself." as edit reason.
Edited by MagBas