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
Well, I originally wanted to create new Self Demonstrating pages for both Finn and Jake but after Fighteer [PMed] me on the issues regarding those two girls (Subjective shipping and grammar issues) I decided to go back to my created character pages to revise them.
What I am asking is that should I tweak them to make any hints of Bubbline as minimum as possible, should I polish them to make it a better quality, or should I delete them? And what should I do about my other three character pages?
openNo Title
I've noticed that when some tropers write about what a character in a TV show does, they don't use the name of the character, but the name of the actor. For example, if they write an example for Charlie's Angels they'll write something like:
- Trope: In one episode, Farrah does this.
instead of
- Trope: In one episode, Jill does this.
I assume this is not desirable. After all, Farrah Fawcett wasn't playing herself, she was playing the fictional character Jill Munroe.
Is it OK to change such usage on sight, or does it require discussion first?
openNo Title
I have no idea where to put this. This site's design is confusing as hell — I've no idea how to apply any of the various banners (like YMMV), actually start discussions, find discussions I've participated in, or do literally /anything/ other than 'add text to a page'. A help section, a 'contact us' page, /anything/ would be nice to actually explain how the hell this site works. It's /great/ as a site to read — but new editors seem to have no readily-available resources to aid them. If I'm wrong, please link me to the information, or email it to me, PM it, however the hell you say things to insure people /actually/ read them.
If 'the community' is supposed to be the repository for this information, well, that's a problem in and of itself.
EDIT: Yes, I realize there's a 'help' sidebar. It's the reason I know as little as I already know.
Edited by ManekIridiusopenNo Title
- In One Piece, potentially anyone can use Haki to strengthen oneself, but not all people in the work uses it.
- There's also another common source of superpower, the Devil Fruit that can give one a certain superpower depending on its types.
So, say, a person fights with just Haki and wins against people with Devil Fruit powers (sometimes against the more broken ones as well). Can I call that person a Badass Normal? My chief problem is in the first point above.
openNo Title Videogame
So a Justifying Edit was recently made in YMMV.Pokken Tournament that negates an example of Hype Backlash if it's true.
- Hype Backlash: When Masuda teased a huge announcement at the 2015 World Championships, everyone was anticipating the reveal of a new main series game due to the unknown Pokémon showcased in the September edition of CoroCoro and The Stinger of Hoopa and the Clash of Ages. Instead it was just the reveal that Pokkén would be ported to Wii U and that Pikachu Libre would be a playable character, which was viewed as nothing really exciting across most of the fanbase due to the existing expectation of the game getting a console release anyway. Every now and then during the live announcement they'd pause during their speeches to allow the crowd to applause...which hardly anybody did (although apparently it has less to do with the announcement and more to the fact that they started the opening ceremonies earlier than usual, what with the audience still entering).
Bolded part is the edit.
I cannot verify the claim of the edit, so I'm not sure if the second half of the examplenote I can confidently say from personal experience on several forums that the example itself is legit. People were definitely very upset about The Un-Reveal concerning the game's Wii U release. should be axed or just the justifying edit. Thoughts?
Edited by KarxridaopenNo Title
Question about a trope. The trope The Good, the Bad, and the Evil has at least three diferent and mutually exclusive definitions across the wiki.
Most of the trops that reference it describe it as "there are good guys and bad guys, plus a third side that's worse than all of them".
Black-and-Gray Morality describes it "Black-and-Gray Morality, except there's a small good faction too."
And the trope page itself describes it as "the story is retconned with an Enemy Civil War so that the popular AntiVillains can join forces with the heroes."
Which one is right?
openNo Title
Slight question, which trope better fits this situation? Strong Family Resemblance or Uncanny Family Resemblance?
- The situation is there are three brothers.
- Two of them look almost identical with one stated being the younger of the other. It's not revealed yet if they're twins or not.
- The third brother looks like an older version of the older of the aforementioned two but it has yet to be stated if he's the eldest brother .
- No parents have been revealed so far.
On a related note, is "The picture speaks for itself." a sufficient description of the appearance of one of the brothers in relation to another, or does it lack context? A fellow troper's been using this over a much longer description.
Edited by ElfkaiseropenNo Title Anime
Ryo Bakura is kind of misleading since it seems to be a page for Abridged!Yami Bakura.
Edited by SeptimusHeapopenNo Title
I think troper Evil Elitest needs a good talking to. He's added badly formatted examples to at least two pages (EnemyMine.Real Life and WebVideo.Skallagram), added more badly formatted natter to VideoGame.Drakensang, and on aforementioned EnemyMine.Real Life page added the following to a mention of Christopher Hitchens below it without any bullets, sub or otherwise:
But of Hitchens is himself an Imperalist and is not political expert so it isn't like his opinion is worthy anything
Edited by AcebrockopenNo Title
What's the best place to discuss whether a trope should be labelled as Trivia, as a Useful Note or something similar? To be more specific, I saw that somebody added Scunthorpe Problem as a trope example to NYPD Blue, referring to the incompetent censorship of the closed captions, and it struck me that that's not really a trope at all (it's not a narrative device or even a part of the show itself).
Launching a TRS thread seems a bit excessive since the "trope" doesn't need repairing, just (perhaps) recategorization (and TRS is closed for new threads anayway). Should I take it to Trope Talk? Or can we discuss it here?
Edited by GnomeTitanopenNo Title
Sound-Effect Bleep's first paragraph is mutilated by the self-demonstration. I'd like to put this to a self-demonstration subpage. Is that fine? And how would I do that?
openNo Title
So I think I might have found a Tabletop Game entry that was created by the author of the said game for the purposes of advertising. Also, I am not entirely sure if the game itself is real, it's website seemed pretty sketchy. I don't know how I should report this. How should I continue?
openNo Title
So we're having arguments here in this ykttw
, specifically in how to name it.
In short: the ykttw's name was originally "Stop Hitting Yourself" but in accordance to No New Stock Phrases, it can't be used since the name implies an imperative. However many people protested and pointed out that the rule is unnecessarily inhibiting, the trope doesn't use the phrase exclusively as part of the trope, and it's unlikely it'll become a Pothole Magnet.
I need a mod's judgement here.
openNo Title
Can somebody who's familiar with GameTheory (Web Show) please fix the Example Indentation of the YMMV page? I tried to do it myself, but there's just so much text in Critical Research Failure and I don't watch it.
openNo Title
After some confusion on my part regarding the Trope You Know What You Did I realized that, as it's described on the page, the trope is seeing a lot of misuse. The entirety of the Western Animation folder, for example.
IIRC the Trope Repair Shop is not accepting new threads at this time to deal with backlog. Given that, my question is that would it be better to wait until TRS is open again or should i try to do something myself, such as YKTTW to put the misused examples into their own trope?
Edited by sgamer82openNo Title
I added on a work page an legit example of Subverted Trope (after carefully reading its content), but another editor deleted it with only reason given that "Subverted Trope is not a trope".
So I'm asking, can a honest example of voluntarily Subverted Trope can be mentioned on a work page as a trope itself, or not?
Reading tropes such as You Know What You Did
openNo Title
Thought this would be a good addition to Gun Safety.
Rule Zero: If you think you want a gun, you really don't. You'll only hurt yourself if you intend it to hurt others, and the lives you destroy if you intend it for yourself are not just your own.
Now say you do genuinely need a gun for your job, home security, ect.
I would just add it but this is very Serious Business and wanted to gain feedback from the experts here. Would that be a fair call? Deter wanting a gun in the first place?
Edited by tsstevens

I found this latest edit on Princess Bubblegum strange. It was changed from, "That's right, we're in a lesbian relationship, something that will never be shown in the cartoon because it's a cartoon for children," to "That's right, we're in a lesbian relationship, something that will never be shown in the cartoon because then it wouldn't be allowed in less progressive countries," because "How about going for the actual reason instead of acting like kids can't deal with two girls together."
If it will never shown in the cartoon then where did this come from? Wouldn't the more simplistic way it was written fit better?