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 Is there a trope for anachronically uniformized armies? Film
Almost all movies displaying vast armies have their mooks wearing absolute identical gear, even when the time period or the social structure should not allow standardized mass production (look the Trojan army in Troy for example).
Of course it is perfectly understandable to do so (help the viewer to identify the sides in battle, make the faceless mooks even more indiscernable from each other and naturally reduce production costs) but it is still an artifact. So shouldn't it be a trope in its own right? Anachronism Stew doesn't mention it (I agree it's a pretty minor anachronism, especially when the gear is at least correct in itself for the time period, but it's also extremely common)
That's mainly a concern when the time depicted is pre-modern. Stormtroopers or British redcoats naturally have the level of industrialization required to field their soldiers a standardized uniform, but medieval (including medieval fantasy) or ancient troops shouldn't be able to (it doesn't mean that they must be completely disparate: the Rohirrim in the LOTR trilogy avert the standardized aspect and still look coherent. On the other side the soldiers of Gondor play the uniformized part straight, with even the archers wearing the exact same plate armor as everyone else. Finally Saruman's Uruk would be a justified example since we see them mass produce their gear, and industrialization is a big part of Saruman's characterization in the books).
Edited by scarpeopenQuotes Pages for Tropes About Quotes
Considering that the trope itself is for a quote that "changes everything" and the examples on all of the subpages feature said quotes, do we really need a quotes page for this?
Edited by MegaMarioManopenFound a page that needs a revert Literature
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=FanFic.BetterLeftUnsaid#
- looks like the page got overwritten by accident. Can a mod hit the revert button? (it doesn't appear I can do it myself).
open What trope would this belong to?
Would someone tell me what trope this would fall under, given how unpredictable most factors are, the OOC-ness involved in some of them, and other stupidity involved in others?
- The antagonists plans in Cries Unheard (a Lucky Star fanfic) could have been pulled off successfully, and they'd still be alive, if they had been a lot smarter about it instead of relying on everything preceding their only-inevitable demises to fall favorably for them. How does Satoshi know that Minami and her friends won't suspect him, charming as he may have been the previous day, of killing her dog Cherry? How does Riku know Kagami won't drop her infatuation for him and slap him for touching her hair, or suspect him of stalking her when she takes Tsukasa out shopping? Kagami and Tsukasa's real character dictates that there should not have been any tension between them that did result from Kagami "ignoring" her (read: Tsukasa just standing on the sidelines and feeling sorry for herself or thinking that Kagami doesn't love her anymore just because she's got a boyfriend now), which in turn would negate Kenji's efforts to keep those two on any questionable terms. What drives Satoshi to obtain security information from Miyuki about her father's company (which she even mentions only overhearing from said father, Jiro, himself)? How does Kenji know that Minoru (or anyone, for that matter) isn't gonna report what he and Brick did to him to the police? How does he manage to stab Konata in the back in the middle of a crowded summer festival, without her either dying or screaming, and without anyone freaking out at such an act of violence or even batting an eye at some guy carrying a girl's limp body around? How do he and Riku know that Misao and her family isn't gonna wonder what's going on with them and Konata while both parties are out camping next to eachother, or that Misao, who has no one yet to lose, isn't gonna scream for her family's help while being raped, or that said family isn't gonna either step in or identify them for the police? How do those boys know Nanako wouldn't survive a car wreck courtesy of some severed brake cables (and they'd just have one more victim to "work on" if she did survive)? How do they know that none of their secondary victims have friends that their primary ones have never even met, who could step in at a moment's notice once they caught wind of everything before being found out about? How do they know that Kagami will either dismiss Misao's complaints of being raped or let them go when they continue to gaslight her? How do they know Kagami will eventually give them sex, when the world is full of people who will do no such thing under any circumstances except marriage? How do they know that Soujiro and Yui will not suspect anything from Konata's aloofness of late or Yutaka's absence for several weeks straight? How do they know none of their own cohorts will start to feel too overwhelmed from whole thing to continue, and either kill himself to avoid prison or just surrender himself and rat on his fellow Yakuza? Really, Satoshi could have just taken some nude footage that he takes of Miyuki, threatened Jiro with it for the information he needs, and left everyone else alone. One thing goes wrong, which evidently does happen eventually, and the whole operation is fucked. Combined with the stupidity of some of the protagonists regarding things like Minami's dog and Tsukasa and Kagami's relationship, any shred of willing suspension of disbelief at this point is obviously long gone, and there's even a certain What If? fic that shows what would have really happened only the second morning in, rendering everything that originally followed a moot point.
Basically, the author wants you to assume that the antagonists get by (at least for as long as they do, before several of their victims finally kill them) due to sheer genius, but we can tell at this point that they only kept lucking out for a whole month straight before biting the dust.
To be fair, though, they are yakuza, and it's possible that they have others carrying some things offpage; one of the onpage antagonists is even called in only partway through the fic. But even then, there are only so many members of the yakuza, compared to the rest of the Japanese population that they'd eventually have to manage had they survived for even longer, and that says nothing about each individual involved still having to do everything they can to simply save themselves from arrest, which not only detracts from their real goalnote to ship some illegal weapons out somewhere via Jiro's company, the reason Satoshi wanted certain information from Miyuki in the first place (as if it even pertains to her), for which he'd also have to keep her and all her friends divided before hoping to blackmail it from her, but would only get harder and harder the more people they end up having to keep divided and drive to either suicide or hikikomori. (Makes you wonder why they don't just kill them outright, considering the sheer workload involved, the already high risk of life in prison, and the fact that dead people cannot contact authorities while anyone still alive could that either stops caring about everything at stake or has yet to even be accounted for.)
Edited by SeaRoveropenBetterToQuitThanBeFired
Can Better to Die than Be Killed be applied to things other than death?
Like "You can't fire me, I quit!"?
Like, if this is true, the Production Code, where, if censorship is inevitable, self-censorship is better than government?:
"The Production Code was not created or enforced by federal, state, or city government; the Hollywood studios adopted the code in large part in the hopes of avoiding government censorship, preferring self-regulation to government regulation."
resolved Iran-Iraq War Page Quote
I was brought into an offsite discussion on the page quote of the Iran–Iraq War page, a page I myself namespaced from Iran-Iraq War in 2014. Anyone know who said it?
Here's the original page's history
, but it doesn't go back far enough.
openVisual Effects of Awesome
Eagal has been very zealous about deleting Visual Effects Of Awesome entries off of YMMV pages, but doesn't include a link to the respective subpage on the Sugar Wiki or edit said subpage itself (which most people aren't aware of the existence of), nor does he relocate them or create the respective subpage for that work, so it just seems like he's torpedoing the entries. Should someone notify him about how to do this in a more constructive way?
Also, for YMMV pages where there's only one entry for a given Sugar Wiki bullet point isn't there usually some flexibility given on those?
Edited by AlleyOopopen About Self Demonstrating Character Page
Shall we add more characters such as Toph from Avatar and Captain America? Just a suggestion.
open Idiot Plot definition
There's an argument on 'Captain America: Civil War involving whether or not the film qualifies for "Idiot Plot".
According to the definition, and Idiot Plot is not literally meant to be an insult to the characters or story, although it has certainly been used for Complaining About Shows You Dont Like. My interpretation, especially given the final paragraph of the definition, is that a plot about characters failing to act rationally (whether due to emotion, bias, or self-interest) and thus making decisions that fail or worsen things makes up an "Idiot Plot". According to the definition, this can be deliberate, or used for tragic effect—which CERTAINLY fits that film.
Jerkass seems to disagree with that, and we've reached an impasse on the Discussion page.
Edited by KingZealopenRegarding a disputed MEH example on AOS Live Action TV
I think Hellfire enjoyed being under the sway, unlike Daisy, and some cracks in Daisy demonstrate that even Inhumans under the sway appear to have some moral agency, at least. Also, Jiaying herself said Hellfire was too dangerous to undergo Terrigenesis, if I remember correctly.
openThe Matchmaker vs. Shipper on Deck
The Matchmaker claims that Shipper on Deck is a subtrope, without explaining what sets it apart. Shipper on Deck, meanwhile, claims the following as its distinction: "Contrasting with The Matchmaker, the Shipper on Deck is usually a secondary character and the characters shipped are the protagonists of the story, and likely to be the Official Couple." That's all fine and dandy, except that it doesn't specify what The Matchmaker itself normally does to complete the contrast. Furthermore, the two descriptions read very similarly to each other, which compounds the problem.
Can anyone help clarify this to me?
openSource of Neologism quote
Does anyone know where the Fast Eddie quote on Neologism comes from? It sounds like the conversation it took place in was absolutely hilarious, so I'd like to see the rest of it for myself.
openEditor with major grammar and formatting problems
sssstariiii
has... many problems. S/he mostly only edits Roleplay.Super Smash Brothers Life Itself and its subpages, but the pages themselves are a mess. Serious issues with capitalisation and punctuation (I've never seen so many incorrectly used apostrophes in one place), incorrect alphabetisation, incorrect indentation, Zero Context Examples galore... and absolutely no clue how to format potholes correctly (s/he uses the entire URL, even if said entire URL is a redirect). The limited crosswicking s/he has done to trope pages suffers from similar problems.
openRegarding Amazing Agent Luna
Shall I remove all spoiler tags for Amazing Agent Luna? Because while adding some stuff to that page, I realized that it would be very tough, if not impossible, to follow proper spoiler procedure considering the amount of potential potholing that might need to be done at certain points that can't be done under spoiler tags, and so I thought to myself, "Screw it, let's just do what we did with Frozen's character page and get rid of all the spoiler markup." But at the same time, I didn't feel I should just remove all spoiler tags without prior permission, so... here I am.
resolved Causes of death on Famous Last Words Pages Film
On the Famous Last Words for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it seems that the cause of death of the person speaking the last words is included with the names of the person. Most other pages don't do that and some of the example come across as rather lengthy and unnecessary. Here's an example Agent Antoine "Trip" Triplett, who smashes the Obelisk to try to stop whatever was happening, but thinks that Skye was fatally petrified and that he made a Senseless Sacrifice. He himself ultimately gets Taken for Granite and shattered before he Skye break free and reawaken as the Inhuman, Quake.. If the page is just meant to show the last words, is all that really necessary?
openFunny/Deoxyrebornicleic
There's a (very long) 'real life' section of the funny Deoxyrebornicleic page (Deoxyrebornicleic is a webcomic artist with an active tumblr, where most of the things mentioned there seem to be from).
The entire main page had a problem of troping the creator themself instead of their work, though I've mostly cleaned it up by now. Is it alright to just cut the whole 'real life' section of the funny page?
Edited by OrbitingopenEasyEvangelism in Mad Max Fury Road
I'd like some guidance on how to handle a conflict of opinion between myself and troper @King Zeal on whether the Easy Evangelism trope applies to the conversion of Nux away from Immortan Joe's cult in Mad Max: Fury Road. The order of events so far:
- @King Zeal deleted what I consider to be a perfectly valid example of Easy Evangelism from the trope list, leaving an edit reason which does not adequately explain why he feels the trope does not apply.
- I restored it and left an invitation for him to take the matter here, to Discussion or to the Is This An Example thread so we can discuss the matter and solicit other opinions.
- @King Zeal commented out the example and started a thread in the film's Discussion page reiterating his earlier points. At this point, I considered reporting him to ATT for edit warring, since as I understand it it's the third edit (he made an edit, I reverted it, he re-reverted it) that crosses the threshold into an Edit War, but since he was giving at least the appearance of being willing to talk it over at this point, I decided to let that particular point of order slide for the moment and join him in Discussion.
- We went back and forth in Discussion for a bit; it quickly became clear that we were repeating the same arguments, neither of us was likely to be convinced by the other, and no third party was likely to show up and break the stalemate.
- I announced my intention to bring the matter to the Is This An Example? thread to attempt to bring in further opinions and invited @King Zeal to join me there. He did not do so.
- The reception at ITAE was mixed; a couple people agreed with me that it was a valid example, one person said he could see both sides and suggested listing it as a justified example. One person (@war877) didn't come down firmly on either side, wound up posting something that got him thumped by the mods (the post had already been blanked by a mod by the time I saw it, so no clue what) and bowed out of the discussion.
- After a reasonable amount of time had gone by with no definitive conclusion being reached, but with the only parties besides myself (firmly for the example's inclusion) and @King Zeal (firmly against but no longer actively participating in the discussion) being very indecisive, I announced my intention to restore the example but invited anyone who had objections to my doing so to speak up so that we could continue the discussion. Only one person did, chiming in firmly in favor of the example's validity. After allowing three days to go by, I restored the example.
- @King Zeal almost immediately made a Justifying Edit, calling it in his edit reason a "compromise solution." Here's the thing: it's only a compromise if everyone agrees to it, and he never put the issue up for discussion in the first place. I'm certainly willing to have that conversation, since at least one other person suggested listing it as a justified example, but @King Zeal declined my invitation to join the discussion in Is This an Example so he currently has nothing but his own fiat to back up his edit.
I'm sort of at a loss for how to proceed at this point. What I'd like to do is delete the Justifying Edit and pull the matter back to discussion (preferably here or at ITAE since the film's Discussion page quickly turned into a 1:1 back-and-forth between myself and @King Zeal) to attempt to reach some kind of consensus (potentially including a new wording of the example), but considering that the last time I did that, @King Zeal's response was to cross the line into an Edit War and filibuster rather than discuss the matter in good faith, I'd appreciate some mod guidance before doing anything at all.
Edited by HighCrate

Currently.Well, just look at it.. Each description is a text wall (although the M16 and AK families are by far the worst offenders), and quite a few have been inflated by a back-and-forth "this gun's the best, no that gun, no this gun, no those guns are better" to the point of roughly 1k words per wall.
I have a project going to fix that, so this is mostly just asking for help :/. Don't trust myself not to be biased. https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=14609531630A25725700&page=1#1