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:
openHarry Potter Acceptable Targets Literature
On the Harry Potter Philosopher's Stone YMMV page, there's this entry for Acceptable Targets:
- Overweight boys. Dudley's weight is openly scorned, with the supposed justification of Rowling's implicit association of it with parental indulgence. Years later, Rowling, outraged at the pressure on girls to be thin, called fat insults "strange and sick." Perhaps as an Author's Saving Throw, later books blame Vernon and Petunia for Dudley's weight, with Dumbledore outright calling them out for inflicting a different kind of abuse on their own son. Dudley also picks up boxing, and switches from being morbidly obese to an example of Stout Strength.
And also on the Goblet of Fire YMMV page:
- Overweight boys. Dudley's increased weight, while treated with some seriousness, is still Played for Laughs. Implied association in previous books of his weight with parental indulgence, his comical resentment of his diet, Fred and George's playful hope for a glimpse of the "great bullying git," and Fred slipping him a toffee which magically engorges his tongue seem to dismiss obesity as idleness. Years later, Rowling, outraged at the pressure on girls to be thin, called fat insults "strange and sick."
I don't feel that these are valid examples of Acceptable Targets. I explained my reasoning on the Goblet of Fire discussion page
. But basically, while it's true that Dudley's weight is poked fun of, I don't see how that applies to overweight boys as a whole. I think that's a stretch. Hagrid is another heavy-set character, and a much nicer and more likeable person, and his weight isn't made fun of (as far as I can remember anyway; it's been a while since I read the books). To me, the entries feel like they're more targeted at J.K. Rowling herself to criticize her apparent hypocrisy on the issue, but I don't see how Rowling's comment in itself really has anything to do with Harry Potter. (I do agree with Rowling's later stance; I just feel it's a separate issue.)
But that's just my take on it. I wanted to get some other opinions.
Edited by StardustSoldieropenNot kosher entry. Film
Found this on the Solo YMMV page by Troper Pren
:
- Fandom Berserk Button: Even with the film being an undeniable Box-Office Bomb, unlike when The Last Jedi was hit with the claim against all sanity, it's still a sore point when the alt-right conspirators trying to destroy the franchise claim this as their doing. In particular, it's often rebutted with how the only film in the revived franchise to date to lose money is also the only one with a white male lead.
This is....yeah no, this needs to go. No valid claims about "alt-right conspirators", and the troper seems to be shoehorning a political Take That! against people who seem to disagree about the film not making a lot of money. Also, white male lead isn't the issue, if anything its that the movie exists at all that some dislike.
Edit: This troper has been going around and making some very political laced claims across several other pages it seems. For example they added this on One Day at a Time (2017).
- Counterpart Comparison: One brought up by Netflix itself, as after the Roseanne revival was cancelled due to Roseanne Barr's racist Tweets, Netflix made their own Tweet about how they also currently have a reboot of a classic sitcom about a working class family that deals with a bunch of political issues, twisting the knife by pointing out how theirs is still going.
Might need to talk to them about them pushing political based opinions in areas that don't seem to be there. Trying to find a good way to word it so apologies.
Edited by keyblade333openNew Acceptable Target confusion (Where should this planned example go?)
I've been reading through the Acceptable Targets pages, which includes just about everyone under the sun aside from those who are obviously Unacceptable Targets. But, unless I overlooked it, I feel that at least one example is missing: people who have had cosmetic surgeries. Even though cosmetic surgery is more common nowadays than it used to be, people who choose to undergo them are often considered self-absorbed narcissists who are plastic and inferior to naturally beautiful—or even non-beautiful people, regardless of quantity or quality. So I was going to add it but I'm not sure which page I should write it on "Ethnic Targets" (since it is about physical appearances and other inborn qualites) or "Lifestyle Targets" (which is about lifestyle choices and burdens). Any suggestions?
openTroper Pages?
I was just on the Dethroning Moment Of Suck page and noticed that when you clicked some of the tropers names, you were taken to a page with a personalized quote and tropes associated with the person as well as a link with their recent edits. I was thinking of making one for myself too but what are the rules concerning the creation of a page like this? I wouldn't want to break any of them.
openChanging my username
So, does anyone know if there's a way to change my username on the site? I sent a contact form over a month ago and haven't gotten a response yet. Is there some way to do it myself that I just haven't found?
openExample?
From YMMV.The Last Jedi under They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot:
- A very divisive case: there are fans who feel like the story would have been improved if Finn had been allowed to make his Heroic Sacrifice, since it would not only show major Character Development on his part in being willing to die for the Resistance rather than running away from joining it, but it would have been the second of a one-two audience gut-punch following Snoke: first the supposed Big Bad dies in the second movie, and then the supposed male lead. Others, of course, don't want Finn to die and would have hated that direction, hence why it's divisive.
Normally, I'd say the admitting it's divisive and the last part explaining why some don't think it's the case would warrant removal as it argues with itself. But there being an argument for They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot (which lacks objective misuse far as I can tell) suggests it is a valid example. This possible open-endedness (even by YMMV standards) hi-lighted why this trope is dangerously close to complaining.
What to do.
open Kid's book about dragon hunting Literature
First off, this is definitely not Dragon Slayer's Academy. I remember this one being a standalone book I read in the 5th grade, I believe? About 11 years ago.
I remember two of the main characters. A boy who was a Paige and bullied by the other Paiges for getting the job of fighting the dragon, with one of them sitting on him. The other was the princess who disguised herself as a boy named Bill to go kill the dragon; I believe this was because her father promised that whoever killed the dragon would get to marry her, but I might just be blending other stories with this one since it's been a while.
openformer page name of Series.Casualty
The page history for CASUAL+Y seems like it was moved from another page in 2013, do we know what page it was previously on and if we have that page's history?
I ask this because there are some entries on the page and subpages about an actress called Amy Wren who was an extra on the show, and they seem like they were added by the actress herself (all complimentary and link to her professional website).
If this is the case, it seems like at least the subpage examples should be removed, because it's a creator about their work and themselves. Still, I feel like the main page entries should go, too, because of how self-aggrandising they are. With a full page history, it would be easier to see who added them and determine if it is the actress.
openStar Wars Expanded Universe Film
The Star Wars Expanded Universe page includes the theatrical Star Wars films, all of them dating back to Star Wars in 1977.
It would seem logical that the theatrical films should not be on the Franchise index for Expanded Universe. The film are base canon (or whatever you'd call that). The Expanded Universe is everything else that's grown out of the theatrical features—cartoons, radio dramas, books, comic books, the Holiday Special, blah blah blah. You can't expand something from itself.
EDIT: The movies are also in Star Wars Legends.
Edited by jamespolkopenLinks to Video Reviews Web Original
I've been noticing an increasing number of articles that have "Hilariously reviewed by popular youtube critic LINK" or "you can watch a great let's play here LINK" as the bottom paragraph. Is this appropriate?
These links can be fun, but putting them in top of the page seems inconsistent at best and like ugly self promotion at worst.
resolved Christian Potter Chandler. Web Original
Hoo boy. Fanfic.Christian Potter Chandler is a Harry Potter fanfic that replaces the title character with... well, you can guess. The fic proceeds to imply that preteen Chris-chan touches himself at night, among other things.
Anyone else think this one should get the Asperchu treatment?
Edited by bwburke94openSeinfeldIsUnfunny.LiveActionFilms Film
Noticed a lot of entries about Star Wars on SeinfeldIsUnfunny.Live Action Films that seem to argue with themselves, get facts incorrect, or are nattery.
"Darth Vader was noted in 1977 for being one of the scariest villains on-screen at the time. However, after becoming a heavily-marketed Series Mascot (even to kids), having seen Luke, I Am Your Father parodied a million times (which are, more often than not, more or less equal amount of Darth Vader clones) in the Expanded Universe,note which has been officially declared defunct by new Star Wars owner Disney, perhaps in part because of this trope and after getting to see villains like Exar Kun, Darth Revan or Kylo Ren, Vader is no longer perceived as the sinister force he once was, and instead has a reputation as a "cool" character akin to a superhero. Rogue One addresses this by depicting Vader, a One-Scene Wonder here, at his most sinister and brutal - making him Nightmare Fuel by 2016 standards and reminding audiences of why he's such a fearsome character."
"*** With some female fans complaining about the use of The Smurfette Principle in the series, many forget that having a woman like Leia being just as heroic as the male heroes was a groundbreaking move in the first place. Like the Vader example, this was addressed in The Force Awakens by having Rey, a woman, as the surprise main character, giving her a surge in popularity and serving as a breakthrough for the aging franchise." Seems unclear in the latter part if it's referring to Rey or Leia.
"*** George Lucas changed the 'Han shot first' scene because he and MPAA thought it was too dark and violent. Nowadays with the normalization of heroes shooting first, many fans consider the change to be an overreaction especially since Greedo was pointing a blaster at Han and he was acting in self-defense. Not helping matters is how later films show moments of heroes trying to kill helpless people like Cassian shooting a handicapped informant or Luke trying to kill his sleeping nephew." Han shot first was only changed in the '98 special editions, 21 years after ANH was first released.
open GOLDEN/BLOND hair girl and bald man trying to steal her hair / OLD CARTOON .- NAME? Film
I'm looking for cartoon/name, it's and older cartoon..probably 70-80-90's..it was about a little girl with short golden hair, that I think lived in the some sort of magical forest with her mushroom friends protecting her against bald man who was always trying to steal her hair so he could wear it, he always pictured him self in the mirror with her hair but always failed to steal it from her. anyone know the name of that cartoon plz???
openShould Public-Domain Character moved to Useful Note?
There're two reasons I think it will be better as a useful note.
- I don't think it's trope. While they can appear in many works, being in public domain in't story telling tool by itself.
- More important, the page is quite a mess right now. We have both "The characters in this work are in public domain" and "This work use public domain characters" throw together in examples list.
I think that move it to Useful Note article and stick to listing public domain characters will be more useful for us.
Edited by KuruniopenEdit War on Fallout 76 Videogame
I'm finding myself in an edit war on Fallout 76. A troper recently put the Doomed by Canon trope on the page, stating the Vault 76's mission to rebuild America in the aftermath of the nuclear war "obviously' failed based on how much of a bombed-out hell hole the Capital Wasteland of Washington D.C. and Boston Commonwealth are 185 years later.
- Vault 76's mission to restore America is obviously doomed to fail from the start, since the east coast is still a Crapsack World 185 years later."
Here's the thing though: this game is a prequel and a spinoff from the main series, but there is literally NO MENTION of the end results of Vault 76's efforts anywhere else in the entire franchise. There's no mention that it's located in West Virginia, or anything else. There's only a computer terminal in Fallout 3 that only mentions that Vault 76 exists.
According to the Doomed by Canon's own Playing With page, if something hasn't been mentioned in the main installments, then it counts as an Averted Trope, and thus should not be mentioned.
"Averted:
- Bob wasn't mentioned in "The Main Tropes", so it doesn't matter what his fate is."
Or, to put it into context:
"Vault 76's efforts aren't mentioned in the rest of the Fallout franchise, so it doesn't matter what its fate is."
The game hasn't even come out yet. It'll be released in November, so nobody actually knows if the game's main storyline will address any actual results from the efforts of the players. To say that they failed because of the Crapsack World that previous (but further down the timeline) installments are with literally zero mention of this game is ridiculous.
Edited by DRCEQopenTLP help
So, I just made a new post on Trope Launch Pad, and I noticed mine doesn't have a green "new" on it, despite a lot of others that are older than mine having one.
Do I need to put it on there myself somehow? Will it show up on its own?
openThinking of Changing an Example for Music/Seinfeld is Unfunny
This one:
"Averted by David Bowie. Part of it is that he changed both his sound and his visual approach to performances of same so often that by the time a given approach was being imitated, he'd usually already moved on. Moreover, way too many of the artists he's influenced tend to copy his flash but not his substance — not to mention lack the unique charisma and strong Creator Thumbprint that ground his body of work. His 1980 album Scary Monsters (And Super Creeps) was hyped with the Tagline "Often copied — never equalled" for this reason."
First, its an Aversion, which I feel is really unnecessary for this trope. Second, though Bowie himself might not have suffered this effect, it could be argued that all his different personas with their different styles did. And just because they only copied his flash and not his substance does not mean that persona would not fall into this trope. In fact, flash-only imitations seem to be implied for this trope.
openQuestion about Solo *SPOILER* Film
A few days back I corrected the name of one spoiler character on all pages for Solo Giving the following edit reason:
"Darth" is a title reserved for Sith Lords, and by the time The Clone Wars, Rebels and this movie takes place, he is no longer one, he says this himself on the former two works . However troper smasll_lordvoice
added more entries with the incorrect name and reverted some of my changes with no edit reason. I've PM them but received no reply, as such I ask if I could make the corrections again without incurring into an Edit War.

I had to clean up the examples involving Kanye’s political views, but other tropers keep adding it back. I’ll admit I added some myself, but since it’s causing edit warring, I deleted the examples altogether. Should there be a mod warning to prevent any more politics-related examples from betting added back.
Edited by MsCC93