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 CircularRedirect is Self-Demonstrating
not Administrivia.Circular Redirect, but the main Circular Redirect page is, well, a circular redirect. according to the history, it was made such by mod fiat going back to 2012. it says it's "to demonstrate what happens", but... do we really need that? the Administrivia page explains what happens, and someone forgetting to properly namespace the link would lead people to get the redirect error without the context of it. i don't think we need a page on the wiki that intentionally induces a browser error, demonstrative or not.
openHandmaid's Tale ROCEJ?
This is an example on the YMMV page
for The Handmaid's Tale, under They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot. It was added added by drmeagher13:
- Simiarly, there are no vocally non-religious characters in the show. In spite of the show taking place in a religiously-derived dystopia, no one seems to suggest that maybe religion itself is the problem. The tenets of Gilead are indeed derived from lines of the Bible, and no one seems to suggest that maybe disregarding the whole thing might be a good idea. Instead, the heroes seem to all be cut from the cloth of more mild religion. A major example is June sympathetically baptizing her child in the Catholic Church, which in the real world has been implicated of routine systemic child abuse, much like Gilead in the show. It represents another failure of representation on the show.
While I can certainly see the TWAPGP part of having no vocally non-religious characters in a religion-dictated dystopia, parts of this example seem like they're pushing into ROCEJ territory, especially the bit about baptism and child abuse.
open Justifying edit on recent Unintentionally Unsympathetic edit
A while back, a troper argued that Atreus fell under the Unintentionally Unsympathetic trope in God of War Ragnarök. Recent add-ons to the edit seem to point to the idea that what is being described may not in fact be unintentional on the developer's part.
For further context:
- The lesson Kratos learns about trusting his son (and others) was very much needed for him to grow into the man he is by the end of the game. But for most of the story, Atreus is nothing but untrustworthy. He went behind his father's back to study Loki, continues to do so after coming clean and after unintentionally disappearing to Jotunheim for two days, all while refusing to elaborate on where he's been — even if Atreus was trying to protect Angrboda and Ironwood at her request by keeping his movements secret. The whole time, Atreus demands his father trust him in spite of the fact that Atreus has done nothing but lie and hide his intentions. The rest of the adults even agree with Kratos and rightfully call out Atreus for thinking he could fix everything all by himself. In the end, it's played realistically: Atreus lampshades himself that Kratos' lack of trust is entirely justified, but he's emotionally unequipped to resolve it.
Should the edit be removed?
Edited by WiryAiluropodineopenNeptunia Characters page Videogame
The characters page is split based on each game. The first game has its own continuity, and the third game introduces some AU Counterparts, but the Hyperdimension characters appear repeatedly throughout the series, so they're often just getting the same tropes on each game's character page. Wouldn't it be better to have Character Specific Pages like Broly's with folders for different continuities as well as one for common traits?
Edited by KOmanresolved An assortment of editing issues and potential rape apologia
Marianabelle is more-or-less solely responsible for creating and editing Without Her Consent and its associated subpages. They have also displayed quite a few issues when editing the subpages of this work alone, including poor spelling and grammar, trope misuse, putting non-YMMV tropes on the YMMV page, and more.
What changed my train of thought from "They really need notifiers sent to them" to "This really should be reported on ATT" was the content of their edits, particularly on the YMMV page. A (likely unapproved) Complete Monster entry that is somehow combined with Freudian Excuse (which they even made a separate entry for), a Jerks Are Worse Than Villains entry that suggests that a selfish Manchild is more loathed by the audience than a Serial Rapist, and more (and this is just on the YMMV page). I felt the need to bring this up because things like a Complete Monster entry for a Serial Rapist that starts with "Doubles as Freudian Excuse" pushes the page too far into rape apologia territory.
And then there's the Fridge and WMG entries that push the narrative that the Serial Rapist will still get away in the end by somehow winning a court case despite being found guilty of rape, even going so far as to say that he will sue the police for negligence and somehow win. Further still, there's graphic detail in the Headscratchers section theorizing as to how the rape scene was "supposed" to play out and meta headscratchers that go way too far into ROCEJ territory.
Edited by UFOYeahopen Should Suletta and Ericht be listed as separate characters or as one?
Hello, Twisted Wanderland here, but please, call me “The Wanderer”. Why? Because it sounds cooler.
As for why I’m on here, last night I joined a discussion on the Mobile Suit Gundam: The Witch from Mercury character page about whether the main character, Suletta and the character from the prologue, Ericht, should be considered the same character or not: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/remarks.php?trope=Characters.MobileSuitGundamTheWitchFromMercury&id=140666#140666
Another user, Kuruni, thinks they should be treated as separate characters, but when asked why, they said that there’s no official source stating that they are, even though the same could be argued for there is no official source stating they aren’t. I’ve tried asking them if they had any evidence as to how Suletta isn’t Ericht after the timeskip between the prologue and the first episode, but they claim that Ericht being in the prologue is reason enough to count them as separate and that it’d be more convenient if they are separate, despite pointing out how if they are the same then it’d be counterproductive to go through Suletta’s examples and add in Ericht’s. This also seems to be a unilateral decision because I searched Ask The Tropers and Trope Talk to see if there was a discussion involved with this, but only found a self-report from them for edit warring with another user over this and when they keep skirting around the question whenever I ask for evidence to support their claim.
At this point, we’re just going back and forth with no resolution in sight, which brings me here to get a consensus on whether Suletta and Ericht should be considered the same character or not. I know that theories are going around on how Suletta may be a clone and that the real Ericht is Aerial herself but with nothing conclusive, saying they aren’t the same is purely speculation.
If an agreement can’t be made, then I may have an alternative solution: we treat Suletta and Ericht as the same character, but separate examples exclusive to Suletta from the series and Ericht from the prologue.
openProblem Making Troper Page
I'm trying to make a Troper page for myself, but because my name has an _ in it, the wiki shows an error message and doesn't have the Edit Page button. Since the name of the Troper page is what ties it to the edit history and PM buttons, I can't do a version without the _ or with a space because it won't link to me.
What are my options?
resolved Regarding conflicting external sources... Web Original
Hello. It took me a while to get my mind on about this, but I would like to politely ask question to get help.
It's about Fire Emblem on Forums - I was trying to do a little editting as can be shown here.
However, after than there is this edit, which says that the GM actually said that the game has not been completed.
After a bit of reviewing, I would assume they're right, I just realize that there are two contradicting possible external sources for this.
First, the source that came from the hub page
shows the game as completed, however, the actual game itself is indeed not yet marked as completed
. I think while it's external source and I can't help about it right now, I would like to mention the fact that a contradiction that has confused me was indeed present.
I'm sorry for having to point this, it might seem minor but it has mislead me into typing error. Forgive me for the incorrect edit, but the troper "IcyTea" and the person who told them are actually correct, so I'll just respect and accept their edit decision for now.
So the only problem here is trying to confirm. The latter edit is more preferable, right? I'm aware that I cannot re-edit it back because that would been an edit war that can be punished. I'm just unsure, and apologizes if this case wasn't that simple. I promise that the intent is to clarify and help. Thank you for understanding.
open Can we put some of our unused/discouraged practices of TV Tropes in Discredited Meme?
We've evolved for quite awhile. I still remember back then when TV Tropes still has A LOT of phrases accompanying either Tear Jerker or Heartwarming Moments: "If you do not tear up on this scene, then you're a horrible, heartless human being without a soul."
But of course, right now, we are not allowed to do it anymore. For good reasons and I agree with the sentiments of disallowance.
Still, here's a question... Is that an example of Discredited Meme? I thought the "have no soul" thing back then was quite widespread that it's a TV Tropes-ish meme. Now that it's extremely discouraged, does it look like an example of the trope Discredited Meme? Is it OK to add that in the page or I shouldn't?
Thank you very much. I would try to add that myself, but just so I don't step into a landmine, I might as well ask here first. Pretty sure there are other 'formerly OK, now discouraged' practices, but I'll just use that as an example first.
Edited by ChrisXopenTaylor Swift-Kanye West incident at the VMAs
From Heartwarming.Real Life Other:
- At the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards, when Taylor Swift went up on stage to accept her Moonman for Best Female Video, she was rudely interrupted by Kanye West, who infamously declared that "Beyonce had the best video of all time!" So when Beyoncé herself wins the award for Video of the Year, what does she do? Rather than deliver the acceptance speech that she had prepared, she invited Taylor back on stage to finish hers.
- Harsher in Hindsight as experienced media reviewers spotted evidence that the "interruption" had been prearranged
. Beyonce's husband Jay-Z later revealed that it had indeed been staged.
- Harsher in Hindsight as experienced media reviewers spotted evidence that the "interruption" had been prearranged
Disclaimer that I am a Swift fan and not a West one, but I attempted to search for Jay-Z's "reveal" and Google turned up no results. The "experienced media reviewers" seem to be giving nothing but speculation and gossip, and even the comment section of that page calls them out on it.
Should the second bullet point be removed, then?
Edited by annieholmesopenRemoval due to Rule of Caution Editing Judgement?
This entry of WebOriginal.Role Ending Misdemeanor was deleted by troper Super_Weegee just giving Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement as an edit reason:
- In September 2022, Cloudflare dropped the notorious website, KiwiFarms, from their DoS protection services, after a campaign organized by Canadian transgender activist and Twitch streamer, Clara "Keffals" Sorrenti, who herself was one of the victims of constant doxxing and harassment by the website, culminating in a swatting incident which made her flee the country. Cloudflare initially made a statement in response to Sorrenti's campaign, declining to drop KiwiFarms from their services, they walked back their statement a few days later when the threats escalated into threats of violence. And during the week after that, KiwiFarms was also dropped from other services, like Captcha, and their Russian and Chinese domains.
So far, I don't think there's anything in the post that's factually incorrect or biased, thoughts?
open Draco in Leather Pants misuse
I've noticed a lot of DILP entries that don't really make the case that fans are downplaying a villain's crimes, but instead act like merely liking or defending the villain at all qualifies as the trope, even if fans still acknowledge that they're the villain. These entries often make aspersions on the work's fandom, or read like this: "[Character] gets this a lot from fans, but this ignores the fact that they [list of the villain's crimes]." Some of these entries also come off as sexist, such as this one:
- The Dark Knight Trilogy: The Joker and the Scarecrow/Jonathan Crane seem to get this a lot in fanfiction for the Nolanverse Batman films. Leave it to crazed fangirls to pick two of the most evil characters in a series that actually has several sympathetic (or in the case of the ordinary mobsters, at least normal) villains to crush on.
It also doesn't help that the trope page itself seems to attribute the trope to fans finding the villain physically attractive, and states (without citing any evidence) that it's mostly fangirls who invoke the trope. I'm starting to think it might be better if this trope was limited to specific fanon examples, similar to what was done with Ron the Death Eater. Thoughts?
Edited by Javertshark13open Edit War alert (self report)
Some background first. There are two characters in Mobile Suit Gundam: The Witch from Mercury that fan presumed to be the same character. The first one is Ericht, a 4 years old girl from Prologue episode, and the other is Suletta, the heroine of the show who's stated to be 17. But the recent 6th episode has dialogue implies that the Prolgue takes place 21 years before the main story. So they're unlikely to be the same character.
While it's true that the dialogue isn't explicit that the 21 years old incident is the Prologue, there is no official words that they're the same character either.
So I removed all assumption that Ericht being Suletta
from Characters.Mobile Suit Gundam The Witch From Mercury.
The next day, frankywifeey274 added them back without edit reason
. I removed them again the next day
state that it's speculation and sent Speculation notifier to frankywifeey274. They added it back later, without edit reason
.
They sent PM to me, claims that there is no proof that they aren't the same character and how "The official Gundam wiki" states they are the same and so the page should remain as is. I replied that there's no such thing as "official Gundam wiki", only fans-operate ones. And as I noted, there is no official source ever state that they're the same character at all. Their next PM pull argument from ignorance that there's no proof that they aren't the same character beyond the statement from 6th episode. Again, I replied that Ericht being Suletta is the speculation itself and it was tolerant prior but now the show suggest that it might not be true. There's no further PM and the edit is still there.
So I did start the Edit War. My defense is that it's to remove Speculative Troping, although I realized it might not be obvious to a third party.
openSelf-reporting - image replacement Print Comic
So...
As a new(ish) troper, when I started actively editing works pages, I swapped out a fair few images for 'better' versions on both ComicBook and Characters pages. By which I mean different images that looked better, not just permitted quality upgrades.
At that point I hadn't fully understood the Image Pickin' rules and how they also applied to non-trope pages with existing images that weren't Image Pickin' approved.
Now, after much more troping, I have a much better understanding of the tools and customs for making that sort of change.
I've never had notifiers on this, and other tropers working on the same pages seemed to be comfortable with the changes. But. This is one of those things where I have seen other tropers get notified and suspended months or years after a change. And I'd prefer not to get caught up In that months or years further down the line, especially if that comes up multiple times on different occasions for the different images.
So what's the best way to make it right? Is it a case of leave it and deal with it if a particular image is challenged, or should I try to look back through history and take the cases to Image Pickin' (or elsewhere) to get them reviewed and confirmed or overturned?
Edited by MacronNotesopenCan Playing With pages be Self-Demonstrating?
I've written up a Playing With page for Back to Front, but I was considering making it Self-Demonstrating. (Starting with a link back to the main page and ending with Basic Trope.) Is this allowed?
openConcerns Regarding HardTruthAesop - Bojack Horseman
I have many concerns regarding the "Aesop's" described in https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/HardTruthAesop/BoJackHorseman
. There's a lot of info that could be seen a disparaging to people with mental illness, and perpetuates some opinions on the subject that I personally find offensive. Granted I am fairly emotional about the topic lately, so if I am overreacting please let me know.
The ones regarding suicide in particular are pretty hot-button and could potentially bring up traumatic memories for people (it did for me). The entries do not seem to recognize or even acknowledge that people who are suicidal are not making a decision. Intervention is important, and although I agree that no one should feel obligated to be someone's support, I also don't think we should be encouraging people to abandon their loved ones when they have a suicide attempt. Not that I think that's the intention of this sentiment, but I do see it becoming more common recently as a push back against supporting people with mental illness.
Also, (digression) I personally find this to be a pretty negative Double Standard. I highly doubt a character with a physical illness would be given as much blame for putting stress on others because of their illness. I wonder if there's a better way to explain this without putting blame on mentally ill people, because that's kinda what it feels like. Like by putting more focus on self-care, instead of implicitly criticizing people for attempting suicide.
openSubverted vs Deconstructed Reformed Rake
I'm working on PlayingWith.Reformed Rakes and I need some help. What would be the difference between a Subverted Trope and a Deconstructed Trope in the specific context of the trope Reformed Rake.
The idea of Reformed Rake is that how a man acts prior to marriage is not indicative of how he will act in marriage. Thus you can get the sexiness of All Girls Want Bad Boys but also the wholesomeness of Family Man, by way of The Power of Love.
The "other version" is that no, actually there is some overlap between how a man acts outside his marriage and how he will act within it, and that expecting otherwise is naïve.
The question then is whether this is deconstructing the trope or subverting it. In the examples on the page, it's often call it a deconstruction. I knee-jerk called it a deconstruction myself.
But after thinking about it some more, is that scenario not more of a subversion? The point is that the trope is unrealistic, and so the realistic scenario is the trope not happening. But isn't the trope not happening (after it seemed like it would) actually a subversion?
And if that's actually a subversion, what would a real deconstruction be?
openMythological Figures and Character Rerailment in Adaptations
I noticed that Character Rerailment, a YMMV trope, was in Mr. Wednesday/Odin's folder on the Character page for American Gods. Normally, I would have just moved it to the YMMV page, but since it's about how the novel chooses to adapt a mythological figure, I decided to ask for advice on whether or not that would indeed be the right course of action.
The entry was as follows:
- Character Rerailment: Post-Eddas, Odin has been mostly portrayed as a Grandpa God. Here, he has the more chaotic and selfish personality of older mythology.
openMerging Two Articles Videogame
The article for Leviathan is in a sorry state and would be difficult to repair/add content for. The work itself is a short, direct prequel to Limbus Company, whose article is in a much better state.
Would it make sense to cut Leviathan's article and simply add its tropes to Limbus Company's? There would be folders separating the two, of course.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UnintentionallySympathetic/AnimeAndManga
In My Hero Academia, Endeavour is shown isolating and roughhousing Shoto, for seemingly no other reason than besting All Might vicariously through his offspring. Shoto and Natsuo blamed their father for their loved ones' downfalls, even if he wasn't physically present at the tragedies. Though Touya's backstory recontextualized the Todoroki history. While Endeavour was still a major cause of conflict, all the family members contributed. Rei agreed to the quirk marriage and having more children after Fuyumi, thinking it could help her family. She could've of put her foot down more and pay closer attention to her older children, when she was wrapped up in her own fears. Besides from Shoto, who was too young at the time, the Todoroki children played their part as well: Touya would burn himself for his hero training and lash out against his loved ones' warnings. Fuyumi was aware of her family's unspoken tension, but kept silent for the sake of keeping the peace. Natsuo grew tired of Touya's ramblings and wasn't as supportive as he could've been.
This doesnt argue that Endeavor Is sympathetic but rather how unsympathetic everyone else is.