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:
openLouder with Crowder edit dispute
vexer is involved in a discussion with myself and (so far) Larkmarn about neutral POV on the politically themed comedy show Louder With Crowder, but are incredibly hostile. Since they've already progressed to namecalling other tropers ("Nazis", "basement dwellers", "creepy bigots", etc.) and started editing the page to unilaterally purge it of content they deem unacceptable, they probably need a cooldown period. "Community resolution" doesn't mean "My way or the highway".
Edited by MorgenthaleropenPossible slut shaming and misogny
So uh this is weird. The troper Little Eagle wrote several kinda offensive diatribes on Ethical Slut
. These are there edits (What they wrote is bolded)
The concept of Ethical Slut is a gender neutral one: The idea that only women can be sluts is a Double Standard, Double Standard (except it would only be a double standard if men and women were the same in every way and women sluts were still reviled more than male sluts. Since men and women sex (semen in womb, penis in vagina) are differnt, it cannot be a Double Standard), and the idea that being a slut would be a bad thing reeks of moralism (except for the diseases, lack of self-respect, irresponsibility, lack of self-control, lack of commitment, and all those other important details that make up being a responsible, respectable member of society)
Of course, it would be easier to find a male character as Ethical Slut than a female, because DoubleStandard.Double Standard (actually it's because women get angry when female characters are ethical sluts since they find being sluts viewed favorably and perversion to be offensive. Like most people. Where as men mostly just don't care and don't get offended and enjoy a male character defending against abuse, as do female audiences.).
Isnt this whole moral diatribe that they wrote the exact opposite of what an Ethical Slut is . What they wrote is also kinda offensive with the whole men and woman are different argument using sexual organs as well as ironically enough being actual Slut-Shaming
Edited by miraculousopenUnintentionallyUnsympathetic miuse and Scrappy misuse. Videogame
Someone added this to the Fire Emblem Fates ymmv page:
- Unintentionally Unsympathetic: The reception of Peri was mixed, but mostly negative for this reason. They attempted to make her a Sympathetic Murderer, but at the same time didn't do enough to actually make her sympathetic for most people. Her backstory that set her up to be this way is briefly summarized in one of her supports and barely acknowledged at all otherwise, her positive traits just aren't enough to redeem her for being a serial killer, almost all of her Character Development is mentioned in her endings to have taken place after the game is over, and most of her darkest aspects are Played for Laughs in ways that feel out of place in the game and leave much of the audience more uncomfortable than amused. This also has the side effect of making Xander look kind of clueless to some people, since there is very little indication that he's even aware of the sorts of things Peri does, despite Peri herself seeing nothing wrong with it, not trying at all to hide it, and talking openly about it to almost everyone.
I removed it and cited that this was someone blantly trying to scapegoat Peri as a scrappy using this, citing that this person was ignoring several aspects of the character. This was done by Gravityman. Two days later, user bigbossdiego readded it, and also added her as a scrappy, which is something that has been done before and has been continually cited as not being a valid entry.
They also said this: "A character having fans does not, I repeat, does not preclude them from this status. Peri is hated by the fans to an almost absurd degree. There are entire reddit threads about how much the fandom hates her (https://www.reddit.com/r/fireemblem/comments/7moa1p/hated_characters_peri/)
. The removal of her Scrappy status was also unwarranted as well in light of this information. I also dislike the entry on Never Live It Down for the reason that it both downplays the problems with picking Peri as a retainer, and ignores the issues with Xander's own justifications for it. If you want to discuss this further, please respond to my post in the discussion page."
Since this is clearly just trying to bash a Base-Breaking Character, I am going to remove it, especially since using places like reddit is not allowed as a source. Want to get opinions as well so this doesn't become an issue again.
- Edit: Also, not sure if this is true, but I believe this qualifies as an edit war on the second users part, but I'm not sure.
open SkidTroper making deliberately misogynistic edits on contentious pages.
It has been brought to my attention that SkidTroper has been making a considerable number of edits that show a bias towards the Men's Rights Movement, but with a slant that is openly hateful towards in particular feminism, but also towards women in general. This behavior is not supported by the wiki. Not only this, but when faced with anything but positive responses (literally doing nothing enrages him) he is openly confrontational and claims to be singled out and that people want to suppress/oppress him. There are also concerns that he is spreading falsehoods regarding atheism, Christianity and what he sees as "anti-Christian".
Here
is a link to the 2013 "The wiki has a feminist bias" thread that was resolved, thus long before Skid Troper ever made an appearance there had been conceited efforts to prevent any bias, as well as explaining to the "concerned" troper at the time that feminism isn't misandrist to no avail. Oh, and his grammar is terrible.
Below are some particularly bad edits of Skid Troper's I've singled out for inspection. I'd also cast a cautious eye on his troper page — particularly where he says he has unrelenting views on Christianity, the strong opinions he holds about how characters and beliefs "should be" presented in works, the view of himself as a "real man" (i.e. tough and outdoorsy and always morally right, according to the entry it's linked to), the fact he applies Perverse Sexual Lust to himself, and, for completeness sake, the claim to Aspergers Syndrome in how, in fairness, he may not know that he is doing something wrong and we are unlikely to be able to convince him that he could change his editing behavior.
- From the Discarded Men's Rights Activism TLP
:
- the Useful Notes for Feminism allows for a discussion of the controversial term "Patriarchy" despite the fact that it gets overused, sometimes to the point of being misandrist
- I do not care whether or not I'm liked here and will not back down from making this just because some people don't like it
- keep in mind any attempts at page blanking or vandalism will be undone
- no one gave suggestions on how to make it neutral other than asking me to remove all mention of the Red Pill, the Manosphere and some of the terms; that is not making it neutral, that is suppressing facts (facts meaning, these are commonly held views in the Manosphere). To me, that comes across less as "keep the text neutral" and more "I disagree with these things so much I want them censored" (as for WHY people want those censored, I don't know, but given the dim reception this trope had I've got some suspicions).
- My draft has been singled out, that's why it's in the "Nuked" section [...] There has been widespread media censorship for anything that challenges a leftist narrative <— in particular, this definitely shows the self-important attitude that is a common feature of misogynistic men.
- The Red Pill and its YMMV page.
- I will say that this is a work page and so may exist. However, the description is currently very short and alludes to (though does not say outright) that feminists should convert to MRA and "question [their] views on gender, power, and privilege".
- Generally bad grammar and phrasing, but the main issue really is the promotion of MRA over feminism.
- Nothing against MRA, except for the fact that this troper seems to be describing it not as "equal rights for men" and instead as "feminists oppress men".
- Acceptable Religious Targets: history
- Edit warring about Scientology
- Adding a lot of very biased and unproven information on atheism and communism vs. religion.
- Changed:
- to
- Deleted:
- But kept the statement that follows it, which is a lot more negative without the above context:
- And a lot more, but I don't want to overload this.
- YMMV.Mass Effect Andromeda
- Edit warring (I think?) about religious allegories in the game, even though it was taken to discussion and his edits reverted by consensus.
- Added the (incorrectly indented) below entry about mild representations of Nazis being anvilicious (Nazi sympathizing?)
- And this: (given the kett's Nazi and religious parallels and the historical targets of left-wing politics)
- Literally every mention of religion, Nazis, fanaticism, and political targets on the page was added by him.
- Just, completely unilaterally rewrote Knight Templar.
Edited by lakingsif
openNeed Mediation
Hi, guys. On the Transgender Fetishization discussion page
, Tropers.Nebulous Violet seems determined to remove any reference to the idea that the trope can be received or portrayed positively, because it's a (historically negative) stereotype of trans people.
To save time here, I'll just copy the summary of disagreements I had:
- You believe that just because the trope Positive Discrimination has "positive" in the name that it's supposed to be seen as good. As I keep repeatedly saying, that is not true. Read the description of the trope.
- You are disregarding the golden rule of Tropes Are Tools. Tropes, even if they are historically negative or call attention to a "flaw" in a work, cannot be treated as inherently bad on this wiki. We must portray the trope itself as neutral, and only trope any negatives if those negatives are evident in the work itself.
openSingle Issue Wonk Review on My Little Pony Equestria Girls: Forgotten Friendship
While JJHIL 325 does have valid points regarding the issue, it's clearly a rant about the issue within the movie and not an actual review of the movie itself. They should have posted in the proper forums instead.
openHeadscratchers pages for not yet released works Film
Is it right that we have Headscratchers pages for movies that have not yet been released? Someone has set one up for the Deadpool sequel and all it is is a complaint about one of the characters that will be in it. (Link: The Untitled Deadpool Sequel ) Isn't Headscratchers to answer questions about something you might not understand from a work's plot, not a demand to know why a character is in it, without knowing how the story plays out first?
On a similar note, the Headscratchers page for The Last Jedi is full of people complaining about something the film did and then not liking or accepting when they are given an answer. Can someone take a look over that, I don't trust myself enough to be impartial on that page and I don't want to end up cutting out too much or leaving in my own pet theory, if someone less involved in that fandom could take a look then I'd appreciate it.
I feel like the headscratchers pages are devolving back towards being complaint sinks like they were in the Just Bugs Me days, and that isn't good.
open Edit warring over including Deadpool on the MCU franchise page. Film
Alright, I'm not sure if this is the place to post this, but here it goes... There's been some controversy on the Marvel Cinematic Universe franchise page regarding the addition of one untitled Deadpool film, which has been confirmed to be in early development by trades and anyone worth a damn. The problem is that Deadpool co-creator Rob Liefeld has recently stated something to the contrary, and that's spawned a ton of clickbait headlines and the spread of misinformation.
Here's the thing - the only person who says that nothing is happening with a character that brought in $1.5B in global ticket sales is Rob Liefeld, who is not part of the Marvel Studios picture at all. He is not being included in conversations about the next movie in spite of being a consultant on the Fox movies, and he recently shared some fan art of Deadpool killing Mickey Mouse on his social media page, so he is clearly not an impartial source of information here.
Another big problem with his statement is that allegedly, production grids for the next film in the series are out there, seen by a select few (including some industry insiders). Disney CEO Bob Iger also has an image of Deadpool on his Twitter banner, and previously noted that he's open to the idea of there being an R-rated Marvel Studios label for a third Deadpool movie and potentially other films. Marvel are currently in the process of making an omnibus of Deadpool stories from Joe Kelly, who gave the character the personality that fans of the character love. But most importantly, not only have Deadpool 1 and Deadpool 2 writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick officially met with Marvel Studios about the future of the franchise, but Ryan Reynolds, who is the only "FoX-Men" actor likely to make the jump into the MCU, has as well.
This was the original entry on the page before it got reverted:
- Untitled Deadpool film (TBA) note Confirmed by Ryan Reynolds to be in development. Reynolds will be returning as Deadpool, with writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick returning. Emma Watts and Simon Kinberg, who were involved with the previous films, will not be returning. The film will be the first R-rated entry in the MCU, and is expected to be distributed by 20th Century Studios instead of by Disney. Whether or not the film is a complete reboot or a Broad Strokes continuation of the franchise as it was prior to Disney's acquisition of Fox remains to be seen.
I tried relaying some of this information into the commented-out notes of article itself, but a Troper has recently accused me of being "biased" and is threatening to report me for vandalism... In spite of my simple relaying of crucial information like what I've shared above that debunks the speculation that Disney wants nothing to do with Deadpool. I am requesting that the Deadpool entry be reinstated into the article.
Edited by KingClarkopenRequesting a revert
A while ago, jto5334t
added several Zero-Context Examples to Elite Beat Agents. I hid them, and in the edit reason I left a link to the Administrivia page. Today, they started an Edit War by restoring all of the hidden entries without any adjustments, on top of adding a few others. I'm requesting a revert on that page, as I cannot edit it without engaging in an Edit War myself.
openPossible fanfic self-promotion?
While some of ZoicAlcelaphine's edits, particularly those related to Undertale, have been pretty questionable, I have reason to believe they may be recommending their own fics on the game's Fanfic Recs page. If you look at their troper page and the FFN page for one of the authors they keep promoting
, they seem a bit too similar for it to be a coincidence (at least, it seems that way to me).
Also, the recently-created page for the fanfic The World Of Humans And Monsters, and especially its YMMV page, are tripping several red flags for me. Some of these include repeated usage of "The author believes/thinks..." and putting four instances of the canon characters getting called out under Catharsis Factor (it doesn't help that they're zero-context examples), along with including some non-YMMV tropes in the YMMV subpage as another way of going "this is why the canon characters are wrong".
Even if I'm wrong about the troper and the author being one and the same, that fic page needs serious work in order to stand as an objective page (which, considering that it's pretty much a Hate Fic that turns most of Undertale's cast into either author avatars or straw characters, may be an uphill battle). What do you think?
openRoberto Jalareno
RobertoJalareno's edits
are a mess, consisting of making subpages for himself (which I'm pretty sure isn't allowed), and the few edits he has on other pages have formatting and grammar issues.
Also all of the pages he made come up as "Make Video game articles" and not Roberto Jalareno, which...I don't even know how that happened.
Edited by ArctimonopenPotential Ban Evader
I think Owah may have returned once again as Mixels Fan 1973, who is a new account primarily editing pages that Owah also liked, such as Brawl of the Objects. And, like Owah, they're changing images on pages, such as on Funny.Inanimate Insanity.
Mixels' history
for comparison with Owah's
.
Here's the previous thread about their evasion,
and the time they outed themself
.
Edit: Sorry, the links have been fixed.
Edited by WarJay77openPossible ROCEJ Violation
On Trivia.Chuggaaconroy, there's an example under Missing Episode involving a video featuring ProJared being removed due to a scandal involving him that started a few months ago that was originally read this:
- One of his Pikmin 3 Mission Mode episodes was removed as of May 2019, as the episode in question had Pro Jared as his guest. This was because said guest star was in deep trouble for...controversial reasons involving Jared cheating on his wife.
However, machop changed it to this:
- One of his Pikmin 3 Mission Mode episodes was removed as of May 2019, as the episode in question had Pro Jared as his guest. This was because said guest star was then-currently being accused by people who might've thought Jared was harassing certain groups. Fortunately, those claims were proven as false as of September 2019 by Jared himself. The video is still currently missing, however.
However, people are debating whether ProJared was really telling the truth or not, and I fear this could lead to an edit war. I think this example should be rewritten to be more neutral and should warn about ROCEJ like this:
- A Pikmin 3 Mission Mode episode featuring Pro Jared as a guest was removed as of May 2019, following allegations of Jared cheating on his wife. And we'll leave it at that.
openCreator complaining
From Creator.Bio Ware:
As of early 2020, BioWare faces a very uncertain future. Once near-universally considered the top studio for Western RPGs, BioWare's releases throughout the 2010s have been met with very serious controversy and criticism, with their last unqualified AAA hit being Mass Effect 2 in early 2010. In addition to a greatly diminished reputation for quality writing, modern BioWare has struggled to find a place for itself among modern industry trends. What was once BioWare's fairly unique signature mechanic of 'Give the player a team of companions to lead, fight alongside, talk to, and fall in love with' has been successfully adapted by other studios. Meanwhile, BioWare's attempts to reinvent its franchises as Wide Open Sandboxes have had poor results: Dragon Age: Inquisition, Mass Effect: Andromeda, and Anthem have all been derided for having shallow open worlds filled with fetch quests with very weak or nonexistent story content attached. In the wake of the disappointing Mass Effect: Andromeda and Anthem, reports have emerged of a studio plagued with weak and ineffective leadership and extremely high staff turnover. It remains to be seen if BioWare will be able to restore its reputation as a creator of great games with great stories.
This entry makes up half the length of the page now. This seems unfair for an entry that complaining and spectating about their future. Cut?
openThe Last of Us Part II questions
The Last of Us Part II has attracted a lot of controversy as mentioned here
. I have questions about the character Abby who is at the center of this controversy.
- Karma Houdini: She ultimately gets away with brutally murdering Joel, as Ellie opts to spare her to end the Cycle of Revenge. Of course, she still loses a lot of her friends at Ellie's hands as a consequence of what she did.
- Villain Protagonist: Arguably given the Black-and-Gray Morality of the setting, but you basically play as Joel's murderer for significant parts of the story. Of course, part of that story involves her having a Heel Realization of sorts that eventually leads her to give up her pursuit of Ellie.
- Designated Hero: Abby, her role in the game was done to humanise her as an antagonist; showing that she had a sympathetic reason to kill Joel and prove that his death changed nothing for her. However, players already saw her as beyond redemption for killing Joel since he was a beloved character from the first game. Ellie sparing her after killing so many people wasn't seen as the message it was intended to be, it was instead seen as Abby getting away with her crimes while Ellie loses everything in the process.
- Fourth Wall Myopia: Arguably part of why Abby is seen as unsympathetic by many players. We've played as Joel in the first game and are thus aware of the complexities of his character, and the understandable (albeit selfish) reasons why he killed the Fireflies to save Ellie. From Abby's perspective, however, he'd just be an unrepentant murderer as she only knows that he killed someone she cared about in cold blood. Many see Abby killing Joel as her crossing the Moral Event Horizon, but the reality is that she wouldn't be aware of Joel as a person unlike the player.
- Unintentionally Unsympathetic: One of the biggest criticisms the game faces is that, despite its numerous efforts to the contrary, Abby is stunningly unlikable and unsympathetic. While just about everybody understands why she would want to kill Joel, the fact that she actually goes through with it, the insanely vicious and sadistic manner she does it in, and her overall mean and ruthless personality destroys a lot of the sympathy the player may feel for her. It also really doesn't help that she basically gets away scot-free at the end, while her friends all suffer Ellie's wrath and Ellie herself ends the game with her life in ruins.
Karma Houdini seems to argue with itself saying they lost friends as karma. Villain Protagonist says it’s arguable and notes she makes an effort to repent. Designated Hero seems to clash with how Ellie and the game treats her as a villain and is redundant with Unintentionally Unsympathetic. Fourth Wall Myopia and Unintentionally Unsympathetic seem to disagree and I question UU since that’s why she’s the villain who gets better of because the repent for those traits (not denying she’s UU but was written it comes of as combining about intentionally dark stuff). Thoughts on these entries? I asked complaining cleanup but haven’t heard back.
I also have a question about Misaimed Fandom, does it count if fans wanted to kill Abby despite the point of the work was to show otherwise (the downer ending was the result of trying to do so)? Does it apply when there are legitimate reason for it (eg. Broken Aesop, Designated Villain, Strawman Has a Point), or only when it goes past what those reasons would justify?
openIs Barry Allen a Designated Hero? Print Comic
Barry Allen has earned himself quite the lengthy entry at the comic book section of Designated Hero. It reads:
"The Flash: Barry Allen, the Silver Age incarnation of the character, has largely became this upon being brought back and pushed as the main Flash.
- Upon returning, he created the Flashpoint incident while trying to undo the meddling of his arch-enemy, Eobard Thawne/Reverse-Flash, who had altered Barry's past to give him an angstier backstory involving his mother getting murdered. However, rather than work with other heroes who are experts on this kind of thing, like Booster Gold or even his own former protege and Superior Successor Wally West (who unlike Barry, could run through time-and-space unaided and understood their powers on a much greater level), he did this by himself, resulting in a distorted Darker and Edgier timeline. While his motivations were sympathetic, the sheer idiocy of his blunder and how easily it could have been avoided, especially as he was warned prior during the Prelude to Flashpoint about what was going to happen and did it anyway.
- When he realised what he did and undid it, the result still didn't fix his mistake, resulting in a new timeline that was still Darker and Edgier, only everyone was also Younger and Hipper on top; while Barry's life in this new timeline wasn't bad, his friends were made miserable with both marriages and people erased, including Wally West, Wally's kids, and also Jay Garrick, Jesse Chambers, and the rest of the Flash Family. Though all of this was because Executive Meddling was in play (co-publisher Dan DiDio wanted the rest of the Flash family erased due to his personal dislike of Wally West and his belief that the franchise should be simpler, as well as his preference for Darker and Edgier stories and belief that True Art Is Angsty), it essentially meant that in-universe, Barry was personally responsible for erasing his nephew and family from existence, essentially killing them, while making everyone else he knew miserable and lonely. Meanwhile, Barry in this new timeline? He was a young, happy single with a cute Adorkable girlfriend, largely beloved by his city, with nobody knowing or remembering what he did.
- The Rebirth era didn't help with this matter, even after Wally West returns. During a team-up with Batman, he discovered Wally wasn't the only forgotten speedster when he meets Jay Garrick in the Speed Force. Rather than working tirelessly to save Jay, as you would expect a hero like Barry to do, he seemingly forgets about it to instead focus on other stuff. Then, Wally has his memory of his kids restored to him, and he calls Barry out on not even informing him about other trapped speedsters; he claims he was working with Batman to investigate it off-panel, but they were clearly not sparing much time looking into this, which could have been resolved by informing Wally, who not only wasn't busy with anything thanks to having his life erased, and also understands the Speed Force to a much greater extent than Barry and would be better suited into looking into it. Then, after the two are manipulated by Hunter Zolomon, Wally has a breakdown over the memory of his kids, so Barry sends him to a mental health facility where he never visits him, trusting instead that the facility can help him. It doesn't. Meanwhile, after sending Wally away, Barry could take this as an indication he should put more focus into finding the lost speedsters, but instead, he starts a different investigation into the "Other Forces", something he could have left up to his new ally, Commander Cold while he continued searching for Jay, Jesse, and Max. While his lack of focus on this could be chalked up to not remembering the other speedsters, it still looks callous of him to know people are suffering and to do nothing, even when told these people are his family."
Okay, I gotta ask: is this valid? I know that some people still have grievances towards Barry even after the end of Comic Book/Flashpoint and I do admit that I don't have the best knowledge on Barry's history, but this entry is so long and descriptive that it comes off as opinionated writing. What do we do with this?
Edited by MasterHeroopenUser changing many images without discussion
Matuta 930 has been changing a lot images without discussion. As far as I know, they've changed the images on the following pages:
- Multiple Head Case (which was later reverted)
- Lovable Lizard
- Barefoot Sage (also later reverted)
- BodyHorror.Western Animation
- Was Once a Man
- Crazy Homeless People (once again, later reverted)
- Cats Are Mean
- For Halloween, I Am Going as Myself
- BodyHorror.Film
- TearJerker.Beastars
- Heartwarming.El Chavo Del Ocho
- Morphic Resonance (yet again, later reverted)
- NightmareFuel.Alien
- Various images on many character pages (although some of them do actually seem like improvements)
They've also added images without discussion on Funny.Akira, Polly Wants a Microphone and Amplified Animal Aptitude (while the first is fine, the latter two are JAFAAC).
Edited by jandn2014openEdit war on Starfield's YMMV page.
On November 15th, troper Mr Dark Man removed this entry from the Starfield's YMMV page with this edit reason
:
"removed misinformation, Heel's rant was taken out of context. His rant actually happens after the character Hadrian reveals herself to be a clone. Some youtubers just edited it so that his rant happens after discovering the pronoun choice."
- He Panned It Now He Sucks: YouTuber HeelvsBabyface went viral in a rant against the game for having the option to select body type and pronouns instead of sex and gender, claiming that such a thing injects "politics" in the game and destroys immersion into the game world. Some gamers were not particularly happy with the accusation and threw it back at him pointing out that the option is really just an option and that it defaults to the most common pronouns to the body type selected, meaning you don't even have to select anything and accuse him of being outraged for the sake of clicks. Fanning the flames is that there are other YouTubers and sizeable portion of gamers who feel similarly to HeelvsBabyface, and it led to a mess that's best left to another site to document.
A month later, troper Who Needs A Mango re-added it
with the edit reason: "Out of context" my ass, he literally screams about "gender" and "California shit""
Two days later, Mr Dark Man removed it for the second time
basically with the same edit reason.
A few hours later, Who Needs A Mango re-added it for the second time
with the edit reason: "Re-adding since he literally shouts "FUCKING PRONOUNS!""

So I recently found out that we are hosting a creators page on Emily Youcis. That woman is one of THE most prolific members of the Alt-Right. She is an anti-semite, a white nationalist, a Female Misogynist and a proud, self-described Nazi. I mean if you really wanna know (and I advise you not to), you can check her out on the racist Twitter equivalent Gab and see what kind of twisted things she espouses. I already saw in the history that, in the past, the page was open about her political affiliation, but that it got cut out and locked. I submitted her page for cutting yesterday, but it got denied. Do we really want to give a person like that a (indirect) plattform here? Would we lose anything of merit if we'd cut her page? I mean, we cut Alex Jones too.
Edited by Forenperser