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:
openEnding Aversion misuse?
- Ending Aversion:Some fans will be turned off by the ending of the film which involves the very memory of Peter Parker being erased from everyone's memories, including his loved ones, with him refusing to remind them in order to protect them and leaving him living on his own and having to support himself while acting as Spider-Man.
I removed it as it requires backlash against the ending to be so widespread even non-fans hear about it and thus avoid the work. "For some" suggests it's not widespread enough an it still seems too soon to tell. It was added back without explanation.
Should I re-cut? Move? Or what?
openEdit War Western Animation
Jumbo J 99 is doing an Edit War on What If…? (2021).
He added a really complaining entry of Took Bleak Stopped Caring to the ymmv (saying it now applied to the whole MCU). It was removed for being both a moment and the work itself ends pretty optimistically.
He then re-added it with a bunch of really reaching and sometimes incorrect versions of how things will in his opinion go
.
Like We have no clue if project insight will happen here and Carter could still stop it, We see in the finale that Tchalla and Quill are going to stop Ego, Loki is also defeated in the finale and a new avengers is formed who will probably deal with Malekith, Strange accepts his punishment and is even at peace, the zombie stuff is apparently going to be covered in another show, I have no idea where the nuclear war will destroy the earth comes from as that's not even in the episode and Killmonger is too stopped.
The show has been well received and from what I've seen loved by the fanbase for the dark moments so I don't think it's an example. Even ignoring that several of these entries are blatantly not true.
open"Edit War" (?) on Womanliness as Pathos
Tropers.Drakos25 has removed, readded (after I questioned them) and now re-removed an entry on Womanliness as Pathos. Here is the entry in question:
- One particular founding myth of Athens
details a dispute between Poseidon and Athena with Poseidon appearing before a coastal city and promising bountiful fishing and harvest from the sea so long as they name him as their Patron God. For no real reason, Athena appears and offers them olive trees, so long as they name her the Patron Goddess instead. The people take a vote, but the vote turns out to be completely split along gender lines: the men all vote for Poseidon, but are outnumbered by the women, who vote for Athena. Poseidon is furious and attempts to appeal with the Olympians, but even they are completely gender-split, so again the women win by one vote and the city officially becomes Athens. However, pissing off a sea god is a bad idea for a coastal city, so the Oracle suggests that they appease Poseidon by forbidding women from voting. So not only did Athena involve herself seemingly only as a Take That! at her uncle, but both mortal and Olympian women almost completely screwed the entire city and the Athenians could only resolve it by reducing women to second-class citizens.
- One particular founding myth of Athens
In addition to the video sourced in the example itself, when I brought this up to Drakos, they stated (paraphrasing) that they had "sixteen years of studying everything" about Greek myth and found "zero evidence" supporting that claim.
I then pointed to three
different
sources
which backed up the aforementioned video's interpretation of the myth. To which Drakos then replied that the first was a blog, the second "has gotten information wrong before" and the last is just a "reinterpretation". They then re-removed the entry and closed off further discussion by saying they would stand with their opinion.
So basically, I have four independent sources to back up this version of a myth (myths, I might add, rarely being clear-cut) while Drakos's only source right now basically amounts to "trust me". Edited by NubianSatyress
openProblematic troper
sumitkumars has only been here for two days, but they seem to have made many questionable edits to both the Useful Notes.Bollywood and Useful Notes.India pages almost to the point where they blanked the pages.
1. removing a lot of text from the Bollywood page
.
2. Removing a big chunk of the India page
.
5. poor grammar
.
6. What the hell is this edit??
I suggest we have someone revert the edits this person made, but please take a look for yourself.
Edited by YuriHaru567openSliding Scale wicks
Guy removed a link in the description of Powered by a Black Hole to Main.Mohs Scale Of Science Fiction Hardness with edit reason "Mohs scales are not tropes", linked to the TRS thread about it: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1640197422056760800&page=3#comment-54
Obviously we're not supposed to use them as trope examples anymore, but that was just a pothole to the explanation of the term "hard science fiction" (which even the Science Fiction page itself still links to).
So basically should that link actually have been removed, or just re-namespaced to Sliding Scale/ ? (The thread never properly decided this before being closed.)
Edited by StarSwordresolved digeraddd
Spinning off from this ATT thread
, digeraddd
has several glaring editing problems dating back to when they first started editing in 2018 and continuing to this day. The linked thread mentions that the page they created is full of Shameless Self-Promotion, unlinked tropes, non-tropes, and trope misuse (and that they have added their self-promotion to other pages (at least one of which has been cut), but it doesn't end there. There's also:
- Several cases of natter/justifying edits (such as on this page
.
- Changing somebody's pronouns from they to he (after it was stated that they go by they/them pronouns)
.
- Their Shameless Self-Promotion reaching pages that don't even have anything to do with Youtube, podcasts, or gaming
.
- Their habit of adding non-tropes and/or with no link (and potential trope misuse) is not limited to the page they created that's mentioned in the ATT thread.
- Some edits that are just
...what (even ones that are made and then immediately undone still exist in the page history)?
openMCU - Confirmed to be Earth-616 repercussions Film
Hoping that this doesn't constitute that big of a spoiler. But in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is officially revealed that - at least inside the MCU multiverse - the main MCU is designated as Earth-616. This only confirms the previous reveal by producer Nate Moore
that the MCU is Earth-616.
I know that maybe this contradicts the official designation by the Marvel databooks, but my stance on it is that: different multiverse, different rules, different designations. So, following from this, would it be ok for me to start to replace "the Sacred Timeline" mentions in entries with "Earth-616"??? I will confess that I have always felt a bit annoyed by how cult-ish the term sounds, and considering how comicbook-616 and MCU-616 have never interacted, it wouldn't lend itself to any problems. Besides, "the sacred timeline" is a mouthful when compared to "-616".
Also, strengthening the argument for the Earth-616 denomination - this is the third time so far it has officially been called that, two of them inside movies. While "sacred timeline" was only used in Loki.
Edited by Edgar81539openSinkholes on Character Page Western Animation
M3S
keeps adding Sinkholes in Characters.The Owl House Amity Blight. (Granted, I've made at least a couple Sinkholes myself lol, in case that needs to be mentioned.)
I tried to prevent this via pointing out that we're not supposed to leave them
. I even later tried leaving a commented-out warning saying not to add those and recently I sent them a DM about this. However, they clearly didn't pay attention to it by the time of writing this; they left a couple more Chained Sinkholes
.
openTroper with Indentation issues, continue to do so despite being messaged multiple time Web Original
A troper by the name of AmuroNT1 regularly breaks the rule written in Example Indentation in Trope Lists.
For example, some past examples of their violations include:
Characters/HololiveEnglish - Oct 5th
- Fun with Acronyms: During her debut stream she lists one of her likes as PWWIE (pronounced "pwee-ay"): People Watching Without Intent to Eat.
- During a Fall Guys stream she attempted to turn her own name into an acronym. After several false starts, she settled on "Giant Underwater Rubber Animal".
Characters/HololiveJapanGenerationThreeFantasy - Oct 14th
- Jerk with a Heart of Gold: Downplayed, but Pekora does enjoy in messing around with anyone in just about every way possible, being quite the mix of a prankster and a troll at any given point. However, she's very very kind, and she keeps all the gifts she's been given from her fans.
- As Pekora's fans are quick to point out, her main goal in her pranking is to make her friends laugh, rather than being outright malicious like most trolls. To wit, when Rushia accidentally fell into Pekora's slime trap and lost a number of items including an enchanted pickaxe, Pekora's response was to leave a chest full of items (including a new pickaxe) on Rushia's doorstep as an apology, even though it wasn't technically her faultnote The fall, and subsequent loss of items, happened mainly because Rushia didn't quite understand how Scaffolding works in Minecraft.
Trivia/Hololive - Oct 30th
- Referenced by…:
- [...]
- The Ancient Gods Part One DLC for Doom Eternal contained an Easter Egg that changes the title to "DOOG Eternal"
, in a reference to Korone's Doom playthroughs; although it has since been deleted, the dev team was impressed at how quickly it was discovered and shared.
- When the Easter Egg was reported online, the official Xbox Twitter account responded
, making it clear that whomever was running the account was an X-Potato themself.
- When the Easter Egg was reported online, the official Xbox Twitter account responded
I have fixed the above entries, but seeing that these are only within the hololive namespace, god knows how many other instances they have done this in other works.
Their most recent one in hololive is:
Characters/HololiveEnglish - Nov 13th
- Heroic Self-Deprecation: While she's usually upbeat, she tends to beat herself up when she doesn't do well at games, especially if it's something she knows the audience is going to be more knowledgeable in. In her first stream of Fire Emblem: Three Houses stream, she almost lost the Mock Battle (as in, the second fight in the game), and only won because of her last character being strong enough to secure the win. She apologized heavily for it, calling herself "bird for brains" even as the chat told her not to worry note Given how she had never played a Fire Emblem game before, it isn't too hard to imagine why she'd have trouble.
- As noted elsewhere, Kiara claimed early on that her "only" talent was for translation and that she felt inadequate compared to the other HoloMyth girls. Since then, she's proven herself to be a very talented singer and artist, and comparisons to professional-level talents like Calli and Ina are doing her a disservice.
I have already messaged them three times about this, directing them to & informing them about the points mentioned in Example Indentation in Trope Lists and even explaining to them the correct way to handle these specific cases, but I've gotten no response whatsoever.
This issue has gone on for long enough and it doesn't look like they will give even a slightest care about this anytime soon unless something is done.
Edited by AsoktencheaopenEdit War on Sonic X: Dark Chaos (and also rudeness)
PrincessPandaTrope Edit-Warred and reverted an edit I made on the Laconic page for Sonic X: Dark Chaos to the earlier version she wrote, with the motivation "Oh, you're here again. Isn't the original okay?"
I figured that instead of joining the Edit War, I'd ask all you fine folks which version you prefer.
And to answer her question of what's wrong: The original uses "crapsack" as an adjective and not a noun, which as far as I know is wrong. That's why I used "crappy" instead. Also, it's a bit too long, so I removed one "really" from "really, really, really". This is supposed to be the Laconic version, after all.
EDIT: In retrospect, I realize that I should have inserted all this in the actual page edit reason. Stupid of me not to. (Also, I probably should have shortened it more, but that's a different story.)
Link
to the edit I mentioned.
SECOND EDIT: Also, she corrected an entry of Black Comedy Rape with the reason "That wasn't played for laughs. What the fuck is wrong with you?!?!"
As far as I know, the correction itself is completely appropriate, but the rudeness...
openEdit war about Ultimate Punisher
The character page for the comic book "The Ultimates" here has an entry about Punisher. There was an entry that said "This version of the Punisher doesn't have any of his 616 counterpart's self-control and moral compass, which leads to him being constantly at odds with the Ultimates and Spider-Man." It was added by Good Gamer 14 as Anti-Villain, and then changed by Chrononaut 70 to Adaptational Villainy.
I removed it as misuse. The Punisher has been changed very little (if at all) between original and adaptation. In both cases we talk about a cold and stoic vigilante that kills petty criminals with no remorse and with extreme prejudice. The only "self-control" and "moral compass" is that he only kills criminals and not innocent people; again, that is true to both versions. Still, this put him at odds with heroes with a Thou Shalt Not Kill code... again, in both versions.
Good Gamer 14 added it again, this time saying this: "This Punisher is way more insane than his 616 counterpart, with him being introduced as a raving psycho during Ultimate Spider-Man. This became more notable when he killed his 616 counterpart during Secret Wars (2015)." Oh, that changes everything! Ultimate Punisher killed the Punisher of another universe! But wait... the original killed three knock-offs of himself in Welcome Back, Frank, and recently tried to kill the Cosmic Ghost Rider (a Frank Castle of another timeline, who was turned into a Ghost Rider, an herald of Galactus and a servant of Thanos and loads of other crazy stuff) when he knew that there was another Frank Castle in town. I would say "again, in both versions", but it's getting repetitive.
openParody Retcon
So, at the beginning of 2020, costanton11 removed this from Trivia.Cinema Sins:
- Parody Retcon: A common response to criticism is "it's satire" and claiming Jeremy is more of a character representing online critics who get anal-retentive over small details. This generally only comes up when they're called out for getting something wrong, while at all other points the complaints they make are their genuine views, mistakes and all, as evidenced in videos on Jeremy's personal channel. Jeremy also acknowledges mistakes, something he wouldn't need to do while in-character, and contradicts himself in several interviews, on Reddit and in his rant on a live-action remake of Winnie the Pooh in a Dear Hollywood video where he states the channel is not satire and should be taken seriously, which really reinforces the notion the "it's satire" and "he's playing a character" claims are just attempts at deflecting legitimate criticisms.
There was no edit reason, and it is actually a valid example. (Cinema Sins is notorious for pulling the Parody Retcon. They've even claimed at certain points that a certain percentage of all the "sins" they call movies out on are "intentionally wrong" as a joke, even though none of them are presented that way and the only way to know which is which is... well, can you prove the point wrong? Then it was on purpose and you just didn't get their biting satire!)
It feels like one fan just not wanting a negative trivia item on the page. Is it safe to put it back?
EDIT: Actually, it looks like there is an edit reason I missed, linking to the Complaints Cleanup thread, where Fighteer said he thought it didn't count as Parody Retcon.
But the thread also has no evidence or even attempts at arguing why it's actually wrong. And honestly, I'm not sure why or how anyone could possibly think that it is wrong. It literally says "people pointed out they made incorrect points and they responded by claiming they were just kidding." How is that not Parody Retcon?
The example could probably stand to be rewritten to be less complainy, and maybe make the point a bit better, but seriously... everyone knows Cinema Sins is guilty of this, even Cinema Sins.
Edited by Mimic1990openMisused as not explanations?
I've removed Fan-Disliked Explanation examples as just being fan-disliked (like X hooked up with Y) but not explanations (how or why X happened). With that I bring up the following:
- Applejack's parents are both deceased, and fans almost universally liked and accepted the idea that Applejack's hat was a Tragic Keepsake from one of them to the point that it fell into Word of Dante territory. Then one of the shorts torpedoed that headcanon by having her declare she won it bobbing for apples at a fair. Fans were quick to fanwank a compromise
. When that was further jossed by showing she has a closet full of identical hats, the bronies proved they were that dedicated to the Tragic Keepsake idea and still insisted that one of the hats was special or simply chose to ignore the closet gag altogether. When she threw her damaged hat away without any of the angst that would support the fanon, fans threw the hat a quick funeral, and still embraced the Tragic Keepsake fanon. Some less seriously than others
. The eventual reveal that her father did wear an identical hat remedied this for a lot of fans, for if nothing else, Applejack got her fashion sense from him even if she didn't get the hat itself.
- Fans were under the impression Luna's turn into Nightmare Moon was purely the result of her giving in to her own feelings of being overshadowed and under-appreciated by the ponies of Equestria, in line with the opening narration of the show. The IDW comics however would explain that it was an outside source that was the cause of the transformation, having taken advantage of this feelings rather than Luna herself deliberately turning against Celestia. When these events were finally shown it was kept ambiguous whether Luna was in full control or not, and showed that Nightmare Moon's "reign" lasted for about an hour at most consisting of a very brief fight between her and Princess Celestia before Nightmare Moon was defeated and banished. Overall, fans found this underwhelming to say the least, felt the show's detailing of the events very disappointing for something so anticipated, and believe said events make Luna's guilt over it come off as silly and overblown to some fans to the point of Fridge Logic unless they take later comics as canon.
- "Tanks for the Memories" implying that less than a year has passed in the series since "May the Best Pet Win". Many fans found it utterly ridiculous that three seasons' worth of episodes all happened to take place within such a short time frame.
The 1st and 3rd I think are misused as they are just refuting popular fan theories as opposed to offering alternative explanations (the implication may even have been unintentional). The 1st half of the second entry is valid if reworked, but the 2nd half (which I added before I realized the possible issue) I'm not sure if it's this or just Jossed as, while it shows how the fight went down, I'm not sure if it reveals it in a way that can be considered an explanation as it was incidental and plot-irrelevant as opposed to meant to explain a question about the setting.
Thoughts?
Edited by Ferot_DreadnaughtopenEdit war
Back in 2018, I added this to the YMMV page for Memoirs of a Geisha here
:
- Unintentionally Unsympathetic: Sayuri about three-quarters through the book. Though she starts off very sympathetic in her Trauma Conga Line and Break the Cutie moments, it becomes very clear that she's willing to do pretty much anything just to get with the Chairman. This includes screwing over her closest companions and showing no remorse for doing so. Values Dissonance also ensues once it's revealed that the Chairman was married the whole time.
The Lucky Cat added this subbullet to it:
- However, given the time period and constraints on women are the time, Sayuri is often forced into doing things she doesn't want to do, either by Mother or Mameha, it's somewhat understandable that she'd do anything she could to try and achieve some lasting happiness, as the only alternative is to be forced into a loveless relationship or spend the rest of her life as a maid. Her choices are to either suffer her entire life or screw over a couple of people to get what she wants, and it's shown she feels terrible about the way things broke down between her and Nobu, but she simply wanted to be with the man she loved and unfortunately couldn't pursue him freely until a lot of hardship is thrown her way.
Lucky Cat also added lines to the Unintentionally Sympathetic entry for Nobu. Originally the entry said that Nobu came off as justifiably angry because Sayuri led him on and betrayed him, while Lucky Cat's addition (which begins with "However") is that Nobu comes off as Entitled to Have You and tried to make Sayuri indebted to him.
Queen of Swords deleted the subbullet for Unintentionally Unsympathetic for being Natter and being a justifying edit.
Last December, Lucky Cat edited the Unintentionally Unsympathetic entry to this:
- Unintentionally Unsympathetic: Sayuri about three-quarters through the book. Though she starts off very sympathetic in her Trauma Conga Line and Break the Cutie moments, it becomes very clear that she's willing to do pretty much anything just to get with the Chairman, though like she herself points out, it's either that or be little more than an indentured servant to Mother for the rest of her life and much of her career was orchestrated by Mameha and The Chairman. Values Dissonance also ensues once it's revealed that the Chairman was married the whole time.
This seems like an edit war to me, and the new edit still seems justifying. Can I get some feedback from other Tropers?
Edited by iamconstantineopenNotSoWellIntentionedExtremist misuse?
After seeing a Not-So-Well-Intentioned Extremist example removed I question this example:
- Starlight Glimmer from My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. In "The Cutie Map – Part 1" and "Part 2", she rules over a town where she collects the villagers' Cutie Marks, which removes their individual special talents — sometimes taking them forcefully, then brainwashing the ponies into accepting their place in her kid-friendly Harrison Bergeron cult. Ostensibly, Starlight does this because she believes true friendship can only come through perfect equality, which in turn is only possible when everyone is equally (in)competent. But she retains her own considerable talent for magic, suggesting that she's really more interested in power than in equality. When called out on this hypocrisy, Starlight claims that it was necessary, because her own magic is needed to equalize everyone else. It's debatable whether she actually believes this, or is just covering her ass. And then Starlight reveals her past in "The Cutie Re-Mark – Part 2'': she was heartbroken when her childhood friend, Sunburst, earned his Cutie Mark and moved away to pursue his special talent in magic, leaving Starlight behind as a result. Because of that, she blamed Cutie Marks for what happened between her and Sunburst and became a cult leader just to ensure that any other friends she made would never be taken away by their Cutie Marks and leave her behind again. She possibly straddles the line between this trope and Well-Intentioned Extremist, depending on how much she believes her own lies — a point the show is ambiguous about.
I'm fairly sure she was supposed to genuinely well-intentioned, the issues being weak writing as opposed to intent, for the following:
- She's genuinely remorseful and becomes The Atoner after seeing the consequences of her actions and learning a better way. A NSWIE would be too selfish to ever accept such.
- "Re-Mark" shows Starlight sincerely believed her rhetoric.
- She's Easily Forgiven by said village which wouldn't have happened if she were meant to be as unsympathetic as NSWID is meant to imply.
- "She possibly straddles the line" sounds like Weasel Words.
This sounds more like Secretly Selfish which I believe is different from NSWIE in that the character is still presented sympathetically.
I'm also asking MLP cleanup
, but am asking here to as general question about how to separate genuine Well-Intentioned Extremist going too far and losing sight of their goals from Not-So in the event of ambiguity.
My impression is that if they're capable of regretting their actions if seeing they're more harmful than good, that's the difference between genuinely well-intention and not-so.
Edited by Ferot_DreadnaughtopenMasters of the Universe Revelation story being troped even though it is incomplete. Western Animation
I'm not intending to add more fuel to the many discussions going on regarding MOTUR and its "lying creator" and/or "woke" issues but rather to ask a question on the presentation of the story itself and how tvtropes should respond to it.
The MOTUR story was conceived, created, written, produced, edited, and scored to be a cohesive 10 episode mini-series. Although all 10 episodes are virtually complete, Netflix has decided to release the story in two five-episode binge bundles because... reasons.
So all we have is part one with a part two release date still TBD. As a result, the story page for the mini-series contains tropes, that in all honesty, can't be justified until the entire story has been told.
Just a cursory glance shows tropes like: Bad Guy Wins, Chuck Cunningham Syndrome, Death by Cameo, Decoy Protagonist, Defrosting Ice Queen, Demoted to Extra that only describe the context of episodes 1-5 and are very, very likely to change or even be invalidated when episodes 6-10 drop.
I understand the edit wars surrounding "lying creator" and the various "girl power / woke" issues have led to a call for page locking.
I'm wondering if the page lock, if implemented, should extend to include the main story and character pages until the entire story drops.
If not, is there another way to address making tropers aware that it's only a half-told story and there are inappropriate / unjustified tropes that one should think twice about adding at this point?
Otherwise it seems there's going to be a considerable amount of revising and re-editing of the trope list when the full story is told which renders the current tvtropes content somewhat pointless.
Edited by rva98014openNASCAR wonking
BNSF1995
has recently added two entries to wonk about how an episode of a certain show was delayed due to the 6 hour rain delay of Dayota 500 (one on the Trivia page of the episode in question
and one on the YMMV page of the show itself
). Both entries (moreso the latter) are rather long and very complain-y.
openDawalk86 is... worrisome
Dawalk 86 was released recently, and has some issues.
There's a bit of Zero Context:
- Eye Pop: Killer upon seeing Charlie and Itchy have returned.
- Black Face: "Little Dutch Mill" briefly features a black shoeshiner (or rather a shoe shaver-and-painter) who is designed in this manner.
The Black Face one also doubles as misuses, since it's a black character who looks like that. Racist old trope, but not this racist old trope.
Then there's Word Cruft (bolded part):
- Color Failure:In "Little Black Sambo", the titular character turns white with fright upon encountering a tiger, not noticing at first that there's a real one behind him as his dog tries to warn him.
- The Dorothy from ''Dorothy Meets Ozma of Oz". Dorothy's skirt billows from the front up to her thighs when there seems to be an earthquake in the cave.
Finally, there's a whole lot this kind of troping:
- Marilyn Maneuver: Dorothy's skirt billows from the front up to her thighs when there seems to be an earthquake in the cave. [This is a shoehorn, that seems to be here only so Dawalk can write about an underage child's thighs. The scene is HERE
and doesn't qualify, in my opinion.]
- Panty Shot: Dorothy, whose skirt billows up from behind and gives a white panty peek as she and Billina flee from the Wheelers.
(I forced myself to look this up. HERE
is the so-called panty-shot. It's not really a panty-shot as much as it's just panties being briefly visible, and it indicates that Dawalk just wanted to write about a child's panties.)
In itself not a problem that someone tropes those things as long as they're done correctly. Still, even disregarding that "Dorothy, whose skirt billows up" should read "Dorothy's skirt billows up", I'm just not sure that this is an intentional example of the trope. Also, Dawalks seems eager to trope panty shots, and again, it could just be an innocent interest so I don't want to assume. But it seems, well, one-handed. So to speak. And it seems as if he's looking for any reason to write about children's panties.
EDIT: Also, I've gone through all his post-release edits, and these are his basic trends:
- Posting Shes Got Legs every time a woman's legs are at all visible, regardless of whether it's meant to be sexy or just is a couple of legs existing.
- Posting Marilyn Maneuver every time a skirt lifts a bit for any reason.
- Calling every glimpse of visible panties a Panty Shot.
openNo Title
Troper Curiousice
edited Ambiguously Gay
to change the pronouns on the trope description and inserted some lines that imply deliberate lesbian erasure (when the first example, posted by myself as a queer woman, was clearly meant to be a hypothetical case not meant to speak for all instances of this trope, and the page itself has plenty of female examples). The edits strike me as Righting Great Wrongs. A bunch of their
other
edits
also have elements of editorializing when it comes to LGBT issues as well. Nothing inherently wrong with that, but not in line with troper etiquette on style conventions of neutrality, and the edit reasons are either lacking or quarrelsome.

I initially brought this up in the Complaining thread, but upon further investigation of the culprit's edit history, it was deemed mod attention may be warrented.
Galdodon 99 made some weird edits to YMMV.Paper Mario The Origami King earlier today.
And
I expanded the spoiler in the second part myself, but aside from their carelessness or lack of respect for spoiling, other red flags include the memetic mutation being a triple bullet point, and frankly I've never seen that meme around as a meme at least in the relatively decent portions of the internet, and the pothole to a Darth Wiki work and reference to a game that has at no point even been hinted to being planned in the Pandering to the Base.
They also added a justifying edit to another entry, I'll just remove that myself when I'm not on mobile.
After making that initial post, it was observed that they had made edits pertaining to the Villain Army, an unpublished work on Darth Wiki, and Paper Jam 2, which as of yet has not even been teased by any development staff, on other pages as well. This whole thing feels like another episode of the Tropers Obsessed with Works that Don't Exist show.