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:
openAbout the Elden Ring cut content
I've noticed that the Elden Ring pages make liberal use of the cut content that was data mined from the game files, there's even a section on the character page dedicated to the cut characters.
This makes some sense, as some of them help to understand the characters and mysteries of the game, and there is the possibility that they were cut out to save them for later content, such as St. Trina's questline. However, other information seems to contradict what is known, such as a cut dialogue in which Morgott refers to himself as Elden Lord, something that is impossible.
Furthermore, this information is presented as factually correct, although we do not know if this is the case. Bernahl's maiden is mentioned in his folder but is never mentioned in the base game and was apparently cut very early in development, as she was only mentioned in the Japanese version. It's commonly agreed that it was the merchants who summoned the Frenzied Flame in retaliation for being persecuted by the Golden Order, but this is only known thanks to Kalé's questline, which was cut and is not mentioned anywhere else in the game, in fact, Shabriri's Woe suggests that it was Shabriri himself who summoned the Frenzied Flame.
My point with this is not to argue whether everything I mentioned is true or not, what I want to discuss is whether it is right to use content that the creator has decided not to include in the final product and present it as valid, even if we don't know if it is still canon.
I think we should treat all information that is not in the final game as non-canon until the creator releases more content.
Edited by SoyValdo7openWeird Edit Removal Reason Western Animation
On YMMV.Dexters Laboratory Walt K removed this entry
- Self-Fanservice:
- Dexter and Mandark get a lot of this in fanart.
- Dee Dee gets her fair share of this, especially when most artists think she'll take after her mom. It doesn't help that Dexter once described Dee Dee as "her hips a bit meaty".
they removed it
with the edit reason "inappropriate" (presumably meaning "sexualizing characters from a children’s series is inappropriate")
Whether you agree with them or not, YMMV is just troping Audience Reactions, and we’ve had other Self-Fanservice entries from kids shows. Even if it is "inappropriate" we’re just troping what fans believe. Is this ok, or should I add it back?
openProblematic/insulting edits.
Sola 001 made these edits to Anvilicious under YMMV.Star Trek Picard:
- Added to portrayal of the Confederation "much like contemporary First World countries and how they built themselves upon the exploitation of Global South and oppression of anyone who is different or dare to dissident" and "just like how USA still celebrates Independence Day and Thanksgiving despite the historical genocide and continued oppression they commited against natives of the Land."
- Changed "climate change" to "climate crisis" (wouldn't see this as a big issue if not for the other stuff).
- Replaced "if you don't know or don't care about American political issues, this episode may come off as confusing or uninteresting" with "if you don't know or don't care about basic human rights, this episode may come off as triggering and offensive to fragile and selfish snowflakes who is crying as they watched this". (The old version seems suspect in retrospect, but this edit is directly insulting audiences.)
I intend to revert. Any objections or anything to deal with first?
openUnilateral trope page change
DavidJohnsonVG
changed all the example folders for the trope T-Word Euphemism to themed names
, so "Anime & Manga" becomes "The A and M Words", Comic Books becomes "The CB Words" and so on, which in my opinion makes the page harder to read. It also doesn't entirely work since some categories start with the same letter, so he includes a second letter which seems to go against the trope itself. Should I just revert it?
openWeird reorganization on What an Idiot!.Saw Film
Recently, Ansongc2000 has done a reorganization process for What an Idiot!.Saw that I find rather weird. To wit, not long beforehand, I had created folders for each film to concur with the first "In General" entry added to the page, especially as some of the film sections were already quite long by then. Then Ansongc walked in and added a decent bunch of new examples (while also removing or rearranging a few existing ones without much explanation other than them being "bad") for the first seven films, while also grouping them in a single folder and leaving Jigsaw and Spiral with their respective folders; they also removed the "Series-wide" and "By movie" headers I added to split the "In General" folder and the movie-specific ones in their own parts. In fact, they relegated the "By movie" name to the new folder for the first seven movies, even though it doesn't make sense when put alongside the Jigsaw and Spiral folders with their respective films' titles.
Even if grouping the movies by major storyline can be reasoned because of Jigsaw and Spiral having time gaps with both the first seven consecutive films and each other, it leaves a somewhat disproportioned and confusing structure for me, especially as plenty of the first seven movies' sections are now as long as the ones that used to be the longest before Ansongc's edits (not to mention to aforementioned issue with the "By movie" name). Even though I did the previous structure myself, I honestly prefer that structure for a movie series' What an Idiot! page over the page's current one.
By the way, I informed Ansongc about this query via private message.
Edited by Inky100resolved JakeStoneArtist
(See here
for earlier query on the troper)
I didn't wanna necro that query, but today, they sent me a strongly-worded PM attacking the writers as well as self-promoting ideas they made on their deviantart account.
Edited by YuriHaru567openOppenheimer's YMMV page, "Barbenheimer", and Japanese response
Oppenheimer's YMMV page is getting coverage of certain issues regarding the whole "Barbenheimer" fandom crossover with the Barbie film, specifically how Japanese audiences don't think it's as funny considering their Nuclear Weapons Taboo. The Mis-blamed entries I think should be cut because not only am I not sure who is supposed to be "in the wrong", I don't think it's particularly relevant to the actual movie (it's a meme that only barely touches the actual Oppenheimer film itself), but the Americans Hate Tingle entry is more vague... I don't think the Barbenheimer meme is really relevant, but the movie does touch on understandably touchy topics; is there any particular hangups Japanese audiences have with the movie on its own terms beyond its overall subject matter?
resolved The Flash AudienceAlienatingPremise Issue
I'd like to report an edit war that's occurred in the YMMV page for The Flash (2023) over whether it qualifies for Audience-Alienating Premise. On January 28, Link Mario Samus removed the entry on the grounds that he felt it came across more as a Tainted by the Preview (due to the details mentioned having primarily more to do with meta and behind the scenes stuff than the actual premise itself). On January 29, Estvyk added it back under the claim that it's simply a case of Audience-Alienating Premise overlapping with Tainted by the Preview. Finally, on February 14, Link Mario Samus removed it again with an edit reason that could be interpreted as rude despite not necessarily being wrong. While I'll concede that I don't know if any discussion occurred between them via PM before or after any of this, I'm nonetheless reporting this edit war so that they can have the chance to come here to present their case.
resolved Technology Marches On example seems invalid
Minor spoilers for the movie ahoy.
On the Hard Candy Trivia page, it says:
"Technology Marches On: Hayley's inability to find porn in Jeff's apartment is seen as damning evidence. Today, she would just assume he watched it online."
Doesn't anyone reading this think "wait a minute?!". The movie is clearly set in the present day (2005 at the time). We see Hayley searching his unlocked computer. She then says to him (according to the shooting script and I remember her saying it in a very similar fashion in the movie itself):
So, obviously she thinks he can download his illicit material online, as anyone would logically presume he could in the well-into-the-internet-era of 2005. She finds a disc in the safe marked "Stuff" which highly implies that's precisely what he's hidden. There may also be physically printed photos of young girls which he took himself, but that's immaterial here. He also could have very well just "enjoyed" the material he found online without downloading it as a private stash. The point is, the second sentence of the example looks to be invalidated, thus invalidating the entire entry. There's no technology marching on here, it would play out exactly the same if the movie was to be released today (whether the safe's illegal material is stored on a CD, an SD card or whatever). Even if he wanted to encrypt it on his computer, that would have been about as feasible back then as today (read: pretty damn feasible), and the police (or Hayley) would still throw resources at it to decrypt it as actionable evidence.
Am I correct here? Or am I missing something?
Edited by FlashStepsopenDisagreement about the Awesome/BobChipman page, don't want to risk an Edit War Web Original
Not too long ago, a troper called 309216364 (is that the ID of an already-banned troper or something?) deleted the single biggest entry on this page, about Bob's massive "Really That Bad" video series on Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, which I will post here:
- During Part 1 of his Really That Bad analysis of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Bob makes a comparison between the narrative structures of The Avengers (2012) and Batman V. Superman stripped of all but their most basic elements that underlines one of the main reasons the former succeeded where the latter failed: Avengers is straightforward, easy to understand and can be enjoyed without prior knowledge of the source comics or the preceding films because it doesn't lean on them to work as a narrative with its single Sequel Hook a post-credits shot of the Greater-Scope Villain, while BvS is a disjointed, convoluted mess that doesn't follow an understandable through-line narrative, paradoxically wants to differentiate itself from the source comics yet relies heavily on them for most of its emotional weight to carry and desperately tries to set up future films through gratuitous in-universe viewings of preview trailers. And he does all of this while giving every person or object with enough plot relevance a funny nickname, with plenty of Actor Allusions and character comparisons to go around.
- The entirety of his "Batman V. Superman" Really That Bad analysis. Chipman delivers his critique in a mature respectful tone, without insulting the filmmakers personally, and goes into detail acknowledging and addressing common arguments in defense of the film.
- Two of the best things he does is to effectively and succinctly fix the movie's greatest problems.
- The first being the 'Diana/Wonder Woman watching the teaser trailer for the Justice League scene', wherein Bob proposes letting Batman, the normal human who is discovering a lot of this new information for the first time, and whose perspective the audience has been following the entire movie, be the one to discover the existence of more metahumans. This not only gives the scene greater suspense and dramatic weight and a greater impetus for Batman to fight a perceived threat like Superman, it also gives a fantastic reason why Diana never showed up for a hundred years and was breaking into Lex Luthor's drives: She was helping cover up the existence of metahumans (and her secretive race) from people like Luthor.
- The second is the entire 'conflict' of the movie being forced and contrived and way too repetitive by the time the two people in the 'V' actually get down to versus-ing each other. Bob fixes the movie without any drastic overhaul or extensive retooling with two simple words: No Batman. The plot remains the same, with all the conspiratorial machinations and the populace distrusting Superman kept intact, but transfer all of Batman's actions and motivations to Luthor, thereby making Luthor a sympathetic, justified, heroic counterpoint to the detached, reluctant, destructive Superman, which would have greater thematic resonance and streamline the plot. For an added bonus, Bob suggests keeping Ben Affleck, with all his likability and charisma and on-the-ground heroism, as Luthor, which would provide even greater metanarrative implications and make the plot more compelling.
- To make what can only be described as a near definitive 3-part, four hour critique about Dawn of Justice, all the while maintaining his normal work responsibilities, is a feat of dedication that can only really be described as impressive.
As well as forgetting to delete the next paragraph that followed on from that (an observation about Bob possibly doing a "Really That Good" series on The Lord of the Rings) and leaving it orphaned, his reason for deleting the entire segment basically came down to "I don't think it's awesome and I don't like Bob". His cited reason from the History page:
Apart from the fact that this reason for removing the entry is entirely subjective (I thought "Really That Bad" was awesome, and I'm not even the one who wrote the original entry), it's also blatantly incorrect- there are several segments in Bob's series where he goes out of his way to be fair to the film and admit the things it did well and the ways it could have worked (even though it didn't), so the troper's claim that "he is entirely biased against the film in all aspects" suggests he edited it solely because of He Panned It Now He Sucks.
I could have just restored the edit myself, but I'm quite certain the guy will just delete it again, triggering an edit war situation. And since the last time I got close to an edit war I nearly got myself permanently banned, I'm not even going to get close to the possibility of it happening again. So I'm hoping there's some way to get a 3rd party judgement on this?
Edited by ArcaneAzmadiresolved There's something wrong with MagnificentBastard.WesternAnimation and MagnificentBastard.ComicBooks
Note: I already posted about this in the bug query
, but I didn't get any response, so I'm reposting it here in the hope that it will be noticed by someone and also made a few changes to the post.
A few days ago, the Sandboxes which are used to make changes MagnificentBastard.Western Animation and MagnificentBastard.Comic Books were swapped to their respective pages in order to make edits to them because they are locked.
However, it seems like something's wrong with the pages, as the changes shown within the edit history aren't reflected in the page source, causing there to be no changes to the pages themselves. For instance, an Error on MagnificentBastard.Western Animation that caused it's subpages to not be indexed is repeatedly
shown to
be fixed
in the edit history, but the Error is still on the main page itself.
From checking the history of these page, it seems like the issue started on December 17th, 2023 for the Comic Books page and on December 31st, 2023 for the Western Animation page.
If anybody notices other pages with the same problem, please leave them in the comment section. Furthermore, if somebody has an idea on what's causing the glitches to occur and/or how to solve this problem, please mention it in the comments so this issue can be resolved.
Edit: Moving this back to query bugs
Edited by jlvs200sopenCowboy Bebop At His Computer
Chris DV seems to be misunderstanding the trope Cowboy BeBop at His Computer as he's claiming that because Sophia Bush thought a plotline that was filmed but not used made it into the final version of a One Tree Hill episode that it qualifies for this trope. I explained that this trope is meant for examples of people outside a fictional work itself getting details wrong about it, not actors slightly misremembering things about it(and he claimed it was "misinformation" when it wasn't) I didn't see any examples like his on the trope page itself under Live-Action TV or anywhere else so I removed the bit on the OTH YMMV page about Sophia but kept in the bit about the show's fan-wiki being inaccurate(as i'm unsure if fan-wikis being inaccurate would be an example of this trope or not, that seems like more of a grey area but I left it in just in case).
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Trivia.OneTreeHill&page=8
openOverly negative editor?
On March 3rd, {{Tropers/2HeadedMoonOctopus}} added an entry for the game Jujutsu Kaisen: Cursed Clash to Video Game Generations: Seventh Onwards, and since then, particularly earlier today, has been serial tweaking the entry to add more and more negativity to it. Given the Horrible namespace, this by itself isn't overly unusual, but I recognized the name, because in December, the same user made a handful of edits to VideoGame.Star Wars Jar Jars Journey Adventure Book which were also negative in nature, including creating a YMMV page that is almost nothing but negativity.
This could just be me overreacting, but if this is a pattern, it might be worth addressing before it goes any further. From a cursory glance at their recent edit history, they seem to have spread some negativity regarding Cursed Clash to some other JJK related pages, and I also found a handful of negative edits to other controversial works like YMMV.Lady Ballers and YMMV.Willys Chocolate Experience.
Edited by JankyKongresolved Possible Word Cruft? Videogame
I attempted to ask this in the "Is this Word Cruft?" thread
, but haven't gotten a response.
This was recently added to YMMV.Mario Kart 8:
- Let’s face it, even if you hadn’t seen the Prefix Leak or didn’t know it was in Tour, you knew Wii Rainbow Road would be the final track of the Booster Course Pass, so it wasn’t even a slight surprise upon its reveal.
While it's not wrong, as others (including myself) were indeed able to predict the course, it just comes of as crufty to me. What should I do?
Edited by ChillyBeanBAMresolved Fic author wants page deleted
The contents of Fanfic.Stormy Bubbles got replaced with the fic's author stating she wants the page deleted since the fic has been deleted.
I know this is a violation of The Fic May Be Yours, but the Trope Page Is Ours but how do I go about this myself?
openTroper with odd issue in Forensic Files
In The Gallbladder seems to take a strange umbrage with the edits on the Forensic Files page, having deleted a large portion of the page without valid reason.
Thankfully, another user restored all of the deleted edits due to it being crucial to the show and certain episodes, but they've done this before, even deleting examples that were mentioned in-universe,
which of course I cannot re-add myself without being accused of edit warring.
resolved WyDuUDuWatUDu = Shaggadelllicc?
I've noticed that Wy Du U Du Wat U Du (who began editing in 2023
) has edited pages on quite a few of the same works that Shaggadelllicc (who was suspended in 2022
) has. Though, admittedly, that isn't enough by itself, the fact that the former troper re-added a Status Quo Is God example about Lisa being a brainy outcast again (albeit rewritten, though still having the same message) that the latter first added on this page
(and it had been cut for shoehorned complaining) is quite suspicious.
open Dvaderstarlord5 Edit War
I've come to report an edit war from Dvaderstarlord 5. On the Live Action TV page for Franchise Original Sin, they removed the header for Supernatural from the examples from said show while also adding in some examples related to Stranger Things. I added the header for the Supernatural examples back so as to maintain accuracy as to which show the examples related to. However, in very recent times, he's deleted the Supernatural header again for (yet again) undisclosed reasons (despite the examples under this now twice deleted header very clearly applying to Supernatural and not having Jack to do with Stranger Things). And since I was the one who'd previously restored the header the last time, I can't do it this time without edit warring myself.
Edited by SimbafanA1openQuestionable edit. Live Action TV
These two entries were recently posted on YMMV.Young Sheldon by user "marshenwhale".
1) Under Unintentionally Sympathetic:
- Sheldon throughout the entire show could be considered this, since he clearly is on the spectrum but the show never directly acknowledges this or delves into it, all of the times where he acts stuck up or talks down to his family for his intelligence, they treat him like a kid who is just being bratty, but since he is neurodivergent, it means his parents never handle his behavior correctly. This is probably at it's worst in "An Entrepreneurialist and a Swat on the Bottom" where Sheldon is portrayed as being completely in the wrong for calling Meemaw selfish and trying to run away to see a lecture when nobody will take him, but the fact is that Sheldon literally does not understand why what he is doing is wrong considering he doesn't read social cues properly, and is shown to not understand when he is hurting people's feelings because from his perspective, he's just stating facts. So Meemaw spanking him and him later getting grounded makes all of the adults in his life look like morons since they have clearly seen by this point that Sheldon doesn't think in a typical way and just choose to ignore it.
2)Under Unintentionally Unsympathetic:
- Going off the point above in Unintentionally Sympathetic, basically the entire family in most of their conflicts with Sheldon since they all fail to recognize that he isn't neurotypical. This doesn't apply to Georgie since he rarely fights with Sheldon, but it does make George, Mary, and Meemaw all look really dumb. You could argue that this is a result of Mary being very religious and therefore not being very educated on what the spectrum is, but considering the show takes place over multiple years you'd think at some point one of the adults in Sheldon's life would wonder if it applied to him. Worst of all, this even makes Missy look really bad, because as a child growing up in the 80s and 90s, she most definitely would have learned what someone being neurodivergent was at some point but never even brings it up, which causes all of her dislike towards Sheldon to make her look like a total jerk instead of just a child lashing out at being the The Un-Favourite, which is clearly what the writers were going for.
I have some issues with this. For one, while hinted at in both The Big Bang Theory and Young Sheldon, Sheldon has never been confirmed to be neurodivergent, not even by Word of God, who blatantly refuse to answer definitively. It wouldn't be much of a stretch to say he is, but there's no official confirmation.
Also, the post reads like the poster has a bit of a bias. Neurodivergent or not, some of the shit Sheldon pulls is uncalled for and would reasonably make most people angry. When I watched "An Entrepreneurialist and a Swat on the Bottom", I was under the impression that Sheldon knew what he was doing was wrong but did it anyway because his needs are more important to him than everyone else and he acts like that quite often in both shows.
Should this stay or not? Or should it be re-written? I'll let the tropers decide since this is YMMV and I am not the biggest Sheldon Cooper fan so I'm likely biased in My own way.

So this is kind of a very-weird, very-major hot button issue (outside of this site anyway), but I feel like it should be addressed.
A few people have added to/altered a Fandom Rivalry entry on Illymation's YMMV page about recent controversy she's going through in regards to beef with another channel. The entry goes more in depth, but basically the issue is about a video they made, which spiralled out of control when she told her Tumblr followers to flag the video.
I'm worried about this for a couple reasons—number one being that a lot of what people currently know about the issue is...pretty grossly exaggerated. The complaint that she tried to deplatform TBYS, which first came from the latter himself, isn't very trustworthy; Illy's Tumblr account apparently had only around 100 views before it was deleted (given the lack of tags in her name
, I think that's pretty believable), and the way the strike system works doesn't account for the sheer number of reports, just judgment on YouTube's part after they see the issue; assuming he doesn't have any strikes already, they would just give him a warning.
There's a lot of other background that I don't want to address for obvious reasons, but the second issue is mainly about how recent this drama is; I know there's no hard-and-fast rule about No Recent Examples, Please! for Fandom Rivalry, but should it apply here? Mainly asking because we're still probably missing a lot of the full context for what precisely happened.
Just trying to give my two cents based on what I've seen/researched. I know I might sound biased (and I'd add more of the background if I knew for sure that it wouldn't add fuel to the fire), but I genuinely think the entry is problematic.
Edited by Coachpill