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:
openPotential Fake Entry
Found this entry on "https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheProductionCurse
", think that it is very likely to be fake because 1) there is a playwright called Lawrence Wright but his earliest play dates to 2005 2) no evidence I can find online of a play called "On With the Show" written by a Lawrence Wright 3) Entry itself reads too much like a creepypasta anyway.
"When Lawrence Wright put his thirteenth play on the stage in 1938 titled On With The Show, he avoided prompting fear among traditionally superstitious actors by saying that it was actually his fourteenth. The fates now thwarted, he went ahead. First, the theatre burnt down and all the props were destroyed. On the replacement smaller pavilion one musician slipped and sprained his wrist while two others were rushed away with gastric troubles. A main character lost his voice while another had to have all his teeth pulled out, leaving him helpless throughout the run. A dancer was ordered to take complete rest, two members of the chorus suffered from sprained ankles and a separate dancer fell upstairs and hurt her leg. The manager collapsed one day while the wardrobe organiser fell and sprained her arm. It was then discovered that there were thirteen people in the cast, thirteen musicians in the band and thirteen songs in the show."
open Very Suspicous Page
Analysis.Jason And The Argonauts was just created today and... it's nothing but a rhetorical question by troper pedro. I'm aware there's already a thread
for them specifically, which just leaves the page itself. I think it definitely needs to get cut.
Migrated to Chloe Jessica!
openProblematic entry
the following entry on Funny.The Legend Of Zelda Breath Of The Wild rubs me the wrong way:
- In fact, getting the Gerudo clothes to sneak into town is hilarious in itself. For starters, the "Vai" is clearly actually a voe, but Link goes along with it for the sake of the mission. When Link is given the rather revealing outfit, he at first looks embarrassed, but after the "Vai" gives him a few compliments, he looks bashful but pleased... And then the wind blows off the "Vai"'s mask, revealing their true face, resulting in a Face Palm from Link.
note that Vai translates as woman and Voe translates as man.
this entry comes off as extremely transphobic to me. the person in question expresses exclusively as female and is never seen expressing any masculine traits. it's noted on the YMMV page that the whole sequence is controversial because of its questionable portrayal of a possibly trans individual. people can find whatever they want funny, of course; it's not like you can choose what you laugh at. but the way this is worded implies that because the person wasn't assigned female at birth, they aren't female. this strikes me as a very mean-spirited jab at non-passing trans people, and i know the wiki is better than that.
openFridge brilliance that isn't a fridge.
RafKen593
changed the first Fridge Brilliance on Animator vs. Animation to something that isn't really a fridge but a simple fact:
"Of course the Chosen One would defeat anyone who gets in his way."
It used to make sense before because it used to be an Harry Potter reference (Of course the Chosen One would eventually triumph over the Dark Lord) and I tried to tell him that what he put wasn't a Fridge but he wasn't intersted in changing it back or asking on Ask The Tropers to see if it is really a Fridge, so I'm asking myself now: Does the first Fridge of this page count as a Fridge ?
openIssues with Franchise/Creator/Genre Killer
Alright I'm kind of new here (having made few edits and having not posted in the forums) and this is my first ATT query, so forgive me if this isn't the right place or I am not the right person to be asking this, or if I am using incorrect formatting.
I have been half-paying attention to some of the cleanup threads of problematic tropes and pages, both Short-Term and Long-Term. It was brought up [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=15523303630A12937700&page=12#comment-283
here] that the Genre Killer trope may be in need of a cleanup effort.
Looking at the trope right now, I am somewhat inclined to agree. While the description does say that a genre can be brought back from the dead, I agree that some of the examples of killed-off "genres" are a bit narrow, such as "live-action Dr. Seuss movies" or ""kid uses super-science and gadgets to deal with everyday life" cartoons," and I also agree that some examples don't define which work, if any, is the Killer, with examples including non-work related Killers such as quiz shows being killed off by a major scandal and not a specific failure, or Gangsta Rap being killed off by the murders of Tupac Shakur and The Notorious B.I.G.. (I have admittedly made a questionable and possibly invalid edit myself to the Music page describing how an album's success killed off the success of a completely different genre, so I apologize for that.)
The reason I bring this up here rather than in the thread where this was originally brought up is because upon further inspection, I believe the other Killer tropes to have their own issues. Creator Killer has examples (such as Milli Vanilli) describing careers destroyed by scandals rather than works (I believe if I am correct that Role-Ending Misdemeanor covers that) or some examples that outright mention a Career Resurrection. Franchise Killer, meanwhile, has problems with examples describing multiple Killers despite the trope description and Laconic stating that only one film can be a Killer, along with some other questionable examples in general (such as one directly quoted as describing the death of "the whole idea of the "peace, love and music" late-'60s outdoor rock festival that Monterey had pioneered and Woodstock made legendary," which isn't a franchise at all.)
Am I correct in assuming that these tropes may be in need of a cleanup? Or are there bigger issues with the tropes that would require more serious action?
openAre FlameBait tropes allowed on Dethroning Moments of Suck?
Dethroning Moment of Suck itself is Flame Bait, some moments include Flame Bait tropes, and none of the guidelines on the main page forbid examples from including Flame Bait tropes, so I'm not sure.
open Troper possibly adding YMMV to her own work
I noticed that PrincessPandaTrope added a trope entry
where she wrote about the art of GothNebula in the first person, saying "Most of my Amy Rose's and Blaze the Cat's alternate outfits" bare the midriff.
This indicates that she is GothNebula. Not a problem in itself, of course; adding tropes to your own creator page is allowed. But she's been adding YMMV tropes to the same creator's page, so we need an IP check, is what I'm saying.
EDIT: Pierpitcher pointed out, correctly, that since GothNebula has no account, an IP check won't help much. Ridiculous of me not to realize that myself, really...
Edited by MichaelKatsuroopenPaper Mario Origami King Development Speculation Videogame
So in Paper Mario The Origami King's Trivia page, I wrote this.
Troubled Production: Based on what can be inferred from interviews and clues from the game itself, there's a case to be made that during the game's development, there was quite a bit of friction between Intelligent Systems and Kensuke Tanabe.
- As mentioned above in Executive Meddling, the development staff was not allowed to create original characters based on mainline races in the Mario cast, as was possible in the first two games. Kensuke Tanabe enforced this based off of Shigeru Miyamoto's one time expression that he thought that the Paper Mario series was deviating too far from his vision of what Super Mario Bros games should be like. Tanabe took this to heart... by shutting down any and all elements that deviated from standard Mario fare that weren't completely different in the first place. This is in spite of Miyamoto having since expressed that he doesn't want the Super Mario Bros. franchise to become stagnant by only using tropes and characters that audiences are familiar with.
- Intelligent Systems were vehemently opposed to Tanabe's extremely strict meddling on how characters were allowed to be presented in the game, despite not being able to challenge the ruling. So instead they resorted to walking around the rule as much as possible. Olivia insisting on referring to Bob-Omb as Bobby, along with the Legion of Stationery all having wildly exaggerated personalities to make up for any lack of visual detail beyond each being an Animate Inanimate Object are just a few examples of the developers trying to skirt past this rule.
It was shot down as Speculative Troping, and while I want to bring attention to some of the details that I found regarding Origami King's development, I also don't want to break any wiki rules. So I asked the person who erased it if I should put this in the game's WMG page instead. He told me that he thought it was frowned upon, and that I should ask here before doing anything else.
Should this be placed on the game's WMG page as a "meta" (theory outside of the game's lore) tab, somewhere else entirely, or does this sort of stuff have no place on TV Tropes?
Edited by MetroidPeteropenDarkhorse misuse?
I suspect these examples from EnsembleDarkhorse.Pokemon are to major characters/intended to be popular to count.
- Ash's Greninja. His species was already quite popular to begin with. But Ash's one gained further admiration. He has a die-hard attitude of being dedicated to his training, only choosing a trainer who could help him get stronger, the mysterious prophecy foretelling greatness for Greninja and Ash. He then went on to become the Breakout Character, where the XY&Z arc gave him the pseudo-Mega Evolution form as a result of synchronizing with Ash, and became Ash's most focused Pokémon for a while. That being said, his popularity took a critical hit following his infamous defeat at the hands of Alain's Charizard. Even so it is still one of the most often-requested Pokémon to make a comeback.
- Ash's Rowlet quickly earned a fan base due to it's Adorkable, dozy personality, along with avoiding the usual fate of comic relief Pokemon by being one of Ash's most effective in battle throughout early Alola.
- Ash's Torracat. It already got attention when it first appeared in the trailer as a Litten, before the series had even premiered. While Litten in general are already quite popular due to their grumpy attitudes, Ash's Litten had further appeal by adding in a Hot-Blooded nature and a tendency to burn Ash much like his past fire-types. Then its character got really fleshed out with it trying to look after the elderly Stoutland who ended up passing away. By the time Litten joins Ash's team it already had a special place in the fans' hearts.
- Ash's Meltan, for both being a cute little powerhouse, being Ash's first Mythical Pokemon, having a fun dynamic with Rowlet, and evolving into the gargantuan Melmetal.
- Just to complete the Alola team, Ash's Lycanroc fits the bill as well for not only being a big loveable mutt but serving as Ash's main powerhouse throughout Sun and Moon, so much it ultimately wins Ash his first ever games-based Pokemon league. Such a bone throw naturally rose Lycanroc up a good deal among Ash's roster.
- Ash's Dragonite and Gengar were both very unexpected catches, to say the least, both because they were long-requested Pokémon fans wanted on his roster and because they were caught at the start of the Journeys series despite being fully-evolved powerhouses. Dragonite is a total cuddlebug with enormous battle prowess while Gengar is Ash's first-ever Ghost-type, so naturally they enjoy a lot of popularity.
- Continuing Journeys ' trend of giving Ash long-requested teammates, his Riolu quickly became a fan-favorite too. Ash's bond with it brings back the plot element of Ash being able to wield aura, while Riolu itself is a very battle-oriented Pokémon that due to its' inexperience can be used to give Ash feasible challenges without underselling Ash's own prowess as a trainer.
Greninja was effectively main character of Ash's Kalos team that series, and fro m the species the creators correctly predicted would become a Breakout Character. This seems too major to count.
Rowlet, Torracat, Meltan, and Lycanroc are the near entity of Ash team witch seems too major to count. Meltan was specially to promote the new Mon in the games. Lycanroc might count.
Dragonite, Gengar, and Riolu were the entity of Ash team when they achieved their popularity. Gengar and Riolu "giving Ash long-requested teammates" means they were supposed to be popular for such. Dragonite might count.
I've long wonder if any of Ash's team (save Charizard who codified the darkhorse traits) are too major characters to count as the seem like main characters. I'd make an exception for any of them minor enough to be Out of Focus / Put on a Bus in-series as opposed to the end of the season per the norm. Thoughts?
I asked Ensemble Darkhorse Cleanup
but was ignored.
open Paper Mario the Horror King Videogame
Can someone tell me why Paper Mario: the Origami King DOESN'T have its own Nightmare Fuel page? The game has a bunch of horrifying things that by all means SHOULD warrant its own Nightmare Fuel page, but for some reason it doesn't. (I think for some time it actually DID have it's own Nightmare fuel page, but now I can't find it.) Am I able to add it myself, or does someone else have to do it?
Edit: Wait, why can't I reply anymore?
Edited by SpideyopenAlphaBitch
I noticed in passing on the Is This An Example? thread that an observation was made that Alpha Bitch is always female. However, the trope description itself states 'almost always female' (confusingly, with a pothole to Always Female) and goes on to state that there are rare cases of Alpha Bastards. There is an existing redirect for Alpha Bastard (there are 21 links). The comment about the Alpha Bastard existing was added in 2012, so it's been around for a long time, but not as long as the trope itself has existed.
So, is it an Always Female trope or is it definitely the case that rare Alpha Bastard examples can indeed exist?
openLost Aesop questions
I looked over Lost Aesop and found many examples that make me question the trope.
- "One Bad Apple" is so clumsy with its intended messages of "standing up to a bully makes you a bully as well" and "telling an adult is the solution to being bullied" that it makes one wonder if some of the cast or crew secretly disagreed with them. In the climax of the episode, almost immediately after the Crusader's epiphany that they should have told an adult, Diamond Tiara and Silver Spoon pop up and begin bullying them right in front of Applejack who does nothing other than frown, effectively negating aesop number one. Then Babs Seed gets in their faces and intimidates them into leaping back in fear and landing in the mud, effectively solving the current bullying issue by standing up to them and negating aesop number two.
This is redundant with Broken Aesop, which applies to many other examples (also redundant with Clueless Aesop).
- "Lesson Zero": While the other ponies learn that they should take their friends' worries seriously even if they think the concern is trivial, Twilight Sparkle doesn't seem to have learned (or at least doesn't say she has learned) not to let trivial concerns get the better of her. On the other hand, the Aesop is mentioned alongside the former in their letter to Celestia, while not by Twilight herself, she is among those making it at the time, implying she agrees with it. It would explain however why the Aesop was repeated in Twilight's next spotlight episode, which she definitely gets the jist of that time.
Besides arguing with itself, the episode never intended that to be the episodes Aesop. "Indecisive Deconstruction" was cut in part for the same issue as it assumed a work was trying for X which isn't valid for non-YMMV.
My impression is that Lost Aesop is for when the Aesop is ignored or contradicted in later installments, but the Lost Aesop page is unclear and convoluted noting the trope is about the Aesop being unclear and convoluted which is not the case for this and many other examples. I was planning a cleanup because it looks like a catch all for complaining about mishandling of Aesops such the intended definition is unclear. Thoughts?
I also asked Aesop Cleanup
but was ignored.
openNightmare Face Web Original
Nightmare Face has a lot of examples from TV Tropes itself, which lists pages whose images fit the trope. The thing is, examples are not supposed to mention that they provide the page image. I already cleaned up a bunch of examples that had unnecessary "This example illustrates the show's Nightmare Fuel page", so do I delete all of the TV Tropes examples?
openUnintentional Deconstruction?
- BioShock 1 could be interpreted as a damning rebuttal to Atlas Shrugged and to the philosophies and attitudes behind Objectivism - without proper regulation, the Objectivist Gulch would become populated with Corrupt Corporate Executives and quickly turn into a Wretched Hive. Although creative lead Ken Levine has refused to comment. The whole franchise could be seen as a Deconstruction of the concept of utopia, as from what can be seen through the games, any attempt to create a perfect society is doomed from the start, as while a theoretical society can be made perfect, the people living within the society can't.
- Kung Fu Panda: Whether or not it was intentional, Tai Lung is one for the traditional Kung-Fu Hero that is exiled or imprisoned by his enemies and returns to claim what is his. The movie also deconstructs in Tai Lung's character the idea of The Chosen One, Master of All, and Roaring Rampage of Revenge. While Tai Lung was imprisoned by his father figure, it was for a good reason as Tai Lung would do anything to get the Dragon Scroll and attacked his mentor/father figure without mercy and showed he would go to extreme lengths to get what he wants. Tai Lung believed he was the chosen one due to his father figure raising him into becoming the best student from the temple. While in most Kung-Fu stories, he would be the chosen one, the nature of the Dragon Scroll renders that belief meaningless and indeed, anathema to the purpose of Kung-Fu. Being raised to crave outside validation for accomplishments was detrimental to Tai Lung's personal growth, who instead needed to look to himself rather than others. While Tai Lung was very much The Ace and a prodigy, learning 1,000 scrolls worth of techniques, he only looked to the physical and technical aspects of Kung-Fu and never focused on spiritual enlightenment or peace within himself. Lastly, while Tai Lung was let down by Shifu by not supporting Tai Lung in the ways that mattered most, and for leaving him to rot in prison for 20 years without trying to reach out to his son or helping him in a way that could have given Tai Lung a chance at redemption, Tai Lung had become so bitter and selfish that even when Shifu admits his own faults and apologizes, Tai Lung still ignores him and not only attacks Shifu but is also harming innocent people. While Shifu was at fault for some of the wrong that resulted, Tai Lung became a cold and brutal beast willing to destroy anyone and anything to get what he wanted.
I was wondering if Deconstruction, or other playing with tropes, have to be intentional. What if it's done by a writer who doesn't understand nor is trying to do it, but are trying to take a spin at it that winds up falling under such?
openNever Live It Down misuse?
NeverLiveItDown.Animated Films
- From the BIONICLE films:
- The very concept of the Turaga. Originally priest-like figures who served as village elders, leaders, guardians of old legends and secret histories, they also had abilities like limited control over elements, mask powers and staffs that doubled as tools or weapons, which helped them protect their people for a thousand years. The movies, in an effort to "humanize" the characters and simplify the franchise, took an overly literal approach to the word "elder" and portrayed Turaga as hunched-over, geriatric and nearly helpless, using their staves as walking sticks. Fridge Logic also kicks in when you realize they're not actually older than those around them, just more experienced. This portrayal even extended to the Rahaga from the third film. While weak and small compared to Toa warriors, they were meant to be very capable and agile — Turaga Vakama's original promo image even shows him sprinting. Since the movies though, Turaga were almost always seen as "elderly robots" and weaklings who avoided any action, rather than as capable but not Toa-level protectors.
- Sidorak was a capable warlord too preoccupied with conquest to realize his viceroy Roodaka was planning to betray him and that his Giant Spider troops feared rather than respected him. The film Web of Shadows, a heavily compressed adaptation of a year's worth of books and comics, focused solely on Sidorak's incompetent and clueless side, turning him into such a pathetic Memetic Loser that even the official writer himself would later adopt this portrayal and retconned Sidorak's earlier accomplishments, crediting them to Roodaka instead.
- Kiina from The Legend Reborn only yelled "Yoo-hoo!" a couple of times but fans would have you believe that's all she's ever done. The comics and books gave a completely different character to Kiina and explained away her movie behavior as merely a play she had put on because she realized her actual personality (a spiteful, short tempered and deeply cynical warrior) was insufferable. But apparently no one read the comics and books.
- Tuma from the same film went down in history as a laughably ineffective, 2nd rate villain who rivaled Sidorak in stupidity and had a giant ego with nothing to back it up, despite every other story material going way out of its way to portray him as a very competent and even somewhat relatable Tragic Villain. The film never touches on his deep backstory, showing him as a one dimensional oaf, and people only remember him for his self-given moniker of "Da mighty Tuma!"
Never Live It Down is about unfair exaggerations. If it had tangible effects/changes like described, this sounds more like Audience-Coloring Adaptation. Move?
I also asked Is this an example
.
openHelstrom editing conflict. Live Action TV
Alright, so there's a bit of an editing conflict going on with the Series.Helstrom page involving myself and a troper by the handle of alliterator. As of right now, Marvel TV is basically on its way out while Marvel Studios prepares their own series, and Helstrom is one of the last shows that the former group made. It's basically DOA with the showrunner gone, and Marvel noticeably have used absolutely no branding on their project, the latter of which is something that I pointed out. (The reasoning for this seems to be that they want to not associate Helstrom with their future shows and movies, but I don't think that that needs to be in the article.) I also pointed out that the series lacked this labeling supposedly due to horror themes, despite three Marvel projects based around horror (Moon Knight, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, and Blade) being actively developed with the Marvel Studios banner intact.
However, alliterator disagreed with that last part of the edit and excised it, saying that it had to do with a TV-MA rating which we don't even know that the show has — not that TV-MA stopped any of the Netflix shows from getting the Marvel label. I initially reinstated the edit with an explanation. Here's how it read before the bold part was cut out:
"Curiously, the series has absolutely no Marvel branding associated with it in any advertising, whereas the same was not true for any prior Marvel TV productions — or film productions without any association with Marvel Studios, for that matter. According to Marvel, this was due to the show's "horror-based content". However, this decision is in contrast to how the Marvel branding is kept on Marvel Studios-produced projects with supernatural themes, such as the television series Moon Knight, or the films Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and Blade."
This edit was reverted for being "speculation"... Which doesn't make any sense to me, as Helstrom has objectively no Marvel branding while all three
projects that
I listed
have the Marvel Studios logo attached to them (and not just the generic Marvel logo). I figure that this discrepancy is noteworthy enough to be mentioned and I wanted to say my piece before I asked to have it reinstated.
openSweeney Todd Literature
Hello! I'm someone who's familiar with Sweeney Todd despite not having seen the musical and only saw clips of the Tim Burton movie adaptation, but has found the penny dreadful the musical and film are adapted from.
However, something about one of the pages bothers me. Even though the original tale titled The String of Pearls is listed as the original source, there is no page/article regarding it by itself, if that makes sense.
Personally, as a literature enthusiast myself and someone who likes looking into stories and authors I don't know of and acquire them to read, I find it disappointing the book isn't a topic.
Is it possible to create a page/article concerning The String of Pearls, even if only to give the written story itself the credit it's due?
openSelf Review
On Shinobi: The RPG, somebody calming to be the author of the fanfic has posted a review
saying that it was an Old Shame and warns others to not repeat the same mistake. Are self reviews allowed?
openCan Mewtwo have Hartman Hips? Asking for someone else.
All the way back in 2014, I pulled an example on Hartman Hips that listed Mewtwo (the genderless, barely-humanoid pokemon). It read as follows.
Mewtwo, despite being classified as genderless and leaning on the masculine side, has pretty big hips while having a small waist and shoulder line.
I just got an inquiry from a troper named Gamer Boy 18 that asked me how it isn't a valid example.
I don't like it when someone sets themself up as the curator of a particular trope, so rather than answer with authority I'm posting it here.
My logic is that since Hartman Hips is about a particular style of drawing female characters and it isn't female, it's not valid.
(Also, it's rather strange that I got an inquiry about an edit I made back in 2014 when the subject hasn't been brought up since then)

Problem fixed
Just stumbled upon Shōnen Hair, which needed some major scrubbing. Though it looks good from the editing window, the page itself...err...something went very wrong. Please help!
Edit: Please note, all I did was delete some natter and potholes, change some indentation around, and hit Shift+5 a lot. None of it should've swallowed the page...was it Data Vampires?
Edit 2: Can't be. Copy+Pasted the source into a sandbox and the same thing happened in preview. :(
Edited by WarJay77