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:
openSpider-Man: No Way it's being brought up again.
A while ago I removed Rescued from the Scrappy Heap entries about all three Spider-Men from Spider-Man: No Way Home after discussing it on Is this an Example
thread, because it was agreed that it was too early to call it that. Then it was re-added again along with another entry and deleted again here
. Which also had it re-added while the query was going on and deleted by the same query. At the same time, I also removed one for all three Spider-Men here
including Andrew Garfield fallowing discussion here
. Well yesterday Enigmatic_Mastermind added these entries here
:
- Rescued from the Scrappy Heap:
- Those who initially weren't impressed with Andrew Garfield as the web-head in The Amazing Spider Man films tend to appreciate his performance more in this film, probably due to the script being more fitting for him as well as the character being comically self-aware that he was the least popular Spider-Man as well as having several highlights in the film. Like the scene where saves MJ in the same way he tried to save Gwen.
- Jamie Foxx's Electro from the same films as well. Even before the movie hit the theaters there were people who were glad that he was given a second shot at playing the supervillain and he felt more serious and formidable here despite his limited screentime, in contrast to the more cliché tragic loner-turned-villain in his original movies while still keeping that aspect of his character in the end without losing the threat.
What should be done cut or keep? You know this page has been the subject of a lot of ATTs.
Edited by BullmanopenDisambig needed, but the main page is already a trope
The Host has a serious issue with subpage collision (the YMMV page alone is seperated into sections for 4 different works). Normally the solution would be to move the individual media pages and make the main page a disambiguation for them... but the main page itself is already a trope.
openIf I wanted to redesign/update Trope-tan, would that be possible?
Trope-tan is a cute concept, but her design has always struck me as busy/outdated/not befitting the Moe Anthropomorphism look. I've drawn the current design
◊ before, and obviously I don't expect to be able to just barge in and do whatever I want—if this is a possibility I'd expect it to be community-approved—but I wanted to get a sense of if it's even feasible before I get ahead of myself.
openCharacter Page Reversion Policy
EDIT: The original issue is being resolved on the Discussion page, but I'm still wondering about character page projects.
A few days ago, someone created this character subpage
. There wasn't any discussion about this, which is technically fine, but the page itself has some issues. Even though a couple of other users have edited it, seven of the folders have 0-2 examples. There's also some weird capitalization and formatting. Some of their edits also don't make much sense: they changed
a Foil example to Contrasting Sequel Main Character, but neither of the characters in the original example are the protagonist of their series. The bulk of the page is focused on one character (who nearly has technically enough content for their own page).
I posted yesterday on the discussion page, but no one has responded. Is it alright to revert the split, or should I wait for approval? On a separate note, is there an existing project focused on setting up a Character Sheet guidelines page? I feel like that could be helpful.
Edited by indigoJayresolved Kill Count and Dead Meat are separate pages Web Original
As the title says, I've noticed that The Kill Count and Dead Meat (the latter of which refers to the channel that the former series is hosted on) are separate pages, but most of the Dead Meat page and its subpages focusses on Kill Count, with hardly anything talking about the rest of the channel's content. What should we do about this (besides possibly renaming the page for Kill Count to remove the "The" if we're keeping the page, since that's not in the title of the show itself outside of James' signing on/off phrases)?
Edited by Akriloth2160openTroper with poor grammar
Gregthe Hellhound is committing basic grammar mistakes in almost all of their edits. This includes misspellings, random capitalizations and misplaced punctuation marks. Examples here
, here
, here
and here
.
I sent them a notifier and they replied with an apology, yet their most recent edits
suggest they did not consider checking the Get Help With English thread.
Edit: Misspelled a word myself. Oh, the irony.
Edited by TantaMontyresolved CerebusCallBack applied to fan works
There a a few Cerebus Call-Back subpages for fan works that were previously under Cerebus Retcon, but were cut as, per this thread
, they were in regards to things that happened in the original work, not the fanfic itself. Do they apply under this trope?
openRegarding using material posted on another site by a Troper with their consent.
I'd like to ask about using summaries when the troper themself has given consent to use them.
Tropers/Comun, a user of Beast's Lair
wrote summaries of the latest chapter of Fate/Grand Order, Non-Primate Ecosphere: Tunguska Sanctuary.
I asked about using their summaries
, to which they gave their blessing
. However, I was told to ask the people in the Copy-paste Cleanup Thread
for advice concerning this situation because using the summaries could be considered plagiarism and break the rules of the site. Unfortunately, I received no response
, so I'm asking here instead.
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
openThe Smite WMG page
Smite is known for featuring gods and mythological heroes as its playable characters, so naturally, its WMG page features lists of characters that Tropers would like to see added.
However, there are Loads And Loads Of Characters throughout all of mythology, so the folders consist almost entirely of lengthy, lengthy lists of names and nothing else. This is not only hard to read, it's also very uninteresting, as it doesn't contain any self-expression or creativity on the part of the writer, just plop down the name of whatever gods or mythological figures you think of.
On the discussion page, as well as the Wild Mass Cleanup thread
, I proposed a solution: for every god suggestion on the page, there should be some kind of explanation of why or how they should be implemented in the game, such as mentioning feats or abilities that could be translated to gameplay. For example, I added that Echidna, mother of monsters, would likely be a Minion Master if she were made into a playable character.
However, I have not gotten any replies regarding this idea in over a month. I don't know if it's too extreme, as it would result in most of the content on the page being removed. But I think it would make the page much lighter and more interesting to read.
Edited by ZuxtronopenSomeone's edit warring with themself on Our Kelpies Are Different
Over the past few months, Cooking Cat has been making edits to the last paragraph of Our Kelpies Are Different's description, which consist of flopping back and forth between "northern" and "northwestern". I feel like this is breaking some rule.
Edited by NitroIndigoopenIs this plagiarism?
The first paragrapgh of DEATH BATTLE! S08E12 - DIO VS Alucard is identical to the intro part of the show (see transcript
from Death Battle Wiki). The rest of the article doesn't match perfectly, but still too close IMO. For example, this is on our Recap page.
"Imagine, if you can, someone so wicked, so vile, so monstrous that the sheer magnitude of their villainy literally destroys the universe. You would think it would be the big D himself, but it was him, Dio. Born a penniless street rat in the slums of the mean streets of Victorian London, Dio Brando was weighed down by poverty and his abusive alcoholic father."
And here's on Death Battle Wiki.
"Wiz: Imagine, if you can, someone so wicked that the sheer magnitude of their unholy dickishness literally destroyed the universe.
Boomstick: You might think they'd have to be no less than the devil himself. But it was him, Dio.
Wiz: Born a penniless street rat with a cunning mind in the slums of Victorian London, Dio was humiliated by his poverty and abused by his alcoholic father."
openValues Dissonance entry Anime
The YMMV page for Monster has a Values Dissonance entry saying, "Asking women to smile has become very frowned upon since the series was made." The troper who added this is now suspended, and it doesn't elaborate at all. I've seen the whole series, but I can't remember what specific moment this is referencing, and the comment itself doesn't make sense without more of an explanation.
Edited by Javertshark13openIs it appropriate to have Will Smith slap Chris Rock as a profile?
The title is self-explanatory. The reason I ask because I was thinking which picture will be my new profile so I pick the slap incident because it's a meme. And I don't know if the Will Smith slap incident is appropriate enough. What you guys think?
Edited by BubblepigopenOdd YMMV point removal Videogame
While browsing around, I found that this point was removed from YMMV.Super Mario Odyssey by The Living Drawing:
- Sacred Cow: Super Mario Odyssey quickly reached this status much like its sister game The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. The Mario franchise in general is a very strong Sacred Cow for Nintendo, and with Odyssey bringing the series back to artistic greatness and having few to no argued flaws, a vast majority of the Mario and Nintendo fandom holds the game in very high regard.
Now, that wouldn't bother me too much — the Broken Base point on the same page notes that it's gotten a fair amount of criticism and debate over the years regarding whether or not it has too many collectibles. What does grab my attention, however, is the edit summary, which reads "Game is very frequently bashed and seems to be seen as one of the weakest 3D Mario games nowadays." I haven't actually seen any of this myself, both in Nintendo-centric and more layperson-oriented spaces, and from what I could glean, it's still very well-regarded despite the content overabundance debate, which makes me wonder if this is someone mistaking a Vocal Minority for general consensus and/or editing solely based on their personal opinion of the game. Should the point be reinstated, given that, or is there a better way to go about it? Edited by bowserbros
openAm I having a Mandela Effect or was there a self-demonstrating page for Tommy Wiseau?
Okay so like I’m not sure how to explain it, but after I was done eating, an image popped into my head about a self demonstrating page for tommy wiseau, it seemed legit so I decided to log onto this site and search for the said page, first thing I did was search for "self-demonstrating tommy wiseau", nothing came up, i decided to double check, nothing, thn, it hit me, was there such thing as a Tommy Wiseau self-demonstrating page? maybe I’m just not look right but who knows.
openSelf-Erotic Troping in Crossover War pages
A quick glance at the History of the Fridge page for The TV Tropes Character Crossover War reveals it was created and almost exclusively edited by contributors and writers of the work, including a Troper who was bounced for reasons tied to it. With what I believe to be the majority of edits (at best) coming from writers of the work, should the page be cutlisted or should it be dealt with by deleting the edits of the contributors to bring it back in line with the site's rules on Self-Erotic Troping?
(Forgive me for making an ATT for this, it seems we don't have a thread for Fridge Clean-up where I could've brought this up.)
resolved What do I do with a fanfic rec if the fanfic in question no longer exists?
So I recently discovered that the links on the page for a Danny Phantom crackfic best known as The Crack no longer work. In addition, I did a quick Google search to see if the fanfic itself still exists in some form, and it seems it doesn't.
I already went ahead and sent requests for both it and its YMMV page over to the Cut List to be deleted. After I did that, I discovered that the fanfic is listed as a recommendation in the fanfic recs page for Danny Phantom.
So what happens now? Will the recommendation stay up, or will it have to be deleted soon since the fanfic is now lost media?
Edited by ArielLightningopenEasily Forgiven playing withs/lack audience reaction part?
Easily Forgiven is now YMMV, which no longer allows playing withs. So I question these (otherwise valid given they got audience contention) MLP examples.
YMMV.My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic S 2 E 26 A Canterlot Wedding Part 2: Granted, they were tricked and all, but Twilight holds absolutely no resentment towards everypony for turning their backs on her. It must be the two seasons worth of friendship lessons. Just copied from the main page. Doesn't explain why audiences found the forgives too easy. (Also a whole rabbit hole of fans debate about matter.)
YMMV.My Little Pony Equestria Girls 1: Sunset Shimmer goes from attempting to murder the Mane Six to being accepted as their friend in the span of about three minutes. Previously removed
as played with (downplayed/played for laughs in first movie, subverted/deconstructed in sequel). If a character is no longer considered this (given how effectively sequel redeemed her), is it retroactively not an example? Does factually inaccurate reasons for the audience reaction disqualify it or not?
YMMV.My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic S 5 E 26 The Cutie Remark Part 2: Debatable, as Starlight did witness how her actions could've destroyed all of Equestria and has to live with that fact, which she clearly feels horrible about. She also had to travel to Our Town and seek their forgiveness. It is also discussed as Applejack points out that someone like Starlight can't be let to roam around free as powerful and unhinged as she is and Twilight pointing out how powerful friendship really is in Equestria. Not to mention that no-one seems to even mention all the serious crimes Starlight had committed in this episode, some of which (conspiring against and assaulting a crowned princess) could even be considered acts of treason against Equestria. Move just swapped "Played with" for "Debatable". Half arguing for/against applying as written.
Questions about reworking to be valid:
- Do they have to explain the audience reaction to the forgiveness to be valid EF?
- How to keep the Sunset and Starlight examples from being redundant with Unintentionally Unsympathetic which already covers the reasons audiences say them such? Should UU just not mention in-universe forgiveness?
- What to do with Broken Base examples? Should fan debate on such be included if applicable? Or does that make it too arguing against self and should go under BB or Base-Breaking Character entires instead?
Asking here because every time I asked the EF cleanup thread, I kept getting no feedback to my questions.
resolved Does YMMV have a different standard for natter than Main? Anime
Hi,
This edit
for YMMV.The 100 Girlfriends Who Really Really Really Really Really Love You strikes me as natter. I was looking to edit the paragraph so that it doesn't look like the wiki arguing with itself, but before I do, I wanted to check whether YMMV has a different (lower?) standard for natter than Main.
My reasoning is given that the opinions expressed in YMMV tend to be subjective, does that mean that it's acceptable for Tropers to respond/debate under an entry?

I was curious if TV Tropes has any other presence online like on Twitter or Facebook aside from just the website itself.