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:
open Reporting Edit Warring and Vandalism Live Action TV
Editor Rm74 has made repeated edits in the Euphoria pages (Character
and YMMV
as far as I know, but I haven’t checked the other Euphoria pages) that exaggerate a character’s negative traits and actions beyond reason— even outright making stuff up about them that they haven’t done or that they aren’t— and a lot of their edits are simply bizarre. I know that YMMV is opinion based, but even still their edits are beyond exaggeration, or even again just them making stuff up. Myself and some other editors have made attempts to fix these Ron The Death Eater style edits, but RM74 has repeatedly gone and added them back in or made new outlandish edits.
resolved An assortment of editing issues and potential rape apologia
Marianabelle is more-or-less solely responsible for creating and editing Without Her Consent and its associated subpages. They have also displayed quite a few issues when editing the subpages of this work alone, including poor spelling and grammar, trope misuse, putting non-YMMV tropes on the YMMV page, and more.
What changed my train of thought from "They really need notifiers sent to them" to "This really should be reported on ATT" was the content of their edits, particularly on the YMMV page. A (likely unapproved) Complete Monster entry that is somehow combined with Freudian Excuse (which they even made a separate entry for), a Jerks Are Worse Than Villains entry that suggests that a selfish Manchild is more loathed by the audience than a Serial Rapist, and more (and this is just on the YMMV page). I felt the need to bring this up because things like a Complete Monster entry for a Serial Rapist that starts with "Doubles as Freudian Excuse" pushes the page too far into rape apologia territory.
And then there's the Fridge and WMG entries that push the narrative that the Serial Rapist will still get away in the end by somehow winning a court case despite being found guilty of rape, even going so far as to say that he will sue the police for negligence and somehow win. Further still, there's graphic detail in the Headscratchers section theorizing as to how the rape scene was "supposed" to play out and meta headscratchers that go way too far into ROCEJ territory.
Edited by UFOYeahopen The Deadpool pages are way to difficult to understand for people note well-versed with the comics. Print Comic
I get it, Deadpool is 4th Wall breaking, but does really need to be applied to Deadpool's T Vtropes and all associated pages, especially the tropes themselves? It's actually hard to understand some of it, especially when it's discussing specific events which A. Aren't clearly stated and B. assumes you already are well-versed with all of Deadpool's appearances. The one I have serious trouble reading in Deadpool/YMMV page for Seasonal Rot, not only is the entry needlessly long winded, but poorly explained on what events or comics it's even talking about and just isn't all the useful.
What's worse is that on the Characters / Marvel Comics aka: Marvel Universe page, next to link for the Deadpool page their's a note that says "(And if you're asking why there's no Comic Book sub-page for me, too bad! My page is always permanently on Self-Demonstrating mode, cuz I'm frickin' Deadpool.)"
Like really? Is this what T Vtropes has come to where we say screw making the site actually anyway useful or informative and just make entire sections useless for a cheap overdrawn joke that just simply isn't funny unless your a hardcore fan of the character and make fun of people for it?
I'm sorry but I really do feel the Deadpool really needs to heavily revised to at least make it understandable for people who aren't well-versed with the comics and the character and make it more clear what is even being discussed.
openTime to reach concensus Film
There was a bit of the controversy going on with the Protagonist-Centered Morality on the Spider-Man: Far From Home page and troper HighCrate
pulled the contested example to the example thread
. It happened at Jul 15th 12:24 AM. Two tropers replied to him there, and six hours later, at Jul 15th 6:25 AM he pulled the example back "per concensus". What kind of concensus can be reached during 6 hours when none of the people originally editing that example got the chance to be involved in the discussion? To be clear, I was not among them but I find it wrong.
The resulting example "per concensus" is factually incorrect. It states that Tony Stark "proclaimed himself a hero" for creating E.D.I.T.H. while nothing like that happened in the film. How do I delete that part when "concensus" was reached?
Edited by AsherinkaopenThe Lobo problem Print Comic
The page SelfDemonstrating.Lobo exists.
The page ComicBook.Lobo doesn't. Once upon a time, it was a redirect to the self-demonstrating page, but it was cutlisted with the following reason "Redirect to SelfDemonstrating.Lobo, causing people to treat the page as a legitimate work page rather than a Just For Fun page. [Anddrix]"
Beyond the fact that ComicBook.Lobo should exist as it is a genuine work, trope examples shouldn't be linking to a self-demonstrating page. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that it was clearly stated by mods that any such link (like SelfDemonstrating.Deadpool or SelfDemonstrating.The Joker to only name common ones) should be corrected to the ComicBook/ namespace.
However, in the case of Lobo, the result would be a red link. (There is currently 259 wicks.) What shall we do? Re-creating the redirect would seem to me the absolute minimum, until someone knowledgeable and/or courageous enough create an actual work page...
Edited by StFanopen [Resolved] Suspicious TLP
This TLP draft
is for an H-game. Judging from the draft, it's probably not something that the P5 would want here, and the Wikipedia page for it
has a very, uh... questionable plot summary itself. And that's not even getting into all the problems with the actual draft, like the broken formatting, zero-context examples, or the fact that the draft uses the game's Japanese name rather than its English name of Stepmother's Sin. This draft needs to be nuked.
But that's not all. The person who posted the draft, YusukeYagami777, named themselves after the game's main character. Said troper has no edits on the wiki or posts on the forum, which makes me think they're here for the sole purpose of launching a hentai page.
Edited by Seracresolved Heavy-handed "badge of honor" troping Live Action TV
rr3elite appears to have a major Single-Issue Wonk focused on showing off the villainy of the character Zein from Kamen Rider Outsiders and their appearances in other Kamen Rider media, including this week's episode of Kamen Rider Gotchard. I initially reported them on ATT before
for shoehorning in Fan Myopia-laden comparisons to other works through misuse of various tropes, but it is now clear that was a symptom of a much bigger wonk, mostly afflicting Zein's sheet, the page for Outsiders itself, and various pages for Gotchard (YMMV, antagonists sheet, Nightmare Fuel, #33's recap) where Zein's appearance is concerned.
I haven't sent any notifiers because there's too many offending edits to comb through, but a lot of their edits consist of what they have previously been reported for, plus Bold Inflation, countless sentence structure and grammar errors, and "look at how horrible this person is" examples that stretch Zein's villainynote it is a sapient AI that has placed the world into an authoritarian surveillance state with the intent of mass genocide and has manipulated the heroes into giving it its resources, but I would hesitate to call a lot of its actions deliberately symbolic or nuanced beyond face value.. They also added Speculative Troping examples to Gotchard #33's recap suggesting Zein would have had a darker and more dramatic role in the episode, when in reality he only appears to kill one of the unambiguously-evil villains in the episode and leaves just as quickly to promote Outsiders.
I'm not sure if this is a policy violation in its own right, but I cannot deny in good faith that it is starting to compromise their writing and thus the quality of the pages they are editing.
EDIT: The issue has persisted despite previous mod notifiers and acknowledgement of behavior. More information in comments.
EDIT 2: There are still issues coming from this troper despite the above. As before, more information in comments.
Edited by TrocyteVopenWeird trivia entry
This Star-Derailing Role entry was added nearly three weeks ago
onto Trivia.Inception:
- Star-Derailing Role: Despite the film's critical and commerical success, Elliot Page's performance in the film was not well-received and was lackluster despite the rest of the cast's performances was well-received. Shortly after the film, Elliot's film career took a major nosedive. His career when he starred in the critically panned remake Flatliners and since then reprised his role as Kitty Pryde in X-Men: Days of Future Past and starred in the Netflix series The Umbrella Academy, His reputation got even when had a gender change in 2020 changing his name from Ellen Page to Elliot Page, While he's still got success in his career on streaming television. He hasn't acted in a film up until 2023.
I wanted to bring this up into Remove Complaining because I'm not sure if its a derailing role (Page's Wikipedia page calls 2015-present "career fluctuations"), but the entry seems to mention his career improving on streaming television, and the entry itself is poorly-written that I'm not sure what's complaining and what's not.
Any thoughts?
openPotential page revert
I have a concern about a recent group of edits from the user wonderpix45. Basically, they edited the page for Characters.Lost Main Survivors four times, seemingly just to trash the character of Libby. Among other things, they removed entries for TheHeart and HairOfGoldHeartOfGold as "incorrect assertions"
, edited the entry for The Shrink to say she's a "self-proclaimed" psychiatrist when there's no indication she's lying about her profession, added a Truth Twister entry to nitpick things she says (in a conversation where she's convincing someone not to kill himself and is very clearly using turns of phrases that the user is taking literally), and changing a Nice Girl entry to "zig-zagged" and saying that her romantic relationship with Hurley is depicted as "questionable" (this is, quite frankly, not true - they are treated as soulmates for the entire show, including the finale which the entry itself acknowledges). Along the way, they've had some questionable grammar and put multiple tropes in the wrong alphabetical order. I would normally go to the Discussion page, but these edits are four of the user's five total edits, which makes me think an agenda is in play.
I don't know what the procedure is when I'm contesting this many entries at once, especially due to concerns about an agenda - can I outright ask for a mod revert, should I just revert it all myself, or is there a third option I don't know about?
Edited by STARCRUSHER99resolved Ban Evader Concern?
Okay, so I'm not 100% certain on this, but the red flags are becoming way too hard to ignore. I think Planet Of The Primates may be Amour Le Fou because:
- They've resurrected Cartoon Monkey
, a TLP draft Amour was very interested in.
- They've resurrected Amour's "Stock Cartoon Animal Depictions
" draft, which was extremely contentious.
All that was just sort of coincidental though. What really gets me worried is their very similar edit histories. They frequent a lot of the same trope and work pages. Comparing their edit history is downright uncanny. It's the same deal with their forum history — they play the same games (which in and of itself wouldn't be incriminating, but on top of everything...)
So, that's the rub. If a mod could look into this, I'd appreciate that.
open Edit war
It's about Daenerys Targeryen again.
The original entry by Eolewyn 1010 here
:
- Daenerys has this at least In-Universe: Missandei, Grey Worm and, to a degree, even Varys constantly tell people that she is a great queen with a sense for justice, Jorah Mormont more than once states she has a "gentle heart". Except this is the very same queen who feeds men to her dragons, commenting that they very well "could all be innocent" of the crime she accuses them of, brings hundreds of thousands of raping and killing warriors into her native land so that they may raid the country and people and burns defeated enemies alive because they refuse to bow to her. Daenerys even has this on herself, as she keeps telling that she will "break the wheel", meaning the social structure that suppresses many people in favor of few others, but at the same time she conquers lands, destroys fleets and ground and kills hundreds of people in order to become queen - thus, their superior.
Deleted by White Wolf 4961 with the reason "This is all clearly anti Dany. Besides that one master, when has she ever fed people to her dragons? And she didn’t bring the Dothraki to rape and pillage with impunity. In fact she was horrified at what they did to that village in S1. Besides what she’s done is hardly any different to what other “good leaders” like the Starks have done."
Re-added by Nerdanel Noldo with the reason "Restoring this because the reasons it was deleted are incorrect. This is not Anti-Daenerys, it's stating what she did in the show. Aside from downplaying the horrific things Daenerys did, the previous editor said that the starks did horrible things too, which they did not, but this ignores the point: the starks weren't continously described as having a 'gentle heart' and being so kind and compassionate, unlike Daenerys."
I'm honestly exhausted with Daenerys arguments at this point, but I think it's worth noting that Nerdanel has a history of edits that seem to slant towards an anti-Dany bias. This
, this
, and and this
are all deletions made in Sansa's defense (some of which may be okay, but Sansa isn't absolutely blameless in some of her Season 8 actions), and the edit reasons are filled with insults at Dany. This
, too, but the first sentence in the edit reason is "The whole entry is just stupid."
Also, imo, Nerdanel's edit reasons tend to be filled with misinformation or misinterpretation that seems deliberate. The aforementioned entry talks about Dany being cruel for crucifying people, leaving out that said people murdered children and slaves and did the same thing to them. This one
calls Mirri Maz Duur an innocent, leaving out that she killed Dany's unborn child. This
and this
, though, are just so blatantly incorrect and I daresay trying to defend Viserys, of all people, saying he "was good to Dany for years" (he constantly abused and sexually assaulted her) and didn't sell Dany to Drogo, and that it was just an arranged marriage. (So, I guess that "I would let all 10,000 Dothraki and their horses fuck you" comment just never happened.) It honestly feels like they're trying to undermine the things Dany suffered through just because they don't like her.
openComplaining?
Alinho Alisson has been editing The Lion King (1994), but his entries tend to demonize the protagonist while excusing the antagonist's actions. These include arguing that Simba wouldn't fare much better as a king than Scar did
; claiming that the lions uphold a totalitarian system that damages the environment
; and saying that the hyenas are only motivated by hunger, despite the film blatantly showcasing how cruel and sadistic they really are
.
The first two examples have already been deleted (the former by Alinho himself, with no explanation; the other one by me, with a rather long edit reason), while the third one has been added today. They all read like Complaining About Shows You Don't Like to me, but I would like to read other people's opinions before I took further action.
openUndermined By Reality cuts
These were cut from Undermined By Reality citing "The MLP examples are all either Broken Aesop or Complaining."
- My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic:
- "The Cutie Re-Mark" has An Aesop that you should not allow circumstances to get in the way of your friendships, as seen in Starlight Glimmer's Start of Darkness when her friend got his cutie mark and moved away, which had near-disastrous consequences. However, the same thing happened between Twist and Apple Bloom earlier in the series. Twist's voice actress moved away from Vancouver (where the series was produced), meaning they have been unable to interact as friends ever since Twist got her cutie mark, which has gone without consequence. In the same season where Starlight Glimmer was introduced, when the similarly demoted-to-background character Babs Seed got her cutie mark, Apple Bloom went out of her way to prove she still considers her a friend, yet the writers have done nothing to suggest that Apple Bloom and Twist are still friends, even offscreen.
- Diamond Tiara's Heel–Face Turn in "Crusaders of the Lost Mark" was intended to show that you can be more than just a bully and become a better person if you wanted. But despite the writers wanting to give her and Silver Spoon more episodes showing off this Character Development, the higher ups turned the idea down, believing their story to be "over". Thus, they had no plot relevance afterward as the writers were not permitted to depict them as anything other than bullies.
- The episode "Fame and Misfortune" teaches that while some people will miss the point of and unfairly criticize your work, the most important thing is that others will get and appreciate it. But the episode's "writer", M.A. Larson, denounced the episode, feeling that the criticisms the background ponies brought up were valid (notably, all the complaints lampooned in the episode actually were addressed in the show, meaning the writers agreed they were issues but called the complainers out anyways), and that audiences would miss the moral entirely due to the episode's allegorical nature and Dear Negative Reader undertones. He tried to rewrite the episode to fix this, but the higher ups wouldn't let him do it any other way, prioritizing their desired story over audiences getting and appreciating it.
- "Shadow Play" has the lesson that you should not assume the worst of others and should get both sides of the story before treating them as irredeemable. This is undermined by the next major villain, Cozy Glow, who the characters and narrative would treat as unquestionably evil despite making no attempts to explain or figure out why/how a child could turn out so evil. The official reason that she was written this way being "It seemed fun and subversive at the time" suggests that the writers have gotten tired of, and no longer endorse, the show's pro-redemption themes and messages, and they would proceed to never forgive a villain again: even King Sombra's well-received sympathetic backstory and traits introduced in the Expanded Universe were ignored entirely in favor of making him a Generic Doomsday Villain, while Ahuizotl was retconned into a guardian spirit unfairly painted as a villain in order to sidestep the need for a redemption to make him a good guy and bring Daring Do's story to a close.
Broken Aesop doesn't apply as it's events outside the work causing this as opposed to the event within the episode. (BH was deemed not to apply if broken by subsequent works as it's about the specific work giving the Aesop contending itself at the time.) The last part of the last entry I can say is complaining and misuse (Neighsay, Garble, and Caballeron get become genuinely nicer redemptions), not sure how the rest are excessively negative given the inherent negativity of Undermined By Reality. Should it be restored and/or the negativity (if someone can point out where exactly it's excessive) fixed?
Worth noting the examples were previously cut by a separate tropes without edit reason, but restored per ATT
.
openBan evader or not?
I’m still convinced mati2002
(who started editing in April 2021) may be laar2002
(suspended in Dec. 2020 for edit warring on NightmareFuel.Pinocchio). The IP/geolocation was negative when the mods first checked, but not only are their usernames eerily similar, their edits have some similarities.
I will first admit that mati has not edited JustForFun.X Meets Y pages like laar (though this may be to cover their tracks), and they have usefully added alphabetization notices to pages (even pages that don’t need them such as Moments pages).
laar’s modus operandi, through scrolling through their edit history, was adding images to pages, even those that already had images (I personally told laar that wasn’t allowed, though that didn’t stop them from reinstating their own change on the Fellowship of the Ring NF page), making nattery and often superfluous edits to Nightmare Fuel and similar pages (often comparing works to other works), and being a serial tweaker to great extents
. They also violated the “don’t say an example is pictured” rule note to be fair, I used to do that too when they were around.
mati’s MO so far has indeed been adding images to pages. Some are great, while some are not
. While they have not replaced images, they have sometimes added images on pages with Image Pickin' tags
, they added two images to HalfDressedCartoonAnimal.Western Animation (don’t really know our stance on that for non-Moments pages), and they once tried to add an image in a trope page folder
. They have also serially tweaked to fix minor mistakes several times like laar did before, and they have also violated the “don’t say an example is pictured” rule just as often.
They made a very questionable edit
on UncannyValley.Animated Films, adding an image and adding an IP notice for the thread for UncannyValley.Film, a thread from 2016 they did not participate in.
It’s probably not much, but I feel there are too many similarities to overlook, even if they have seemingly improved themself.
Edited by PurpleEyedGumaopenComplaints Magnet? Film
The Critical Research Failure section under Mulan (2020) is getting quite long and nitpicky, in excess of even what the most flexible interpretations of the trope allow. While a lot of people have correctly called the film out for failing to get basic aspects of Chinese culture correct despite advertising itself as more authentic, a lot of these examples come off as less informed criticisms and more an excuse for certain users to kick the film while it's down by parroting criticisms they saw elsewhere, some of which may misunderstand the actual reason for why the mistake was such an issue in the first place, or introduce Critical Research Failure of their own.
This despite scholars of Chinese culture and people of Chinese descent themselves pointing out that these aspects of Chinese culture get subjected to Artistic License within Chinese-created media all the time, and are not as clear-cut or even the worst crimes the film commits.
Edited by AlleyOopopenYMMV Nostalgia Critic Edit War?
During my cleanup for The Nostalgia Critic and its subpages, I deleted this Seasonal Rot entry on the basis that it doesn't describe why the whole season was bad, just focusing more on the show being Overshadowed by Controversy by an external scandal and two bad episodes out of a season of over fifty.
- In 2019, the decline has continued. Since the #ChangeTheChannel scandal, the Nostalgia Critic has increasingly become the target of ridicule in many internet circles. His review of The Wall was so widely hated that it became a meme in and of itself. The episode's lacking quality also lead viewers to start becoming more critical of future episodes, and even reflect on the flaws of past episodes initially given a free pass. The "Maybe he was transitioning" line from the Venom review wasn't received well in certain circles, either (though even in-universe, it was viewed as a dumb explanation). Even on This Very Wiki, there hasn't been as much activity regarding more recent episodes.
minikiss just re-added it
, but cut out the ChangeTheChannel and Venom mentions. However, the example still doesn't stand because it only refers to a single episode and the implication that the episode being bad made people more critical of other episodes, past and future, which doesn't indicate that particular season (or even the "recent" seasons, since it includes past episodes) being bad.
They also added a Hype Backlash entry which may or may not fit. Personally I don't think it does because the show's reputation has plummeted in recent years, so thinking it's bad now isn't really Hype Backlash - that's the common consensus.
Edited by mightymewtronopenWeird sandbox
Imperial Majesty XO created Sandbox.Gay Draft Sandbox on October 8th. It doesn't appear to be that discussion happened to result in its creation, and the sandbox itself doesn't seem to serve any real purpose. That, and it's related to the TLP incident.
Edited by GoldenCityBirdopenTroper uncommenting out ZCEs, some rudeness
It was brought up on the ZCE thread
that Queen Adrian uncommented out some ZC Es without adding context on Webcomic.Pandoras Tale. I looked through their edit history to see if this was frequent behavior and I ended up finding that they deleted this entry on SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped.Video Games:
- Pokémon Black and White mentions that you should try to get along with people who have different views from yourself. Take one look at any political debate, especially those around major political parties and those on the internet, and you'd know how much that anvil really needed to be dropped.
With the edit reason:
"Oh, fuck off. People's rights are not on a similar scale to whether or not pineapple goes on pizza."
Regardless of context, the edit reason was quite rude. Didn't find a lot of other problems looking through their edits (granted I didn't look a lot, maybe there are others but I didn't see them on a cursory glance) but based on what I did find should something be done?
Edited by themayorofsimpletonopenPrincess1988
Princess1988 has been vandalizing and/or blanking literally every page they have edited so far. The only reasoning I can find is what they left on TearJerker.Lilo And Stitch (the page itself, not the edit reason):

User Lord Twibill
appears to be attempting an edit war on the YMMV page of Fire Emblem: Three Houses
.
Back in late July they added an example of the game having a broken aesop. I believed their example as-written didn't satisfy the standards of a broken aesop (for one, I don't believe it breaks the aesop at all), so I deleted it, explaining my reasons why in the edit reason.
In response they sent me a VERY long private message explaining their viewpoint, but I got the impression them and I had an irreconcilable interpretation of the game (for one, they view all the characters as being horrible people when without the influence of the player avatar) and that attempting to discuss it over private messages would be a waste of time, so I encouraged them instead to bring it up to public discussion to get more viewpoints than just our own.
They did not do this, and yesterday sent me another pm asking for further discussion. This time I outright told them I thought our reads were irreconcilable and reiterated they should publicly raise a discussion to see how others felt. I then went on to disagree with some of their own interpretations of Fire Emblem: Fates. I criticized the game's morality quite harshly, but I avoided criticizing Lord Twibill themself.
In response to that, they sent me a pair of rather insulting and threatening pms, telling me I was being childish and that they were going to just re-add the example whether I liked it or not, and then threatened me not to delete it again or they'd bring the mods into it. At no point did I find any evidence that Lord Twibill raised a discussion on the accuracy of the example, so I decided to bring the situation up to folks here before things could get any more out of hand.
Edited by Raxis