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:
openBounds of tropable material
I had some questions regarding what information is considered part of an official work for the purposes of troping.
I'm aware of how the basic guidelines work: examples need to draw from information present in a released work, while stuff that the author mentions elsewhere is considered Trivia and should be listed under Trivia entries such as Word of God, Author's Saving Throw, and the like. I am wondering precisely where the line is drawn.
For specific reference, I am looking at a Deviantart webcomic, so the "boundaries" there are a little loose by definition. There's the comic itself
, and that's obviously the work proper. The author also includes a few images describing additional lore and worldbuilding that don't appear in the comic itself, which are kept in a subfolder of the comic's main gallery
. I am not confident on whether this stuff would be considered part of the work, and thus tropable under the aegis of All There in the Manual or something like that, or Trivia.
openQuestion about moving a work page
So I brought up here
that the page for Supermarioglitchy4's Super Mario 64 Bloopers contains a very outdated name. The series hasn't called itself that since March 18th, 2017
. Since then, it's called itself "SMG4", and in War of the Fat Italians 2021, it was established that "SMG4" doesn't stand for SuperMarioGlitchy4 but instead SuperMemeGuardian4. Should the page be renamed?
resolved About re-adding a specific trope
All of the examples for Talking to Themself have been removed from the trivia pages, as they used to refer to one actor playing more than one role. But would adding them back in as Acting for Two, which does refer to such, count as edit warring?
openold-ass self-aggregandizing, keep or cut?
yeah yeah There Is No Such Thing As Notability
ive stumbled across a few links ranting about undertale to some site called Froghand. all the examples spread through the site have been made by (surprise) a guy named froge. i dont know what policy is on people who sign up to promote their blogs/rants; if this guy had an audience i wouldnt mind
Edited by MsOranjeDiscoDancerresolved Edit war
Reginald Ogron 5 introduced following edit to Hearts of Iron:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.HeartsOfIron#edit34958967
I slashed it, along with citing my reasons for that (and a quarter of all entries from that specific YMMV page are going to support those reasons). Except a few days later, the troper in question put it back without a single alternation
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.HeartsOfIron#edit34998908
So it's a double whammy: not only did he repost the same entry, but the entry itself claims things that aren't true, where stuff listed as supposed praises are widely considered to be Scrappy Mechanic within the playerbase.
resolved Which name to use for this character Literature
In The Scum Villain's Self-Saving System: Ren Zha Fanpai Zijiu Xitong, the protagonist, originally named Shen Yuan, transmigrates into a character named Shen Qingqiu, and from then on is referred to as Shen Qingqiu, including in his own thoughts. So in the story, he's called Shen Qingqiu like 99% of the time. I've noticed that the article for The Scum Villain's Self-Saving System: Ren Zha Fanpai Zijiu Xitong uses both names, but Shen Yuan more often than Shen Qingqiu. I feel like it would be better to use Shen Qingqiu by default and only use Shen Yuan when referring to his past life as the novel does. Would it be okay for me to make these changes?
openCould it have been worded better?
This was re-added to YMMV.Forspoken because according to the user who re-added it, it met the criteria:
- Hype Backlash: One of the biggest victims of the current generation. Forspoken started with an elaborate, multi-million dollar marketing campaign offering bombastic promises, only to be mired with constant production delays, Release Date Changes, cut content, broken promises, a controversial pricetag and eventual delivery of a game that, even if it wasn't flawed by itself, still couldn't hope to match the build-up done over three years.
Could it have been worded better, or it's just fine?
openContested entry
So on the page for hijacked destiny, there's this entry:
- Happens inadvertently in the Star Wars Continuity Reboot. The Skywalker bloodline ultimately ended having accomplished nothing and The Unchosen One Rey, descendant of the very person it was created to destroy, saves the day on her own and rubs salt in the wound by taking their name for herself in an attempt to honor their sacrifice.
It was originally added
by stankykong
, then removed
by DJones662
for being "A VERY Opinion-based example that honestly would be better fitted in a YMMV folder." It was restored
by gjjones
but was just deleted
again by WalkerBRiley
with the reason "Removed for being biased beyond all reason. Come up with a way to write it without sounding like a jilted lover and maybe I won't keep deleting it."
Technically this doesn't count as an edit war since it isn't the same Tropers doing the editing, but this is being contested by several Tropers and probably needs to be taken to a proper discussion page? (Also, I feel like the "jilted lover" comment was unnecessarily rude. Should a rudeness notifier be sent?)
resolved Should this be cut?
First, I found Awesome.Other Friendship Is Magic Fan Vids during a round of meta moment hunting and sent it to Cut List since all of the examples are from fan works or other derivative works (like DEATH BATTLE!). I were on phone and so didn't dig deeper then.
Now, I check it again and realized that the only inbound link is a circular link to itself. The main work page, WebAnimation.Other Friendship Is Magic Fan Vids, seems to be misuse since it look like Fanfic Recommendations but with poor troping (most, if not all, examples are ZCE) and long list of external link without recommendation. It also has other subpages, all are of poor quality.
Edited by KuruniopenEdit War Over Misused Trope
(Spoilers for Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney – Trials and Tribulations.)
The other day, Irodion added an entry
to Characters.Ace Attorney Dahlia Hawthorne which misused Ain't Too Proud to Beg. This is because, as stated on its main page, it applies to a hero and not a villain while Dahlia is the latter. Therefore, I removed it
and explained that in my edit reason. However, they later brought it back
anyway.
Can I have permission to remove this entry? If someone wants to do it yourself, you're free to, though I'd link this post somewhere in your edit reason.
openNot example/complaining?
- CoriFalls's work tries to be a deconstruction of Ash's dealings with Team Rocket only to fail by swinging the perceived unfair treatment the other way around: instead, Ash becomes the highly abused villain who's just trying to live his life while Jessie, James and Meowth become the self-centered "heroes" who believe everything they do is good and right because they're them and they're Such Good People.
I intend to delete this as misuse and complain as:
- Deconstruction is a Playing With which can't by played with so unsuccessful attempts are just not examples. (Not sure if this applies to Deconstution or Genre sub-tropes so asking here first.)
- Complaining/YMMV for non-YMMV items which is not allowed
- It doesn't even say what about it it's supposed to deconstructing. (If it did I we could cut the plaining parts and it would be valid.)
Thoughts?
openDrama Importation?
On YMMV.Genshin Impact, GRD added this questionable Fandom Rivalry entry (see here
).
- A weird one, but this also applies within subsections of the Genshin fanbase itself. As there is a strong distaste between Reddit Genshin and Twitter Genshin; forming distinct blocs due to how large the fanbase is. With the reddit base of Genshin accusing the twitter base of being the source of the majority of the toxicity and controversies as well as ruining the fandom's reputation. Expect plenty of Genshin redditors chastising twitter users for any controversy that gets brought up, whilst twitter Genshin accusing their reddit counterparts as just being as equally toxic in its own ways. To a lesser extent, the Youtube fanbase of Genshin sometimes gets flack from both sides due to clickbait issues. Whereas the fanbase powerbloc in Facebook and Hoyolab are considered to be far more chill in contrast. The fanbase is not considered 'broken' like that of Star Wars since there is still a unified passion across the board on the game and there isn't any severe breach of conduct to ignite a civil war. But there is a distinct cultural rivalry between the websites formulating into something akin to a fandom Cold War.
Reading this, it sounds to me like importation of fandom drama onto TV Tropes, and even though my experience with the Genshin fandom is short-lived, they are prone to drama spats every now and again. What do you think?
openProblems on Music/FallingInReverse Music
A number of examples on the page appear to be troping the frontman himself rather than either his work or performances or describing the real life history of the band using narrative tropes. Can I just remove them and rewrite the salvageable ones or is this big enough to take to a cleanup thread?
- The Atoner: Ronnie after making up with Craig in 2013 and becoming a father, seems to really want to ditch the past "Radical Ronnie" bravado he put on. He also seems incredibly regretful about the time he cheated on his girlfriend, especially as it caused him to see his daughter less. (this one's also a morality trope)
- Even the Guys Want Him: Ronnie.
(fanservice trope applied to a real person, Weblinks Are Not Examples and it's a matter of opinion)
- Jerkass: Ronnie Radke, if this video
is anything to go by. Several other people, including fans themselves, have even called him out on this. The incident where he threw a mic stand into the crowd at a show at Six Flags Great Adventure and managed to both send several people to the hospital and get heavier acts permanently banned from being booked at the park did not help matters.
- His choice of lyrical content is all you need to know Ronnie is a bit of a jerk, with lines like "They'll call me king of the music scene" (morality trope being applied to a real person and the second is both subjective and possibly complainy)
- Large Ham: Ronnie. (also zero context; could be rewritten to describe actual performances by someone who knows more about such things than I do)
- Long-Haired Pretty Boy: All of them, but especially Ronnie for most fangirls.
- Mr. Fanservice: Especially Ronnie and Jacky. (these two have the same problems as Even the Guys Want Him and are also zero context)
- Parental Abandonment: Ronnie's mom left him and his brother when they were young.
- He finally met her again in November 2013. (this is just straight up real life; it could be rewritten to describe songs that talk about his mother rather than the literal events)
- Sex, Drugs, and Rock & Roll: The focus of many of their songs, since they were apparently written by Ronnie while he was in jail and going through rehab. However, he is currently very much sober, and as much can be assumed for the other band members.
- Actually a requirement on tour. Ronnie is Straight Edge now, and doesn't trust himself around substances to the point of declaring them off limits on the bus. I See Stars were thrown off tour in 2012 when their keyboard player was arrested for weed possession. (everything past it being the subject of songs is real life)
- Start My Own: How the band was formed. Ronnie was mad at his former bandmates and swore to become bigger than they were. (For the record, they're about equal ever since.)
- Also why Max left. He'd been attempting to make a band of his own since being thrown out of ETF, and finally they debuted in 2016 as Violent New Breed.
- Jacky started a solo shred/instrumental rock project and eventually left to focus on it.
resolved LGBT Fanbase example concerns
i am once again bothering tvt about hideri /s
so the LGBT Fanbase example on YMMV.Blend S lists that gender-nonconforming and transfem fans really like hideri (after a bit of tweaking from me, since the entry used to only list that GNC fans like them), but as far as i'm aware the common consensus on the wiki is that crossdressing and gender-nonconformity in general doesn't automatically equal LGBTQ+, and i feel like that part of the entry could be trimmed off considering that.
however, i'm a bit worried about doing so myself since it could come off as agenda-based, seeing that it's. not really a secret that i'm very much in the "transfem hideri" camp when it comes to the character in question, so i'm coming here for consensus. what do
Edited by worldwidewoomyopen Most Edited Playing With Page?
Apologies in advance if this seems like a waste of time. It's just a personal challenge, something that wouldn't change the grand scheme of things. Basically, making The Idiot From Osaka as the most edited Playing With page possible.
I've seen Karma Houdini as the most edited Playing With page, with 176 edits counting myself. The edits tell me it's the most edited while my gut doesn't. Is there a way I can find the most edited Playing With page?
open Disagreement on Marx page.
First of all, I understand that this topic might be sensitive to some people here, but I hope that we can maintain a sense of objectivity and base our conclusions on the facts.
Marxist economics is not considered scientifically credible by the economics establishment. It has zero or near zero presence in economics textbooks, and it has zero or near zero presence in economics university courses. To my knowledge, there is nowhere in the world where Marxism is included as a component of economics education. Maybe Cuba or North Korea or somewhere like that. This is something that, in my experience, Marxists completely concede and acknowledge. They concede and acknowledge it to try and demonstrate that modern economics is hopelessly corrupt, but they concede and acknowledge it nonetheless.
The Karl Marx page had a line noting that "As an economist, Marx remains heterodox, and nearly all modern economic institutions reject his work as scientifically incorrect. Nevertheless, Marxist economics retains a significant following and continues to be used as the foundation of socialist economic ideology." I believe this is incredibly important and relevant information. I think one of the most pertinent questions a layman would have about a field of study is "Is this considered credible and effective by the experts?"
05tele changed the line to "As an economist, Marx remains heterodox, and many modern economic institutions reject his work as scientifically incorrect." I sent him a message explaining that this edit was inappropriate. I explained that Marxist economics is overwhelmingly rejected by the scientific establishment, and the article needs to reflect that.
He replied with the rebuttal that different schools of economic thought exist. I replied and conceded that yes, different schools of thought exist, but that is insufficient. I told him that it's not enough for schools to exist and for some people to believe in them, but he needs to demonstrate that they are considered credible on a significant scale. I asked if he could demonstrate this.
Rather than providing me with any indication whatsoever that Marxism was indeed considered credible, he replied to me, rather rudely, "I am not responsible for your ignorance of economics. I suggest you remedy it."
I stress again, that the issue here should not be whether Marxism is right or wrong, but whether it's accepted as credible by current institutions. This is something 05tele himself seems to implicitly concede, given that he hasn't touched a later paragraph in the same article expanding on the point. I'd like to revert this edit.
I feel I might also note that 05tele failed to include an edit reason on his initial edit. So, essentially, he's made an edit with no justification, and when asked for some, responded by saying "I'm not responsible for you being ignorant."
Edited by HingabeSiebenopenEdit War on Characters / Genshin Impact Sumeru
Courtesy link here
.
- July 28: Phi Sat added
Nahida's profile and provided most of her examples.
- July 29: cureconquestgirl commented out
some of Nahida's examples with this edit reason: "please don't trope information that hasn't been officially confirmed in game yet".
- August 11: PhiSat uncommented
the same examples with this edit reason: "Since the Sumeru Promotional Trailer's video description says Nahida is the narrator and her voice is the same voice heard in the Summer Fantasia Event, it's safe to say Nahida = Kusanali is confirmed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZEpU-DbzZU
".
Even if PhiSat is sorta correct about their assumption of Nahida being Kusanali, Sumeru hasn't even been released yet so we're still not 100% sure if that's the case. Even then, this is still an Edit War since PhiSat contributed and then uncommented Nahida's examples.
EDIT: I just want to clarify that I watched the trailer itself and found nothing that currently connects Nahida to Kusanali, so it seems PhiSat is trying to push a Speculative Troping agenda.
Edited by CytoZytokineopen Word Cruft notifier
Okay, this is a bit of a weird situation, and I just wanted to send it out here to get the lay of the land and see what people think. I'm gonna admit up front that I might be in the wrong here, but I just want to be sure.
Yesterday, I made an edit to Characters.Better Call Saul Howard Hamlin. It was an edit to a Foil entry for him and Hank Schrader (which I admit in hindsight should probably actually be under Contrasting Sequel Main Character, but that's another issue). I wrote this:
- Their deaths are later used as part of a deception for Jimmy and Walt to help their loved ones; Walt claims responsibility for Hank's murder on the phone in order to confirm it to the authorities and play himself up as a monster for Skyler's benefit, while Jimmy lies about Kim's role in Howard's death in order to spare her prison time and take all the blame for himself.
Yesterday, Random Troper 123 removed the "in order"
that I bolded in the entry citing Word Cruft - and sure, I guess the entry still makes grammatical sense without it even if I think it added to the grammar of the sentence and don't think it was worth deleting, so nothing wrong there - but then they went the extra mile and sent me a Word Cruft notifier about it. I might be overreacting myself taking it here, but that seems like a bit of an overreaction, and looking through their recent history, they seem to be on a bit of a Word Cruft binge today (among other things that seem perfectly legitimate) and making some edits that seem unnecessary:
- Changing "quite a few" to "several"
- Removing the word "also" from the sentence "There's also grenadiers"
.
- Turning the sentence "breaking heads in" into just "breaking heads"
- Changing "pretty much" to "well-nigh"
and "That said" to "Still", even though it didn't change the meaning of the sentence.
- Trimming an entry
by removing the word "that" in the phrase "She claims that", changing "tend to" to "often", "such as" to "like", removing the qualifier "a bit", and changing "the girl" to "someone".
Like, maybe I'm reading too much into things, and if I am, please don't hesitate to tell me, but there's worrying about word cruft and then there's taking the time to change two words to one seemingly just because. It just seems a bit unnecessary, plus a look at ATT shows that this has come up before
, and if I'm getting a notifier over this, then other editors probably are too, so I want to see what people think.
openHow to approach adressing a problematic aspect of this work(Little Witch Nobeta) Videogame
Considering addressing the Little devs offical Twitter provocative posts but not sure how to approach it given the account contains explicit posts over the protagonist and bosses.
Mainly because it's worth discussing since the game it's self is rather tame, outisde a few questionable outifts, and takes its self seriously but the offical twitter accounts post brazenly erotic and suggestive posts from time to time enough that it's rather noticeably jarring to compare the two.
Note this is an issue mainly because of this site's stance on "pedobait"
Though on a more minor not sure what tag to use for a "sexual advertisement tame work" kind of thing.

Vindicator Wes added this example
to an upcoming work. When it was commented out under the "no citation" rule
. Vindicator Wes uncommented it out with no other change
to the example. They claimed "it was clarified in the press release" in the edit reason, but nothing in the example itself suggests this.
Edited by UFOYeah