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 TinyLittleLetters Western Animation
Tiny Little Letters makes a lot of edits on Tangled: The Series pages. I deleted shoehorns here
, here
, here
, here
, and here
— darn, I cut a lot; have I grown trigger-happy? I wrote an edit reason for each deletion though. But what I want to talk about is that I suspect this troper does Draco in Leather Pants.
- Here
, meet Rapunzel the Death Eater who makes the poor Varian suffer.
- Laser-Guided Karma: Done en masse. Toward the end of Season 1, the people of Corona turned their backs on Varian and denied him when he begged them for help. Now, he's allied himself with the Saporians and has taken over the kingdom, with Corona's citizens being forced to mine crystals for Varian's chemicals so the Saporians can use them to their advantage.
A few days ago, the same troper added this on YMMV.Tangled The Series:
- Catharsis Factor:
- After seeing them display disturbing Lack of Empathy towards his problems in the second half of Season 1, with King Frederic hunting down Varian for the Demanitus Scroll and chasing him out of his own home, and Rapunzel never checking on Varian after Zhan Tiri's blizzard was over (thus abandoning him for months on end), as well as expressing little-to-no concern for his well-being even when seeing Quirin encased in amber, Varian gloating in their faces over abducting Queen Arianna is quite satisfying, especially when he taunts Frederic to his face and puts Rapunzel through physical pain while using her hair as a drill. This also goes true for Varian, in his giant automaton, grabbing Arianna away from them, after they'd shared a warm and long hug right in front of him as he breaks down over failing to free his father.
So, what to do about this? Maybe I should talk to this troper but I don't know how. "Even if you're grief-stricken, it's not nice to enslave and kill innocent people?"
openCharacter Page Vandalism Western Animation
axwi07 made deletions to Voltron: Legendary Defender - Team Voltron, likely motivated by shipping. Notably removing any entries referring to Shiro and Keith's relationship as platonic or to the fact that Shiro ended up with someone else (I have my own various thoughts about those two relationships but regardless, what's official is what's official; canon doesn't care about quality or subtext and trope pages are not the place to share your personal criticisms). The most generous one I can give them is the decision to leave off Heterosexual Life-Partners given that Shiro is not heterosexual, but the trope itself points out that it doesn't care about such things.
I could easily revert it myself but I think a proper warning is worth having given the fact that we've had other shipping-based vandalism for this work in the recent past. Let them report to their fellow shipper brethren that this kind of behavior is not to be tolerated.
Edited by AlleyOopopenSingle troper's vandalism of animated series all from same creator Western Animation
A troper by the name of Bento Boxer Justin Roiland has had a history of vandalizing work pages involving cartoons created by Brazilian animator Pedro Eboli, often adding false information. This includes:
- Claiming his works from Birdo Studio (Oswaldo, Cupcake & Dino: General Services, and Ba Da Bean) were co-produced by Bento Box Entertainment on December 16, 2024
(edit removed January 13, 2025
).
- They added this information to Bento Box's page too on April 19, 2025
. (removed April 24, 2025
)
- They also said Ollie's Pack was animated by Atomic Cartoons, Toon City, and Snipple Animation on April 19, 2025
(removed April 24, 2025
).
- They added this information to Bento Box's page too on April 19, 2025
- Creating a Character Sheet for Cupcake & Dino: General Services full of outright false information on December 17 2024. (page was cut by yours truly)
- Creating a Crosses the Line Twice page for Ollie's Pack once again full of false information and using a page image not actually from the show on February 1, 2025 (has been added to the Cutlist by me again).
- Adding a frankly bizarre and nonsensical, as well as unnecessary, image and caption to the Ollie's Pack Character Sheet photoshopping the characters' heads onto the cast of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia on April 18, 2025
(removed May 8, 2025
).
- Also adding links to that image and new ones to the Image Links for Crosses the Line Twice on May 6, 2025
that appear to go to their Deviantart. (images cut May 8, 2025
).
- Also adding links to that image and new ones to the Image Links for Crosses the Line Twice on May 6, 2025
There are probably other examples, but I think we all get the point (I get the sense they are a ban evader as another troper named Morty 336 Steve 909 made similar vandalizing edits regarding the same shows). And while they do seem to have made a few positive contributions, this frequent vandalism and spreading of misinformation targeting a few specific shows (that all share the same creator, so I have my suspicions here) is very frustrating, especially for people who work on pages for obscure works, like myself. While I am personally of the belief that this user should be banned, I would like to know what other people's opinions on this matter is.
Edited by MagnusForceresolved DisillusionedCheetah100 spiraling Western Animation
Hi. I hope this is not the wrong place to report this but Disillusioned Cheetah 100 has been lashing out at people who tried to help him in his obscure Dr. Rabbit and Toon definition threads. He says he doesn't like people "correcting" or "helping" him and says they just want him to think and behave like them, while also saying people use "moronic excuses" and lie about wanting to help him.
He's doing the same spamming that resulted in his previous suspension wrapped up in a persecution complex and saying he wishes he could delete his threads (then when people say he just needs to holler a mod he doubles down on insulting himself and saying people hate him or are annoyed by him.) I am honestly worried about this guy's mental health based on his forum behavior.
openDCAU Superman's personality Western Animation
Thetropemaster101 has sent me a message
about most recent edits for the character page for the Superman from the DC Animated Universe, and honestly, I have no idea what's he trying to do here.
He is very obsessed with explaining how different DCAU Superman is to his comic book counterpart, but his edits feel gratuitous at best, downright irrelevant at worst. What do I mean with this?
Superman's characterization has been all over the place in the comics, particularly in his identity as Clark Kent, but Tropemaster seems to think that the DCAU presents radical changes to Superman's portrayal.
- He is considerably less dorky as Clark Kent compared to most versions. In the comic books from the Silver Age and the Christopher Reeve movies; yes, Clark was a dorky nerd. In the John Byrne reboot and Lois & Clark, Clark is a lot more assertive.
- As mentioned above in Adaptational Angst Upgrade, this Superman is shown to be more short-termed, fearful, insecure, and cynical compared to more versions in addition to retaining his idealism. Apart from the fact that redirecting to other parts of the page is a huge no-no, Superman has struggled with some pretty dark topics throughout his history, such as political corruption, depression, loss of loved ones, detachment from humanity, etc.
- Also, like most modern versions, he prefers to be identified as Clark first in order to keep himself sane and believes Superman is a way of helping people. Again, John Byrne did it first.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just being too harsh on Tropemaster but I don't want this page to look like it's talking down to readers by explaining in excruciating detail how DCAU Superman is different from the Superman from the modern comics.
So, what do you think?
Edited by MasterHeroopenNot an example of Idiot Plot? Western Animation
From Idiot Plot - Animated Films:
- The entire Final Battle of Incredibles 2 could have been shortened considerably if not outright avoided, allowing the capture the Big Bad before they fled the ship and preventing the entire crash, had anyone actually targeted the mind-controlling goggles during the fights. It's at least a bit understandable with the kids given their age and lack of experience, but the adults really should have tried just plucking them off instead of running or fighting until the goggles happened to fall off. Ironically the only character who does do this is Jack-Jack, entirely by accident, when reaching for his mom, showing how swift and effortless it really would have been.
In reality, adults did try to remove mind-controlling goggles from other supers as soon as they're freed (of course, with the difficulty of taking away a mind-controlling device from an enhanced human who fights back), and they manage to remove them, they don't just "happen to fall off". It's true that in the previous scenes kids didn't try to remove the goggles, but the entry itself suggests that their age and lack of experience can be a forgiving factor.
Since it's not A story driven entirely by all the characters being idiots that would otherwise take less than five minutes to resolve, but a specific scene, wouldn't that count at best as a Downplayed Idiot Ball, and perhaps not even that?
Bumping because the entry was readded. Edited by gc10
openPossible Edit War Western Animation
On Dec 31st, user K added this to YMMV.Coco:
- While the movie has been in production for six years, and thus wasn't created with the intent of dropping this particular anvil, the heavy subtext of "Mexico is a beautiful country full of beautiful people" is sorely needed in the United States in 2017.
That was removed on Jan 5th after the Trump and ROCEJ thread
stated that edit may have violated the Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement. I personally felt it was shoehorning an opinion in.
On Jan 8th, K replaced it with this:
- Co-Director Adrian Molina, from an interview with NPR, in response to a question about if the meaning of making a film set in Mexico over the course of six years changed at all since the 2016 election: "Well, it's a long time coming for Latinos to see themselves on screen represented in a way that they can be proud of and in a way that reflects the things that they value about their culture and they value about their families. [...] And for a family to go and see themselves reflected on screen the way they experience their lives and see that shown to the world means a lot. It means a lot for your self-esteem, and it means a lot for how you see yourself in the world."
Is this Edit War, and should I message K and tell him to go to the Trump and ROCEJ thread and Coco's discussion pages?
Edited by jameygameropen Unfortunate Unfortunate Implications in YMMV/StevenUniverse Western Animation
Yesterday, Keshali added this to the Unfortunate Implications section of YMMV.Steven Universe:
- While Steven Universe is typically considered a trailblazer for LGBT representation, a lot of LGBT viewers and critics have pointed out its representation is actually pretty horrible
, from its relentless apologism of characters allegorical of homophobes (Homeworld, Uncle Andy) to the only actual LGBT characters being Discount Lesbians. To say nothing on the ambiguity of Bismuth’s racial coding.
- While Steven Universe is typically considered a trailblazer for LGBT representation, a lot of LGBT viewers and critics have pointed out its representation is actually pretty horrible
I have several problems with it. My write-up ended up being longer than intended, so TL;DR, the entry is built on blatantly false information from a website I'm not even sure counts as reputable, and I would like permission to remove it.
- This one's more of a general question, but does PopMatters even count as a good source? A quick look at the site shows it to be a generic news and music review site.
- Saying the Diamonds and Andy are given "relentless apologism" is blatantly untrue for the former and downright nonsensical for the latter. Whenever the Diamonds’ bigotry for Fusion (in this case used as an allegory for same-sex relationships) is brought up, the narrative and characters always treat it as a horrendous way of thinking, to the point that the climax for one of the penultimate episodes has the Crystal Gems fuse with each other in defiance of them and basically say "this is how we live our lives and we're not going to change that, so you can take your hate and shove it". And Andy... is never once portrayed as a homophobe. Old fashioned with a bit of Fantastic Racism, yeah, but he never once makes any comments that imply he's homophobic - in fact, when talking about how his family drifted apart after Greg left, he positively talks about his aunt and her partner (implied to be another woman), and later willingly attends a same-sex wedding with no fuss and has a good time at the reception.
- Regarding the Gems (or at least Ruby, Sapphire, and Pearl) being Discount Lesbians, Word of God - but not the show itself - confirmed that Gems are a sexless, genderless species that appear feminine and use she/her pronouns. Being genderless doesn't mean they can't be lesbians if they want to be, but I digress.
- As for Ruby and Sapphire's love for each other and Pearl's love for Rose being the only LGBT+ representation, this is also false. A lesbian couple and their son frequently appear in the background during the show, one episode has Pearl getting a crush on a human woman who reciprocates her advances, there are various moments where human characters blush or show attraction towards characters of the same gender (or characters they believe to be the same gender in Stevonnie's case) and all of Steven’s Fusions (in this context being an allegory for platonic and familial relationships) barring one use they/them pronouns, and Stevonnie is outright confirmed to be intersex and non-binary.
- Also, the bit about Bismuth and her possible racial coding feels really tacked on. Like, the entire entry talks about LGBT representation, and then randomly drops that sentence at the end without going into it more.
openIncredibles 2 Award Snub Western Animation
The Award Snub entry has been a contentious one for Incredibles 2, and has been added and deleted multiple times over the years.
Those that add it are fans of the franchise, jubilant over finally getting a sequel and are disappointed it didn't win the Best Animated Picture Oscar.
Those that remove it point out that it's not an Award Snub situation, Incredibles 2 ran against Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse which was universally acclaimed to be a groundbreaking achievement in animation. As such Incredibles 2 simply lost to a superior film.
We're in the situation of it being added back again with the troper, perkeez, insisting that "Some people preferred Incredibles 2. As long as some people agree with the entry, it belongs in YMMV."
I don't know if it's worth arguing that point, however, I think the entry as currently written is problematic:
- Award Snub: Incredibles 2 was a strong contender for the 2018 Best Animated Feature Academy Award, but was very unlucky another great animated film was released in the same year. It lost to Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, which broke a six year run (2012-2017) of a Disney/Pixar film winning that category. Incredibles 2 only received 7 wins and 40 nominations compared to 40 wins and 71 nominations for Spider-Verse. In most other years, Incredibles 2 would have won the Academy Award.
Issues:
1) It leans very heavily into the presumption that if Spiderverse was not in the running then Incredibles 2 clearly would have won the award. In 2018 there were several equally good challengers. Wreck-It Ralph 2, Isle of Dogs, Incredibles 2. To imply that Incredibles 2 was the clear winner of those three, is speculation and doesn't need to be part of the example.
2) The line "broke a six year run" is just a trivia factoid that has nothing to do with Incredibles 2 being snubbed or not and kinda implies that Incredibles 2 was snubbed simply because of its Disney/ Pixar pedigree.
3) The wins/nominations statistics should be removed. While it illustrates how Spiderverse won more awards and thus won the Oscar, the gap between it and Incredibles 2 is quite large. Spiderverse won over 5 times the awards (40 vs 7) and had almost double the nominations (71 vs 40). These facts show just how much of an underdog Incredibles 2 was to winning the Oscar that year and undermines the case that an Award Snub even occurred at all.
I opened a discussion on this and three tropers participated (myself, perkeez, and Larkman) but we could not achieve a consensus.
Reference: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/remarks.php?trope=YMMV.Incredibles2#comment-141341
I suggested this wording to reflect the feedback of Larkman and myself... (Example A)
- Award Snub: Although Incredibles 2 was a solid candidate for the 2018 Best Animated Feature Academy Award, it lost to the equally great Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. It was clearly a case of two strong films being in competition but There Can Be Only One and Spiderverse ran a clean sweep of the awards circuit that year.
Perkeez suggested this wording which takes into account issue #3. (Example B)
- Award Snub: Although Incredibles 2 was a solid candidate for the 2018 Best Animated Feature Academy Award, it lost to the equally great Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, breaking a six year run (2012-2017) of a Disney/Pixar film winning that category. It was clearly a case of two strong films being in competition but There Can Be Only One and Spiderverse ran a clean sweep of the awards circuit that year. In most other years, Incredibles 2 would likely have won the Academy Award.
So I put before you:
A) Should Incredibles 2 even have an Award Snub entry at all?
B) If yes, which wording is the best for the example? Example A or Example B?
Edited by rva98014openSpeculative Troping Western Animation
Beatman 1 has been doing a lot of edits over the past for the Voltron: Legendary Defender page that speculate the intent of why things happen, or add negative weasel words to otherwise unremarkable information, in order to turn it more negative-sounding. For example bringing up that the lack of merchandise is likely due to the creators' personal hatred of the mecha genre, that certain lines of products were possibly poorly received, or canceled due to fan outrage (when poor sales or company mergers and layoffs are as likely of a cause and actually have received press coverage at the time; even so, that constitutes being too speculative to add in itself, and another user who made similar types of entries recently got suspended here and on other pages for blatantly violating the rules), despite no official indications otherwise.
I feel that, due to the notorious amounts of Epileptic Trees regarding this franchise and its creators' intent (of which I have plenty, but which I don't believe is my place to add them), that without some kind of official confirmation as to the motives of company actions, it crosses the boundary into speculative troping since it reads creator intent and malice into a page that is supposed to about recording audience reactions, and thus requires some measure of impartiality, despite the name.
I've had to do a lot of cleanup regarding his edits for negativity bias and it's getting very tiring as he rarely adds anything strictly informative enough to leave alone, and has already had a history of excess negativity towards the series to the point of thumps on the forums, and has been found to have engaged in unsolicited harassment of fans of the work on other social media.
I mentioned in the past about a tendency of his to use the page as a soapbox for his Single-Issue Wonk with the show, as well as bring it up in threads and pages for unrelated works, even bringing up arguments from people he's otherwise violently opposed to due to his vocal hatred of their taste for same-sex shipping in order to bash it, but I don't think it's safe for me to PM him knowing this now for fear of inviting said harassment onto myself.
Edited by AlleyOopopenFat Shaming? Western Animation
The Great Hydra has written four entries for the Amythst/Steven fusion all relvoling around fat tropes which wouldn't be a big deal if those entries weren't written so insulting. I deleted their first three entries only for thirty minutes later, they put another entry (a zero context one too might I add) without even noticing my edit reason for pulling the first three. I don't want to jump to conclusions but I do feel like they might be trolling at least this page. These are their entries.
- Fat Bastard: Their first act upon being born is to beat the living crap out of Jasper, who admittedly deserved it, but the amount of perverse glee they take in doing it cements them into this trope.
- Fat Idiot: The combined intelligence of Steven Universe and Amethyst stuffed into a body three times their width that could be mistaken for a giant milk dud. Need we say more?
- You Are Fat: As part of their self given The Reason You Suck speech in "Know Your Fusion".
- Fat Slob: Natch.
openFridge horror on Arthur Western Animation
Found this on Arthur:
- D.W. becomes much more disturbing as a character when you realize that her treatment of Arthur and her behavior in general, despite her being only 4, is actually eerily consistent with a sociopath. She tends to see anything she wants as good and anything she doesn't want as bad, believes she is entitled to whatever she wants, is a Manipulative Bitch (often tricks others to get her way), is known to have outbursts, and seems to be learning to do what is socially expected of her even when she herself doesn't think she needs to do it but shows a complete lack of genuine empathy (for example, her Backhanded Apology in "Arthur's Big Hit", where she apologizes to Arthur for breaking his model plane when ordered to do so but doesn't actually feel guilty for it and still sees it as Arthur's fault for building the model wrong, therefore seeing anything "bad" as the fault of anyone but herself), and in general actually seems to enjoy making Arthur's life a living hell. So if she's already this sociopathic at four, what is she going to turn out like as a teen and adult!? Not to mention how this easily makes her one of the, if not the, most disturbingly fucked up characters to ever grace an Edutainment Show.
- While it's not canon, the You Tube video series Adult Arthur by AOK takes the "what will she be like as an adult" part and runs with it. It's not pretty.
Is this allowed here or no?
Edited by fraggleloveropenWhere do I go for help? Western Animation
Rainbow Phoenix is certain that The Simpsons S8 E15: "Homer's Phobia" was an N-Word Privileges-focused episode, and was arguing with me and trying to instigate an edit war which I refused to take part in.
Yes, they have a point since there is a subtle difference when certain people make jokes about subject and how audiences react to it, and odds are, a writer probably had this in mind. However, this isn't enough to make a fuss about who's right when describing it on a page which is being viewed by the public.
I pointed out, since I am pan, so I would be hypothetically be able to make jokes with lesser backlash if I ever got to be a creator of any work, but fighting with people because they think they're 100% right is so not ethical. That's what this user has been trying to do to me.
Now, this episode did cause a Mexicans Love Speedy Gonzales so this should speak for itself, and most of these viewers don't even know who the writer is, let alone would be aware of their sexual orientation.
Where do I discuss this problem? I hate resorting to Ask The Tropers but the cleanup thread hasn't been used in a very long time.
openEdit War Western Animation
Jumbo J 99 is doing an Edit War on What If…? (2021).
He added a really complaining entry of Took Bleak Stopped Caring to the ymmv (saying it now applied to the whole MCU). It was removed for being both a moment and the work itself ends pretty optimistically.
He then re-added it with a bunch of really reaching and sometimes incorrect versions of how things will in his opinion go
.
Like We have no clue if project insight will happen here and Carter could still stop it, We see in the finale that Tchalla and Quill are going to stop Ego, Loki is also defeated in the finale and a new avengers is formed who will probably deal with Malekith, Strange accepts his punishment and is even at peace, the zombie stuff is apparently going to be covered in another show, I have no idea where the nuclear war will destroy the earth comes from as that's not even in the episode and Killmonger is too stopped.
The show has been well received and from what I've seen loved by the fanbase for the dark moments so I don't think it's an example. Even ignoring that several of these entries are blatantly not true.
open Is there such a thing as a "Trusted Editor"? Western Animation
I've noticed that a troper, in their profile, listed themselves as a Trusted Editor of a specific set of pages here on tvtropes.
I hadn't ever come across that term before. If this a real thing, I'd be curious to know how that role works?
Or is it just a self-proclaimed title chosen by the troper that has no real meaning?
Edited by rva98014openMasters of the Universe Revelation story being troped even though it is incomplete. Western Animation
I'm not intending to add more fuel to the many discussions going on regarding MOTUR and its "lying creator" and/or "woke" issues but rather to ask a question on the presentation of the story itself and how tvtropes should respond to it.
The MOTUR story was conceived, created, written, produced, edited, and scored to be a cohesive 10 episode mini-series. Although all 10 episodes are virtually complete, Netflix has decided to release the story in two five-episode binge bundles because... reasons.
So all we have is part one with a part two release date still TBD. As a result, the story page for the mini-series contains tropes, that in all honesty, can't be justified until the entire story has been told.
Just a cursory glance shows tropes like: Bad Guy Wins, Chuck Cunningham Syndrome, Death by Cameo, Decoy Protagonist, Defrosting Ice Queen, Demoted to Extra that only describe the context of episodes 1-5 and are very, very likely to change or even be invalidated when episodes 6-10 drop.
I understand the edit wars surrounding "lying creator" and the various "girl power / woke" issues have led to a call for page locking.
I'm wondering if the page lock, if implemented, should extend to include the main story and character pages until the entire story drops.
If not, is there another way to address making tropers aware that it's only a half-told story and there are inappropriate / unjustified tropes that one should think twice about adding at this point?
Otherwise it seems there's going to be a considerable amount of revising and re-editing of the trope list when the full story is told which renders the current tvtropes content somewhat pointless.
Edited by rva98014openSinkholes on Character Page Western Animation
M3S
keeps adding Sinkholes in Characters.The Owl House Amity Blight. (Granted, I've made at least a couple Sinkholes myself lol, in case that needs to be mentioned.)
I tried to prevent this via pointing out that we're not supposed to leave them
. I even later tried leaving a commented-out warning saying not to add those and recently I sent them a DM about this. However, they clearly didn't pay attention to it by the time of writing this; they left a couple more Chained Sinkholes
.
openA weird use of a ymmv trope on a film page Western Animation
So Idumean Patriot added this to
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.TheHunchbackOfNotreDame
Under Strawman Has a Point:
- While his beliefs are still bigoted and he remains a crusader/fanatic, the movie proves Frollo more or less right that at least those Gypsies who are associated with the Court of Miracles are dangerous criminals, and arguably even terrorists for attempting to murder the serving captain of the guard. Even if they had done nothing bad whatever before, that by itself actually serves to perfectly justify him arresting them, even under modern legal norms.
- Similarly, while his treatment of Esmeralda can in no way be justified, the fact remains that she is a criminal who resisted arrest and assaulted the arresting officers, with a degree of violence that would likely have killed or seriously maimed at least some of them without the meliorating effects of cartoon physics.note She also publicly reviled a Minister of the Crown (i.e., Frollo himself), which would count as a serious crime in real medieval France, though that bit looks more like a Felony Misdemeanor to a modern audience. If he had simply wanted her arrested and fairly tried, it would be difficult to fault him for that; it's his creepy personal vendetta that makes him the villain in that case.
I'm sorry but the way this is written comes off like he's trying to downplay how evil some of the stuff That Frollo does in the film is. They reak to me of bias here
resolved BonaFIDE's edits to Recap.SpongeBobSquarePantsS2E14WelcomeToTheChumBucketFrankendoodle Western Animation
Bona FIDE made these edits on Recap.Sponge Bob Square Pants S 2 E 14 Welcome To The Chum Bucket Frankendoodle:
- Unexpectedly Dark Episode: The episode from the revelation that Plankton has obtained SpongeBob's services to the musical number has copious, if not gratuitous amount of crying. And that's the tip of the iceberg, with SpongeBob's brain being removed and placed in a robot and the Krusty Krab actually shutting down! Holy overexagerating, Batman! This is not "unexpectedly dark". Plankton basically kidnaps SpongeBob for one episode and shenanigans ensue with everything going back to normal by the end. There are really only two scenes with crying and they're semi-Played for Laughs (any emotional tension is broken up with Plankton being a comedically massive jerk). SpongeBob's brain being removed is also Played for Laughs given how we don't see the operation, Plankton's plan fails miserably regardless and SpongeBob gets his brain back in short order, and the Krusty Krab is shut down for a grand total of about 10 seconds. Also a Pothole to a Moments page. Yeah that song in the middle of the episode made me weepy as a kid but it's followed up with more typical SpongeBob hijinks. This is no darker than your typical SpongeBob episode.
He added Just Eat Gilligan to the page even though it's YMMV now and even then, it makes no sense: Plankton couldn't control what Mr. Krabs was going to bet: his secret recipe (which, let's face it, he would probably never in a million years do even if he was confident he would win) or SpongeBob's employment contract. He also added a Sinkhole elsewhere on the page.
- Just Eat Gilligan: Plankton admits he threw card games so that Mr. Krabs would bet something valuable, but despite the idea of betting the physical formula being mentioned twice (one time by Plankton himself), Plankton goes for SpongeBob instead for some reason.
He changed the word "punk" to "jerk" several times for some reason.
Edited by supernintendo128

Hello! So I recently posted this in the "Is this an Example?" thread, and haven't really got replies, though they have been leaning to my side.
I found something that screams shoehorning from a biased source.
From the YMMV page of The Owl House:
Two huge problems with this. First, it's very clearly overly hostile and biased against the show judging by it's language, and attempting to whitewash Belos by suggesting he has a point. Secondly, both examples are taken completely out of context to form a rhetorical strawman. The first one isn't an example because she wasn't born with any special destiny. She only got the Titan's approval due to being her kind and loving self, especially to his son. The second is just plainly absurd. It's attempting to play moral judgement on some of the people who have suffered the most under the genocidal psychopath, when he had just made his second attempt to commit genocide against their species.
I took the liberty of removing the example from the YMMV page. Now that would be fine on it's own, even if I heavily disagree with it... If it weren't for this entry literally being a copy paste of something that was posted on the main page of the show which the troper Gamermaster removed. The weird part is that it was copy pasted onto the YMMV page by an entirely different user, and the first user has a total of two edits on their entire edit history, both of which are super hostile to modern Disney properties. Later on the person who posted it on the main Owl House page posted it right back on the YMMV page exactly as is without going to the "Is this an Example?" thread, and added further shoehorning. I removed those too... but now I am wondering if this is some sort of sockpuppeting situation due to the reasons listed above. At the very least it could warp into an Edit War.