Why have some of my avatars changed?

Just noticed it and I don't understand what happened, have I been hacked or something?

Potentially unsalvageable page

Today, I stumbled upon Xia Xia. It may have the bare minimum number of tropes (3), but I'm not sure if they have enough context. Here they are, with my opinions in bold:

• Gotta Catch Them All: The hermit crabs are out to collect shells. It doesn't say how many you need to collect to beat the game, how many there are in total, why they have to be collected, or what happens if you collect them all, unlike almost all examples of this trope (where at least one of these things is mentioned).
• Licensed Game: This game is based off of a toy line. Which one?
• No Antagonist: There is nothing in particular to oppose the hermit crabs. Fair enough, this one has context.

On top of this, the page was created and solely edited by a troper who hasn't been active since 2013. As such, the page hasn't been updated since the same year. The description is bare-bones. None of the tropes are crosswicked, either. Is it salvageable?

Edit war on Resident Evil Village YMMV page

We have an edit war on Resident Evil: Village.

123ninja originally wrote an entry for Author's Saving Throw that read:

Emeriin deleted the example with the edit reason "is 'toning down sex appeal' really such a problem to warrant Author's Saving Throw?"

123ninja then re-added the example with the edit reason "The devs deliberately altered Jill's original outfit for the remake. It's more than 'they just put pants on her'"

What should be done in this situation?

EDIT: Apparently this is not the first time 123ninja has been brought up regarding questionable edits about female characters' clothing.

all lowercase letters

all lowercase letters has all the examples in lowercase, including work names and proper nouns. Is this overkill?

What's the cutoff for 20 Minutes Into the Past?

I read that historical fiction is anything set more than 50 years before the release date. Is 20 Minutes Into the Past for anything set less than 50 years ago, or is there a different cutoff?

Namespace question

Why is The Barbarian And The Troll in the Western Animation namespace? For context, the show is a puppet show.

Agenda-based editing?

I'm not quite sure what to make of some of LunaSea's most recent edits. On Music.LOONA, they changed the entry for Queer Romance to LGBT Romance (the latter redirects to the former), without bothering to re-alphabetise it. And on the AwesomeMusic.LOONA subpage, they deleted the "Q" from two separate uses of "LGBTQ".

Should these be reverted?

Troper with bad grammar

mariovsonic999 frequently makes edits with bad grammar. I sent a notifier a few days ago, but as seen here, their edits are still poor.

Help with an entry.

Hello

Is there somewhere here on TV Tropes I can go for help in writing an entry? I have one I want to add to a work (Specifically a case of Deconstructed Trope for the work Avesta of Black and White) but I am having trouble formulating and compressing it to something presentable as it turns out to be pretty loaded example with lots of moving parts. Any help would be much appreciated.

Restoring a page Videogame

The page Warcraft The Artifact Weapons was cut because quote: "We shouldn't be giving a CHARACTER page to a bunch of inanimate objects."

That's fair, but the problem here is that some of the 'objects' are sapient weaponry with character traits of their own, some of which have manifested physical avatars and one of which have been transferred into a physical humanoid body. And these characters were not transferred to other pages where they belong. The page was cut without a chance to do this.

I would like for the page to be restored to pre-cut, at least until this can be rectified.

Odd example on the Family Guy YMMV page

I found this example of Faux Symbolism on the Family Guy page and thought it was odd. I'm thinking of deleting it, but I want some input before I do it:

• Faux Symbolism: Sometimes it is implied that Chris is some sort of Messianic Archetype - his name, his disposition as the kindest and most innocent member of the family and his blond hair all go towards this. Sometimes the jokes are pushed a little further, such as when he was cast as Luke Skywalker when Peter parodied the story of Star Wars, and when he dressed up as Optimus Prime from Transformers, both of whom are messianic archetypes themselves. Of course it's all a gag.

To me this all seems like a reach. As a longtime viewer of the show, I never got the impression that Chris was supposed to be a Messianic Archetype. I also doubt him dressing up as Optimus Prime was meant to imply he was a messianic archetype.

Unbuilt Trope again Anime

(NSFW)

Few days ago, I removed this Monster Musume entry from UnbuiltTrope.Anime And Manga (originally a two bullets entry).

• Animal-based species are given the strength of their respective animals to match, and examined realistically as well. With the exception of Rachnera^note who does know her strength and Lala^note who is fundamentally no different than a normal human outside of her being headless, Kimihito's monster girls frequently have trouble holding their strength back, which results in him getting injured. Should any of them not hold back any of their strength, such as during a full moon, their strength could literally kill him.

My reason is that this one is a plain Deconstruction. As noted in the work page, Monster Musume is Bleached Underpants of Living with Monster Girl (and I would like to add that it's also know as My Life with Monster Girl), itself is fanwork of Monster Girl Encyclopedia, an escapism porn (we used to have pages for it, but it got cut by P5 for lolicon content). In that work, it's noted that monster girls' strenght or pointy bodyparts will never harm their husband thank to their innate succubi mana. Oyakado deconstructed it since Living with Monster Girl with two strips showing how sex with monster girls can leave their mates with scars and marks (I don't think I can provide a link here, am I?).

Today, Tehrannotaur add it back. Claims that "unbuilt trope is that the trope was played with (this includes deconstructed) before it was popularized (and in some case the epitome itself played with that trope). While monster musume wasn't the first monster girl-centric series, it popularized the genre".

But as noted, this one is direct deconstruction to its parent work. It pick an element (monster girls can't accidently harm their husbands) and potray it as how it should be (originally when they get too excite during sex, then Bleached Underpants version expand it to everyday life).

In other words, this isn't the case of "the work that popularized the genre use a trope in unusual way", it's "the work that popularized the genre deconstruct the older work, but the later work follow the older one". Not unbuilt, just a plain deconstruction.

Skogsbrynet

Cleaning out Bi the Way wicks again and stumbled Characters.Skogsbrynet: lots of ZCEs, not indexed, doesn't mention the work name in the description... Oddly, aside from my edit, the page has only been touched by a troper of the same name, and searching "Skogsbrynet game" just leads back to this characters page and their troper page.

Suspected ban evader

Some time ago I brought up Starbrand 1987 here for their incredibly bashy edits about William Dey from Supergirl—including but not limited to misuse of audience reactions just to further complain on the pages.

Any chance Daniel-Wesker is Starbrand ban-evading? Many of their edits are focused on bashing William. This includes some snarky stuff—"he only makes brief appearances without significant contribution to the plot (presumably to remind the audience he still exists)," "the attraction between Kara and William appears from nowhere"— and putting Executive Meddling, Trivia, on the YMMV page to complain about William's inclusion.

Trolls subpages

reposting here from a Trope Talk thread to see if i can get some more succinct answers about this.

i think trolls might be suffering from a bizarre form of Entry Pimping; it seems one particular user, Inky100, is insistent on making subpages because it's possible even if it isn't necessary. besides LogoJoke.Trolls (the subject of the original thread, deemed too short to be necessary), here's a rundown:

• Analysis.Trolls is blank
• DarthWiki.Trolls and SugarWiki.Trolls are just used to list YMMV tropes—and Not Safe for Work, for some reason. isn't NSFW supposed to be a definition-only page?
• DrinkingGame.Trolls and its subpages are clearly stretching for things to "drink" for—"Whenever you get a Squick, Narm or Tastes Like Diabetes feeling" is on all of them—and also, oddly, provides non-alcoholic alternatives
• FanficRecs.Trolls is blank; FanWorks.Trolls only has one entry and multiple blank folders
• Haiku.Trolls is blank
• WhatCouldHaveBeen.TrollsWorldTour has been brought up before as not exactly being necessary given that there's already a tenuously-necessary WhatCouldHaveBeen.Trolls page
• GravityIsAHarshMistress.Trolls is probably the strangest of all, since Gravity Is a Harsh Mistress is such an omnipresent cartoon trope you don't have to single out every single instance of it on its own subpage

there's a few other oddities besides that which are still valid but definitely read like someone hoping to pad out subpages to make the series look more important than it really is, like Recap.Trolls (which has subpages for all of the individual entries in the series, kind of defeating the point), Timeline.Trolls (the extensive and confusing timeline of the trolls universe?), and Memes.Trolls (most YMMV pages have longer "memetic mutation" sections than this). i'm not exactly sure what to do with all this, but it's really strange.

besides cutlisting the blank pages, is there anything that should be done about the others?

Possible Agenda-Based Edit on Bowdlerise/VideoGames

Last night, a troper by the name of Mc Jeff made an edit to Bowdlerise.Video Games that made me raise an eyebrow. They touched up some stuff on the Final Fight example, but one of the things they changed was the mention of Poison/Roxy being "transgender" (since Capcom has said that it's up to the player to decide their gender identities) to "female or female-presenting, if you prefer".

Now, I'm a cis male, but the term "female-presenting" to describe a transgender woman strikes me as... problematic, to say the least. Is this kosher, and if not, may I please revert it?

Do Useful Notes have to go to TRS to be expanded on?

So on the making up for lost LGBT tropes thread, I suggested the idea of making Useful Notes pages for aromanticism and pansexuality. Someone else responded that the existing UsefulNotes.Asexuality and UsefulNotes.Bisexual should just be expanded since they're similar concepts and the isn't much media differation between the two pairs - but like, adding an entire section about a different sexuality to an already existing page feels like it should not be that simple.

Semi-related question; why is the ace page at asexuality, but the bi page is at bisexual?

(Note: I'm very tired while writing this, so if anything seems unclear, ask about and I'll elaborate after getting some sleep)

I blubbed up a custom title

I custom-titled Whammy to have the Excited Show Title! but forgot that it also added the exclamation point to the Whammy trope name. Should I migrate the show page to Whammy 2002 or Whammy! The All-New Press Your Luck (then custom-title that) or is the exclamation point on the trope name not a big deal?

Creator Question

What's the reason Yuen Woo-Ping is sorted under other on the main Creators page instead of being in the Directors sub-page? It seems to me like that would be the better place to put his page.

Strange example on YMMV.ASoundOfThunder

I'm not sure how to handle this. On one hand, we have obvious natter. On the other hand, the single-bullet part appears to be giving details that weren't established in the novel, which is something the second-level bullet is trying to clarify.

The second-level bullet was added by Tropers.The Book Was Better. The initial entry was added by Tropers.AK 47 Productions. Page history.

• Values Dissonance: It's Keith, the liberal president, who is devoutly Christian, while the conservative Deutscher is specifically called out for being "Anti-Christ". In modern America it's most usually the conservative politicians who use Christian morals to attempt to enforce their conservative views, despite a traditional separation of Church and State. It's worth noting that Bradbury himself was a staunch conservative in his final years, during which time he had some very positive things to say about Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Take that as you will. This is mainly due to the Sound of Thunder being made during the time when Christianity was generally considered as a "neutral" topic until the rise of the Moral Majority movement among American Conservatism in 1980's.
  • The story never actually classifies the candidates as being "Liberal" or "Conservative". It only describes Deutscher as "anti-Christ, anti-human, and anti-intellectual" These terms could describe extremism at either far end of the spectrum, especially depending on the reader's point of view. Then again, political ideologies might be aligned differently in the fictional world of the story than in ours. Hence, YMMV.

Problems not withstanding, what should be done about this? This is rather political and there is the real possibility some of the details are false.

Troper with oodles of problems

Snax Box has lots of issues with their troping.

First of all, there's this recap page. There's trope slashing, there's bad grammar, there's the fact that the article is a stub... And this is how they usually trope.

Unmarked spoilers in a work description Literature

The description for A Sound of Thunder spoils the ending of the work, which is intended to be a twist, though it may be subject to It Was His Sled. Should that part of the description be removed or at least reworded to something more vague? There's no spoiler marking on the rest of the page, though.

Possible edit war on Low Fantasy

We might have an edit war on Low Fantasy, though it is one that's kind of spread out over the years.

Back in 2017, CalamityRaven26 originally added to a Fire Emblem example in Low Fantasy. I had my doubts about it counting, so I brought it up in the "Is This an Example?" thread. The feedback I got was that the series leaned more towards High Fantasy, so I deleted everything related to Fire Emblem from the page on grounds of misuse.

Then, in 2020, CalamityRaven26 added the entry back without an edit reason.

Is this considered an edit war? I've also brought this entry up in the "Is This an Example?" thread for feedback.

SupernaturaldramasFan

Supernaturaldramas Fan has been doing some bizarre things in some Smallville and Buffy the Vampire Slayer pages.

On the Characters.Buffy The Vampire Slayer Scooby Gang Originals, they deleted several entries on a character with no reason given (they were already restored by another troper).

They created the Analysis.Smallville page and copy-pasted some argument between users from another Wikia site.

They also created the Synopsis.Smallville page just to put a PSA for people not to skip the first 3 seasons, which is not what Sypnosis pages are for.

They put the same PSA on the main Smallville article, which I removed myself for being out of place.

They're also posting both that Wikia argument and the PSA on many of the Smallville discussion pages.