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:
openVandalism/gushing
Borught up here
, but I saw some bits that I'm certain are gushing on top of natter, and had to double-check if the troper's edits were natter on other pages too (the troper self-admitted in the edit reason, and they appear to be new, only having five edits).
On Characters.Sonic Boom Antagonists, in this edit
for Shadow the Hedgehog:
- Adaptational Jerkass: Shadow was never a saint, but he wasn't malicious and had several close friends. His original version was a Consummate Professional whose rivalry with Sonic was built around either seeing Sonic as a Worthy Opponent or an obstacle in the way. This version of Shadow is an arrogant (yet awesome) bastard who mocks Sonic for relying on his friends and wants nothing to do with them in the games. In the TV show, he's also a case of Vile Villain, Saccharine Show, being a villain that even intimidates Eggman, and knocks everyone else out of the way so he can fight Sonic one-on-one, and even then his motivations can be seen as petty.
- One-Man Army: He absolutely destroys Team Sonic like the scrubs they are, all by himself, just like the badass he is.
And these edits in Characters.Dragon Ball Z Abridged Movies for Broly here
- Hulk Speak: Just like the Trope Namer, he speaks like this after his homicidal personality surfaces.
Broly: Excuse Broly? (Rebel's Version: "Excuse me?")
- Mythology Gag: When Broly attempts to describe himself.
Broly: Monster? Broly's not a monster. Broly is a... huh...\ (Rebel's Version: Monster, you say?! I'm not a monster! I am... hmm...)Gohan: A genuine demon? note What Broly refers to himself as in the AB Groupe "Big Green" dub
—>Goku: A true freak? note What Broly refers to himself as in the Funimation dub
—>Broly: The Devil. note How Broly refers to himself in the original Japanese version and the Speedy dub
—>Vegeta: OH MY GOD, HE'S SO GODDAMN COOL! - Pre-Mortem One-Liner: Arguably, it's ambiguous whether he knew it would kill him or he simply didn't know his own strength. However, what is the last thing he says to his dad before crushing his pod (and him)? "HUG!" (Rebel's Version: "DEATH WAITS FOR NO ONE!")
- Pokémon Speak: As LSSJ, he devolves into Hulk Speak and then into saying only "Kakarot!" And also "hug"...while crushing his dad to death. Rebel's Version defies this with a huge passion.
- His general impatience even in casual conversation, especially in his Legendary form, also mirrors that of the aforementioned fans when they kept asking for Broly's movie to get the Abridged treatment.
Broly: BROLY DOES NOT LIKE TO WAIT! (Rebel's Version: "TIME'S UP, MOTHERFUCKER!")- Played straight after becoming the Legendary Super Saiyan: his interest in Trunks has increased to the point he thinks Trunks is his property.
Vegeta: You've been ignoring someone this entire time.
Broly: Broly's wife?\ (Rebel's Version Are you referring...to Trunks?
Trunks: Well, technically, I was the one who killed Freeza.
Broly: That's hot.
This is all grounds for vandalism and I can remove without issue, correct? I should also send both a natter and gushing notifiers too?
openGunarmDyne and (Lack of) Crosswicking.
Back near the end of January, I sent Gunarm Dyne a Crosswicking notifier regarding the page VisualNovel.Since Memories Off The Starry Sky, which they had just created a couple of days previously. I got what seemed to be a positive response saying that they would work on it, so I let it go for a while. (Hey, everyone has different schedules.)
Just did a quick look over, and found that they did thereafter crosswick 8 of about 50 examples. (The page has 22 wicks, but most of these are Creator/ entries and various indexes linked by other tropers.)
They have since moved on to adding examples to Other work pages, such as Film.Hillbillys In A Haunted House, Characters.Ar Nosurge Ode To An Unborn Star and Characters.Ar Tonelico Qoga Knell Of Ar Ciel, also without crosswicking.
I'm not sure how to approach this, as it appears that they didn't read/understand, or just don't care about proper crosswicking. Thoughts?
Edited by underCoverSailsmanopenNarm Entry on Kamen America
Recently a Narm Entry was removed with claims of it being exaggerated off of Kamen America's YMMV page.
- Narm: The comic's conservative right-leaning writing can sometimes reach eye-rolling levels (and is somewhat ironic given the creative team's critiques of the so-called "left wing bias" of mainstream superhero comics) due to the sheer amount of strawmen characters and mouthpieces demonizing almost every non-conservative concept or idea under the sun and portraying it's proponents as either evil criminals or brainless sheep, while the "wholesome, proud conservative characters" are near-perfect and always right.
It was removed by another troper for claims of it being exaggerated and claiming the characters were far more three dimensional when they're...not.
The story's recent arc focused on a climate change allegory that leans very heavily into the conspiracy claim that "climate change is a hoax from liberal-aligned cabals faking weather disasters to push radical climate change laws."
The entire Fateful Lightning Story is so full of straw you could feed an entire herd. There's never a counterpoint, there's never a moment where the heroes have to question if they're in the wrong. They're always right, and the people championing the climate change allegory are all portrayed as moronic violent thugs who are 100% wrong and treated like idiots.
They literally differentiate the red and blue states as "light and dark states" for crying out loud.
I didn't want this to turn into an edit war, so wanted to see if this more or less tracks.
openClarification on Injury tropes
So for tropes involving injuries (Eye Scream, An Arm and a Leg, etc) what kind of example is it if someone THREATENS to inflict said injury ("Say goodbye to your one good eye!") but is prevented from carrying it out? Is it straight, subverted, or implied?
openTrope for Taking the Edge out of a character or idea
Do we have a trope specifically for a writer who more or less takes an originally pretty offensive and/or controversial approach to a subject, but brings it back in a cleaner, less offensive format?
The example in question:
Kamen America.
The writers were a little infamous before making the above indie comic due to a series of "satire" books called the Wall Might series. Basically a My Hero Academia parody with Donald Trump and Right wing characters fighting left-wing straw-men. One of the villain groups in this series were blatantly racist/homophobic caricatures of Marvel Characters at the time, and was (according to them) supposed to be a satirical critique on forced diversity in mainstream comics. They had parodies of Miss Marvel, Ice Man, Captain Marvel (the character who would spin off to become Kamen America), and more that were just plain offensive and edgy.
Years later they took the Captain Marvel parody from this comic and spun her into her own series Kamen America, and showed a stark change in their writing style. While still over-bearingly conservative to narmy degrees, it lacked the offensive, edgy cringe that made people hate their guts and slowly became an golden child of the indie comics circles.
One of their recent arcs introduced the Zennregers (power rangers parodies) who are...basically the same as the above group being "a critique of "woke/forced diversity" in media" that, while eye-rolling, lacks the blatant racism and edgy "humor" of their older works.
I thought Lighter and Softer, but didn't fit, Same with Bowderlize, but I'm not sure. Don't want to get smacked with the edit lock stick if I pick the wrong one.
Any ideas?
openuhh are these allowed or nah???
since trivia and YMMV stuff arent allowed in the main page of a work(obviously bc its out of universe bc trivia are facts that arent in universe and are for Word of God stuff thats confirmed and YMMV are opinion related such as fanon things and whatever) but are these things allowed if its actually IN universe??? like for example a character thinks a Show Within a Show is really narmy. yes or no?
Edited by Inotpurplegirl06openReporting Troper for Un-hiding Zero Context Examples
As I was requested to do so here
by TantaMonty, Scarlet Jersey unhid some Zero Context Examples on Narm.Marvel Cinematic Universe here
and here
, some of which they did not even add additional context to, like the Thor entries.
They also removed the Administrivia warning at the top of the page that said not to unhide Zero Context Examples without adding sufficient context, even though there were still other ZCEs on the page.
openWeird wording on a work page (and YMMV page) Film
I found a weird sentence with weird wording on from Furie and its YMMV page. Here are some examples (spoiler warning):
- Fourth Wall Farewell: The film ends with Hai Phuong agreeing to teach her daughter martial arts. She closes out by telling the daughter some of the tenets that she had to internalize during her own training, and her head snaps to the camera when delivering the final line of the movie.
- Narm: The film ends with Hai Phuong promising to teach Mai martial arts. Hai Phuong begins telling Mai some of the lessons that she learned during her own training while they're resting in a hospital bed. So far, a fairly touching moment between mother and daughter. It only gets laughable when she snaps her head to the camera in order to deliver the final line of the film in a moment so out of place and jarring that it's hilarious.
What do they mean by snaps their head to the camera? I never heard that sentence. Does this make sense or not?
Edited by BubblepigopenIs this an edit war?
So, on YMMV.Deadpool And Wolverine I removed
this entry:
- WTH, Costuming Department?: As great as it is to finally see Jackman wearing the Wolverine cowl, the item ultimately looks cheap and rubbery. One can't help but understand why it hasn't been employed in live-action before.
I removed because most fans liked the mask, and I couldn't find anyone claiming that it looked bad or cheap. However, then I looked through history and found that I removed this
Narm Charm entry that was very similar (and I forgot about):
- Narm Charm: Wolverine's suit on its own doesn't look bad in live action, but the mask is a little ridiculous and has some impractical features, like covering Logan's eyes. But when he put it on, many in the audience, and Deadpool himself, love it anyway despite or because of how ridiculous it looks and because they have waited since 2000 for this to happen.
It was removed per Narm thread
. Now they are not exactly the same and they are different tropes, so I don't think I edit warred, but I wanted to make sure.
openUnjustified edit to remove my contribution
Warning: spoilers for the work in question, including a video link to a climactic scene. Discretion advised.
On The Witches (1990), NOYB decided to remove my edit under Narm which read:
- The movie has a bizarre out-of-character moment for Mr. Jenkins. During the dinner scene, he greets the Grand High Witch by saying "Good evening" with a smile which makes it clear that he's got butterflies in his stomach. While he was established earlier as having a crush on her, bear in mind that this is not only in the midst of the witches in various stages of mouse transformation, he's also just witnessed definitive proof of his son being a mouse, not to mention being right next to his traumatised wife who is clearly nearly catatonic on witnessing the very same thing. Given that, his reaction is weird.
with the reason:
"Mr Jenkins is clearly scared of the GHW when he says that."
I'm sorry, but hard YMMV here. And of course, the troper in question made the removal on the movie's YMMV page. That is to say, the foremost class of page where subjectivity is the name of the game. Let me argue my case, as if the paragraph I had wrote wasn't quite enough on it's own, with receipts. Jenkins clearly hits on the Grand High Witch in this earlier scene (there's a bit more to it in the full movie, where he elaborates on how he admires her supposed "RSPCA work" and associated "philanthropy"):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLfb9Zx4ZRQ
Then, in this subsequent scene, check it out (timestamped to the relevant moment where my paragraph was chiefly concerned):
https://youtu.be/QsuIp03FENc?si=bnrp0WmmSRgE4v1y&t=53
I do not see fear in his expression at all. That's not a scared smile. I see a man who was excited by this exotic woman from his earlier introduction to her, and sorry to be crude, but in this latter scene, it's as if he's even hornier. And as I said, given the chaotic context of the scene, it's oddly out of character. The man is not cringing in fear (however his wife is), but instead his inappropriate lust kinda makes the audience cringe. I can't be the only one who sees that, right? And again, if NOYB disagreed and saw fear, they could have instead made an edit underneath to state something like "On the other hand, some viewers see Mr Jenkins as instead being afraid of the GHW in this moment" (such a counter-statement approach being true to the nature of YMMV pages), instead of deleting my example with no real justification.
So, I'm requesting some validation and support to restore the contribution I'd made, as it has some real weight.
Edited by FlashStepsopenPossible edit war? Videogame
Back in August, I removed
a set of Narm examples from The Last of Us Part II after the cleanup thread
reached consensus (my edit reason explained this). In April, Yukianesa added two of the examples back.
The wording is pretty different, and the removed examples were originally added by two different users (EnigmaLobo added the Mel example,
and Connor2107
added the nickname one). This seems unintentional, and if I remember correctly, doesn't count as an edit war.
My question: if consensus is reached and then breached, is it acceptable to remove the offending examples unilaterally, or is that an edit war?
Edited by indigoJayopenBioWare creator's subpage split Videogame
Already pointed out in the other thread
, but I'm posting this for more opinions. This creator page has a lot of subpages for some reason and things like FranchiseOriginalSin.Bio Ware and Narm.Bioware exist here instead of doing that in its actual work pages.
This is highly discouraged by Administrivia.Creator Page Guidelines when the works have pages (and yeah, Bioware games all have pages) and it makes navigation unnecessarily difficult because you have to travel between creator and work pages. So, I want to put them back to the works. Thoughts?
openNarm Removal
I want to challenge the removal of one of my inserts.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Narm.JessicaJones2015
This person argued that it was Truth in Television:
"Someone trying to convince a child of their parents wrong-doing is Truth in television and a staple plot point of police procedurals. Nothing in the example states why the drama is so bad it makes the scene funny."
First off, that statement is debatable, especially since in this case, the child wouldn't be inclined to believe a stranger. Second, this is not an apparent case of wrong-doing to bystanders, or to the child. Third, It wasn't that she was trying to convince her. It was how she said it.
What was funny was her inflection. As a bonus, there's him suddenly threatening to get physical. Even if he didn't know about her powers, it would be a very silly idea to make a scene on the beach, especially for someone keeping a low profile.
openFilm namespace
So, I noticed several Film namespaces covering both Animated and Live-Action movies, like AnArmAndALeg.Film, TragicVillain.Film and WhatDoYouMeanItsForKids.Film. Is it okay to split to their respective namespaces ? If so, how should I split them without losing their history edits ?
openEdit War?
So, on YMMV.Mean Girls 2024 the following happened:
- Young Artist 79 added
Narm entries.
- Octoya removed
them do to being misuse.
- Young Artist 79 re-added
them without discussing it anywhere.
I already removed them again due to being jokes where the trope is for stuff that accidentally becomes funny. That said is Young Artist 79 edit warring?
openCan This Really Be Considered Narm, Or Is It Misuse?
I was looking through the pages for the fan fic The Sun Will Come Up, and the Seasons Will Change and I noticed that in the YMMV page, a user put in this entry:
- Narm: Nora is revealed to be a neo-Nazi in her debut when she walks across the snow, and the cut of her shoes leave swastikas in her footprints. It's meant to be a shocking moment, but the image of a hate symbol being molded into the bottom of someone's shoes with the purpose of actually leaving footprints in that shape comes off as so sudden and over-the-top it rolls into hilarity.
I know this kind of stuff is subjective for each troper, but reading over it...I don't know, something about it feels really off to me. I might be biased here as I'm a huge fan of the fan fic in question, but reading the scene in its actual context, I couldn't find anything in the fic itself or its writing that made the scene in question come off as unintentionally hilarious or over-the-top like the troper who made the edit claims. Plus, as weird as this sounds, I found out through watching a documentary that there actually are such things as companies that make the exact kind of boots with little swastikas molded onto the soles, so it's not something that was just pulled out of their imagination. Something about the wording feels really off to me too, but I'm admittedly not an expert on these matters, so for all I know I'm probably reading too deep into it. What do you guys think? Is this a misuage of Narm, or is it actually following the trope page's rules?
Edited by TwilightPegasusopenEdit War on The Marvels YMMV
On December 21st, Arcane Azmadi added a Narm entry
to YMMV.The Marvels 2023. Three days later, it was cut by the cleanup thread
for being media association and Fridge Logic, therefore not qualifying as Narm. On January 29th, the same troper re-added it
with different wording but still all the same problems.
I already removed it since it was already voted by thread and I wasn't part of that discussion.
openInsight so as to avoid Edit War
On the YMMV page
for The Haunting of Hill House, I added the following Narm example a while back:
- Episode 3 begins with an unsettling scene of someone crawling into a young Theo's bed and snuggling up to her. She thinks it's Nellie, but when she turns, no one is there. The music goes eerie, and the camera creeps in to Theo...who then asks aloud, to no one, "Who's hand was I holding?" As though the audience needed to be told why the scene was scary.
alexrae250
later added a note to it:
- The line is in reference to an extremely famous scene and line from the original novel, in which Eleanor and Theo cling to each other in terror at the sound of a mysterious something approaching them, only for Theo to realize that Eleanor has been across the room from her the whole time and was not in fact holding her hand. This line was not added for the audience's sake, but because an adaptation of Hill House would be incomplete without it.
Which seems like a justifying edit, IMO? But I don't want to commit an edit war by deleting this bit outright, so I wanted some thoughts.
Edited by iamconstantineopenWhere can we discuss YMMV-tropes?
Such as "Catharsis Factor", "It Was His Sled", "Narm"?
Edited by Kuprin

Question about putting YMMV tropes on main work pages when it's done In-Universe—is this no longer appropriate?
In Their Finest, there's a scene where a propaganda film that is supposed to be taken seriously is laughed at by the audience. It had the Narm trope listed with the In-Universe tag (copied below), which was recently removed with the edit reason "Misuse of an audience reaction on a main work page".
Since the reaction isn't of viewers at home, but of an audience in the film watching a badly-made Show Within a Show, calling it Narm seemed appropriate, but has the policy changed on that?