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:
openCryptavolt Web Original
There's this You Tuber (not sure if anyone uses that term anymore) called Cryptabolt who is a web voice actor and makes funny videos about Dead by Daylight, mainly revolving around Springtrap. I tried searching it on this site to see if there's a page about them but there wasn't, so I was wondering if I could create the page myself, if it's okay.
Edited by IC420openBetter Than Canon no longer allowed on YMMV Pages? Web Original
I'm trying to find when the decision that Better Than Canon is no longer allowed on YMMV pages was made, as I recently got a notification that amounted to "It's not allowed on YMMV pages anymore, only on the page itself" and I'm like... since when? I remember seeing it on the SAO Abridged page less than six months ago. It doesn't make sense that its disallowed since its inverse, Canon Defilement, is still allowed.
What's the point of having a wiki-like format if we're not allowed to have links to pages from other pages?
Edited by PhyrexianAjani95openLinking external works? Web Original
If one were to add a quote or example from a fanfiction without a page on this site, is it ok to link the title to the fanfiction itself? Additionally, should the page of the original work be linked somewhere in the quote?
Eg.
as opposed to
openHow should I handle spoilering on my page? Web Original
Self-explanatory. I want to put ROYN as an example of media that uses certain tropes in their respective pages, but the format of the series makes it hard to handle this, so how should I handle this?
Edited by GammaRaulopenComments As Moments on Webvideo pages Web Original
I've noticed that there are a few moments pages for youtube series (mostly funny moments) where some of the moments listed are comments on one of their videos instead of anything from the video itself. Wouldn't those technically count as meta moments, or at least not count as actual content from the show itself?
Edited by AfterwordopenDisagreement about the Awesome/BobChipman page, don't want to risk an Edit War Web Original
Not too long ago, a troper called 309216364 (is that the ID of an already-banned troper or something?) deleted the single biggest entry on this page, about Bob's massive "Really That Bad" video series on Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, which I will post here:
- During Part 1 of his Really That Bad analysis of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Bob makes a comparison between the narrative structures of The Avengers (2012) and Batman V. Superman stripped of all but their most basic elements that underlines one of the main reasons the former succeeded where the latter failed: Avengers is straightforward, easy to understand and can be enjoyed without prior knowledge of the source comics or the preceding films because it doesn't lean on them to work as a narrative with its single Sequel Hook a post-credits shot of the Greater-Scope Villain, while BvS is a disjointed, convoluted mess that doesn't follow an understandable through-line narrative, paradoxically wants to differentiate itself from the source comics yet relies heavily on them for most of its emotional weight to carry and desperately tries to set up future films through gratuitous in-universe viewings of preview trailers. And he does all of this while giving every person or object with enough plot relevance a funny nickname, with plenty of Actor Allusions and character comparisons to go around.
- The entirety of his "Batman V. Superman" Really That Bad analysis. Chipman delivers his critique in a mature respectful tone, without insulting the filmmakers personally, and goes into detail acknowledging and addressing common arguments in defense of the film.
- Two of the best things he does is to effectively and succinctly fix the movie's greatest problems.
- The first being the 'Diana/Wonder Woman watching the teaser trailer for the Justice League scene', wherein Bob proposes letting Batman, the normal human who is discovering a lot of this new information for the first time, and whose perspective the audience has been following the entire movie, be the one to discover the existence of more metahumans. This not only gives the scene greater suspense and dramatic weight and a greater impetus for Batman to fight a perceived threat like Superman, it also gives a fantastic reason why Diana never showed up for a hundred years and was breaking into Lex Luthor's drives: She was helping cover up the existence of metahumans (and her secretive race) from people like Luthor.
- The second is the entire 'conflict' of the movie being forced and contrived and way too repetitive by the time the two people in the 'V' actually get down to versus-ing each other. Bob fixes the movie without any drastic overhaul or extensive retooling with two simple words: No Batman. The plot remains the same, with all the conspiratorial machinations and the populace distrusting Superman kept intact, but transfer all of Batman's actions and motivations to Luthor, thereby making Luthor a sympathetic, justified, heroic counterpoint to the detached, reluctant, destructive Superman, which would have greater thematic resonance and streamline the plot. For an added bonus, Bob suggests keeping Ben Affleck, with all his likability and charisma and on-the-ground heroism, as Luthor, which would provide even greater metanarrative implications and make the plot more compelling.
- To make what can only be described as a near definitive 3-part, four hour critique about Dawn of Justice, all the while maintaining his normal work responsibilities, is a feat of dedication that can only really be described as impressive.
As well as forgetting to delete the next paragraph that followed on from that (an observation about Bob possibly doing a "Really That Good" series on The Lord of the Rings) and leaving it orphaned, his reason for deleting the entire segment basically came down to "I don't think it's awesome and I don't like Bob". His cited reason from the History page:
Apart from the fact that this reason for removing the entry is entirely subjective (I thought "Really That Bad" was awesome, and I'm not even the one who wrote the original entry), it's also blatantly incorrect- there are several segments in Bob's series where he goes out of his way to be fair to the film and admit the things it did well and the ways it could have worked (even though it didn't), so the troper's claim that "he is entirely biased against the film in all aspects" suggests he edited it solely because of He Panned It Now He Sucks.
I could have just restored the edit myself, but I'm quite certain the guy will just delete it again, triggering an edit war situation. And since the last time I got close to an edit war I nearly got myself permanently banned, I'm not even going to get close to the possibility of it happening again. So I'm hoping there's some way to get a 3rd party judgement on this?
Edited by ArcaneAzmadiopenMisplaced IKnewIt Entry? Web Original
In Trivia.Cell Spex, I Knew It! is now YMMV, but it's about CellSpex herself accurately predicting a meme. Should it still be moved to the YMMV page?
openWorks page made for a single video questions Web Original
I noticed someone made a trope page for AI Pajama Sam, which is based off of a youtuber (DougDoug) playing Pajama Sam in "No Need to Hide When It's Dark Outside" using an AI voice program. I'm unsure why it exists or if it needs to, but I wanted to mention it since it feels odd it was made.
The video it was made for was a decently length one, but it is so far the only one Doug has made, and stuff it mentions can be done on his own Web Video page. Is this something that really should be done? The page itself is somewhat barebones and even has a character page now, but it feels unnecessary to make a page for a single video like that. I think it should be deleted for now, but wanted to get feedback on this.
Edited by keyblade333openHandling Fanfic Recs Who Break The "No Self-Recommendations"-rule Web Original
I was told to come here for this question, so I hope it's not a dumb one:
How is the breaking of the "No Self-Recommendations" rule handled in Fanfic Recommendations? Like, if somebody posts a fanfic rec of their own fic, is the entry in question just cut with a provided reason for the entry being cut, or does the user in question also get a warning?
I figure that it's probably just the former, or maybe even cut without having to provide a reason(?) because a self-recommend isn't a big deal in comparison to active policy violations, but I figure that it's better to ask anyway. I just want to know if I can just go ahead and cut such an entry or if there's more of a procedure to it.
Edited by MagmaTeaMerryopenIs It Okay to Create a Page About ChatGPT? Web Original
The year 2023 is now the year of A.I., especially ChatGPT and AI Generated Artwork.
If it's okay to make, we could make it self-demonstrative, like so:
TropeGPT: Sure! Here's a page about ChatGPT on TV Tropes.
The Laconic page can also be self-demonstrative too:
A chatbot developed by OpenAI that can write whatever the user asks.
- Troper: How do I go back to the unabridged version?
TropeGPT: Here's a link that will take you back to the unabridged version.
Edited by Oxyrhynchus
open Etiquette on deleting contentious/false moments examples Web Original
Got something that has been bothering me for a few weeks and rather than go the edit route I thought I would get a proper consensus first before taking any action.
Over on the H.Bomberguy heartwarming page there is an example for his RWBY criticism video with two subpoints and one third point. Most of the second and the third dot points are potshots at the show or it's company disguised as compliments to HB and could easily be cut out without much controversy. It's the main entry that I have an issue with.
To summarize, in his video on RWBY HB portrays himself as having been a life-long fan of Monty Oum (RWBY's creator who was long deceased at the time of the video), and the heartwarming entry on his page is talking about how much respect HB has for Monty as a creator and a person. The problem is that this is a lie; whilst Monty was alive HB made a lot of outright venomous statements on Monty and his skills that contradict his claims about how he was always in awe of Monty's work and considered him a personal hero. This makes HB contentious in the RWBY fandom since a lot of people see him as pretending to respect Monty (or at the most generous obscure his previous hatedom which he's since backed down on) to make his criticism seem unbiased rather than someone who went into the show as someone who thought its creator lacked talent and thought it looked average at best. It touches on a sore spot in that community of haters of the show using Monty's name as a way to bash the show/it's remaining creators.
So to circle back to the entry, it's repeating the claim that HB respected Monty and his work. That is a lie as HB's own forum comments can attest to. Would that be enough to get the entry taken down, or does this still fall under a subjective opinion and so the entry stays? If so, would deleting the sub-entries which lean towards taking potshots at the show and it's fans be acceptable?
openEdit War Web Original
On the recap page for RWBY's final episode for Volume 9
:
- Full Metal Heart 20 added a Surprisingly Realistic Outcome entry tackling Ruby's ascension
.
- It was deemed misuse by Wyldchyld, who deleted it
about four hours after it was added.
- Full Metal Heart 20 re-added the entry, albeit worded differently
with no given edit reason.
openIs this really Woolseyism? Web Original
I found this in Manga Soprano. To my understanding a Woolseyism is a change that people like but I think this example is just "Blind Idiot" Translation.
In the Japanese version
So what do I do with this example?
Edited by mickey96open Not sure or not Web Original
Would Helluva Boss count as a Cosmic Horror Story, or at least Lovecraft Lite, because even in death someone who hates someone else can pay to have them killed in life and it's implied that Heaven may be just as bad as hell itself so any hopes of peace after death may not even exist.
Edited by coldcascadeopenAvoiding Edit War/RoCEJ Web Original
A while back I made this entry on the Forgotten Weapons YMMV Page putting in folder for length.
- Broken Base: Forgotten Weapons is associated with Headstamp Publishing, which publishes in-depth books about firearms history. In February 2022, they announced their latest book, a memoir by a foreign volunteer who fought in Ukraine in 2014/15 in the Azov Battalion. Unfortunately the Azov Battalion is controversial and the author was found to frequently post far right and neo-Nazi views, Ian insisted this book itself was non-political and his audience was sharply divided between those who wanted it published for the sake of the information and those who found financially supporting the author to be morally unacceptable. Ultimately the book was cancelled when the site used to run the funding campaign pulled out of the project and Headstamp decided not to find another funding site for it.
And a few days ago I noticed another user had made an edit to change it to this:
- Broken Base: Forgotten Weapons is associated with Headstamp Publishing, which publishes in-depth books about firearms history. In February 2022, they announced their latest book, a memoir by a foreign volunteer who fought in Ukraine in 2014/15 in the Azov Battalion. Unfortunately, author was found to frequently post far right and neo-Nazi views. Ian insisted this book itself was non-political and his audience was sharply divided between those who wanted it published for the sake of the information and those who found financially supporting the author to be morally unacceptable. Ultimately the book was cancelled when the site used to run the funding campaign pulled out of the project and Headstamp decided not to find another funding site for it.
Removing the section stating 'the Azov battalion is controversial' with the edit reason: "I guess that by now only chosen ones can view Azov as controversial."
Now I PMed them and they said they were okay if I reverted the change.
So two questions: 1)If I did revert it is an edit reason saying 'discussed this via PM' enough to avoid it being an edit war? 2) Should I revert it? I guess the edit reason was saying that given the Ukraine War, it's no longer acceptable to call them that but it was at the time, and it was their reputation as well as the specific person's postings that caused the controversy (Alas all the videos and comments on them were deleted from youtube after the incident so proving anything is difficult)
openFormatting for a WMG page Web Original
Hi folks, I made a WMG page for the first time ever at Outside Xbox (for the purpose of their TTRPG series' only). I divided some of it by folders as I know is done for some topics on other pages (perhaps getting ahead of myself there) ... but the formatting seems off when I compare it to a couple of other pages of similar sorts. Could anyone please advise? Kind regards - captainmarkle
Edited by captainmarkleopenWhen to know a page needs cleanup? Web Original
I've been looking over the page for Hamsters Paradise, as I've been following that particular work, and it seems to me that it could use a little help. Mostly in the grammar department, maybe with the spoiler tagging as well (At the moment it's just the stuff related to the original sketches that spoilered, though it's a little inconsistent. I'm also wondering if it's worth spoilering entries related to the Harmster and Baywulf sagas since they're a little heavier on plot details than the rest of the work).
At the same time, I'm not entirely sure if the issues are great enough that it needs a Cleanup topic, or any discussion at all as opposed to just fixing it myself. Is there a good way to know where to draw the line?
openA page for Ask Mario Web Original
So, I was thinking that there should be a page for the YouTube series "Ask Mario". However, I think that would be hard to make all by myself even if I started the page myself, which I could. So, if I do make this page, I would appreciate any help anyone else can offer, be it trope examples or subpages, which this page will definitely need. Please let me know your thoughts and thank you in advance.
Edited by LaughsWithGophers

I know this sounds like the dumbest question in the world, but I wouldn't ask it if I didn't feel like I was missing something. The search function on the site itself (I don't use mobile so I don't know if it's different there) only goes 10 pages of 10 links per search, which is obviously inadequate for deep diving. I've found a way to circumvent it by putting -[insert page I've already seen here] in my search, rinse and repeat as I go along, filtering out more and more stuff to prolong my search as much as I can. However, I can't help but think this is extremely inefficient in a way that might be obvious to everyone except me. So is there something I'm missing here? I am aware I could just do exactly what I'm doing in Google search or something, but I just want to make sure if there is an in-site solution to my problem?