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:
openEasily Forgiven, what warrants keeping or cutting?
Per cleanup
, I've been cutting Easily Forgiven examples that don't mention the audience reaction part (just Turn the Other Cheek if just about forgiven in-work.) But that's effectively every example I've seen since, which I didn't think was a problem as they just moved pre-YMMV criteria examples there so general cleanup. But these were added to the main EG page.
- Little Witch Academia (2017): Big Bad Professor Croix du Sud was almost going to destroy the world with her experiments on Noir Rod and is confirmed by Word of God to go to magic prison for her crimes, but Headmistress Holbrooke still seems to be in good terms with her and the whole thing is left vague enough that she could receive just a light punishment. Not to mention her former best friend (and more?) Chariot was still willing to risk her life for hers, despite everything.
- Really Rosie: The lion in "Pierre". His parents forgive it for eating their son (though he is none the worse for it) and even allow it to stay the weekend. At least it offered them a ride home.
- Maury:
- Despite the fact that some men initially celebrated onstage when they found that they weren't the father of a child, they would help Maury comfort and encourage a sobbing mother backstage, no matter how abrasive she was beforehand. I previously deleted this as lacking audience reaction.
- It seems as if, no matter how many times a person cheated, their guilt and infidelity was tossed out of the window as long as their infidelities didn't result in any questionable paternity, such as a woman getting pregnant by another man, or a man getting another woman pregnant while in a relationship. A woman would hug and kiss their man after a DNA test proved he wasn't the father of another woman's baby even though he lied to her about it, and men would hug and kiss women if they were the father of their baby even if the women did, in fact, cheat on them many times. A particularly egregious example of this was the case of a woman who was being accused by her husband of cheating with another man and the husband believed that the woman's child may belong to that man. A lie detector test proved the woman had sexual contact with that man many times.note It turned out that the man in question was married to someone close to the woman. However, a DNA test proved he was the father of the woman's baby. The woman then made the man kiss her feet, which he did.
Given such examples are still being added and 99% of exiting examples are likewise, I'm asking if it's worth continuing such cleanup (no one's objected yet), or if I'm being overly strict about what's misuse. This entry, specifically the recently added last part, gave me thought.
- Starlight Glimmer starts out as a villain who steals ponies' cutie marks and leaves them without individuality, then she tries to change history so that the protagonists' destinies changed (by making it so that the incident that caused them all to get their cutie marks never happened) to the point that she creates several Bad Futures, and she reforms after being defeated the second time. Starlight's detractors believe that these actions were too extreme for the abrupt full forgiveness she got in the end and how quickly she integrated into the main cast with various benefits and honors to her name. Worse when her victims from her old village were shown to have also fully forgiven her despite brainwashing and controlling them for her own plans.
- Does it not need to outright state the audience reaction if it is able to convey the reasons for digression otherwise like with Unintentionally Unsympathetic?
- Speaking of UU, is it separate from Easily Forgiven as even if the character was sympathetic as intended, audiences can/would find their forgiveness too easy?
EG cleanup has been unreliable in responding to my inquires there so asking here first.
openHeavy quoting in more ways than one
I noticed that a troper named OUSIsITH has added a number of quotes in the past couple of months in several pages under Real Life, all of them coming from discussions and quotes from blog posts within the last three years and which take a rather pessimistic view of the future. Some of them are very long, like several paragraphs. Quotes can be found in Reality Is Unrealistic, Terminally Dependent Society, Humans Are Bastards, Nostalgia Ain't Like It Used to Be, and Post-Peak Oil.
Simply being negative might not be grounds for removal, but with the result being in some of these pages being so heavily negative I am not sure whether this by itself merits a review. (I have refrained from pinging the troper in question for now since if this is a nothingburger I'm fine with not bothering them.)
openReverting edits with little context as to why Videogame
So since I didn't get any answer on the discussion page for the fatui character page I'm taking this to here
First I made an edit
with the edit reason being that the Fatui aren't hated in Fontaine and if they were Lyney and Lynette wouldn't be able to keep doing magic shows after being outed as Fatui
Second Awkbut TVT reverts
it because of Eula's Story Quest, but her Story Quest has nothing to do with Fontaine
Third I made this edit
as an attempted compromise, only for Awkbut TVT to revert it too
for the same reason, when just saying Eula's Story Quest isn't enough context for me
Soooo what to do?
Edited by lancelot22openRedirect To Genre Subpage
And Then There Were None has a Values Dissonance page in the "more subpages" menu, but clicking it goes to ValuesDissonance.Literature with the ATTWN examples being part of an Agatha Christie example block. Should the redirect be removed (as it already has multiple VD examples on its own YMMV page) or a new VD page made for Christie's works and the redirect shifted to it?
Edited by Chabal2openWriter's Block?
I know the answer is gonna be obvious but I'm gonna ask this anyway...
Does anyone have Writer's Block when doing their trope entries or other pages? I wanted to create an Awesome Music page for Astro Bot (2024) (it's in my first Sandbox) but it remains unfinished because I struggle to write song descriptions... Makes me wish I can pass the editing torch to someone who can write better Moment Subpage descriptions.
Edited by SleepingStarAikunoopenWhy was the trope page for 366 Weird Movies removed?
So, there used to be a trope page for the website 366 Weird Movies
and I was wondering about why that page got removed?
openEdit War on YMMV.Wednesday. Could this use a rewrite?
So, here on YMMV.Wednesday, the following happened:
- Damian Wayne added
an Unintentionally Unsympathetic entry for Tyler.
- Endurable Narwhal 313 removed it
citing "A character can very much be a Tragic Villain even if they cross the Moral Event Horizon. Additionally, a vast majority of fans sympathize with Tyler and want o see him redeemed."
- Damian Wayne re-added
it, without discussing it anywhere, citing "1. A quick look on reddit, X, tumblr and bluesky shows this is a very comon criticism. 2. I may vhange the introduction. However "tragic villains" usally also have redeeming qualities".
Normally, I would stay out of it, but I actually think Damian Wayne is right to an extent. While a lot of fans sympathize Tyler, a good number don't and it's quite common to see that people just don't feel sympathy for him. But my thing is that the entry is weird to me:
- The second season was criticised, among other things, for trying to turn Tyler in a Tragic Monster, even after he crossed the Moral Event Horizon:
- While he does have a genuine tragic backstory, with many comparing Thornhill's manipulation of him to outright grooming, this doesn't change the fact he never once displayed regret for his actions. During his breakout from the asylum, Tyler still goes out of his way to hurt innocent people, including throwing Wednesday out of a window for no real reason.
- Before being found by his mother, he also wastes days obsessing over Wednesday and attacks Enid and the rest of Wednesday's friends for trying to protect her from him. Similarly to what had happened in the hospital, he was also acting of his own free will rather than being forced by his Master.
- While Francoise is an Abusive Parent, who outright chains him to a bed, Tyler's self-admitted main focus is trying to kill Wednesday again and he voices opposition to her plans only because he priorities killing the girl in question over everything else. He likewise has zero compunction murdering innocent people, at one point feeding an innocent veterinarian to Isaac and being fully willing to let Isaac eat Agnes's brain. Agnes being only thirteen years old.
- In the end, Tyler does turn against his mom and uncle and indirectly assists Wednesday and her family. However this happened only because he didn't want to lose his powers rather than any moral qualms. Indeed, his critics have pointed out he went happily along with Isaac's plan in the previous episodes even if it meant kidnapping Pugsley and burying Wednesday alive.
- The second season was criticised, among other things, for trying to turn Tyler in a Tragic Monster, even after he crossed the Moral Event Horizon:
I feel like it could be rewritten to be more concise and one entry. Is it cool if I rewrite it?
openAvoiding an edit war
So, on Alexandra Daddario, I removed a pothole to
What Beautiful Eyes! as that is No Real Life Examples, Please!. However, Fireblood addded it back
. I am unsure what to do here.
openAgenda Edits Videogame
I'm a bit concerned with these edits by SpeedyTornado, who seems to be a new troper with only three edits. Ands all directed at Ho Yay related content for Zenless Zone Zero
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=HoYay.ZenlessZoneZero&page=2
They cite "heavy bias" for removing entires Ambiguously Gay and Ship Tease for a specific female character, despite said entires having multiple in game examples for several individual interactions, and any other queer tropes and readings being left untouched.
Edited by IkeaHanopenRemoving the Sneaky's Snack Bar entry from the Analog Horror bullet point list
So there are two redlinks in the list of Analog Horror works with pages on the site, over at the Analog Horror page. One of them is Sneaky's Snack Bar, which was cut for having only three tropes, but the name is still there. I'm thinking that, since other redlinked items have been removed, it's high time Sneaky's got the axe as well. To put it simply: May I remove Sneaky's from the list since the trope page was cut? I'm asking here because I don't want to just cut it and then get a PM from someone yelling at me that they were working on the page and had plans to add the full contingent of tropes and such.
(the second redlink is for The Winterland Incident, which is a nonexistent page; might as well ask here if I can nuke that one, too)
Edited by mortimermcmireopenEdit War on Sword Art Online Character Pages
Recently, a newer troper named Seport07
removed anything pertaining to All the Other Reindeer, the trope itself and anything that may allude to it, from Yuuki's folder in the Sword Art Online Major Characters page
, and Sinon's Character page
, under the reasoning that nothing in the story states or implies that they were isolated.
Me, having engaged with both the anime and light novels and knowing that they were in fact isolated during their Dark And Troubled Pasts, re-added the entries explaining this. However, today they re-removed the entries on Yuuki's folder
, and Sinon's page
without discussion under the claim of having re-watched the anime and seeing no evidence of such for either character.
Can I ask that this is sorted out soon?
Edited by AnimeGameropenActor Myopia?
Something I noticed on foreign voice actor pages is that they note the actor playing in teh original dub (either live action or animated). For example, take this one on Megumi Han's page:
- Carrie White (Chloë Moretz) in the Japanese dub of Carrie (2013)
I know some dub actors are assigned to certain actors but I feel like this actor myopia in a way. Any thoughts on this?
openWhy can't I reuse old profile pics anymore?
I used to use previous photos for my profile image on forums/queries but for some reason it doesn't work anymore. What gives?
openHow do I write a crossed-off markup? Literature
I'm thinking about writing a subversion of a spoiler, but the "strike" markup no longer works. I want to cross off a few words, but I don't know how.
openLockout or Alienating Premise?
YMMV.Captain America Brave New World.
- Continuity Lock-Out: Unlike some recent MCU films where the continuity lockout came from the sheer volume of stuff audiences were expected to know going in, a common critique of Brave New World is that it relies on its audience remembering specific events from three "lesser" MCU entries, namely a Disney+ exclusive mini-series from four years prior, a film from four years prior released during the pandemic, and another film from seventeen years prior, the latter two being not well received by MCU fans. Brave New World rapidly recaps all of the necessary information from those installments to get everyone up to speed, but it also clearly expects them to be fresh on the audience's mind.
I intend to delete as cleanup
of
YMMV.The Marvels 2023 said CL doesn't apply if it sufficiently explains past events to newcomers to follow, audiences merely assuming lockout is something else. I'm asking if Audience-Alienating Premise might apply as it contributed to work being a Box-Office Bomb.
Relating this was removed from YMMV.The Marvels 2023:
- Audience-Alienating Premise: One the biggest factors that led to the movie's colossal Box-Office Bomb is the fact that the premise of the story involves Carol teaming up with Monica and Kamala, two characters that have previously appeared in the Disney+ streams. The problem with this is the fact that the general audience have no idea who they are, the former only appearing in a supporting role in the previous movie & WandaVision and the latter only appearing in her own series which itself isn't well-received by the viewers. While the movie did give a summary regarding who they are, the perceived Continuity Lock-Out ended up leading to non-comic book fans being turned away from the cinemas' premiere.
Removal reason was "I highly doubt this was that big of a problem, given that a general moviegoer would either just see a bunch of new characters or would have likely seen both Wandavision and Ms. Marvel beforehand if they were hyped for this movie. This is like arguing that audiences would be confused on seeing Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in Age of Ultron, or Black Panther in Civil War, or for that matter The Falcon in The Winter Soldier." Valid or not?
But there's this under AudienceAlienatingPremise.Film:
- This was a major reason why Thunderbolts* (2025) became an Acclaimed Flop. It sold itself on a unification of various villains from prior Marvel Cinematic Universe projects—which, due to the MCU's propensity towards killing off its villains, left it with a collection of second-string characters from divisive or less-acclaimed projects, with Black Widow (2021) and The Falcon and the Winter Soldier providing the lion's share. This put it in a weird position of simultaneously dealing with Continuity Lock-Out and not really benefiting from star power, and it bearing little resemblance to the most popular runs of the comic Thunderbolts didn't give it much of a draw with the core fanbase, either. The result was a lukewarm-at-best runup to release, and while the film tended to pleasantly surprise those who did see it, it nonetheless lost quite a bit of money, with even Kevin Feige admitting that the film was probably doomed from the get-go.
Since asking about other possible AAP examples, asking about this as well. And if valid, would disinterest/unfamiliarity with prior works be grounds for applying AAP to the others?
openWhat to name this page?
I'm thinking of making a page for a British theatre adaptation of The Talented Mr. Ripley (see here
for the webpage). It began being performed in 2025. I would call it The Talented Mr. Ripley (2025) or The Talented Mr. Ripley (Play), but apparently there's another separate play adaptation in Sydney (webpage here
) that also started performing this year.
openAdded "Keep Circulating the Tapes" to the Deer Hunter game series' trivia page Videogame
Since i added Keep "Circulating the Tapes" to the Deer Hunter game series' trivia page since some games got removed from IOS, Android and PC, the Android versions can be found using any APK websites but the IOS versions are hard to find does that count?
Edited by Elemental-PlayeropenBlue-linked index
"Uh-Oh" Eyes has been turned into an index or disambig (I don't know which), but on some pages like Recap.The Legend Of Vox Machina S 03 E 6 The Coming Storm, the link is blue, when it should be green.
openDoes writing something in a WMG tab actually make it harder for a creator to use that idea?
I remember reading that back when Babylon 5 was coming out, JMS was accused of stealing the premise for an episode about a Death of Personality murderer learning about his dark past because a fan idly said such a scenario would be cool on an online forum and JMS ended up presenting older story notes to show he'd had the idea all along or something like that. Does the same thing apply to WMG speculation for long-running works? Can creators actually use ideas they see on our WMG pages, or are we just dooming those ideas (or at least ones with a lot of specifity) to never be used because of how we suggested them?

See this discussion
on the Unintentionally Unsympathetic Cleanup thread.
I felt that this particular UU example didn't work because the character's unsympathetic nature was intentional, so I added more tropes on the film's main page to clarify this.
However, the user who originally wrote the UU example argues that UU still applies even if the jerkiness is intentional as long as the jerkiness overshadows any good qualities. This user rewrote the UU example to reference the Character Development I wrote on the main page.
However, I think the rewritten UU example still doesn't have sufficient context to explain why exactly the character is UU. I asked War Jay 77, who was part of the discussion on the cleanup thread, and she recommended that I bring it here.
We have also noticed that the UU example contains spelling and grammar errors, but I know those can be fixed if the example is given sufficient context.
Any advice you can provide on how to proceed would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Edited by DrNoPuma