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:
openPossible Fandom Agenda-Based Edits? Live Action TV
I've been monitoring the Supernatural page for a while now to cut down on agenda-based editing in wake of the show's controversial ending. I know enough about it from osmosis to understand what the different fandom camps are, which generally fall into three camps: Destiel fans (Dean/Castiel shippers, the largest group), Wincest fans (Sam/Dean shippers, second most common group), and Bibros (platonic Sam+Dean, the audience to whom the show has officially markets itself, though the show's LGBT Fanbase and Yaoi Fangirls have famously disputed this), and how acrimonious things are that keeping an eye on that page is necessary.
Destiel and Wincest fans notoriously do not get along, and I've had to clean up vandalism related to that war in the past. Bibros, though they officially prefer the brothers' relationship platonic, often take the side of Wincest fans against Destiel fans because they share more in common. Bibros are characterized as not liking non-Sam or Dean characters in general, but their dislike for Castiel is less because of Die for Our Ship and more because they consider him a Spotlight-Stealing Squad who took attention away from Sam and made the show more about an expanded cast. Many saw this as a good thing (Castiel was meant to appear in only a few episodes, but the very positive reception from audiences and critics led to him becoming an Ascended Extra and eventually a Breakout Character, especially since the earlier seasons developed a Broken Base where one half of fans believed that the show's exclusive focus on the brothers resulted in a great deal of They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character or Plot), but Bibros see him as the harbinger of They Changed It, Now It Sucks!.
Many of Lapistier's
edits on the Supernatural YMMV page and others are fine enough and stay nonpartisan, but other times it comes off as a Bibro Righting Great Wrongs or stealth complaining about fans who feel differently. I am not the only one who feels this way, am I?
open Odd deletions and edit reasons. Live Action TV
So the troper Pikachu 4 Prezident
Has made some deletions with some concerning edit reasons.
- Here.
They deleted a Values Resonance entry I think (I don't know where it was) with an edit reason that states this And as a final point, the whole "men in miniskirts" thing was stupid-looming back then and it still very much looks dumb now. I don't get why everyone feels the need to inject current year politics into their edits...
Theirs also this one.
- where tbf
the entry itself might be kinda a stretch. But his actual edit reason is strange.
There seems to be an agenda here....
Edited by miraculousopenSuspicious edits Live Action TV
I know Draco in Leather Pants is in need of TRS; probably there are inconsistencies in its definition and use. Still, I'm pretty sure the proper context for any trope entry needs to say how all of the requirements of the trope are met. For DILP, one of such requirements seems to be that the character in question is a jerk and/or a villain; consequently, I think a DILP entry needs to mention their bad actions. Also, I don't think a DILP entry should actually argue in their favor.
So, on YMMV.Wanda Vision, a Draco in Leather Pants entry saw a series of suspicious tweaks.
- Firstly, they deleted the bit about Hayward refusing to let Wanda bury Vision saying, "the reasons he gives her for why he can't give her Vision's body, that he can't just let a three-billion dollars’ android made of vibranium, an extremely valuable resource In Universe, be buried somewhere, are legitimate reasons that would've kept Wanda from attaining his body independent of Hayward and his Project Cataract plan." This sounds like justifying Hayward's disregarding Vision's will and treating him as a chunk of metal and not a person.
- Secondly, they said in their edit reason, "he did not make an attempt on the twins' lives twice. He only did it once" and cut any mention about that from the entry proper.
Then, Tropers/rva98014 edited
the entry with the edit reason, "Hayward did not plan to use the anomaly from the start to animate White Vision. He discovered Wanda's residual energy would work as a power source and used it." I don't think this explains the removal of the point about Hayward's disinterest in rescuing the townsfolk. Also, I feel that "he is quite willing to ensure Wanda is killed" is quite downplaying the fact that Hayward attempts to murder her by firing a missile at her. (In another reason for deletion
, the same troper cited "generalizations without providing real specifics.")
I edited the entry
to (hopefully) accurately describe Hayward endangering and attacking the kids. I mentioned the speculation about them being hex creations - well, I thought this was interesting; I think the show's final scene implies they are real but saying so in a trope entry would verge on Speculative Troping, so I wrote that this is left ambiguous in the show, erring on the side of caution. I'm sorry about my grumpy edit reason.
Then, Tropers/rva98014 edited
the entry again with the edit reason, "Draco In Leather Pants which is the situation where the fandom takes a controversial or downright villainous character and downplays his/her flaws. An example of this trope simply has to point out how this is occurring. It's not necessary to argue whether the "downplaying" is justified or not." I don't get how the edit reason goes with the edit itself because it removes the part pointing out Hayward's villainous actions but keeps the part that allegedly justifies him.
Then, Tropers/rva98014 made another little edit
with the reason, "I think the "apparently" is needed. Yes he did disregard Vision's will but the story is unclear if he had done this without approval. It would not be the first time that a will was overridden nor were his actions particularly clandestine making it hard to justify "project cataract" was a top secret project no one but he knew about." This doesn't bring any proof from the show proper to back up this speculation. The speculation that shifts the blame from Hayward.
Also, Tropers/rva98014 edited
another entry saying in their edit reason, "Agatha was not running the entire show, she just kept introducing elements of chaos into the scenarios because she was trying to get Wanda out of her pretend world. Sparky was never a real dog either and Agatha knew that she was only "killing" a prop." While the part about Agatha not running the entire show is true, the rest sounds like justifying her, too, and decisively calls Sparky "a prop." IIRC, the show doesn't indicate he isn't a real dog.
There's a mod note on top of the page saying that the guy is "an antagonist meant to be seen as an antagonist," and you should not whitewash him. From these edits, I get the feeling the Draco in Leather Pants entry about him is gradually turning into a self-demonstrating one, what's with cutting bits about his bad actions, downplaying, and justifying them. Should something be done?
open Reporting Edit Warring and Vandalism Live Action TV
Editor Rm74 has made repeated edits in the Euphoria pages (Character
and YMMV
as far as I know, but I haven’t checked the other Euphoria pages) that exaggerate a character’s negative traits and actions beyond reason— even outright making stuff up about them that they haven’t done or that they aren’t— and a lot of their edits are simply bizarre. I know that YMMV is opinion based, but even still their edits are beyond exaggeration, or even again just them making stuff up. Myself and some other editors have made attempts to fix these Ron The Death Eater style edits, but RM74 has repeatedly gone and added them back in or made new outlandish edits.
openAgenda-based editing Live Action TV
A large portion of regularmordecai’s
edits here center around the Stranger Things scene where Eleven hits Angela with a skate for bullying her (most of them are on the show’s YMMV page) and it definitely seems agenda-based as they keep pushing the message that fans shouldn’t have enjoyed that scene and exaggerating Eleven’s actions (such as calling her a school shooter despite the fact that she didn’t kill anyone). This has been going on for about ten months now and on several occasions I tried making these entries more neutral but they promptly edited them again to add additional complaints, often using weasel words to make it sound like much of the fandom agrees with them when it’s likely just their personal opinion. They recently added an entry
under the Nightmare Fuel page bashing real-life fans for thinking Angela had it coming and calling them “foolhardy”
for allegedly saying they wished they could have done the same to their bullies (and the entry is improper at any rate since the page is about the show itself, not real-life events).
openLarge scale editing without discussion and leaving behind quite some mess Live Action TV
So troper adonzo
has taken it upon himself to move large portions on MCU related pages.
While I am not necessarily opposed to what he did, I am opposed to how he did it, as he didn't discuss this with anybody and also left some mess behind
Biggest example: The folder for Mack is now double, both here
and here
, with no redirect.
I already PM'd him, but if he doesn't react, can his edits be reverted?
Edited by ForenperseropenEdit War and bad examples Live Action TV
The user Crunchy Crunch
keeps adding [[ https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Characters.ArrowverseSTARLabs
incorrect examples]] to Caitlin Snow/Killer Frost's entry on the Arrowverse: S.T.A.R. Labs
page. Either the examples are blatantly incorrect, a clear example of entry pimping for the character, tremendous Square Peg Round Trope, using different trope names to say the same thing, overexplaining/Purple Prose, or contradicting the example in the middle, making it redundant. They've also edited Barry Allen's
page with the same misinformation to make it seem like they have a romantic connection. When I removed the examples and explained why it was wrong (they seem fairly new to the site and probably don't know about the Edit War rules), they just put them back. I P Med them and they seemed to understand, but then they just started adding them back again. I tried to message them again but the system wasn't working (?), so I removed the examples again and said that if they did it again I would report them, which they're still ignoring. I'm aware that I added to the Edit War and I'm cool with being suspended myself if needs be.
openFlaming alert Live Action TV
CrazyMinh's
edits consists mostly of long-winded rants against Star Trek Discovery, and one case of self-promotion (I don't know if it's acceptable, but it doesn't follow the page's format). I removed their paragraph on Fanon Discontinuity (aside from flaming and claiming the voice of a whole fandom, they had erased a line and merged together two sets of examples). They have left long rants on the Headscratchers page, but I'm not sure about removing them outright. I'd like them to be officially warned about this at least.
openLarge Scale Edits and no response Live Action TV
So troper Metal Shadow X is one of the most active editors of the Arrowverse. And I want to make it clear that I do not wish to diminish him or his contributions which, for the most part, have been pretty good. However, as of late he keeps making
tons of large-scale adjustments to all pages, constantly moving stuff and never discussing any of it.
While that by itself might not warrant any action, what tipped me off was him moving the Star Labs Page
to Team Flash
.
The biggest problem here is that he outright deleted some character folders and hasn't put them up anywhere else. I have messaged him this morning, but haven't received anything back. He did make 1 edit afterwards though.
What would be the best course of action?
Edited by ForenperseropenPossible Single Issue Wonk and unnecessary bashing on a recap page Live Action TV
On a recap page of a few episodes of Just Beyond, I have found two examples where the troper named Colleen seem to hate the same aseop about Be Yourself and True Beauty Is on the Inside. The third example is basically the op bashing Kim Kardashian for no reason. Here's the example (Bold part means I highlighted it):
In Just Beyond S 1 E 3 Which Witch
- An Aesop: Yet another story about how Being Yourself is more important than fitting in.
In Just Beyond S 1 E 5 Unfiltered
- An Aesop: Another story about how Beauty Is Bad and True Beauty Is on the Inside.
- I Just Want to Be Beautiful: Lily wants to be as glamorous and attractive to be boys as the popular girls in her school. When she gets the app that starts magically altering her face, she gets greedy and uses it more and more until her face looks like Kim Kardashian threw up on her.
openDr Adler and Master Org are two different characters Live Action TV
Okay, this is the first time I've done this and I wasn't sure at first and though just speaking with the troper who kept doing it. However, doing some research I found this troper has a history of changing or altering things based more on their perception rather than what actually happens and wanted other to know of this.
It regards the characters section of Power Rangers Wild Force. There are spoilers for this season so if you hadn't watched it, be warned.
The Big Bad of the series is not the original Master Org by Dr. Victor Adler. He was friends with the Red Rangers parents and fell for his mother, but she was unaware of his feelings and she married who became Cole's father. Resentment turned to hatred, when they discovered seeds that were the remains of the original Master Org, and this is important to note, he swallowed them.
Now, the troper in question, TV Lubber, insists Adler was possessed by Master Org from the start and made him do terrible things. However, as someone who watches Wild Force once in a while, I can tell you this is not true in the slightest.
Adler has full agency over his actions, it's one of the reasons why in the YMMV section he, not Master Org, is given the Complete Monster entry. Until the episode The Master's Last Stand, it's repeatedly stated by himself that he's not the original or at least the original isn't in the driver's seat.
For example, one episode has him send his henchmen steal his tombstone built for his supposedly lost body. Upon reading it, how he supposedly died, he laughs about "So that's where they think I am..." Note that the wording clearly shows this is Adler, not the original, who is in full control of his actions.
This is why the original Master Org was given his own, albeit short, character entry to show he's the Greater-Scope Villain and could be influencing Adler, or influencing him.
Even to give TV Lubber the benefit of the doubt and assume Master Org has been in control of Adler the whole time, he still has full agency over all of his actions, including murdering Cole's parents, outright rejects his one chance at redemption towards the end of the series and clearly enjoys committing his evil deeds.
Anyway, I just wanted to ask what should I do about this? I don't want this to be an edit war, especially when the show itself makes it clear Adler isn't a good man under evil's control but genuinely evil himself.
openYMMV Riverdale issues Live Action TV
The YMMV.Riverdale page is full of anti-Betty stuff mostly made by one troper, hiddenelastic, who's used Base-Breaking Character and Creator's Pet incorrectly. I sent a Pm about Word Cruft since it was the closest match but we might need to craft PMs about problem tropes like that, IE " Base-Breaking Character needs to acknowledge both sides of an argument" or "Creator's Pet must meet four specific criteria".
Examples:
"Base-Breaking Character: Betty, especially as of Season 2. Some fans argue that they find Betty annoying and hypocritical. Many fans opinions of her have changed for the negative after she blackmailed and threatened Cheryl in 2x02. Her self righteous attitude hasn't done her any favors with some of the fans either. The fact that a lot of fans feel that Betty is favored by the writers, doesn't help matters at all."
" Creator's Pet: Betty. Dear God, Betty. It's speculated that Betty is arguably the writer's favorite given how much focus they give her. This in turn has turned many fans off of Betty's character and they actually find her more annoying and boring, especially in Season 2. Many fans have complained that they wish the writers would stop putting so much focus on Betty and focus on other characters like Kevin, Josie, and especially Cheryl. "
Edited by lalalei2001openPossibly Biased Editing on the Glee YMMV Page. Live Action TV
lakingsif edited and removed a couple entries on the YMMV page for Glee, claiming that they were "defending homophobia" even though I honestly fail to see how (I'm bi and thus part of the LGBT community myself; there's no way that I would genuinely try to defend homophobia). They were also one of the main editors for the TV Tropes Glee recaps (which, if I'm not mistaken, have actually popped up here on Ask The Tropers a couple times), and it's clear from the tone of these recaps, as well as some of the edits previously mentioned, that they really hate the character Finn Hudson, usually choosing to interpret his actions in the worst possible way and also consistently downplaying the flaws of characters like Quinn and especially Santana. Their edits seem really shoehorned and complain-y, with things like referring to Finn as "acting like the hetero savior of the gays", and many entries were deleted without any real explanation. I know it's a YMMV page and it's for more subjective reactions and all, but I feel like this is a little excessive.
Here are the edits in question: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.Glee#edit26500052
openA character listed under seemingly contradictory tropes... Live Action TV
So, going on a wiki-walk, I noticed something rather strange. The tropes Apologises a Lot and The Unapologetic would certainly seem to be contradictory tropes. The strange thing I noticed? Dean Winchester from Supernatural is listed under both.
I kinda get it? It's a long runner with a lot of character development; some arcs/seasons/episodes he's unrepentant about any of his antics (mostly earlier in the series), sometimes he's very repentant and says so (mostly later in the series). With 'Apologises a Lot', the editor lists 'self-blame' as the reason he's there — which to my mind isn't quite the same thing as being apologetic. The editor for 'The Unapologetic' lists lines like 'I'd do it again' and 'I made the right call', which are true lines, but the kind that, honestly, I feel come from a lot of characters on the show at various points. Often enough, eventually apologizing for... completely disregarding other characters viewpoints by being unapologetic?
I felt like I needed some more viewpoints here to get an idea of what if anything to do, if anything, and what process to follow. Since Discussion pages don't seem to get a lot of use and it affects more than one trope, I thought I'd bring it here. I'm not sure Dean belongs on either page. I might be more inclined to remove him from 'Apologises a Lot', if I were judging it.
Edited by PointMaid
Pls stop calling everything Harsher In Hindsight
openRequesting assistance with cleaning up the Series/BigBrother pages Live Action TV
So... I'm not sure this is the place to bring this up (I don't use forums much if ever), but I've been meaning to for a while now...
I edit for the show Survivor a lot, and someone brought up the point that you aren't really supposed to bring real life into reality tv shows.
This is a bit of an issue where Big Brother is concerned. I am mainly referring to the U.S versions, as they are the bulk of what's discussed.
On top of that, a lot of the entries are what people call... bad. Many entries are blatantly written during the season, with tense not being updated in the slightest, and a wholeeeeeee lotta entries are just wrong, particularly audience reactions.
I'd fix this myself but
1) I do not watch or even have the capability of watching Big Brother, and am restricted to what the wiki + internet will tell me (which is not all that much) + what is blatantly wrong (which is a lot).
2) New stuff keeps getting added and I can't keep up.
3) Some of the stuff that sounds too ridiculous and/or conspiratorial to be factually accurate is actually correct. For example, these:
- Creator's Pet: Frankie of 16. They even delayed a challenge for a couple of hours to save him from elimination.Broken Base: Is Big Brother 21 a good season? Due to the unique combination of having one of the worst pre-jury sessions in the history of the show, along with a great jury phase where nearly every pre-jury villain got what was coming to them week after week, only to end with the season's unofficial heroes getting evicted just before the finale for the season's Manipulative Bastard to win, and then promptly get called out on his racist behavior... yeah, Big Brother 21 is polarizing, to say the least.
To give an idea of some of the issues happening here, I'm gonna post some images.

- Just blatant misuse here, though I do wonder where it goes (Julie Chen is the show's host)Click if you need to see the transcript Big "OMG!": A few days before Double Eviction night, CBS Chairman Les Moonves - Julie Chen's husband - was fired in the wake of several accusations of sexual harassment against him. At the conclusion of DE night, Julie signed off using her married surname for the first time in the show's history. Within the hour, Twitter exploded.

- This is somehow an Adorkable entryClick if you need to see the transcript Raven is very lovable and dorky and she's also the type to get easily excited over things. She shows to be enthusiastic and perky come every eviction vote with Julie. Raven was also the one who wanted temporary tattoos after the "Inked & Evicted" challenge ended. Her showmance partner Matt chose a temptation where he was made to dress as a ballerina. Raven is a dance teacher, so, naturally, after the challenge ends, he gave his tutu for her to wear for fun. However, her adorable personality is later on tainted and viewed in a more negative light as she reveals that underneath her cutesy persona, there lies a very nasty and violent personality. She's not as cute when she's bullying people or exploding in anger at others. The fact that she constantly embellishes stuff about her real life does not make her the least bit endearing.

- Under Critical DissonanceClick if you need to see the transcript Season 20. Fans love it because it's gotten back to unpredictable gameplay, but there's a lot of ego in the house this season and controversial behavior both on the televised episodes and especially on the live feeds.

- Under Never Live It DownClick if you need to see the transcript Averted - Jade Goody would have never lived down the bullying of Shilpa Shetty in Celebrity Big Brother or her stints on the previous Big Brothers if she were still alive. Which is, in hindsight... very saddening. Goody's vile behavior was punished on the most extreme level- her body withered and developed terminal cervical cancer. She spent one month married to fellow houseguest Jack Tweed. And what makes this so eerie is that Goody developed this cancer when she appeared on the Indian version of Big Brother, Bigg Boss... after she previously harassed an Indian actress... two days into the playing.....almost as though she fell victim to a spiteful Indian curse coming onto that show.

- Deleted this example of The Scrappy already, but it's a worth posting as an example because it has pretty much everything you shouldn't do.Click if you need to see the transcript Swaggy C is hated for being an arrogant douche 90% of the time, and showmancing Bayleigh 10% of the time. As soon as that guy opened his mouth he quickly became one of the most disliked African American contestants in a VERY long time. Though like Rachel he did get some woobie points after revealing his backstory where his mom left him at three years old, and his dad died when he was in high school. He even got a Take That, Scrappy! from Julie Chen who showed him his intro video showing he didn't want to be seen as the jerky, smug, alliance leader. He's also a sore loser given that he refuses to talk to Tyler the one who orchestrated his backdoor on the outside.
And thennnnn there's the Character pages, which consist of pretty much everything the viewers want them to.
I seriously have no idea what goes into character pages normally, but I'm pretty sure it ain't any of this.

- (Also contains speculation and assumptions)Click if you need to see the transcript Too Dumb to Live: Why did Derrick choose to become aligned so close with Cody? Because Cody's too stupid to think Derrick could possibly be a threat. He's thought of pretty much no major moves by himself. To wit: Cody won an early Head of Household. He used it to target Brittany, who had no intention of getting him out. He never stopped to question whether or not she'd actually target him. Joined in on voting out a lot of people who would have taken him further in the game like Christine and Nicole. Not once stopped to think that Derrick had never faced the block until the final 50 minutes of the game, missing the obvious red flag of that and how he was just following Derrick's word. When confronted with the chance to bring Victoria, who would have gotten him a guaranteed win, to the finals, he chose to take Derrick. Guess who won?

- The What An Idiot page for this show is somehow nicer than the character page.Click if you need to see the transcript Idiot Hero: Cody comes across as one of the dumber and less intelligent houseguests of the season. He has proven time and time again that he is not smart in terms of strategy and he strongly depends on Derrick in the strategic department. Cody won the Final HOH of the season, which meant that he was able to choose or decide who he wanted to take to the Final 2 with him. His options were either the biggest threat and most dangerous player in the game yet his closest ally and friend (Derrick) or the most useless, terrible player in the game who is considered to be the ultimate floater who got dragged to the end but whom Cody doesn't personally like (Victoria). Who does Cody ultimately end up choosing to take to the Final 2 with him? That's right. DERRICK. Cody actually took Derrick, the most dangerous player in the entire game, to the Final 2, somewhat feeling confident that he could beat him, instead of actually taking Victoria, the ultimate goat, someone whom he 100% knows he could have beaten. When it came time for the jury to ask the two of them questions, Cody was both shocked and surprised to hear how the jury really viewed him, which was basically as Derrick's loyal lapdog or puppy. It was at that point that Cody realized that he made a half a million dollar mistake and realized that he had no shot at beating Derrick. Cody ended up losing to Derrick in a near unanimous 7-2 jury vote. Cody, did anyone tell you that Big Brother isn't about loyalty when you get to the Final 3 and even more, the Final 2? You're in a game to win $500,000! What. an. idiot.

- Click if you need to see the transcript Bait the Dog: Frankie appeared as though he would be a likeable, upbeat and happy gay houseguest. Turns out that he is really extremely narcissistic, hateful, vile, attention seeking, and self absorbed. Shouldn't we have all remembered Andy from last season?


- Click if you need to see the transcript Jerkass: Mixed with Bait the Dog - it starts off as a nice and well-mannered house, but once Paul enters the fray, all hell breaks loose. It also rivals BB 15's rotten apple cast. Big Brother 15 gave us bigot city, Big Brother 19 gives us Spoiled Brat city mixed with Crazytown. All the thoroughly nice people except for Kevin (and arguably Mark) are gobbled up before the game reaches the halfway point. So many of them are gonna have to go into hiding post-season and freeze out their detractors on social media. If your name isn't Cameron, Megan (Public service announcement: please don't harass the PTSD sufferer, or you're scum), Jillian, Dominique, Ramses, or Kevin, you gunna get it!

- Good lord this is long...Click if you need to see the transcript The Bully: Many of the houseguests used intimidation tactics and bullying to further their games. But this had more to do with having a group or mob mentality more than anything else. Houseguests such as Paul, Alex, Christmas, Josh, Cody, Jessica, and Raven had no problem partaking in the bullying of other houseguests which caused a lot of animosity and tension to rise in the house. Paul was the centrepiece of pretty much all of the bullying in the house as he was the one who was encouraging and inciting it for the most part. His targets were primarily Cody and Jessica, but he would also use other houseguests such as Josh to also bully them as well. Cody and Jessica bullied people such as Christmas, Alex, Paul, and Josh at various points in the game. Cody verbally attacked and physically threatened Paul after he had nominated him in Week 5. Cody also bullied Josh in Week 6 that he was going to physically beat up Josh outside of the house and make his life a living Hell. Jessica also did her fair share of bullying when she humiliated Josh in front of everyone after not voting to keep Jillian by calling him a crybaby victim. Josh ended up crying hysterically afterwards and the other houseguests had to comfort him. Jessica also personally attacked Josh numerous times by fat shaming him (calling him fat ass, widdle-waddle, fat f-ck, etc) and insulting his intelligence by calling him a moron and the dumbest person she's ever met. This also resulted in Josh crying and the houseguests having to comfort and support him. Christmas also did her fair share of bullying but most of it was towards Cody and Josh. She attacked Cody by calling him a disgraceful marine and questioning has military service. And Christmas would also act as a Big Sister Bully to Josh whenever he ended up doing something that she didn't like or approve of. Alex bullied people like Jessica, Cody, Elena and Kevin unnecessarily. She constantly bashed them behind their back and antagonized them by starting fights and conflicts with them. Josh also frequently resorted to using intimidation and bullying towards other houseguests such as Cody, Mark, Elena, Kevin, Jessica. He has personally attacked all of them, insulted them and has resorted to banging pots and pans in their faces in order to torment them all while singing a circus tune. Raven also got into the mob mentality of bullying when she yelled and attacked Jessica by calling her endless derogatory names and consistently cursing at her and Cody during the house fight that took place in Week 5. At some point, everyone has come across as a bully and this is definitely a season where bullying took centre stage in the game. The last recent season to showcase bullying to this strength was Big Brother 15.
openMisaimed Complaint (Halo 2022)? Live Action TV
So there's a bit on Halo's YMMV page about They Changed It, Now It Sucks!, that is railing against the Fanservice in the show.
- A lot of fans have been complaining about the show's heavy emphasis on Fanservice from a franchise with very little of it aside from Cortana's game design, with the second through fourth episode featuring at least one nude scene, including from the Chief himself. It's even more ironic considering the reaction to Cortana's design for the show, which made her more modest.
The issue I have is none of the scenes in question are played for Fanservice at all. Even calling them nude scenes is only technically correct, as two of them are scenes of characters performing surgery on themselves, another is simply a quick shot of a character getting changed in and out of clothes, and then there's one of a character in a bath that is played less for "look at how sexy this man is" (though it is Burn Gorman) and more for "look how decadent this new ruler of a planet is" Seems more like a complaint about human nudity in general, which seems a bit odd. That's ignoring the weasel words of "A lot of fans".
I figure the example should either be cut or rewritten.
openWhat do you do with a page mostly plagiarized? Live Action TV
I’m doing a plagiarism clean-up of Doctor Who’s trivia pages. I got tipped off a while ago that almost every page of the first Three doctors’ pages has examples (mostly under What Could Have Been) that have been plagiarized from either the show’s wiki or this comprehensive website
(which the wiki itself has cribbed from).
For example, several trivia examples from the episode “An Unearthly Child” (the very 1st episode of the series) had been plagiarized from it’s wiki article’s story notes.
- The first school scene was re-written to reduce the tension between Barbara and Ian. In the original script, Ian says, "When I've had a bad day, I come in here [the staff room], and I want to smash all the windows". Barbara retorts, "It hasn't been a bad day", and Ian remarks, "You're just naturally like that?" Barbara replies, "I hope not. I've had another kind of day. A very puzzling kind of day".
- Ian and Barbara's relationship was much more romantic in the original script.
- In the original script, the "PRIVATE" notice at the junkyard was originally supposed to appear significantly newer than the lettering on the gates. The junkyard was also supposed to contain "a broken-down old shed".
And while doing cleanup the trivia page for the episode “The Romans”
and it is seeping with plagiarism, up to and including Wikipedia.
So how should I go forward with this? I’ve been editing previous pages to remove plagiarism, but this particular page is compromised with it.
Edited by CanuckMcDuck1openAbby Cadabby Live Action TV
From PeripheryHatedom.Live Action TV:
- Showing that history can indeed repeat itself, Abby is currently getting the same treatment as Elmo, mainly from the generation of young adults and teens that grew up watching and fell in love with Elmo. Abby's popularity with the older fanbase is a Broken Base—some find her a refreshing change from the two decades of Elmo (although how long this will last before they start getting annoyed by her remains a question), while others still don't care and still want the focus to be back on Big Bird and the Muppets (and human characters) of their time. The root cause of the hatedom here is The Generation Gap combined with a Nostalgia Filter, combined with a heaping dose of They Changed It, Now It Sucks!.
openClarification On This Live Action TV
From Mean Character Nice Actor Live Action TV
- Mark Pellegrino has pretty much built his career on playing assholes that include abusive husbands, Jacob and Lucifer. In real life, he is a devout christian and family man who comes across as very sweet, relaxed, funny and very appreciative of fans.
But from Wikipedia:
- Pellegrino was born in Los Angeles, California. He is an adherent of Objectivism, a philosophy created by Russian-American writer Ayn Rand.[4] Pellegrino does not identify as a libertarian. Though he considers this description to be the closest to his political views, he considers libertarianism to be an anarchist political ideology and has distanced himself from this ideology, describing himself solely as an Objectivist, stating that he sees a place for government in society.[5][6][7][8] He has described his political views, instead, as classical liberalism,[9] and has also described himself as a radical capitalist.[6] He is married to Tracy Aziz and is the stepfather of her daughter Tess.[10]
- Pellegrino is an atheist.[11]
Did someone pull the bit about him being a Christian out of their ass, or has renounced faith at some point?
Edited by shoboni

Troper robin8821
seems to be on a editing spree for character pictures.
While that in itself is not something bad, he has changed a whole lot of stuff (see here
) without any discussion I could see.
He seems to replace a lot of pictures and even outright
delete
some of them, without any real apparent reason.
Edit: Keeps going
as we speak. I honestly think most of his pictures aren't an improvement, quite the contrary.
EDIT 2: He also left a whole lot of "Some caption text" captions.
Edited by Forenperser