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:
openPage move request Literature
I've been thinking that the page for the Black Lagoon book series should be moved to The Black Lagoon which seems to be its official name, and it would help avoid confusion with the Black Lagoon anime. Is this something I can do myself or do I need permission from a mod first?
Edited by Javertshark13openStrengthSorceryFinesse is limited to exactly three classes?
In Strength, Sorcery, Finesse, there is this hidden note.
"If your example has four or more types of character classes, than it belongs in either Common Character Classes or Character Class System."
But the trope description itself has full elaborate section about hybrid classes, which suggest that four or more classes would be fine.
So I think either the hidden note or the hybrid section should be remove.
(I adked in duscussion page already, and get the usual silence)
Edited by KuruniopenUnsolicited DM regarding Complete Monster
So, I got a DM from someone(Finding Prosperity) I've never spoken to before regarding my activity in the Complete Monster thread.
They noted that I had upvoted Derek Danforth a few months ago, and used that as a segue to request I go out of my way to watch a musical to propose the villain from there on their behalf. They wouldn't even be forthcoming with the work's title or who the villain was, saying I'd need to figure it out for myself.
They have a whooping two edits in their account history and a single forum post from back in April. They provided no adequate reason they couldn't propose the villain themselves, which makes the whole thing even more suspicious. I know there's been past issues with ban evaders/suspendees D Ming users involved in the thread for various reasons, so I thought this merited reporting on the grounds of standing a good chance to be the same situation. At the very, they're trying to use me as a meat puppet
Edited by BozzyopenInconsistency in trope description of TheVoiceless
I just noticed that the trope description of The Voiceless contradicts itself. It explicitly states that it's for characters who can speak, but for some reason don't, at least not on-stage. But then it contains this paragraph:
"Sometimes The Voiceless is The Team Pet, who is no doubt smarter than his masters, but can only communicate through normal animal noises and perhaps the occasional sardonic eye roll or other body language."
By that description, the team pet is The Speechless (a character who can't speak) and not The Voiceless.
At first, I was going to bring it to the Trope Description Improvement Drive, but the pinned post there, which lists the thread's purpose, didn't mention correcting contradictions (it seems to be more about improving writing and adding clarity). Should I bring it there anyway? Or can we build consensus here? I don't think it's a case for TRS since I'm not proposing a change of the actual trope definition.
Edited by GnomeTitanopenAsking if these entries are valid Videogame
Originally posted on the BB thread and here but decided to rewrite part of it.
These examples from BrokenBase.Touken Ranbu are kinda shakey. This is primarily because a majority of them were added by one troper (biggestSoap) and since the fandom is fairly niche (in English speaking spheres), I have a feeling that these entries might be biased or apply to other fandoms besides Touken. All opinions I have on the issues are bolded.
- In July 2015, an update changed several charactersnote Izuminokami, Ookurikara, and Doudanuki from tachi to uchigatana. Naturally, fans were divided over this change, with some not really minding while others were unhappy, considering the change a big downgrade for the characters; however, their tachi-grade stats weren't nerfed, making them a strong uchigatana trio. Especially Izuminokami, who currently holds the position as the strongest uchigatana. unsure
- How the Revisionists are portrayed in and out of game counts. Some are fine with their monsterous characterization, since it brings more focus on the Saniwa's swords and leaves less room to root for the empire like what happened with the Abyssal Fleet in KanColle. Others argue that the Revisionists barely have character at all, and treating them as little more than cannon fodder takes away from exploring how the factions operate and the possible implications of how they came to be (See Fanon below). unsure (also has a "see below" mark)
- The announcement of the two anime adaptations had mixed reactions. Some people fear that the adaptations will not be very good (especially considering the low opinions many fans have of the KanColle anime), while others are happy about the prospect of their favorite swords getting animated. Another reason why a part of the fandom (mostly overseas fans) are against the adaptations is because they fear how the new Touken Ranbu fans will be. It was notable how they held the popularity of the franchise back, however, with two upcoming anime, chances are pretty high the bigger mass will discover Touken Ranbu. unsure
- Related to above, will the Saniwa (and by extension, what will the Saniwa's gender will be) appear in the anime or not has sparked debates, similar to the adaptation of KanColle. While the saniwa of Touken Ranbu - Hanamaru sparked some debate over whether or not they should have been depicted in full or just have another sword take the role (amusingly, similar to KanColles own adaptation), Ufotable's version for Katsugeki/Touken Ranbu ended up in some wondering why the saniwa wasn't depicted as off screen like the Hanamaru one, why they looked like a little boy, and whether the decision to go for an androgynous look and not confirm either way instead of featuring the more popular interpretations of the character was an example of pandering, chickening out, a good idea, or something else entirely. not only does it contain Word Cruft (related to the above), I'm very unsure of this entry since a lot games have self-insert like Main characters'
- While Kiwame has been well-received by most players as a way to upgrade the weak tantous to be useful on later maps, some are concerned by the changes in their lines that focus more on that Saniwa's attention and less on their own character tics. In a particular case, many fans of Imanotsurugi are reluctant to give him the Kiwame upgrade because it retcons a huge part of his character, and tragically so. unsure
- However, as later swords got remodels, it seems this trait is only reserved for tantous only. Justified, as tantous are supposed to be protection weapons. natter
- In the Western fanbase, there are quite a few vocal fans that openly question the morality of shipping the younger looking toudan, particularly the tantou, with the swords that are clearly intended to be adults, believing it to be disgusting despite the actual ages of the swords who in reality are well over centuries old; some of the younger looking sword boys are older than the characters that look like adults. There are fans that argue back that the age they appear to be is irrelevant due to the reasoning mentioned. The JP fanbase generally doesn't make a big deal out of this but that doesn't stop the debates from coming up. Valid but I do think it might be better as Values Dissonance
- Now that the first seasons of the Anime adaptations have concluded, which one was superior? Touken Ranbu - Hanamaru or Katsugeki/Touken Ranbu? In Japan, it's made abundantly clear that Fans tend to prefer Hanamaru's adaptation over Katsugekinote and the dvd/bluray sales only hammer this home but in the west it's more divided. The below examples are arguing with themselves which may be part for the course for a BB entry but I do think that some of it just complain-y
- Some say Katsugeki was better because it supposedly had more of a plot, "relevant" character arcs, played up the oft-forgotten "protecting history" angle, and to some felt more like a Touken Ranbu anime in adapting the more dramatic aspects of the swords' backstoriesnote mainly only with the two leads Izuminokami and Mutsunokami, plus tritagonist Horikawa; the rest of the squad, despite being a part of the main cast, did not really get much development or arc focus and decry Hanamaru as "the Pixiv version" that makes the series look no different than any other Slice of Life series, and overexaggerates the characters and their arcs to match with fan perceptions (leading to events like Yamatonokami's controversial desicion to stop Okita from getting injured at the Ikeda-ya). Some also feel like the series crams too many characters in to make sure nobody feels left out, at the expense of the main pair's arc and development, up until the end. kinda complaining about more casual stories
- However, others argue that Katsugeki was a soulless bore of an adaptation whose only saving grace was it being visually impressive, and that it didn't live up to what it promised/was hyped up to be. In comparison, fans of Hanamaru say that this series felt like it was made for the fans, fun to watch, took an Ensemble Cast approach thus giving all fans more time to see their faves instead of staying focused on one (and to a VERY LESSER degree, two) sword group and was supposedly more faithful to the game and characterization; whereas Katsugeki took various liberties, particularly with their citadel's lore (the multiple Konnosukes in one citadel and being able to only send two swords at a time back in history at one point, in particular) and characterization/dynamics. People who prefer Hanamaru often refer to Katsugeki as a "Fate/stay night with a Touken Ranbu skin" anime and various other snarky nicknames involving that franchise due to their similarities in animation and other things ufotable lifted from their previous Fate adaptations. Complaining that an adaption is bad
- There are some fans who say they like both adaptations but lean more towards one, and those who say that both adaptations sucked or didn't like the heavy Shinsengumi focus on both series' leads (two Okita swords in Hanamaru, two Hijikata swords in Katsugeki) and their commonality of attempting to prevent their masters' most famous historical injuries. Some other fans tend to prefer the Stage play, Musical and Manga adaptations over both, while others just prefer the original game and fan created content. unsure
- Lastly, there are fans who whole heartily liked both adaptations or felt that both adaptations fulfilled their purpose of what they were adapted to be like with Hanamaru being the Slice of Life anime it was promised to be and Katsugeki being the action oriented other half. unsure
- The English translation of the game divided fans. For one thing, the website it was hosted on was largely known for ecchi and hentai games, so playing the game made certain fans uncomfortable, not only for the porn ads that would surround the game window, but for the sheer absurdity of such a tame game about men being hosted in such a place. For another, many fans took issue with the incredibly liberal translation, which often changed the characterisations of the boys, and contained many spelling and grammar errors. Some fans refuse to touch the English version thanks to all of these issues, while others think that the issues are minor and are just glad the game got an official translation at all. maybe valid
- The shipping of swords who are brothers can cause controversy, with one side claiming that it's incest and therefore immoral, and the other side countering that fiction has nothing to do with a writer or consumer's morality and therefore what a person ships doesn't matter. The issue gets muddied further by the nonhuman natures of the Toudan, and that what exactly makes a pair of swords "brothers" varies from character to character. Much like the tantou issue above, this argument is exclusive to the Western side of the fandom due to Values Dissonance. As squicky as it is, its a fairly common talking point in a decent amount of fandoms so this is not a new issue
- Over the years, fans have become conflicted about the statuses of the Series Mascots (Mikazuki Munechika, Yamanbagiri Kunihiro, Kashuu Kiyomitsu, Kasen Kanesada, Hachisuka Koutetsu, and Mutsunokami Yoshiyuki) and how much emphasis the franchise places on them for what they assume is for no other reason than because they're the mascots: Unsure and violates the Examples Are Not Recent rule
- Dissatisfaction with Mikazuki's "special positions" has grown over time because of his frequent appearances in merchandise, attention from advertisers, assurance of an important role in every adaptation, appearance on the cover of anthologies, and other benefits. Also, unlike the five starter swords, he is not limited to being advertised as part of a group, meaning he is often promoted independently of the Sanjou, Tenka Goken, and, on occasion, the starter swords, leading to accusations of preferential treatment, especially over the other Tenka Goken who some believe he is treated as better than, despite there being no evidence of this in the story content that features the Tenka Goken.note While most works focus on Mikazuki Munechika due to his mascot status, every work treats the Tenka Goken group as a whole as special because of their status, even the original game itself. Others have argued back that Mikazuki showing up is justifiable and inevitable because of his status as one of the most recognizable characters and that his appearances don't take away from focus from other characters in the franchise, as he often isn't even the main character of the adaptations he appears in, with the exceptions being the live-action movies and Kabuki, due to the works either featuring an Ensemble Cast or focusing on some other character (ironically usually being some other overused Touken Danshi). There have also been some accusations of hypocrisy on the part of critics, as some other non-mascots like Tsurumaru Kuninaga and the Shinsengumi swords have shown up almost as often in merch and just as often in adaptations without facing the same heat that Mikazuki does because they aren't outright regarded as mascot characters.
- Yamanbagiri Kunihiro has also received criticism over the years, particularly following the announcement of the stage play's anime adaptation, due to his frequent appearance in adaptations, to the point where the only major adaptation he has not appeared in is Kabuki, making him more prominent than even the equally popular Kashuu Kiyomitsu. Like with Mikazuki, fans have argued about preferential treatment because of his popularity and a desire to see other swords promoted more, especially among the five starter swords, as, with the exception of Kashuu Kiyomitsu, the Mutsunokami, Kasen, and especially Hachisuka have made far fewer appearances and most of their advertising comes from being advertised as a part of the five starter swords group rather than because of their individual characters (Although Mutsunokami has been a little better off in recent years than to the introduction of the Jouishishi).
- Kashuu Kiyomitsu receives this as well, albeit to a somewhat lesser extent because he appears in less adaptations unless it somehow relates to the equally oversaturated Shinsengumi group (the first Touken Ranbu Musical being an exception). However, his Spotlight-Stealing Squad tendencies have been highlighted by fans who have watched the musicals (not helped by the fact that his actor is incredibly popular, not just the character, giving the production more reason to promote him over others), and the anthologies that are impossible to get through without at least three chapters that concentrate primarily on Kashuu and his Shinsengumi comrade. Fans of the other five starter swords have also pointed out just how long his Special Investigation event is compared to the other starter swords, leading to accusations of bias.
Any thoughts?
openSpyro: Shadow Legacy armadillos in Spyro 1 Cliff Town- what trope does it fall under? Videogame
I just played through all of Spyro: Shadow Legacy, adding tropes to its page here, and just started playing through the Reignited remake of Spyro 1. Due to this technically out-of-order play order and reaching a certain stage in Spyro 1 Reignited, an odd, idiosyncratic question has come up.
In the original Spyro game, Cliff Town was implied to just be inhabited by Peace Keeper dragons. Here in Shadow Legacy (where the trope is meant for), the armadillos live there instead, with no dragons there. However, while Spyro 1's instruction book at least affirms the Peace Keeper dragons lived in their territory as a whole, nothing in it or the original game necessarily says no-one else lives in Cliff Town, and Shadow Legacy doesn't say anything to contradict Spyro 1 regarding Cliff Town despite the armadillos. As a result, I don't believe it can be considered a Retcon. In addition, since this is part of the same continuity as the classic games and is also a video game itself, I don't believe it falls under Adaptation Expansion. I also want to say Remember the New Guy? or New Neighbours as the Plot Demands, but some little details stop each from being a perfect match.
So I guess the question is "What trope would a new species living in a past canon location fall under, let alone the Shadow Legacy armadillos living in Spyro 1's Cliff Town?" Is it one of those tropes after all, or another one?
openKeystone Vs Decapitated Army
So I was looking at the two tropes and I must say I can't really tell the difference. The former seems to imply that the "keystone" is just anything from a book to a portal, and Decapitated is when the Keystone is the leader, but the page image and several examples use the army being routed once the leader goes down as an example of a Keystone army. The decapitated army page says that Keystone is when "the villain's entire army collapses without him," but that seems to be what Decapitated Army itself is describing. I'm sure there is a difference, but I can't quite tell what it is.
openPotential Problem Troper
Back in June, hubakon1368 cut a large number of examples from TabletopGame.Vampire The Masquerade — the edits can be seen starting here
. The first edit provides the standard template Example does not sufficiently explain how it applies reason; the later two do not. However, two problems:
- Firstly, ZCEs should be commented out rather than cut wholesale, but more importantly
- These aren't ZCEs. These are the entries that were cut:
- Always a Bigger Fish:
- Additionally, vampires fare poorly against the supernaturals of the two other big World of Darkness games. A frenzied werewolf can rip apart a group of vampires, and unfortunately for the socially isolated vampires, werewolves are pack hunters.
- "Wormwood", one of the apocalyptic scenarios in the Gehenna sourcebook, features this realization as a major component in the vampires' fate. Even the greatest of the Kindred — princes, Methuselahs, Antediluvians, Caine himself — learn the hard way that even such beings as they, for all their power and cunning and ancient wisdom, are insignificant compared to the might and will of God. If the Creator decides that the vampires' time on Earth is up, then that's the way it's going to be, and even the greatest, darkest and vilest of the Kindred shall be helpless before His judgement.
- Believing Their Own Lies: The Camarilla's Inner Circle denied the existence of the Antediluvians originally as a means to establish themselves as the strongest vampires in the world. Over time, they forgot it was a lie.
- Beneath The Earth:
- Nosferatu usually congregate in sewers, abandoned tunnels and the like.
- Beneath New York, once lay a horror more terrifying than any Nosferatu. It was thought by the Nosferatu to be a Nictuku, a childe of Absimilard, the Nosferatu Antediluvian. Only Lambach Ruthven knew the truth. It was the Tzimisce Antediluvian. He tried to tell people what was in there, but no one believed him... Then it pulled itself together... and left to meet with its "siblings".
- Doomed by Canon: In the Dark Ages books, characters are given a Destiny along with the regular info, and many of them meet violent ends. Also, quite a few clans are doomed: the Salubri, the Cappadocians, the Ravnos, and also in Gehenna the Tremere, the Giovanni, the Setites, and the Tzimisce. If you choose to play the Wormwood chronicle for Gehenna instead, God destroys all vampires except for a handful whom he rewards with mortality.
- First Time in the Sun: A possible ending for your repentant character in the Gehenna scenario "Wormwood" has you confront the sun as a human once again. This is an example of Cue the Sun as well.
- God: The Abrahamic God plays a large role in the setting's backstory, although He is fairly distant in the present, as He was the one to mark Caine in the first place and curse him to become the first vampire. In "Wormwood", one of the apocalyptic scenarios in Gehenna, He returns to the fore after deciding that vampires need to be gotten rid of for the good of humanity. (Only cut the bolded part.)
- Muggles Do It Better: Individual humans ignorant of the existence of vampires are all but helpless if they find themselves confronting one, but humans in very large numbers, humans with powerful modern weapons, and humans educated in the ways of the undead can pose quite a danger to the average vampire indeed. This, of course, is why the Masquerade exists in the first place.]]
- Outside-Context Problem: The Kindred have a great number of prophesies and theories concerning the end times and the Final Nights, and a great many schemes, plans and contingencies laid aside for that eventuality. In "Wormwood", one of the apocalyptic scenarios in the Gehenna sourcebook, absolutely none of this comes to pass — the end times come unannounced, bereft of any of the signs the vampires spent centuries watching for, in a way that none of them predicted, because God has made up His mind that the Kindred have overstayed their welcome on the Earth. One night, the eldest vampires begin to notice a loss in power, and forty nights later every vampire on Earth is dead; many go to their final end never understanding what is happening to them.
There is also this bit, which is a ZCE, but should have been commented out instead of being cut:
- Humanity Ensues: The climax of the "Wormwood" Gehenna scenario, if your vampire was "good" enough. Poor Ferox...
(In some instances, I omitted bullet points that were kept.)
I don't think that any of these are ZCEs by any definition of the term. However, I find it notable that several are connected to "Wormwood", one of the apocalyptic scenarios presented in the Gehenna sourcebook, where God kills off vampirekind but gives a small group the chance to redeem and become human (other scenarios have vampires destroyed by other supernatural forces, or just do each other in in civil war). Some of the cut material is unrelated, like the first entry on Always a Bigger Fish, Believing Their Own Lies, and Beneath The Earth, but I think it's notable that the editor purged all material related to this scenario from the page.
Permission to restore the cut material?
(Beneath The Earth would need to be moved to other applicable tropes if such as available, obviously.)
(Also, for the sake of transparency, I feel I should mention that a decent portion of the cut material was originally written by me some time ago, which is part of the reason why I'm not just restoring things myself.)
EDIT: I looked through their edit history, and there were some other suspect edits at the same time:
- Crosswicks for Always a Bigger Fish (here
) and Outside-Context Problem (here
) were removed.
- A wick to Outside-Context Problem on Characters.Werewolf The Apocalypse The Wyrm was changed
to Crippling Overspecialization (not hugely odd in itself, but in context with the others it's a bit eyebrow-raising).
- There were other big cuts
on Characters.Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines Others that removed examples of Always a Bigger Fish, Anti-Villain, Hold the Line, Implacable Man, "Instant Death" Radius, The Juggernaut, Our Werewolves Are Different, and Man of Kryptonite.
This is a fairly thorough campaign of removal focused on Vampire: The Masquerade in particular, and the general pattern seems to be:
- Removal of examples of Always a Bigger Fish and Outside-Context Problem.
- Removal of examples based on a gameplay scenario where the Abrahamic God kills off vampires.
- Removal of examples describing werewolves being stronger than vampires.
openQUESTION: can I add the pale garden to the fridge horror page on minecraft? Videogame
CCONTEXT: The name kind of speaks for itself. I have a fridge theory based on how the creak is behaving, along the way to defeating it. Can I begin the small edits? Also, if you find some errors, it will be nice if you'd be the one to fix it, since it won't be easy for me to be aware of it.
EDIT: made it a bit more lively to myself, while fixing a few spelling errors
Edited by bereshpoop19openI have to bring up M84
He's a good guy and probably means well, but he sees so many bad things on my posts and so he's despective of me and and my posts.
Normally I would just keep the peace, but today after he said I was importing drama after making an innocent comment about how I disagreed with a NOT NAMED faction of people and not in a bashy or complainy way and I knew I couldnt defend myself lest I be thumped so I dropped it, but then I remembered I made a thread in another place and his first post in it is to bash it "Because its bragging" and I again played nice.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=ka1p4935g3od982kf54ktkwk&page=4379
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=17276648190A73099300&page=1#7
The threads in question.
openIs 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.
openHow to make a trope page for Under the Boardwalk? Western Animation
I was looking for the trope page for Paramount Animation's 2024 film "Under the Boardwalk", but as far as I can tell, it doesn't exist? There is a red-linked Under the Boardwalk page, which has a warning on it that it was basically cut because somebody did a really half-arsed job of starting it. So what's the proper procedure for relaunching the page? I will admit I'm actually not sure what indexes it would go on myself, but I do at least have a number of appropriate tropes...
openNiche works and outdated pages
Okay... I didn't think I would do this. This is probably the most risky thing I'm gonna say here, but while I'm not the oldest user by a long shot, I think being here for almost 5 years now is enough for me to bring up this subject. To clarify: it's not my intention to make any trouble, and if that happens and I get to be seen as some sort of "pariah" or get banned from my favourite site I've ever been, well... it was nice meeting the tropers who helped me along the way.
[*sighs*] Well, here we go, I'm gonna address a persistent issue within the site itself. I may not be the first to point this out, but I feel like I’m speaking for others who’ve noticed it, too.
Look, I know that there are people who just want to enjoy and see pages, I know that users are free to edit whatever and whenever it feels like it. It's okay. Really. Free will obviously exists and nobody should be forced to edit something they don't want or don't know about in a work, and there are indeed almost an infinite amount of works globally, some more obscure than others...
That being said, anything has its limits, and while it's true that niche works and creators are indeed niche, this is still no justification to just let a great amount of pages left to be undead. "It's how wiki culture works" shouldn’t be an automatic excuse to leave so many pages unresolved or unfinished. Works Needing Tropes and Pages Needing Wiki Magic have pages that haven't been touched for at least a year, and at this point, adding something to those lists feels like shouting into the void nownote Just to add an example to complement this, a user I've found
in a forum said that this was the very reason why they were hesitant on launching the pages for Zuzubaland, Vivi and Underdogs United (side note to them: you still owe me that "bumping" apology for helping you twice).
And no, despite what I've been told
, crosswicking only helps so little, if at all, especially if there are, just to give an example, pages about mods, which is even less likely to have the page's example crosswicked.
I'm thinking, like I've said in a forum
, just as a random idea, that maybe we can find an alternative for people who may actually be interested in editing a page for a work or things related to said work (like say mods, sequels, derivative works, etc.) but maybe they actually don't know their existence, something like a social group or special area where people can interact and collaborate on these pages—because promoting them in forums often has the opposite effect. Obviously, someone might come up with a better idea, but I think the key is finding an alternative solution.
But either way, sorry for the Wall of Text and if I’ve stirred up any bad blood. I just really wanted to bring attention to this issue because it's so hard to ignore now.
openAligning text without a bullet point
I have a single example in Actor-Shared Background. I've used a bullet appropriately and added the relevant quote below it.
I have a concluding sentence I want to add underneath the quote. How can I push the concluding sentence a bit further to the right so that it aligns with the bulleted text, but not display a bullet?
To avoid confusion, the sentence with the spoiler is the one I want to move slightly.
- The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel has an in-joke where Midge goes to confront a journalist she believes to be a man - the ambiguously named L. Roy Dunham. She approaches the desk of a woman she assumes to be Dunham's assistant. Dunham walks away, returns, and flips around the nameplate on her desk revealing herself as L. Roy Dunham.
Midge: But you're a woman!L. Roy Dunham: [with faux shock] What?!Midge: And you've always been a woman?L Roy Dunham: I have, yes. Be a better story if I hadn't though, right?
I thought about simply using regular space bar spaces, but not sure if that would display formatting differently on PC vs phone and so on.
openWhere do I go for help? Western Animation
Rainbow Phoenix is certain that The Simpsons S8 E15: "Homer's Phobia" was an N-Word Privileges-focused episode, and was arguing with me and trying to instigate an edit war which I refused to take part in.
Yes, they have a point since there is a subtle difference when certain people make jokes about subject and how audiences react to it, and odds are, a writer probably had this in mind. However, this isn't enough to make a fuss about who's right when describing it on a page which is being viewed by the public.
I pointed out, since I am pan, so I would be hypothetically be able to make jokes with lesser backlash if I ever got to be a creator of any work, but fighting with people because they think they're 100% right is so not ethical. That's what this user has been trying to do to me.
Now, this episode did cause a Mexicans Love Speedy Gonzales so this should speak for itself, and most of these viewers don't even know who the writer is, let alone would be aware of their sexual orientation.
Where do I discuss this problem? I hate resorting to Ask The Tropers but the cleanup thread hasn't been used in a very long time.
open''Series/BigLove'' example on MarryThemAll
Marry Them All has an example from Big Love. I don't think it fits because Marry Them All is about Polyamory as a solution to a love rivalry. I had removed the example but it was reinstated. Polyamory in and of itself is already a trope.
Edited by randomtroper89openAbby 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!.
openPossible violation of YMMV page policies
So I was checking out the Fanfic.Passing Days page, which as per its Archive of Our Own page is written by WriterandArtist27. The same Fanfic page on this very wiki features numerous edits from Tropers.Writer-and-Artist 27, who obviously has the same username as the fic's author... and also has done numerous edits on Heartwarming.Passing Days and TearJerker.Passing Days. Administrivia.How To Create A Work Page states "You are also not allowed to create or add items to a YMMV subpage or related subpages". While the fic's actual YMMV page is untouched by this Troper, if said Troper really is the author judging by the shared username, then the edits to the Heartwarming and Tear Jerker pages are in violation of the policies forbidding a Troper from editing the YMMV subpages of a work they themself created.

Flare up from a bit ago that seems like a problematic edit.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.ShatteredSkiesTheMorningLights&page=2#edit41803564
By user Rbookchild
, it basically nuked the unintentionally sympathetic and unsympathetic sections because they disagreed with them. Which I am certainly aware does happen, but its also 'Your Mileage May Vary' and I've seen sentiments of that nature shared about the fic both in how many people edited or added to those sections here or commented elsewhere on the matter, so there are people with this opinion out there. Seems like a pretty clear case, and honestly I wouldn't hesitate to put it back myself and send a PM to Rbook on the matter, and I did send a PM a month ago that never got responded to, but I had previously edited the section twice. I neither created it or was the last one to edit it, and one of the edits was a general clean-up on the page that was previously unalphabetized, but I don't know if that would count as an edit war or not due to those edits, hence bringing it up here to avoid any issues.