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:
openWork page titles for arcs - should they include the series/franchise name? Print Comic
As I understand it, works pages should reflect the (or at least an) official title of the work in question.
In the ComicBook namespace, we have quite a few pages for arcs within a single series (or Bat Family Crossover events officially badged under a single series/character title) that only use the subtitle and not the series/character title.
So, for example -
- The Celestial Madonna Saga is an Avengers arc and the collected edition is titled Avengers: The Celestial Madonna Saga. There are no crossovers and no other titles involved in that arc.
- Days of Future Past is an X-Men story that's collected and sold as X-Men: Days of Future Past. Again, it's entirely from one series, Uncanny X-Men, not a crossover event.
- The Demon Bear Saga is a New Mutants arc and collected/sold as New Mutants: The Demon Bear Saga.
- God Loves, Man Kills... well, as you can see on the works page, the cover has X-Men as a prominent part of the title.
- Mutant Massacre is a Bat Family Crossover that covers three different X-books (plus odd issues of Thor and Daredevil, but is packaged and sold as X-Men: Mutant Massacre.
...you get the idea. I don't think there are many disambiguation concerns with the current names, if any. But we're inconsistent on this and many, many ComicBook pages have included the series title or character name as a prefix to the arc/event name.
It seems odd that we're editing down the names to remove the character/comic/franchise element when there are no character-limit issues, and when that's not the version that the publisher's officially using.
(It also increases the number of oddities in alphabetical indexes - e.g. tropers put One More Day and Go Down Swinging under S, because they know they're Spider-Man stories, but unless you're looking at the index page itself the structure and ** / *** bullets aren't visible)
So, subject to discussion on the relevant pages and elsewhere, is it worth a tidy up that attempts to move them?
(One note on this: due to the film of the same name, we'd probably need to add a year to X-Men: Days of Future Past to disambig if we do move it - but that's the exception)
Edited by Mrph1openBrokenAesop.Naruto
Mister OM added this entry to BrokenAesop.Naruto on November 28th (bold emphasis mine):
- The story often carries out, whether intentionally or not, the message that “anybody can become the best through determination and hard work, and if you can’t, then you just need to try harder”. And the story even tries to pass on the main cast as examples of people who fit that criteria…except that they don’t. The strongest characters in the series, both good and bad, are often people who were born with either great inner strength by virtue of who or what they are, or born to really powerful, gifted or wealthy families and whatnot. Naruto himself and nearly every other character of any significance became stronger and stronger by virtue of the legacies that were passed down to them (in Naruto's case, no less than four ultra-powerful legacies, on top of the all-powerful demon sealed inside of him) leaving everyone who isn't a Person Shaped Can o' Evil or named Uchiha (and most of those besides) far behind in the dust. For all the series’s talk about hard work and determination, Hard Work Hardly Works is more in effect here. Sure, Naruto and Sasuke (and everybody else this applies to) did have to train, sweat and bleed to get where they are now, but it doesn’t change the fact that they had access to advantages, powers and shortcuts that normal people and ninjas wouldn’t have access to, and that they didn’t even have to do anything at all to get those powers bestowed upon them. Granted, some of these powers come with negative side-effects to counterbalance that problem, but even that doesn’t really mean much since Naruto and Sasuke both eventually find ways to overcome these side effects.
It is generally agreed upon that this aesop doesn't actually exist in the series and was made up by detractors. Despite this, this entry tries to circumvent this with "intentionally or not". Similar entries to this were argued upon in the past, which is why I'm bringing it here so it doesn't become an edit war.
Edited by SatoshiBakuraopenHTTYD Cleanup
I've noticed that the How To Train Your Dragon has not been worked on in quite some time. Almost every subpage is written in a way that tells me it hasn't been changed since the initial release (2010) or around that time.
Countless entries are riddled with errors, random comments or opinions, and other things that should either belong in YMMV, or nowhere at all. It seems very unprofessional. Under Leitmotif, for example, there is a comment at the end that just gushes about how great the composer was for using this trope:
- Comment: Our hero, ladies and gentlemen.
I would make these edits myself, but there are so many issues with this page that I think a clean-up may be warranted.
Edited by ovskiiopenFolders/Sections on the Shonen Jump page Anime
I'm not going to mince words on it: I think the Shonen Jump page is a complete mess, namely all of the folders and sections in the middle of the page. IMO there's way too many folders, too many gigantic folders, a bunch of weird placements that don't make intuitive sense, a bizarre Adaptations section, etc. I don't know when exactly this happened (based on the Discussion page this has been sitting like this since ~2019) but I do remember the older version of this page from years back and while it wasn't necessarily perfect it was significantly more usable than the page in its current state.
I'm bringing this up here to at the very least draw some attention to it and get some responses and feedback on what should be done before proceeding on anything. Cleaning it up would be quite a bit of work for me to do by myself/on a single go so I would appreciate any help with it, and I'd like to get some consensus on a few things with it as well. Biggest part would be addressing some of the sister mags; while most of the folders are IMO superfluous I do think some are at least worth highlighting given the overlaps involved (for example Viz's Shonen Jump app pulls from Jump+, Jump Square, and V-Jump).
openMagnificent Bastard Chain Hole
Remnant 43 has a bit of an issue with potholes on Magnificent Bastard entries. Once before they edit warred over the selection of one on Breaking Bad. This time while they haven't technically edit warred Sandbox.Magnificent Bastard Call Of Duty has an entry with a Chain Hole, which they re-added after I removed (I removed while pasting over their entry to the Sandbox so it isn't technically an edit war). I'm posting this to gain consensus for me to change back without committing an edit war myself.
Edited by 43110openConflicting Examples Videogame
Hellboy: The Science of Evil has examples for both No Problem With Licensed Games and The Problem with Licensed Games and I wouldn't think they can both be true.
- No Problem with Licensed Games: While it isn't a great example, it is definitely better than the other Hellboy licensed games, with Ron Perlman, Selma Blair and Doug Jones voicing the characters as they did in the films.
- The Problem with Licensed Games: While it was made from the makers and cast of the film duology, it wasn't programmed very well.
I've no played the game myself but I'd would seem better to combine them into something like:
- The Problem with Licensed Games: While it is definitely better than previous Hellboy games and it benefits from being made by the makers and cast of the film duology, with Ron Perlman, Selma Blair and Doug Jones reprising their role, it still wasn't programmed very well.
Or vice versa, since that example seems to come across slanted towards it being good. As I say I haven't play the game so I don't know what the issues with it were.
openFanDisservice Misuse Live Action TV
I noticed on the Recap pages for Breaking Bad that Fan Disservice is listed any time we see Walt naked.
If I'm correct, Fan Disservice is for sexual situations deliberately played up to be disturbing or uncomfortable (like the show's infamous "Happy Birthday, Ted" scene, which ironically wasn't listed anywhere until I added it myself), not "character gets naked in this scene and they're unattractive". The examples don't list why the trope counts, it just says "Walt was naked in this scene." It even lists it for a serious moment where Walt undresses to get in the shower only to pass out on the floor while Skyler tries to talk to him.
Examples:
- "Pilot": Bryan Cranston makes the first of many appearances in his tighty whitey briefs, and it is not pleasant...
- "The Cat's In the Bag": In the opening scene, we see Walt's bottom as he walks naked to the bathroom after sex with Skyler.
- "Bit By a Dead Bee": Once again, Bryan Cranston shows some skin, this time going fully naked (albeit from the back).
- "I See You": Fanservice: Opening scene. For once, it’s Jesse that’s topless, not Walt.
- "Buried": Walt stripping in silence to take a shower, before collapsing on the bathroom floor.
- Walt's character page: Walt sometimes strips down to his tighty whities in order to cook (usually in the first season) or for other reasons, but neither for comedy nor to look pretty. I don't know about that, the scene with Walt naked in the supermarket was pretty funny...
The page for the episode "Peekaboo" lists the trope because of Spooge and his girlfriend (two ugly meth-heads) even though neither are seen naked or in an otherwise sexual situation.
I ran a wick check and couldn't find enough misuse otherwise to justify a TRS thread or a clean-up thread so that's why I'm presenting it here. Cut these examples?
Edited by supernintendo128openDark Universe
So I am not totally sure if this has been asked before but this has kept bothering me so I feel like I should bring it up.
So we currently have a page for the Dark Universe and I am honestly wondering if it is really worth actually keeping around. Technically the universe was planned to be a thing but it got scrapped after only a single movie the page itself barely has any info and is mostly just covering stuff that might have happened or stuff that happens in The Mummy, the only film that got released. The Invisible Man (2020) isn't actually part of this universe.
The page itself has a very small amount of entries for the index, only covering The Mummy, 4 tie-ins to that film and mentioning some cancelled films, most of the important stuff being already covered on The Mummy franchise page. Like it is really weird to consider this a universe worth a page when there is basically only one installment. I will admit I have made a page like this before but it did at least have more than one installment.
openJurisdiction Friction in Star Trek
In the Star Trek TOS episode "The Doomsday Machine", the conflict between Kirk, Spock and Decker is listed under Jurisdiction Friction, and this example is also cited on the Jurisdiction Friction page itself. My POV is that I really don't regard this example as Jurisdiction Friction. None of them are arguing or concerned about who has jurisdiction, they're arguing about who is in command. Two different things. They're all Star Fleet officers. If anything, it would be Artistic License – Military. Spock did have to give up command of the Enterprise when Decker pulled rank. However, as soon as Decker announced that he was going to try and attack the Doomsday Machine when everyone knew the Enterprise's weapons couldn't scratch it Spock should have simply said "that's insane, you're relieved. Security, get him out of here." It also heads into Surprisingly Realistic Outcome when Kirk orders Spock to assume command. Decker tries to say Kirk doesn't have the authority to do that but Kirk actually does, he's Captain of the Enterprise and Decker's plan is clearly insane. Anyway, that's my perspective but I wanted to get feedback from tropers before I started editing.
Edited by Traveler123open How to create a constant link in character page? Videogame
I created a separate character page for Claire Redfield in Resident Evil (because it's an abomination that Ada Wong would have one but not her), but I'm wondering whether I need to go through each individual character page in the series and manually generate the link to the page itself or if there's a way to easily index it somewhere?
openSuspected Ban Evader
I'm pretty sure Resident Blade Oreboros, who just made this
query, is actually a sockpuppet of Ninten Fire Swag 20, who got bounced over their obsession with making a scene from RWBY count as a "Ray of Hope" Ending... the same thing that Oreboros is talking about in their query.
Also they edit similar pages (a lot of creator pages, Fire Emblem, Supermarioglitchy, etc).
Hate to call someone out while they're literally a thread below me, but... well, it beat accusing them directly on their thread and something just smells fishy.
Edit: Quick fact check, they were actually trying to make it count as a Downer Ending in addition to "Ray of Hope" Ending. Just wanted to correct myself.
Edited by WarJay77openHelp in cross-wicking.
I just launched Rescue Equipment Attack and it has lots of examples that I may not be able to cross-wick them all by myself. Any help with cross-wicking the examples would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
(Do not reply to this).
Edited by selkiesopen Not sure or not Web Original
Would Helluva Boss count as a Cosmic Horror Story, or at least Lovecraft Lite, because even in death someone who hates someone else can pay to have them killed in life and it's implied that Heaven may be just as bad as hell itself so any hopes of peace after death may not even exist.
Edited by coldcascadeopenIs this an Edit War
So on YMMV.Tomorrowverse brightfan99 added
this Fandom Rivalry entry.
- A minor example with the DC Animated Movie Universe, considering that most fans of the Tomorroverse are fans of DC's animated films in general, but some DCAMU fans have expressed disappointment that the franchise ended not long after Growing the Beard as they feel there were more stories to be told. In contrast fans of Tomorrowverse feel that the DCAMU only had a few genuinely good films, with the rest either being mediocre at best or boring at worst, while the new Shared Universe is a breath of fresh air that doesn't limit itself to one specific era of DC's history as well as having a reduced focus on Batman (who appeared in the first eight DCAMU films while five films in the Tomorrowverse has only used him for his two-parter).
I removed the "A minor example"
because it's not really a minor example in my experience and we aren't supposed to trope minor YMMV reactions from what I have been told.
brightfan99 without discussing it anywhere added "A small one"
. Which while not the exact same wording means the same thing.
I don't know what to do here.i ultimately do not care about the wording as ultimately I think I left it weirdly phrased by my original removal now that I think about it but this feels like it is now an Edit War considering the other troper added nearly the exact same wording without discussing it anywhere. But I want to get some more opinions.
Edited by BullmanopenEnsemble Darkhorse move undid
- Clodsire is adored by the fanbase. Quagsire was already an Ensemble Dark Horse due to its blank, derpy yet charming looks. Clodsire's more blob-ness with it being quadrupedal like a dog made it arguably more appealing and huggable to fans. Animations like this
only further highlighted how adorable it really is.
Per Darkhorse cleanup
I moved this to Quagsire's ED entry as Clodsire was likely made in response/to bank off Quagsire's popularity as opposed to Clodsire's being unintentional, so it's part of the Quag's Darkhorse status as opposed to counting as one itself.
It was moved back to it's own entry, by a separate troper from who first added it, citing "There is no evidence to suggest that Clodsire's creation is a result of Quagsire's popularity as there have been plenty of non-Ensemble Dark Horse pokemon with regional variants that have received new evolutions (such as Corsola, Farfetch'd, Mr Mime, Basculin and Qwilfish)." I don't disagree, it would fit that Clodsire not being revealed prerelease, but this gets into the issue of speculating creator knowledge/intent.
Before taking to ED cleanup, I'm asking if it should be re-moved as that's what the cleanup decided so undoing what they voted on without discussion violates rules.
openFandom rivalry discussion
Hello. I recently deleted the following examples of Fandom Rivalry and Friendly Fandoms from DC Animated Movie Universe.
- Fandom Rivalry: A minor example with the Tomorrowverse, considering that most fans of the DCAMU are fans of DC's animated films in general, but some DCAMU fans have expressed disappointment that the franchise ended not long after Growing the Beard as they feel there were more stories this franchise could tell. In contrast fans of Tomorrowverse feel that the DCAMU only had a few genuinely good films, with the rest either being mediocre at best or boring at worst, while the new Shared Universe is a breath of fresh air that doesn't limit itself to one specific era of DC's history as well as having a reduced focus on Batman (who appeared in the first eight DCAMU films while five films in the Tomorrowverse has only used him for his two-parter).
- Friendly Fandoms:
- After the release of Justice League Dark: Apokolips War fans of this franchise have bonded with fans of the early Darker and Edgier DC Extended Universe movies, particularly those directed by Zack Snyder. A number of these fans have praised Apokolips War as the closest thing they'll likely get to Snyder's original five-film arc (which was Cut Short due to the financial underperformance of Snyder's films relative to their massive budgets).
- Since most fans grew up watching the DCAU it's unsurprising that the two fandoms get along. Most of the DCAU fans see the DCAMU as a more mature alternative to their own fandom now that they are all adults.
- Despite the above mentioned Fandom Rivalry with the Tomorrowverse, there are DCAMU fans who either enjoy both for their differences, or hope that the Tomorrowverse is the post-Apokolips War timeline that could continue the story of the DCAMU.
My argument is that those are not separate fandoms. It's literally DC fans disagreeing over which films based on the same property are good or bad.
brightfan99, who added the examples, has contacted me via PM and argues that DC should be seen as a cluster of smaller fandoms. As an example, they mentioned how fans of the Christopher Reeve Superman don't like the Henry Cavill version and vice-versa.
Requesting other tropers' opinions to settle this discussion.
open (RESOLVED) nattery wall-o'-text on Sci-Fi Writers Have No Sense of Energy Literature
Half the Literature folder on SciFiWritersHave.No Sense Of Energy is currently comprised of a nattery, Example Indentation-noncompliant Wall of Text about the Incredible Cross-Sections firepower numbers controversy in Star Wars Legends (which admittedly I contributed to over a decade ago when I was young and stupid).
Fixing it would be a major change that I think probably could use some extra sets of eyes, but couldn't find a good cleanup thread for this to go in, so I figured I'd come here.
- In one of the Star Wars Legends technical manuals (now non-canon along with the rest of Star Wars Legends), a starfighter's main guns are about 1/200,000,000th the power of a capital ship's heavy guns, and yet starfighters still try to shoot at enemy capital ships like they can do more than annoy the enemy captain by obstructing his view out the bridge. The series that book belongs to throws out words like kilotons for starfighter weaponry, megatons for Slave-1's weaponry, hundreds of gigatons each shot for capital scale weaponry, and the latter being powered by reactors with the energy output of a star. All this for weapons which, for the films that they're detailing, display yields that rarely stack up to the more extreme episodes of MythBusters and are outdone by modern heavy cruise missiles. The light ion cannons the size of mortars on the Invisible Hand are supposedly throwing out as much heat as a 4.8 megaton thermonuclear bomb, which is strange when compared to the Hoth Ion cannon, a weapon that disabled an Imperial Star Destroyer in a handful of shots and yet didn't produce enough heat to melt the surrounding snow. In general, you could probably knock off about six orders of magnitude on anything written in those books and you'd still get way too much. Supposedly, these represent the maximum yields, but because nothing like these figures occur in the movies and there are multiple times when using even a percentage of these maximum yields would prevent ship-wide destruction, where do these numbers come from?
- In general, all of the Star Wars films basically depict combat as being World War II IN SPACE!. This extends to firepower. Fighter cannons can hit the ground a few meters from foot soldiers without harming them, while main gun batteries on capital ships seldom display effects beyond a few tons of TNT- which is roughly in line with World War II era battleship guns, albeit with a higher rate of fire and effective range. There's even a famous scene in Return of the Jedi where the kinetic energy (plus whatever explosives were still on-board) of a crashing kamikaze fighter was able to cripple a Star Destroyer by destroying its bridge, something that would be completely impossible if these things were routinely trading shots with ships capable of depopulating a planet with a single salvo. These numbers have been made even more ridiculous in hindsight by material that came out after the Disney buyout. For example, the Last Jedi art book depicts a strategic-scale (i.e. orders of magnitude more powerful than regular guns) plasma bomb carried by the Free Virgillia-class corvettes as being the size of a building... yet "only" having a 100 megaton yield (which makes these bombs, per area, less efficient than the Tsar Bomba). For reference, by Saxton's old numbers, any single Acclamator-class ship (which are the size of heavy cruisers) had 12 turbolaser cannons each capable of dishing out 200 gigatons per shot. So basically, a ship not much bigger than the Virigillia-class could dish out 2,400 gigatons or the equivalent of 24,000 strategic-scale plasma bombs, every second, continuously. Imagine that every ship in the U.S. Navy had an autocannon that shoots the equivalent of 24,000 nuclear missiles a second and you start to see how ridiculous this idea is.
- However, the author of these works, Dr. Curtis Saxton, is an astrophysicist and so by any right should have a very good understanding of the yields being described. Unfortunately, there is controversy surrounding the author's relationship with those in the online "versus debate" community, which, if true, would mean that the author didn't so much screw up the math as deliberately misrepresent it. Another scientist and Star Wars fan/contributor, Gary Sarli, analyzed Saxton's work and came to very different conclusions. Particularly one of Saxton's most influential calculations, which not only vastly overestimated how much damage needed to be done to fulfill a certain operation ("Base Delta Zero", glassing a planet, in other wordsnote A big part of Sarli's argument pointed out that the original description in the Imperial Sourcebook limited itself, relatively speaking, to wiping out the planet's assets of production, like factories, arable lands, mines, fisheries, and all sentient beings and droids, which, while on a planetary scale is definitely impressive, wouldn't necessarily mandate slagging literally everything on the surface or vaporizing the oceans unless the commander was in a particularly vindictive mood, nor would it have to do so by itself, in under an hour. For context, the entire world nuclear arsenal (more than enough to wipe out all major cities and industry) totals 1.5 gigatons. Ten times that number should easily be able to kill nearly every human on Earth. Melting off all the Earth's crust and vaporizing all its oceans, on the other hand?
7 exatons or 7,000,000,000 gigatons.).
- And on the third hand, proponents of the ICS numbers point out that they are several orders of magnitude less than what you'd get simply by down-scaling from the Death Star, which has been calculated from screen evidencehow? Measure how long it took the planet to double in diameter after being shot (0.83 seconds), and do the math assuming Alderaan has the same properties as Earth. For the math, see these
links
. to produce a minimum of 1E38 joules, roughly the energy that the Sun produces in eight thousand years when firing a planet-busting shot. That puts the Empire well into Type II on the Kardashev scale. By the same token, there are those who think that Saxton did the above calculations and then gave their shipboard weapons numbers that he would have expected a Type II civilization to have. Of course, both the EU and the new Disney continuity specified that the Death Star's power came from Kyber crystals, making its showing completely irrelevant to anything that doesn't also use Kyber crystals.
- And critics will counter that there are a lot of weird effects for that to be purely a brute-force weapon, like the existence of a two-stage explosion and a Planar Shockwave. And since the Death Star novel came out, they've either retconned or clarified that the superlaser uses an exotic reaction that causes large parts of the planet to shift into hyperspace (presumably in a violent manner, since vessels with hyperdrives can do so without exploding), causing the planet to blow itself up.
- (separate unrelated example about Vulture droids I added yesterday)
- Star Wars Legends:
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to be wildly out of scale with the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith). Saxton was even accused at times of making up inflated numbers to help Star Wars "win" the Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny with Star Trek (he was a participant in sci-fi debating groups on the Internet at the time the books came out). Other debaters argued that some of his calculations were rooted in faulty assumptions, for example that the Orbital Bombardment involved in a Base Delta Zero operation wasn't intended to be at the Earth-Shattering Kaboom level a la Exterminatus, but just to destroy population centers and military sites. The argument was ultimately rendered moot when the Legends continuity was ended.
- (unrelated Vulture droid example)
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to be wildly out of scale with the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith); the latter number is about 10% of the estimated yield of the Chicxulub meteorite impact. Saxton has shown where his calculations came from: primarily the Death Star's destruction of Alderaan, the concept of Base Delta Zero from West End Games' Imperial Sourcebook, and shots from The Empire Strikes Back of star destroyers blowing up asteroids said to be nickel-iron in Alan Dean Foster's novelization; however, other debaters such as Gary Sarli have questioned some of his underlying assumptions. The whole thing was ultimately rendered moot after Legends was decanonized, with the efficacy of Orbital Bombardment in particular dramatically scaled down in Disney canon reference books.
Third draft:
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to significantly inflated compared to the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith); for reference, the latter number is about 10% of the estimated yield of the Chicxulub meteorite impact
. Saxton has shown where his calculations came from;note primarily the Death Star's destruction of Alderaan, the concept of Base Delta Zero from West End Games' Imperial Sourcebook, and shots from The Empire Strikes Back of star destroyers blowing up asteroids said to be nickel-iron in Alan Dean Foster's novelization however, other debaters such as Gary Sarli have questioned some of his underlying assumptions.note e.g. whether "Base Delta Zero" involves glassing an entire planet For the Evulz or just destroying mission-critical population centers Due to his author's notes thanking various members of online "versus debating" communities, Saxton has also been accused of deliberately inflating his numbers to "win" arguments over whether Star Wars factions would beat Star Trek factions in a war.
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to significantly inflated compared to the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith); for reference, the latter number is about 10% of the estimated yield of the Chicxulub meteorite impact
open Real Life cleanup crowner
There is an active crowner on the Real Life cleanup thread to make the following tropes No Real Life Examples, Please!.
If you want to join the conversation, do so here
. Please do not reply to this query directly.

Recently, I added this particular example on Glass Onion YMMV page because I personally thought it's fitting, but not everyone may think so as well, so I thought it should be a YMMV example:
Then another troper AyyItsMidnight
deleted it by reasoning that it's not a YMMV trope, so I was wondering if this example could be added somewhere else? Or is it not applicable at all? I personally thought that the whole scene with Miles Bron explaining about "Disruptors" is quite reflective of Rian Johnson himself and his directing style, even if it's not the intended effect. Rian often breaks trends and conventions simply because he could, and that one time he caused a large rift in the Star Wars fandom with The Last Jedi that still has lasting effects today, so I thought the example applies in this case.
Edited by Willy2537