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:
openLucy Lane = Unintentionally Unsympathetic? Live Action TV
A few days ago, I described Lucy, younger sister of Lois Lane, as Unintentionally Unsympathetic in the YMMV page of Superman & Lois with the following argument:
"An argument can be made that Lucy was treated with a lot of sympathy for someone who willingly betrayed her own family and endangered her own universe in service of a cult leader. Over the course of season 2, Lucy attempts to destroy her sister's reputation, drugs her father to break Ally out of military custody and almost gets Superman (her own brother-in-law) killed but her family doesn't have any hard feelings against her. Further aggravating the issue is that she doesn't suffer any comeuppance for her actions. Sure, she feels guilty for almost getting Superman killed, but it comes off as Lucy repenting her actions when she herself suffers from them. Possibly justified due to the fact that Sam and Lois aren't angry at Lucy but rather at Ally for manipulating Lucy and at themselves for failing Lucy when she needed them most, but it's still notable."
I really don't want to come off as the guy trying to editorialize his opinions and I certainly don't hate Lucy as a character or as a concept. I just don't like what the show did with Lucy.
So, what do you think?
Edited by MasterHeroopenSelf-report for a possible edit war
I don't know how to word something like this, so I'll make a timeline of events that happened:
- On June 9 2021, felt_toycat added this edit
on Terry Gilliam.
- The edit was later taken down
on June 29 2021 with the edit reason "I don't think that should be included here."
- The edit was added back by the same person who wrote it
on June 28, 2022.
- I took the edit down
today for being a ROCEJ violation.
I'm just asking: did I take part in an edit war? I don't think the rules for an edit war apply if the edit breaks the rules, but I just want to make sure.
openTitanic video for Crowd Panic Film
Hi. I noticed that the video example for Crowd Panic, which is from Titanic (1997), has a mouse cursor embedded in the video itself. I was wondering if someone could upload a new, cleaner version, as the final plunge is an excellent example of this trope.
open How long should a page be to be folderized?
GenreTurningPoint.Live Action Films has gotten pretty long and isn't folderized. I want to do it myself, but I wanted to ask how long a page should get to be deemed folder-worthy before I do. How long should a page be to be folderized?
openGrand Finale misuse?
- While it wasn't intended to be at the time, Licence to Kill would prove to be not only Timothy Dalton's last go around as Agent 007, but it was also the last film that would extensively adapt elements and characters from Ian Fleming's books until Casino Royale in 2006, the fifth and final Bond film to be directed by John Glen, the last to feature actors Robert Brown as M and Caroline Bliss as Miss Moneypenny respectively, the final Bond film to be co-written by Richard Maibaum, the final Bond film with opening credits by Maurice Binder, and the final Bond film to be produced by Albert R. Broccoli. It was also the final Bond film to be shot during the Cold War, although the plot isn't related to it. Licence to Kill itself concludes with Bond still on the outs from MI 6 after successfully avenging the brutal attack his friend, Felix Leiter. And yet, there's also the feeling that with Pam Bouvier, Bond has finally found his true love, someone he can finally settle down with. Especially now with the likes Blofeld and his other big shot enemies gone. While Pam may have not been as good of a character as Tracy was in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, she was more Bond's equal. Patti LaBelle's closing song, "If You Asked Me To" also has a more bittersweet feeling to it than other closing songs from Bond films of the time. And even though the closing credits sequence concluded with the customary "JAMES BOND WILL RETURN" caption, many people weren't so sure as Bond was considered irrelevant by this point. So if Bond did return, it wouldn't be a for a long time. So the ending to Licence to Killnote Complete with a winking fish statue nearby a swimming pool. felt like a "Goodbye, for now!"
I suspect this may misuse as there are many otherwise possible examples not listed because they were due to being Cut Short or other outside circumstance (which an unintended finale like this sounds like) and the last part is subjective which this trope isn't. The narrative closure which is the heart of this trope is noted to be incidental and at odds with other parts. If the entry is a valid Grand Finale entry I'd not sure it properly conveys that as written.
Thoughts?
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
open Avoiding an edit war on My Hero Academia - Izuku Midoriya
I removed this example from Characters.My Hero Academia Izuku Midoriya for being misuse:
- Ambiguous Disorder: Two.
- His constant doubting of himself, fear of being perceived as a fraud due to not having obtained his Quirk in a normal way, and his constant feelings of incompetence despite his improvements and achievements heavily suggests he suffers from Imposter Syndrome. This can easily be stemmed from his less than ideal childhood where he was ostracized by others for his Quirklessness and ruthlessly bullied by his former friend, Katsuki Bakugo.
- He may also suffer from Stockholm Syndrome in his friendship with Bakugo. Considering they were once friends before Bakugo deemed Midoriya inferior and worthless due to him growing prideful and arrogant, Midoriya may continue to see Bakugo's positive qualities despite how ruthlessly Bakugo bullied him. Midoriya still considers Bakugo his friend even though Bakugo is often cruel and derogatory towards him.
Ambiguous Disorder examples shouldn't name specific disorders: the trope is about when it's clear that a character has SOME disorder but it's hard to tell which one specifically. Here, it was used to say that it's ambiguous whether he has a specific disorder.
North Wolf then re-added the Imposter Syndrome part of the example, saying that "He may not have Stockholm syndrome, but he still checks a lot of boxes for Imposter Syndrome", which is missing the point of why I removed the example in the first place. I sent a PM but they didn't respond and have had other activity since then.
openReport New Troper
Okay, I don't normally jump to reporting a new troper for issues, but there's so many things going on here I don't know where to start. Basically, justSomeGuy1 seems to have joined the wiki to edit the page for Fanfic.Heroes Series, which I happen to follow. Having apparently began editing this morning, they have:
- Created a Fanfic Recs page for a fanfic (specifically, FanficRecs.Avengers Of The Ring), which they eventually blanked and ended up cut
- Tweaked the main page for the fanfic 49 times, including:
- Taking around six tries
to properly link to Ascended Meme (which is misuse anyway, since this is a fanfic that's just referencing the memes in question)
- Added multiple blue links which, while pointing to the right place, are incredibly excessive (it's basically every time they referenced a character, they added a link to the character's franchise or page)
- They clearly don't know how to wiki link single words, because every time they tried to link to Smallville, they'd just write Series/Smallville - they eventually just gave up and wrote around it instead of fixing the link
- Added multiple spoilers that either aren't formatted right (such as multiple single word spoilers here
and here
), aren't spoilers for the fic (such as spoiling out that Thanos gets the Infinity Stones and Snaps, even though that was in the third story of twenty-two in the series), or even just getting the markup wrong like here
- Taking around six tries
- This is more of a gripe than an actual complaint, but they add Main/ to all of their trope titles instead of just spelling them out
- Added an unapproved CM entry to the YMMV page
- In the process of tweaking, they kept adding information, making grammar mistakes, or just moving examples around in their lists seemingly randomly, so now the page history is clogged up with random tweaks
Like I said, I don't like jumping straight to reporting someone who is clearly new, but they're rushing so fast into editing that they didn't seem to actually realize how anything worked first, and now the page needs a reversion to before their first edit here
. I can add back in the stuff they got right, but while I would normally send notifiers myself, I don't even know where to start here, and I honestly think they'd benefit most from slowing down and reading the Administrivia pages before they edit again.
open Why does Artistic License Law list examples?
Artistic License – Law says it should not be used in example lists but instead we should use its subtropes. However, the page itself lists examples, indicating that the supertrope is needed in some way. How to make sense of this?
Edited by eroockopenOdd edit reason
Nightwolf Gamer 03 appears to be a new account, with only one edit made today. That wouldn't be too much to talk about, but the edit itself is a bit... questionable. Specifically, on LGBT Representation in Media, they replaced
an instance of "agender" on a point about Craig of the Creek with "non-binary" with the edit reason "Agender does not equal non-binary. Agender equals agender. Non-binary equals non-binary." If memory serves, agender is indeed part of the nonbinary spectrum (it's the black stripe on the nonbinary pride flag), and nonbinary is itself an umbrella term for gender identities that fall outside the western "male/female" model, so the edit feels a bit gatekeep-y in a somewhat shifty sort of way. Thoughts on how to address it?
openDefense/Defence?
jeez recently sent a grammar notification for an edit I did on Elements of Justice and not to use Commonwealth spelling, themself changing two instances of defense into defence. However, the only edit I made to the page was moving an example to a proper location, the spelling was like that when I moved it. I also noticed how the words defense and defence are used interchangeably throughout the page.
openEdit War and Avoiding Entering One
A while back, in Characters.NU Carnival, I deleted a Beauty Mark entry as that's no longer a trope and I explained that in my edit reason. However, Shootthestar18 brought it back
. While I sent them a "not a trope" notifier a few days ago, I still haven't gotten a response. I also checked the history and I realized Shootthestar 18 engaged in an Edit War since they originally added the entry.
Would it be ok if I remove this Beauty Mark entry? I would do it myself, however, I want to avoid an Edit War. If somebody else wants to delete it, you're free to do so.
EDIT: Slightly trimmed this.
Edited by RandomTroper123openQuestion about Definition Only Tropes and potholes
So, do Definition-Only Pages allow potholes. I ask because on YMMV.The Devil Wears Prada there's this Alternate Aesop Interpretation thing example:
- The Take
posits that another interpretation is less "holding true to your morals" vs "selling out," and more about finding a healthy balance between being invested in your job without falling into its toxic or destructive tendencies. Andy starts off thinking the fashion industry is beneath her and is rightly called out for it, but once she applies herself she outstrips Emily as Miranda's preferred assistant. Meanwhile, Emily is so devoted to her job that she's a Nervous Wreck, Extreme Doormat, and Professional Butt-Kisser who is literally killing herself to please an unappreciative Miranda (goes on starvation diets, works even when sick, and is hospitalized due to being so distracted running errands for Miranda that she gets hit by a car). Whereas when Andy realizes she's becoming too invested in her industry's cutthroat and back-stabbing politics, she takes a step back and decides to pursue the career she really does want.
The Take: So, like Emily, we can all stand to learn that a job is just a job.- The Take
Now the reason I am asking is that Hello 83433 removed
the Static Character pothole from the quote citing "Dewicking as Static Character is now Definition Only" and then rjd1922 added
the pothole back citing "Definition-Only Pages allow potholes". So I am kinda of confused due they allow potholes like this are not.
openVanillaEdition
Should Vanilla Edition be a trope or a Trivia item? It's not technically a part of the work itself, but how it's released; compare DVD Commentary and Early-Bird Release, which also involve home video tropes.
openEdit War Over Chained Sinkholes
In Characters.A Nightmare On Elm Street Freddy Krueger, Night Games made an edit
in which they used a couple Chained Sinkholes. I therefore sent them a notifier about this and fixed them
while noting this in my edit reason.
However, they clearly ignored my notifier and my edit reason as they just re-added
the Chained Sinkholes. Can I please revert these changes? (Of course, I would myself. However, I don't want to be a participant in said Edit War.)
openNot example/complaining?
- CoriFalls's work tries to be a deconstruction of Ash's dealings with Team Rocket only to fail by swinging the perceived unfair treatment the other way around: instead, Ash becomes the highly abused villain who's just trying to live his life while Jessie, James and Meowth become the self-centered "heroes" who believe everything they do is good and right because they're them and they're Such Good People.
I intend to delete this as misuse and complain as:
- Deconstruction is a Playing With which can't by played with so unsuccessful attempts are just not examples. (Not sure if this applies to Deconstution or Genre sub-tropes so asking here first.)
- Complaining/YMMV for non-YMMV items which is not allowed
- It doesn't even say what about it it's supposed to deconstructing. (If it did I we could cut the plaining parts and it would be valid.)
Thoughts?
openRude Troper
From what I've seen, Mr Stranger 616 seems to be rude. I realized he posted a harsh message in the discussion page
for KarmicButtMonkey.Western Animation. When I asked him to remove a Super-Trope he added to WesternAnimation.Donald Duck as a Sub-Trope was already listed, he started being rude. (Granted, he did do so
. I also won't reveal exactly what was said, partially because I don't think we're supposed to do that.) For the record, the trope he added
was Butt-Monkey and the Sub-Trope that was already listed is Karmic Butt-Monkey. I also would have deleted it myself, however, I didn't want to get in an Edit War since I previously deleted
the Butt-Monkey entry.
openCan I give the BECK manga its own set of pages? Anime
I'm talking about Beck. It's currently sharing sub-pages with the musician Beck, as well as an unrelated movie. Being a diehard fan of this series, I'd like to make the usual suite of pages for the manga/anime (Character page, Funny, Heartwarming, YMMV etc.), to avoid sharing with the musician and movie. The BECK manga has an official alternate title, "BECK - Mongolian Chop Squad" or just "BECK - MCS", and I was thinking if I could just go for it. Would I be allowed to do this myself? Thank you in advance!
Edited by pottski

Scrolling Bows and Errors and I'm noticing a lot of people citing the keeping a bow strung thing for situations where unstringing it would make no sense like temporarily "holstering" during a combat mission or carrying it around for potential self-defense in a fantasy setting
Edited by CryptidProductions