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:
openBroken Base on The Last Of Us Part Two
VideoGame.The Last Of Us Part 2, Tropers.Super Weegee added
this Broken Aesop example:
- Broken Aesop: The game has the messages that violence isn't always the answer and revenge sometimes just becomes a cycle of violence and further revenge and can even destroy everyone you love, with an attempt to call players out on their treating death as nothing by making the death animations very brutal and giving every character a name. There are two problems with this, however:
- One: The game often gives you no choice but to kill and will continue to call you out on it, even if you avoid violence as much as the game will allow. Furthermore, although some wounded enemies will beg and plead for mercy, if you do decide to spare them then as soon as you turn your back and try to walk away, they'll get up and attack you anyway.
- Two: Much of your killing/violence is in self-defense against those who have actively done worse things than you (like the Wolves, who kill anyone who happens upon them, danger or not).
- Three: Abby, who successfully took revenge against Joel, never feels guilty for it, only regrets that it wasn't satisfying, and never takes responsibility for starting the Cycle of Revenge, and yet gets a more hopeful ending than Ellie, who ultimately let go of revenge and was rewarded with a Downer Ending for it.
The example was then removed later the same day by Tropers.Mega J, with the edit reason "...except Abby did feel guilty about it because she doesn't pass up the chance to save Lev and Yara after they save her life", referring to the third bullet point.
Super_Weegee then restored the first two bullets, stating "...Then why remove the entire entry instead of just that one?"
Mega J did indeed later only delete the third point on the BrokenBase.Videogames page.
Given that the original edit reason only addressed the third point, I don't know think this qualifies as an edit war, but I have an objection to the example as a whole.
The game doesn't really qualify as "Blamed for Being Railroaded", as the story is about Abby and Ellie making choices and living with consequences, not the player. More than most games, TLOU and its sequel are a closed story about the characters in question. There are very few narrative choices the player can actually make. The story is about walking in the shoes of flawed people making questionable choices, and the game suitably blames the characters for these actions, not the player.
Also, the narrative isn't just about Ellie killing people in self-defense. The story is very clear, in fact, that Ellie has numerous chances to stop her pursuit of Abby and simply live peacefully with her girlfriend and her baby, but Ellie refuses to stop.
Given that the TLOU 2 is a game that tends to get a lot of negative criticism from a sizeable hatedom (in particular, spewing vitriolic hate towards Abby and thus defending Ellie's desire to murder Abby), I'm asking about this just to be on the safe side.
Edited by NubianSatyressopen"Edit War" (?) on Womanliness as Pathos
Tropers.Drakos25 has removed, readded (after I questioned them) and now re-removed an entry on Womanliness as Pathos. Here is the entry in question:
- One particular founding myth of Athens
details a dispute between Poseidon and Athena with Poseidon appearing before a coastal city and promising bountiful fishing and harvest from the sea so long as they name him as their Patron God. For no real reason, Athena appears and offers them olive trees, so long as they name her the Patron Goddess instead. The people take a vote, but the vote turns out to be completely split along gender lines: the men all vote for Poseidon, but are outnumbered by the women, who vote for Athena. Poseidon is furious and attempts to appeal with the Olympians, but even they are completely gender-split, so again the women win by one vote and the city officially becomes Athens. However, pissing off a sea god is a bad idea for a coastal city, so the Oracle suggests that they appease Poseidon by forbidding women from voting. So not only did Athena involve herself seemingly only as a Take That! at her uncle, but both mortal and Olympian women almost completely screwed the entire city and the Athenians could only resolve it by reducing women to second-class citizens.
- One particular founding myth of Athens
In addition to the video sourced in the example itself, when I brought this up to Drakos, they stated (paraphrasing) that they had "sixteen years of studying everything" about Greek myth and found "zero evidence" supporting that claim.
I then pointed to three
different
sources
which backed up the aforementioned video's interpretation of the myth. To which Drakos then replied that the first was a blog, the second "has gotten information wrong before" and the last is just a "reinterpretation". They then re-removed the entry and closed off further discussion by saying they would stand with their opinion.
So basically, I have four independent sources to back up this version of a myth (myths, I might add, rarely being clear-cut) while Drakos's only source right now basically amounts to "trust me". Edited by NubianSatyress
openiDubbbz and Content Cop Web Original
So, I've looked on WebVideo.I Dubbbz TV to find that WebVideo.Content Cop exists. Problem is, I don't know if this page is troping real life. While Ian is certainly playing a character here, he's still going after real life people who've made problematic content on YouTube.
Be warned that there's quite a lot of mentions of hypocrisy in the examples I'm about to list.
- Dirty Coward: This is Ian's biggest problem with Leafy. He demonstrates that Leafy regularly directs vicious insults at channels too small to make a real retaliation, playing it off as praeteritio or feigning ignorance, only to whine about drama or people talking behind his back when insults of the same variety are hurled his way. As Ian puts it:
Straight off the bat, I want all of the newcomers to my channel know that I'm perfectly fine with bullying. Make fun of someone because they're fat, autistic, or riddled with acne. I don't care, make fun of them. I think my only stipulation with the bullying is that you have to not be a pussy.
- Hypocrite: most of the Content Cops rip on hypocrisy on the subject's parts.
- In "Busting Jinx Reload," Ian riffs on Jinx's watermarking his original videos so they cannot be reacted to, despite being a reaction channel.
- Keemstar's Content Cop points out his lashing out at Pyrocynical's light criticism of him, despite having made a career out of making much harsher criticism; claiming to not use Drama Alert's influence to bully, before subsequently threatening to reveal information solely to direct the Internet mob's vitriol at people who anger him.
- Leafy is criticized for making attacks on people's appearances, despite clearly being insecure about his chin; using Keemstar to boost his platform, despite Keemstar's many controversies being public knowledge, and only ending their friendship when the YouTube community turned on him; and whining about drama whenever being called out for bullying, despite having made a career out of insulting other YouTubers.
- Ian attacks Tana Mongeau for telling him to kill himself for using the N-word, despite having used it herself in the past and in a much more vicious manner than Ian, and for recording a stream of her crying at the negative comments directed at her for the inflammatory and hypocritical comments she directed at iDubbbz.
- Irony: Ian devotes a good chunk of the Jinx Content Cop to pointing out that Jinx, who has made a career out of Stealing the Credit from other creators by reacting to their videos, puts watermarks on the few original videos of his, something done to make sure copyrighted material can't be infringed on.
- "The Reason You Suck" Speech: Rather, a "The Reason You and Your Channel Suck" speech. Content Cop is essentially a 10 to 20 minutes long version of this, but special mention goes to his videos on Keemstar and LeafyIsHere, who had their channels and reputation systematically dismantled.
"'Oh, you'll ruin my career, Keemstar? Good fucking luck. You're not going to ruin my career, you dumb piece of shit, and I've shown you why you aren't going to ruin my career; I'm smarter than you, you can't think before you speak, and I've never said this unironically, but I think this will be the first time I've said this unironically and mean it: kill yourself.'"
- Take That!: Content Cop tends to be this for the people iDubbbz criticizes, but he does throw in some pot shots at certain other Youtubers. Including himself.
- Content Cop - TOY REVIEW CHANNELS (GIANT SURPRISE EGG)
- In the toy box, iDubbbz finds a toy gun dubbed "Sam Pepper's Kill Your Best Friend Prank Gun".
- Content Cop - KEEMSTAR
- When recounting the Keemstar incident involving Pyrocynical, he describes Pyrocynical as someone who "sucked Keemstar's dick half the time".
- Content Cop - Leafy
- iDubbbz points out that Grade A Under A, along with the titular Leafy, is a hypocrite for using Keemstar to boost his platform despite Keemstar's many controversies being public knowledge and only ending their friendship when the YouTube community turned on him. That being said, iDubbbz does give them both the benefit of the doubt although this does lead iDubbbz to another conclusion...
iDubbbz: Wow, you guys must be great judges of character if you were surprised by Keemstar going behind your backs. GradeA and Leafy, complete fucking retards. Actual retards.
- Then, he mocks Scarce by telling his audience to only subscribe to Scarce "when Scarce's content gets better".
iDubbbz: Scarce is overweight, but more importantly than that, Scarce is boring.
- iDubbbz points out that Grade A Under A, along with the titular Leafy, is a hypocrite for using Keemstar to boost his platform despite Keemstar's many controversies being public knowledge and only ending their friendship when the YouTube community turned on him. That being said, iDubbbz does give them both the benefit of the doubt although this does lead iDubbbz to another conclusion...
- Content Cop - Jake Paul
- He calls Jake Paul an "obnoxious, arrogant asshole" before mentioning that RiceGum is an obnoxious, arrogant asshole as well.
- Content Cop - TOY REVIEW CHANNELS (GIANT SURPRISE EGG)
- "The Villain Sucks" Song / The Diss Track: He's made two of these, "Hey Now, You're A Keemstar" on the titular Killer Keemstar and "Asian Jake Paul" on Ricegum.
- Memetic Badass: He's built up a reputation of being one to mainstream Youtube channels thanks to his Content Cop series. When you see a popular YouTuber that is particularly bad or controversial, Ian is frequently cited as someone to tear them a new one because his series is just that detailed and well-researched and utterly scathing, often crippling the viewerbase and reputation of his subjects.
- In addition, Ian always knows how the YouTubers he is doing a Content Cop on will react and notes it in his videos how they will respond before the YouTuber in question responds EXACTLY as he predicted they would. Bonus points if he ends up doing a second The Reason You Suck video afterwards because the response to his Content Cop was just that poorly thought out.
- Moment of Awesome: Pretty much all the Content Cop content is this: Ian critiques YouTubers he feels are either being assholes/making the community bad/did something incredibly bad that they try to pretend didn't happen. Examples include:
- His slam towards Tana Mongeau after she said some rather rude and spiteful things to him and said he should lose his fans/break his legs all for saying the N-Word in an argumentative context along her own hypocrisy.
- Utterly ripping Keemstar apart for his attacks to other YouTubers for petty things, saying he doesn't use his platform to attack others but doing it and overall being a very cruel person to the YouTube community.
- As a matter of fact, when the video was uploaded, the biggest YouTubers (including Game Grumps, Jack Septic Eye, Pew Die Pie, and h3h3productions) were all together in a hotel and happily huddled around the laptop to watch the Keemstar Content Cop over and over again. Ethan of h3h3 compared the experience to watching Star Wars with friends for the first time.
- His video on Leafy and calling him out on bullying other YouTubers after the TOMMYNC2010 incident.
- The RiceGum video after he made some very hypocritical comments such as not recording people on his streams when he does and then asking for the same after smashing someone's phone at a YouTube party. It ends with a RiceGum-style diss track that includes a cameo from Pew Die Pie.
I feel like the people who wrote these entries endorsed Ian's views on these subjects, thus have made it the wiki's viewpoint. I just don't think there's really any way of troping these people without making it seem we have anything against them.
So what should we keep these on the stipulation that we're troping Ian's interpretation of these people, or cut WebVideo.Content Cop for attracting real life troping of his subjects?
Edited by PlasmaPoweropenEdit War on Characters.Metroid Samus Aran
Hey guys. Back again with another Metroid-related problem.
Tropers.Mew1996 is falling into the trap of over-zealously editing after the release of a hot work, and as a result making several bad edits on Characters.Metroid Samus Aran.
The foremost issue is that they re-added a second page quote
after said quote had already been removed by another troper.
In that same edit, they have also added several poorly-written trope examples:
- A Cain and Abel entry that violates Examples Are Not Arguable (it starts off calling itself an "odd example" and then tries to bend over backwards trying to justify how it "fits" the trope).
- An Ax-Crazy "subversion" which is Not a Subversion. Ax-Crazy is a specific thing, not just "a person kills a lot of stuff", especially if the stuff in question are predators and aliens out to kill her first.
- A massive Wall of Text added to He Who Fights Monsters which goes into way too many tangents, flowery prose about Samus and her relationship with the Metroids, and potholing tropes which are unnecessary and distracting.
I've already removed or trimmed down all except the quote. The only reason I haven't touched it first is because of the aforementioned Edit War. Removing at this point would result in a fourth edit, so I brought the matter here first.
Edited by NubianSatyressopenEdit War regarding Authors Saving Throw entry on YMMV/Metroid Dread.
For context, Other M is notorious for a scene in which the female protagonist Samus enters an area with deadly high temperature despite having a suit modification (Varia Suit) that lets her survive in extreme temperature. She does this until her former commanding officer, Adam, authorizes her to use the Varia Suit, almost dying in the process. In particular, fans were very upset that Samus obeyed Adam's orders not to do anything until he authorized her (she is no longer his subordinate at the time of the game) and that Adam waited until Samus almost cooked to death to give her said authorization.
Salmon Aran has made edits based on a recent "discovery" which claims that the English localization was to blame for that last sentence; in the Japanese version (allegedly, since I don't speak the language), Adam never orders her not to use her abilities and he never knew Samus was in that area until moments before he authorized the Varia Suit. End of context.
Salmon edited a Author's Saving Throw entry on YMMV.Metroid Dread that tries to differentiate the scene between the English and Japanese versions. Basically, constantly using terms like "English version" or "English fans" or "English Adam".
Given that Other M has been getting
more attention
here on ATT since the release of the newest game in the series, I specifically rewrote entry to remove the distinction between the English and Japanese versions of the game, because that seems to be a touchy subject and isn't really necessary to understanding the entry. Basically, regardless of the translation, the fans still find the idea that Samus would run into a heated area until authorized to use her Varia Suit to be pretty ridiculous and thus hilarious that ADAM's AI replacement warns her NOT to do that. I was trying to rewrite the entry to make the version distinctions irrelevant but Salmon re-added said distinctions
again with the edit reason:
Again, though, I think the entry can be written in a way where what's "canon" is irrelevant. Whether Adam intended it or not, the fact remains that Samus entered a deadly area and refused to use equipment that could save her life until he authorized it, whereas in Dread, the AI ADAM basically tells Samus not to do that immediately after she comes across a heated area.
Edited by NubianSatyressopen Other M
The Analysis page on Metroid Other M should be cut
. Or at least seriously overhauled.
To put it simply, that's not an unbiased analysis, it's an extensive review with a vested interest in "saving" the game. I went back in the history to try to find the undo point, but apparently the analysis page was created purely to host it.
This isn't the first time someone has gone out of their way to "explain away" the intense problems with Metroid: Other M and try to "clarify" how audiences who took issue with it "don't truly get it". The review itself - both on-page and the linked Lexicon Lookout review - are polite, sure, but also...wrong. They make many extrapolations that are more than generous, and they've bled out onto the other pages associated with Metroid: Other M. I'm planning on cleaning them up myself, but I don't know what to do with the Analysis page.
openBleached Underpants decayed?
I saw this on hololive
- Bleached Underpants: Not the actual talents themselves, but rather their illustrators, or "mamas" and "papas", some of whom were well-known for their NSFW content long before their associated members debuted, such as Pochi (Reine) and TAM-U (Shion), the former of which has a particularly prolific body of work.
I removed it on the ground that Bleached Underpants is about the creator toned down their works while the example is "He Also Did NSFW". Then I check the trope page itself to see if the entry also present there. But surprise... many on-page examples are just that "The creator also did porn". I read the trope description again, and while it does extend to the creators reuse their characters from NSFW works, I don't see how it could include "The creator did a completely unrelate NSFW work."
Here's a whole folder from the trope page.
- John Mitchell, aka DYWTABA_Brony, is not only known for being one of the storyboard artists and animators for DEATH BATTLE!. He's also the artist behind Anime One Night Stand Requests, a series of pornographic short comics planned to consist of over 300 pages of his characters shagging other characters once he is fully finished with it.
- Alvin Earthworm, the creator of Super Mario Bros. Z, is an avid furry artist as can be seen in his DeviantArt Account
.
- Mikeinel, the creator of Draw with Me, also draws H-comics and has animated adult parodies of certain cartoonsnote Including a parody of the Mystic Spring Oasis scene from Zootopia where the characters are Little Bit Beastly instead of Funny Animals.. Even some of his DeviantArt works reflect this.
- The famous pornographic animator ZONE also created this
Game Grumps animation. You'd never be able to tell if not for the rather... suggestive way a mustard bottle squirts on the end card.
- Retired YouTube Pooper TimoteiLSD once made an animation in 2011 called "Nyan Ho", which involved a cat and a Pop-Tart (named Lulubelle Nyanette Cheshire and Barry Popper respectively) having sex in the back of the latter's Hummer truck. While the original video was taken down from his channel for obvious reasons (though reuploads do exist), he was proud enough of Lulubelle that he had her make cameo appearances in almost every YTP he made since.
Should such examples removed, or I miss something?
Edited by KuruniopenHow do I create an Awesome Music page? Anime
(Apologies for the wall of text, TL;DR will be provided.)
Being a musician and fan of music (particularly OSTs), Awesome Music pages are my favorite thing to view on this site. However, I was disappointed to find that Dr. Stone had no Awesome Music page to speak of. I've been tempted to make it myself, but the reason why I enjoy visiting this site is to hear how other people describe things. If the majority of a page is written by me, it defeats the purpose and ceases being fun. With that aside, I've accepted that there are times when I must be that person for others, as opposed to the inverse.
Anyway, here's what I'm struggling with. Since I'm still relatively new to editing on the site, navigating the rules, forums, and resources is painfully difficult. I've searched numerous times for instructions or guidelines on how to create an Awesome Music page, but have come up empty-handed. When clicking "Create New" on the Main for Dr. Stone, there's no option for Awesome Music.
I can think of a few reasons as to why I haven't figured this out yet. One, I'm stupid and the answer is staring me in the face. Or two, I've been looking in all the wrong places. Knowing me, the former seems to be the most likely scenario.
TL;DR: I'm a newbie idiot, so I need help figuring out how to start an Awesome Music page for Dr. Stone.
Edited by NexyopenUnusual entry on YMMV page
YMMV.Boys Dont Cry has this entry for Misaimed Fandom:
- Most reviewers loved it, but while sympathetic to the character, referred to Brandon as female and seemed to think it was a story about a lesbian who felt she had to pretend to be a boy because of homophobia. One reviewer even said something like "in disguising herself, ironically, this young woman helped other girls find themselves." In real life, Brandon was transgender, but also your average somewhat rugged young man and had the kind of opinions on feminism and lesbianism expected from a young man born in Nebraska in the early seventies.
The last paragraph of that entry seems to entirely be speculative. I searched Brandon Teena and found nothing to suggest he had something against feminism or lesbians. His WP page states that he was against Christian views on abstinence and LGBT (source 8 on the article, if you're curious).
Permission to remove that part? I know little about Brandon but wasn't able to find anything suggesting what the entry pertains.
openWhat happened to the Franchise/Scream page (and can we get it back)?
Hey, I looked it up but couldn't see anything about this...I was trying to find the franchise page for the Scream films (1, 2, 3, 4, TV series, and the upcoming 5th). It was deleted to "correct the namespace", which I don't understand.
It's now under Scream, which I think is actually more confusing now that the IP itself has produced content other than films (e.g. the TV series), and especially since the 1996 original film was also called Scream (and the 2022 film has been announced to be called Scream as well). Other movies with similar audience and reach (e.g. A Nightmare on Elm Street) have their own "franchise" pages, and I think it would be better to either pothole Scream or make it for the original (the 1996 version), and give it a general Franchise entry for all the content.
Edited by harrietvangeropenAmbiguous Situation examples?
My Little Pony: A New Generation had these What Happened to the Mouse? examples that were removed per cleanup
. Someone wants to add it back under Ambiguous Situation.
- Despite this is the same world as Friendship Is Magic, it's never acknowledged how the sun and moon are able to rise and set without the use of magic or someone to move them, or how weather occurs without ponies actively managing it.
- In Generation 4, it's shown that disharmony between the three pony races summons ghostly, horse-like creatures known as Windigos that feed on their negative emotions and turn Equestria into an icy wasteland. Here, the three races living apart and believing the worst of each other seems to have eliminated magic entirely, with no hint of the Windigos ever being a problem, though it's possible they were destroyed at the end of Friendship is Magic.
- Throughout Friendship Is Magic, the ponies make peace and became friends with several other creatures throughout the world, including dragons, griffons, changelings, hippogriffs, yaks, and others. However, none of these other creatures are ever referred to in the film, making it unclear what happened to them or if the ponies became divided from them like they did with each other.
- There is no clue as to if any of the god-level characters from Generation 4 still live. Discord, Celestia, Twilight, and Tirek are fairly explicitly immortal, and elder dragons can live for millennia. Where are they, and if any of the alicorns still live, what happened to cause them to abandon their people? Did they give up their immortality at some point, or lose it when magic ended?
- Are Tirek, Chrysalis, and Cozy Glow still statues by this time? If they haven't been destroyed at some point already (which the pegasi of Zephyr Heights likely could have done after the divide, either out of fear of unicorns releasing them or covering up evidence of ponies working together — the biggest instance of which being the fight with this trio — or both), it is possible that the disappearance of magic released them (given Cozy Glow's ritual had broken the "walk on clouds" spell), though if this was the case, they would be powerless and most likely die of old age by G5's time (depending on how immortal Tirek is and whether it depends on magic or Tartarus). Unless the spell was permanent.
At first I and the thread argued against adding for the same reason they were cut from Mouse, the question was not even touched on in the movie itself. They then argued for adding saying " the Ambiguous Situation page and it doesn't say anything about "It needs to be brought up in universe", only "The alternatives need to be reasonable"." It might be valid, but I'm not sure as these don't sound like alternatives as the main thing/issue isn't in the story. I'm taking here for additional thoughts.
openQuestion about page clean up? Western Animation
I'd like to ask where I would go to post a request for a page or pages to be cleaned up? The pages related to Western Animation/Chaotic and it's subages need some serious adjustments as its still from the very earliest stages of TV Tropes, including stuff like "This Troper" and stuff like that.
I have no idea how to do it myself, so I'd like to leave it in the hands of people who can do it better
openYGO Sevens Fridge removed by Jackpot for no obvious reason Anime
...Yeah, this again.
So I had put a bit of an expansion on a Fridge observation. This is an original.
...
During Yuga and Luke’s duel near the end of the Team Battle Royal Arc, they both use an old card that perfectly reflects their character’s: Luke used Pot of Greed, which lets him draw two cards for no cost, reflecting his huge ego and desire to be the best either blinding him to the real problems the characters are facing, or directly contribute to them. Yuga used Graceful Charity, which lets him draw three cards, but then has to discard two for the cost, reflecting his selfless nature to make dueling enjoyable and making sacrifices to help others. This is further exemplified during the Goha Siblings Arc, where Luke sided with Yuo without any hesitation under the belief he was the sixth sibling, while Yuga, after defeating The☆Lukeman, negotiates with Yuo to reinstate his siblings as president in exchange for him working for Goha.
...
This is what I added
...
- This is not the only way of reflecting on their characteristics. Yuga's use of Graceful Charity allows him to set up long term strategies with the graveyard, such as Kuribot and massing Level 7 monsters for his trap cards, showing his strategic mindset. Meanwhile Luke's preference for more simple and straightforward strategies is shown by him just drawing two cards. He gets what he needs without any side effects or costs in a straightforward but effective manner.
...
Jackpot removed it, and I have no idea why or for what. I don't see why as there are several tropes elsewhere in Sevens about how Yuga prefers more complicated strategies and Luke prefers simpler and straightforward ones and adding onto the above discussion with a second layer of how it reflects the two of them's preferences seems like it shouldn't be an issue. Expanding on fridge points with additional elements happens all the time, and I have no idea why Jackpot removed it.
Please assist.
(NOTE: I am specifically referring to the above Fridge. Jackpot's removed or messed with several edits of mine on other pages in both Sevens pages and Ladybug's fridge page recently, but I have discussions on their own pages about those incidents. This is specifically on this fridge issue only. Please keep it to this specific topic for Mod preferences).
openWonder Woman = Pinball Protagonist? Film
The DC Extended Universe version of Wonder Woman is classified as a Pinball Protagonist in her solo movie under this argument: "If Steve Trevor had escaped from the Germans without going through Themyscira, the world would have been exactly the same. He would have brought Dr. Poison's notebook to British High-Command, they would have ignored it, Steve would have recruited his friends to go after the chemical plant, Veld wouldn't have been liberated but it would still have been wiped out the next day, Steve would have tracked Ludendorf to the plant, and sacrificed himself to destroy the gas. The only significant thing Diana did was kill Ares, which didn't make much of a difference, since he only influenced humans to go to war with each other and create weapons of mass destruction, and humans continued to do that after he died anyway."
Is this true or just nitpicking?
Alleged Number1KirbyFan
openAccidentally messed up a page Anime
I was removing spoiler tags from TearJerker.Case Closed but something went wrong and there's a bunch of broken brackets in the page. I'm trying to fix my mistake myself but if a mod is reading this and can revert the edit then that would be helpful. Thanks
edit: fixed I think
Edited by N1KFopenTroper Report
So we've got a troper on the CM thread who's now hit strike three on a bit of a Single-Issue Wonk. Their name is Cartoon All Stars, and they seem very determined to get some CMs from Kamen Rider Saber. No problem in itself, but their way of going about it is just to keep asking the thread about it, even though they've been told multiple times to stop asking because none of the "regulars" watched it.
First they asked here
on the discussion day, only to be told that neither of the two people that reserved it ended up watching it. Then, they got aggressive about it
(the post was thumped, but it was "calling" the tropers that usually discuss the show to discuss it, even though they both said they didn't watch it). Then, they posted suggestions themselves
, at which point they were advised to check it out themselves - advice that they didn't take, because they just asked about it again
.
For what it's worth, asking the same question multiple times in spite of getting a response is not new behavior for them - they did the same with Aldrich Killian, where they asked about him
, got a response immediately
, then asked again later for no reason
. There's only so many ways we can ask someone to stop or just watch the work themselves before it becomes clear that they're not actually listening to what we say, and I don't really know what else can be done but ask for mod intervention at this point.
openCan I add a page to the No Real Life Examples?
I'd like to add the Conspicuous Consumption to the Gossip and Stereotypes page and delete the 'Real Life' section for the former. I certainly think it fits; the real life section is little more than a list of so-and-so celebrity owns a super-duper big mansion, or owns a super-duper big yacht, or a gold plated toilet, or such-and-such silly product exists.
Can I do this by myself, or do I need to go through some process first?
openIncredibles 2 Award Snub Western Animation
The Award Snub entry has been a contentious one for Incredibles 2, and has been added and deleted multiple times over the years.
Those that add it are fans of the franchise, jubilant over finally getting a sequel and are disappointed it didn't win the Best Animated Picture Oscar.
Those that remove it point out that it's not an Award Snub situation, Incredibles 2 ran against Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse which was universally acclaimed to be a groundbreaking achievement in animation. As such Incredibles 2 simply lost to a superior film.
We're in the situation of it being added back again with the troper, perkeez, insisting that "Some people preferred Incredibles 2. As long as some people agree with the entry, it belongs in YMMV."
I don't know if it's worth arguing that point, however, I think the entry as currently written is problematic:
- Award Snub: Incredibles 2 was a strong contender for the 2018 Best Animated Feature Academy Award, but was very unlucky another great animated film was released in the same year. It lost to Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, which broke a six year run (2012-2017) of a Disney/Pixar film winning that category. Incredibles 2 only received 7 wins and 40 nominations compared to 40 wins and 71 nominations for Spider-Verse. In most other years, Incredibles 2 would have won the Academy Award.
Issues:
1) It leans very heavily into the presumption that if Spiderverse was not in the running then Incredibles 2 clearly would have won the award. In 2018 there were several equally good challengers. Wreck-It Ralph 2, Isle of Dogs, Incredibles 2. To imply that Incredibles 2 was the clear winner of those three, is speculation and doesn't need to be part of the example.
2) The line "broke a six year run" is just a trivia factoid that has nothing to do with Incredibles 2 being snubbed or not and kinda implies that Incredibles 2 was snubbed simply because of its Disney/ Pixar pedigree.
3) The wins/nominations statistics should be removed. While it illustrates how Spiderverse won more awards and thus won the Oscar, the gap between it and Incredibles 2 is quite large. Spiderverse won over 5 times the awards (40 vs 7) and had almost double the nominations (71 vs 40). These facts show just how much of an underdog Incredibles 2 was to winning the Oscar that year and undermines the case that an Award Snub even occurred at all.
I opened a discussion on this and three tropers participated (myself, perkeez, and Larkman) but we could not achieve a consensus.
Reference: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/remarks.php?trope=YMMV.Incredibles2#comment-141341
I suggested this wording to reflect the feedback of Larkman and myself... (Example A)
- Award Snub: Although Incredibles 2 was a solid candidate for the 2018 Best Animated Feature Academy Award, it lost to the equally great Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. It was clearly a case of two strong films being in competition but There Can Be Only One and Spiderverse ran a clean sweep of the awards circuit that year.
Perkeez suggested this wording which takes into account issue #3. (Example B)
- Award Snub: Although Incredibles 2 was a solid candidate for the 2018 Best Animated Feature Academy Award, it lost to the equally great Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, breaking a six year run (2012-2017) of a Disney/Pixar film winning that category. It was clearly a case of two strong films being in competition but There Can Be Only One and Spiderverse ran a clean sweep of the awards circuit that year. In most other years, Incredibles 2 would likely have won the Academy Award.
So I put before you:
A) Should Incredibles 2 even have an Award Snub entry at all?
B) If yes, which wording is the best for the example? Example A or Example B?
Edited by rva98014

Courtesy link here
Based on Cauchy's edit reasons, I suspect that they're showing favoritism towards a particular character and are trying to shoehorn their bias without discussion. Edited by DivineFlame100