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:
open Need help Finding Correct Trope Anime
There's a death trope I'm searching for, but I don't know the exact name and the index is huge, so I'm hoping someone here can help me out. It's where someone is afraid of dying. The closest one I've found is I Don't Want to Die, but according to the trope description, it only applies to heroic characters and is more about the phrase itself.
The one I'm looking for is for someone who's terrified of dying (almost as if it's a phobia), to the point of either thinking about it constantly, or spending most of/their entire lives doing everything they can to prolong their very existence. I need it so I can update the Kamigari character page for Maken-ki!. Any help would be appreciated.
Edited by MiinUopen Captain Marvel's YMMV
Who ever deleted this page needs to cool off.
Movie isn't out yet and the page is attracting as much controversy and stupidity as the film itself. Leave off until the damn thing is released.
open"Just for Fun" - What's Allowed
I was randomly clicking through links just now and came across a rather baffling entry on the Abusing the Kardashev Scale for Fun and Profit page.
It's in the "Other: Unconventional or hard to quantify in watts." section, and if anyone wants a look a page search for "Or Something" will get you there...TBH I'm not quite sure what the entry's talking about - limited context plus questionable grammar plus semi-random italicisation make it barely comprehensible (IMHO).
I couldn't fathom its origin from the Page History, and without knowing something about what it's talking about it'd be a challenge to attempt to clean it up.
On a trope or work page I'd be inclined to delete it, but as that page is a "Just for Fun" one I wondered whether there's more tolerance of non-standard entries (a bit like YMMV).
Any views on that, or can anyone offer clues on the entry's original work so it could be tidied up a bit?
Edit: had to go back to the page to check my link to it, so while I'm at it am adding the text of the entry itself:
- The author-stated badly written character habitat Or Something Like That has at least six layers of existence (he got to stuff like Omniverse and We Gave Up So Let's Just Call It Points) and the three most powerful attacks are throwing literally EVERYTHING else at them, breaking the story, but forcing the target to take some form of major backlash from it and imposing reality (or at least a semblance of logic) on the setting. The people who use those are leaders, but it is stated that the rough estimate is that newborn babies have the ability to break the story at least a hundred times on birth and it only gets stronger from there. And that's the civilians. Military or police forces use unquantifiable amounts of energy breaking the flimsy-in-the-first-place rules of reality, omniverses (in jewels) are somewhat expensive and require much care but multiverses and universes are cheaper and easily cared for, plot devices are medium-class weapons, hybridizing of technology and magic is the equivalent of tools, and throwing existence at someone is the effective-ish method of killing supervillains, although it's not perfect.
openNamespace Change
Why did Main.Wild Teen Party turn into SelfDemonstrating.Wild Teen Party? It doesn't seem to be a self-demonstrating page.
Edited by Pichu-kunopenPage on Emergence (Manga)? Anime
I did a search for the doujin Emergence (also known as Metamorphosis) just out of curiosity in order to see what kind of tropes you were able to find within it... and I noticed that there wasn't a page for it. I was considering making a page for it due to it being a massive case Porn with Plot, especially since it is a rather noticeable doujin, having its own Know Your Meme page and everything, but I wasn't sure about it due to the rules about adult content here. If you've read it, then you know what I'm talking about.
I did read through the guidelines about your restrictions on covering H-content, including the rules created by 5P, but I wasn't really able to come to a decision by myself due to the fact that there are some pages about h-content while others get immediately nuked, so I figured that I'd post a thread here to ask if a page for this doujin would be acceptable before I make a page for it myself.
Edited by FEARattataopenYMMV deletions.
Troper PickleRick2017 deleted the following from YMMV.My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic S 7 E 26 Shadow Play Part 2 without explanation:
- Memetic Loser: The Pony of Shadows has started getting this due to his Anti-Climax Boss and They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character statuses. In fact, a lot of fans even believe that between him and The Storm King (another recent "winner" of this "award"), the latter was the more-effective Big Bad note For at least being able to pull off a Near-Villain Victory and having Tempest Shadow as an effective Heavy. Not to mention being more genuinly entertaining.!
- The Scrappy: The Pony of Shadows is largely seen as the weakest part of this finale. While his Anti-Climax Boss and They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character statuses are disappointing enough for many fans, it doesn't help that some also see him as a lazy Suspiciously Similar Substitute for Nightmare Moon's shtick from all the way back in the Season 1 premiere. This is subverted with Stygian himself; he's actually well-received.
- They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character: The synopsis saying that The Pony of Shadows was going to be the main villain seemed to address this complaint from "Castle Mane-ia". However, he's revealed to have been trapped in Limbo during that episode, so the entity from The Stinger couldn't have been him (it was more likely Tirek, since he is introduced wearing the exact same cloak discarded from Pinkie Pie in the castle). Likewise, he's completely unrelated to Nightmare Moon, despite the Urban Legend associated with him. Beyond that, the Pony of Shadows simply doesn't do a lot. Despite him constantly being described as incredibly powerful, he spends most of the two-parter in a severely weakened state and doesn't do much beyond destroying Star Swirl's journal and blasting the heroes with dark energy. Also, unlike King Sombra from the Season 3 premiere, he doesn't even have any Crazy-Prepared countermeasures to make up for his lack of direct action.
- They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot:
- Though Nightmare Moon is mentioned in passing when the Mane Six go over their various accolades with the Pillars, no mention is ever made that Nightmare Moon was once Princess Luna, even though there are clear parallels between her and the Pony of Shadows.
- The Pony of Shadows turns out to be hiding in Hollow Shades... why not have its lair be in the Castle of the Two Sisters, to tie back into "Castle-Mania" and allow a chance to explain how/if it is connected to Nightmare Moon?
- The cast specifically notes that Star Swirl knew about travel between worlds, but makes no mention of Equestria Girls or the magic mirror. If anything, the episode goes out of its way to avoid referencing the mirror, instead mentioning Starlight's time travel portal and then immediately noting it isn't the same thing as dimensional travel. This is in spite of the episode showing the Sirens from Rainbow Rocks in the Pillars' flashback; there clearly wasn't an issue with referencing the films that way, which makes the lack of mention of the mirror all the more glaring.
- While many like getting the Elements back, others are upset the Rainbow Power aren't mentioned in the slightest, as in the first potential usage of them since they were used to beat Tirek, they're just re-replaced with the Elements.
- The ritual Stygian was performing, where he attempted to use the relics of the Pillars to gain similar powers to them, is similar to how Twilight became an alicorn by harnessing the power of the Elements of Harmony via Starswirl's unfinished spell. Furthermore, in his Pony of Shadows form, Stygian becomes a dark alicorn. However, this is completely unremarked upon, and any potential connection between Stygian's ritual and Star Swirl's spell is up to fan speculation.
- On that topic, despite Star Swirl's unfinished spell apparently being his life's work, and Twilight finishing it was so monumental a feat it earned her a royal title, that she finished his spell is only glossed over briefly in dialogue and Star Swirl doesn't even seem to think it's a big deal.
- WTH, Casting Agency?: Some feel that Murry Peeters's performance as Somnambula is too deep-voiced and serious in contrast to the character's Moe appearance and Hope Bringer personality.
I PM'd them about Deleting The Scrappy but haven't heard back. I added it back since policy is not to cut YMMV unless you give a reason. Anything else?
I asked the Scrappy Cleanup before and after this if the Pony of Shadows counted a, but it was ignored. Should the be removed if no-one apparently feels this strongly?
openRude edit reason on Law & Order: Criminal Intent
Makarovak 47 recently made an inappropriate comment while editing some content on the Criminal Intent page. I don't like conversation on the main page myself, but the last sentence told the offending contributor to "go to a fucking forum". I had sent them a message asking them not to do it again, but never got a response. It would not bother me so much if a) comments made on the edit reason weren't permanent, b) CI rarely (if ever) attracts such a hostile response and c) this weren't so out of character from what I've seen from them on here.
openStub article
Photo Psychic has only one example (and a ZCE at that) that's in the trope description and has two wicks (to works that aren't even mentioned on the page itself). Cut?
openBroken formatting on Spell my name with an S- Video games
In Persona 3, there's Aigis, whose name is derived from an ancient Greek word, which correctly would be spelled "&A Elig;gis." As the "&A Elig;" symbol would be too hard to read for most players, the development team commonly romanizes the name as "Aegis" when necessary. The localization team didn't get the memo and went with the (equally correct) "Aigis" instead.
I'd fix it myself, but I have no clue what the symbol even should be.
openEdit War and Creator Bashing
LookyLooky00 has been edit-warring on YMMV.Fantastic Beasts The Crimes Of Grindelwald. They added a comment to the Unfortunate Implications entry about there only being three Asian actors in the franchise. The comment was removed, with a redirect to the discussion page
so as to avoid an edit war. And there was a discussion, which myself and LookyLooky00 and a couple others participated in. However, then LookyLooky00 went back to the YMMV page and re-added the comment about the three Asian actors anyway, even though the reason for its removal was never sufficiently addressed.
I also notice that they have a very strong anti-J.K. Rowling bias. And in fact, a look through their edit history
shows that complaining about Rowling and her apparent racism is the only thing they've been adding to the site. At this point I'm concerned that they have an agenda at play here.
open Does this Trope exist? Guns are the only bad weapons
Does this Trope exist?
The Hero, or some other character, takes issue with guns. Other weapons are fine with the hero. Hurting the bad guys is fine, but if you do it with a gun specifically, then the hero will give you an earful.
I am thinking specifically of things like Doctor Who, where the Doctor condemns the use of guns, but will happily do things like activate the self destruct sequence and blow up the Daleks base (and the Daleks inside) without thinking about it.
Also to a lesser extent Batman will happily use weapons like Batarangs, but guns are forbidden. (Side note: This is separate from Batman's "no killing" policy as he is often objecting to the gun ITSELF, whether the gun was used fatally or not).
openWhere should I put The Worf Effect? Web Original
I'm still clean up Characters.SCP Foundation from time to time. There're several examples of The Worf Effect across those pages, about various skips that the Foundation is simply unable to do anything meaningful with it.
The question is, is The Worf Effect a plot trope (the defeat of strong character) or character trope (the strong character that keep get his ass kicked)? The laconic page of The Worf Effect suggest that the trope's focus is the character, but the trope description seems to indicate that the focus is the event itself.
Edited by KuruniopenResistance episodes Western Animation
Hi. Not that long ago, I asked for several Star Wars Resistance recap pages to be cut as they appeared to be the wrong episode number (The Children from Tehar, Signal from Sector Six, Synara's Score, The Platform Classic). However, more recent information has come to light that the initial episode numbers were correct, and so I find myself in the awkward position of requesting that the pages be able to be recreated.
Here ([1]
, [2]
, [3]
, [4]
) are the relevant Wookieepedia articles of the episodes in question, with links to the recently released information.
openAdd, tweak (once or twice), delete
Perhaps this is entirely unimportant and harmless, but I have occasionally seen tropers who add an example in one edit, then tweak it in one or two edits, and then delete it. In nearly every case, they don't explain why they remove it. Is it because they feel the example doesn't fit the trope? Is it because they found no way to better describe it and thus zapped it altogether? Should I send an Edit Reason Issue Helper to them for this?
Whenever I remove an example I myself added in the past, I explain why (usually starting with "On a second thought, [reason for removal]"). But these tropers remove the examples in such a short time since the addition that I doubt the casual reader will even get to read it.
openContemptible cover
Is there reason that Contemptible Cover is a main page trope. It doesn't really have anything to do with the work itself and hence would fit better under trivia or ymmv(assuming its debatable).
openPosts not showing up
For some of the threads here in ATT, I'm replying and my post gets eaten by the Data Vampires. The thread itself gets bumped, but my post is lost.
openMisuse of Fridge
JackDavid has been re-adding
what I think are invalid Fridge Horror examples on this page.
As I understand it, and how the Fridge Horror page reads, the idea is it's when something horrific happened or must have happened in the background, without the work itself explicitly saying so.
Jack David's entries are what-ifs, in the vein of, "If the villain won, she would have done this." It's speculation at best, and doesn't fit the description of Fridge Horror.
I've removed his entries a couple times, and he keeps putting them back. He's seen the edit reasons for them and responded to them, so I do not think P Ming him will do anything about it.
openSevere trope misuse by User: DarthWiki/DethroningMomentOfSuck
Troper Peridonyx has issues with DMoS. On this page alone, I count some pretty severe and blatant unpunished violations of the rules governing entries, although I assure you there are more on other pages.
Perhaps this is redundant, but just in case anyone doesn't know them, here are the stated rules of any Dethroning Moment subpage:
Keep in mind:
- Sign your entries.
- One moment per game to a troper. If multiple entries are signed to the same troper, the more recent one will be cut.
- Moments only, no "just everything he said," or "The entire game" entries.
- No contesting entries. This is subjective, the entry is their opinion.
- No natter. As above, anything contesting an entry will be cut, and anything that's just contributing more can be made its own entry.
- Explain why it's a Dethroning Moment of Suck.
- Please make sure the moment is fictional and is neither an event that occurred in real life nor something gameplay-related. We have a perfectly good Scrappy Mechanic page for the latter.
- No ALLCAPS, no bold, and no italics unless it's the title of a work. We are not yelling the DMoSs out loud.
And here are the entries Peridonyx has on the page:
I spot in these entries several violations of the above-mentioned rules, particularly these two:
- Only one entry: Do I even need to explain?
- Moments only: A couple of these are bones to pick with concepts, or multiple things within a single game or two. Not moments.
And make no mistake, this is not an isolated incident. There are several other pages with multiple entries from this user that violate the same rules. Considering the rules are right near the top of the page and are one of the first things you see when you load the page, there is just no excuse not to see them, read them and follow them when troping. Never mind doing it again on multiple other pages, as you'll see if you look here: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/el.php?findfor=Peridonyx
And I'm sure if we looked farther, we'd find even more.
Which is why I'm bringing this to everyone's attention. I'm not a mod, I don't know the proper protocol for dealing with users who conduct themselves this way, but I know this is a pretty bad situation and I'm blowing the whistle on it.
As a coda, Peridonyx keeps using Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy. I don't think that entry means what they think it means. Can't tell if it's meant to be Angst Aversion or Eight Deadly Words though.
openProblematic Entry?
On the YMMV page for Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, there's this entry, which rubs me the wrong way somehow, but I can't articulate why:
- * Unintentionally Unsympathetic: Darryl in Season 3. He decides, for no apparent reason, that he absolutely must have another child, breaking up with his boyfriend and leaving him heartbroken when he doesn't want to go along with it. Note here that it's not that Darryl is worried about never getting to experience fatherhood - he already has a daughter who he's got a great relationship with, it's just that for some reason he must have another, something the show expects us to be fully on board with. Large parts of a season otherwise devoted to serious and thought-provocing topics are wasted by making us watch Darryl angst over his non-problems. Rebecca and Heather both suffer for enabling him (in Rebecca's case, he indirectly caused the unhappy ending of the season because he didn't consider that letting a woman who was recovering from a mental illness go on hormones might not be the best idea) while he makes it all about himself at every turn. And in the end, it looks like he'll come out of it smelling like a rose and probably even get his boyfriend back, because Babies Make Everything Better.
It seems overly negative, or maybe just a too-specific take that relies on personal feelings towards kids?

The user Crunchy Crunch
keeps adding [[ https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Characters.ArrowverseSTARLabs
incorrect examples]] to Caitlin Snow/Killer Frost's entry on the Arrowverse: S.T.A.R. Labs
page. Either the examples are blatantly incorrect, a clear example of entry pimping for the character, tremendous Square Peg Round Trope, using different trope names to say the same thing, overexplaining/Purple Prose, or contradicting the example in the middle, making it redundant. They've also edited Barry Allen's
page with the same misinformation to make it seem like they have a romantic connection. When I removed the examples and explained why it was wrong (they seem fairly new to the site and probably don't know about the Edit War rules), they just put them back. I P Med them and they seemed to understand, but then they just started adding them back again. I tried to message them again but the system wasn't working (?), so I removed the examples again and said that if they did it again I would report them, which they're still ignoring. I'm aware that I added to the Edit War and I'm cool with being suspended myself if needs be.