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:
openTempting Fate: Weird subtropes
Tempting Fate has a huge list of subtropes. Which isn't a problem in of itself.
The problem is that a lot of them... aren't subtropes? Some of them are, but a lot of them are examples of how one can tempt fate and saying the trope that they're tempting.
For example, the very first "subtrope":
- "At least it isn't raining." — Cue the Rain. Alternatively, a worse type of weather will occur instead.
Cue the Rain isn't a subtrope of Tempting Fate. A character doesn't have to do or say anything for Cue the Rain to happen, it's just "the weather turns to emphasize an already bad situation." You can tempt fate in a Cue the Rain situation, but it's not a subtrope, just one that can overlap.
A lot of the "subtropes" are like that.
Even if they're valid subtropes, it's not useful as an index because they're ordered by the Stock Phrase that's tempting fate rather than the trope itself, and sometimes the trope is potholed so it's not even visible.
Sorta tempted to just move the whole thing to Analysis.Tempting Fate.
Edited by LarkmarnopenAcceptable Targets misuse?
- Acceptable Targets: Everyone and everything on the planet, at one point or another, has been lampooned on the show, even the show itself.
- Out of everyone they've ridiculed, favored butt-monkeys include hippies, Ben Affleck (at least until Argo came out), and Barbra Streisand.
My impression is that this that it's about targets audiences find acceptable. But the entry is about the show finding them assertable which doesn't sound YMMV. ALL the Acceptable Targets entries I've seen are written as the work treating them as assertable, not audiences.
Is it YMMV because fan of the work find it such? That's not how they're written and fans of a work agreeing with the works opinions seems like People Sit on Chairs.
openAsHimself or AsHerself?
The trope page for As Himself adds "a.k.a. As Herself" to the page title.
I know that many tropes have an "official" name which uses the male gender, with a female redirect for the obvious reasons. Does that mean that the male version takes precedence?
I'm asking because there's an example on NYPD Blue which originally referred to one woman appearing as herself, and it was accordingly headed "As Herself". But now a second example has been added under the same heading, this time about a man. So there's one male and one female example under the heading "As Herself".
What's wiki policy about this? Should the heading be kept or changed to "As Himself"? None is really better than the other. I'm inclined to leave it as is, but I'm wondering if "As Herself" counts as a redirect and, as such, shouldn't be used unless it's necessary to avoid confusion?
openPrincess Jasmine's Age Western Animation
A while back, I deleted a Values Dissonance entry on Aladdin's YMMV page stating Princess Jasmine to be 15 years old, as I had stumbled across a piece of trivia on Jasmine's page on the Disney Wiki saying she was going to be fifteen and that the Sultan would say that she's got to be married by her sixteenth birthday in an early story concept for the movie, but Jeffery Katzenberg nixed it because he worried about sending the wrong message by showing a fifteen year old girl getting married. It then linked to a book titled Aladdin: The Making of an Animated Film, a book that talks about the movie's development, as its source. More recently, a fellow troper added a Fanon entry to the movie's YMMV page mentioning this exact information. However, Queen Of Swords just deleted it and re-added the Values Dissonance entry while linking to two articles as a source. One of which is a blog that says "although several of the princesses ages were never actually stated in the films, researchers have used aspects from the movies, interviews with members from the Disney corporation, and a general sense of how girls act at certain ages to compile enough data to at least guess at these ages"; from my point of view, this blog never provides any actual sources of their own to back up this claim apart from hearsay, and they even state that it's more of an estimation rather than a concrete answer. The other one links to a Buzzfeed article which itself links to the Disney Princess page on the Disney Wiki, stating that that's where their ages are found. However, I looked, and there's nothing there. Suffice it to say, I don't really consider these valid sources to back up the idea that Jasmine is 15, and I personally trust what a book, that talks about the movie's development and the people working on the movie while going into great detail about each of those things, has to say over what these people on the Internet have to say. I would delete the Values Dissonance example again and re-add fearlessnikki's Fanon entry, but I don't want to risk starting an Edit War.
Any thoughts?
openDeleted Transgender Tropes for Re:Zero Anime
So a while ago I had asked if I should change the page of the character Felis Argyle from Re:Zero to make note that she is a transgender girl, which the story revealed in the prequel volume Ex.1 Dream of the Lion King, and the general consensus was that I should go ahead and do so, and to also cite the post in my reasoning.
I even have the page where she reveals it to the readers, in a scene where its revealed she's been praying to be a girl for six years. https://imgur.com/a/3pNo8Wo
Just right now I found that the character page was altered, by the user Domadordedios, removing any reference to Felis being Trans and gendering them as a guy. They also deleted the Transgender trope, in which this was written.
- Transgender: In the side novel focusing on her backstory, it is revealed that she been praying to be a girl for atleast six years, and is using magic to prevent her body from getting any more masculine. She also gets extremely uncomfortable in men's clothes and addresses herself using feminine Japanese Pronouns.
All of which is true and can be found in the story, mostly within the prequel volume.
The only reason they cite is "Misleading information" without anything else.
What should I do here?
openHaving a problem with a thing on the Camp page Film
It's this: "Don't expect it to take itself the least bit seriously."
Now, that may apply with Batman (1966), the works of John Waters, and some of the films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (specifically Thor: Ragnarok and The Guardians of the Galaxy films), but with all the books and articles I've read on the subject, I've found that part of the page disingenuous. The Universal Monster Movies and the films of Bette Davis and Joan Crawford are very serious but are regarded as camp due to their melodrama, theatricality, and artifice.
I was wondering if it could be changed to something like "The serious becomes silly while the silly becomes serious. And there's no limit to how over the top something can get."
openUnilateral Image Changes in Characters/SpongeBobSquarePantsRecurringCharacters
Troper Grojfan has unilaterally changed the images on Characters.Sponge Bob Square Pants Recurring Characters without going on the Image Pickin' threads for a discussion first. I already PMed them about it earlier today and they agreed to stop (only adding new images for characters who don't have them), but now I would like someone to revert the new images back into the old ones please? I tried doing it myself, but the original image URLs were lost in their other slew of edits, making them confusing to find.
Courtesy link here: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Characters.SpongebobSquarepantsRecurringCharacters
open Eteral make-up
Is there any trope for make-up that stays around and is always perfect regardless of anything? I'm not talking about Wakeup Makeup (inly when waking up) nor Beauty Is Never Tarnished (barely even related with the subject of make-up itself), but just make-up that survives improbable things without being just washed away, worn out or even eaten away.
openTroper not giving edit reasons for removals. Also possibly an agenda.
Grotadmorv appears to be almost exclusively removing Nightmare Fuel examples, without giving any of them edit reasons. Could someone send them a notifier? I don't really know that much of how I should do it myself.
Edited by pikachu17openRise of Skywalker trope misuses?
I find these from The Rise of Skywalker suspect.
- Aborted Arc: After much buildup in the Prequels, and an arc in The Clone Wars, regarding a prophecy where Anakin Skywalker is The Chosen One who would restore balance to the force, the theme is dropped in favor of allowing Palpatine to survive and continue spreading the dark side via Puppet King Snoke and Ren, and causing destruction with the Sith fleet, thus nullifying his sacrifice. Zigzagged in that he does help Rey at the end, but by joining the thousands of other Jedi who live inside Rey, including Qui-Gon, Mace, Ahsoka, and Obi-Wan to empower Rey to defeat Palpatine once and for all and of course nothing said that the force will stay balanced.
The arc was completed and balance restored in ''Return of the Jedi", Anakin outright said "Bring back the balance Rey, as I did." It just didn't stay balanced or Palpatine stay dead for as long as we assumed. This sounds like complaining about the arc being arbitrarily undone as opposed to aborted. Saying it's Zigzagged makes it sound more like a non-example.
- Broken Aesop: Played With. One aesop of the previous film is that it doesn't matter if you're a "nobody," as Rey is still a powerful and capable hero despite the revelation her parents were just two drunken junk traders who sold her off. Then it turns out in this film that Rey was actually never nobody; the reason she's so powerful is because she's the granddaughter of Palpatine and heir to the entire Empire. Then it plays with it by showing she is a nobody. Her parents were nobody, useless to Palpatine and degraded to live as drunkards and junk traders. Her parents never intended her to become a Jedi, a war hero, or anything besides a scavenger to prevent her grandfather from finding her. Unfortunately, they failed.The aesop is reconstructed in a conversation between Finn and Jannah, where they discuss the possibility that when they refused to fight for the First Order anymore, they heard the Force calling out to them. Just because they aren't descended from a powerful line of Jedi doesn't mean the Force doesn't flow through them, same as with every other living being in the galaxy. Additionally, Rey being a heroic descendant of Palpatine who takes on the Skywalker name despite lacking blood relations to them continues the theme that blood does not mean everything.
Broken Aesop cannot be played with as by definition it's unintentional, all this sounds like it's arguing with itself. It also requires contradicting it's internal logic, so contradicting the Aesop of prior installments isn't this as it's an external contradiction. This sounds more like complaining.
Last question: Rey saving the day by by following Kylo's "Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to." seems worth noting. Would this be Villain Has a Point or Strawman Has a Point as the validity was retconned in?
openNever Life it Down misuse?
- Among critics of the trilogy, that Disney didn't have a set plan for how the trilogy would go and that the directors basically had a blank slate to do whatever they wanted lead to a lot of the major problems beginning in Force Awakens that would go on to haunt the series going onward for years.
- The movie as a whole will likely never live down it's "subverting viewer expectations" approach. While subverting expectations isn't bad in itself, the fact that a number of things fans speculated about were given wildly unexpected results contributed to making TLJ a very divisive Star Wars movie. Whats more, the subverted plotlines would go on to create issues that would affect the franchise in the years following the movies' release, issues mostly fixed through supplementary material.
- This film is also notorious for many fans as the entry which confirmed and reinforced what TFA strongly implied: nothing the Original Trilogy heroes did mattered in the long run since their accomplishments were nipped in the bud or undone, and Luke dies anticlimactically this time. Even Mark Hamill voiced his misgivings until he issued a retraction, the sincerity of which some of these fans doubt.
- Fans will never live down The Reveal that Luke Skywalker almost went through with killing his nephew just because he had bad dreams about him turning evil, when he was willing to save his already evil father despite him killing or trying to kill Luke's loved ones and chopping his arm off. Following on that, said fans especially won't let live down that when Kylo did go evil partially as a result, Luke decided to go into exile as a grumpy hermit drinking milk out of animals instead of confronting the First Order.
- Fans will never live down that Rose stopped Finn from doing a Heroic Sacrifice which he thought would've saved the Resistance. Rose's kiss with Finn at the end did not help at all.
The first two I think cross into RL example which need 25 years, the claim "will likely never live" sounds like major Weasel Words and a red flag for cutting. The rest I find suspect per prior ATT
which state NLIP requires explaining how fans are exaggerating that aspect, otherwise it's just complaining about something that objectively happened as opposed to how it's this trope. I don't desire the latter one are valid, just not as written. Thoughts?
open ROCEJ Potholes?
Something I've noticed time and time again on this wiki is people punctuating entries on dicey topics with condescending remarks like "and that's all that will be said about that" potholed to the ROCEJ page.
I feel like it's kind of awkard and in violation of ROCEJ in and of itself because of the slightly arrogant tone that adds to the text and because it comes off almost like it's daring some idiot to start an edit war over the entry in question
It's a habit I almost think should be banned and an effort started to clean it off the wiki.
openThe Lobo problem Print Comic
The page SelfDemonstrating.Lobo exists.
The page ComicBook.Lobo doesn't. Once upon a time, it was a redirect to the self-demonstrating page, but it was cutlisted with the following reason "Redirect to SelfDemonstrating.Lobo, causing people to treat the page as a legitimate work page rather than a Just For Fun page. [Anddrix]"
Beyond the fact that ComicBook.Lobo should exist as it is a genuine work, trope examples shouldn't be linking to a self-demonstrating page. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that it was clearly stated by mods that any such link (like SelfDemonstrating.Deadpool or SelfDemonstrating.The Joker to only name common ones) should be corrected to the ComicBook/ namespace.
However, in the case of Lobo, the result would be a red link. (There is currently 259 wicks.) What shall we do? Re-creating the redirect would seem to me the absolute minimum, until someone knowledgeable and/or courageous enough create an actual work page...
Edited by StFanopen Can't Take Compliments
Is there a trope for this? Someone who just can't accept any sort of compliment no matter how deserved it is. I don't think it is quite Heroic Self-Deprecation since that implies that they feel they are inherently worthless. It's just not being able to take a compliment by either deflecting credit elsewhere when they are fully responsible for the achievement or trying to downplay it. Basically just thinking they're not as great as they really are.
It would be more of a direct inversion to Can't Take Criticism. Instead of not being able to accept any form of criticism, they can't accept any form of compliment.
openDeliberatre misindentation
Guiletheme misindented when adding an example in EarlyInstallmentWeirdness.Real Life, I fixed the issue and sent them an Indentation notifier. Next time I blink the eyes, they re-add the misindentation and then add another misindented example. See for yourself
openDarkness Induced Audience Apathy in TROS?
On YMMV.The Rise Of Skywalker, I deleted an example of Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy, citing that it was misuse of the trope. A different example of Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy was added with no edit reason. Both entries are just complaining about Happy Ending Override and Esoteric Happy Ending, without citing any hopelessness of setting or any characters being unsympathetic.
The only thing that suffers from Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy is the YMMV page itself.
openHandling adaptation spoilers Live Action TV
At the The Witcher (2019) page someone just added a spoiler from the books the show is based on to the main page. It is under spoiler tags, but it is a twist that hasn't been revealed or hinted at in the show itself, so a person who has seen the entire first season and thinks it safe to look at the spoiler tags will have the surprise ruined.
Before removing it I wanted to ask if there was any Administrivia source I could quote to add a warning about doing this sort of thing in the future.
ETA: The spoiler in question was added at the end of the Leave No Survivors entry.
Edited by AzureOwlopenNote mark up covered with spoiler
I think it should be forbidden since it's impossible to show it, clicking on "Note" simply cover text again.
Try it yourself, the first entry on Glass (2019) has note markup in the middle of spoiler.
But Handling Spoilers say nothing about this issue.
Edited by Kuruni

I wanted to make a Self-Demonstrating page for a web series, where would I index it?