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:
openVandalism in WhatCouldHaveBeen/Sports
Trooper Triple TV 95 has been removing the player names from the basketball section of What Could Have Been/Sports. I reverted the edits the last two times myself and warned him he'd be reported if it happened again.
He claimed to have no idea what I was talking about.
He did it again, today. No reasoning or explanation.
Edited by WillbyropenGame book Pages - Cleansing Required?
I've actually brought this up with another moderator, but decide to bring it here for a ... uhm, let's say, broader opinion, shall we?
So... on the Gamebooks main page
, there is a page dedicated for the What If… (Gamebooks), and its divided into 9 sub-pages of the various instalments.
Which is fine and all if the person who started the sub-pages bothered to make it complete, however its really, really noticeable that the sub-pages are unprofessionally written, severely lacking in details, and some of them doesn't even have tropes. And if it did, each page contains at most 2 to 4 tropes, which begs the question, do we really need these pages?
All those pages are started by Sideshow Jazz 1 3 years ago, and said troper have not been updating the pages he/she started. (circa 2017)
I'm suggesting we consolidate all the books into 1 page (like this one for Give Yourself Goosebumps) and send the rest to the Cutlist. What do you think??
Edited by RobertTYLopenBashing Troper
I just want to go ahead and say I don't watch Supergirl so I have no two cents in this one way or the other.
So on Supergirl, there's a character named William who apparently is not liked at all by the fanbase. I suppose that in and of itself is fine to put on YMMV pages since it's a notable Audience Reaction, but there seems to be a problem with bashing rather than just stating. Specifically, Starbrand 1987 has made many, many edits just talking about how much fans hate William. (They also have several grammar problems like no punctuation and no capitalization, but that's beside the point.)
Here
Starbrand adds And The Fandom Rejoiced about William possibly dying. Here
they put in an entry saying that William flirting with Kara after she turned him down on an episode that aired on International Woman's Day...is Narm.
Most of it is here
on the YMMV page. Starbrand puts a large edition to an entry talking about how poorly-received William is, an entry about how his actor and Kara's actress have no chemistry, adding William and Kara's romance under Audience-Alienating Premise ("Not one regular supergirl media reviewer approves of the relationship."), basically accusing the writers under Trolling Creators, and several subbullets under The Scrappy that got deleted.
Forenperser has deleted some entries, but with the reasons "Stop this silly obsession already." and "Natter, poorly written and just plain obsession," I'm afraid this is going to get hostile soon. They were reported to ATT before
, but it seems they're still at it.
open Valid removal?
Steve From Canada removed an example
from TheReasonYouSuckSpeech.Real Life, with the edit reason "Removed Tommy Lee's entry because he invocked the "Fine Prople Hoax" while berating Donald Trump. If you want to give to someone reasons why he sucks, stick to non-fiction ones."
This seems like an invalid deletion to me; the trope still applies, this was still a TRYSS directed at Trump, even if the speech itself had inaccuracies. I think it should be re-added, but want to discuss it first.
Edit: Hold on, this is worse than I realized. Every edit this person has made has been to this page, and all they've ever done is delete Trump-related examples from it.
Edited by WarJay77openQuestion on what to do about Nice Guy
Like Deadpan Snarker, Nice Guy is another popular established trope that has gotten huge amounts trope decay. The trope is supposed to about a character that is defined by their niceness and isnt really involved in the story events. Now it's used for character that shows an ounce of kindness or human decency even if they are a Jerk with a Heart of Gold.
To quote Administrivia.Square Peg Round Trope:
"Like the Deadpan Snarker before him, the Nice Guy distinguishes himself (or herself) from other characters by having his niceness, politeness, helpfulness, and lack of overt conflict/drama be his defining characteristic. However, much like how every character ever to make a sarcastic quip was soon labeled a Deadpan Snarker, now every character ever shown to have an ounce of kindness is being labeled Nice Guy even though it's far from their primary characteristic. Put simply: If you and/or the characters have to look for the niceness under a cold, harsh, or troubled exterior, then the character is not a Nice Guy. Please don't go slapping that label on every character who is not a complete Jerkass."
Do I make a clean up thread for it first and then if TRS is decided to be necessary take it there? Or should I gear up towards just doing the wick check and then take it to TRS?
openHilarious In Hindsight on the Megamind page, misuse or not? Film
I've noticed that keyblade333 recently deleted the entirety of the Hilarious in Hindsight entry from the Megamind page.
After I talked to them about it, they claimed that it was because of misuse.
I think they're a mixed bag. Things like Jonah Hill's and Will Ferrell's roles in The Lego Movie count, given that Jonah Hill was voicing a character who was heavily inspired by Jimmy Olsen, with the names of two Green Lanterns, only to later voice Green Lantern himself who has an obsession with Superman. Same thing with both Will Ferrell characters having a tendency to mispronounce things and also being parodies of over-the-top supervillains.
Some of the entries really were borderline examples, but that's no reason to delete the entire entry.
Edited by tropineasilyopenDoes Dummied Out apply here? Videogame
This example of Dummied Out is on the page for Animal Crossing: New Horizons:
- Dummied Out:
- Data for the Sanrio villagers exists in New Horizons, but the villagers aren't currently used, possibly being intended to be added to the game in future updates. The other Welcome amiibo-introduced villagers, however, have no data for them whatsoever.
- Museum room IDs exist
for a cafe (presumably the Roost) and a Gyroid exhibit. ID data also exists for a two-room art exhibit, but this was eventually implemented into the game itself via the Nature Day update, implying that the cafe and Gyroid exhibit will be made accessible to players somewhere down the road.
- Another dataminer
found even more info about dummied content. There's an unused shopping menu for the Museum (presumably the shop that was previously seen in New Leaf), as well as "Real Estate" and "Gallery" shops of unknown purpose. Data relating to diving and deep-sea creatures (from New Leaf) that may also tie into a third unused "Seafood" section of the Critterpedianote The manila clam is the only entity in this category which was implemented in the game at launch, vegetables that can be harvested, and recipes for cooked dishes and clothing were also found among the game's files. Finally, there's also data for a third Nook's Cranny upgrade.
- The same miner also found Leif's garden shop, the return of bushes and artwork, and Redd's Treasure Trawler before their proper release in the Nature Day update. The "private beach" where Redd docks is referred to as "Nつねきち" ("NTsunekichi") in the game's files, with Tsunekichi being Redd's Japanese name.
The problem is, New Horizons is a game that's being continuously updated with new content. As stated in the example, some of the items that were listed as Dummied Out have already been added to the game through content updates, and it's likely that more of them will be in the future. Since Dummied Out appears to deal specifically with content that was cut from a game, should examples be listed if there's still a reasonable chance that they could be added to the game?
openPossible example Web Original
(Sorry for making so much ATT threads regarding entries i’m just kinda nervous about my contributions and I want to make sure they’re right-)
So I want to add an example for Self-Destruct Mechanism from a You Tube series I’m into, and I just want to make sure it’s a-okay before adding it.
The Final Minutes - Zombie Plague: The Path’s compound locations are fitted with a Magno Loop, an underground ring that acts as the compounds’ defense system. It’s also fitted with Complete Destruction mode, which causes the loop to cycle through all of its defense modes before detonating and vaporizing anything in a 25 kilometer radius.
Here’s the part that the info comes from
, the self destruct mode gets more detail at the 37:13 mark.
open Adjusting Your Glasses
Somebody really needs to explain to me what's going on with the Adjusting Your Glasses page. The description has an example as thesis thing going on, it's got four extra descriptions trying to make subtropes that are probably unnecessary, and because of all that most of the examples are ZCEs.
I really don't know what to do with this. There is a trope in here, but the page itself is bizarre.
openWasted plots and characters Film
So, I found these entries in the YMMV page for Wonder Woman (2017).
- They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character:
- In the backstory the Greek Gods (especially Diana's patron goddess Athena) are all dead save for Ares, who by his own admission destroyed them. A common complaint among Wonder Woman fans is that while she is an excellent character herself, her stories generally don't have the same density of Worldbuilding and Rogues Gallery that Batman and Superman have, and that DC rarely does heavy lifting in integrating the richness of Classical Mythology to its superhero lore the way Marvel does with Norse Mythology, and that arbitrarily wiping out the Pantheon, for the sake of simplifying Diana's origin, potentially limited the scope of her stories going forward.
- Some viewers were disappointed more wasn't done with Dr. Poison. For starters, she's a female scientist during World War 1, a period of time where someone such as herself would be looked out with confusion or disdain from her allies. One youtuber
discussed this by pointing out how she acts as the perfect Foil to Diana: Diana had the ability to choose her destiny, while Dr. Poison essentially didn't, but the choice was made to make her a straight up villain in the end and not a Tragic Villain. Others think it may have been more interesting if she was Ares.
- The choice to kill off Ares. Not only is he Wonder Woman's most powerful and iconic villain, but he has so much backstory and potential that lends him to being one of the biggest villains in the DCU. He easily could have been a villain the Justice League could have had to face, and with how small Wonder Woman's Rogues Gallery is, he makes for a good long term villain. Instead he gets killed shortly after appearing, which calls into question now what they can do with Wonder Woman since her first solo-film has her beating a literal God of War.
- They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot: Quite a few people considered it a wasted opportunity that the movie did not stick to the idea that Ares was not behind the war and that the people fighting in it were fighting purely because they wanted to, particularly since it would have provided a great reason for Diana to seclude herself from humanity. This is especially strange given that up until that point in the movie, Diana's entire character arc was about learning how humans are both capable of evil and good, but the choice for Ares to appear throws all of it under the bus. Its such a sore spot for people that many feel it damages the films quality.
Do they really qualify for these tropes or not? I'm asking because sometimes, the inclusion of these tropes in YMMV pages are less "This plot/character wasn't properly developed or explored" and more "I didn't like the way this plot/character was handled."
openNobody Poops and aversions
I don't know whether to go to Trope Talk, Wiki Talk, or Trope Repair Shop, so I just went here.
So I was alphabetizing Nobody Poops and adding a few examples, when I noticed that aversions were listed on the Video Games folder despite that the page itself said that aversions (and straight examples) are too common to list, so you should only list parodies, lampshades, etc.
Also, on several works' pages like Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood, they list aversions for Nobody Poops.
openWhen should I split off a sub-page to a trope?
When should I split off a sub-page to a trope?
I have at least 25 to add from one author, to One-Word Title....
Should I give that author their own page, or just split off the Fanfic section?
But really, if a work has 50 examples, it should just get its own sub-page all to itself...
This
planned Underground Monkey entry, that is already taking up 12 lines, and I'm not done. Although, at best, it should... Oh, I missed some...
Note to Self: Trees, Mushrooms, (Bats?)
It might be 30 lines long...
Edited by MaladyopenCreate page button
I was thinking could we create a dedicated "Create page" button on the wiki?
I mean having to edit the url of an existing page to create a new page really doesn't make sense.
1. Creating a page is a fundamental function so there could be a fundamental button for it. Having to modify an existing page to make a new page, is like having to turn on the dishwasher to use the stove. It doesn't make any sense since couldn't the stove just have a button of its own to turn itself on rather than having to operate another appliance.
2. Having to modify the url of a an existing page can be complicated based on what characters you have to add/remove and where. Do I remove these characters? Do I add these characters? Which part to I focus on removing and adding characters.
3. Having a "Create Page" button would make it so much easier to make a url for it and make it less likely that you'll mess up the url for the new page by manually changing an old one. The create page would do all the work for you rather than "Do I change these characters or these characters?"
If this feature is implemented this would make it easier to contribute to the wiki. I mean you wouldn't have to worry about messing up a url to create a new works page. I mean if you know about a show for example that hasn't been added yet, you could right then and there add it before you forget.
Basically it'd make adding works so much more efficient.
openShould this be troped?
Found on YMMV.Metroid Prime:
- Harsher in Hindsight: The tales of developers sleeping on couches in the office and consuming massive quantities of fireball candy to get the game finished is a lot less appealing to the current industrial standards in which developers from multiple companies such as Riot and Netherrealm studios are working their staff into what can be charitably called sweatshop conditions.
I feel like this is in a gray area considering it's not talking about the game itself.
openChanging "Characters/GodzillaTheGodzillas" as Characters/Godzilla The Character Film
I want to know if it's okay to change Godzilla: The Godzillas as "Godzilla The Character", since while it's a page designed to show multiple versions of the character, the title itself makes it sound like they in the same continuity when there's 10 different versions of the same character while adding other media-related characters.
openRecurring Fanon Character vs. O.C. Stand-in
- Very common in My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic circles.
- The "Background Six" were all characters with absolutely no characterization beyond some slight gags, or maybe a bit line or two. The fandom went wild with them anyway. All of these turned into Ascended Fanon within the show itself in the episode "Slice of Life". These characterizations mostly still persist to this day within the fandom.
- Flufflepuff from Ask Fluffle Puff
- Gamer Princess Luna from Ask Princess Molestia and Ask Gaming Princess Luna
The first example sounds more like O.C. Stand-in they are not fan made characters. The second might count as a persona adopted after they got canon characterization but was commented out as I was posting this.
I’d say O.C. Stand-in should be a separate thing, as such characters aren’t OC’s. But there’s this description from Recurring Fanon Character:
- A reinterpretation of a canon character; these characters are known as the counterparts of the canon characters. The Tails Doll of Sonic R is a robotic doll meant to serve as Tails' Metal Sonic, but is an otherwise Flat Character. Due to its unintentional creepiness, the fans treat as an actual creature of nightmares, which has been the base for many fanworks and creepypasta.
How is O.C. Stand-in separate from RFC? Because OCSI is Depending on the Writer while RFC is a constituent characterization?
And why is O.C. Stand-in not Trivia like Fan Nickname or YMMV if it’s how audiences treat characters? If it is for characters intentionally written to be such do they need proof it’s intentional as opposed to incidental?

Does anyone recall a TV show around 10 years ago that shows individual people filming themselves in recluse places around the world..... but something goes terribly wrong.... and they disappear? I watched the episodes when I was younger and am eager to show my partner the series that has stayed on my mind so long. I really only remember two episodes distinctly, but like I said, they were good enough to stick in my memory for this long One episode features a guy who is making a documentary, but it is not 'professional.' it really looked like some guy took a camera with him and filmed himself. for the most part of the episode, you really only see him from the chest up. however, some way through the episode, he is 'attacked' by something (which you don't see on camera) and you later see him document his wounds. through the progression of the episode, this man slowly becomes sick (im pretty sure he mentions that something similar to a kimodo dragon attacked him, and because they have so much bacteria in their mouth, he quickly becomes sick). the end of the episode is a caption that 'the man was never found, but this footage was recorded ect' THATS THE FIRST EPISODE. THE NEXT IS MY FAVOURITE
This episode features a woman who is on the ocean with her boat, she is filming herself in a very similar way to the man in the episode previously, but hers is more like a video blog. continuing on with her story, something happens to the womans boat which stops it from running anymore (I think the propeller broke or something) this woman puts her wetsuit on ect, and ATTACHES THE CAMERA TO THE FRONT OF HER WETSUIT/VEST so you can only see an up-close-and-personal view of her neck, nose, mouth and eyes. anyway, she climbs down the ladder into the water to see what had happened to the propeller, but something come out of the water and she is dragged under. the camera is submerged in water and you see a huge amound of bubbles. the video ends and the same caption is showed at the end of the episode 'the woman was never found, but this footage was recorded' (or something to that extent) the next thing that happened in the episode after the caption is there is video of a camera in the water and people speaking a foreign language (i believe they were of 'asian' descent and it was some sort of a falling-apart fishing boat). they pick the camera up out of the water and look at it (so its an upclose shot of a man looking into the lense). the video cuts out. after that theres a video of someone filming their boat (like you were looking from his perspective) coming to an abandoned boat floating in the ocean. the people on this video are speaking English, however and talk about how weird it is that the boat is empty. they yell at the boat, trying to make contact with the occupants, but of course there is no one on board. they travel around the boat and you can hear people exclaim at bloody hand prints that they see on the side of the boat. the episode ends
I dont ever remember seeing more episodes like this, im pretty sure it was featured on Foxtel. I am 18 now, and i remember seeing this when i was between the ages of 8-9 (so 9-10 yrs ago) and the quality of the film was really poor, like someone is literally holding a camera up to their face and filming themselves. (i also live in australia and watched this in australia) It honestly stuck in my head so vividly beacuse of how REALISTIC the filming was, like it could be an actual event that happened and people have randomly discovered these video cameras lying around and released the videos found on them. I know its a long shot and i havent found anything on the internet remotely similar to what i have watched. this was my last shot at finding the Tv show or some of the film from it, because it was honestly quite cool. Please help if you can. MUCH APPRECIATED
- Trinity