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:
openIssue on Midnight Mass work page
Capretty moved a trope example from the main work page to the YMMV page, even though the trope is objective. The work is Midnight Mass (2021) and the trope is Satire, which is not listed on any YMMV index. The edit reason for this move states: "These are all personal opinions from one source, so I moved it to the YMMV page." The "one source" happens to be the show itself which I watched before adding this example. This is the trope example:
- Satire: The show ultimately tries to point out the folly of being religious. The first two episodes clearly establish that the writers respect those with religious beliefs by accurately portraying Catholicism, but after that the show gets more and more offensive to religious people. By the end of the the first season, it's clear this is a satire that favors atheism over religious beliefs.
- The Decoy Protagonist is an atheist who tries to stop the Catholic vampires, and the first victim of the show, a dog, is killed by the most well-read Catholic character.
- There are some "classic" anti-Catholic tropes present throughout the season, such as only one Catholic knowing much about Scripture, Catholics drinking literal blood as opposed to blood in the form of wine, the Church embezzling people's money, the monsignor regretting becoming a priest and fraternizing with a member of his flock, the faithful being timid and subservient to the one person who quotes Scripture the most, and Catholics being generally closed-minded concerning other religions.
- While there are two characters who are Muslim, one of them converts to Catholicism and by the end of the show they both die while praying. Moreover, the Catholic vampires all die while singing a hymn, which is a form of prayer.
- In the season finale, one of the supposedly devout Catholics, who has attended Mass every day, suddenly goes through a "death-bed conversion" to atheism, insisting that she will become one with the universe after decomposing and even going so far as to use the phrase "I am that I am," making herself equivalent to God, which is the last thing one would expect a devout Christian to say.
This person also moved an example of Actor Allusion to the Trivia subpage despite the fact that Actor Allusion is not a Trivia trope.
EDIT: In addition to moving the Satire entry to YMMV.Midnight Mass 2021, this troper then proceeded to completely delete the entry even from the YMMV page. If you look at the page history for the YMMV page,
you'll see that the move happened on the 23rd and then the deletion happened on the 24th.
openBBC too soon.
- Base-Breaking Character: Yuehiro, the Transgender male Twi’lek, caused some controversy among the fanbase. In addition to the expected vocal minority of transphobes, there was also debate over whether it was realistic for him to take hormones the same way a transperson would in the real world, since medical technology in the GFFA would presumably be miles advanced of our own, not to mention the differences between human and Twi’lek biology. The author herself
eventually addressed this on her Twitter and Tumblr, stating that it was mostly just Rule of Cool.
The work released October 12, 2021, so it's too soon for BBC which needs 6 months.
It's currently the only trope on the page. Should the page be cut or is there anything else to add to it/replace BBC with?
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 PlasmaPoweropenPutting back info in a Creator page
I noticed that gorobestboy has heavily altered Sayuri Hara (a page I made by myself), and I noticed that they removed some dots containing certain roles such as Reimi Sugimoto in JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Diamond is Unbreakable and Yori in Princess Connect! Re:Dive. While I'd like to put them back, I'm hesitant to do so since I was the one who put it in and I don't want to get into an edit war. Would it be okay to put them back anyway? Also, they didn't provide any Edit Reasons as to why they rearranged the page. Do you need to ask for permission to rearrange the list order in a Creator page?
Edited by Excessive-Menaceopenbigmouthstrikesagain strikes again
I've been having trouble with Tropers/bigmouthstrikesagain for a while, and while it's never anything big, it adds up.
- HERE
they change an aversion into a subversion, even though it's not a subversion.
- HERE
they write an entry in the past tense, even the stuff that happens in the episode and should be in the present tense.
- HERE
they list a trope for Halloween Kills on the page for Halloween, saying that "In the following film, however..." even though obviously, any Halloween Kills trope should be on the actual page for Halloween Kills itself.
- HERE
they have an example refer to another example on the list.
- HERE
they write that somebody "has a tendency of doing this", which is zero context. (They fixed it after I told them, though, but I did need to tell them.)
So yeah. Like I said. It adds up.
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 KuruniopenBroken 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 NubianSatyressopenMulti-works reference example
Does this writeup look... I dunno... too dependent on other works to make its point?
- Gorn: Miura depicts all kinds of bloodshed and dismemberment with a level of detail that straddles the line between horror and fascination. To elaborate, it's even bloodier than all of Quentin Tarantino's films combined, is packed the very gills and guts with gratuitous extreme graphic aberrant violence that not only makes Mortal Kombat 11, Doom Eternal, The Last of Us Part II and even Manhunt look like games made for little children but also, makes the Live-Action Deadpool duo logy look and feel more like a So Bad, It's Good Live-Action Adaptation of Cardcaptor Sakura as a Sitcom by comparison (and if Deadpool killing so many people aren't that Bloody enough, then think again with how many people and monsters has Guts beaten up to the death), there's large amounts of Gratuitous Rape that downright obscene and pornographic, explicit brutality that makes Crossed look like a joke and much, MUCH more. This holds the reputation as the most violent manga ever created in history and for good reason. And not to mention, Invincible is basically Berserk with Superheroes.
openEdit war.
On YMMV.Six Of Crows the Complete Monster Entries were changed without discussion on thee thread from these:
- Complete Monster:
- Jan Van Eck is a seemingly-respectable merchant who turns out to be an egotistical sociopath obsessed with his own glory and reputation. Callously disowning his son Wylan for his dyslexia that has made him illiterate, Van Eck divorces his wife, throws her into an asylum and tells Wylan she's dead so he can steal all her assets. When his new wife is pregnant, Van Eck tries to have Wylan murdered. After enlisting Kaz Brekker for a job and learning Kaz has Wylan hostage, Van Eck later attempts to betray Kaz and have Wylan murdered via having his ship sunk. It turns out Van Eck is behind a scheme to cheat his fellow merchants and distribute jurda parem to enslave the Grisha, or those with magic, subjecting them to addiction or death, all as long as he profits from the chaos he inflicts.
- Heleen Van Houden, or Tante Heleen, the cruel owner of the brothel the Menagerie, buys teenage girls from foreign nations and cruelly trains them to be Sex Slave prostitutes. From Inej Ghafa's backstory, we see this involves horrific abuse, both physical and psychological with Heleen repeatedly having her whipped and beaten, even having a girl who kept some money from a client cruelly murdered in front of the other girls as a lesson. Even after being freed by Kaz, Inej is intensely scarred by her time at the Menagerie, and Heleen gleefully taunts her of it when they meet, even trying to have Inej killed later. Utterly reprehensible and dedicated to making a fortune from the sexual enslavement of countless young women, Tante Heleen is one of the worst that Ketterdam has to offer.
To these:
- Complete Monster:
- Jan Van Eck is a seemingly-respectable merchant who turns out to be an egotistical sociopath obsessed with his own glory and reputation. Callously disowning his son Wylan for his dyslexia (that has made him illiterate), Van Eck divorces his wife, throws her into an asylum to get rid of her, and tells Wylan she's dead so he can steal all her assets. When his new wife (who's only a few years older than Wylan himself) becomes pregnant, Van Eck tries to have his son murdered. After enlisting Kaz Brekker for a job and learning Kaz has Wylan hostage, Van Eck attempts to betray Kaz in order to have Wylan murdered via having his ship sunk. It also turns out Van Eck is behind a scheme to cheat his fellow merchants and distribute jurda parem to enslave the Grisha, or those with magic, subjecting them to addiction or a painful death. As long as long as he profits from the chaos he inflicts, he doesn't care about those he hurts.
- Heleen Van Houden, or Tante Heleen, is the cruel owner of the brothel known as the Menagerie. She buys trafficked teenage girls from foreign nations and brutally trains them to be prostitutes. From Inej Ghafa's backstory, we see this involves horrific abuse, both physical and psychological, with Heleen repeatedly having her whipped and beaten. She even has a girl violently murdered as a "lesson" with all of the other girls watching after learning she was "wronging" her by keeping some money from a client. Even after being freed by Kaz, Inej is intensely scarred by her time at the Menagerie - to where she couldn't even walk past the brothel without having a panic attack. Heleen, knowing Inej's trauma by her hand, gleefully taunts her whenever they meet and even tries to have her killed. Utterly reprehensible and dedicated to making a fortune from the sexual enslavement of countless young women, Tante Heleen is one of the worst that Ketterdam has to offer.
It was changed by by
a troper
called
HazelEyes14
a couple of times. This is not the first
time
they have edited these entries despite it being reverted
each time
with warnings not to do it without thread discussion. They also edited
the Magnificent Bastard entry without discussion as far as I can tell.
openFinding Nemo and Overprotective Dad Western Animation
I'm not 100% sure this is the right place to ask. My doubt isn't about the entry itself or its usage, but the correctness of this entry in YMMV.Finding Nemo that I find rather excessive:
- "Seinfeld" Is Unfunny:
- Marlin is the Trope Codifier of the Overprotective Dad trope mostly found in Western Animation. This has resulted in many other overprotective dads, like Dracula, Samson and Manny being seen as rip-offs of him.
open Self Report Music
It appears I have let my hatred for sexual predators seep into my edit reasons
beyond a point that is considered socially acceptable. Admittedly, I am not handling the notion of a prolific nonce being allowed any freedom whatsoever very well at all.
I just want to explain that I acted rashly due to my anti-predator bias, compounded by the fact that Ian Watkins—a man who considers molesting children "mega lolz"—could go free in seven years.
I am considering going on hiatus so that I can clear my head.
I understand if the mods feel a suspension is necessary. Hopefully, if such is the case, I can appeal a while after the suspension, when I have a clear head.
Edited by SkyCat32openOdd edit war in Moral Myopia
Here's a weird situation: Back in March, stankykong added a Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness example (yeah, Strange again) to MoralMyopia.Live Action Films. Loekman3 rightfully deleted it, saying to wait for release in case of Trailers Always Lie. stanky did as asked, and waited until last weekend to restore it... except the trailer did lie, and stanky's entry is inaccurate (stanky and the marketing focused on Strange's actions in No Way Home, while the actual movie points to Infinity War instead).
Now obviously, the entry needs to be updated to accurately reflect the movie, and I can do that myself if nobody else gets to it first. But a blanket restore without bothering to correct bad information (did stanky even see the movie yet?) feels like something that needs to be addressed.
openMulti-language quote
So I checked out Administrivia.Text Formatting Rules to check out its quote formatting section and I didn't get the answer to my question, so here it is - how do we format a quote if the person switches languages throughout it?
Specifically, I'm eventually going to propose a Complete Monster quote, and the speaker is a Chinese-American who switches languages throughout the quote. For a brief excerpt, he says "I want you to show yourself for the good of all", then immediately switches to Chinese to say "I don't want to shoot you all". How would that be formatted? Would we just italicize the Chinese parts or something else??
openGainax Ending Cleanup?
So I wasn't sure about posting this in short term projects, as I wanted to get some consensus first.
But I was going through Gainax Ending after being potholed there and...it has some problems. I don't think the trope itself needs to be fixed, but there is some misuse, and it also leads into complaining as editors often use it as a way of saying "this ending is confusing and that means bad".
Here's an example:
- Lost seems like this trope if you have no knowledge of 2,000 year old religions like Neoplatonism or Gnosticism that it draws from (or can't type "dharma" into Wikipedia). Since the ending does make sense but is hidden under enough Mind Screw to not have an easy explanation, it is the second form of Gainax Ending. If an ending requires a couple of college courses (such as "Religious Studies") or other extensive off-screen research to understand it, it's a Gainax Ending.
Sniping aside, this example tells me precisely nothing about what actually happens in the ending of Lost. Now, I've seen it, but if I hadn't, this example would be the opposite of informative.
But there are plenty of examples where I haven't seen the thing in question, so I wouldn't know to correct them. But there are also a lot of ZC Es (one example in Film mentions a Sy Fy original but doesn't even name the film in question), that amount to "X movie has an ending that is totally crazy, nobody knows what it means!" without saying what makes the ending so crazy.
The example for Dr. T and the Women does this as it does mention what happens- "the protagonist ends up in Mexico and helps deliver a baby." which ironically leaves out the part this actually odd-he only gets to Mexico (presumably) because a tornado drops him there.
Is this a big enough issue to require a Clean-up thread? Or should I just correct the examples I know about (like Lost) and leave the rest up to others.
Also-should Gainax Ending really apply to say, season finales or the like? I saw an episode on Euphoria (which is what brought me here), that was basically "this season ends on a weird note, but then subsequent events make it more clear".
open Weirdly off-topic poster.
We're having a bit of an issue over on Complete Monster cleanup thread with a troper Molokai198
whose umh really disruptive and off-topic with some offputting comments.
- This one was a very strange comment arguing about whether infecting people with HIV
is horrible?
- Their was this weird time they just went off-topic to ask about the contents of an article
about Purdue and the Opoid crisis.
- Now we've gotten this post
which featured this shockingly bad statement.
This is just both incoherent and offensive.
He also doesn't vote On anything so much as the questions.
Like the fact this has happened three separate times.
Edited by MacronNotesopenRepeated Trope Misuse on YMMV/TheVillainessReversesTheHourglas Literature
I’ve been trying to clean up the pages for the Webnovel/Webtoon The Villainess Turns The Hourglass (which is in the wrong directory but that’s a different problem) and one of the editors
keeps trying to shoehorn the same entry about the protagonist into different tropes that it does not fit. The character is a Base Breaker but the issues related to why are already well documented in the Base Breaker entry, so this just seems to keep veering into Complaining about a character they don’t like.
The trope text that keeps moving:
- As noted by some readers, Aria herself wasn't a good person in her previous life, and while she was unjustly executed, she's not exactly the case of an innocent persecuted person. After being reborn she's basically a 24 year-old woman in a teenager's body (and later, due to Rapid Aging, in an adult body) getting revenge on a teenage Mielle, who had not yet done anything particularly heinous. Even after realising Mielle was just a child manipulated by her nanny and Isis, Aria still continues to bully and humiliate her. The fact that Mielle herself is revealed to not be a very bright girl makes Aria being duped by someone like her in her previous life, and taking revenge on Mielle in her current life reflect rather badly on her.
- In fact, several readers pointed out that Mielle herself would be a prime candidate for a Peggy Sue story of her own, where Aria would be considered an outright villain.
So when I first removed it from the page it was listed as Protagonist-Centered Morality, which isn’t YMMV and this text doesn’t meet. Now it’s at Designated Hero, but I’m this case the main character’s not a hero, isn’t described as a hero except by people who she’s concealed her nature from, is honest with herself that her actions are not heroic, and constantly calls herself “the villainess.” Whether she’s a likable Anti-Hero isn’t this trope (and again, that’s already well-written up in Base Breaker.)
I want to remove the text again but I’m concerned about being accused of edit warring. I sent an indicator to the editor about the misuse with this explanation.
Edited by RebochanopenWonky/weasel edits by previously suspended user spread out over time
On the "Is this an example?" forum I had asked
about a user named CorvusIX
making an edit on the Total Drama Unintentionally Unsympathetic page that seemed to contradict the edit reason they provided for removing it in the first place. I had remembered seeing a post specifically by them on ATT about restoring an edit that had tons of elaboration so it didn't really seem that unusual. However when I searched their name the post didn't show up, and apparently, in addition to getting suspended due to these circumstances
, there have been at least two other cases
of edit warring
that CorvusIX had started dating back to two years ago. It had apparently gotten bad enough that in the first cited instance of this happening someone suggested that they were going out of their way to do this, which in and of itself implies this wasn't an isolated incident even before then. On top of that some of their non-warring edits go beyond Weasel Words and seem
to rely heavily on assumptions
that can be traced
to Fan Myopia. Since instances of both edit warring and the Weasel Words/Fan Myopia + wonks + misinformation seem really sporadic (I haven't found instances of any of that concoction the second page of their edit history) it really seems like they're doing this to try and make biased edits undetected, but I can't say I'm 100% sure since (as I mentioned) I can't always go by anything more than a couple implications. Thoughts?
openOver Spoiler-ing
A bit of context: a few days ago, I removed some spoilers from the description of VS OURPLE GUY that were hiding the mod's final song, which is unlocked by beating the rest of the mod's songs and is a homage to another game's ending. To compromise since it is still a spoiler, I put who sings it in a note, since the song title itself isn't too spoiler-y in my opinion. I also added an example of Brutal Bonus Level discussing this song, spoiling what it is while still keeping the actual context visible.
A few hours ago, Bread Pear not only put the entire song into the note in the description, but also widened the spoilers on Brutal Bonus Level to almost the whole thing, meaning the context is now under a black bar someone has to click to know if it's a spoiler.
I can't fix it because I added it originally, but I'm curious what to actually do here.
Edited by Crossover-EnthusiastopenGodzillaFan1954
Could someone please help me check the accuracy of their edits? I recently had to revert their apparent attempt to make the Channel Hop entry on Trivia.Willy Wonka And The Chocolate Factory much less accurate, but they also worked on pages about subjects I don't know much about myself. At the least, they don't bother italicizing movie titles.

When editing the page for Series.Space 1999, I found that not only does its producers Gerry and Sylvia Anderson not have creator pages, but Creator.Gerry Anderson is a redirect to the Useful Notes page UsefulNotes.Supermarionation, which is about an animation technique frequently used by the Andersons.
Is it really kosher to have a creator page redirecting to a useful note which is not even supposed to be about the creator in question? I think it would actually be better to remove the redirect and have Creator.Gerry Anderson create a redlink, until a proper creator page can be created (I might get around to that myself when I get the time).
Edited by GnomeTitan