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:
openJust how much information should be mentioned in a character's description? Videogame
Felt like I have to ask this question hoping for those who are way more familiar with how this wiki works to give their thoughts as well. Wall of text warning though, as this does not involve only one video game. But a TL;DR is that some Gacha Games on this wiki have long character descriptions because they're also including gameplay information and other fluff, while there's a debate on whether one game should copy another similar game's way of handling descriptions. Who knows if the descriptions run the risk of going into Walkthrough Mode? Just how much "fluff" can really be added there?
For those who are not familiar with the above two games, the older and longer way of writing descriptions can still be seen on Characters.Genshin Impact Fischl, divided into paragraphs or parts:
- First, a short paragraph describing who they are, usually just in a concise manner, but longer ones talk about their lore.
- Second, a general paragraph describing their "core" gameplay mechanics; what their general gameplay is, what their skill does, what their Limit Break does.
- Third, another gameplay-related paragraph talking about their "character progression systems", like how their skills or Limit Break are improved through in-game means. There are also bits of fluff added in this part.
- Fourth, one sentence stating where the character can be obtained, as the game is a Gacha Game.
Note that the character descriptions for Star Rail used to have simple descriptions, yet there are tropers who massively expanded them to focus on their gameplay. The discussion on the descriptions started a month ago
... Several tropers (including myself) have already weighed in our thoughts on why trimming was necessary, though the discussion was mostly between tropers zero5889 and Ner0014re N, with the latter being the one who mostly did the trimming after getting plenty of responses from those who agree.
Personally, I agreed trimming specifically the "fluff" part of the third paragraph
, stating fluff doesn't really make sense depending on the character... as if other tropers were trying to link gameplay upgrades/passives and lore when they can be misinterpreted in another way, or are not exactly Gameplay and Story Integration at all. Welt's old character description in Characters.Honkai Star Rail Astral Express used to have such kind of fluff that don't really make sense if you're into the lore of the character.
The newer and shorter way of writing descriptions can now be seen on Characters.Honkai Star Rail Astral Express. Generally, there's no longer a paragraph talking about "character progression systems".
For what it's worth though, games like Arknights and Honkai Impact 3rd were written with concise/very simple character descriptions for years now (and tropers who are/were very active on maintaining them kept it that way), and yet troper zero5889 insisted that Honkai Impact 3rd needs some structuring on character pages, and suggested
that "detailed descriptions" for gachas like Arknights are long overdue.
But should it be the case? Are detailed character descriptions for Gacha Games really necessary?
If it would seem like troper zero5889 is planning to restructure character pages or rewrite descriptions on Gacha Games, they did confirm
they are going to give the character pages of Honkai Impact 3rd a look in the future. zero5889 also went to the Arknights forum
to suggest a rearranging of Arknights character pages to group them by "subclass" instead of general class, but several tropers objected and say it would just be overcomplicating things.
Recently on the Discussion tab
for Star Rail, there's another troper who disagreed on the trimming effort of some ability descriptions in Star Rail (particularly the removal of the "character progression systems" paragraph), like a week or so after the actual trimming edits were being done... suggesting the character descriptions of Genshin and Star Rail should still have a similar way of writing.
The trimming effort went through because many tropers agreed with it (like a majority vote, or so), but there are still those few who disagree (likely unware that a month-long discussion already happened).
Edited by DanteVinopenActor Allusion clarification Film
SOLVED: Production Throwback
Can Actor Allusion be also applied to the director or is it strictly for actors?
In Conspiracy Theory, one of the scenes has the characters hide in a crowded cinema, where they are screening Ladyhawke. Both were directed by Richard Donner and he picked the screened movie himself as a joke.
Edited by TropiarzopenTroping works made by family members
I know that Auto-Erotic Troping, troping your own works, is disliked, and YMMV for such is outright forbidden, but what about troping and adding YMMV for works made by family members? For example, making a work page for a now-discontinued webcomic my brother made. I probably can't reference anything he told me personally that he never wrote anywhere, but the comic itself should be fair game, right?
Edited by KingofNightmaresopenFor Want of a Nail substitute
So For Want Of A Nail is apparently not a trope anymore (something I disagree with, but fine), and I've got a problem. Many of the alternatives offered don't really fit with some of the examples used for characters, most commonly when describing the differences between the main version of a character and their AU self. Should these differences be put in the Alternate Self trope or can anyone think of a different trope that could be used?
openEdit war(?)...in custom WikiWord display?
I have some concerns regarding the page Bug Fables. Right now it displays as Bug Fables: The Everlasting Sapling. What concerns me, however, is that the page name just uses two words: 'Bug Fables', and the custom display just changes the page name to the game's full title. And the thing that worries me even more is that this custom display was already used before some long time ago, and was, for some reason, got reverted back to just 'Bug Fables' at some point of time. And now, several days ago, it's back at 'Bug Fables: The Everlasting Sapling'. Also, it prompts people to wick the redirect to the work page instead of the work page itself, and it bugs me.
I'd like to ask: is this acceptable to have the full title as custom display when the link itself uses the shortened title? And does this fall under the definition of the "edit war"?
Hope my wording doesn't confuse you.
Edited by I--Vanya--IopenDMOS Advertising
On DethroningMoment.Advertising, there are several different entries made by the same tropers (myself included, admittedly), but about advertising from different products. Other genre works allow repeated examples as long as they're not repeating the same moment from the same show/movie/etc, so what's the standard for DMOS on advertising? Is it a DMOS for all advertising, in which the repeated entries wouldn't be allowed, or just a DMOS for those specific brands' advertising campaigns, in which the repeated examples are okay if they're for different franchises? (This would also make it clearer whether examples that refer to entire campaigns can be cut, since they may be the nadir of advertisement in general, but too general for a specific campaign.)
Edited by mightymewtronopenIs it appropriate to add a relevant reference to one's self to a work's page?
So, in effect, I am a Promoted Fanboy who has gone on to also become a variation of Teasing Creator for a web original. I'm certainly not the only Promoted Fanboy, so I can be pretty vague on that one, but the Teasing Creator part is unique to me and one other person involved in the work. I want to avoid accidentally adding anything to the page that could be read as self-promotion, since I know that is against the rules, but I also seem to be the only person maintaining the work's page. Would it be appropriate for me to add these facts to the work's trivia page?
openWhy are people just arbitrarily removing red links for work pages?
I've been noticing this happening lately in pages I made. Even though the Red Link page says to leave red links for works in so that it's easier to crosswick later, people keep editing them out.
For instance, in the Spiritual Crossover page, a Red Link for Hawkgirl was removed, and then in the Split-Personality Switch Trigger page, two links for Outlaw Kid - a character with 45 issues to his name - were removed, with the only justification being that it was a red link. One of them even linked to the Red Link page itself in the edit reason, despite the fact that this action would seem to indicate they didn't actually read said page.
Either that, or the policy changed and no one bothered to update the Red Link page.
Edited by DBZfan102openAbout audience reactions
So on the YMMV page for Mary and Max here
has a Nightmare Fuel entry that I find questionable, but I wanted to bring it up Here.
Spoilers for the movie, I guess. The film is about the unlikely friendship between a young girl with low self-esteem named Mary and an older, autistic man named Max as they write letters to each other. The film covers the years of their friendship and their individual problems, including a fight between them, but it isn't until the end that they finally get the chance to meet when Mary flies over to visit, only to find that Max has already passed away. Mary sits down beside him, sees that he's saved every one of her letters over the years, and is comforted knowing that her friend died in peace.
It's better when seen, of course, but the ending is presented as bittersweet but heartwarming. But the YMMV page in question has a Nightmare Fuel entry about Mary sitting next to Max's corpse. I don't really...agree with the entry since the scene is presented as nothing but touching, but I don't know if this is just a case of "Your Mileage May Vary."
So, this specific entry aside, I guess I'm curious if Tearjerker, Nightmare Fuel, Heartwarming, etc. entries like these - reactions that were not ones that were intended - are valid? Obviously sitting next to a corpse isn't an endearing thought, but nothing about the scene is trying to be scary in the slightest. I don't know where we draw the line with YMMV entries, I must admit.
openCleanup needed on The Mask cartoon pages
Domino 710 added a whole bunch of really long and grammatically-dubious passages to pages related to the animated adaptation of ''The Mask''. For example:
“The Mask can be too strong towards any girls he comes across such as putting himself in a position with a girl so that he can kiss them only they are put off by him which makes him like Stanley unlucky with any woman he comes across but however he does get lucky later on due to the fact that he’s polite, kind and very sweet as well which makes most of the girls who are put off by him to be attracted to him.”
You’ll notice how it is just one run-on sentence with very strange wording. Stuff like this is all over the place, so I’d like to request some help in fixing it all up. Luckily, some tropers have already started (thanks for that!), but there’s still much more that needs to be done.
Edited by Loopytires55openChild Soldier Misuse?
Once again, on Characters.Ys VIII Lacrimosa Of Dana. I saw four examples of Child Soldier used for Ricotta, Reja, Quina, and the general Castaway Village folder. However, given that the trope talks about literal child soldiers trained and drafted for war, these examples on the character page are really overstretching it, because not only are these child characters not actually soldiers to begin with, but outside of Beast Raids as support skills, Reja and Quina don't get actively involved in fights, and Ricotta is actually a Jungle Princess who fights for survival rather than war.
Edited by DivineFlame100openConfusing YMMV deletion
Last month, concernedalien11780 did some cleanup on YMMV.Big Mouth. Some of this was admittedly helpful, deleting natter or ZCE, but there was an entry from Author's Saving Throw that I had initially added and I don't know why it was deleted:
- After being criticized for their poorly phrased and under-researched definitions of bisexuality and pansexuality in "Rankings," the next season introduced a transgender character, Natalie, written in collaboration with transgender women to ensure she wouldn't be written offensively. Natalie is actually a season four highlight she also has a legal, yet teenage voice actress, Josie Totah, (a 19-year-old in a cast of primarily 30 and 40 somethings), who is also transgender herself.
Note that I didn't add that bit about her actress - I think it's kind of weird to highlight her as "legal yet teenage." That came from lifelover91, who also seemed to have some grammar and ZCE issues on top of gushy writing ("Natalie and Gina are the characters we love (and totally deserve)."
) Not sure if they warrant a separate query. Anyway, to make things clearer, the entry as I originally wrote it was:
- After being criticized for their outdated and transphobic definitions of bisexuality and pansexuality in "Rankings," the next season introduced a transgender character, Natalie, written in collaboration with transgender women to ensure she wouldn't be written offensively.
I think this is a valid entry because the creators have discussed wanting to better represent certain positions, they apologized for the Unfortunate Implications in their depiction of pansexuality, so when adding more representation to the show, they made sure to include voices of the community when writing the episode (as a trans woman is on the writing team now), as they were criticized for presumably not consulting pansexual people when writing "Rankings." In short: they were criticized for transphobic implications in their LGBT rep, so they took measures to avoid transphobic implications in future episodes.
I mentioned this on the discussion page
but have yet to hear any feedback. I'd like to re-add it, but I want to avoid an Edit War.
openEdit Warring on YMMV/Overlord2012 Anime
Leonidaz made some edits to the Overlord (2012) page on roughly 1/12.
- Memetic Badass: Ainz Ooal Gown is regarded as one of the most overpowered, invincible and badass villains and protagonists in Isekai history. An unusual case in that Ainz is indeed invencible and in-universe everybody regards him as the ultimate superior being, but in reality Ainz is far from being the unbeatable badass everyone thinks he is, he is just lucky to always meet foes weaker or dumber than him.
- Rooting for the Empire: It's rather hard to root for Ainz and the rest of the gang when they act like your typical Fantasy JRPG villains. The fact that they easily steamroll through any obstacle or foe, all the while acting over the top arrogant and snide at the other races and people around them does not help matters. You WISH the antagonist of the arc would actually smack the smirks right off of their faces just for a change of pace (though a bunch of them, such as the Eight Fingers, are even worse than them). The Tomb of Nazarick's over the top entrance and sadistic subjugation of the Lizardfolk (a peaceful community they went to war with just as an "experiment") has been seen as rather infuriating for readers. Though, after they were conquered, Ainz then ordered Cocytus to rule over them with the carrot and not the stick, showing that he's not a total sadist. However, Ainz later unleashed five abominations on a huge, mostly conscript, army and showed nothing but glee towards breaking the record of how many monsters were summoned at once, not even feeling anything about all those who his summoned monstrosities slaughtered. And then there's everything about Demiurge's "livestock". Seriously, many fans of Overlord would want a crossover with other series just so Ainz could face a challenge and be defeated JUST ONCE.
- Spiritual Adaptation: If you unfocus your eyes, you can almost convince yourself you’re watching an anime adaptation of Den.
- That One Boss: For the Great Underground Tomb of Nazarick this title can easily be assigned to Victim, Guardian of the 8th Level. The irony of it all is that Victim is only level 35 and the weakest Guardian. His power comes from being able to sacrifice himself, which causes an onslaught of crippling status debuffs and movement lockdown effects, allowing the rest of Nazarick's forces to kill the invaders at their leisure. To emphasise this point; no Raid Party in Yggdrasil had ever gotten past it.
I removed the areas marked in bold, Spiritual Adaptation, and That One Boss because of the nature of these edits.
- Memetic Badass not only had misspelling, but it also reads as a Justifying Edit and conflicts with the trope.
- Rooting for the Empire has an unnecessary point at the end and has no reason to be there.
- Spiritual Adaptation reads as a ZCE since it doesn't explain how it is one.
- That One Boss is being used for an In-Universe example, so it doesn't make sense to include it.
After removing them on 1/13, said troper returned and added them back in without a message. I sent them a message notifying them I would be making this.
Edited by keyblade333openIndexing a work with an uncertain (2019/2020) release date
When I created Pinball.Stranger Things last year, I indexed it under The New '10s because it was revealed in December 2019, with at least outside forum post noting that someone had received a machine before 2020 began. Now, however, I find myself wondering if I should categorize and index it as a 2020 release instead, as the vast majority of machines were manufactured and released that year. (Long story short: there are three different versions of the game, all of which entered production at different times. The Internet Pinball Database lists the Pro model
as beginning manufacturing in December 2019, though the Premium
and Limited
models started in early 2020. In addition, the TWIPYs - the most prominent pinball awards show as of present - listed it among other 2020 pinball games for their most recent ceremony
.)
openNo Title
Godscar Chasm deleted a lot of the examples
on Nick Fury, so now it just looks like a list of tropes with no context.
openWhat Could Have Been use?
I have a question about this I found on a characters page.
- LoveTriangle: [[WhatCouldHaveBeen Had the series continued]] he would have eventually found himself in one of these.
Is What Could Have Been not allowed under character pages or non-Trivia tropes as it doesn't happen in the actual work? Or is it allowed if the series never reached the point to contradict it (the notes the author revealed it in are effectively the continuation of the work as opposed to something they changed their mind about, or does it not count as they might have changed it in the final product?) and/or only allowed if it provides important context for what is there (like what it was building to)?
Edited by Ferot_DreadnaughtopenLaconic troubles...
Laconic.Zeldas Honor was brought up in the Laconic improvement thread
for being distinctly unlaconic (i.e. way too dang long). We took a crack at trimming it down
, but Chrononaut 70 came back and added many of the unnecessary words back
.
Can't revert it ourself cause that's an edit war, pinging them in the thread
got no response so we think they just don't read their DMs.
halp
openCan Trivia be played with? Videogame
Exactly What It Says on the Tin: I'm wondering if Trivia can be played with. Specifically, I'm asking in regards to Trivia.Super Smash Bros, as the Unintentional Period Piece has two bullet points; one which explains how the first three games are this (due to them being Museum Games that released before games could be regularly updated, and as such are limited to what existed at the time of development), and one which explains how the fourth and fifth games avert this by adding in new content from games which were concurrent to and/or released after Smash itself.
I looked at What Goes Where on the Wiki and Trivia and they don't mention it at all; compare to YMMV.Home Page, which does.
openUse Of The R-Word
I was reading one of the trope pages for American Dad! and came across an entry for a minor character. The character was described as “mentally re***” (uncensored on the page, but I refuse to type it in full), which I really must question. I know that phrase used to be used as a medical term, but it just seems... really not polite and kind of shocking on the page itself.
Sorry if this sounds whiny, I have a big thing against slurs.

So I recently tried to create new folders for the Kombat Kast for Mortal Kombat's reboot timeline, using precedent such as Soul Series, since virtually every character has a radically different history and/or personality to the point that their old character folders are incompatible
Futhermore these new incarnations of the characters are regarded by the lore of the story itself as being distinct entities (For example: original timeline Kitana has no continuity with New Era Kitana, instead existing as Titan Kitana who's a completely different character; all of Liu Kang's prior relationship with Kitana is only present when interacting with Titan Kitana)
I don't think there's a feasible alternative to creating new folders for all the characters on the New Era's character page. Trying to just slot them into their old folders is just a recipe for confusion and clutter. And the only other alternative is to create individual character pages for all the characters so we can put multiple folders on their pages for all their different incarnations, which is just needlessly messy and still confusing since we have situations like New Era Scorpion being Kuai Liang instead of Hanzo Hisashi
Plus I'm under the impression that TV tropes wants to avoid creating individual character pages where possible
Unfortunately someone reverted my attempt to create new folders on the Mortal Kombat 1 character page and I don't want to get into an edit war, so I'm bringing it to the ATT thread
I also brought up the matter on the Mortal Kombat Discussion thread, and the limited replies so far have been in agreement that the New Era should have it's own character folders as well
Edited by CrimsonOddball