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:
openTroper forcing a CompleteMonster pothole on a non-YMMV page
First of all: yes, I'm aware the Complete Monster trope is currently going through some major revisions, and the cleanup threads are being revamped right now, so directing them to the thread isn't going to help out much.
That said:
Fidor
just added a Complete Monster pothole to Characters.IT with an EDIT reason that boils down to "I want to pothole Complete Monster to a non-YMMV page regardless what the rules says, because I just want to...."
Looking through the page's history of 500-odd edits, this isn't the first time someone had tried forcing a CM pothole up there, including an instance in 2016 where the CM curator ACW removed a Complete Monster pothole because... well, it's a YMMV trope. Note that it's clearly specified on the page itself: there's no In-Universe trope for Complete Monster
, characters calling out others is You Monster!
And that Fidor
is a new troper who barely had any edits, yet is already insisting on potholing a YMMV item on a character page...
openNarm - flame bait status?
Narm is marked as a YMMV trope, but not Flame Bait.
However, the medium-specific subpages for Narm are marked as Flame Bait.
Shouldn't Narm itself be marked that way?
Or is the intent really that mediums with no subpage (E.g. Tabletop Game) can continue to add Narm to their works' ymmv pages, and can crosswick to the main Narm page without ever seeing those flamebait warnings?
Thanks!
openGenshin Impact - major gamebreaker page renovation Videogame
Genshin Impact's gamebreaker page has become a bit bloated, so myself and another troper have been proposing ways to trim it down. But because this is going to be a very large-scale edit, I wanted more than just one other voice on this before we start pruning. My proposed changes are:
1. Gamebreakers are based on spiral abyss performance only. It's the only "endgame" content and the main-game and timed events are generally too easy to warrant a gamebreaker page. I'd also like to add a disclaimer that gamebreakers are not necessary to "win" at this game since the spiral abyss has very little rewards and this is an expensive Gacha game.
2. Character write-ups focus on their gamebreaking aspects only. Currently they seem to go over every part of their kit leading to bloated entries often getting too far into walkthrough mode or adding meaningless dribble.
3. Cut the artifacts section. It focuses on set bonuses, which while nice are not as important as the substats at the mercy of RNG (so a mixed set with great substats will beat a set bonus with meh stats). That and most characters have more than one viable set, so which is "gamebreaking" is subjective. The Emblem of Severed Fate is the only one worth keeping imo, as while others just amplify already strong characters this one actually fixes holes and makes certain playstyles viable.
4. Cut the elemental reactions section. At this time about two-thirds of all the reactions in the game are listed, making the list less novel. About every reaction has a viable team set-up, so at this point we're just saying it pays to use the game's central mechanic.
What do you think?
openHandmaid's Tale ROCEJ?
This is an example on the YMMV page
for The Handmaid's Tale, under They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot. It was added added by drmeagher13:
- Simiarly, there are no vocally non-religious characters in the show. In spite of the show taking place in a religiously-derived dystopia, no one seems to suggest that maybe religion itself is the problem. The tenets of Gilead are indeed derived from lines of the Bible, and no one seems to suggest that maybe disregarding the whole thing might be a good idea. Instead, the heroes seem to all be cut from the cloth of more mild religion. A major example is June sympathetically baptizing her child in the Catholic Church, which in the real world has been implicated of routine systemic child abuse, much like Gilead in the show. It represents another failure of representation on the show.
While I can certainly see the TWAPGP part of having no vocally non-religious characters in a religion-dictated dystopia, parts of this example seem like they're pushing into ROCEJ territory, especially the bit about baptism and child abuse.
open Edit War on Love of Kill Anime
I swore to myself I was going to avoid this page from now on but I need to report myself and another troper for edit-warring. Back in January I added the following example to Love of Kill (and admittedly with an unnecessarily rude edit reason because I was furious at having wasted my lunch break watching it, thinking it would be similar to SPY×FAMILY).
- Sexual Extortion: Song (AN: male lead) spends the first episode (or first few manga chapters) extorting a "date" from Chateau (AN: female lead) in exchange for information she needs for her day job and only manages to not actually rape her because she finally musters the nerve to actually leave the hotel room he takes her to at the end of it. He still manages to force a hug on her before she gets on the train to go home.
This example was first modified due to a factual error in the original version (perfectly okay), and then deleted outright by Ominae (not okay). I re-added it, and then immediately realized I was edit-warring and posted on the discussion tab
. I fully admit I blew it.
Without checking the discussion tab or taking note of the legal definition of sexual harassment, Ominae removed the example again.
I freely admit that I was unnecessarily rude and have an irrational hatred for this series (I consider it to be the best fantasy for incels since Redo Of Healer), but everything in the example is factually correct.
openTrailer spoiler markup
YMMV.My Little Pony Make Your Mark
- One-Scene Wonder: Opaline, the then unnamed villainous alicorn, only appeared for a few seconds in the premier, but became its most talked about part due to the likely ramifications they'd have for the backstory and series going forward and speculation about their identity.
- Tainted by the Preview: Twilight's appearance at the end of the second chapter trailer has received some criticism for looking like her normal self, as opposed to her post-Time Skip Alicorn appearance in the series finale of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic.
The latter I'm not sure about spoiling as it was in the trailer so it is not supposed to be a spoiler or so exposed that spoiling it is moot.
The former was a legit spoiler in the series premiere, but was also shown in said trailer. So is that the point we can un-spoil them? If not when (they seem poised to be the Big Bad so it's nigh-impossible to discuss the series without spoiling them)?
openKrazy Kat
Every single hard C on Krazy Kat is replaced with a K, so you get stuff like "klassik newspaper komics" in the opening paragraph. This may work as a brief gag, or as a Self-Demonstrating subpage, but is it really necessary to use it on the entire page, along with the subpages? It makes the text hard to read.
openEdit War
ElJuaco added Alternate Self
to the Sony Kraven's character folder, HissingAurora94 deletes it,
Eljuaco re-adds it, HissingAurora94 redeletes it.
openI Knew It! back and forth/meta and YMMV move?
- I Knew It!: Fans are completely happy that Hasbro confirmed that Bumblebee is a complete reboot to the film franchise after 2 months of debate, given the reshoots/rewrites. Fans began to theorize this was the case pretty much as soon as Blitzwing, at the time believed to be Starscream, showed up in trailers sporting the look of a classic Seeker, and the theories got more intense as more information came out. When the movie itself was released, most of the audience either accepted it was a reboot or strongly believed it should be. Fortunately, that turned out to be the case Hasbro went with.
This was commended out as Flip-Flop of God has gone back to mixed messages on if it's a Soft Reboot as opposed to Alternate Continuity. So should it be removed, kept as it was once an example, or does this mean it should be limited to confirmed in-work as opposed to Word of God or production?
And as I Knew It! is now YMMV, is there a reason there hasn't seemed to be much moves/cleanup on that? Answering the former question would help with the move.
Also, Characters.Bumblebee was split from the films because it was initially confirmed as alternate continuity. I assume we want to keep them separate given it's effectively its own thing and the aforementioned inconsistency on its official status.
openFinal Fantasy XVI ButNotTooGay example removed, no edit reason Videogame
I added But Not Too Gay on Final Fantasy XVI recently, but it was removed by Diracspuddle without an edit reason, to which I've sent them a notifier for. The user is infrequently active, so I don't expect an answer back soon. Edit made here
.
In the context of FFXVI not shying away from some partial nudity and sex scenes where they make use of camera work to hide the naughty bits and kiss scenes between male-female pairings being generally more involved than the one gay kissing scene (characters are further away from the camera with their heads/hair blocking out the kiss itself), in addition to the gay couple not interacting romantically after that point, it seemed like it fit enough for me to be an example.
Is it fine to add the example back in?
Edited by YourIdeasopenA continuation from the SMG4 query
So to continue from this
query, and particularly this
point and help point out where things went wrong:
- March 19th, 2022
: Euan 2000 edits the list, adding the "SMG4 Cosmology Saga" as its own, unwicked bullet and placing Genesis and Revelations underneath it as second-level bullets.
- March 11th, 2023
: Dragon Ball changes the list to also place the YouTube arc underneath the "Cosmology Saga" bullet.
- March 12th, 2023
: Soufriere reverts the above edit, making YouTube a single-level bullet again. Their edit reason:
- March 16th, 2023
: Dragon Ball changes the YouTube arc back to a sub-level bullet. (I believe this in of itself is an edit war, though it's not especially relevant to what's been happening more recently and the troper has already been suspended for another issue.)
- March 30th, 2023
: troperaiser once again gives the YouTube arc its own bullet, separate from the "Cosmology Saga." (They also change the wording of the latter to omit "SMG4.")
- June 15th, 2023
: Random User 21360 makes all four pre-Genesis arcs (including YouTube) into sub-bullets under "Cosmology Lore." Their edit reason:
- For context, Glitch Productions makes the series, and the Lawsuit arc comes after Revelations.
- June 23rd, 2023
: troperaiser reverts the above edit, making the first four arcs single-bullet again.
- June 24th, 2023
: Random User 21360 reverts the above edit, once again making the first four arcs sub-bullets under "Cosmology Saga." (This is where they start edit warring.) Their edit reason, with slight formatting corrections:
- June 27th, 2023
: Broson Roder 232 reverts the last edit again (putting the first four arcs on their own bullets).
- July 17th, 2023
: troperaiser adds small headers to the list of arcs: "Cosmology Lore" (containing the first six arcs, up through Revelations) and "Post-Cosmology Lore" (containing the Lawsuit arc, the seventh and currently last one). This is in addition to the "Cosmology Saga" bullet point.
- July 18th, 2023
: Random User 21360 gives the Genesis and Revelations arcs their own bullet points and removes the "Cosmology Saga" one. In other words, every arc has a single-level bullet like a normal list.
- July 26th, 2023
: Broson Roder 232 changes the "X Lore" headers, splitting off the first three arcs to a new "Pre-Cosmology Lore" section. Their edit reason, with slight formatting corrections:
- July 27th, 2023
: Random User 21360 reverts the above edit, essentially lumping the first six arcs under the "Cosmology Lore" header again. Their edit reason:
- July 28th, 2023
: Wingnut re-adds the "Cosmology Saga" bullet point, once again placing Genesis and Revelations as sub-level bullets underneath it. Their edit reason:
- August 2nd, 2023
: In what is currently the latest revision of the page, Random User 21360 moves the YouTube arc to a sub-bullet under the "Cosmology Saga" bullet point. Their edit reason, with minor formatting corrections:
So there are three tropers guilty of edit warring: troperaiser, Random User 21360, and the aforementioned still-suspended Dragon Ball.
I also put this in a separate query to help the mods and other tropers determine what to do, who's in the wrong, and which entry goes where.
Edited by skan123openHow to handle sensitive topics regarding Kanye West audience reaction pages?
So I noticed that after a long stint of being locked due to rampant vandalism, Kanye West pages have been unlocked, and I think now's a good a time as any to question: what's the degree to which discussion on Kanye's life should be mentioned before it becomes inherently uncivil? Normally I wouldn't question this at all because duh, no real-life troping, but Kanye West is in a bit of a unique situation since a heavily significant portion of his music is autobiographical, often addressing the controversies and scandals he's in as they were happening.
I was considering adding a Harsher in Hindsight entry about how much of his post-808s and Heartbreak music being marked by his self-confessed emotional and mental collapse seems especially uncomfortable after 2022, where by all accounts (from tabloid drama to his actual new music) indicates he's pretty much gone off the rails. For specificity's sake (as well as focusing primarily on the music as an axis of discussion), the 2018 album ye entirely hinges around his anxieties following his then-recent diagnosis with bipolar disorder (as just one bit from that album, "Yikes" expresses worry that he won't be able to control himself in another public controversy) and trying to find peace for the future, which seems especially depressing since nowadays he's proudly refusing his meds and doing far grosser and more irresponsible things that have really wrecked his mainstream profile, as well as making music where he's continuing his autobiographical slant by espousing his conspiracy theory mindset and disturbingly violent and hateful thoughts. Even if not just documenting that comprehensively, there's some individual moments like in 2007's "Flashing Lights" with the line "I hate these [n-word] more than a [naz-word]" that are wince-inducing now in their own right.
If it comes down to it, I'm ok with simply not writing anything down addressing the elephant in the room, because while I trust in my ability to document it as civilly as possible, I don't want to enable the floodgates for more vandalism regarding his behavior and stinking up the pages again. In general, I'm wondering what the stance is on regarding the limits to how much his personal history is allowed to matter when it comes to his art, because the things I think are most controversial about him sadly do occupy a gray space thanks to Kanye's approach as both "provider of art" and "himself a living artpiece". Any specific thoughts on what's okay or not okay to talk about?
Edited by number9roboticopenToo Much on The Millennium Age of Animation? Western Animation
On the UsefulNotes.The Millennium Age Of Animation page, TimonAndPumbaa623
has been adding numerous series/movies/specials to the page's list of "Series/Films associated with this era", since 2021 and especially recently, treating it like an index of anything that's come out since the Turn of the Millennium. While the folder itself admits the list is incomplete, it's added a lot of bloat to an already long page, approaching 400,000 . And while "associated with the era" is a somewhat nebulous and subjective term, I'm questioning if such works as CJ the DJ or Little Angels: The Brightest Christmas are notable enough for such a list if it intends to inform people.
All that said, I'm not comfortable with just making a unilateral page change all by myself, so are there any further opinions on this?
openDeath's Head: seeking consensus to revert changes after fact check Print Comic
Two Marvel Comics pages, ComicBook.Deaths Head and Trivia.Deaths Head, have some 'detective work' statements/examples added by DaPolicia regarding the character's creation and copyright status. The same claims were added to The Other Wiki's page for the character.
These are largely updates to examples and text I previously edited or added, so I don't want to revert them myself (and start an edit war) without a consensus.
This is the core claim they've added:
- Pop-Culture Urban Legends: Multiple sources, including Simon Furman himself, allege that Marvel maintained Death's Head's rights by rushing out a one-page comic (commonly referred to as "High Noon Tex" after a line spoken by Death's Head in the strip) that was featured in various other Marvel UK comics before his Transformers debut, circumventing the company's agreement with Hasbro. However, artist Bryan Hitch's signature in the final panel reads "Hitch '88", indicating that it wasn't drawn until the year after Death's Head debuted in Transformers, and there's no actual indication that the strip was published until May of 1988, meaning that Marvel likely engaged in some other chicanery to keep Hasbro away from Death's Head.
The collected edition introduction directly states that "High Noon Tex" was created to secure copyright. There's a photo of the relevant statements here
◊ for anyone who want to read it.
IANAL, but as I understand it UK copyright law is based on evidence of creation, not just widespread publication. Ashcan Copy logic allows the creation of a quick, sketchy version of the work or character to confirm ownership. The intro says it was "subsequently" published and I don't think a 1988 signature on the final/published work is a "Gotcha!" to show the creators are lying.
With that in mind I'd like to:
- Cut Pop-Culture Urban Legends entirely
- Cut the "if Marvel hadn't done whatever they did" element from What Could Have Been, which also casts doubt on Marvel's claims.
- Cut the whole "A commonly-circulated story, corroborated by both Furman and artist Bryan Hitch and perpetuated by sources like This Very Wiki" section that was added to the ComicBook.Deaths Head intro, which casts doubt on the intro's original brief factual statement about the character's creation.
Even if there's more to the story than the official sources suggest, and Marvel isn't telling the complete and accurate history, I don't think it's our place to speculate in this way.
(If we get an official on-the-record statement from the company or creators that contradicts the original printed statements, that would be different)
Does that sound fair?
Edited by Mrph1openUnilateral restoration of "1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die" list
Back in January, there was an ATT thread that moved to delete the list of films on Literature.One Thousand And One Movies You Must See Before You Die for potential copyright infringement, with Tabs actually deleting the list (courtesy link to page history
). jamespolk made a null edit protesting the decision in the edit reason and arguing that it constituted fair use, but only went as far as expressing a hope that the list might be restored some day (and copy/pasting the list to their Troper Wall/ page).
Well, last week, editor TompaDompa
(whose troper page identifies them as the original creator of the page)note Although the page history only goes back to 2019; it was cut for just being a list of the films and nothing else, but TompaDompa successfully petitioned for its restoration in ATT.
decided to restore the list with the edit reason "Agree with the previous editor. Should be no more of a problem than listing the Academy Award winners and nominees, which we also do (though the show itself is obviously copyrighted)." As near as I can tell, this was not discussed anywhere (the Discussion page is empty, and I can't find anything in either ATT or the forums).
Should the list be re-deleted? And if so, is there a suitable notifier to send TompaDompa?
openThe Last of Us (2023) edit war
Yesterday, Tropers.Phanthom Singh added this entry to a recap page for The Last of Us (2023) (spoiler tag mine). tropers.eroock subsequently moved it to YMMV.The Last Of Us 2023 as it's a YMMV trope:
- Improved Second Attempt: In the game after Henry shot Sam, he kept pointing his Gun at Joel, muttering "What did you do?" and "It's all your fault!", insinuating that he blamed Joel for Sam turning and Joel tried to defend himself by stating that it was no one's fault, and it is a shocking subversion when Henry suddenly turn the Gun onto himself, showing that he was talking to himself. In this version of the scene (episode 5), he uses the first person ("What did I do?") throughout, making the scene much clearer.
By my understanding of the trope from skimming it's definition, Improved Second Attempt is for when something that was disliked or disappointing is redone by an adaptation or remake in a way that is better received by audiences. The original version of this scene is, to my knowledge, considered very good, so I removed it with the following edit reason:
However, PhanthomSingh subsequently restored it with the following edit reason (again, spoiler tags mine):
I took it to the "Is This An Example" thread to avoid a potential edit war and get clarification about the trope in question (a fair bit of this query is a copy-paste of that post), where eroock informed me that Singh had added the example in the first place, making this an edit war of sorts — which brings us here.
Edited by Dirtyblue929openReally weird entry
- Executive Meddling: Many of their American distributors have not got along with Toei due to things such as preventing necessary edits to Digimon Tamers, or being forced to dub shows they don't want due to Blatant Lies (like 4Kids' dub of One Piece). They're also known for providing poor quality video masters to overseas distributors in the past. The only western distributor that gets along with them is FU Nimation due to their shared origins.
First this contradicts itself. Toei was perfectly happy with letting licensors censor their anime. If they didnt mind with One Piece (Which the entry even admits they forced upon 4kids) I doubt they would mind if they edited Digimon Tamers. And the grammar is kinda weird here.
The page this edit is from: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Creator/ToeiAnimation
openWanted to bring up a case on a new user.
The main reason I'm bringing it up here instead of attempting to give a PM to them, is because they're currently edit banned for a rogue launch reason, so I wasn't sure if giving it there would work out.
But to get to what I mean, I wanted to bring up the, so far only, edit of new troper karryoke. Specifically, this edit
on The Angry Birds Movie. I removed the edit myself, but this edit just feels like a big mess of what not to do: a link-heavy ZCE that was placed on the top of the page (despite being an S-starting trope), that's also a YMMV trope. Plus, there's something about the way it's worded, as if these scenes are meant to be good parts of the movie.
open OvershadowedByControversy misuse added back
OvershadowedByControversy.Western Animation
- My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic:
- The fandom itself suffers from it as well, due to attracting an adult, often male, Periphery Demographic and the fact that a few of said periphery fans have done things that reflected badly on the whole fandom. Having quite a bit of, shall we say, controversial fan art, has ignited some online wars as well, especially when some was made with racist intent.
I previously deleted a similar example (by a seperate troper) per OBC cleanup
as many works have such objectionable fan behavior without effecting the works reception and FIM's success means such was objectively insufficient to overshadow it. Permission to re-remove it and add a note since it's a repeated issue now?

This is rather belated, but it's something I wanted some feedback on to prevent an edit war.
About three weeks ago, I saw an example on Characters.Nickelodeon All Star Brawl without a citation:
The game in question still hasn't been released yet, so I commented it out
since it lacked a citation, along with a small tag explaining this (in addition to the edit reason). At the time, I did not remember the source.
Twelve days later
, ravioliluigi uncommented it out and slightly altered it with the following edit reason:
In spite of this, they did not add a citation in the example itself, going against the guidelines explained in Administrivia.Creating A Work Page For An Upcoming Work:
I sent them a notifier explaining the policy not long after their edit. However, in the interim, I remembered where the animation in question can be seen: this short teaser for a Gamescom character reveal
. I could add the necessary citation to the example, but I wanted to make sure that this would not constitute an edit war.
Edited by BlueGuy