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:
openAcceptable Targets misuse?
- Acceptable Targets: Everyone and everything on the planet, at one point or another, has been lampooned on the show, even the show itself.
- Out of everyone they've ridiculed, favored butt-monkeys include hippies, Ben Affleck (at least until Argo came out), and Barbra Streisand.
My impression is that this that it's about targets audiences find acceptable. But the entry is about the show finding them assertable which doesn't sound YMMV. ALL the Acceptable Targets entries I've seen are written as the work treating them as assertable, not audiences.
Is it YMMV because fan of the work find it such? That's not how they're written and fans of a work agreeing with the works opinions seems like People Sit on Chairs.
openTroper not giving edit reasons for removals. Also possibly an agenda.
Grotadmorv appears to be almost exclusively removing Nightmare Fuel examples, without giving any of them edit reasons. Could someone send them a notifier? I don't really know that much of how I should do it myself.
Edited by pikachu17openHaving a problem with a thing on the Camp page Film
It's this: "Don't expect it to take itself the least bit seriously."
Now, that may apply with Batman (1966), the works of John Waters, and some of the films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (specifically Thor: Ragnarok and The Guardians of the Galaxy films), but with all the books and articles I've read on the subject, I've found that part of the page disingenuous. The Universal Monster Movies and the films of Bette Davis and Joan Crawford are very serious but are regarded as camp due to their melodrama, theatricality, and artifice.
I was wondering if it could be changed to something like "The serious becomes silly while the silly becomes serious. And there's no limit to how over the top something can get."
openEdit War in YMMV/Super Smash Bros Ultimate Videogame
A while back I noticed this from YMMV.Super Smash Bros Ultimate:
- This would later be downplayed in Castlevania: Grimoire of Souls where Simon initially displays this attitude towards Alucard, commenting on the dark powers from within him are on-par with Dracula's, only for Alucard to remind Simon that he once fought alongside Trevor Belmont, and comments on both Maria, Shanoa, and Charlotte's impressive abilities in magic.
This was a lone third level bullet "reply" to another example under Memetic Psychopath, which was what first stood out as incorrect Example Indentation. Then looking at the text itself it was all about another game's characterization of Simon and nothing to with Simon in Smash Bros. Ultimate. So I removed
it citing both reasons in the Edit Reason.
Tailikku then put it back
showing misunderstanding of both reasons in their Edit Reason.
I PMed them telling them the reasons the entry is incorrect, but they did not respond. So I decided to bring it up here, and checking the Page History again I noticed Tailikku was the one that added the entry
in the first place, so they're also Edit Warring.
openLimiting vitriol/harsh edits on a YMMV page. Web Original
I’m the creator of a web original project, Diamond In The Rough, a Touhou self-insert fic part-deconstruction part-satire, and I also overlook the trope pages for it.
Recently, there’ve been some patronizing edits, but I’m not sure how to go about it. The edits have some legit complaints, but the wording feels hostile. If I’m not mistaken, the rules for creators on their own YMMV pages are stricter, but at the same time, what if an edit broke TV Tropes’ guidelines, but the creator wanted to clean up said edits while maintaining the essence of the complaints?
Here is the page in question: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/DiamondInTheRoughTouhou
As you can tell by the recent edit history (in addition to me hitting enter too quickly and having to redo my edit reason separately), some of the edits were either less-than-flattering or just outright broke the rules. If it’s against the rules for me to edit this, I guess let me know and revert the page, though somebody else will have to clean it all up.
I’d rather leave the person who made the edits out of this since, again, they had common complaints, plus it seems by the fast edits it was done in the heat of passion. I just mainly wanna know what I, as the creator, can do to clean up the language/what I can do in general within the creator’s guidelines.
Edited by SpaztiqueopenShould Ferris (from Re:Zero) Be considered Transgender? Anime
Hi, I'm new to posting here, though I've browsed for longer. I'm a fan of the book series ReZero
, but what caught my interest while browsing the trope page was the fact that in the Re Zero Character Sheet Ferris is listed as a crossdressing boy, yet in the Transgender page Ferris is also listed as a transwoman. I think that these are conflicting statements or something. and a bit confusing? Idk. But I wanted to know whether Ferris should be considered a trans girl or a crossdressing boy.
Now. I personally believe that Ferris is a trans woman having read the bulk of the series. And these are some of my reasoning's as to why. Sorry if this is too long.
- Ferris legally goes by Felix Argyle, but she wishes to be called Ferris. In her introduction she reiterates to her boss that being called Felix upsets her,
and that "It's Ferris, Not Felix." Her birth name is rarely used in the story. This is akin to a trans person's deadname.
- In the side novel EX 1, it is shown that not even Fourier, one of her best friends, was aware that she had another name that she never used,
as Ferris does not like talking about the past, to the point where she doesn't tell people her birth name.
- In the side novel EX 1, it is shown that not even Fourier, one of her best friends, was aware that she had another name that she never used,
- In the English books, Ferris is addressed with male pronouns after her introduction. yet in the japanese version, she frequently uses feminine pronouns, this fact is also stated on the character sheet.
- Most importantly, there is a scene in her side novel Volume EX 1 which shows that for the last 6 years, Ferris has been praying to be a girl,
reaffirming herself everyday when she is alone in the mirror. The Narrator goes on to state that she no longer had to say these words, as they were already apart of the person who spoke them for 6 years.
- There is also a scene in EX 1 which shows that she dreaded coming out to Fourier about her birth gender, as she feared that, like other people, he would no longer want to be her friend.
- Ferris also states that she will never wear men's clothes again. In an interview on Twitter, the Author stated that the one time she wore men's clothes, she actually cried.
- And there is also the small fact that Ferris has been in a couple of video game crossovers that feature them in all-girls casts. I just figured I might add that in.
I know of a popular counterargument that might be brought up. That one is that Ferris in Arc 4 says that "He is a man in heart and soul" according to fan translations of the Web Novel. However, in the Official Light Novel release, This line is omitted and replaced with a line that reads "This outfit is a reflection of my body and spirit." I feel this has a much different meaning than the former line, as the outfit Ferris wears is a girls outfit, and it doesn't seem to imply that she identifies as male. This line is omitted in Volume 10 of the Light Novel, which the author considers to be the final version of the book series. Arc 4 was also released in 2013, when EX 1 and Volume 10 were released post 2015.
All-in-all, these points, alongside other evidence I didn't mention, are why I also think Ferris is trans, and I'd like to know what to make of this.
Edited by SneekshionopenShenanigans on the Hinduism page
On UsefulNotes.Hinduism, it has a WMG page and the phrase "By fully understanding how those fundamental particles react with each other, they could understand creation itself, and transcend it" is potholed to Does This Remind You of Anything?
Edited by WillbyropenGroups of characters as Ensemble Darkhorses?
A few months ago, I deleted a couple of Ensemble Dark Horse entries in the The Powerpuff Girls page because they listed teams of characters as examples of the trope. My understanding is that this trope, as the name would suggest, only applies to specific, individual characters within each group, not to multiple members at once.
A troper has re-added the deleted entries, reasoning that "nothing on the Ensemble Dark Horse states that it has to be individual character". However, the page actually states the exact opposite: "Although this applies to individual characters, as a YMMV item, it should not be listed on character pages."
I also took a look at the cleanup thread and found a couple
of posts
that confirm that groups should not be listed as examples. However, the messages are kind of old, and the thread itself seems to not be active, so I don't know whether the rule still stands.
So, tropers, are those valid entries? And if not, should I cut them again?
openEdit War Western Animation
NWolfman
added the following example to Trivia.Toy Story:
- Old Shame: Not the film itself by any means, but the creators have acknowledged just how poorly the computer graphics have aged, going as far as to call it their "ugliest film."
Later JameyGamer
added an additional sentence to it containing a Circular Link within the example:
- Old Shame: Not the film itself by any means, but the creators have acknowledged just how poorly the computer graphics have aged, going as far as to call it their "ugliest film." Elsewhere, the infamous "Black Friday" reel that Lasseter screened for Katzenberg of course became an instant Old Shame to John.
N Wolfman later re-wrote the example like so:
- Old Shame: Not the film itself by any means, but the creators have acknowledged just how poorly the computer graphics have aged, going as far as to call it their "ugliest film." As for the actual film, there's the norotious "Black Friday" cut John Lasserer and co. made to appease Jeff Katzenberg.
And recently Jamey Gamer has changed it back:
- Old Shame: Not the film itself by any means, but the creators have acknowledged just how poorly the computer graphics have aged, going as far as to call it their "ugliest film. "" Elsewhere, the infamous "Black Friday" reel that Lasseter screened for Katzenberg of course became an instant Old Shame to John.
openTroper displaying some editing problems
Tropers.One Punch has a problem with Natter. From his edit on Akame ga Kill! - The Jaegers:
They also display some minor grammar and indentation problems.
Edited by JRads47open''Fantastic Beasts'' character or ''Harry Potter'' character? Film
A major character from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them was moved from the film's character page to a miscellaneous sub-page for the Harry Potter books because he was a part of the backstory for those books. Where does this character belong? For those that have seen the film, I'm talking about Grindelwald, who disguises himself and then acts as the film's main villain while being portrayed by the biggest name in the movie.
openJauneBlackSmudge is trying to pick a fight on the RWBY Fridge tab
Here are two of teh tree entries that Jaune Black Smudge put into the RWBY Fridge tab:
- Another reason why Ironwood blamed Ozpin for Beacon is his choice for Pyrrha. Think about it. Ozpin wanted to give the 'incredible' power of a Maiden to a 'seventeen year-old girl'. And she's also just a First Year Beacon Student, young and prone to recklessness and arrogance. Pyrrha might've been the strongest First Year Huntress-in-training at Beacon, but she was 'far' from being the strongest student in the school. At best, she was maybe as strong as a Second Year. But there are plenty of students older than her that could wreck her. Giving the Maiden's Power to her of all people seemed idiotic. After all, it's not like Ozpin has literally trained thousands of Huntresses over the years and could've simply asked one of them to become the Fall Maiden, given that they would be leagues stronger and mature and experienced than Pyrrha. Right? But no, he instead chose Pyrrha.
1. The Sarcasm Mode is made for humor and is used here to poke at the show. 2. This has been discussed to death by RWBY fans and back 3. He tries to imply an Idiot Ball when said character was a natural prodegy when the problem arose from a lack of experience and skill. 4. "ever so handy" is saracastic as well, just being a dick
- And this serves to bite Ozpin in the ass. The thought of that power and the possible loss of her idnetity overwhelms her and makes her feel insecure. And then she goes to fight Cinder in "End of the Beginning". Why? If Ozpin, widely believed to be one of the strongest Huntsmen in Vale, and possibly Remnant was defeated by the Fall Maiden Cinder, what the 'hell' made her believe that she could defeat her? You can see it in their fight when Cinder 'wrecks' Pyrrha. Has it never occurred to anyone that Cinder was toying with her, given that she could've easily blown up the entire floor of Ozpin's office with Pyrrha still in it? Literally, her sacrifice while heart-breaking, was utterly in vain and didn't really stop or slow Cinder at all. The only silver lining to her sacrifice was that it oh-so conveniently unlocked Ruby's Silver Eyes.
openNotEvilJustMisunderstood, seem to be greatly misundertood
I'm planing to remove many examples from it, and think it's better to post here for record first(because aside from my very recent post the last entry in discussion was from 2014).
I think the trope need better description. The current description put too much emphasis on "Not Evil" part but almost completely ignoring Just Misundertood part. From my impression, a character being "Not Evil" isn't as important as (people) "Just Misundertood" the chaarcter. In this trope context, "evil" is likely include "harmful/dangerous". Lets say we have a Classical Movie Vampire, the character may simply feed for sustain himself and not really malice (not evil), but there's no misunderstanding that he kill and feed on humans. So he can't be this trope, else the description of this trope will be narrowed to "any villain/antagonist that doesn't use For the Evulz as motivation" (which make it People Sit on Chairs).
I think the condition should be that
- The character mean no harm to anyone
- In case that it accidently cause harm (alien mind, Does Not Know His Own Strength, or other reason), it must at least has aversion to does so once become aware of this
- People mistaken its action/intention as harmful one.
Blue-and-Orange Morality shouldn't be excuse here, else there won't be Just Misunderstood part. A robotic army programmed to kill every lives is not evil, and likely not aware that what they're doing is wrong, but there's no misunderstood part - they're really out to kill everything.
Just read the examples, we've "totally evil (Psychopathic Manchild who kills and eats people for fun), but she's raised that way" (no misundertood part), "totally evil, but used to be The Woobie" (no misundertood part, they're dangerous now), "doing evil things but has Well-Intentioned Extremist motive" (Necessarily Evil is still evil, and usually no misunderstood part. A dictator who Take Over the World to bring everlasting peace is still taking over the world with force.) Really, I think it need to be fixed.
Any opinion?
Edited by KuruniopenIf it is not "Deader Than Disco", that what is it?
There has been a huge clean-up of the Deader Than Disco trope recently. Fair enough, but I wonder where certain cut entries could get a new home. Many of the earlier DTD entries could be moved to a different trope, but I don't know where this one belongs:
- Lil Abner: The strip fell into this pretty hard. For a couple of decades (40s-60s), it was the most popular comic strip in America by a mile, with an estimated daily readership of 70 million in the US alone (back when the country's population was ~180 million.) The strip produced omnipresent merchandise and even a few live-action films. Al Capp was called the modern-day Mark Twain. Characters from the strip, such as Daisy Mae, Sadie Hawkins, and Lena the Hyena were part of the Small Reference Pools. It also spawned an extremely successful spinoff character, the Schmoo, which was a cultural phenomenon in its own right. The main reason it died off in popularity was because of its complete alienation of the baby boomer generation. Al Capp became increasingly conservative in his later years, and the strip started taking regular potshots at the civil rights movement, hippies, and anti-war protesters, including an infamous feud with John Lennon. Perhaps even worse, in 1971, Al Capp got caught in multiple near-simultaneous sex scandals that led to many newspapers dropping the strip out of protest. Due to these two factors, the strip's popularity plummeted in the 70s, until it finally ended in 1977 by Capp himself. The result is that today, the strip is a footnote in the history of American pop culture if it's even remembered at all. Perhaps ironically, its biggest continuing legacy might be the concept of Sadie Hawkins dances.
It is not "Seinfeld" Is Unfunny, right? Because there is nothing in the entry about the comic being creatively impressive for its time. I believed that Society Marches On could be it, but it seems to about how writers seem to think that people in the future has the same values as people today. So...? I believe that someone in the clean-up thread mentioned Seasonal Rot. Could that work?
Edited by FuriennaopenAvoiding an EditWar Videogame
Nintendoer asked a meta question on Headscratchers.Pokemon Sun And Moon. I deleted it with this note: "This question is more appropriate for Discussion or a Forum thread. Headscratchers is for questions about the game itself, not meta fan theories." They promplty readded the question. Is Headscratchers the appropriate place?
Edited by ChaoticQueenopenExtremely Short Timespan
Does Extremely Short Timespan require that the plot happen in 3 days or less? Because I've got this example and I don't know if it fits:
"This game takes place over a far shorter amount of time than any other main series game: just under a month, excluding DLC. Case 1 starts on April 23, case 5 ends on May 19. Only the Investigations games cover less time. To wit, Case 3 ends on May 12, and Case 4 takes place on May 13... with the same prosecutor. In a different country. And he somehow familiarized himself with rakugo tradition in preparation. However, the DLC case, Turnabout Time Traveler, takes place after a four month timeskip."
For those who don't know, the example is from Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney – Spirit of Justice, a game belonging to the Ace Attorney series. The plot in the games in this series usually spans through half a year or more, yet in this game it all takes place in less than a month.
Edited by GosicrystalopenHero of Another Story Videogame
On the trope page for Mental Omega, a troper added an example for Hero of Another Story which I removed since I don't consider to be valid (since the heroes in question are also playable characters in their own right) but he didn't agree and added it back for this reason: 'reputting because said I watch and played the game and saw it myself'. I'm not very sure about who's right and I don't want to start an Edit War over this issue.
openAre Calvin's parents hated?
Someone just added this to YMMV.Calvin And Hobbes.
- The Scrappy: Calvin's parents were criticized early in the strip for being too harsh and needlessly sarcastic to Calvin. One strip even has them arguing on whether or not they're sorry for having him with his father wishing to buy a dachshund instead. Watterson himself addressed this, saying their reactions to Calvin's antics make them more realistic. While his mom has since been rescued for being the better Reasonable Authority Figure, his dad still has a hatedom not just for being a Jerkass to Calvin but also an Author Avatar for Watterson in the later years of the strip.
Last time I checked, Calvin's dad is really popular and well-liked due to the Running Gag of making up facts whenever Calvin asks him a question, to the extent that there's a subreddit called "r/Explain Like Im Calvin" involving people doing the above. So doesn't this disqualify them?
openVisual Effects of Awesome
Eagal has been very zealous about deleting Visual Effects Of Awesome entries off of YMMV pages, but doesn't include a link to the respective subpage on the Sugar Wiki or edit said subpage itself (which most people aren't aware of the existence of), nor does he relocate them or create the respective subpage for that work, so it just seems like he's torpedoing the entries. Should someone notify him about how to do this in a more constructive way?
Also, for YMMV pages where there's only one entry for a given Sugar Wiki bullet point isn't there usually some flexibility given on those?
Edited by AlleyOop

Hey everyone, I wanted to ask for help/feedback about what it should be done about the YMMV pages of both Red Hood and the Outlaws and Red Hood YMMV pages. The pages have been ignored for a long while with only a few tropers showing interest in keeping the entries up to date. One of the tropers that have, unfortunately, shows an obvious negative bias against the series and its writer, Scott Lobdell. I find the current state of the pages to be not only unhelpful for anyone interested in checking the series and/or the character and the personal views expressed to be somewhat out of place. I tried to fix the pages a little a while back, trying to be as objective as possible with my edits but I only succeeded in getting myself tangled in an Edit War with the aforementioned troper. Since I don't want the situation to repeat itself, and I'm still not satisfied with the pages' current status, I ask you for some help in improving those pages.