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:
resolved Close to being an edit war? Literature
JaidebeccaShipper removed
the word "transphobic" from this entry:
- Audience-Alienating Premise: The book tells the story of a little boy named Johnny who loves to role-play as different animals and objects. One day, he decides that he wants to be a walrus. This (somehow) causes everyone to treat him as if he actually wants to become a walrus, culminating in a doctor suggesting that Johnny eat worms and have his limbs cut off in an allegory for hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery — a metaphor that would only be understood by the transphobic adults in Walsh's audience who would purchase it, despite the book being illustrated and ostensibly presented as a children's book. Walsh boasted that it was the best-selling book in Amazon's LGBTQ+ category, only for Amazon to recategorize it to Political and Social Commentary and for Target to completely remove it from its online storefront.
With the edit reason: " Arguing against an ideology is not transphobic, just like not following a religion doesn't mean you hate people of that religion."
Moroaica added
"transphobic" back to the entry with the edit reason: "trans medication isn't 'ideology' and opposition to that is transphobic."
I'm not sure what do here. But my observation is that they're both troping with an agenda (but hey, correct me if that observation is wrong).
On a related note, Moroaica removed
- Narm Charm: The Zookeeper Author Avatar looking like Walsh is something that fans of the book consistently praise.
Their edit reason for removing it was: "This book has no actual 'fans'"
As much as I disagree with this book's message, this isn't true. The book certainly does have fans and those who agree with Walsh's message. It feels like Moroaica is being disingenuous here and biased.
Edited by AudioSpeaks2resolved Edit war(s)
On this page
, Tropers/bud0011 added
a Narm Charm entry, then re-added it
after it was removed for misuse.
They also did the same
thing
with a misused Hindsight entry, although they did delete it soon after
.
resolved Removal of YMMV examples over what seems to be a personal disagreement
I noticed that the Narm entries on the YMMV page for Jeff Wayne's Musical Version of The War of the Worlds were removed in July last year by Primis for what they put down as just "Misuse".
Thing is, the only thing they show to back up the claim of misuse is a link to the Narm cleanup thread
where they come off as simply disagreeing with the examples listed, with no other troper replying to agree with their post.
I was under the impression that simply disagreeing with YMMV items isn't enough reason to remove them, and that's what seems to be happening here, especially as I've actually seen the "dancing heatray" examples in both the 2006 and New Generation shows and know exactly what those examples are referring to and why it would come across as Narm. Is it ok to restore those examples (minus the Mondegreen link, since that's obviously not a YMMV trope)?
resolved Is Narm YMMV or Flame Bait?
I noticed that Narm has the YMMV banner at the top, but on the subpage for the different media (Narm.Anime, Narm.Film, Narm.Literature, Narm.Western Animation), it appears with the Flame Bait banner.
Is there a reason for this?
Edited by SoyValdo7resolved Weird edit reasons
Troper Shinn Bidan made a few edits with a few edits that I consider to be, for lack of a better word, off.
- In here
they added a Blue with Shock entry with this:
- In here
, they added a What Could Have Been entry wishing it was in the final game.
Now, none of these are really eyebrow raising but I firmly believe that personal opinions should not be in the wiki pages and these edit reasons make me unsure we that also includes expressing those opinions on edit reasons.
Any other opinions?
resolved Are Cut Pages Gone for Good? Web Original
I just noticed that the page for my personal channel was cut. Is there any way to retrieve the content so it can be archived elsewhere?
If not, it's not the end of the world.
resolved Is this mf a Love To Hate villain? Web Original
https://hate-sink.fandom.com/wiki/Patrick_Star_(Paka)
This is Patrick Star, from Paka's Dark SpongeBob Parodies. It's more than obvious he's a Hate Sinknote while some people may not trust FANDOM much because of some mistakes they have from time to time, they clearly discuss
every character before adding pages related to the Moral Ranking Wiki, Heroes Wiki, and Villains Wiki, since the series itself presents him as an irredeemable and dislikable, violent and cold asshole who wants nothing more than to kill SpongeBob and Junior (a baby clam, btw) at all costs (and he also basically represents the abusive husband in a toxic relationship when the sponge took the clam to his house, doubling his hatable points), whether is by killing people, threatening them at gunpoint, and -spoilers if you didn't see the animatics- making SpongeBob digs his own grave in a graveyard while having Junior in a cage.
Yet even with all this hatable and unsympathetic traits, he also has some Evil Is Cool moments when he kills an entire gang all by himself, all of the things he does to get to Sponge and Junior actually shows him how much of a clever and manipulative son of a bitch he is that accompanies his brutality (and this is Patrick, by the way), and, after the events of Part 2, he's shown to have the regenerative and cloning powers like his The Bikini Bottom Horror counterpart, which he uses to beat the crap out of and kidnap Mr. Krabs and asphyxiate Bubble Bass by making him gulp one of his parts by force, killing him and latter making a clone of himself be created, also Paka does a really good job at voicing him.
Apparently, I also saw that Hate Sinks can indeed also be "Love to Hate" characters, so he may also count.
Also sorry for all this Wall of Text.
Edited by UzarNaimBer15resolved Two pages covering the same thing. Which should be kept?
While going through and cleaning up Narm from non-YMMV work subpages (characters, right now), I spotted the following two pages:
As you can guess by the names, they cover the same information, with the latter having info on other characters, meaning one of them is redundant. The question is, which one should be kept and which should be cut?

Okay, so a certain troper, Colonel-Knight-Rider, has been adding multiple They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character entries on the YMMV section of The Super Mario Bros. Movie and one of them especially stuck out to me as being especially nitpicky.
Ignoring the fact that Spike's whole point in the movie is to be a minor character, he actually does impact the plot in some way by being one of the main reasons for why Mario feels so "small" and "insignificant" to everyone and adding to Mario's motivation of wanting to feel more important, which is what motivates him to fix a flooding in Brooklyn and therefore leads him and Luigi to the Mushroom Kingdom and the Dark Lands respectively and the rest is history. Also some weird 1993 movie glazing because Vindicated by History I guess.
Also the troper who added this, Colonel-Knight-Rider, seemingly has a serious vendetta and hatred towards this movie as they have been adding constant negative examples and downright complainy edits at times to their examples in this movie's YMMV section (with them also citing a random YouTuber, The Little Platoon, who gave a negative review towards the movie in many of their YMMV edits and examples for some reason)
This is their edit about said YouTuber in the Awesome Music section for some reason.
This is their edit about said YouTuber again on the They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot section.
All of this implies a possible case of Single-Issue Wonk is at foot here. For example, this is a Kong section that they added to the They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character section with an especially complainy part at the end that was edited out by another troper.
This is not the first time they’ve done this too. They did this before on January this year as well with just as much of an egregiously complainy addition at the end as well. I deleted this one myself because of how egregiously complainy it was as well as giving reasons as to why the Kongs were necessary to the plot of the movie.
I tried DMing them to stop with their seemingly Single-Issue Wonk behavior regarding this movie and they did at first adjust and edit their Kong example to be more fair and less complainy as shown here:
and I thought they had stopped altogether, but they have since then continued to add more negative examples like the "Spike" one as well as a So Okay, It's Average example towards the movie as well.
This is an Ass Pull entry that they added on January this year that I deleted for reasons explaining how it’s not an Ass Pull.
I went to the They Wasted A Perfectly Good Cleanup forum
and they gave me permission to delete their They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character entries so I already took care of those.
Is there anything we should do about the others?
Edited by Fireball246