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 Reporting User (Again)
So, NicMasterTrope has a fairly well-established habit of unfortunate conduct on the Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard cleanup threads and the wiki in general due to impatience and unilateral action, quite frequently reported in instances like these: Here
Here
Here
And here
Thing is, the user doesn't seem interested in improving their behavior as they promised. Recently, on the Magnificent Bastard Cleanup thread, the user asked when a draft would be done while saying they'd already made a Video Example for the not-yet-written-up character
. While the latter is not an issue as the character is approved, them demanding to know when a character will be written up is not only a further instance of impatience and rudeness but has been, in the past, precedent for them to try and unilaterally handle the character themself, and the fact it is a character from My Hero Academia, the same franchise as two previous incidents with their tendency toward unilateral edits and attempting to edit other tropers' write-ups, does not inspire faith.
resolved Report Troper (technically part 3)
I'm here because a previous ATT
went very long and though I know it received moderator attention, I don't know how much the mods were able to see because of the length (and because the issue kept going after the initial report), so I wanted to make a new one to make sure it got seen. Basically, I would like to join in on reporting NicMasterTrope for several thread-related issues, including but not limited to CM issues.
- In April he was reported
due to possessiveness issues regarding My Hero Academia, specifically the character of All For One (AFO). In summary, after the character was proposed, Nic PM'd the user asking to take the writeup, and when he was not given such permission, he went in and edited the draft without permission. Later on, he tried to alter the writeup without permission again to add in spoilers in violation of those threads' two-week rule. He was reprimanded by Tabs
and said he would try to communicate better
.
- Recently, he again
harped on when an MB draft from MHA would be done. When the writeup was done, he proceeded to comment that he would make a few improvements
but didn't offer any insight as to what those were.
- In the first ATT on this specific issue, he attempted to summarize the issue as just voicing his opinion
and said that he's not acting "haughty".
- He then proceeded to "discuss" the MHA tree order
by basically saying that it has to go a certain way, even though that exact order had already been agreed upon
anyway. He framed it as attempting to discuss it because of "the rules", even though there was no discussion to be had on the issue by that point because everyone, including him, was in agreement.
- After that, he then asked if Riley intended to propose another MHA character for MB
and asked to take it if Riley wasn't - this isn't an issue in isolation, but the fact that he's still harping on trying to propose and edit stuff from MHA despite the work already being reserved speaks to how far he's missing the point of the issue.
- Somewhere in the middle of all this, they made a CM EP and deleted it when it got downvoted, giving the reason as "What’s point of creating EP in the first place if it’s still rejected despite providing valid points
" (implicitly stating that the counterarguments were invalid).
- This is minor in the grand scheme of things, but he double
posted several
times, and when asked not to do that, not only immediately did it again
but also triple-posted later
. He later proceeded to make the exact same
comment twice, but about an hour apart
- Beyond the issue of possessiveness and attitude regarding their own proposals, there's also just a general history of rudeness, which is not restricted to CM/MB:
- Here
, he was very rude to someone while downvoting an EP and only edited it out after being called out later.
- Here
, they bumped a previous post with like sixteen exclamation and question marks, seemingly just to highlight their impatience, and said it was irritating to be "ignored"
(he got a talking to from Bisected for that as well).
- Here
, back when the character of Vecna was in limbo (a stage play seemed to give him redeeming qualities, but no one had actually seen it, so we kept getting cut proposals based solely on wiki summaries), Nic joined in in asking if he would be cut. Six posts later, he furiously
told us to stop ignoring him and implied that he would unilaterally cut him if no one else was planning to.
- Here
, he asked a question about TVT rules vs. Fandom wiki rules, got an answer literally immediately
, and then reposted the question
and called it "important" while asking us to stop treating him like a "jerk" (as this post
shows in an admittedly snarky fashion, the Administrivia page the thread OP instructs everyone to read answers the question anyway).
- Here
, in a similar fashion, he once asked the ITAE thread to stop ignoring him and answer his question. When Libraryseraph responded that she didn't know why any of his examples might not count, he basically said that now it was her turn to explain herself
.
- Here
Basically, he has a history of being disruptive, possessive over My Hero Academia despite the series being reserved (which could have been solved if he had just been polite about it, since works get split among users all the time and Riley has a well-documented history of doing so), rude if he doesn't get the answers he wants in a timely fashion, and completely missing the point of the problem even when it's spelled out clearly and thus continuing all of the issues after multiple ATTs and mod warnings. I know the last ATT was seen by mods (Bisected commented on it to ask for no popcorning), but I also know that there was a lot of information given there in no particular order, so I hope that consolidating everything here might make it easier for the mod team to see our issues.
Thank you for your time.
Edited by STARCRUSHER99resolved Start of an Edit War/Possible Sockpuppet? Western Animation
Hello! So I recently posted this in the "Is this an Example?" thread, and haven't really got replies, though they have been leaning to my side.
I found something that screams shoehorning from a biased source.
From the YMMV page of The Owl House:
- Broken Aesop: The Series Finale has two major ones;
- Earlier in the series, the show railed against the concept of a Chosen One, and said that people should carve out their own paths. Just before the climax however, it's revealed that the remnants of the dead Titan has been actively helping Luz in learning Magic and has picked her to be the one to stand up against Belos. Guess what? That makes her a fucking CHOSEN ONE!!!
- After Belos is defeated and no longer a threat, he starts begging for Luz to save him from death, saying that is she doesn't, she'll be just as "evil" as the witches, and "We're Human, we're better than this!", only for Eda and friends to push Luz aside, smugly say to Belos "Well we ain't!" and then gleefully stomp him to death and laugh, proving that despite everything the show preached, in his final moments, they proved that everything Belos said had some merit of truth to it.
Two huge problems with this. First, it's very clearly overly hostile and biased against the show judging by it's language, and attempting to whitewash Belos by suggesting he has a point. Secondly, both examples are taken completely out of context to form a rhetorical strawman. The first one isn't an example because she wasn't born with any special destiny. She only got the Titan's approval due to being her kind and loving self, especially to his son. The second is just plainly absurd. It's attempting to play moral judgement on some of the people who have suffered the most under the genocidal psychopath, when he had just made his second attempt to commit genocide against their species.
I took the liberty of removing the example from the YMMV page. Now that would be fine on it's own, even if I heavily disagree with it... If it weren't for this entry literally being a copy paste of something that was posted on the main page of the show which the troper Gamermaster removed. The weird part is that it was copy pasted onto the YMMV page by an entirely different user, and the first user has a total of two edits on their entire edit history, both of which are super hostile to modern Disney properties. Later on the person who posted it on the main Owl House page posted it right back on the YMMV page exactly as is without going to the "Is this an Example?" thread, and added further shoehorning. I removed those too... but now I am wondering if this is some sort of sockpuppeting situation due to the reasons listed above. At the very least it could warp into an Edit War.
resolved Concerning lewdness issues in Trope Pantheons forum
The user M1gami Tensei has posted a draft profile for the character Yuzuki from Call Girl in Another World, which we're getting concerned is toeing the line into fetishism. Their third draft of them
has a full 30 paragraphs (which isn't neccesarily a bad thing, but in this case keep in mind most profiles have just around 10-20), many of which describe the character in question prostituting themselves to other deities or other deities attempting to do "stuff" I'd rather not describe here to her, often in eerily descriptive writing. It was even worse in the first and
second drafts
, which notably feature Melkor getting into very uncomfortable and OOC situations with her and outright stating that Frollo "wanted to suck on her titties", though those two issues were removed in the later drafts after pushback from other members of the thread.
From what I've heard, stuff like this does happen in Yuzuki's Manga from time to time, but I find that weak justification to go all in against the "no lewdness" rule. It doesn't help the character herself looks uncomfortably young. While much of the excessive stuff described here was cut out in the most recent draft posted today
, I find the fact that it was written at all and it took us 3 tries to convince him to cut it out very concerning, so I'm making this ATT to see if further action is needed against this user.
resolved Fairly new troper making suspicious edits
~stemy is a troper who joined around May this year, and in the TRS just posted an improperly-formatted thread
for All Gays Are Pedophiles whose entire point of concern is not just something that can be sorted out in a Trope Description repair thread, but is also pretty eyebrow-raising, because it takes umbrage with the "Nowadays this is a Discredited Trope" part:
Out of curiosity, I went to check on their edit history, and while there's a decent amount of impartial, non-problematic edits, there were a few that definitely blinked as being a bit agenda-y:
- Adding an improperly-indented justifying edit
to Just Ignore It that segregates "trolls" and "internet jerks" in a vague way, phrased as to imply that Just Ignore It is an invalid practice. This has since been removed.
- Adding an entry
to BrokenAesop.Harry Potter criticizing JK Rowling for "breaking her own morals" based on her real-life history of transphobia. This has also since been removed.
- Adding this entry
to UncertainAudience.Live Action Films that only exists to complain about Ghostbusters (2016) and Ocean's 8 in the same sentence (two movies separated by a few years and by different studios) solely on the basis of "has female cast", uses language like "They are seen as useless and effortless remakes by the majority of the public, looks like a liberal fanservice for conservatist audience and disorienting liberal audience not knowing if the gender bending was supposed to be a really clumsy representation of women or mocking their revendications[sic?] for more diversity."
- Adding an odd expansion
to Red Scare in the sentence "The Red Scare is different from works genuinely critical of the Soviet governments and specific aspects of the ideology.", adding "...and it often involves leftist ideologies that can't be remotely qualified as communism." I don't treat this as strictly inappropriate, but adding this without elaboration, especially in conjunction with everything else about their edit history makes me tilt my head a little.
- And just today
, they're constructing Analysis.Misaimed Fandom, an incomplete, improperly-formatted stub that wants to list the reasons for Misaimed Fandom, but presently isn't doing much beyond saying "fandoms miss the point".
Normally I'd just brush these off as incidental, but their TRS thread really propped up a red flag in them trying to push "people don't care about LGBTQ people anymore, conservatives are still queerphobic; I fixed your description". Did they ever receive notifiers of their previous and now-removed political edits? I feel like they should be aware at this point that regardless of where they put it, moralizing of this sort is discouraged and should be discussed beforehand.
Edited by number9roboticresolved Useful Notes - AI Boom? Web Original
Just stumbled across this new page and feel like it could use some discussion. It seems to have been quietly launched a little over a week ago, in more or less its current form.
For one thing, I see a few suspicious signs that the text might be AI-generated itself; notice the em dashes, the lists of three items, "from x to y", the vague adjectives.... plus it's pretty poorly organized.
Be that as it may, it takes a weirdly hyped tone, almost self-congratulatory, and only glancingly touches on some of the huge controversies in the creative world around AI and LLMs. Obviously it's a hot-button topic that evokes strong feelings for many, including being a central point of contention in the most recent WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes... but there I go. Point being, the page as it is seems like one person's opinion that doesn't do a good enough job at taking multiple perspectives into account. It lacks a lot of specifics about the technology and the discussions around it as it exists.
That's assuming we even want/need such a page, honestly I fear Flame Bait in its future.
What do we think should be done with it: Cutlist it, expand it, find some more contributors and entry pimps to balance it out?
Edited by Jeduthunresolved PhoenixRedux
In this review
, Phoenix Redux admitted to deleting their old account and creating a new one specifically to write an overly-long review that breaks the 3000 character limit several times over.
Considering that deleting your old account to make a new one is prohibited without permission from the moderators, and the troper in question deleted their account two years before making a new one, I have to wonder...is this allowed? Especially if they were previously suspended (which I can't investigate myself, as I have no idea what their previous handle was called)?
resolved Troper with persistent complaining problems, possible wonk(s)
Sponge Bat 1 has been, over a long period of time, adding numerous entries to pages that contain complaining, sometimes with rude edit reasons, and also appears to have a weird wonk over Glitch Productions (which they clearly seem to despise) and Helluva Boss (ditto). Some examples:
- Here
they added complaining about Knights of Guinevere, alleging that the show was made out of spite for Disney's mistreatment of The Owl House, along with further complaining about other shows they deemed to have been treated worse by Disney.
- Here
they used a really aggressive edit reason to complain about the Helluva Boss fandom.
- Here
they added a Designated Hero entry for Helluva Boss character Stolas with similar wording to the above edit reason.
- Another rude edit reason
related to Stolas
- Here
they added a complain-y entry (granted, it's Darth, but still) alleging that Windows 11 is incapable of running games that use Unreal Engine 4. A previous ATT I started on the matter
, along with independent research, additionally could not verify the claim.
- Complaining general example
about Windows computers
- This edit
, while not very complain-y in and of itself, continues the Glitch and Helluva wonk by adding a negative Genre Turning Point example alleging both were responsible for indie animation going upmarket and shutting out lower-budget projects.
- This edit
complains about the AI opponents and difficulty in Diddy Kong Racing
- This edit
complains about the underlying message of Steven Universe, with an edit reason enforcing as such
- This edit
baselessly alleges, on the WMG page for The Amazing Digital Circus, that the series was stealth insulting the entire animation industry
And so on. Note that most of these edits were on page 1.
Now, I know Sponge Bat 1 has been an active participant in cleanup threads, and has done some good work. However, I'm concerned about the propensity with which this is happening. I have not sent any complaining notifiers, but I did send a "general example" notifier for the The Alleged Computer example that I never got a response on (along with a PM on the Unreal claims I also got no response on), so I don't think a notifier would be listened to anyway.
Edited by themayorofsimpletonresolved Report Troper
Okay, I've kept this kinda on the backburner for a while now, but after finally having enough, I'd like to report Psyga 315 for his conduct in the RWBY Discussion Thread.
Basically, he's become infamous there for his flagrantly bad faith conduct. Just about all of his posts do one of a few things:
- Complain about the show's fans with vague accusations of things they "claim"
- Complain about the writing
- Complain about the decisions behind the writing
- Generally take the most cynical interpretation possible (to the point of disregarding the actual show's writing and taking "vindictation" - his terms - when some of his headcanons were suggested to be on the right track)
- Blatantly lying about things to make the characters and writing look worse
- Defending James Ironwood at all costs and making everyone who opposes him into the true villains of the show (again, often to the point of just straight up lying)
- Demanding evidence from other people whenever he gets into debates but then shifting the goalposts when it's provided
- Getting defensive about works that are generally unanimously considered to be Hate Fics
- Deflecting the blame onto other users when called out on his bad faith conduct
Multiple users have either called them out or downright begged him to just stop over the past year or so and he simply never has. Don't believe me? Here's proof:
- 1
- claims that fans like that we were "robbed" of certain moments between characters.
- 2
- complains that the show has too many characters and "fetishizes" the number 4 somehow
- 3
- lies that something was retconned as being magic when the first two paragraphs here
make it clear this isn't true
- 4
- reposts one of the show's creators talking about something in the show not landing and just leaves it at that
- 5
- complains about the way the show introduced other characters besides the four leads
- 6
- somehow thinks it's disturbing that the heroes want to kill the Big Bad (who is effectively the emodiment of destruction who wants to destroy the planet)
- 7
- has an entire rant about one of the fight scenes where he literally posts a video of someone screaming
- 8
- implies that a creator called Volume 9 of the show "filler" when that's not what the creator was saying at all. After several people have to explain what filler is
and all the ways it's not filler
, he moves the goalposts
to keep complaining about it.
- 9
- makes another lie about the writing (specifically how the concept of "Ascension" works) and gets corrected
.
- 10
- lies about the way that discussions on certain characters began, gets corrected
, then doubles down
.
- 11
- goes out of his way to complain about fans supposedly "misattributing" a Kingdom's destruction to a guy who was pretty damn responsible for it.
- 12
- Posts three "unbiased" videos that are just complaining about the way a character was handled.
- 13
- when someone posts a critique about said character, he reflects that critique onto a different character in a completely different situation and again complains about how it was handled
- 14
- he again deflects a point in a sarcastic manner rather than actually address it (as the post below it points out)
- 15
- he complains about a Deus ex Machina which isn't a Deus ex Machina (it was a plot device that had been set up years prior). I finally had enough and asked him to not post in such bad faith
and another user
also called out his bad faith conduct.
- 16
- again complaining about the thought process behind a writing decision
- 17
- taking the most negative possible interpretation of the ending of an arc to turn it completely negative when that's just not true (as the two posts underneath it point out)
- 18
- implying that things will get worse when a certain secret in the show gets out, even though everyone who knows the truth of the situation has no reason to reveal it
.
- 19
- continues to complain about a choice the main characters make when the alternative is letting a continent full of people die
.
- 20
- apparently he even wrote a fanfic that's particularly cynical about the show's circumstances.
- 21
- downplays a major reveal in the show to complain about it
- 22
- again blames the protagonists for opposing a character he likes and accuses them of self-righteousness
- 23
- again misframes a situation to make the protagonists look bad (as detailed two posts below)
- 24
- straight up lies about a character he doesn't like to make her look bad even when it makes no sense
- 25
- refers to a situation as said character trying to "murder" two people when that's simply not what happens
- 26
- when confronted on the lies, he just pivots to something he thinks someone else made up
- 27
- again completely misrepresentating a situation, to the point that he was outright called a troll below
- 28
- he doubles down when called out, leading to several callout posts below
- 29
- cynically stating a simple solution that transparently wouldn't work
- 30
- diminishes an entire volume of a show as "pointless exposition" and complains about a character disappearing from the show after that volume
. At this point people were outright begging him to just stop already
.
- 31
- again shilling a character he likes and complaining about the writing of him
- 32
- calls all of the season finales of the show "rushed"
- 33
- implicitly calls the entire show badly written. Even someone who agrees with him
thinks he "bends over backwards" to hate it all.
- 34
- was extremely vindicated when it was later revealed that the world is indeed worse off than we expected. He's again accused of purely bad takes
and only responds with another jab towards the show
that disregards the hopeful aspects of the revelations. A later post
from someone who tends to agree with Psyga also agreed that he was interpreting it incorrectly.
- 35
- I don't remember what was said here but I do remember that I got thumped for getting sick and tired of it and finally asking why he bothers to post there.
- 36
- claims that a video example of someone complaining about the show contains tropes that can have a video example attached when someone details
why that's not accurate
- 37
- out of complete nowhere, assuming that the ending's going to be bad
- 38
- this one's from me in response to several times that he engaged in bad faith discussion in a row, disregarding opposing opinions because they disagreed with his yet demanding that people supply more evidence for their point of view anyway.
- 39
- claims that a character acts like a "Saturday morning cartoon villain", which is complete nonsense
- 40
- generally accusing "people" (presumably fans) of throwing out accusations of misoginy for disagreeing with them.
- 41
- again makes vague accusations about people calling him a "fascist" for supporting a character and begins the post with an outright lie about what certain people have said in the past (as I point out here
)
- 42
- again accuses a protagonist of being an idiot by misreading the situation. He then proceeds to only focus on one part of the argument
when supposedly refuting it.
- 43
- again accuses "fans" of something vague like lumping in some random Fan Animation with the infamous Hate Fic Fixing RWBY.
- 44
- again accuses the protagonists of messing up the situation even more than the Big Bad
- 45
- again complaining about the writing and the "fans" who supposedly defend it
- 46
- again complaining about the writing
- 47
- again just accusing the show of character bloat.
Like, the people in the thread who like the show are open to criticism, but that's not what Psyga's doing. Even if you only believe half of the things i've linked are valid examples of what I'm trying to say, that's still around 23 times he's complained about damn near everything in the show over the past year. I genuinely don't know why he bothers to keep going back to a thread meant to be about discussing a show people like when he has a well-documented history of hating the show, the writers, the writing process, the protagonists, the setting, and the fans of it. It's all he posts and I and several other users are so beyond tired of it.
I'm damn near begging for mods to do something at this point, please.
resolved Page attracting drama importation
Due to recent allegations of rape against the content creator in question, the YMMV page for animation reviewer Saberspark has been attracting drama importation and edit disputes between multiple users. The edit history
has the details, but here's a quick summary:
- Jibanyan 641 added the following under Harsher in Hindsight:
- The Jayman 49 rewrote it to this:
- Corporal Pig 22 then added "(falsely)" before "accused" in the previous sentence.
- Blue Blazes then removed "(falsely)" and added "(though he denies the allegations), along with the fact Saber has come under scrutiny for his continued association with Black Gryph0n despite Gabriel currently having several allegations of grooming and child predation against him." after "2025".
- Rise from Your Grave then appended "and says in a response video that he is looking into legal avenues to deal with the situation" after "allegations".
Given all the drama, should this page be temporarily locked? Or is there another path that can be taken?
Edited by themayorofsimpletonresolved Troper with character wonks Anime
cotton-cloud22 appears to have this wonk regarding Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba of defending Zenitsu and bashing Obanai.
- Added a Draco in Leather Pants entry
for Obanai that, while not in itself wrong, used all caps to call him “WORSE” than Zenitsu AND a Misaimed Fandom entry complaining about the fandom not realizing Obanai is worse than Zenitsu. I have since moved the entry to Ron the Death Eater to focus more on Zenitsu’s demonization in the fandom and removed mentions of Obanai.
- This Unintentionally Unsympathetic entry on Obanai
isn’t too bad in isolation, but worth mentioning for their wonk against him and how it seems to take his gags too seriously.
- Speaking of taking gags too seriously, after I removed a Karmic Overkill entry for Yoshiteru (Zenitsu’s descendant) that bashed how Obanai’s reincarnation treated him since I felt it was misuse as a gag moment, they re-added it
.
- Complainy ship-to-ship combat entries
(I’ve since reworded them to sound more neutral).
- All their edits on the Fandom-Enraging misconception
subpage feel less like straightforward examples and more of rants against people who dislike Zenitsu. Also includes another all caps claiming Obanai is “WORSE” regarding jealousy which just feels like a shoehorn. (On a side note I think the Fandom-Enraging Misconception subpage for Demon Slayer as a whole needs a clean-up, it’s pretty messy).
resolved User with problematic wonk over vtuber drama, and especially complaining about Nijisanji
As pointed out just earlier today
, there was a random entry
on VestigialEmpire/RealLife added a month ago by the troper WM-R that was just an extensive rant against Nijisanji, discussing all the backstage/corporate drama about the company and the handling of its talents. Because this was such blatant misuse I went to check and see if the original writer has demonstrated similar behavior in other pages, and it appears this does seem to be a pattern, especially within the last month:
- Multi-bullet-point rants about Nijisanji and Brave Group Incorporated in Abusive Workplace to discuss their real-life business controversies, in violation of the "real life examples must be at least 5 years old" rule (which frankly, that still sounds too generous for that trope).
- They also added
Abusive Workplace onto the Nijisanji page itself.
- EDIT: It has also been pointed out that WM-R originally came up with and launched the trope earlier this year
. It appears that they never actually had a consensus on whether the trope counted for "no recent examples" and "no real life examples" despite there being concerns about both, and after the page went live, they added in various "sneak-edits" of further documenting vtuber company drama with "do not make public until 5 years from now" notices
, so it doesn't even sound like they were even respecting their own rule.
- They also added
- Adding in many entries about vtuber graduations/identity changes
to Open Secret, most of which were removed as per consensus in the respective cleanup thread
as being in violation of real-life troping, only for them to partly add back in some content
without consulting the thread on the matter (despite them participating in it earlier
).
- Making excessive additions to Pop-Culture Isolation discussing Nijisanji, with very pointed focus on blaming the company for "enforcing" isolation because of its bad practices, while adding in a seemingly irrelevant paragraph about how hololive "avoids" it.
- Making an entry about the Hololive vs. Nijisanji rivalry in Quantity vs. Quality. While technically not an incorrect use of the trope as far as I can tell, it still reads as unnecessary and is reflective of a lot of the OP's anti-Nijisanji rhetoric.
- A lot of various entries
on Culture Clash ranting more about Nijisanji's business practices and how badly they mishandled one particular vtuber in specific, admitted at the very start to be largely speculative ("It's strongly suspected that...") with only minor focus on them being a result of actual cultural divides.
- A lot of entries on YMMV/Nijisanji about its various workplace allegations and controversies, most of which are written to skirt around YMMV guidelines, including inappropriate uses of Never Live It Down (which were since taken down as per cleanup thread
in violation of "no recent examples")
- They added most vtuber entries
onto Unperson/RealLife since February. While technically not incorrect usage, some of these entries are really freaking long and go into a lot of personal detail and speculation (talking about how one person crying as a result of a genmate being retired, or how fans got angry of a vtuber being retired, are completely unnecessary to the point), and the Nijisanji entries naturally read as very biased and trying to emphasize as being "drama".
- Also just in general violating a lot of real-life troping rules that would be insensitive even if it wasn't a vtuber (none of the tropes in question warrant focus on someone's suicide attempt, especially since it's never been actually confirmed and just sounds like gossip, in addition to being weirdly invasive).
I know we have a dedicated vtuber cleanup thread, but this user in particular has added such bad juju regarding vtuber drama across the wiki; can something be done about this?
Edited by number9roboticresolved Very belated notice of an edit war
July 2024 update: They're back at it again.
Was doing cleanup, found an analysis page for Unproblematic Prostitution and an out-of-place headline reading "We now break from our usual entertaining content to provide a one-sided editorial as to why sex work is inherently bad. Because, clearly, this is the one right and true analysis of the sex trade.", which was edited the previous January by Iamcuriousblue. According to page history, this wasn't the first time it was added — they first did so in December 2022
, and after it was removed for vandalism
, they added it back in without any edit reason. They also have an edit history of trashing the page on the main
Unproblematic Prostitution page itself, as well as editing out this one passage of the main description
for "out-of-place propaganda for the Nordic Model approach to prostitution" when it was literally just saying an objective fact on some countries passing laws.
This user isn't very active, only between 2021 to 2023, with their editing-back-in-of-vandalism being their last act. I couldn't find any verification if they were at all suspended or punished for their behavior, but I do notice in their edit history they have a suspicious single-issue focus regarding the portrayal of women in sexual or otherwise fanservice-y scenarios, so treating the topic with that level of unprofessionalism is a smidge concerning.
Edited by number9roboticresolved Mass violation of Administrivia policy on Peter and Company. Webcomic
The author of Peter And Company, who goes by the username PeterAndCompany, I'm pretty sure just violated The Fic May Be Yours, but the Trope Page Is Ours and Auto-Erotic Troping.
I quote the following from the former:
- You may contest factual information and either make the changes or ask others to change it for you, as long as you are polite and respect consensus.
- You may inform us that your work has been removed and made permanently inaccessible to the public, in which case we may consider deleting our article(s). This requires agreement from the troper body.
- You may request removal of content that you believe is hostile or defamatory towards yourself or your work, but we hold final discretion as to what falls into those categories.
Nowhere have I seen the author do this at all; as far as I can tell, they also did not go to any of the cleanup pages. They instead gave a lengthy edit reason
stating that they are the author in an attempt to justify their vandalism of the page, which as Edit War states, is not sufficient discussion; Essentially he is trying to claim ownership of the page.
He has also gone on the trivia page and the YMMV page to do the exact same thing, moreso with the latter especially on parts that have to do with the main webcomic itself, and has also engaged in Auto-Erotic Troping on this paticular edit
and possibly the Main page. Admin has not indicated to me that he had the permission needed to take down what I wrote or the right to make the edits he made (the latter of which had nothing to do with removing misinformation on the Trivia page) either, so I'm on high alert with this.
He has also done the following which is something authors are not supposed to do, especially in regard to YMMV. I quote the following:
- You may not remove content from our articles on the basis that you disagree with it or do not like it.
I am open to input from the community and admin on this matter as to what can, should, or if anything can be done.
Edited by Stardust5099resolved Discussion pages spam complaining about Sinfest images
burglesnur has made a total of 57 comments
today alone on the discussion pages of tropes/one index with a Sinfest panel as the image, with the post each time being:
Issues with Sinfest itself aside, surely this violates Rule 1, right? If it was just a single post it would be one thing, but this is...well, a lot more than that. I don't know if it could be considered a Single-Issue Wonk since they've made unrelated discussion posts and their edits seem to be fine, but at any rate it's not okay.
Edited by Coachpillresolved DisillusionedCheetah100 spiraling Western Animation
Hi. I hope this is not the wrong place to report this but Disillusioned Cheetah 100 has been lashing out at people who tried to help him in his obscure Dr. Rabbit and Toon definition threads. He says he doesn't like people "correcting" or "helping" him and says they just want him to think and behave like them, while also saying people use "moronic excuses" and lie about wanting to help him.
He's doing the same spamming that resulted in his previous suspension wrapped up in a persecution complex and saying he wishes he could delete his threads (then when people say he just needs to holler a mod he doubles down on insulting himself and saying people hate him or are annoyed by him.) I am honestly worried about this guy's mental health based on his forum behavior.
resolved Velma YMMV and the Alt-Right Accusation
Hello, everyone. I was browsing through "Ask the Tropers," and I see that a troper called "Neverwood" tried to report me for spreading "Alt-right" messages on the Velma YMMV page
, and I'm having trouble moving forward from the accusation. I know this accusation was 2 years ago, but it's still a jarring thing to see considering it's visible to the public. Because I wasn't tagged in the conversation or notified of it when it came out, I wasn't given a chance to explain myself. I am aware of the misfortune and ramifications of posting this on April Fool's Day. I assure you, this is not a joke; I truly wanted to address this with sincerity.
I know it's pointless talking about it now, considering it's been almost two years since the accusation, and this post would only bring attention to it. I want to get this off my chest and clear things up, even if it doesn't matter anymore, because this is a serious accusation from my point of view. The edits I made on Velma YMMV page were caused by a lot of anxiety and stress. For clarity, I was never trying to spread an "alt-right" agenda, and I would never endorse those beliefs.
- In Neverwood's complaint, they accused me of posting "alt-right nonsense" and that I was claiming how "Velma is racist against whites". Although I did describe Velma's behavior as racially motivated in previous entries, it's too strong a description, and I should have used the terms "biased" or "wary" because they align more with the creator's intent behind these remarks. To explain the difference, "bias" is used to describe a mistrust or wariness, whereas racism implies the speaker believes in superiority over another race or ethnicity. I interpreted these actions as racist or racially motivated because I have read reviews and seen reaction videos that called Velma's actions bigoted, hypocritical, and racist for her comments about Fred's race. I understand that Velma was referring to the system, not Fred's race. Because of these reviews, I mistakenly thought it was the consensus towards the character. I was being literal-minded when I interpreted her comments, not that it excuses my actions. This misunderstanding and misinterpretation of Velma's comments are what led to these statements. That said, I'm aware this isn't the place to discuss what constitutes racism.
- Regarding my comments on the "social commentary", I sincerely believed that was the creator's intent when they made the show. Despite Neverwood's accusations that I claimed "it's the reason why most people hate the show", I never said social commentary was the thing that ruined the show or the reason why so many people hated it; all I said was that the social commentary could have been done better. I wasn't complaining or criticizing the message; I was criticizing and referring to the methods used by Velma, which were over-aggressive and heavy-handed. I never said she was right or wrong either; that isn't my place to say, I just said these themes and messages were done better in other movies and shows. The point of my argument was that bringing identity politics into the story doesn't automatically make a character compelling or deep. I believe in Show, Don't Tell. Social commentary is a delicate and complex topic that must be done in an engaging, entertaining, and thought-provoking way. To reiterate, I was not trying to spread or push an alt-right agenda by criticising the show's methods in providing social commentary. I supported the message the series tried to convey, even if I doubted and disliked its presentation and heavy-handed, over-aggressive approach.
- Finally, when I deleted the social commentary edit, I genuinely didn't know about Neverwood's complaint. It was already a point of contention on the page, and I thought I was doing the right thing to stop more complaints and edits. When I brought up the show's social commentary again, I tried to provide a calm and rational explanation to avoid causing more arguments, not knowing the matter was already resolved. I tried to explain how the show was full of identity politics and socio-political commentary, I felt it was something that had to be addressed because it was a component of the show. However, my edits had problems of their own: Firstly, whether you agree with the show or not, it's hard to talk about these issues without making the edits sound like a massive, over-aggressive rant. And secondly, despite my attempts at damage control, it unintentionally came across as flame bait. I stopped because it wasn't worth it in the end, and I haven't been on the YMMV page since 2023.
Anyway, I think I've explained everything. I am truly sorry for what happened and for causing this much drama. I can't apologise enough for my actions; it was foolish and a product of stress mismanagement. I have no excuse for my actions because I know I should have known better. I sincerely know now how my actions can upset others. I will be more careful and mindful in how I phrase my entries in the future.
Edited by Buckresolved Preventing edit war from continuing Film
The troper ~Remnant 43 has been repeatedly adding Not-So-Well-Intentioned Extremist to the villain Remmick's character sheet on Sinners (2025). They first did so here
, giving an edit reason. I disagree with the use of the trope and others did too as another troper, ~Wet Flannels altered the trope back to Well-Intentioned Extremist here
. Remnant altered it back once again here
with a frankly rude and accusatory edit reason this time.
This feels rather like the issue we ran into with one troper insisting Charles zi Britannia from Code Geass was a Not-So-Well-Intentioned Extremist based on the work's protagonist's line about him being selfish. A villain can be selfish and have a god complex. Well-Intentioned Extremist just requires they believe in what they're saying and this applies to Remmick. He's absorbing people in his vampire Hive Mind and wants to recreate his lost culture but he repeatedly states it will be a happy world, he believes in equality and Remnant's arguments hit of trying to play up the fact he has negative traits to allege his good intentions are wholly shut down, which isn't the case.
That's my stance at least, the much bigger problem is Remnant continually re-adding the trope and their attitude given in their latest edit reason.
Thoughts?
Edited by PassingThroughresolved Agenda Based Editing on pages for Code Geass. Anime
Reddish Guy 1 is once again
conducting agenda based editing
for Code Geass, depicting the Britannian Characters as if they were solely black in terms of morality and changing things to reflect that including removing sympathetic tropes from several characters, while adding YMMV entries suggesting opinion for Noble Demon characters being unsympathetic is widespread despite there be little indication of this outside of the Base-Breaking Character Cornelia. What's more, they attempt to justify this by claiming this site thinks the series is Black-and-Gray Morality, but if the series itself is said to be Grey-and-Gray Morality, then that is what is supposed to be troped, with the idea its not that falling under Unintentionally tropes and Misaimed Fandom. And yes, it is meant to be seen as Grey-and-Gray Morality since the showrunners and even the actors have said as much, with them going on record as stating Cornelia and Suzaku are two of the most moral characters in the show, and they consider Lelouch to be irredeemable. For objective troping, authorial intent is important to note. Whether it worked or not would be covered in YMMV. I've sent them a notifier directing them to this thread, but this needs to be addressed as this is the second time now this situation has needed to be brought up to ATT.

I have been receiving strange PMs from users in recent months asking incredibly nitpick-y things about posts I make on the forums, that I have come to believe is actually just one person using a bunch of sockpuppets. They always ask similar, inane questions; use the same kind of wording; and always claim that, quote, "myself and others" are "confused" or "have questions" about something I said on the forums. It's too similar and consistent for me to believe this just happens to be random users who type exactly the same, ask the same kinds of questions, and claim that "others" were wondering.
The "users" who have messaged me include: Master Waldon, Speed Gamer, and varazthemage. All of them have been new accounts with no edits to their name.
I'm just curious if anyone else has been having this issue and if there's anything to be done about it if so. Thanks!