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 Are Page Images allowed to have triggering content?
This question feels kind of silly to ask considering how subjective triggers are, but I want to put it forth anyway.
It no longer seems to be up, but I remember at one point, Tearjerker.Thirteen Reasons Why had its page image hidden behind a content warning. The image itself was not graphic, but what it implied could be triggering and so that’s why the folder was there.
I’m wondering if something similar can be done for other pages. The reason I ask is I was browsing the pages for Film.Event Horizon, and the Nighmare Fuel page’s image contains major Eye Scream. Now, I know I am ultimately responsible for what content I consume on this wiki, and I can handle being jumpscared by Nightmare Fuel pages. Heck, I can even handle reading about the things that happen in Event Horizon. But reading about it and seeing it are two very different things, at least for me, and I would’ve appreciated a warning.
I can’t be the first person who has had an experience like this, and here is what I propose: a list of common triggers that images with those triggers should warn about first. Again, I know triggers are a very subjective thing, and it would take a lot of work. But it feels worth it to me.
Thank you for coming to my borderline vent session.
resolved Daylight Horror reverted
So, Daylight Horror was made a disambiguation page a while ago because it was determined
that something scary happening during the day wasn't itself a trope.
However, Klaiopoiso
has recently decided to ignore that and restore the page without any discussion. The closest was them bringing up in the discussion page
, but they the only feedback they got were two people agreeing the trope shouldn't have been cut. The decision to restore the page seemed unilateral, and they didn't seem to take it through the TRS. The page is also a stub, with only two entries.
Can I get a page revert please?
Edited by chasemaddiganresolved Reporting self-recommended fanfic
I noticed that on the Zootopia fanfic recs page, a troper added their own fic a few years ago,
then added other people's names to the rec after the fact. I hid it at first, then looked over ATT for precedent, then removed it entirely.
Is there anything else that needs to be done?
resolved How to make a redirect page. Western Animation
I want to make a Nightmare Fuel redirection for OPAL, so it redirects to the Nightmare fuel page for Jack Stauber. All the examples regarding Opal are already on the Jack Stauber page, and there's no existing page on Nightmare Fuel for Opal by itself.
resolved "A time to kill": From Questionable trope entries to a questionable page overall. Film
So...I noticed the page for A Time to Kill was made years ago by erforce, who's account was deleted a while ago. Overall, the way it was all written sounds weirdly apologetic to the two white supremacists while overtly critical to Carl and the protagonists of the film.
I'll be very honest; I'm unfamiliar with the policy in regard to entries with tropes like Black-and-Gray Morality, if any, so I will need the perspective or knowledge of fellow tropers on this one.
I was looking through the page, and then I noticed the entries done for Black-and-Gray Morality, and I noticed this:
* What the men did to his daughter was undoubtedly reprehensible, but did that give Carl Lee the right to take their lives? If it had been a black rapist getting shot, would there be as much discussion? What if it had been your child? Well, much depends on the personal standpoint.
I can't quite put my finger on what's wrong with this entry, aside from the obvious whataboutism, but there's something that seems a bit off.
I'm also thinking, upon second inspection, it's not just the entries for that trope that are the only problematic thing about the way this page was written. Again, alot of this was edited by other tropers, but I do know that it wasn't really altered so much as it was broken up into smaller entries from what Erforce originally had written. There's more than what I've listed here, but that can be seen on the page itself.
Overall, what should be my next step of action with this? More importantly, what does everyone else make of how this page was written?
Edited by Stardust5099resolved Is this an example of PhlebotinumProofRobot? Webcomic
Trope summary: most of the cast in a work is being affected by something, except for one... because they're a robot.
So: Schlock of Schlock Mercenary is descended from self-repairing computer memory/storage units. One storyline had the crew finding out some politically sensitive information, and having their memories modified as a result. Schlock was able to bypass this by using his 'biology' to make a backup of his real memories, and restoring them later.
resolved Artist intent vs. Audience perseption
So I was thinking about adding a DeviantArt creator named "Femdom-OTS-Fan" to the Fan Work folders of the pages Victory Pose On Person and Over-the-Shoulder Carry since they create a lot of images depicting those two tropes.
They themself have explicitly
stated that they don't consider what they are creating to be Not Safe for Work (except if it is uploaded to a separate account which literally has NSFW in its name) since, according to them, physical female domination and someone being carried over someone else's shoulder appeals to them like sunsets appeal to other people. But I can also certainly see why anyone who is not them would disagree with their assessment of their own work. It is also worth noting that all their images are flagged as "Mature content" though I don't know for sure whether it was them or Deviantart who did this.
Since I of course don't want to violate this website's policy, I would like to ask whether or not in such cases, the creators intent of "This is not Rule 34" overrules any opposing opinions and evaluations by people who are not them?
resolved Is this a valid example of Playing Against Type? Web Original
So someone added this to Etra chan saw it!:
- Playing Against Type: In this episode
, Azami, who usually plays an Obnoxious In-Law, gets the role of the abused daughter-in-law and her usual role goes to Akane. Yuzuriha is also cast as a nerdy girl, which is usually Tsutsuji's role, and Tsutsuji herself gets Yuzuriha's usual role as a Crusading Lawyer.
As far as I know, the trope seems to cover only actors that play against what they're usually cast for, and don't include any in-universe examples. (For context, Etra chan saw it! has the characters as actors In-Universe).
Edited by mickey96resolved The Ron the Death Eater example from YMMV/SonicX Anime
I wanted to make this discussion because I saw that the Ron the Death Eater example for Chris Thorndyke was deleted. Here it is.
- Ron the Death Eater: Chris Thorndyke is often viewed by fans as a selfish, spoiled brat, who's life isn't all that bad as he claims it is, and being more obsessive over Sonic than Amy is. However, Chris isn't really a bad kid. His whiny moments like in episode 49 were due to his fear of loneliness, which kept him from handling the situation of Sonic returning to his world more positively, especially since the news sprung upon him unexpectedly and was pretty impactful for him, and he was acting more traumatic and in denial than like a spoiled brat. His clinginess to Sonic and his fear of loneliness is due to being neglected by his parents since he was little, as he had to spend most of his time alone inside his huge and empty mansion without friends or siblings, making his life feel very empty and he didn't want to lose the one person who filled that void with his friendship and adventures. This also applies to when Chris shut down the portal to stop Sonic from going back to his world. Chris didn't shut down the portal because he's a spoiled brat. He did it because his emotions and fears got the best of him, that he made a reckless choice without thinking clearly.
I actually agree with this example, but it was deleted because apparently it was added by a ban evader. I am for adding it back because although Chris is not my favorite character of this show (due to some issues with how he was written), I do agree that fans do tend to demonize this kid.
resolved Which folder
I'm trying to figure out where to crosswick an entry for The Scum Villain's Self-Saving System: Ren Zha Fanpai Zijiu Xitong to when it pertains specifically to the donghua. Should it still go under the Literature folder on the trope page or under Asian Animation?
Edited by Zaperexresolved Page needs renaming
I noticed the page for Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea goes by a translation of the film's Japanese name, when in English it's known as just Ponyo. TV Tropes has a policy of going by a work's official English name whenever possible. The normal solution would of course be to manually change everything myself, but I don't know if I'll have the time or resources to do everything. Is it possible to tell a moderator to do this for me? Thanks in advance.
I should also mention the film has a bunch of subpages that go by Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea and need changing as well.
Edited by SparkPlugTheTroperresolved Heavy-handed "badge of honor" troping Live Action TV
rr3elite appears to have a major Single-Issue Wonk focused on showing off the villainy of the character Zein from Kamen Rider Outsiders and their appearances in other Kamen Rider media, including this week's episode of Kamen Rider Gotchard. I initially reported them on ATT before
for shoehorning in Fan Myopia-laden comparisons to other works through misuse of various tropes, but it is now clear that was a symptom of a much bigger wonk, mostly afflicting Zein's sheet, the page for Outsiders itself, and various pages for Gotchard (YMMV, antagonists sheet, Nightmare Fuel, #33's recap) where Zein's appearance is concerned.
I haven't sent any notifiers because there's too many offending edits to comb through, but a lot of their edits consist of what they have previously been reported for, plus Bold Inflation, countless sentence structure and grammar errors, and "look at how horrible this person is" examples that stretch Zein's villainynote it is a sapient AI that has placed the world into an authoritarian surveillance state with the intent of mass genocide and has manipulated the heroes into giving it its resources, but I would hesitate to call a lot of its actions deliberately symbolic or nuanced beyond face value.. They also added Speculative Troping examples to Gotchard #33's recap suggesting Zein would have had a darker and more dramatic role in the episode, when in reality he only appears to kill one of the unambiguously-evil villains in the episode and leaves just as quickly to promote Outsiders.
I'm not sure if this is a policy violation in its own right, but I cannot deny in good faith that it is starting to compromise their writing and thus the quality of the pages they are editing.
EDIT: The issue has persisted despite previous mod notifiers and acknowledgement of behavior. More information in comments.
EDIT 2: There are still issues coming from this troper despite the above. As before, more information in comments.
Edited by TrocyteVresolved Self Pimping Vandal?
Samarth Ror's Only edits
are to add poorly formatted sinkholes to a Creator article to his own name (which doesn't exist not that it matters he seems to not understand how to wikiword).
Incidently there's an article on Wikipedia (EDIT: actually wikialpha, wikipedia's cousin with lower standards where they pride themselves on not deleting stuff) by the same name made by a guy with the same name 2 days ago so it seems to be a weird troll going around creating pages for himself?
Latest entry was trying to add himself as a lead actor for RRR (2022)
Edited by Ghilzresolved 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 Interruption by (possible) Trojan
I'm browsing a page on the site, when suddenly, the tab I'm on changes from TV Tropes to what seems to be a page for Norton Antivirus Software. A popup then appears, showing that apparently, my computer has five computer viruses, and that my Norton contract has expired. But here's the rub; I'm from England, which doesn't have Norton available (as far as I know). So, I do what I always do against potential phishing: turn the computer off and on again with my keyboard, then open Windows Security and run a quick scan (better safe than sorry), before reopening my browser (Google Chrome), restoring my tabs, and quickly closing the "Antivirus" tab before it fully restores itself.
This has happened once in two consecutive days (as of writing). So, my question is: Please can anyone confirm that a) this isn't just a "me" thing, and b) the issue is being dealt with?
resolved Super Mario Odyssey: Hide and Seek Web Original
So I made a page for Super Mario Odyssey: Hide and Seek the other day, and then I thought of something. I was going to put the series into the FanWorks.Super Mario Bros page... only to be confused for quite a while, because the series itself is based on a mod for the game, so do I put it in ROM hacks or Web Video?
I have no idea.
Edit: I just realise that I thought about it too much, please ignore this.
Edited by Narioresolved NRLEP with page.
The Real Life page for Mercy Kill exists, although last I checked, it was listed as NRLEP. It just isn't linked to on the main page itself anymore. Was this an oversight?

Reginald Ogron 5 for the last couple months, against many other people has been deleting anything that regards FromSoftware as having a series in a loose continuity. Whether that be for Mythology Gag, or Spiritual Successor, or just a reference to a level in another Souls game.
This was their latest justification for a Fan Nickname entry: "Due to this game's legacy, many terms and mechanics that were translated over but retained the same identity are often referred to with their previous names. Therefore, Runes are still frequently called Souls, Sites of Grace are still bonfires, Incantations are Miracles, etc."
"Dark Souls is not Elden Ring's predecessor. I have never seen any of these terms used intentionally as a Fan Nickname, they are almost exclusively used by people who don't care about the lore enough to use the correct terms, I.E. they're just getting it wrong unintentionally."
Despite the fact the director has declared them to be in a sort of series.
https://www.thegamer.com/elden-ring-director-hidetaka-miyazaki-defends-dark-souls-2-says-it-carried-the-rest-of-the-series/
He references Elden Ring in this context of "loose" continuity.
When he tried to remove the many concepts from old games that didn't make it in, but were used in Elden Ring on the trivia page, someone wrote this.
"Tropes Are Flexible and the page explanation itself explicitly says it allows for instances of recycled assets and concepts in dlc and the like. Elden Ring was advertised as a Spiritual Successor / "greatest hits" amalgamation of all the prior Soulsborne games, made by the same devs, and uses code and models that are directly lifted from the cut content of those prior entries, it absolutely falls under this umbrella."
I believe he's gone way too far, but before I revert his edits, I want to ask everyone's opinion on this question of Mythology Gag, and see whether it's actually against the site's rules?
Edited by smogmonster