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 Question about Image Pickin'
If I open a new thread on Image Pickin', do I need to post an image myself as a suggestion on that thread or is that something I leave to the forum team?
resolved Easily Forgiven, now complaining magnet.
Easily Forgiven was recently made YMMV, and it's now attracting a lot of complainy edits (despite cleanup saying they should be neutral
) that seem redundant with Unintentionally Unsympathetic (worse, UU without explaining why their forgiveness wasn't seen as earned as intended) and other issues reading as bashing forgivenesses they don't like rather than why it came of as (too) easy. Some examples.
- Steven Universe: This was how the fandom saw the resolution to the original series with the Diamond Authority's "redemption". Most people expected Blue to be redeemed, but were critical on Yellow and especially White, as due to executive restraints, the pacing of the final few episodes made the ending resolution feel rushed. This is mitigated by the movie and sequel mini-series showing that just because Steven solved matters peacefully with the Diamonds doesn't mean he forgave them for their horrible actions and the three of them (mainly White) still hold a few of their toxic mindsets, but for many fans this was not nearly enough and they should have stayed villains to the end. Would be valid but doesn't explain what they did for those unfamiliar with the work. Also said movie was in production before fan complaints so not an after the fact fix, so if they weren't as easily forgiven as first implied is it not/no longer an example? (YMMV cannot be subverted or played with).
- Jedi Academy Trilogy: The New Republic decides to place the fate of Kyp Durron, who, under the influence of the ghost of the Sith Lord Exar Kun, had first assaulted his master Luke Skywalker, then stolen an Imperial superweapon and blown up an entire star system, in the hands of Luke himself. Luke chooses to forgive Kyp and welcome him back into the Jedi Order. This proved extremely controversial in the Star Wars Legends, fandom, which was reflected in later works: In the P.O.V. Sequel I, Jedi, Corran Horn rage quits the order over it, while a story in Tales from the New Republic portrayed Kyp as The Atoner. Other readers suspect that the New Republic considered the population of Carida to be Asshole Victims since it was an Imperial system whose governor had just attempted to assassinate Chief of State Mon Mothma with Grey Goo and then kidnap the infant Anakin Solo, and Kyp had subsequently helped win the books' final battle for the New Republic after Exar Kun was destroyed, so they weren't that inclined to prosecute him. Argues with itself noting there were those who though otherwise/mitigating context. If it explain why critics felt this wasn't enough, would it be redundant with UU?
- WandaVision: Many fans criticized Wanda for being this at the end of the series. With her having kidnapped an entire town and forcing them to play roles in her weird meltdown, including not letting some of them see their children. And after beating Agatha, Wanda suffers no consequences for MindRaping the people of Westview beyond being shunned by them and simply leaves to live a relatively peaceful life of solitude and self-discovery. Making her seem less like a grieving victim and more like an insane, sociopathic Karma Houdini who should've been thrown in prison or received some kind of punishment instead. Deleted this as she was not forgiven, Westview was noted justifiably still hated her. Even if EF was just getting off light (the TRS said it still requires in-universe forgiveness), this seem to be getting bashy. This is the kind of ill-faith edits being attracted.
- Detractors of Elsa in Frozen cited this trope as one of the criticisms levied against her. While it was already implausible enough for Anna to forgive her so easily after being shut out for so long, even more implausible is the fact that the entire citizens of Arendelle happily accepts her as their queen in spite of accidentally unleashing the Endless Winter that followed beforehand especially considering that unlike Anna who believed and eventually vindicated that she didn't mean to do so (and we the viewers know that she didn't even realize this until Anna pointed it out), they have no reason to believe that it was an accident (especially given how reclusive she was prior to her coronation) so the fact that they welcome someone who in their eyes, intentionally unleashed an Eternal Winter upon their land and abandoned them to their fates rubbed them the wrong way with fans citing this as another example as to why Elsa would have worked better if she actually freezes the kingdom on purpose. Notes it's just detractors. Character extreme popularity means it's likely not a widespread opinion.
- The Owl House: Even though Eda and Luz both make a point to not forgive Lilith straight away for her actions in the Season Finale with the latter doing her best to make amends, there are a number of fans who still think they let her off way too easily for cursing Eda, keeping her in the dark for 30 years and trying to forcibly abduct her into the Emperor's Coven as well as using Luz as a Human Shield in order to let her guard down with her redeeming actions being to help Luz save Eda and sharing the latter's curse not being enough to make up for it. Besides noting she wasn't forgiven until they did all this redeeming stuff and arguably not even then, doesn't explain why critics found it insufficient to redeem them as intended (UU needs that level of objectivity). This could be worked into a valid example, but comes of as Never Live It Down without the requirement (why fans exaggerate/ignore mitigating context) that keeps it from pure complaining/bashing.
I've asked the EG TRS
about coming of as redundant with UU, but it's coming along so slowly I feel the need to bring to attention what I find a disturbing amount of toxicity, lacking the constructiveness/objectiveness that makes other negative audience reaction item valid, for something that while contentious isn't supposed to be a inherently negative reaction, and seems overly complainy even if it was.
resolved Loved Dead Fridge Brilliance
Over on "The Loved Dead", there's a fridge page with a Fridge Brilliance entry that refers to the singular line "[...] others who knew something of my ancestry called attention to the vague mysterious rumors concerning a great-great-grand uncle who had been burned at the stake as a necromancer." in "The Loved Dead".
I don't ever use Fridge myself, so I might be off, but I believe there's no Fridge Brilliance here, just speculation. The premise doesn't loop back to anything relevant to the story.
I also question the claim about the USA being burning-at-the-stake free. I am not well-acquainted with the subject matter, but I gather that there is a history of enslaved people getting killed this way, such as happened during the New York Conspiracy of 1741 or a 1805 case in Wayne County.
I would like permission to delete the entry if necessary, but since I do agree with the fridge's essence that this particular execution method here invites theories, I was wondering if the entry can be preserved under another header. Like, for instance, is it WMG material?
Edited by Pfff133resolved Buffy should have more tropes dedicated
here's a post on reddit explaining my point a little better : Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a show I can considered to be a classic. It's shaped TV and pop culture in a very unique way, in way few does trough the history of medias. Hell, even today, there are articles saying "this is the new "Buffy"" or "this could be a worthy "Buffy" descendant". One of the many aspects that made Buffy so iconic and memorable were the characters. The characters of Buffy are what I can considered to be iconic. I don't really like that word because I think people like to use it a bit too much but I think it applies here. Let's dive into the characters I think had the more impact on pop culture :
Angel : The brooding hero, lurking in the dark who ends up being the good guy the girl fall in love with, I'm obviously talking about Edward Cull... No wait, not at all, it was Angel. Let's admit it, from the first moment Angel turned into a vampire in Buffy's bedroom, it was the beginning of a common theme in teen dramas. Edward, Stefan, Bill, all take their inspo from Angel. They also happend to have a dark side hidden all along. The romance between Angel and Buffy inspired generations of writers, I mean, Scott and Allison in Teen Wolf (especially at the end of season 2 when Allison happen to become one of the bad guys while season 2 have been bulding the tension between them...). The secret circle have this curse that stops Cassie and Adam to consume their love. Same thing with Legacies when the main girl's love interest become mud because...They slept together, like girly, what is this. The end of Becoming : Once More With Feeling season 5 finale remind me of it, same thing with the end of Chilling adventures of Sabrina season 2, with this episode of Legacies season 4 and I know some of y'all will comes to my neck saying but it just a coincidence, main love interests die sometimes...I'm aware and I know thank you but also, I'm not sutpid. I know a certain character's death in The O.C. has nothing to do with Buffy, I know that the death of another certain character in Teen Wolf (despite the MANY connections between the 2) has nothing to do with Buffy. The reason I'm giving those exemples is because, well, the similarities are there. Anyway, I'm done talking about Angel. Let's talk about his arch-rival now.
Spike : Spike is an anomaly. He's a character that shouldn't hold such a big place in the show, because Joss didn't attend him to but I'm glad he's here. I was asking questions around my high school about if people knew Buffy and, despite most of them not actually watching the show, they knew the name and were saying stuff like '"isn't the show with the cheeleader slaying vampires" or "isnt it the original Twilight with the girl falling in love with vampires" and during those interventions, a lot of them mentions Spike, trough his hair, but also by his name sometimes. I think Spike is a character many have tried to replicate but very rarely succed. Characters like Damon Salvatore are fun for a while before it becomes clear that the writers have no intentions to change him or do anything meaningful with him on the long term. Eric Northman tried it and almost succeed before season 5 and beyond. Crowley from Supernatural shares some similarities but those characteristics are used in kind of a superficial level. Hook (Once Upon A T Ime), Luki from MCU etc.... Plus, the tv tropes "Badass Decay" directly comes from Spike, as it was named Spikefication for a long time. There's an article about how Spike open the gate for bad boys getting redemption for the girls they love and along the characters he might influenced was Jess Mariano (Gilmore Girls), Chuck Bass (Gossip Girl)... I mean there was bad boys before Spike, like let's be for real, but characters like Dylan from Beverly Hills helped built the "bad boy" archetype as wikipedia and articles are telling about but not really expend it further.
Cordelia Chase : I already wrote a whole post about the influence of Cordy on the mean girl archetype feel free to read it : https://www.reddit.com/r/buffy/comments/1ifd02a/the_impact_of_cordelia_chase_on_pop_cultures_mean/
Also there is this video explaining her impact : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0Nt4lgzREk
But without Cordelia Chase, characters like Summer Roberts, Brooke Davis, Katie Fitch, Cheryl Blossom, Lydia Martin, Caroline Forbes,Lizzie Saltzman etc....
Willow Rosenberg : Willow is one of the most important character in the LGBTQ+ community. The critics also appreciated the fact that Willow, was a proud Jewish and that she was good representation for girls. The impact of Willow goes beyond just her sexuality. The character of Willow and her journey is one of the most interting thing on TV ever. The sidekicks of the main characters in teen dramas owns a lot to Willow. I mean Josie Saltzman is a copy of Willow (especially her turn into Dark Josie). Willow is a character with a lot of depth : She start off as this shy, nerdy girl who had no so much respect towards herself. She's smart and really competant in a lot of things but it's obvious that she put herself down and that she don't believe in herself. She has a crush on Xander since years and never dared do anything about it, she always let people walk all over her without any complaints. However she seems to be all positive about and almost childish (which was something changed from the writers. Originally, the actress playing Willow was kinda moody and seems to mooping about herself a lot but the writers wanted Willow to be someone smiling and positive despite all the shit she was taking). Her meeting Buffy made her gaining confidence more. She doesn't want to admit it, but it's obvious that Willow wants people to see that she can be strong and powerful. I can't deny that Willow, especially in the early seasons, wants to help people a lot and she wants to be useful. But she also craves for people to see it and acknoledge it and when it happens, Willow get kinda cocky and arrogant, like Giles alread said once. The Dark Persona thing didn't start with Willow but a lot of characters wants to replicate what made Dark Willow an iconic villain of the show. Betty Cooper turn into Dark Betty is just Dark Willow without debt (because Roberto Aguirre Sacasa just wants an excuse to sexualize the character). Void Stiles from Teen Wolf is clearly a descedant of Dark Willow (even tho, done better on some aspects). Mac from Veronica Mars was clearly meant to the Willow of the show and we could go on and on about it. But let's move on.
Xander Harris : Seth Cohen, Stiles Stilinski, Matt Donovan... Please bffr, Xander was clearly a mjor influence on them. Like, the nerdy boy having a crush on the Valley/Mean/Popular girl, pinning over her for a long time and having a chance to finally get it. I mean Xander (Stiles, Seth, Sid from Skins), fall in love with Buffy (Lydia, Summer, Michelle) who kinda ignore him or consider him as a brother, and he doesn't notice that the girl, less "attractive" and "confident" or not girly enough, is pinning over him secretly (Erica, Anna, Cassie). Either way, while Xander don't end up being with Buffy, he's ending up being with Cordelia (who is basically the original Lydia and Summer). The popular/mean girl ending up with the nerd boy is it. In the 90s, the nerd boy could pin over the popular girl but never quite got her because he realized he worth better than that or someting. It was always the jerk, popular guy falling in love with the nerdy girl . However, I firmly believe Xander and Cordelia are the blueprint for (and almost every shows I'm gonna quote already talked about Buffy has one of their influence) : Stiles and Lydia, Seth and Summer, Dan and Blair, Sid and Michelle, MG and Lizzie, Naomi and Max etc.... He's the everyman. The normal man who is always questionning his place in the group being the normal one without special skills or powers (Cisco from The Flash, Matt from The Vampire Diaries and basically every shows on The CW with a supernatural setting has one of those).
Rupert Giles : While maybe the most subtle but Giles also had it's own fair share of impact on some characters on TV. Keith Mars was the Rupert Giles of Rob Thomas for Veronica Mars, Hopper from Stranger Things is this to Eleven, Alaric Saltzman is the wallmart version of Giles created by Julie Plec for TVD (as the father figure of Elena) and Legacies (for Hope Mikaelson). Lilith and Sabrina has dynamic similar to Giles and Buffy, while darker since Lilith is manipulative. Luke and Rory dynamic remind me of Giles and Buffy.
The Scooby-Gang : The Scooby-Gang as a whole is something that inspired countless of friend group setting in a supernatural world such as Stranger Things, every supernatural shows on The CW, Teen Wolf etc... We don't need to talk about the details.
How Sabrina Spellman, Kim Possible, Hope Mikaelson, Veronica Mars are not expy of Buffy Summers (and even more than them but oh well). The Scooby-Gang should've a trope named after it, same thing with the character of Giles. The romance between Cordelia and Xander should've also a trope after it and being acknoledge as an influence for shows after it. Like I just saw Lucrecia having Blair Waldorf as an expy (by the way, the character of Veronica Lodge is clearly a Blair Waldorf wallmart version.)
resolved Need mod / admin help to delete pages.
Quotes.Star-LadyIzolMeredithQuill and
Starladyocs.Star-LadyIzolMeredithQuill
And would it be faster / better if admins deleted the TroperWorks ghost-wick heavy namespace
or if I did it myself?
resolved Possibly accidental vandalism
looks like Agent Skyblue M 7 made an edit to Jerk with a Heart of Jerk that chopped like half of the page, including its description: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.JerkWithAHeartOfJerk&page=35#edit43464386
this was most likely an accident or something, but i'm on mobile so i'm unable to revert the change myself, could we get a mod revert to this page?
Edited by worldwidewoomyresolved Edit warring to keep a YMMV item on a main work page
About a month ago ~King Ghost added
Designated Hero—a YMMV item—with improper Example Indentation to Webcomic.The Idaten Deities Know Only Peace.
Yestersday I sent "YMMV" and "indentation" Notifiers to King Ghost, then removed
the entry from the page and combined
it with the entry that was already on YMMV.The Idaten Deities Know Only Peace.
Today King Ghost replied to the notifiers with what clearly showed he didn't read the articles linked in them to understand why what he did was wrong. I replied to the replies, but then I checked the page itself and saw that he had already
put Designated Hero back on the work page, again improperly indented, and with Edit Reasons that also show he doesn't understand what the problem is.
I'd continue to try explaining things to him before coming here, but since there's a rule violation on the page I'd wanted some help with that, since removing it again is pointless if he'll just put it back once again.
Local Odd Squad Connoisseur
resolved Troper that seems to be here just to complain
~katiepricesaunt joined the site last month, but their only contribution is this complainy self-hatted TLP draft
that seems to be taking a potshot at Put on a Bus and has the the troper be needlessly sarcastic in the comments to boot.
I'm not sure if they're just here to complain and be rude, if they're a bandodger of some kind, or what, but I figured I'd report them here and nip things in the bud before they potentially head over to other parts of the site.
resolved Am I Being Too Uptight About This? Anime
This question involves the final episode of one of those rather important older anime series, so if you're interested in Revolutionary Girl Utena and haven't seen it, this spoiler warning is for you.
Here's my question:
"Revolutionary Girl Utena E 39 Someday We Will Shine Together", has an example of Screw This, I'm Outta Here!. At two points in 2024 I deleted one of its two bullets on the basis that the event in question does not meet the trope's "unplanned departure" criteria (the character who leaves pays a visit to another character to say that she's leaving, and is then shown walking away with a suitcase). Now that I think about it, it's a better fit for Won't Do Your Dirty Work.
Recently another editor added this event under Screw This, I'm Outta Here! again. I don't want to be a wonk about this and I'm already uncomfortable with having deleted it twice. The event in question is a key moment in the story and as such, editors like to mention it in as many examples as possible. So if I delete it again the odds are good that someone else will add it back before long.
Am I interpreting this trope too strictly? I've been treating "unplanned" as something along the lines of "spontaneous"—maybe I'm setting the bar too high?
Or maybe I'm second guessing myself too much and what I need is a commented out message to discourage people from adding this to Screw This, I'm Outta Here!?
Edited by ShivaIndisresolved Plot Hole page for Ranma 1/2? Anime
I love Ranma ½, but the series was clearly an episodic comedy that Takahashi was making it up as she goes along, and it shows, because there's quite a few times when the story doesn't make sense or contradicts itself - three major examples are how Ranma is perfectly happy to go back to China in the first 2 chapters, but Shampoo's intro reveals he left China partially to escape Shampoo; how Ranma goes from wanting to investigate potential cures in those same chapters, only for everybody to know that the Nanniichuan can cure Ranma and the other guys like him in the Instant Nanniichuan story; and of course the Instant Nanniichuan temporarily curing Ranma and Genma, but Taro being able to upgrade his curse with water from the Jusenkyo Spring of Drowned Octopus.
But... the Plot Hole page notes that it's a No Examples trope. Does that just mean no adding examples to that page, or does it mean that a Plot Hole page for Ranma 1/2 is forbidden as well?
resolved Spotted a problem that's beyond my powers as an editor
I've discovered that, back in July, someone named Tropers/TMH-Sir-Iron-Vomit made an edit that deleted huge swaths of the Scary Scarecrows page, without an edit reason and seemingly without permission to make such sweeping changes.
Being a good troper, I'd ordinarily try to fix the problem myself, but there's too much gone for me to restore. What should I do?
resolved First post Live Action TV
Hello,do you have any example of a live action tv show or movie where a mother involves herself in a sex for services situation to benefit her kid in some way?Other than those already present on this site i mean
resolved Interesting edits on Gender-Equal Ensemble
On November 1st, 2024, I added an example of this trope from Bad Times at the Battle Royale, a movie that I had put together a couple of years ago, and in December 25th, 2024, I did the same thing for Lights, Camera, Action! Moviemaking Mania. Both examples were also crosswicked to their respective film pages. So far, so good.
Fast-forward to January 14th, 2025 where user Diask changed almost every single instance of "male and female" on the article to something different. Some examples have "males and females" changed to "guys and girls", while it was far more common for instances of "males and females" to be changed to "men and women". All of this without an edit reason. And yes, both of my film examples were caught in the crossfire.
What reason would this user have to change almost every example of "males and females" without specifying exactly why? I'm concerned undoing these changes (especially in regards to both of my film examples) might lead to an edit war and possibly another suspension, hence why I'm bringing this up here first and foremost to see what others think. I myself find it weird to make these sorts of massive changes without prior discussion, especially for an article specifically talking about how the gender ratio between male and female is exactly 50/50 for certain works of art. If it's already correct to use "male and female" to refer to both genders, then why bother changing it?
Before anyone asks, I did check the Discussion tab for Gender-Equal Ensemble to see if I could find anything, but there was nothing. If there was a discussion regarding this elsewhere on the site (particularly a forum thread or two), then please let me know about any such areas so I can take a closer look.
Initial Battle Royale edit on Gender-Equal Ensemble by myself: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.GenderEqualEnsemble&page=23#edit42324893
Initial Lights, Camera, Action! edit on Gender-Equal Ensemble by myself: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.GenderEqualEnsemble&page=23#edit42887001
Edit to Gender-Equal Ensemble by Diask changing almost every instance of "male and female" without prior discussion: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.GenderEqualEnsemble&page=23#edit43089160
resolved Suspicious review thinly veiled as a personal attack.
Troper Biri made a rather suspicious review
of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood that comes off more as complaining than reviewing it. When other viewers asked about their hatred of Fred Rogers himself, they proceeded to go on a rant alleging that he was a homophobe/anti-LGBTQ, a phony, using a Christian agenda to condescend against children, referring to his fandom as "fanbrats" and, most disturbingly, hoping that someone urinates on his grave.
Now, I get that not everyone is going to like something or someone, regardless of popularity, and if all of that's true about him, so be it, but I don't think being so hostile towards someone's fanbase or hoping that their final resting place be desecrated is okay or complies with the site's rules, do you?
Edited by Erin582resolved 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 Unsure of edit to Symbiotes page Print Comic
An editor made an addition to the Characters/MarvelComicsSymbiotes page that's got me scratching my head—stating that when the symbiotes were first introduced "it was said only very specific people can ever bond with [them], much less form an actual partnership with them".
I consider myself a big Venom fan, but the only time I remember that being a thing is in the Venom movies.
The closest I can remember to seeing something along the lines of that statement in the comics is a narration/thought box in 1996's Venom: The Hunger where Eddie Brock muses that symbiotes didn't evolve to be bonded to humans, and that whatever host they did evolve to naturally bond to would have supplied them with the phenethylamine levels they need to survive... but that was retconned a long time ago—even before Donny Cates introduced Knull.
I was equally curious and confused, so I did some digging to see if I could find anything, but all I've come up with are several instances where that's is shown not to be the case—even early on:
- In 1984's Peter Parker, The Spectacular Spider-Man #99, the symbiote that became Venom bonded to a man named Leonard Elkhart to get back to Peter Parker.
- In 1991's Fantastic Four (Vol. 1) #359-360, Dreadface bonds to a random gorilla before taking over the Thing and jumping to the Human Torch, and was where symbiotes were first established as being part of a marauding interstellar empire and prefering strong hosts suitable for facilitating planetary conquests.
- In 1993's Fantastic Four Annual #26, Dreadface takes over a woman named Carrie Burke and consumes her from the inside-out—marking the first time symbiotes are shown doing so to their hosts.
- In 1994's Venom: Seperation Anxiety (Vol. 1) the Venom symbiote bonds to Doctor Zwerling and an unnamed trucker to get back to Eddie Brock.
- In 1995's Venom: Sinner Takes All the Venom symbiote bonds to Anne Weying to save her life, later rebonding to her to save Eddie.
- In the 1995 Planet of the Symbiotes event, it's established that symbiotes are capable of bonding to any host they please, but have a modus operandi of draining their vitality / adrenaline / phenylethanolamine until they die and/or just straight-up consuming them from the inside-out before jumping to a new one—something later seen with the Venom symbiote in 2003's The Spectacular Spider-Man (Vol. 2) and the Mania symbiote in 2003's Venom (Vol. 1).
- In 1996's Venom: The Hunted, two symbiotes that survived the aftermath of the invasion were shown having bonded to otherwise ordinary civilians named George Strickland and Zeena Hodges.
- In 1996's The Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #410, the Carnage symbiote leaves Cletus Kasady to take over John Jameson without issue before jumping to Ben Reilly.
Am I missing something? I will admit it's possible—I haven't read every single Venom-related comic (yet) and it's been a long time since I've read some of them. But if this ever was said to be a thing in the comics, it both contradicts the earlier lore (what little there was, at least) and is completely ignored by the later lore—which wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened at Marvel.
Edited by Arawn999resolved Possible Edit War on YMMV Watson(2025) Live Action TV
Regarding this page, https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/Watson
there was an UnintentionallyUnsympathetic example I removed as audiences and critics noted that Ingrid seemingly set Isaac up to take his spot. I did add reasons for the removal, as Ingrid did not deny her actions and deflected his accusations. In episode she seemed knowingly let him drive while (mildly) intoxicated then turned him in not out of morality but out of benefit to herself.
It was originally added by {{6 »Tropers}} , then re-added again after removal, not sure if that counts as EditWar or not.
As pointed out by the reasoning stated she didn't deter him from driving, she didn't call for an UBER. She waited till he was on the road then called the Police to advise of a drunk driver, including his car model essentially setting him up. As critics and other audiences pointed out she set him up to take his spot, ruining his life and deflecting blame. Making his character sympathetic.
As the example was re-added without reasoning am I able to remove it again.
Edited by Tuvokresolved Typo in the title: Recap/TheChicagoCodeS1E13MikeRyokosRevenge Live Action TV
The Chicago Code S 1 E 13 Mike Ryokos Revenge
The episode title should be "Mike Royko's Revenge," not Ryoko— the reference is to a Chicago Tribune columnist, not a J-Pop singer. But I'm not sure how to fix it as it's in the page title itself.

On the tf2 npcs page the trope Entertainingly Wrong was changed from
to
With the reasoning "Natter, also disputes canon." Firstly the new text is longer and makes what I feel is pointless use of footnotes, but also I fail to see how it disputes canon; Miss Pauling is canonically a lesbian, and when Scout (who was also staring for the 'weird to see naked people in honey' reason) tries to pull her away she says with a slightly awestruck expression
"You go ahead. I'll catch up," which I feel pretty decisively implies that she was Eating the Eye Candy.
So just wanted to check with the chorus before editing it back.
Edited by Biggby