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 Questionable comment Music
I found this entry on Irony.Music:
- Luther Vandross is known for singing some of the most well-known R&B love songs of the 1980s and 1990s. He himself, however, never married, never had children, and never even had any known romantic relationships with women (it's possible he could have been gay).
The part in bold seems to be speculation on a real-life person's personal life. Is this the kind of thing that's allowed?
resolved What do I go to change the title of a work page? Anime
I'm considering of changing the main title of "Literature.Bakemonogatari" to "Literature.MonogatariSeries" since Bakemonogatari is only the title for the first arc/season of the series (and the series itself is a bit of a Long Runner with multiple different names for each arc/season and Bakemonogatari is only one of them). It makes more sense for the main title to be the Monogatari Series instead.
However, I'm not exactly sure where I can propose to change the main title. How do I do this?
Edited by RuckusHeartsresolved Fire Emblem edit war
- Dimitri from Fire Emblem: Three Houses. He is meant to be the closest to a traditional Fire Emblem lord. But even without his Sanity Slippage over the timeskip, some fans think that his heroic traits have setbacks that make him the very opposite of what those traits should make him. Even though his Ax-Crazy mindset for the first half of Part II is supposed to be wrong, many think that it is sloppily done because the cataclyst for it is him believing Edelgard caused the Tragedy of Duscur through small steps that come across as illogical, and that it happened when she was only 13 years old which is something he never thinks twice about until Cornelia drops some hints that leads him off from suspecting Edelgard. And even though he does eventually make attempts to better himself and atone for what he has done, it's seen as him being Easily Forgiven despite how mean he had been to his friends up until that point and that someone close to him such as Rodrigue had to die for it to happen. His overall goals is probably the biggest point against him, which is to keep Fódlan as it was before the war started and make changes in a slow but steady pace to prevent unnecessary sacrifices or upsetting the people, since he thinks the nobility and crests still have values. Many find this to be in incredibly poor taste when so much about the game's story is about showing how the current system has made Fódlan into the Crapsack World it is that brings harm to both nobles and commoners and is the exact thing Edelgard started the war against. And even if Dimitri were to install changes, who's to say they won't just as easily be undone by a future ruler, setting the world back to what it was before the game started? Even if that might happen somewhere down the line in every lords' ending, it is the easiest for Dimitri's reforms to be undone since it was so easy for him to install them, as opposed to the other endings where radical reforms are introduced and therefore is gonna be harder.
Ruderruby added this, Jamesjamm deleted citing "As another troper explained when removing this from the YMMV page, this is misuse as the only truly villainous acts are the Sanity Slippage the entry acknowledges is portrayed as wrong, and since Three Houses runs on Grey And Gray Morality, none of the lords can be said to be designated heroes since they’re antagonists on routes that aren’t theirs", Ruderruby added it back without explanation.
Thoughts on the matter?
resolved Dramatic Irony requiring knowledge from supplemental materials?
I found a Dramatic Irony entry on one of the Cyberpunk 2077 characters' subpages, related to Adam Smasher, the final boss. Explaining the entry would be complex and full of spoilers, but in summary the entry explains the character says a line which implies he doesn't know something about himself which is explained in Cyberpunk: Edgerunners Mission Kit. Cyberpunk: Edgerunners Mission Kit is an add-on for the Cyberpunk RED tabletop RPG which serves to connect Cyberpunk RED, the Cyberpunk: Edgerunners anime (itself a Cyberpunk 2077 prequel), and Cyberpunk 2077.
Dramatic Irony is about situations where the audience knows something an in-univers character doesn't. My issue is: since this is technically another work, does it qualify? Not to mention the players of the videogame need to also have played a prequel tabletop RPG, which itself is another prequel's sequel, and I'm not sure most 2077 players would also have played the RPG (videogames and tabletop RPGs don't exactly have the same player base). And last, said RPG add-on was released months after the last major Cyberpunk 2077 patch. For all those reasons, a non-negligible part of Cyberpunk 2077 audience probably didn't get the information needed to notice the Dramatic Irony.
In general, does it count as Dramatic Irony if the audience must know other parts of the extended universe (especially since they are another medium) to notice it? Is it really Dramatic Irony if you must know about the whole extended universe to get it is supposed to be Dramatic Irony?
Edited by Psychopompos007resolved Mebrouk is writing ROCEJ violations... again
I found this
on Scenery Gorn's Real Life page, calling the Gaza strip scenery gorn and calling Nehtanyahu a genocidal monster. I recognized that this was Mebrouk, the same guy from the Your Terrorists Are Our Freedom Fighters image debacle in May that ended with that trope getting NRLEP'd. Looks like he's back to his old tricks - he added Aaron Bushnell's suicide note
to the Self-Immolation quotes page, and, while not Hamas related, an iffy example
on No-Holds-Barred Beatdown Real Life.
resolved 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 Edit war on MyRealDaddy.WesternAnimation
There seems to be an
edit
war
over
the inclusion of the following paragraph on MyRealDaddy.Western Animation:
- Ever want to get a bunch of Gargoyles fans riled up? Just bring up the idea that Greg Weisman isn't really the show's creator — Michael Reaves is. They'll go utterly off-the-deep-end bananas (as they have on this site) — even though the show in fact has no official "created by" credit, and the topic is hotly debated within the screenwriting community. Of course, Weisman is undoubtedly the show's post-series biggest booster, and pitched an early goofy comic version of Gargoyles that's unrecognizable compared to the finished show. However, Reaves actually wrote the series' first five episodes that set everything up, and most of the series' subsequent high points. (Weisman himself did not receive a writing credit on any episode until the dire spin-off/continuation Gargoyles: The Goliath Chronicles.) In fact, virtually everything that people remember and enjoy about Gargoyles was Reaves' work. Wiseman, meanwhile, who genuinely did love Gargoyles and was involved on the production end from the get-go (and did give notes on Reaves' work and participate in story meetings), hyped himself as the show's creator at every opportunity. Reaves also labelled himself as a co-creator of the show, but in a much more low-key way. The reality is much more complex — and Weisman's role is unquestionably a crucial one — but under Writers Guild practices, Reaves would be credited as the creator of Gargoyles, and Wiseman (with no writing credits whatsoever on the original 65-episode run) would have no claim to a creator credit. (Non-prime-time animation, however, is not covered by the Guild.).
Note that I haven't seen the show myself, so I don't have any insight over whether the example is valid.
The involved parties are Demona Fan X and breadalbane.
Edited by costanton11resolved I'm not sure if Visions of Mana counts as an example of Screwed by the Network...
I saw someone added the trivia to the game
in light of the studio that developed it getting shut down upon release. From my understanding, SbtN is for works that have been negatively affected as a result of Executive Meddling and such. Thus, Visions can only work as an example if Studio Ouka's closing will have a direct negative impact on its sales, marketing, etc. which is too early to tell. Because as far as everyone knows at this point, the game itself has been completed and polished before the studio's closure. Is there a more appropriate trivia for this? I don't think Creator Killer works either, because from the information gathered, the reason NetEase closed Studio Ouka had no direct connection to the game, just another corporate cost cutting measure.
EDIT: Someone else deleted the entry shortly after I brought the subject here, citing no confirmation. That said, everything seems to point towards a forthcoming closure as noted by reports
.
resolved TRS crowner
There is an open crowner for If You Call Before Midnight Tonight, It Works Itself, andForYourPeopleByYourPeople at the Trope Repair Shop. Click here
if you'd like to join the discussion.
resolved About Mickey Mouse's non-Disney works... Western Animation
Hey! It's me again with yet another Mickey question
!
So in the franchise page for Mickey Mouse, there's a section about non-Disney works, which are about derivative works made after (the 1928 versions of) the mouse became public domain. The page itself indexes the Disney-made works over the non-Disney ones (which I completely understand and I support for them to still being the only ones indexed there), but since there are now many non-Disney Mickey works that have pages (Mickey's Mouse Trap, The Vanishing of S.S. Willie, Captain Willie, Infestation: Origins, Inverse Ninjas VS. The Public Domain, Mousetrapped and the many pre-2024 works that feature Mickey's 1928 designs, such as Suicide Mouse and Mickey Mouse in Vietnam), should we make a separate page for them to be indexed so it would be easier to search for and find them in other pages instead of going to the "Related" tab in each of the works' pages and then go to Mickey's franchise page to search for one work? Maybe something like Non-Disney Works/Mickey Mouse, or something?
Edited by UzarNaimBer15resolved Fridge Brilliance with Character's AssCaps Style
Can I make a section for "Spider-Man Into the Spider-Verse's fridge brilliance
's section with Character's Ass Caps style?
Note: Perhaps if it were allowed, I would give a character's Ass Caps style from another fridge's page.
In order to prevent like I've been happened before
It would look like this (as an example from Wreck-It Ralph - fridge brilliance, of course):
Ralph
- On the topic of Ralph's backstory in his game, there's some brilliance there in itself. Since Ralph is apparently only trying to destroy the apartment because its construction destroyed his home, well,
resolved Edit on Jesse Ventura
I noticed that somebody made quite substantial edits on the Wrestling.Jesse Ventura page. Basically, on every mention that Ventura was Governor of Minnesota, "Governor" is replaced with "Premier" (even though the name of the office is Governor) and claims without proof that Ventura is a Canadian citizen (even though he was born in Minnesota). I though about editing it myself, but the changes are so substantial that I thought it would be easier to ask a mod to take a look at it and revert it wholesale, as I don't see any proof of these claims.
resolved Reporting an Edit War on the ymmv page of Fire Emblem: Three Houses
User Lord Twibill
appears to be attempting an edit war on the YMMV page of Fire Emblem: Three Houses
.
Back in late July they added an example of the game having a broken aesop. I believed their example as-written didn't satisfy the standards of a broken aesop (for one, I don't believe it breaks the aesop at all), so I deleted it, explaining my reasons why in the edit reason.
In response they sent me a VERY long private message explaining their viewpoint, but I got the impression them and I had an irreconcilable interpretation of the game (for one, they view all the characters as being horrible people when without the influence of the player avatar) and that attempting to discuss it over private messages would be a waste of time, so I encouraged them instead to bring it up to public discussion to get more viewpoints than just our own.
They did not do this, and yesterday sent me another pm asking for further discussion. This time I outright told them I thought our reads were irreconcilable and reiterated they should publicly raise a discussion to see how others felt. I then went on to disagree with some of their own interpretations of Fire Emblem: Fates. I criticized the game's morality quite harshly, but I avoided criticizing Lord Twibill themself.
In response to that, they sent me a pair of rather insulting and threatening pms, telling me I was being childish and that they were going to just re-add the example whether I liked it or not, and then threatened me not to delete it again or they'd bring the mods into it. At no point did I find any evidence that Lord Twibill raised a discussion on the accuracy of the example, so I decided to bring the situation up to folks here before things could get any more out of hand.
Edited by Raxisresolved Did I partially edit warred?
I'm concerned that I accidentally committed a partial edit war on Ys X: Nordics
- Here
, I made an edit regarding that game's PC port
- Another troper
reworded it as "With an additional PC port"
- I reverted
part of it so while the rest of the previous troper's edit is intact, I changed the wording back to "along with a PC port"
I have no excuse if I did something wrong so I'm self-reporting.
resolved Cold Duke of the North trope? Literature
Since really getting into Korean webtoons in the last two years, there's a certain character archetype that shows up in like 90% of romantic fantasy novels and I'm surprised it isn't here yet so maybe I've just missed it. Its become so common that people have even made jokes memes about him and different series have started calling the trope out even when playing it straight.
That man is the Cold Duke of the North! He has short black hair cut, red or blue eyes (and if they're red its distinct to either himself or his family), and a love for black clothing with bits of jewelry hanging off. He is also known for being an *incredibly* well-built hunk of man meat and yes we the reader will always see him with his shirt undone or off at some point to make sure we know how stacked he is. Despite appearing emotionless to everyone around him, his heart will thaw usually on first sight when he sees our lovely lady protagonist, who he will remark is "interesting." The guy has a tragic past and a reputation as a cold-hearted butcher of the battlefield, and his northern domain is akin to Winterfell in both temperature and regular monster invasions which he has take point in fending off for the rest of the Empire. His cold demeanor means a significant chunk of the story involves communication problems in the central relationship with the female lead that any normal person could resolve through a five second conversation. Also it means the vast majority of stories starring one of these fellows as the male romantic lead features a contract relationship at the center of it that everyone thinks the female lead is bonkers for entering into because of his fearsome reputation.
Do we not have this a trope that already covers this specific main character archetype?
resolved Improper namespace
General.Sanctuaryverse has a General/ namespace that I’ve never seen used on any other page. Looking at the page itself, it looks like a Main/ page. EDIT: never mind, there’s already another query about this on the previous page. Disregard.
Edited by loserswithwifiresolved BaseBreakingCharacter EditWar on FFXIV Page. Videogame
Recently Final Fantasy XIV released it's newest expansion, and there has been division about the main focal point character for it, Wuk Lamat. Already people have jumped to adding her as a Base-Breaking Character (someone even put her on The Scrappy about two weeks after the expansion came out before it was removed), despite the expansion only being out for barely a month as of now despite the rules stating otherwise.
Walker B Riley recently added the entry after it was already removed, so I removed it and mentioned how the expansion was new and even if true needs to be discussed first because of how polarizing the subject is, but instead he went ahead and readded it to the YMMV page with the following: "Stop removing her from the list. Wuk Lamat is the single most basebreaking character introduced since Zenos."
Even if the BBC entry is not needing the 6 month period cause its an expansion, they still readded a removed entry without going to discussion. The entry itself is doesn't work well even if it is okay to add her as it is short and barely explains anything: "Wuk Lamat has divided the fanbase in two with her portrayal either praised or hated. The consensus on both sides is she did receive more story involvement that was potentially necessary."
Edited by keyblade333

There was a page move request
that I fulfilled that moved a page from an incorrect namespace of FridgeLogic/ to Fridge/, and I added "Fridge Logic" as the header for the single entry.
~constanton11 edited the header
to Fridge Brilliance instead, I assume this was an oversight since most Fridge/ pages start with "Fridge Brilliance"
Why I'm bringing this to ATT (besides wanting to avoid an edit war which could be hashed out privately) is that I'm not so certain myself if a Fridge/ page can have a Fridge Logic entry alone or if it should be moved to Headscratchers/ or merged back to YMMV.
Edited by BlackFaithStar