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 That One Boss natter? Videogame
I tried to bring this up in the cleanup thread
, but to no avail.
This was recently added under Sillydillo's entry in ThatOneBoss.Kirby:
- In a June 2022 interview with Nintendo Dream, Shinya Kumazaki admitted that members of the development team often raised complaints about Sillydillo's difficulty... including Kumazaki himself. You know a boss deserves to be on this list when the people who made the game wound up finding him too tough!
Seems like natter to me, but should I remove it?
resolved Edit War on Hijacked Destiny Film
WalkerBRiley deleted this entry under Film in Hijacked Destiny:
- Happens inadvertently in the Star Wars Continuity Reboot. The Skywalker bloodline ultimately ended having accomplished nothing and The Unchosen One Rey, descendant of the very person it was created to destroy, saves the day on her own and rubs salt in the wound by taking their name for herself in an attempt to honor their sacrifice.
resolved "Acceptable" H-games Videogame
Seeing that some H-games do get a page and some don't, I got a bit confused about how content rules actually work regarding those; just how H-games actually do get their pages and it gets decided "okay, those may stay"? Is there a pre-moderation for those? Or it's "take the risk now, get executed by a firing squad later if we don't like it"? And what are the signs that there's a point to even bother, that it may pass?
I have one in mind (it's Overgrown: Genesis), as I genuinely like it (for its story and characters; was genuinely surprised myself at first, I originally only looked for something short which I can translate for practice), but want to make sure before even bothering with drafting, as it's better to throw out an idea than hours or days of writing. I wouldn't put it in sandbox until later anyway, but want to know in advance.
It's set After the End (Zombie Apocalypse, similar to one in Last of Us; albeit backstory is closer to the series rather than the games, despite predating it), and has rather bleak atmosphere; it starts as a story of survivor who was backstabbed and left for dead on the first field operation, but gradually becomes a battle for survival of humanity. Gameplay-wise, it's Survival Horror. It seems that almost entire H-content is avoidable; few scenes happens regardless of the player's actions, but it should be entirely possible to just write without mentioning them.
resolved Old Removal from Lode Runner Videogame
Hi, I was looking through the YMMV section of Lode Runner and noticed that one of the older edits was the removal of a rather large section of content for Surrealism and Nothing is Scarier, with the only reason being that it was "Not YMMV," but it was never relocated anywhere else.
I read through the removed sections and determined it still seemed like an appropriate use of those tropes, however I would like input on whether or not it should go back to YMMV, or if those tropes belong in the main page of tropes? I'm still relatively new to this so any input on this would be a big help.
Edit: I made the changes myself after some light research on page editing. This can be disregarded.
Edited by MidnightRun99resolved Does Editing on A Non-Banned Person's Behalf Count as Ban Evasion?
If a non-banned person proposes edits in an offsite document but doesn't make the edits themself, then is it alright for someone else to make the edits for them as long as they credit them?
resolved Broken Base and other Recent Examples in MMOs? Videogame
So today, RuneScape (specifically Runescape 3) got an update that is fairly controversial, regarding the identity of a fairly major NPC, and I'm wondering how to address it on the trope page; RS itself has been out for over twenty years, but the update is literally not even a day old. Do I add a Broken Base example now, or do I have to wait six months from today (January 17th, 2024) to do it?
resolved Plan succeeds despite setback Film
Is there any trope where:
- Characters plan something
- The plan is disrupted one way or another, in a truly dramatic fashion
- Yet their original goal is still achieved, despite the fact the plan itself failed entirely
resolved Problematic Wall of Text example Web Original
I originally raised this on the Wall of Text cleanup thread
, but it's had no reply for two weeks, so I decided to raise it here.
On the YMMV page for Crash Thompson, there's this lengthy sub-bullet listed under Broken Base:
- Crash's tendency to put certain albums at #1 on his "Worst of" lists that others felt weren't nearly as deserving of the spot as others. Many were surprised that Doug Walker's Wall parody album was even included on the list at all considering very few people even cared about it and many saw the segment as little more then an excuse for Crash to vent about his own disillusionment with Channel Awesome (which he applied to in the past), likewise in the "Worst of 2020" list some thought Crash was stretching by calling the "Living the Dream" music video for Five Finger Death Punch as being "anti-masker", and him trying to use a select few Youtube comments as an excuse to condemn the whole band as being rather unfair, not to mention Crash's repeated insults towards the band's own fans over the years in his reviews of their albums has led some to believe that he just wanted an excuse to rant about the band again and that accusing them of causing deaths was going too far, not to mention impossible to factually prove (plus seeing blaming a band for something that a few of their fans do as rather unfair), not to mention Crash slagging the band for their views (or at least what he thought they were) and penalizing them for it by putting them at #1 came off as hugely hypocritical to some considering he put Deftones "Ohms" on his "best" list despite one of their members (guitarist Stephen Carpenter) outright revealing himself to be not only an anti-vaxxer/anti-masker but a flat-earther as well (in addition to a whole bunch of other crazy conspiracy theory nonsense), yet Crash didn't penalize their album in the same way. For what it's worth, Crash himself later admitted in one of the "Rock Coliseum" videos that he regretted going as hard on both albums as he did, admitting that even if they were bad they weren't really worth all the anger he directed at them.
Originally, I was aiming to heavily gut this example due to its reliance on weasel words and what I initially interpreted as reaching for complaining via an appeal to hypocrisy (an appeal to hypocrisy which isn't even accurate even with the later context, considering that Crash actually did speak out against Carpenter in the same "best of" video). Other than maybe removing the attempt at drawing a double standard concerning Ohms, I'm wondering how exactly this can be trimmed to be easier on the eyes and less complain-y, if not cut completely.
Edited by Akriloth2160resolved Trivia relevancy on Voltron: Legendary Defender Western Animation
Hello,
I was doing a Wiki Walk and i found this trivia about Voltron: Legendary Defender:
-"The Klance (Keith/Lance) fanfiction "Dirty Laundry" had the second most kudos of all fanfiction on Archive of Our Own. (It is second only to a Groot parody fic.)"
I was wondering about the relevancy of this information and if it should be removed since it's not really about the show itself and seem oddly specific to me.
What are your thoughts on this?
resolved Permission to restore Unintentionally Unsympathetic entry on YMMV/GenV Live Action TV
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.GenV&page=5#edit46057001
I added an Unintentionally Unsympathetic entry regarding one character’s redemption arc.
- Unintentionally Unsympathetic: Cate in Season 2, where both she and Sam are given redemption arcs. By the end of Season 1, after having disregarded her friends' wishes once again, Cate (alongside Sam) led a school massacre to purge God U of humans, regardless of if they were complicit in the Woods. The Boys Season 4 had her eagerly pledge loyalty to Homelander and round up dissidents to put in internment camps. However, the school massacre and the two's commitment to Supe Supremacy are either not mentioned or glossed over in Season 2. Sam felt legitimate doubt and hesitation during the campus massacre and needed his emotions wiped to continue on. After his emotions came back in Season 2 and the ensuing regret impacted him, he worked to improve himself, took responsibility for his actions, and gave Emma a sincere apology. Whereas Cate showed no doubt at any point during the anti-human killing spree (she coldly brushed off Sam's concerns about innocent people dying before offering to wipe his emotions to "help" him) and for the first half of Season 2, refused to accept that anything was her fault and blamed everyone but herself for her misfortune. She only ever acknowledged wrongdoing by episode 7 after she found out Marie could heal her. Yet, throughout the entirety of Season 2, she never gives the gang a sincere apology that she doesn't diminish by then bringing up how she didn't deserve the "murder attempt" on her, which was just Jordan protecting Marie from Cate in self-defense after the latter tried to control Marie into giving up information on Starlight. All in all, Cate came across as caring more about what she did to her friends and wanting back in the group than regretting any of her other terrible crimes, making her redemption feel very much unearned. This feeling wasn't helped by the show also seeming to inexplicably equate Marie lifting her friends off the ground for a few minutes in an attempt to protect them from Cipher (whose puppeteering powers they had no defense against) to the several atrocities Cate committed by abusing her powers.
It was removed on two separate occasions (sorry, I wasn’t aware of the rules. That’s my fault) for these reasons:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.GenV&page=5#edit46056103
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=YMMV.GenV&page=5#edit46059563
When they came to rescue her in episode 5, Cate was happy but she didn’t actually say that SHE did anything wrong. She just said she was shocked they came “after everything.” Her telling Sam they “hurt people” seemed more like an attempt to get him to back off wanting her to erase his emotions, which she certainly would have done if her powers were working right (she even did it once without his consent earlier this season). And her promise to not use her powers on her friends again doesn’t hold much water since 1.) It’s easy to say that and commit to it when she doesn’t actually HAVE powers at the time, and 2.) She was already given MANY chances in season 1 by the gang to stop doing just that which she didn’t take. It also doesn’t help that she’s guilty of several instances of sexual assault. There were the guards in season 1 she could have easily just put to sleep. And there was arguably her sexual relationship with Golden Boy where she repeatedly wiped certain memories that would’ve made him rightfully repulsed by her. If he had encountered Cate during his maddened rampage, he surely would have given her the same treatment he gave Brink. The Boys universe (rightfully) seems to treat sexual assault as one crime you can’t come back from, as demonstrated by Homelander, Deep, Tek-Knight, Firecracker, and Rufus remaining villains. Not to mention how Cate played along with Firecracker’s transphobic smear campaign against Jordan in episode 4. After Jordan called BS on Cate saying she was “forced” to do it, Cate’s only response was to falsely claim Jordan “tried to murder her and bragged about it in front of the whole school.” Overall, I feel Cate’s a similar case to Lamplighter and Victoria Neuman, who are listed under the Unintentionally Unsympathetic trope over on The Boys. Especially since she didn’t give a genuine apology to anyone and just suddenly seemed to stop hating humans.
Thoughts?
resolved Is the Classic Disney Shorts Characters page locked? Western Animation
I was just trying to add some tropes to the Characters page for Classic Disney Shorts, specifically to the folder for the one-shot character Joey the Kangaroo, but whenever I try to save my changes, I'm instead booted to this website's main page. I double-checked my messages, but I don't see any messages about being banned, I'm signed in, so I don't know what's wrong. Is this page under protection, perhaps?
If it helps, this was the rewritten entry I was trying to save:
A baby kangaroo that Donald decides to adopt as his son for some reason.
- Aw, Look! They Really Do Love Each Other: While Joey gets thoroughly into trouble, and ends up putting Donald through the ringer, the short emphasizes that he's not malicious, but just an energetic and mischievous little kid. In fact he cares about Donald a great deal, and he showers Donald with affection at several points. And then there's the climax of the episode, where he thinks Donald has been eaten by a bear, and he goes berserk in his efforts to rescue him..
- Badass Adorable: An adorable infant kangaroo... whose reaction to seeing his adoptive father Donald seemingly be eaten by a full-grown black bear is to beat seven shades of snot out of it to save him.
- Batter Up!: After the initial jab with a red-hot fire poker and a thorough drubbing with his kicks, Joey grabs a handy baseball bat and chases the "bear" around the house with it.
- Badly Battered Babysitter: The central point of comedy of his short is that he's rambunctious and a lot stronger than Donald anticipated, so Donald ends up being run off of his feet. And that's before Donald makes the poorly judged decision to play a joke on Joey by pretending that his bearskin rug is not only a real bear, but one that manages to eat Donald.
- Boxing Kangaroo: He's only an infant kangaroo, but he's already a skilled pugilist, as shown when he attacks the "bear" (really Donald inside of a bearskin rug).
- Hates Baths: At one point in "Daddy Duck", Donald attempts to give Joey a bath, and he is not thrilled at the prospect, using his feet and his tail to brace himself so he can't be forced into the water. It is subtly implied that Joey's refusal stems from the fact the water is too cold, as he's shown dipping his own elbow into it in imitation of Donald and then shuddering in disgust.
resolved No Title
Hoo boy, Bowdler.Bowdlerise is a mess.
- Is there any reason the namespace is Bowdler rather than SelfDemonstrating?
- The main self-demonstration is altering the page to make Bowdlerisation and Media Watchdogs seem positive, rather than actually censoring anything.
- The page didn't receive the "removal of spoiler tags above the examples line" update that the main Bowdlerise page did, which is both inconsistent with the main page and a violation of our spoiler-tag policy. The page quote and image caption probably need to be dumped entirely, as there is no way to make them work on a "proper" self-demonstration without including spoiler tags.
With that in mind, I've created Sandbox.Bowdlerise as a better example of self-demonstration.
Edited by SeptimusHeapresolved No Title
honeyishrunkmyself is running a find-and-replace from "space" to "spaaaaaace". Also removing the word "egregious" entirely in the style of the IANMTU removal.
resolved Regarding conflicting external sources... Web Original
Hello. It took me a while to get my mind on about this, but I would like to politely ask question to get help.
It's about Fire Emblem on Forums - I was trying to do a little editting as can be shown here.
However, after than there is this edit, which says that the GM actually said that the game has not been completed.
After a bit of reviewing, I would assume they're right, I just realize that there are two contradicting possible external sources for this.
First, the source that came from the hub page
shows the game as completed, however, the actual game itself is indeed not yet marked as completed
. I think while it's external source and I can't help about it right now, I would like to mention the fact that a contradiction that has confused me was indeed present.
I'm sorry for having to point this, it might seem minor but it has mislead me into typing error. Forgive me for the incorrect edit, but the troper "IcyTea" and the person who told them are actually correct, so I'll just respect and accept their edit decision for now.
So the only problem here is trying to confirm. The latter edit is more preferable, right? I'm aware that I cannot re-edit it back because that would been an edit war that can be punished. I'm just unsure, and apologizes if this case wasn't that simple. I promise that the intent is to clarify and help. Thank you for understanding.
resolved Character pages - navbox 'index' links and crossreferencing? Print Comic
Are there any guidelines for start of page navbox 'indexing' (the cross-referencing wikilink kind, rather than [[index]] tagging) on Character pages, for the cases where a work or franchise has a huge number of characters across a large number of sub-pages?
Looking at Characters.X Men Arakko (and the other X-Men Characters pages), I count 19 lines of links in the navbox before the page itself starts, mapping out approximately 50 different X-Men character pages. Presumably that also needs to be updated on all 50(ish) of the character pages any time it changes.
That's not an exhaustive list either, as it doesn't directly link to some of the single-character pages or the works-specific pages for particular comic books.
Most of these characters range across the wider franchise, appearing in multiple Marvel Universe comics and webcomics, so are not specific to any one comic series and their Characters page names don't mirror a particular works page.
(It's also using WMG tagging, which I’m not used to seeing outside of WMG pages, but I’m assuming that's not a problem?)
Looking at other sprawling franchises -
- Characters.Star Wars takes a different approach, with a single link back to the top-level page - e.g. as seen on Characters.Star Wars High Republic Era Jedi.
- Characters.Star Trek uses a much shorter list of links on subpages, mapping back to the relevant series (e.g. on Characters.Star Trek Deep Space Nine Federation And Bajor)- but its characters tend to be series-specific so it doesn't have quite the same structural challenge.
Is this approach fine 'as is', should it be condensed/removed in a similar way to Star Trek & Star Wars, or can it be streamlined in a different way (e.g. hide it in a folder to save space)?
Thanks!
EDIT: Edited to fix terminology and make navbox references clearer.
Edited by Mrph1resolved AuthorAppeal - reusing characters? Print Comic
I'm seeing a few examples where tropers have added the Author Appeal trope because writers have reused familiar / favourite characters in shared-universe comics. For example, from the new ComicBook.Defenders Beyond works page:
- Author Appeal: The new Defenders roster is comprised almost entirely of characters Ewing's either created (Taaia) or written before, from Mighty Avengers and The Ultimates to Loki: Agent of Asgard.
As per the trope page, Author Appeal is "a particular gimmick or kink is so widespread and prominent that it is interpreted as a specific reason the creator actually produced the work".
I can see how that might be applied to an attribute of the characters - although that seems to veer closer to Creator Thumbprint unless it goes into kink territory.
But simply reusing existing characters, whether or not the writer created them, doesn't feel like it fits.
I'd originally asked the same question on the discussion page for the trope itself, but didn't get an answer - flagging it here just to ensure I'm not misunderstanding before I delete someone's work (I don't see a more appropriate trope to move it to?).
Thanks!
Edited by Mrph1resolved Bad Sequelitis Entry on YMMV Total War Warhammer III Videogame
A while back, there was an Edit War ATT concerning the Sequelitis entry on Total War: Warhammer III. See here
. I don't disagree that it was Edit Warring, but what got lost in that discussion is that the offending entry is genuinely bad, violates a number of rules and is very outdated compared to the current state of the game. For context here is the current entry as it stands on that page.
- Sequelitis: It was very clear that the team developing this game and the team maintaining the previous game either disagreed heavily or just weren't coordinating as much of the fixes, patches, updates, and design evolutions that made the previous game so popular were not present at the launch of this one. The game shifted back in favor of things that were either patched out of or specifically avoided in the previous game resulting in a launch that many fans agree was a major step backwards.
- "Poorly Optimized" is an understatement when you see the litany of programming errors that caused a lot of vitriol among the players
. It's widely theorized that the core of the game was forked off an older build of the previous game before the big Potion of Speed update and thus never received most of the multitude of fixes, patches, and updates present in that patch and subsequent ones.
- The skill and tech trees for many factions are poorly-executed, with many technologies or skills that range from underwhelming (+1% chance for a plague to spread for Nurgle) to completely useless (Leadership bonuses for an Unbreakable unit). Several skills and technologies also don't do what the description says they do, making it hard to know what bonus you're actually getting. On top of this, some factions have their unique bonuses and unit abilities gated behind technologies (such as Tzeentch's Teleport stance, Kislev's Ice Court mechanic, and the spellcasting abilities of every Greater Daemon, with each spell having its own technology), something that was specifically hated about the Greenskins in the first game and removed from them with a series of reworks in the second. Patch 1.2 focused heavily on beefing up factions' tech trees, mitigating this.
- While they raised the level cap for Heroes and Lords to level 50 they didn't necessarily give them any more skills, meaning some heroes can get more skill points than they can spend; Iridescent Horrors with the Lore of Tzeentch, for example, can only spend 47 due to having mutually-exclusive skills, and even if they didn't would only have 49. This was previously only a problem with mods and those modders had solved the problem early in the first game's lifecycle.
- Many players and reviewers alike agree the game's UI is both less appealing and harder to read due to the overemphasis on the color red compared to the previous game's more vibrant interface. A common source of frustration is that the colors for many different functions are effectively the same, making it impossible to quickly distinguish if a settlement is, for example, building a structure or demolishing it.
- The campaign that launched with the game, Realm of Chaos, doubled down on the elements players hated about the second game's Vortex campaign (particularly the time pressure and the random invasions) without making many improvements, ignoring well-received diversification of faction objectives and stories from the previous game's DLC packs. See Scrappy Mechanic for more details on why the Reign of Chaos campaign mechanics are especially loathed. The reception of this campaign was so bad Creative Assembly had to delay their first planned update and rush out Patch 1.1 specifically to address it.
- The series has long had a reputation for amazing mods that expand and improve on the game in a myriad of ways. This game did not launch with Steam Workshop support and went without for two months until the 1.1 update.
- "Poorly Optimized" is an understatement when you see the litany of programming errors that caused a lot of vitriol among the players
And here is my critique of this entry and its sub-bullets, breaking it down by the elements.
1. For starters this entry really shouldn't be broken down into multiple sub-bullets. They give the appearance of a Wall of Text. A single bullet that's Clear, Concise, Witty is preferable.
2. ""Poorly Optimized" is an understatement" etc.: The video link can stay but the words inside it should be rewritten and the rest of the paragraph should be cut. One half is hyperbolic Word Cruft with unnecessary italics, the other is pure speculation.
3. "The skill and tech trees for many factions" etc.: The points can stand but the bracketed text should be moved into Notes to make the paragraph more concise. Also, the text may need to be put into past tense as the subbullet itself admits CA have been working on this, though I think it should go as I would rather keep that element for last.
4. "While they raised the level cap for Heroes and Lords" etc.: The point is valid, but IMO we can reduce this to a single sentence or even a fragment of one. e.g. CA raised the level cap for Lords and Heroes to 50, but some characters don't have enough room for that many skill points.
5. "Many players and reviewers alike agree the game's UI" etc.: Can delete. The point is valid but they directly addressed it in a later patch which means it should go under Author's Saving Throw. At most a fragment of a sentence like "issues with the game's interface due to poor colour balance and excessive use of bright red".
6. "The campaign that launched with the game" etc.: Valid but needs compression and to remove the reference to Scrappy Mechanic which is considered bad form. A single sentence should do it.
7. "The series has long had a reputation" etc.: Delete. Yes it was frustrating but it's been addessed.
So with all these in mind, a revised version of the entry as I see it would go something like this:
- Sequelitis: At launch, the game was very divisively and even negatively received for feeling like a step backwards after the much-lauded final state of Total War: Warhammer II. Reasons for this include a large host of glitches, bugs and programming errors
that made it feel unpolished, complaints about poor choices for skillnote Ranging from underwhelming (+1% chance for a plague to spread for Nurgle) to completely useless (Leadership bonuses for an Unbreakable unit). and technology treesnote Some factions had their unique bonuses and unit abilities gated behind technologies, such as Tzeentch's Teleport stance, Kislev's Ice Court mechanic, and the spellcasting abilities of every Greater Daemon, with each spell having its own technology. for certain races, CA raising the level cap for Lords and Heroes to 50 but not accounting for characters who didn't have enough skills to accommodate 49 skill points, issues with the game's interface due to poor colour balance and excessive use of bright red, not launching with built-in support for Game Mods like its predecessors did, which might have mitigated some people's complaints about it, and worst of all, a base game campaign that was almost universally derided for loathsome mechanics, an irritating amount of time pressure and homogenising the storylines and campaign goals of the factions featured, making people who hated the how the Vortex campaign in the second game started out before DLC packs brought diversification of faction objectives and stories cry, "Oh, No... Not Again!" Fortunately, CA have since worked hard to address all these issues throught game patches and their first DLC pack, which has led to the game getting a much more positive reception.
Note this is not the final form I would put it in, I just needed to make something for this, but I also wanted to achieve consensus before I posted it. Thoughts?
Edited by MinisterOfSinisterresolved No Title Film
Considering the ban on potholing trope names in example lists, should we make a separate self-demonstrating page for Attack of the The Eye Creatures in order to maintain the "the the" joke?
We have precedent, as Gadsby received a self-demonstrating page for this reason.
resolved No Title Live Action TV
It seems someone's been adding examples pertaining to Selfie at the top of example lists, even if the lists are already alphabetized. While there's little risk of it happening with Selfie again for obvious reasons, whatever troper did this might do this again with some other series in the future.

Would there be any objections if the FF7 fanfic recs was moved to "Fanfic Recs / Compilation Of Final Fantasy VII", with redirects from the other Compilation titles? It would make a lot more sense given that the fics encompass much of the Compilation, not just FF7 itself. I had asked
, but no response.
Edited by eagle108