[002]
JBK405
Current Version
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
RepairDontRespond. It is Wiki policy that, if you see something you feel does not fit the trope, you remove it. Whether or not you yourself added it is irrelevent. This is not my opinion, this is a \'\'rule\'\' here. ConversationsOnTheMainPage are actually something we are specifically told to avoid.
to:
RepairDontRespond. It is Wiki policy that, if you see something you feel does not fit the trope, you remove it. Whether or not you yourself added it is irrelevent. This is not my opinion, this is a \\\'\\\'rule\\\'\\\' here. ConversationInTheMainPage are actually something we are specifically told to avoid.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
The point of a Wiki in general, and the policies on this particular wiki, is that we can fix errors when encountered, and that sometimes includes telling somebody \
to:
The point of a Wiki in general, and the policies on this particular wiki, is that we can fix errors when encountered, and that sometimes includes telling somebody \\\"Sorry, you made a mistake.\\\" I\\\'ve made plenty of my own mistakes, I\\\'ve deleted some myself when I realized this and I have had other people delete them if I never noticed it was an error, and though I was rarely happy to be told I was wrong, I accept that what I did was against the policy of this web-site (again, I point to the conversation \\\'\\\'on this very page\\\'\\\' where I am willing to talk about the Fridge Logic example, and which I stopped re-adding not because I have been convinced I was wrong, but because wiki policy says it does not belong).
I will continue to delete {{natter}} as it appears on this page not because I disagree with what is being said, but because it is natter. If there is a legitimate trope that the information should be placed in that is great, and MrDeath made a good point that it could probably be fit somewhere under one of the continuity tropes, but if it remains as natter it will be deleted as natter. This is not me saying \\\"STFU\\\" and I\\\'m sorry if you interpret it that way, but this is TV Tropes policy.
EDIT: Uncle Ghost, I was thinking that maybe Ryloth and some other examples should be listed under the InNameOnly trope, but I\\\'m not sure if it exactly matches the intent of that trope. Ryloth is the previously-established Ryloth in name only, without its defining features, as are some other planets, species, characters and events. Wuuld that fit?
I will continue to delete {{natter}} as it appears on this page not because I disagree with what is being said, but because it is natter. If there is a legitimate trope that the information should be placed in that is great, and MrDeath made a good point that it could probably be fit somewhere under one of the continuity tropes, but if it remains as natter it will be deleted as natter. This is not me saying \\\"STFU\\\" and I\\\'m sorry if you interpret it that way, but this is TV Tropes policy.
EDIT: Uncle Ghost, I was thinking that maybe Ryloth and some other examples should be listed under the InNameOnly trope, but I\\\'m not sure if it exactly matches the intent of that trope. Ryloth is the previously-established Ryloth in name only, without its defining features, as are some other planets, species, characters and events. Wuuld that fit?
