Follow TV Tropes
Since this is an In Universe Examples Only and No Real Life Examples Please trope (I've asked around, and it's not to be limited to this page), ruling our any YMMV uses of the trope, should it be removed from YMMV trope (like we did for Dude, Not Funny!)?
If this page is YMMV and In Universe Examples Only, then clearly TV Tropes is doing it wrong.
You can have non-in-universe examples. You just can't have them on the trope page. Why? Because when we didn't have that rule, it was a worthless clusterfuck where every dubious example fed into even more dubious examples. This trope can handle YMMV examples, it just can't handle having them all in one place.
Did we really need to get rid of all the examples?
Read the last paragraph in the page description.
Kind of renders the whole thing moot. And if we aren't allowed to include opinions about shows why are movie review shows included? I feel we should include Star Trek Enterprise because it split Trek fandom into two factions dubbed "bashers" and "gushers". There is also the polarizing opinion regarding Firefly. Those who love it love it with an almost insane level of obsession; those who hate it call it the worst thing ever made for television. I think those two, at least, should be included here, real life or not.
See above. Review shows are works too, so a review discussing this counts as an example from that review.
If it's only for in-universe examples, why's it a YMMV trope?
If this is for in-universe examples only, why does the introductory text talk about people in the real world either loving or hating shows rather than shows containing people who either love or hate other things within the context of the show itself?
This genuinely doesn't make any sense.
Restricted to In-Universe examples only. Please, if you'd like to replace an example that was deleted, find an example of a critic referring to it as this trope and list it under the critic's show instead. Alternately, your personal experiences with the trope can go in TroperTales.Love It Or Hate It.
Trope Repair Shop discussion
A complete farce of an edit. Shame on you.
I have a question about this. Can we put one item in if there are a lot of entries about it?
Only if it's In-Universe.
If it's discussed in a review, it counts as In-Universe for that review, but you have to list it under the work that does the reviewing and not the work being reviewed.
I knew that reviews counted. But of something was called this is mutiple reviews, can we put it like this?
^ That should go on the YMMV tab for Random Show.
I meant on this page if several shows/reviews discussed Random Show that way.
No, because the trope doesn't occur in Random Show.
anyone else here manage to be a casual viewer of both Star Trek and MST 3 K?
I think it is time that the page was split into subpages. It took me 38 seconds just to scroll down the full page.
Phbt. Your computer's just slow.
...Seriously, though, what kind of split do you suggest? I can't think of any way to divide it by definition. Should we do it by genre categories?
genre categories could work
Took me only 18 seconds. Yup, your computer's definitely slow.
I don't think a split's necessary yet. The Anime and Video Game examples run a bit long, but that's why we have folders.
Is the example for Lost's Across the Sea deliberately strawmanning, or were the audience members who thought that just not paying attention to the show? At all. Cop-out is too subjective, so I can't comment too much, calling them non-main is, well, wrong, and WHAT SCIENTIFIC BASIS? There was a fucking monster. Made out of smoke who can shapeshift. The Island is implicitly sentient and can quicken injuries and even heal a paralysed man and a woman who had cancer. Not to mention the whole pregnant women dying. And of course the "entering a recurring string of numbers that appear throughout the series into a computer to stop an island from destroying the world". All of those are from seasons 1 and 2, by the way, which are considered "normal" in comparison to season 6. I'm okay with an audience member being dissatisfied with some of the answers given. I respect the right to an opinion at the very least, but the rest? Seriously?
I don't know why, but it pleases me to know somebody already put "buttered popcorn jelly beans" on the list. I myself am indifferent to them (give me the toasted marshmallow ones any day—om nom nom) but everyone I know is either so vehemently for or against them it makes me wonder.
Alright, about last year, we had a real life section that was a lot more comprehensive. I think we should restore it. Sure, the stuff there is controversial, but that's the point of this whole list in the first place. I'll do my best to restore it, if nobody else will.
(sorry, double post) What was the point of deleting the real life section in the first place. I'm all for bringing it back.
There already is a real-life section, entitled "Other".
"When it comes to this trope in Real Life, this descriptor applies to literally everything" in the article is pure relativist nonsense. No, not "everything" in real life is either loved or hated, and there are plenty of examples of figures, practices and mores that people disagree FERVENTLY on, and not just civilly.
Whoever's in charge of article editing has done a huge disservice to intellectual discussion here by embracing this postmodern nonsense approach.
Seconded. That's ridiculous. "Love It Or Hate It", as the trope description describes and the title all but spells out, implies that opinions tend to be very polarised, leaning heavily towards the extremes and covering very little middle ground, statistically speaking. That is absolutely NOT true of "literally everything" in real life. While there ARE haters and lovers of everything, most normal real life issues tend to have a HUGE following of simple indifference. That expansive middle ground area disqualifies them from qualifying for the trope right there.
It's not a postmodern approach I see here. It's wrong and a misapplication of trope descriptions, plain and simple.
So get rid of that bit then. You're on a wiki, after all...
I have to agree on both counts. The number of In-Universe examples are so few that it seems pointless to contend that the page is or was ever only intended for them. Might as well get rid of it entirely if it's not talking about Real Life examples. And on that subject, it is a little over-cautious to say that it applies to everything. There are very well-known examples in every form of media, and just because some people are in the middle doesn't make it any less so. And I would hope that people can acknowledge that something is Love It or Hate It without coming to blows over which is the more valid standpoint. Clive Barkers Jericho, for instance, is a video game I quite liked, but it's clearly a better fit for this page than, say, Assassins Creed. Point is, there are examples that are pretty widely considered Love It or Hate It, even by those who love it.
The entirety of the page was "Insert work here: You either love it for X or hate it for Y."
Who gets to draw the line as to what's a "very well known example"?
For example, let's use the Assassins Creed example you mentioned. I've seen a ton of fights over the first game, and I'd consider it to be a great example. You apparently do not.
Also, never suggest cutting a page entirely until you've checked the inbound links.
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?