Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Forum administrators, Interface administrators, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
116,199
edits
All The Tropes:Everything You Wanted to Know About Changing Trope Names: Difference between revisions
All The Tropes:Everything You Wanted to Know About Changing Trope Names (view source)
Revision as of 02:04, 13 August 2016
, 7 years agoupdated page links, quote cleanup
Looney Toons (talk | contribs) (added cleanup template) |
Looney Toons (talk | contribs) (updated page links, quote cleanup) |
||
Line 13:
* A '''large number of inbound links''' indicates that the current name is generating "buzz", being linked from outside the wiki and generating traffic for us. The higher the inbound count, the stronger this argument is. If it can be further shown that these inbound links are resulting from ''bona fide'' conversational use of the name outside All The Tropes, this means the name has gained traction outside the wiki and is a very good reason to keep it. For details, see [[Analyzing Inbounds]].
* If the name is already an '''established term''' in the outside world, that's a good reason to keep it (assuming its outside-world meaning is related to the trope). When making this claim, it is recommended to show outside proof thereof; the strength of this argument depends on how widely the term is in use. The article should have the name with the meaning that is used by the widest number of people.
* '''No (or negligible) misuse''' in the wicks (in-wiki links) means that the title isn't [[I Thought It Meant|confusing our editors into thinking it's something else]]. For details, see [[All The Tropes:How to Do A Wick Check
:Some tropers believe wick/inbound checks are nigh-essential to ground the discussion in facts; other tropers believe that in some cases they are irrelevant and insisting on them is obstructive. Whatever you do, don't get dragged into "your argument doesn't count!" "No, ''your'' argument doesn't count!" [[Rules Lawyer|Rules Lawyering]] meta-arguments. Those ''never'' help.
* If a name is just '''evocative''' in a way that some bland alternative cannot hope to emulate, leaving it be becomes a more attractive option. This is often due to the [[Rule of Funny]], [[Rule of Cool]] or [[Rule of Drama]].
* '''All other things being equal, keeping the current name is better''' - if it ain't broken, don't fix it. Lack of a good argument for renaming is a good argument for not renaming (and the converse is not true). This means that if someone brings up an argument for renaming, pointing out weaknesses in it stands on its own as an argument for keeping the current name.
Line 19 ⟶ 20:
=== Good arguments for changing an existing name to a new name ===
* The name is '''Unclear''' -- it fails to indicate what the trope is about, and thus undermines our goal of making the trope as accessible to as great a portion of our readership as possible. This includes [[Word Salad Title|titles that have nothing to do with the trope]], using technical terms that mean something else in everyday speech, or names that rely on familiarity with a particular work to make sense
:If you think a name is unclear, remember that ''you are required to make substantial arguments and provide substantial evidence that the name is really unclear to actual readers, and that this lack of clarity exists outside your imagination.'' There are all sorts of ways to do this; you can use a [[All The Tropes:How to Do A Wick Check|Wick Check]], an [[Inbound Check]], Google result analysis or a dictionary, to name a few. Just saying "this is totally unclear" is not an argument in and of itself.
* '''Character-Named Tropes''' used to be standard, but are now deprecated and considered a form of [[Fan Myopia]]. Very few characters are iconic enough to truly personify a trope, and these are generally in the dictionary (e.g. [[The Pollyanna|Pollyanna]]); using anyone else risks [[Pop Cultural Osmosis Failure]]. Consider whether there are [[One Mario Limit|other fictional characters by that name]], whether [[I Thought It Meant|the character may have other aspects]], and how old the work is that the character is from.
:This is really a subset of the "unclear" issue outlined earlier. As before, explain how naming this trope after the character is unclear, and be prepared to provide substantial evidence. While a common issue, this isn't ''automatically'' a warrant to rename.
* '''[[Everything's Worse With Snowclones]]'''. Too often the, ah, [[A Worldwide Punomenon|cleverness]] of a snowclone can obscure the fact that a name doesn't quite fit the trope it's supposed to describe. If the snowclone doesn't make sense outside of the context of the original, or doesn't make sense ''inside'' the context of the original, it's misleading.
* A trend of the name being '''misused''' -- as in, the trope's supposed "examples" are often not actually examples, or many of the wicks are wrong. This might be because the title suggests a trope broader than, or subtly different from, the actual definition.
* The trope is suffering from '''disuse''' - as in, it has significantly less wicks or inbounds than it's supposed to. Deciding how many wicks or inbounds a trope is "supposed to" have can be a bit of a problem, so this argument is best used in clear-cut cases, or when there are other tropes we can compare against. For details, see [[All The Tropes:How to Do A Wick Check|How to Do A Wick Check]] and [[Analyzing Inbounds]].
* The name seems '''unnecessarily subjective''' - that is, it's outright spiteful or laudatory, but the trope isn't a [[Your Mileage May Vary|YMMV]] item. Sometimes the ''trope itself'' is unnecessarily subjective; in that case, it's better to first discuss what to do with the trope.
* If a trope '''has the same title as a work of fiction''', except if that title is a common established term for that trope.
| |||