Forum:Trope Talk

Jump to navigation Jump to search

About this board

Not editable

Help New Trope - Adapted Out

Summary by Looney Toons

Trope passed muster and launched.

Jade Shauni (talkcontribs)
GethN7 (talkcontribs)

Well, I see you went out of your way to make a "from scratch" version that passes copyright muster, my gratitude for doing so.

I cleaned up some grammar and fixed a few trope links for you, just add some examples and you'll be good.

You can even use the same examples they did, just written in your own words, as the basic information about the examples is public access (i.e. - you can view the same media they did and see the examples like they did), but so long as you avoid copy-paste of someone else's work from there and write your own version of an example they used, that should pass legal muster.

Jade Shauni (talkcontribs)

Okay, I tried fixing some parts of the description and adding examples. Does it read well or must I fix it up some more?

Summary by Looney Toons

Apparently no one recognized the game from the provided description.

RocketMaster (talkcontribs)

I remember reading about a man in a psychiatric ward screaming about a zombie apocalypse, while a baby was crying next door to him. He then leaves and fights zombies, all the while he hears a baby crying. In what game does this happen?

Hugh Mann vs Most Definitely Not a Villain

Summary by Looney Toons

Distinction clarified.

Goo Monster (talkcontribs)

Can someone clear up the difference between these for me?

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Hugh Mann is when a non-human Doppelgänger pretends to be the person he's replaced, no matter how bad his disguise is.

Most Definitely Not a Villain is when somebody repeatedly says "I'm not X" in order to pretend to be not X, not even bothering with a disguise.

Merge Safe Harbor (Useful notes) to Watershed

Summary by Looney Toons


Carlb (talkcontribs)

Safe Harbor (Useful notes) and Watershed seem to be the same concept - broadcast regulators demanding that over-the-air terrestrial stations *bleep* all of the f-ing expletives from content until about 9PM or so, after which they adopt a slightly more lax stance. The presumption is the brats are asleep, so their whiny )(*&$# parents will stop (*&$# complaining about the ($#)@*$ bad words on the (*&$# telly once its past their (*&@# bedtime.

By either name? The end result of this little bit of paternalism may well be the feature film before the late news having the cuss words inexplicably bleeped from just the first half of the picture, with the rest of the dialogue left intact.

That said, Safe Harbor (Useful notes) is not a good page title. It conflicts with a work's page Safe Harbor (TV series). Its spelling is non-standardised (it's "harbour" in English) and the use of a different term from the standard "watershed" was only done because an obscure FCC regulation uses the different name. Also, "useful notes" is usually used as a category tag (to distinguish a page which doesn't contain an actual trope) or as the name of a "notes" subpage, not as a disambiguator in a main article's title.

The end result in this instance is two articles on the same topic. Unless there's a difference in substance (and not merely in name) there's no reason to separate "safe harbor" from "watershed". They're basically the same article with just a little more Ofcom after watershed.

I propose to merge them, with watershed as the destination article, and a hatnote on Safe Harbor once it's simply redirected to the work Safe Harbor (TV series).

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

We inherited both articles from TV Tropes, and they were substantially more lax with duplicate articles that we are. Considering that Safe Harbor (Useful notes) is "Watershed in the USA", I'd be inclined to merge the two into Watershed. But I'm only one mod; I can't speak for everybody.

(Similarly, we have "Takahashi Couple", which is "Belligerent Sexual Tension written by Rumiko Takahashi". We have a discussion going to merge those two pages. No doubt we have more examples of this.)

That said, I see a few techincal inaccuracies in your post:

  • The category is "Useful Notes", not "useful notes". Pagenames are case-sensitive.
  • There is no conflict between "Safe Harbor (Useful notes)" and "Safe Harbor (TV series)". We have the MediaWiki "disambiguation" system to distinguish between them if if becomes an issue.
  • While it is true that the word is spelled "harbour" in British English, "Safe Harbor" is American. They drop a lot of "U"s.
  • All The Tropes doesn't do hatnotes. Instead, we add a "Not to be confused with..." line just before the list of examples or tropes. (We don't have this documented anywhere. This needs to go into the Style Guide.) And there's no reason to add either to a redirect, since the vast majority of people will never see the text.
Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

Actually, we do mention that we don't use hatnotes several times in All The Tropes:Creating Disambiguation Pages -- in the third paragraph as well as the section on "Not To Be Confused With".

But yeah, putting it in the Style Guide as well is a good idea.

Carlb (talkcontribs)
Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

You code it like this: {{Useful Notes|wppage=Watershed (broadcasting)}}

Don't forget to add the Pages with Working Wikipedia tabs category.

Derivative (talkcontribs)

Yeah @Carlb, we do create categories for disambig pages.

Also I recommend you follow the wppage advice, as we are heavily interlinked with Wikimedia anyway, especially the Commons.

Rename Rock Trio -> Power Trio -> Freudian Trio

Summary by Looney Toons

Done, and all confusion caused by the original naming seems to have been resolved.

Labster (talkcontribs)

I hate to be that guy who wants to ruin all of the history of TV Tropes and All The Tropes but... sigh.

Power Trio is currently a list all of the tropes of three characters. According to Renamed Tropes/F to K]:

So what does the rest of the world think a power trio is? A rock band with bass, guitar, and drums. There's pages of this on Google, and then there's the trope sites with a different definition. I'm not afraid of a different definition for troping wikis. The problem is that the "real" definition of power trio is also within our scope. And in fact the Rock Trio page states that its real name is "taken".

So I'm going to propose a somewhat sweeping change:

I think bot edits will be OK here because its the same part of speech and takes the same articles. I will see if I can write a bot to alphabetize it appropriately; User:Dai-Guard is almost back in commission.

TL;DR Having tropish English names different from vernacular English keeps the autistic people communicating effectively with neurotypicals, so let's rename Power Trio.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Sounds good to me.

We're supposedly a wiki about the building blocks of stories; it seems reasonable that we should be able to communicate with everyone else - because communication is the most basic building block of telling stories.

Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

Agreed. I was one of the original voices on TVT saying things like "if there's already a name for it among the professionals, let's use that instead of making up our own" and "don't change the nomenclature the rest of the world uses because you're ignorant and don't get it." So yeah, definitely. We should be using Power Trio like the rest of the world uses it. And the rest of the shuffle makes perfect sense to me, too.

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

Except in most cases it has nothing common with Freud?

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Yes, most of what's listed on the current Power Trio page has nothing to do with Freud:Blonde, Brunette, Redhead ; Knight, Knave, and Squire ; Land, Sea, Sky ...

Perhaps we should rename the current "Power Trio" to "Trio" (optionally making it a subtrope of "Rule of Three"), then rename the current "Rock Trio" to "Power Trio".

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

"Assorted Trio"? :D

Labster (talkcontribs)

Guys, the current page is a category. It's not a trope, it's an analogue to Category:Duo Tropes. As far as possible I've been trying to rename them to have the form "[type] Tropes" or "[genre] [medium]s" which is super-boring but also very easy to remember when you're trying to categorize pages.

Links to the current page are another matter entirely, because they're almost all in common with Freud. TV Tropes renamed a page and replaced it with its supertrope (which again, is really just a category), and then didn't update the links.

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

"Trio Tropes"? That sounds much better. Also, alliterative.

Labster (talkcontribs)

T'was in the original proposal. I tried to add a third word like Triumphant Trio Tropes to form a trilogy but tragically it's not tractable; the third word was trimmed and trashed.

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

A good part, yes.

I still don't see how linking everything to Freudian Trio is a good idea. Even what already links there, at a glance, looks like potholing so ridiculously stretched that it's comparable only to a stereotypical Yaoi Fangirl's "subtext!!".

GethN7 (talkcontribs)

I agree with this proposed change.

If you need a bot, send me the deets on what needs done, and I'll let Gethbot do his thing.

Derivative (talkcontribs)

From what I can gather, my position is between yours and TBeholder's.

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

Point is, there needs to be

  • a category for trio in general,
  • Freudian Trio and
  • generic trio trope (or to look it from the other angle, unsorted).

To avoid a massive case of Square Peg, Round Trope.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

I'm of the opinion that a trope for trio in general would be a case of People Sit on Chairs, but I'm willing to listed to arguments why it wouldn't be. A category for trios would be useful, yes.

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

In itself, yes.

But there are many examples/potholes that don't really fit and dumping them in one place rather than just dropping them may help to extract another typical set or notice things like Missing Supertrope. Hence my notion that it equals "unsorted".

Labster (talkcontribs)

While I understand TBeholder's argument here, I think this has more to do with Trope Decay of the Freudian Trio concept, than it does with examples being unsorted.

While I'm not opposed to creating some sort of holding page, Power Trio has 1369 inbound links, and I am not going to review all of them. In fact I don't know most of these works. I get the vague feeling that a portion are most likely Square Peg, Round Trope-ing the Freudian ideal. And a few just connected the word "power" to "superpower" or "cool", and declared it a Power Trio. But I don't know enough about these works to tell the difference.

Anyway, I now have a bot that will work on these, because I wrote a bot. Unless TBeholder pipes up, I'll go with my original proposal.

If you want, I can also rename all of the Power Trio wick to a temporary page, like Unsorted Trio. Seriously, just something that won't pick up wicks. Because a trio is very much not a trope. But I think in practice that Freudian Trio will do just as well if no one wants to sort now, because it will be more obvious that it's wrong upon reading the page.

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

For less-ugly, something like "Three by Three"?

Labster (talkcontribs)

Maybe. I guess I can't imagine someone linking to Three by Three on purpose. Wait, I just did it. D'oh!

Anyway, I had something of a thought: maybe we can bot edit to the new names any examples that contain the words 'id' or 'superego' (/\b(?:id|superego)\b/i). These are unlikely enough words in normal examples, and at least indicate the author was trying to employ the Freudian trope.

Also, alphabetization is working: . Note that it's not magic, it's not going to cross the headers. This is construed as a feature. I probably need to pull out a Unicode alphabetization algorithm due to things like Schrödinger's Gun, but I'm happy with where this started. The hardest part was handling quotes correctly in the middle of the lists.

Labster (talkcontribs)

OK, ran the first bot. It's reduced the number of links on Power Trio to 1116, which is 250 pages less to check. Well, sort of. While most of the time sorting worked great, on pages like iCarly/Tropes P-T, obviously that "F" is only going to float to the top of the current page. Oh well, at least those are easy to fix.

I don't see any obvious patterns in the remaining links to Power Trio -- if any does see a pattern, do let me know.

Labster (talkcontribs)
Robkelk (talkcontribs)

(blows dust off thread)

The rename has been done - Power Trio now means what the rest of the world says it means, and the new page Trio points to Category:Trio Tropes which is what used to be Power Trio.

The links need to be fixed.

Summary by Looney Toons

Someone who seemed to think he was required to create a page asked what to write about.

Hrvcfr (talkcontribs)

im confused with making a page. What do I write about? Thnx. Hrvcfr (talk) 10:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

I'm not sure I understand your question. If you don't have anything you want to write about, why do you think you have to make a page? You're not required to do anything.

-- Looney Toons, admin

Proposal: Move all Logical Fallacies from Trope to Useful Notes

Summary by Robkelk

The logical fallacy pages have been moved to Useful Notes.

Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

Or maybe their own space entirely. While they can manifest in a trope-like way, they don't really exist in the same metaphorical space, being something in between a law or formula and an audience reaction.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Agreed that they aren't tropes. I'm thinking they aren't audience reactions, either - like them or hate them, they're still fallacies. Laws and Formulas might be the best place for them, perhaps as a sub-category.

Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

Okay, then... They live in Useful Notes and are categorized as Laws and Formulas. Anyone against?

Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

Actually, as it happens they have their own category already, and some do not work as laws/formulas; those that do already are in that category. So I settled for just changing the page template.

Arromdee (talkcontribs)

Yet something else I also brought up once on TVT, and still has problems.

The term "Ghost Ship" can refer to two things in normal usage:

  1. A derelict ship.
  2. A ship crewed by ghosts.

Ghost Ship currently means the first of these, rather than being a disambiguation, which is already confusing. It then claims that "If you're looking for otherworldly ships with tattered sails crewed by the damned, see Afterlife Express."

If you go to Afterlife Express, almost all of the text claims that it specifically is about a ship that transports souls to the afterlife--not about any old ship crewed by ghosts. Only the word "often" suggests otherwise.

Flying Dutchman often covers the second meaning of Ghost Ship, but it isn't the same thing; for one thing, it can be about a ship that's cursed without anyone being dead. Also, it needs to have Wandering Jew made into a separate trope.

Furthermore, "crewed by ghosts" and "to the afterlife" can also apply to trains. And Ghost Ship is named after ships and Afterlife Express after trains--that implies that the dividing line is based on type of vehicle when it certainly isn't. (I can't think of anything other than ships and trains that does this commonly enough to be called a trope.)

In other words, it's all sort of right but confusing and not quite.

Possible solution:

  • Ghost Ship is a disambiguation for three tropes:
    1. Derelict Ship
    2. Haunted Ship. Also includes ships that are themselves supernatural.
    3. Afterlife Express
  • Flying Dutchman can be the second but isn't necessarily.
  • Names are up for grabs--there may be better ones.

On TVT there was also the idea of distinguishing between a haunted ship and a ship crewed by ghosts, which I'm no longer so sure about. Link to TVT discussion:

GethN7 (talkcontribs)

I agree, that is confusing.

"Crew Of Ghosts" could cover the crew of any vessel composed of spirits.

GethN7 (talkcontribs)

I like the disambiguation proposal.

Arromdee (talkcontribs)

I'm also wondering if we should separate out Ghost Train as well.

Arromdee (talkcontribs)

Actually looking at the Ghost Ship trope, it seems that there are a lot of examples that are about things that are not literally ghosts, but are demons, the sci-fi equivalent of ghosts, or something else that is not strictly speaking a ghost but is supernatural and/or an undead version of the crew. Seldom do people encounter an abandoned ship and find only mundane threats.

So now I'm tempted to rewrite the definition to make it supernatural (and not to tell people to go to Afterlife Express for supernatural ships) and to have a mundanely abandoned ship not be a trope at all.

What do people think?

GethN7 (talkcontribs)

That actually sounds like a good idea.

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

Yes, there definitely is such a trope. But this would leave "missing supertrope": it works much the same way with Giant Mutant Fleas, and other critters, up to degenerate descendants of the former crew. E.g. WH40k hulks, and even less-staffed used ships, are full of such things. But the name would not quite fit even your version. And there would be inevitable overlap. Perhaps something like "Derelict Denizens"? With "Ghost Ship" left as disambiguation.

Name change request from Monday Every Day to It's Always Monday

Summary by RocketMaster

Proposed name change, everyone agreed, moved the page myself.

RocketMaster (talkcontribs)

I never liked that trope name. Can we change it?

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

I don't mind. "

Looney Toons (talkcontribs)

I have no objections.

RocketMaster (talkcontribs)

I moved the page myself. I hope I didn't break anything.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

You left a redirect from the old name to the new name, so none of the wiki links broke.

The only thing that didn't move was the Category page, and I just moved that to the new name. No worries.

Beta Log 86 (talkcontribs)

I was checking and noticed a new fleet of punk sub-genres: solar and cassette for starters. Not, sure how will be for a version here. Of course, copying word by word isn't allow, so coming up with an original definition and works would have to do.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

We could copy with attribution the Wikipedia definition of solarpunk as a placeholder until we write our own.

Is cassettepunk a thing? The only results I get from a web search are to an artist's project of that name.

Beta Log 86 (talkcontribs)

Well, TVTropes has a page on Cassette Futurism or Formica Punk. Like I said, we ought to go for an original definition though some of the works mentioned are fine.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Another thought: If we're only going to be giving a definition and a list of works, we should create these as categories instead of as tropes.

Beta Log 86 (talkcontribs)

that could work