Created 11 months ago, last significant work on it done 11 months ago, no examples at all, only default categories. Toss this one.
Topic on Talk:Setting Alignment
What "examples"? It's a fan-speak trope.
Firstly, tropes in the Fan-Speak category are not automatically devoid of the need for examples. Secondly, why did you create it with the examples section intact and no explicit text suggesting it didn't need them? If you felt it was complete as is, why did you not suggest launching yourself?
Regardless, it's almost a year old, you haven't bothered to work on it in months, it is still incomplete (just at a quick glance I can see a couple bare URLs with no potholes), and most importantly, no one else has objected to the deletion.
You have a bad habit of dropping half-formed tropes into the Workshop, abandoning them after a couple edits, and then getting shirty when six months or a year later they're nominated for deletion. If you want a trope to get out of the workshop, do a better than half-assed job on creating them and shepherding them to completion.
-- Looney Toons, Admin
CC: @Labster, @GethN7, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @DocColress, @LulzKiller, @SelfCloak
Agreed with Looney Toons.
On All The Tropes, the important part of the phrase "fan-speak trope" is the word "trope", and we have a specific look-and-feel for what a Trope page should look like. Part of that look-and-feel is the list of examples.
And if you're just going to toss something onto the wiki and ignore it for almost a year, use your Sandbox, not the Trope Workshop. (I'm guilty as charged here, regarding the Names to Know project.)
Closer to launchable, but again, it's been two weeks since anyone worked on it, and the main text still needs cleanup -- at a quick glance I see three bare URLs that need potholes and an inline note about needing a better name for a concept.
Why do they need potholes? Perhaps innate superiority of "here" over "[2]" may be obvious to you, but it's not obvious to me.
It's part of the style guide, where we also explain the reasoning.
Also, we've had requests to look more different than TVTropes, and sticking to the style guide is one way to fulfill those requests.
I'm not wild about pigeonholing works into alignment systems (I much prefer advantage/disadvantage systems :) ), but if people want this I won't stand in the way.
It is a pretty well established means of categorizing settings, even if not necessarily the best one.
Okay, it has been more than a month since the last edit on this page, which was about one sentence's worth of text (88 chars). It has nine examples, which is sufficient to launch. If no one objects I'm booting it out into the main namespace, which will a) get it out of the Workshop, and b) allow us to show TBeholder that we don't automatically delete every abandoned, half-formed thing he drops into the Workshop before moving on.