User talk:Cwf1997

After several warnings and a tempban, Cwf1997 continued to demonstrate an unwillingness (or a complete inability) to understand multiple tropes as they are written and compose proper examples for them. He was permanently banned from the wiki to protect it from contributions that were essentially gibberish and meaningless.

Despite all of the times members of the moderation team have told you to ensure you have the correct trope when adding examples, you have continued to make this same mistake. Most recently, you called a case of Schedule Slip a "Funny Aneurysm Moment" on Rayman/YMMV without bothering to say exactly what happened in Real Life to change it from amusing to cringe-worthy.

All The Tropes:How We Do Bans Around Here clearly states that "Refusing to learn from honest mistakes, or repeatedly making the same honest mistake after it's been pointed out" is grounds for a temporary block of editing rights.

In accordance with that page, I am now giving you an Official Warning: If you add another example that has nothing to do with the trope that you list with the example, your account will be blocked from editing for a short period.

Please reply to this thread with a statement as to what action you plan to take in the future regarding this.

-- robkelk, Admin

@Cwf1997 @Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

I am planning on making more proper edits.

Don't plan. Do.

And you didn't. From your recent change to Batman: Arkham Knight: Alice Allusion is not about characters named for characters from the Alice books, It's specifically about characters named "Alice" who are deliberately modeled after Alice from those books. None of the characters in your example are named "Alice". At best it's a shout-out.

So congratulations. You have earned yourself a two-week vacation from editing the wiki.

With it you get another official warning: If, after this temporary block expires and your edit rights are returned, you continue to misuse tropes out of willful ignorance or a complete inability to understand written English, then per All The Tropes:How We Do Bans Around Here Section 2.1 bulleted item six, you will be the lucky recipient of a full and total permanent ban from the wiki. As GethN7 has noted in a different thread, you have proven yourself so incompetent at understanding proper trope definitions and writing proper contributions (and so incapable of improving), that we have to deal with you as a potential threat to the integrity of the wiki, if not a flat-out vandal.

So there you go. After a short vacation, you have one last chance before you're kicked out on your ass. Make the most of it.

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

You had fair warning that your account would be permanently blocked if you did not start paying attention to the actual meanings of tropes here.

You did not start paying attention to the actual meanings of tropes here.

As a result, we have no option but to impose the block that we told you we would impose if you did not change your ways.

Good-bye.

@Cwf1997 @Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

I'm coming out of hibernation to weigh in on this matter. I'm sorry, I disagree with this judgement. He made a brand new YMMV page for a work that did not previously have one, correctly used 8 out of 9 tropes, and paved the way for others to provide additional information. One of the two tropes deleted in a later edit, Surprisingly Improved Sequel, was exchanged for Contested Sequel; this is not because he misused the trope, but because of a difference in opinion. The only trope he truly misused was Obvious Judas. All in all, 90% of his contribution was useful.

He has shown a willingness to improve. You are being overly critical and ignoring the human. @Cwf1997 @Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

We have to ignore the human - we've never met the human.

All we have to go on is the contributions - which were consistently sub-par and requiring other tropers' time to correct. No matter how many times we asked for this particular troper to improve, it never happened.

• Magnum Opus Dissonance: Megan Fox, Amanda Seyfried and Diablo Cody thought that this film was their favorite work.

This is misused. This trope is when they think it's their best work, not just their favorite. The distinction might be subtle, but it's a distinction nonetheless.

Be careful. You will get booted the next time you misuse a trope.

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

Also, I have reverted your page move for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (film). First, page renames are to be discussed before being implemented when they are not applied for organizational or structural reasons by the mod staff. Second, there is a better way to handle this, which has been explicitly noted in a new cleanup note at the top of the page.

This one just made it through.

I have already fixed this issue:

• Throw It In is for "the occasional accident or mistimed what-have-you". Improv is for entire scenes.

Please fix these issues:

• Fergie who? There are dozens of Fergies, including Robert Ferguson and the Duchess of York.
• Jesus who? There are dozens of Jesuses, including Zola Jesus and Jesús Manuel Rodríguez.

We've noticed you have been misusing a number of tropes, and we wanted to clue you in.

• Big Name Fan: This is not a famous person who's a fan of something. This is a regular person who has become famous (mainly within a fandom) because he's a fan of something
• Colbert Bump: This is "a little-known movie, TV show or band suddenly gets an upswell of popularity because it got mentioned or featured somewhere a lot of people could see it". It is not "an obscure, unknown YouTuber's sub-3000 viewership suddenly made the number one movie of 2010 much more famous and profitable just because he mentioned it". (We should note that you seem especially prone to a bad case of Small Reference Pools when it comes the works you cite for this trope -- you keep referencing films and shows that were very popular and successful and which still have large and active fanbases as though they were obscure B-movies that disappeared without a trace. Your entries for this trope come across as almost comically ignorant when you suggest that a small YouTube channel somehow made any measurable difference at all to the prominence and profitability of these works.)
• Promoted Fanboy: This is not a famous person who got to work in a franchise or property he's a fan of. This is an ordinary fan who by dint of effort and devotion becomes part of the team that makes the franchise or property he's been a fan of for years.
• Star-Making Role: This is not "they kept working after this movie". This is "after this film, they became A-list talent able to command millions of dollars for an appearance, and began winning awards".

We're sure these aren't the only tropes you've been misusing, and we are carefully studying your every contribution to find and fix/delete any past and future misuses along these lines. To avoid further problems, though, we suggest that you actually read and understand the tropes you're writing examples for, so you don't come across as someone who's not familiar enough with the wiki to get even simple things right.

-- Looney Toons, admin CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

Promoted Fanboy: This is not a famous person who got to work in a franchise or property he's a fan of. This is an ordinary fan who by dint of effort and devotion becomes part of the team that makes the franchise or property he's been a fan of for years.

I'm an example of this trope. Seven years ago, I had just created an account on All The Tropes and was just starting to make edits. Today, I'm a senior mod here. And I suspect you've never heard of me outside of this site.

-- robkelk, admin

I got it.

Another one, taken off Shark Tale/Trivia a minute ago:

• Unintentional Period Piece: This film should have been called 2004: The Movie because all of the actors were highly active during that year and has a heaping helping of Urban Gangsta Flava.

The very first sentence of Unintentional Period Piece reads:

A work set in the present day at the time of its creation, but is so full of the culture of the time it resembles a deliberate exaggeration of the era in a work made later.

A couple of paragraphs later:

It should be noted that part of what makes a work into an Unintentional Period Piece is an unconscious assumption on the part of the creator(s) that some element of the story or setting -- like smallpox or the raids on gay bars in the Barney Miller example -- is universal and unchanging when it's not, to the point that to an audience after the time that things changed, the reference is almost incomprehensible.

In what way does a selection of actors and a "flavor" even sound like this trope? You're very clearly not aware of what some of the tropes you're using actually mean. It's almost like you just look at the name of the trope and guess what it's about -- and you usually guess very very wrong.

Read the tropes. Know what they mean. Write examples that actually apply. We can't force you to do this, but if you don't we will be required to start editing your work severely, to keep you from embarrassing yourself with your rank willful ignorance. If that doesn't work, we will have to remove the automoderated and autopatrolled privileges we granted you less than two weeks ago, flagging you to every mod on the staff as someone whose work isn't to be trusted and which needs close vetting before the edits are even permitted to be applied to the wiki.

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

You did it again, a half-hour after Looney Toons posted that warning, on Fantastic Four (2015 film)/YMMV:

Sequelitis: Rebootitis in this case.

You gave no explanation why that supposed example is not actually an example of Continuity Reboot.

You may have done it again in your other edits in that batch - I have not yet looked at them (nor do I have time to look at them at the moment).

Automatic Moderation is a privilege given for consistently good edits and being a Troper in good standing, not a right. If you continue to misuse tropes in your examples, your account will be reverted to manual Moderation.

-- robkelk, admin

cc: @Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

You may have done it again in your other edits in that batch

He did:

Vindicated by History: A minor example. If this wasn't made as a Fantastic Four reboot and instead to a Chronicle sequel, it would be better received.

Setting aside the fact that every other entry on the page says this film is irredeemably bad and that no one has a good thing to say about it, the descriptive text on this has absolutely nothing to do with what "Vindicated by History" means either as a trope or in general usage. It's almost like he said to himself, "I want to say something and need a random trope name to justify it."

EDIT: And since "Chronicle" has no link, there's no clue what work that is, nor why this being a "Chronicle film" would improve its reception. Obvious Small Reference Pools again -- "I know it, so everyone knows it."

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

And again, on Fantastic Four (2005 film)/YMMV:

Fan Dumb: Critics at the time of the release date thought that the film was a rip-off of The Incredibles but the comic originated in 1962, over 4 decades before The Incredibles.

I've changed that to an entry for Small Reference Pools with some edits so as not to tar all critics with the same brush.

And again:

Technology Marches On: Conrad is seen using a Game Boy Advance and Sally used a PDA. Smartphones would easily replace them.

on The Cat in the Hat (film)/Trivia. I've noticed this pattern on other pages already -- Cwf thinks that if it can be done on a smartphone anything else someone could use is obsolete, even if it is a mature technology still in common use.

@Cwf1997: After discussion off the wiki at a forum frequented by all the admin staff, it has been decided to remove your Automoderated status. Once again your edits will go into the moderation queue and will require a mod's approval before they are applied to the wiki's contents. Do be aware that if you overload the queue as you often did in your first weeks on the wiki, your edits may get ignored until a mod has the time to sort through them all. We do not guarantee prompt review of your changes, although rest assured they will be thoroughly vetted before they are allowed through, which will slow the approval process even further.

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

In fact, let me put it clearer for you, just so you have no mistake our intentions.

You've proven to be rather incompetent at understanding proper trope definitions, badly shoehorning in tropes that you do seem to understand, and generally been making more of a mess than useful edits, and we are not going to be your 24/7 janitors.

That said, since you are now forced to wait for us to approve your edits, get it right the first time, or we reserve the right to delete as many terrible edits as we need to until you make edits that fit our manual of style and show you are capable of reading comprehension. Spamming the moderation queue will not help here, doing so and not showing any improvement means they all get rejected without a second thought, so don't waste our time with bad quality work and do it right the first time.

In accordance with the spirit of GethN7's comment immediately above, I have rejected your edit to Venom (2018 film)/YMMV.

Fandom Rivalry: Has one with fans of Lady Gaga, whose film A Star is Born was released the exact same day.

And just where were the flamewars that the more passionate ends of each fandom directed at the other? I must have missed seeing them... that, or this isn't an example of Fandom Rivalry.

Narm: Cletus Kassady looked like Sideshow Bob with the cartoony curly hair.

Were people laughing at the supposed-to-be-serious hair? Or is this not Narm?

This is a movie based on a comic book, after all.

One-Scene Wonder: Stan Lee made a cameo as a dog walker at the end of the film.

Stan Lee made cameos in all of the MCU movies. How does this particular Cameo count as a One-Scene Wonder? You didn't describe the difference.

Signature Line: The "Like a turd in the wind" speech.

A speech is not a line.

Next to these, the purely mechanical error that you made in "What Do You Mean It's Not for Kids?" ("peoples" instead of "people's") is barely noticeable.

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

Right off the bat, "Queer Character, Queer Actor" has failed to meet the first requirement of the Three Rules of Three. Combined with a trope description that would fit in a fortune cookie, the proposed page overall fails to meet even the barest minimum standards for a trope proposal. It has therefore been deleted from the Trope Workshop.

Before you submit any more trope candidates, let alone a new version of this one, we strongly recommend you read the Three Rules of Three and All The Tropes:Trope Workshop Guidelines so you understand what we require in a trope candidate -- and a launchable trope. You are of course free to ignore this recommendation, but do not be surprised if your suggested tropes continue to be deleted.

I will also note that this is the second time you've lobbed a half-assed candidate into the workshop. The last time you then walked off to let everyone else do all the work required to take it from essentially a junk page to something workable. We are not going to let that happen again. If you can't put in a decent amount of work up front, we're not going let you shove it off on everyone else.

Please reply in this thread to acknowledge that you understand what we're asking of you and that you will or have read the pages you've been directed to. Failure to reply will be considered "ignoring a mod" per All The Tropes:How We Do Bans Around Here. Given that you have ignored moderator communications at least once already -- see the thread "Regarding File:Lobo Webseries.png and File:Logan 2017 poster.jpg" below -- this is now a formal warning, and failure to reply will result in a tempban. It is in your interests to reply.

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

I understand.

Thank you for following our advice (and legal requirements) for these uploads! Believe us, we're grateful. However there's just one more thing you need to do for both. You may not have read closely the text inserted by the wikipedia-fair use template. It reads, in part, as follows:

Please also provide the license terms given on the source Wikimedia project, and a link back to the File page.

What that means is that you need to do a little copy-paste from Wikipedia still. For an example of what's needed and one way to present it, take a look at the summary for this image. It doesn't have to slavishly follow that model, but you do need to provide a direct link to the image, as well as the license terms. (To be honest, our {{fairuse}} template is probably sufficient for fair use images, but it doesn't hurt to specifically quote Wikipedia's rationale. And you may eventually want to use an image which uses different licensing, like Creative Commons, so it's a good idea to get in the habit.)

Thanks again!

I've noted that you've uploaded another Wikimedia Fair Use file, File:Batman Ninja Turtles Cover.png. Once again, while you're adhering to the absolute bare minimum of effort needed to keep an image from being deleted, we believe that we need the exact terms by which Wikimedia/Wikipedia justifies fair use. And having a direct link to where you got the image will help us if we ever have another situation like the Great Hack where we lost a significant fraction of our images.

If you would, please provide the missing information for these three files?

Thank you.

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

It has been nineteen days since this file was uploaded. While you have provided the license information that @Looney Toons requested, you have not actually used the image on any pages here (according to the wiki software).

We cannot claim "Fair Use" without use.

I have deleted the file. I can restore the file upon request, but you will need to tell me which page you intend to use the file on before I do that.

-- robkielk, admin

Just a couple things. First, a "thank" is not considered acknowledgement of a moderator communication, and use of the feature instead of replying in words in a thread like this one can be (and has been0 treated as ignoring the mods. Second, while you did provide the image URL for "Batman Ninja Turtles Cover.png", you still have yet to provide Wikpedia's rationale for Fair Use.

What Do You Mean It's Not for Kids?: The pilot was the most-viewed YouTube video when C.O.P.P.A. got instated.

Just what is that supposed to mean? COPPA was passed in 1998 and became active law in 2000; Helluva Boss came out in 2019. Whatever you're trying to say, it's coming out as Word Salad.

Because there is standard functionality they all need.

Virtually every type of page has a predefined template to make sure they have everything they need. Every time you create a page by hand, you inevitably do a half-assed job of it, and they must either be repaired by an admin, or deleted outright and recreated. This is not endearing you to the admin team.

We strongly recommend that you use the Page Creator in the Troping Utilities submenu to the left for anything you're tempted to create by hand.

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

You actually have to create it in the Trope Workshop for it to be in the Trope Workshop, which is a separate namespace from the Main namespace where the "live" wiki entries are. I have moved it there. Next time you want to create a trope, use the Trope Workshop page to do so. It will also place all the other markup which you ignored in your "candidate", which I have added to the page.

Before you create another new trope, please read All The Tropes:Trope Workshop Guidelines and All The Tropes:Style Guide. It will help you avoid doing (or not doing) things that cause extra work for the admins.

-- Looney Toons, admin

CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7

I'm finding I'm having to correct this on a lot of your recent edits, so I wanted to bring it to your attention:

"It's" means "it is", "it was" or "it has". It is not a possessive. The possessive is "its" with no apostrophe.

Please be careful about that -- it's such a simple thing to get right, and getting it wrong makes the wiki look illiterate.

Thanks.

You're still doing this. I just corrected two instances of this in material you added to Josie and the Pussycats (film)/YMMV. C'mon, this is fourth grade stuff. We just took a chance on giving you autopatrolled and automoderated status today. Don't make us take them away because we can't trust you to use basic grammar properly.