User talk:DemonDuckofDoom

Hello, and welcome to All The Tropes!

I see you've discovered one of the "list" pages that we inherited from TV Tropes when we forked the wiki - Cult Classic. All The Tropes doesn't do list pages; instead, we do categories.

I'll approve your change to the page this time... but please note that this makes more work for the people who are turning the "list" page into a category. It's faster to add Category:Cult Classic to the pages that you think should be on the list, rather than adding them to the "list" page and then having somebody add the category and take them off the "list" page.

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

Oh, there is? I'll do that in the future then. Thanks for telling me.

Oh also don't worry about my edits. I'll add them to the category over the next few days.

Thank you!

Quick question: I don't really have the time to make pages for the redlinks I added. Should I leave them until somebody else can or is there spot for works that need pages?

Always leave the redlinks. They tell other users that "hey, this needs a page written!" and someone other than you may take up the task.

And there's also a place for works that need pages - List of Works That Need Summary - so the answer to your question is "yes to both".

There's no requirement to add pages to List of Works That Need Summary (sometimes I think nobody looks at it), but it is there.

Okay so I nixed a bunch of bluelinks, finishing off anime & manga, comic books, film and literature. That said the site's started timing me out so I'm not sure if I can continue. Is there a workaround? Given the size I can't really lessen the time without saving edits every few minutes, which is really annoying.

Alas, there's no workaround for the timeouts - even the mods are struggling to work through them. It might be best to come back in a few hours or days.

Hello again. The question has arisen during a mod discussion - how many of the movies that you've been tagging as Cult Classics are actually cult classics, and not simply sleeper hits?

You seem to be confusing "sleeper hit" with "cult classic". Could you go through your list and make sure you've only tagged films that have attracted a perpetually small fanbase, please? I've already reverted your addition of the category to The Blair Witch Project.

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

I also want to discuss the "cult classic" status of Spirited Away, which you added to the list in 2022. I think it's just a "classic" and not a "cult classic". According to the page for Cult Classic, "If a work is commonly described by critics as quirky, fringe, bizarre or off-putting to newcomers, and therefore "cult", then that meets the definition of the trope." I found critic census is not like that. The critic reviews I've seen for Spirited Away is just praise, even if the film does get quirky and bizarre. Look at some critic reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. Yes, there are some reviews that make mention of the film's bizarreness, but the reviews aren't centred around the bizarreness. There's no consensus about this being a "weird film". I also did a quick search through Roger Ebert's review of the film. The word "bizarre" popped up only once, and the review isn't centred around it. Therefore, there clearly isn't census for the film being weird in the eyes of critics.

A Cult Classic is also defined by their fanbase. They're supposed to have a smaller, devoted fanbase, but the fanbase for Spirited Away isn't just devoted to the film. Rather, the fanbase is an extension of the Studio Ghibli fandom. You'll never see someone just talking about Spirited Away. You'll see them bring other Ghibli films into it. I work on a wide variety of films from the studio, including Spirited Away, but never limited to just the film. Of course, experiences in fandoms vary, and I could very well be wrong. Correct me if this is the case.

Another sign of a cult classic is a film not being successful at the box office. This is not the case here. Spirited Away shot up and became the highest grossing Japanese film for twenty years. It clearly isn't an obscure film.

That said, I do agree that The Cat Returns is a better fit to the category. If you say so, I'll simply remove Spirited Away from the list of cult classics.

I think you've more than made your case, ILC. Go ahead and remove the category from Spirited Away. And just for future reference, you don't have to make an exhaustive defense before such an edit, just make it with a capsule explanation in the edit reason. If more detail is needed, someone will ask.

Been away from the site for a bit, revert whatever you need to. I figured Spirited Away qualified because far as I know it's really not well-known among the mainstream.

far as I know

So, you've never heard of the Academy Awards. They're televised every year, and Spirited Away was rather famously awarded a "Best Animated Feature" Oscar.

Please stop confusing your Small Reference Pools with actual Cult Classics.

This is one of the other things the user I mentioned below who got permabanned did to earn his departure -- his reference pools were so small, he routinely credited his 3000-viewer YouTube channel with rescuing major film blockbusters from the oblivion of being watched by only hundreds of millions of moviegoers.

Don't assume your ignorance defines the borders of the world. Take the time to do the research.

Trust me, after you decided the thirty-year-old multi-installment multi-media Tomb Raider franchise with its millions of international fans and players is somehow too obscure to be mainstream, I'm planning on checking everything in the Cult Classic category and confirming it belongs there. At this point in time, it would appear that your definition of "cult classic" requires that everyone in the world must be an avowed fan of a work before it can be considered mainstream.

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

It's not just that. Tomb Raider is in the World Video Game Hall of Fame, and that's stated clearly on the work page. Calling it a "cult classic" is like calling Joe Biden and Boris Johnson "obscure politicians", or calling the USA and Russia "backwater countries" -- all are blatantly and obviously false statements.

This is getting out of hand with your Cult Classic abuse.

We have a very clear definition of the trope on the page. Your use needs to conform to that trope. So far, you've been plastering that label on all sorts of things that do NOT fit the description.

I say this with mod hat on: Cut it out or we will take whatever measures are necessary to make sure that you pay attention to our manual of style.

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

Just following up on what Geth said: we've already had to permanently block one troper who refused to pay attention to the definitions of tropes as written and just vomited up anything he cared to as "examples" of them. You are doing the same thing. Stop it or be stopped.

Also following up to what Geth said, "Adding incorrect text and presenting it as fact" is specifically listed as a reason to issue a tempban after a warning. Geth has given you your warning.

Oh, God.

Cthulhu Mythos is the most famous and most respected North American horror franchise ever. If that's really a cult classic, then so are Dracula and Frankenstein.

The King of Fighters, Dead or Alive, and Mortal Kombat are not cult classics. I don't play video games, and even I know that they've always been famous.

Puella Magi Madoka Magica is the single biggest anime franchise of the 2010s, and has never been unpopular. Calling that a cult classic is, quite frankly, bullshit.

'Salem's Lot... You tagged a Stephen King book as "cult"? Really?

And that's just off the top of the list.

You obviously have no idea what a "Cult Classic" actually is. (Hint: It is not "a work that DemonDuckofDoom hasn't heard of".)

In order to prevent further damage to the wiki, your Automoderated privileges have been removed. You obviously cannot be trusted with the ability to make wiki updates without somebody looking over your shoulder.

Oh, and a handy tip:

If a work won a major award (Academy Award, BAFTA award, Nobel Prize for Literature, etc.), it isn't a cult classic. If the Work page has a navbox listing major awards, there's no possible excuse for you to tag the work as a cult classic.

Well, that isn't always true, but as the saying goes, that's the way to bet.

Also, old and obscure does not automatically equal cult classic. A cult classic has a fanbase, despite its age, awfulness or other qualities that keep it from being a classic. If it doesn't have a loving fanbase, it doesn't count.

Now that your edits are being moderated again, prepare to be challenged to show how any given work you want to call a cult classic actually qualifies. We will not accept an attempt by you to add that category without proof.

I see that some of this is not directly your fault. You tagged works that were on the list that we copied from TV Tropes during the fork, which accounts for some of your incorrect tags.

We've all discovered - the hard way - that the old lists are not to be treated as gospel.

Another piece of advice: Don't put the category on pages that have the "Multiple Works Need Separate Pages" template without somehow indicating just which version of the work is the cult classic. (EDIT: And not as a comment in the source. It needs to be made clear to the casual reader of the page, not just someone editing it. Information stashed in a comment is information that is unavailable to the reader.)