All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XXXII

[Bob Schroeck]

Oh, good, I'm not the only one getting fed up with TheCajunPhoenix. He just doubled down on his user page, declaring that regardless of what anyone else says, his edits only improve pages. I feel like turning his logic around on him and throwing some outrageous counterexample at him.

I'm thinking the time is coming where his obnoxiousness will far outweigh his value to the wiki.

[robkelk]

As of this posting, there are four replies to the proposal. One (not including the proponent) prefers just the apostrophe. One prefers apostrophe and s. The other two are essentially abstaining from making a choice.

I am not going to fast-track the proposal. Give it a full three days of debate, so that a consensus can emerge.

[robkelk]

I gave it six days. The proposal passed (and still would have passed with only three days), and the Style Guide has been updated.

And I've left a note on TheCajunPhoenix' talk page making it clear that, since they were given a chance to comment but decided not to, and they were already On Notice, any violation of the new rule will result in a tempban.

[robkelk]

Is this too rare to trope?

In a Refugee From TV Land situation, the characters meet the people who played them.

[Bob Schroeck]

I don't think so... Right off the top of my head, I can think of the RWBY fic Emergence (for which we have a page) in which there's a moment when Yang Xiao Long and Barbara Dunkelman meet. If I spend some time musing on it, I'm sure I'll remember other examples.

[Norgarth]

I seem to recall the final part of the original Undocumented Features stories (Core 4?) has the 'real life' versions of Gryphon, Zoner, and Rerob(?) meet their 'character' selves. Been a long time since I read those stories.

[Mamorien]

I seem to recall the final part of the original Undocumented Features stories (Core 4?) has the 'real life' versions of Gryphon, Zoner, and Rerob(?) meet their 'character' selves.  Been a long time since I read those stories.

It does have that, and Vaughn meeting himself; I just checked. (If memory serves me right, there's actually a third iteration of Gryph present, as I for my part seem to recall that Edison Bell started as the patron-level Detians-413 version of himself.) However, comma, in what I understand is a relative rarity for this sort of thing, the Primary World versions are the ones being brought into their own (at the time bald and unconvincing) Secondary World.

[robkelk]

Not sure whether that qualifies,. That's more a case of something like "James T. Kirk, meet James T. Kirk" rather than "James T. Kirk, meet William Shatner, Chris Pine, and Paul Wesley".

[MilkmanConspiracy]

There are two edits in the mod queue requesting deletion of content by a new user on a claim of defamation. I don't have the wiki permissions or the general authority to act on that request, but I figured I ought to note it here, since it is a serious claim. The request is worded vaguely, but there appears to be just one subject in question on the page.

[GethN7]

There are two edits in the mod queue requesting deletion of content by a new user on a claim of defamation. I don't have the wiki permissions or the general authority to act on that request, but I figured I ought to note it here, since it is a serious claim. The request is worded vaguely, but there appears to be just one subject in question on the page.

I took a look at their claims, and so far, I find their claims vague and rather dubious since they don't establish what role, if any, they have in said defamation claims. If this is just a fan trying to make us disappear something that puts who they are a fan of in a bad light, then I'd be very reluctant at best to do anything. If the claims are properly sourced and reference publicly available information that can be verified, that would make me even more reluctant.

The party demanding we delete the content needs to clarify their legal role, give more information as to how this fits the legal definition of defamation, and be willing to respect our decision, whatever it may be. If the content is indeed proven to be defamatory, then and only then would I be comfortable with not only deletion, but even hiding the revisions of the page that cite it if need be.

[MilkmanConspiracy]

That makes sense, thanks!

[robkelk]

I got a couple of emails about this last night.

The first email:

Hi. I am contacting you because I would like to request the deletion of content from your website.

https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Troubled_P.../Fan_Works

This page has a single entry which is dedicated to tarnishing my identity publically,[sic] including through listing my real name. It has, unfortunately, consequences greater than merely being posted in your wiki. It has actually reached search engines. It has caused me real life complications. I would like to formally ask for the deletion of the content.

I understand normally there is public interest in troubled productions but I am not a public entity. I am a person. I am unfortunate enough to have been friends with the person who posted all that. So I must make this request and, if you need me to explain anything further, I will.

My reply -- I was pressed for time:

Why are you asking me to do something that you can do yourself? Accounts at All The Tropes are free and that page is not protected from being edited.

Please note that you will most likely be asked by other moderators to justify your actions to their satisfaction.

Their reply to my reply:

Because I made an attempt and my attempt deleted most of it because it's the only entry in the list, so it was rejected for blanking.

I've made a proper attempt before sending this message. I apologize for the mistake; I am dealing with very unfortunate real life drama due to this which has led to more mistakes than expected.

After a night's sleep and reading this thread, my reply to that:

BCC to other wiki admins.

There is a large difference between deleting personally-identifying
information and deleting an entire entry.  There is definitely an
example of a troubled production described in the entry.

Also, I have looked at the logs and cannot find any edit requests by
[REDACTED], or any close variant
thereof. As a victim of online impersonation in the early 2000s, I am
worried that you might not be somebody directly involved in the matter
described on the page.

To quote the wiki's founding moderator, GethN7: "If this is just a fan
trying to make us disappear something that puts who they are a fan of
in a bad light, then I'd be very reluctant at best to do anything. If
the claims are properly sourced and reference publicly available
information that can be verified, that would make me even more
reluctant." You've shown no indication that you are or are not
directly involved in this matter -- you're asking us to take your word
for it, and we don't know who you are.

And that's where it stands as of this posting.