The "TV Tropes vs. Wikipedia" dichotomy

Anonus

TV Tropes is meant to be an encyclopedia of devices found in writing, and the things relevant to them (and, to an extent, analysis). Wikipedia is meant to be a compendium of verifiable, neutral information about everything.

How exactly can they be at odds?

glennmagusharvey

Because original research, mainly.

DYRE

Because tropers are mad they can't mention Warhammer 40k and The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya on every single Wikipedia article, so obviously Wikipedia is horrible.

ClockworkUniverse

What GMH said.

Lots of people, though, seem to think the difference is that TV tropes is supposed to be fun incarnate and Wikipedia is run by anti-fun Nazis.

Gelzo

Wikipedia can be a little picky about what it considers notable. Fans of "non-notable" works can get frustrated by this.

Anonus

^^Neither of them are that at all. Wikipedia's "fun" stuff is behind the scenes, and I find the site itself an enjoyable place.

ClockworkUniverse

^Indeed. I'm just saying that a lot of people seem to think that.

glennmagusharvey

Oh yeah, that too, notability.

RedEyedAbyss

Fast Eddie has a major grudge against the site which sometimes ends up spreading to other users on TvTropes.

glennmagusharvey

Gone Horribly Right?

Anonus

I tried to keep it off of me, because I always thought it was irrational.

RedEyedAbyss

If you ask me, the dumbest result of the grudge is our Citation Needed page, a stub-quality article with a complete misinterpretation of the accompanying image. I also recall Fast Eddie fell right into a troll trap just because he bashed Wikipedia (citation needed; I couldn't recall where the thread was).

Anonus

I once cutlisted it because I thought it was pointless and overlapped with There Is No Such Thing As Notability.

GuyInWhite

TVTropes used to be fun before all those renames and stuff.

Now they're almost as bad a Wikipedia in that every title has to be clear.

Um, I thought half the fun was trying to figure out the obscure reference in the title?

ClockworkUniverse

^Um...sorry, but are you actually serious? I honestly can't tell.

GuyInWhite

I am serious, actually.

I know I'm in the minority, but I really do like tho older titles better.

Central Avenue

I never to contribute to Wikipedia, because (a) I rarely have information to add, and (b) when I do, I don't know any of the relevant policies--what counts as a "reliable source" to cite?

I rarely contribute to TV Tropes either, but that's starting to change as I start getting into fiction again.

RedEyedAbyss

I am curious as to how their "Reception" sections are regulated. Most of the time, it seems people cherry-pick articles to support a certain viewpoint or they are so weasel-worded that the only useful things about them are the external links.

Anonus

This should help.

Bob

TVTropes and Wikipedia are at odds? When did that happen?

DYRE

Well, it's more like Fast Eddie has a personal grudge against Wikipedia, and so some tropers decide they should hate Wikipedia too for some reason.  I don't think people on Wikipedia care one way or another about TV Tropes.

Tnophelia

Is it just me or are most guideline pages on wikis really ugly looking?

Bob

So, what's FE's beef with Wikipedia? Is he just butthurt, or does he have an actual reason for the grudge?

Tnophelia

Because Wikipedia is boring.

ClockworkUniverse

I never got the impression that Fast Eddie didn't like Wikipedia. I just got the impression that tropers didn't.

DYRE

I dunno.  The TV Tropes articles Wikipedia and Citation Needed (mostly because these pages were locked by Fast Eddie in the form they're currently in) sure make it look like it's just Fast Eddie hating Wikipedia for some poorly-justified reason.

Tnophelia

Your Mileage May Vary DYRE.

I see no Wikipedia hate, more like "Don't get us confused with that site."

RedEyedAbyss

I remember back in the early Trope Repair Shop days when every other post opposing renames invoked the "turning into Wikipedia" argument. It was actually ccoa who I first remember suggesting a Godwin's Law equivalent against it, so Troper's Law was born later on. And yet some uninformed newbies still invoke the law.

DYRE

^^ Well, to be fair, you're kind of right about the Wikipedia article.  However, in any case, there's no reason that an article about Wikipedia should actually spend half of the page talking about TV Tropes instead of Wikipedia, so it just feels more like Fast Eddie's trying a bit too hard to remind people that TV Tropes isn't Wikipedia (the fact that they have different names should be more than enough of an indicator).

The Citation Needed page definitely is just a needless attack at Wikipedia policy.

ClockworkUniverse

I think that page is more because way too many people come to TV Tropes from Wikipedia and think it works the same way when it doesn't.

Tnophelia

It's because people constantly compare us to Wikipedia for some stupid reason, so you kind of have to remind them WHY you are not. considering this place isn't an encyclopedia, and more of a wiki.

Define "needless". Smacking "citation needed" on a lot of things here unironically would lead to a lot of bitching and having to constantly find sources on everything that happened, when generally the trope works pages usually work with the "You Should Know This Already" page, and shouldn't need to hinder themselves to such insane levels to prove everything that happened, happened. You watched the show, and so did a lot of other editors, so why would you need to cite your references from the show? If it didn't happen, and other people know it didn't, it can be just removed, rather than invoke other citations and references.