No to both. I do like the collapsable boxes for both.
From the little bit we've seen, I'd not consider GoL *or* GoD as "evil". They set the Rule of Law in their world. Which they both promised to abide by. And unlike virtually every Light Entity v Dark Entity ever written, they did *not* battle each other. Squared off against, but GoD saw and accepted what his brother brought to him and even "corrected" his own actions.
It is also unclear—to *me*—that GoD meant to wipe out humanity. He was attacked by magic—his GIFT to mankind, which *every* human was instilled with—and took it back. Repealed it. That mankind were not able to survive that action may have been unintentional and unavoidable, if not unexpected.
IMO, GoD was not *villainous* much less GoL.
Look, no child likes or appreciates parental discipline when slapped down for their rebellious actions. Now, *we* as humans may consider GoL's response as too much, and even GoL apparently did not fully agree with it, but I don't see it as "evil".
Agreed. With each point.
Unless a character is an agent for the death of ALL life in the Universe, family, children especially, is essentially a measure of Immortality. "Even if *I* may die, my legacy will live on in them".
To safeguard family (includes the mother of progeny) thus fits into even Pure Evil.
Of course, a measure of "how dare anyone touch anything of mine" could be confused as "caring"…
So unless PEs can ONLY be "Death of the Universe" types, I move that Care of Family can be a moderating conditional. Mind you, *I* have Antagonists and Villains in my stories who don't care about their children (although one has special feelings for only one of his daughters, but does include sexual desires for her) which I might call Pure Evil while still caring for their family.
As one put it: "There is a difference between not liking one's brother, and not caring when some asshole tosses him off a building."
The issue with manga/animé, and Japanese storytelling in general, is they are often *Tales of Morality*. That what is apparent is not always what *is*. They are not always as clear-cut as Western stories which usually have clearly set black and white Good vs Evil. The entire spectrum of what is good and what is bad gets explored.
So trying to assign a blanket to cover all Japanese (and Asian) franchises will be difficult.
To me, "No votes" = Nay
In the case of a tie, I think 1 week should be enough of an extension to accept NEW VOTES. Meaning, not the same users, not sockpuppets. And of course, registered user accounts.
Should a tie persist, then after a review of the status of users who already cast votes (if currently blocked, their vote is voided), then I suggest THE LAST VALID VOTE CAST at time of deadline be counted twice (tie breaker).
Late, but I agree
As long as category:Pure Evil Proposals is a *temporary* one, like "stub" et al, I agree.
I've long been saying that "we're not TVT" but by using so many of their trope names and decisions here, we confuse people. And let me caveat that when I say "tvt trope names" I mean some of their more tailor-made and tvt specific ones, like "red oni, blue oni". That is almost purely a TVT-created label.
Some labels are virtually "public domain". For example when we had "Complete Monster", my issue was not with that label as it is a fairly wide-spread statement, but as soon as Pure Evil was proposed, I endorsed it as a distancing from tvt.
Anyway… I agree with this continuing to divorce us from TVTropes
Changing categories is a hassle. So their wording should be thought out and as generalized as possible and with an eye to any potential future wikia paradigm shifts. If ever this wikia decides to alter some of its rules and shift away from characters-only, the less a cat is character-oriented, the better.
In other words, "Plot Twist" could mean a person, place, or thing, while a "plot twister" is restricted to a person. So the former is preferable.
I'm in favor of "plot twist" ONLY if it is TRULY a plot twist. A "Whodunnit of the week" should not apply. Also, *Unseen* does not apply. Nor any "hidden but true villains", etc.
No, it should be a case of "wow, never saw that coming" for most people (some of us are very exceptional when it comes to seeing the twists early on). For example, [[Grant Ward]] in Agents of SHIELD qualifies as a plot twist upon his reveal.
The category should be special, not typical.
Basically, a True Hidden is someone that maybe not even the audience knows and in never being revealed is also a Karma Houdini.
"plot twist" is a staple. Especially in any franchise with any sort of mystery. A simple murder crime show relies on "hiding" the culprit. The whole idea is that the evil-doer is not obvious. The entire story is puzzling out whodoneit. Staple.
Personally I don't like "hidden" because very few villains remain hidden/unrevealed. Once revealed, "hidden" stops applying. However, something like "Unsuspected" or "Plot twist" I'd not be against
[shrug] Moving incarnations is as simple as renaming a page. Example from above, "Joker (Batman the Animated Series)" to "Joker/Batman the Animated Series" and the change is done. It's mainly an administrative structural thing.
Main point is, any main article could/should have a sufficiently long subheading shifted to a subpage. Like a long list of episodes, etc.
ALSO, that *versions* of a character should be subpages. For example, using Joker…
Joker/Batman the Animated Series
Joker/Batman (60s series)
And subpages can have subpages, so if necessary, any of those Joker/subpage could have a /Gallery and or /Synopsis
If wanted, I have access to CSS coding which will create a "subpage list" similar to a TOC to list links to subsequent subpages.
Prime, reach out to me for links to examples if you're interested.
I agree that ANY subpage should have a minimum threshold. Also that even if created, the basepage should still have a subheading with a *very brief* paragraph THEN a link tot he subpage.
For example, while there is a minimum number of images before a /Gallery can be created, the basepage should still have a ==Gallery subheading with at least THREE (of the most representative) images, then the link to the /Gallery subpage.
What about those groups clearly modeled on Nazis which "for reasons" are not actually identified AS Nazi? Like The Empire in *Star Wars*? They are clearly stand-in for Nazis. Or the Party of ''The Great Dictator?''
Thing is, Nazis are a specific subset of Totalitarians, Autocrats, and Tyrannical societies. Like Jeeps are a specific subset of automotive land vehicles. Jeeps fit Cars and SUVs. Civilian and Military. And what about franchises which have "hover jeeps" or vehicles which fill the role of Jeeps?
Nazis are similar. Some franchises try to avoid the actual term "Nazi" yet will present characters which act the part and fill the role of Nazis without using the actual term.
Whether or not we make "Totalitarian", Nazi is a very specific mindset and role.
Of course, some usages need to be ignored. For example, "grammar nazi" does not apply.