History Administrivia / HowToWriteAnExample

* '''Do Not Alter or Pothole the Trope Name:''' When adding a trope to a work page, always use the trope's correct, unaltered title -- don't use "Red Right Paw" as a pothole to RedRightHand when writing about a FunnyAnimal. Potholing the trope name isn't as clever as you may think, and it creates problems with alphabetization and wick migration. However, it's OK to use gendered redirects to tropes when appropriate.\\\

* '''Include the Full Name of the Work or Trope:''' Every example on a trope page should either include the name of the work or be placed under the work's entry as a secondary bullet point. Likewise, every trope on a work page should organized under its name in alphabetical order. You ''do'' want the reader to know which work or trope you're talking about, right?\\\

* '''Don't Write Reviews on the Trope Page:''' TV Tropes defines "tropes" as [[Administrivia/TropesAreTools tools for storytelling]]. As such, they cannot improve or destroy the quality of a work; they merely ''exist'' in a work. Using the trope page to highlight your opinion of how the trope is used is off-topic. If you ''must'' write reviews, we have a [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/review_activity.php Reviews Section]], as well as the relevant sections of the SugarWiki/SugarWiki, and DarthWiki/DarthWiki.\\\

If tropes are the "meat" of TV Tropes, examples are the potatoes, sides, sauces and condiments that give that meat both substance and flavor. A list of tropes with descriptions and clever names is all well and good, but examples bring articles to life, flesh out readers' understanding of tropes, and showcase the many ways a single trope can be used.

* '''Don't Write in the First Person:''' TVTropes is not a forum or a blog, so using such self-referential language (even something like "This Troper") is not appropriate. You aren't the topic of conversation; this isn't the time or place to make the discussion about you.\\\

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotRecent Good Examples Are Not "Recent"]]:''' Avoid using words like "recent" or "new" when writing on TVTropes. The work in question may be new when you ''write'' the example, but people might still be reading it years from now, when the work may no longer be considered "recent". Also, works tend to come out on different dates in different countries, so what is "new" to America may not be so recent in Japan or Europe. If the time of release is important to your point, use an actual date.\\\

* '''Don't Be Afraid to Edit:''' Sometimes a prior example is worded strangely or glosses over distinct examples in its own right. You are encouraged [[Administrivia/WikiMagic to clean up what came before]]: parse down a WallOfText into bullet points, fix grammar and formatting, and eliminate natter. The cleaner the page looks, the better your example can be read and understood.\\\

* '''Check Your Formatting:''' Check your entry after writing to make sure it's formatted the way you intended. Double check trope links to make sure they aren't [[Administrivia/RedLink broken links]]. Try to avoid spending [[SerialTweaker three editing sessions]] fixing your mistakes; use the Preview function to double-check your work before committing to it.\\\

* '''Check Your Formatting:''' Check your entry after writing to make sure it's formatted the way you intended. Double check trope links to make sure they aren't [[RedLink broken links]]. Try to avoid spending [[SerialTweaker three editing sessions]] fixing your mistakes; use the Preview function to double-check your work before committing to it.\\\

* '''Don't Refer to Other Items on the Page:''' TV Tropes is a wiki, and wikis change constantly. So don't have an example specifically refer to information elsewhere on the page. Also, be very careful about starting an example with "Similarly," or "Like in the example above," if it isn't part of the same entry, as info may get deleted or moved.\\\

* '''Do Not Alter or Pothole the Trope Name:''' When adding a trope to a work page, always use the trope's correct, unaltered title -- don't use "Red Right Paw" as a pothole to RedRightHand when writing about a FunnyAnimal. Potholing the trope name isn't as clever as you may think, and it creates problems with alphabetization and wick migration.\\\

* '''...[[Administrivia/ZeroContextExample But Not Too Brief]]:''' Remember, an example is exactly that: ''an example''. With the specific exceptions of a select few TitleTropes, there is no such thing as an example that doesn't need to be explained or given context. On TV Tropes, '''context is key'''.\\\

** Don't use ten words where two words will suffice. You aren't being paid by the word...or at all, really.

* '''Good Examples Are Business Casual''': In this case, the term "business casual" means that you can have some fun and don't have to write in a cold, sterile, overly academic style. In the end, though, TV Tropes is not a lawless free-for-all. You do have to take care of business -- being clear and informative -- while having your fun.\\\

* '''Good Examples Are Easily Explained:''' All examples must provide context, or ''briefly explain'' what the trope is and how the work uses it. However, providing context is not the same thing as trying to justify why you think the example fits the trope. The truth is, if you have to spend ''significant'' time qualifying and justifying how your example fits, it's probably not a very good example...or an example at all.\\\

* '''Have Fun!''': These rules are here to help produce a useful, easy-to-read, fun environment for reader and editor alike. They are ''not'' a massive SwordOfDamocles waiting to fall on you at the slightest misstep. ''Follow'' them to the best of your ability, but don't let them ''stress you out''. TV Tropes is generally a pretty relaxed place, and as long as you aren't deliberately causing trouble, vandalizing the wiki, or outright refusing to listen or communicate, our moderator team and community are more than willing to work with you.\\\

* '''Good Examples Are Not General:''' While you don't necessarily have to cite the exact chapter or episode, examples do have point to at least one specific instance of a trope occurring within a work to be considered valid. Broad statements and generalizations, like "Early anime dubs often had pointless cursing added to the script" may or may not be ''true'', but without at least one specific example, they're considered unsubstantiated claims.\\\

* '''Don't Be Afraid to Edit:''' Sometimes a prior example is worded strangely or glosses over distinct examples in its own right. You are encouraged [[WikiMagic to clean up what came before]]: parse down a WallOfText into bullet points, fix grammar and formatting, and eliminate natter. The cleaner the page looks, the better your example can be read and understood.\\\

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotRecent Good Examples Are Not "Recent"]]:''' Avoid using words like "recent" or "new" when writing on TVTropes. The work in question may be new when you ''write'' the example, but people might still be reading it years from now, when the example may no longer be considered "recent". Also, works tend to come out on different dates in different countries, so what is "new" to America may not be so recent in Japan or Europe. If the time of release is important to your point, use an actual date.\\\

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotArguable Good Examples Are Not Arguable]]:''' Tropes are objective, so a trope either exists within a work or it doesn't. There is no such thing as an "arguable" example of a trope, so don't list any. YMMV entries are subjective, so there's no need to use phrases like "arguably" or "to some," because that part is already understood.\\\

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotRecent Good Examples Are Not "Recent"]]:''' Avoid using words like "recent" or "new" when writing on TVTropes. The work in question may be new when you ''write'' the example, but people might still be reading it years from now. Also, works tend to come out on different dates in different countries, so what is "new" to America may not be so recent in Japan or Europe. If the time of release is important to your point, use an actual date.\\\

* '''[[Administrivia/WeblinksAreNotExamples Good Examples Are Not Weblinks]]:''' Links to other websites, such as a Website/YouTube video or an offsite image, are ''never'' considered sufficient context for examples. Since the Internet is constantly changing, whatever links you put in an example will most likely no longer exist in a few weeks. Weblinks may be used to supplement your written example, but they are never a substitute for it.\\\

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotGeneral Good Examples Are Not General]]:''' While you don't necessarily have to cite the exact chapter or episode, examples do have point to at least one specific instance of a trope occurring within a work to be considered valid. Broad statements and generalizations, like "Early anime dubs often had pointless cursing added to the script" may or may not be ''true'', but without at least one specific example, they're considered unsubstantiated claims.\\\

!Example Do's and Don'ts:

[[folder:Example Do's]]

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotRecent Good Examples Are Not "Recent"]]:''' Avoid using words like "recent" or "new" when writing on TVTropes. The work in question may be new when you ''wrote'' the example, but people might still be reading it years from now. Also, works tend to come out on different dates in different countries, so what is "new" to America may not be so recent in Japan or Europe. If the time of release is important to your point, use an actual date.\\\

* '''Don't Comment on a Work's Popularity (or Lack Thereof):''' On TV Tropes, Administrivia/ThereIsNoSuchThingAsNotability. We ''don't care'' if a work is popular or not. Outside of YMMV tropes specifically about how a work was received, statements that a work is "famous" or "little-known" or "surprisingly obscure" is garbage text.\\\

* '''Avoid Detail Bloat:''' Please purge PurpleProse. One of the most common mistakes tropers make is believing that they have to include ''every'' semi-relevant detail in their examples, thus bloating fairly simple entries into a massive WallOfText. Examples should only include details necessary to understanding the example; comprehensive detail is neither necessary nor desirable in trope examples. This is admittedly one of the more difficult habits to break, and developing a sense of what's truly necessary can take time, but help is available if you need it.\\\

* '''Aim For "Final Draft" Quality:''' Simply adhering to this concept will serve you well throughout your troping career, regardless of where or what you're doing. \\\

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotGeneral Good Examples Are Not General]]"''' While you don't necessarily have to cite the exact chapter or episode, examples do have point to at least one specific instance of a trope occurring within a work to be considered valid. Broad statements and generalizations, like "Early anime dubs often had pointless cursing added to the script" may or may not be ''true'', but without at least one specific example, they're considered unsubstantiated claims.\\\

* '''Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotArguable:''' Tropes are objective, so a trope either exists within a work or it doesn't. There is no such thing as an "arguable" example of a trope, so don't list any. YMMV entries are subjective, so there's no need to use phrases like "arguably" or "to some," because that part is already understood.\\\

* '''Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotGeneral:''' While you don't necessarily have to cite the exact chapter or episode, examples do have point to at least one specific instance of a trope occurring within a work to be considered valid. Broad statements and generalizations, like "Early anime dubs often had pointless cursing added to the script" may or may not be ''true'', but without at least one specific example, they're considered unsubstantiated claims.\\\

* '''Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotRecent:''' Avoid using words like "recent" or "new" when writing on TVTropes. The work in question may be new when you ''wrote'' the example, but people might still be reading it years from now. Also, works tend to come out on different dates in different countries, so what is "new" to America may not be so recent in Japan or Europe. If the time of release is important to your point, use an actual date.\\\

* '''Administrivia/TypeLabelsAreNotExamples:''' You may encounter a trope that refers to different variations of the trope as "Type 1" or "Type A". Such type labels are an artifact of TV Tropes' early days, and are no longer used as letters and numbers do nothing to describe the trope or its subtype. Moreover, listing a type label in an "example" in lieu of actually providing context is considered a Administrivia/ZeroContextExample, which will be deleted and could result in a suspension if done habitually.\\\

* '''Administrivia/WeblinksAreNotExamples:''' Links to other websites, such as a Website/YouTube video or an offsite image, are ''never'' considered sufficient context for examples. Since the Internet is constantly changing, whatever links you put in an example will most likely no longer exist in a few weeks. Weblinks may be used to enrich your written example, but they are never a substitute for it.\\\

* '''Administrivia/EditReasonsAndWhyYouShouldUseThem:''' When you make an edit to a page, it is helpful to fill in the "Edit Reason" box with a brief but courteous explanation of what you have added, changed, or removed along with your rationale. This helps other tropers quickly see what has changed and understand why it has changed.\\\

Here at TV Tropes, we like to encourage editors to dive right in and add examples without forcing them to spend months lurking around and arduously studying proper editing [[Administrivia/TextFormattingRules form and style]]. Unfortunately, unleashing an ever-increasing horde of eager-but-clueless contributors onto an unprepared wiki can lead to ''problems''. With that in mind, here are some pieces of advice and common pitfalls for tropers new and old to consider when posting examples.

Contrast DarthWiki/HowNotToWriteAnExample.

Also see: Administrivia/ExampleIndentationInTropeLists, Administrivia/TVTropesCustoms.

* '''[[Administrivia/ClearConciseWitty The point of an example is to convey information]].''' Clarity is the most important aspect. "Clever" is nice, "Funny" is nice, "Detailed" is nice. But if any of them get in the way of ''clarity'', they cease being nice additions and become a problem.

* '''Aim For A Final Draft Appearance:''' Just adhering to this concept will help you with all the specifics below. It is not a forum so don't write in first person. Try not to write something that you know someone else has to clean up later to make it readable. This Wiki should at least ''look'' professional despite having a breezy attitude. Information should make sense years from now and not be "[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotRecent hot off the press]]" in word choice.

* '''Do Not Pothole the Trope Name:''' When adding a trope to a work page, always use the trope's correct, unaltered title (e.g. RedRightHand as "Red Right Paw" when troping a FunnyAnimal is [[Literature/NineteenEightyFour doubleplusungood]]). Potholing the trope name to be clever is way overdone, and causes problems with keeping the list alphabetical and with wick migration, among other things. Most tropes referring to one gender have a redirect that can be used for examples of the other gender. There is ''slightly'' more leeway when incorporating a trope into a description. See Administrivia/{{Sinkhole}} for more details.

* '''[[Administrivia/RepairDontRespond If you think an example is inaccurate, correct it yourself:]]''' Do not write a response below it. Cut the inaccurate part and replace it with the correct information. If there's a change to be made, make it yourself and move on. Same thing goes for this page. Remember, the person who originally typed the example ''does not'' hold a copyright to it. You ''can'' change it.

* '''If the examples have been sorted, respect the sorting'''. Most pages for tropes are sorted by medium, while most pages for works and lists (e.g. [[CanonicalListOfSubtleTropeDistinctions Canonical List]]) are sorted alphabetically. Either way, new examples should go where they belong under the system. This helps the reader find them.
** ''If the page is organized alphabetically'', put it in the correct alphabetical position. See Administrivia/HowToAlphabetizeThings for more information.
** ''If the page is organized by medium/genre,'' put a new example in as the last example in that medium/genre.
** ''If the page is ranked from top to bottom'', like MohsScaleOfSciFiHardness, put the example in the position that you feel is most appropriate.
** ''If the page states that it's sorted some other way,'' follow that sorting pattern. (For example, the {{Authors}} page is sorted first chronologically (Classical, Medieval, Renaissance, and so on), then within each time period by geographic region, then within each region either chronologically again or alphabetically.)
** ''If the page is ''not'' sorted,'' and the page has gotten long enough to need sorting, then adopt the method used by the same [[Administrivia/WhatPageTypesMean page type]].

* [[#StateTheSource]]'''State the source:''' The name of the work the example comes from should be clearly stated, ideally near the beginning of the example. Work names require emphasis, and should also be put under the proper '''Administrivia/{{namespace}}''' (ex. [=''VideoGame/TombRaider''=] will give you ''VideoGame/TombRaider'', [=''WesternAnimation/{{Brave}}''=] will give ''WesternAnimation/{{Brave}}''). {{Webcomic}} examples should ideally also provide a link to a relevant comic if one exists. While it can ''help'', listing a character name, episode name, or actor's name is no substitute for the series name. (No, not even if you PotHole it.) Listing a well known quote and leaving it at that is also clumsy. Being clever is always fun but being ''clear'' is much more important. Authors' names are also acceptable when referring collectively to multiple series by them.
** [[#EmphasisForWorkNames]] '''Emphasis For Work Names:''' Most works are considered "Long Works", and their names should be bracketed by two apostrophes ([=''=]), which render the work in italic font. Short works like individual songs, TV show episodes, short stories, short poems, essays or chapters use "quotation marks". There is no emphasis used when referring to personas, sacred texts, and works by a name other than their franchise name. When in doubt, it is better to use italics, and have it fixed later. Italics help to differentiate the work name from other blue links.
** '''Administrivia/ThereIsNoSuchThingAsNotability:''' Stating that a work is "famous" or "little-known" or "surprisingly obscure" is beside the point if TV Tropes has a page on it, and not useful for identifying it if it doesn't have a page.
** '''State the WordOfGod source:''' While we don't require strict Wikipedia style citations, one ''should'' say where a WordOfGod statement originated from. Something as simple at "[[http://www.example.com this interview]]" or "Wizard magazine issue 200" or "in the commentary on the [=DVD=]" is sufficient. This is because a lot of people like to [[GodNeverSaidThat claim]] such and such is WordOfGod to make their claims seem more valid.
** '''[[Administrivia/CreatingAWorkPageForAnUpcomingWork State the Pre-Release source:]]''' Examples on work pages that don't say otherwise are presumed to refer to, well... the work. This is a problem if the work hasn't come out yet, because a casual reader can't tell whether you're talking about a trailer or other promotional material (which may be troped under [[Administrivia/CreatingAWorkPageForAnUpcomingWork specific circumstances]]), a leak (which may not be troped ever), or just making stuff up based on assumptions or knowledge of the franchise (seriously, don't do this). To prevent confusion, if you're writing a trope entry based on a trailer or other promotional material, make sure to say that that's where it comes from!
** '''Be Specific:''' There are some things that are nearly universal with a medium, ExecutiveMeddling being one of them. But saying "An interview with person X reveals that there was a lot of ExecutiveMeddling going on" and [[Administrivia/ZeroContextExample not explaining it is ultimately an empty example]]. We want to know ''what'' was screwed around with and even the ''why'', even if it doesn't make sense.
** '''The Trope is Most Important:''' Listing every episode a CatchPhrase is said becomes a list of episodes, not describing trope examples. Likewise giving exact details of where, when and how a WordOfGod statement came about is Administrivia/WordCruft.
** '''Use Weblinks Sparingly:''' Direct links to the source can be nice, but many are unreliable as [=YouTube=] videos get taken down or entire websites go under. Too many links run into the same problem as Administrivia/AllBlueEntry, but also takes people ''away from TV Tropes''. See also ''Administrivia/WeblinksAreNotExamples''.

* '''Check For Duplicates''': Before you hit the edit button, it's always wise to search existing examples to make sure yours hasn't already been added. If you don't want to read them all, Ctrl+F (Command+F if you're a Mac user) the page instead.

* '''Group Examples on Trope Articles''': If there are already examples for a particular author, work, or series on a trope article, don't add a new example for it in a different part of the page. Rather, you should add your example in the same section, changing indentation as necessary (see Administrivia/ExampleIndentationInTropeLists). However...

* '''Do ''Not'' Group ''Tropes''''' under a {{supertrope}} header. Among perennial problem children in this regard are tropes like {{Badass}} and FiveManBand. List each individual trope example separately in its proper order. There's a section in Administrivia/ExampleIndentationInTropeLists covering this case. Oh and also...

* '''Do Not Add Multiple Tropes With A Slash/Adding Multiple Tropes With A Slash Is Bad:''' See what we did there? Don't do that either. It's lazy, causes duplicate examples to pop up when other tropers notice that a given trope is missing from its proper alphabetical position, not realizing it's slashed with another trope, creates confusion when there are multiple examples (which examples apply to which trope?), and overall just looks bad. If two or more tropes apply to a contextual description, put each trope separately in its correct place.

* '''Make Sure it's Relevant:''' {{Entry Pimp}}ing is extremely common among editors new and old, and is the main reason most of us know anything about ''WesternAnimation/AvatarTheLastAirbender'', but it is not without its downside. Sometimes we think we understand a trope better than we do and wind up [[Administrivia/SquarePegRoundTrope shoehorning examples in where they don't fit]] as a result. Remember, ''always'' make sure to read a trope before you add an example to it. If you are still not sure if it fits, you can always click on the little "discuss" link at the top and ask someone about it. Write the example to address the trope. For example, the trope BadassLongcoat is about ''the garment'', not the person wearing it. Your example should be more about the coat than the person. Also, think twice before citing an entire work as an example of a trope normally applied to individual characters.

* '''Make Sure it's Accurate:''' At times there can be dozens of different tropes that describe very similar events. Be aware of those other tropes before you start shoving in wave after wave of examples into the wrong trope. We have the CanonicalListOfSubtleTropeDistinctions just for that purpose. It is also very easy to go ranting about whatever problem a specific production may have without realizing that your comment is in fact the antithesis of what the trope is about. So in a trope about, say... SugarWiki/VisualEffectsOfAwesome, there is no need to go about and list every SpecialEffectsFailure in the movies listed as having generally great special effects. There is a reason there are multiple pages on the subject; list where it is appropriate.

* '''Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotArguable:''' Do not coat examples in words like "arguably" or "to some". A trope is either used or not used. If you can't make a case beyond a work "debatably" using a certain trope, don't list it. Even on [[YMMV.HomePage YMMV]] pages there is no need to do this because everything is already subjective anyway, making the inclusion of words like "arguably" [[DepartmentOfRedundancyDepartment redundant]]. Don't write "arguable examples". See also PlayingWithATrope to see if something like DownplayedTrope or ZigZaggedTrope may be better.

* '''Avoid Irrelevant Potholing and References:''' Associating one work with another may seem cute, but it is a distraction (e.g. Creator/JewelStaite was in ''Series/{{Firefly}}''; when she was in ''Series/StargateAtlantis'' a number of references to her character on TV Tropes redirected back to ''Firefly''). A {{pothole}} can be very much like its real world version, an annoying bump in the road. It should be used to help the flow of the information without flooding the reader with [[JustForFun/TVTropesWillRuinYourVocabulary wiki injokes and terminology]] (like so). Around here, we have come to refer to the "bad" sort as Administrivia/{{Sinkhole}}s.

* [[#ExamplesAreNotGeneral]]'''Examples Are Not General:''' Making a blanket statement on the behavior of '70s LiveActionTV may be interesting information, but it technically doesn't add anything new as an example. If you feel the information is important, then add it to the description (or the {{Analysis}} subpage) instead of the examples. Examples are about specific works and instances in them; the description is the general behavior of the trope. See Administrivia/NeedsABetterDescription.

* '''Keep it Brief:''' Administrivia/BrevityIsWit. No one wants to read WallsOfText. Overlong examples can encourage other tropers to carry on too long and can quickly turn a trope from a fun read to a long slog. Examples should have enough substance so that readers can get a relatively clear picture of how a given work used the trope in question, ''and no more.'' Don't bog the example down with unnecessary detail or canned analysis. Sometimes saying ItMakesSenseInContext is enough information. As a general rule, if you ever find yourself feeling the need to indent and start a new paragraph, chances are you've gone on too long. A quick way to shorten your example is to scan it and excise any Administrivia/WordCruft.

* '''...[[Administrivia/ZeroContextExample But Not Too Brief]]:''' Remember, examples sections are more than just long lists of shows or tropes -- they are here to ''serve as examples''. If you don't explain how a show used a given trope, what have you really said? Remember, nothing is [[Administrivia/NotSelfExplanatory self-explanatory]] unless it is ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin (even then, err on the side of readers are morons and explain it anyway). Unless it provides context, an example is just a series name floating in space, probably not worth much to anyone who doesn't already remember it (and what's the point of telling people something they already know?). Oh, and most of us are pretty sick of TwoWordsAddedEmphasis Administrivia/{{SinkHole}}s, so please don't do that either. It's easy to [[FanMyopia assume that everyone else is familiar]] with the same things you're familiar with, but this is usually not the case, so think before you break out the internal jargon and {{Fan Nickname}}s without explanation. There are still some people who don't know ItWasHisSled.

* '''Avoid Spoilers:''' Remember our [[Administrivia/HandlingSpoilers Spoiler Policy]]. It is always better to have a somewhat vague example that anyone can read than a precise and specific example covered with pieces of spoiler text. [[spoiler:An entry with]] Spoiler Text [[spoiler:like this one]] can [[spoiler:confuse and]] annoy [[spoiler:even fans of the work in question, not to mention]] anyone [[spoiler:else]]. Always try to write your examples in such a way as to avoid plot-sensitive information like someone [[DeathTropes dying]] or [[BetrayalTropes switching sides]], if you can help it. And for the love of God, don't add in spoileriffic content unless it's ''relevant'' to the topic at hand. If you don't ''need'' to talk about sensitive information to make your point, then ''don't''. Again, don't assume everyone else knows about everything you know. If an example needs to be ''entirely'' spoiler-tagged (including the work/trope name) to avoid spoiling the work, reconsider adding it; it won't do any good as an example for anyone who doesn't want to be spoiled for that work.

* '''Simplify For Non Fans:''' Instead of saying "[[AliceAndBob Alice kills Bob]]," for instance, try to instead identify them by character archetype, as in "FemmeFatale Alice kills Bob, TheFool." If stating this explicitly in the sentence would be too clunky, use potholes: "[[FemmeFatale Alice]] kills [[TheFool Bob]]." This approach has the added bonus of telling the uninitiated who the characters are. If the information is spoiler sensitive, then shift it up a little. "FemmeFatale Alice kills TheFool of the work."

* '''Stay on Topic:''' Don't be a LeftFielder who inserts completely irrelevant topics into an existing subject. If you're talking about a TV show, don't switch in midstream to another one. A new work always deserves its own bullet point, at the very least.

* '''Don't Project Yourself Into the Entry:''' It's not about you, it's about the trope. There's no need to mention yourself. Try to refrain from inserting examples that boil down to "something that happened to me/my mom/a friend of a friend of a friend" or "something that I/my mom/a friend of a friend of a friend thought/did/said." Avoid making personal comments if at all possible, such as "This troper is shocked that we haven't yet mentioned..." or "[[FanonDiscontinuity What are you talking about? There was no X]]." This might all seem very compelling to you, but most people don't care to read it. Most of all, the wiki isn't a place for you to soapbox about things that annoy you -- again, [[Administrivia/TakeItToTheForums we have the forums for that]]. It's about the trope. Stay focused on the trope. That's why we're all here.

* '''Don't Write Reviews:''' Outside of the [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/review_activity.php Reviews Section]], that is. Explaining why your favorite show is the best thing ever is fine; FanMyopia thrives off of this. But a trope is just a trope. Using one trope will not [[Administrivia/TropesAreTools improve or destroy]] the quality of your favorite show. Reviewing the episode where a trope was used is usually off topic and unnecessary to give the example. Sometimes these reviews come across as "this trope was used here, but they made it ''awesome.''" with no description of how it was used. As well, that's why we have the Review feature now.

* '''Don't Rock the Boat:''' Remember the Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement. Administrivia/{{Edit War}}s are no fun for anyone (except {{Wiki Vandal}}s, obviously), so keep that rant about geopolitics to yourself, or Administrivia/TakeItToTheForums. Putting it where it doesn't belong accomplishes nothing besides raising tempers. If you decide to delete something that somebody else wrote, politely drop it into the discussion page with a justification -- nothing but the most blatant [[WikiVandal vandalism]] deserves a [[DriveByUpdater Drive By edit]].

* '''Make A Point, Don't Complain:''' Administrivia/ComplainingAboutShowsYouDontLike is one of the most often used tropes thrown around on this wiki. A TakeThat remark in fiction often comes across as petty, but even more so when it is {{Pot Hole}}d into a comment by a random person on the Internet. As an inversion, try to avoid gushing, too.

* '''Write From A Generic Time Frame:''' Don't be surprised that an example has not been listed -- just list it yourself. Saying "This Troper is surprised that (show/movie/anime/webcomic) has not been listed yet..." then going on to talk about it is nonsensical because, hey, now we have. Your "Surprised it is not listed yet" example may become closer to the top of the page instead of the bottom within a few weeks’ time.

* '''Write in Historical Present Tense:''' Descriptions of events in an example should usually be written in present tense. Only use past or future tense when referring to things that happened in the past or will happen in the future with respect to the events you're describing.
** '''Right:''' Alice eats the burger Bob prepared a while back.
** '''Wrong:''' Alice ate the burger Bob prepared a while back.

* '''[[Administrivia/ExamplesAreNotRecent Don't Use the Word "Recent"]]:''' TV episodes and comic book issues (and some movies) come out on different dates in different parts of the world, so what is to you the most recent episode might be old hat to someone in America or Japan, or it might be several months away from being seen in the UK or Australia. Besides, its status as 'recent' is going to be outdated fairly soon. Instead, refer to the episode or issue by name ("Joey Uses A Trope"), number (X-Men #8), or (rough) date ("during the second season", "an arc in late 1997", "during the continuity reboot") if you feel that information is important.

* '''Remember That This Is A Wiki:''' Therefore, you cannot rely on certain elements remaining on the page. Page quotes and images may be swapped out as tastes change and new works come out, so don't have an example specifically refer to information therein. Also, be very careful about starting an example with "Similarly," or "Like in the Franchise/CareBears example above," if it isn't part of the same group. That example may get deleted, even if it seems like it wouldn't. This goes double on pages that aren't categorized by media yet; if the trope grows popular enough, media categories will be added, and suddenly the "above" example you were comparing it to is now three-quarters of the way down the page. Along a similar line, don't be surprised if someone slices and dices your example because half of it was Administrivia/ConversationInTheMainPage .

* '''Don't Use Internet Acronyms:''' AFAIK, IIRC, BTW, and the like have no place in an example. In fact, if you remove one of these while leaving the rest of the example intact, not only does the example lose no information at all, it actually becomes ''more'' comprehensible because people who aren't familiar with Net slang don't have to go look up the acronym. And since these acronyms are meant to make texting and forum posting quicker, when you see it here it makes the page seem like you didn't put a lot of effort into it. Despite the relaxed attitude, we are still trying to be well written.

* '''This is not a Wiki of [[MemeticMutation Memes]]:''' We know [[Film/{{Transformers}} Bonecrusher hates everything]], Creator/ChuckNorris is a [[MemeticBadass god in mortal form]], and [[Film/IronMan Tony Stark built a suit of armor]] in a cave with a box of [[Series/{{Seinfeld}} yadda yadda]], but these cute gags rarely stay popular longer than 6 months. Unless you are listing an example of a MemeticMutation from a work, there is no real reason to list it among tropes that have nothing to do with the meme in the first place.

* '''Don't Use Acronyms For Show Titles:''' It's generally a bad idea, since an acronym of a title won't be readily recognized by non-fans (and might even be used in multiple fandoms), nor will it be automatically linked to the show's media page. Mixed-case initialisms (e.g. [=WoW=] for ''VideoGame/WorldOfWarcraft'') are particularly bad, since they will create red links unless the proper escapes are used. The only exception is if a media page describes the common acronym, and you are editing ''that'' page. In the general wiki use the full name.

* '''Don't Use Administrivia/WordCruft:''' Phrases like "Possibly subverted in..." or "<Show X> might qualify" make the example look wishy-washy and add no informational content. If you want to add an example and you're not 100% sure about the details, then either:
## ''Don't add it'', but instead put a note in the discussion page saying "I think there might be an example along these lines;" or
## ''Pretend you're certain'', and rely on WikiMagic to fix it if you're wrong.

* '''Don't Use Weasel Tropes:''' Part of this is just being accurate to the trope, as FridgeLogic is specifically "You didn't notice it until long afterwards" but many people tend to use it as "This thing annoys me." Attaching a trope to it does not excuse anyone of the Administrivia/{{Complaining|AboutShowsYouDontLike}} rule. The same goes for any other number of tropes that have loosely defined parameters.

* '''Being an example of a trope is neither a badge of honor nor a mark of shame:''' Administrivia/TropesAreTools. If your favorite show has a perfectly fitting example in a trope [[PetPeeveTrope you think is bad]], it isn't going to magically make the show worse. Conversely, don't rush to try to include examples of your favorite in tropes you think are good, especially if, as previously noted, they don't really fit. In fact, if you recognize a "bad" trope being used by a work you love, be the one to list it first. That way you have the chance to explain it properly instead of letting someone else use it to rant. It's not going to make the show better if it's part of all the good tropes. A show is good or bad on its own terms.

* '''[[Administrivia/WeblinksAreNotExamples Don't rely on YouTube or other URL links:]]''' Don't put in an example that consists of "watch this Website/YouTube video[=/=]read this strip of the comic[=/=]look at this other site to understand what the heck I'm talking about!" The entire example will become worthless if (and in many cases, ''when'') the offsite link changes or is deleted. Videos in particular are often taken down for copyright reasons or just aren't available worldwide. Webcomics and Web Originals change hosting sites or strip[=/=]episode numbering formats. Also, try not to link to videos/forums/etc. that can only be viewed by members or subsets thereof.\\
\\
URL link pages should make things absolutely clear what information you are searching for. A 10 page review of an episode is not helpful for a single trope. If you can't link more precisely than the whole review, add more information about where the relevant part is; something like "about halfway down page three" will do.

* '''[[Administrivia/SpeculativeTroping Don't Speculate, Don't Prognosticate]]:''' You may have a good reason for assuming the trope will be used in a show eventually, but if you haven't '''seen''' the trope in the work, [[ShapedLikeItself you haven't seen the trope used in the work]], whether it's because the creators haven't put it in yet, because [[AvertedTrope they're not going to put it in]], or because you haven't actually seen the work in question (particularly if [[Administrivia/CreatingAWorkPageForAnUpcomingWork it hasn't actually been released yet]]). If and when you actually see the trope used, add it -- but not before. By the same token, don't say "used in pretty much every [genre] work," particularly if you haven't seen literally all of them and can confirm that it's in them.

* '''Don't Use Bad Markup:''' In particular, never, ''ever'' put [=[[redi=][=rect:]]=] markup within an example, as it will obliterate the trope entry. With practice, the markup language will become familiar. Check your entry after you edited it to make sure it worked out properly. You might be going for '''''BOLD and Italics''''' and end up just getting '''''Italics''. Double check trope links to make sure it isn't RedLinked. Try to avoid spending [[SerialTweaker three editing sessions]] fixing your mistakes; use the Preview function to double-check your work before committing it.

* '''Don't Overuse Emphasis Markup:''' '''Boldface''', ''italics'', and ALLCAPS for emphasis are best used sparingly when writing examples. Put too much of an example in emphasis markup, and nothing stands out. If you do emphasise something, just use one form of markup; combining two or more results in the text equivalent of '''''SHOUTING FULL VOLUME'''''. Save that for quotes where the speaker actually is shouting full volume. The names of tropes on work pages and their subpages never go in emphasis markup for any reason; if you want to emphasise how powerfully a work uses a trope, write a compelling description for it.

* '''Don't Be Afraid to''' '''''Edit:''''' Sometimes a prior example is worded strangely or glosses over distinct examples in its own right. You are encouraged [[WikiMagic to clean up what came before]]: parse down a WallOfText into bullet points, fix grammar or bad mark-up and eliminate natter. The cleaner the page looks, the better your example can be read and understood.

* '''Do Not Use Comment Tags to Pre-hide Examples:''' While existing examples that violate a rule, such as Administrivia/ZeroContextExamples or uncited examples for works that haven't released, may be hidden with comment tags to encourage users to fix them, ''never'' add a new example that is already commented out. It's considered lazy, sneaky, and underhanded, and repeated offenses lead to quick suspensions.

* '''Have Fun!''': Seriously, don't stress the rules and relax. We're mostly pretty chill here. As long as you don't go trashing entries or peeing on other tropers' lawns, we'll forgive just about anything. Seriously. Even the administrators are the type of people who'd [[AllLovingHero give their shoes to a man on the street if he asked nicely enough]].

* '''Don't Speculate, Don't Prognosticate:''' You may have a good reason for assuming the trope will be used in a show eventually, but if you haven't '''seen''' the trope in the work, [[ShapedLikeItself you haven't seen the trope used in the work]], whether it's because the creators haven't put it in yet, because [[AvertedTrope they're not going to put it in]], or because you haven't actually seen the work in question (particularly if [[Administrivia/CreatingAWorkPageForAnUpcomingWork it hasn't actually been released yet]]). If and when you actually see the trope used, add it -- but not before. By the same token, don't say "used in pretty much every [genre] work," particularly if you haven't seen literally all of them and can confirm that it's in them.

* '''Avoid Irrelevant Potholing and References:''' Associating one work with another may seem cute, but it is a distraction (ie Creator/JewelStaite was in ''Series/{{Firefly}}'', when she was in ''Series/StargateAtlantis'' a number of references to her character on TV Tropes redirected back to ''Firefly''). A {{pothole}} can be very much like its real world version, an annoying bump in the road. It should be used to help the flow of the information without flooding the reader with [[JustForFun/TVTropesWillRuinYourVocabulary wiki injokes and terminology]] (like so). Around here, we have come to refer to the "bad" sort as Administrivia/{{Sinkhole}}s.

* '''Do Not Use Comment Tags to Pre-hide Examples:''' While existing examples that violate a rule, such as Administrivia/{{ZeroContextExample}}s or uncited examples for works that haven't released, may be hidden with comment tags to encourage users to fix them, ''never'' add a new example that is already commented out. It's considered lazy, sneaky, and underhanded, and repeated offenses lead to quick suspensions.