History Administrivia / JustifyingEdit

Hey! Wait a minute! That's my favorite show on that list, five lines down! [[NoTrueScotsman They'd never use such a lame cliche]]! Doesn't the editor who wrote this know that [[JustifiedTrope it's perfectly justified]], and that ItMakesSenseInContext, really, I swear?

This is bad form. TV Tropes is informal enough not to demand references for every claim as Wiki/TheOtherWiki does, so you don't need justification to correct a perceived error in objective fact (though explaining in the "edit reason" is considered good form). If the objective facts contradict or significantly challenge the validity of the example, the best thing to do is 1) if possible, check to make sure you're remembering it correctly, then 2) ''remove it altogether'' (again, with an "edit reason" given for good form, or even an explanation on the discussion page if the edit is drastic enough). If it's a recent edit and you're particularly sensitive about hurting the editor's feelings, explain what you think the factual error is on the discussion page and give them a chance to delete it themselves (there's a strong chance they'll never respond or even know. Make a mental note to check back later, and delete it yourself if there's no response). See Administrivia/RepairDontRespond.

# The justification is that ''some'' kind of rationalization is provided in-story. This is based on a misunderstanding of {{justified trope}} by the Wiki/TVTropes definition: It's not a "good trope", it's a trope that flows naturally and inevitably from the original premise of the story. A story fact that is invented and introduced to explain an otherwise-implausible trope is a HandWave, not a {{justified trope}} (many handwaves are used to excellent effect; many justified tropes wind up as frustrating--"good" has nothing to do with it).

Justifying edits are to be avoided since they are a form of Administrivia/ConversationInTheMainPage. To a fan of the show they look nitpicky; to someone who's not a fan, they're annoying and look like {{fan dumb}}, possibly even turning them off from trying the show. Don't make the writing weaker in order to try and cast your show in a better light. The way a work [[PlayingWithATrope plays with any given trope]] says little or nothing about its overall quality, in either direction. If an example is ''factually'' incorrect, remove it entirely and explain in the "edit reason" field or the discussion page. Finally, remember that acknowledging that it's a justifying edit [[HypocrisyNod doesn't mean that it's okay to make it]].

Justifying edits are to be avoided since they are a form of Administrivia/ConversationInTheMainPage. To a fan of the show they look nitpicky; to someone who's not a fan, they're annoying and look like {{fan dumb}}, possibly turning them off from trying the show. Don't make the writing weaker in order to try and cast your show in a better light. The way a work [[PlayingWithATrope plays with any given trope]] says little or nothing about its overall quality, in either direction. If an example is ''factually'' incorrect, remove it entirely and explain in the "edit reason" field or the discussion page. Finally, remember that acknowledging that it's a justifying edit [[HypocrisyNod doesn't mean that it's okay to make it]].

Justifying edits usually come from a fundamental misunderstanding of what "{{trope}}" means (or, for that matter, what "justified" here refers to). The point of tropes is that they ''work''; that's why they're used so much. They're natural and useful story elements, often shortcuts that eliminate scads of boring exposition. Since tropes [[Administrivia/TropesAreTools are not inherently bad]] to begin with, there's no reason to "defend" your favorite show by "justifying" its tropes. In short, tropes are "justified" in the way of "it makes an in-universe sense"[[note]]"to give you a better idea, think "explained"[[/note]], not "it is good that this trope happens"[[note]]"justify" does have 2 meanings, although the latter is used more often[[/note]]. If you see the latter, that's Justifying Edit.

# The justification is based on debatable grounds that will look like [[WildMassGuessing guesswork]], [[FanWank rationalization]] or {{misaimed fandom}} to others.

# The justification is that ''some'' kind of rationalization is provided in-story. This is based on a misunderstanding of {{justified trope}} by the Wiki/TVTropes definition: It's not a "good trope", it's a trope that flows naturally and inevitably from the original premise of the story. A story fact that is invented and introduced to explain an otherwise-implausible trope is a [[HandWave handwave]], not a {{justified trope}} (many handwaves are used to excellent effect; many justified tropes wind up as frustrating--"good" has nothing to do with it).

* If it's being argumentative or explaining how the above entry is Administrivia/{{not an example}}, then just delete it. Examples are only useful when most people who watch the show in question can at least agree that it uses the trope. If it has a point, you can probably delete the entry that it's responding to as well.

That's what you should do if you see a justifying edit, but remember that above all else, what you should ''not'' do is [[PotHole pothole]] it to this page.

Hey! Wait a minute! That's my favorite show on that list, five lines down! [[NoTrueScotsman They'd never use such a lame cliche]]! Doesn't the editor who wrote this know that [[JustifiedTrope it's perfectly justified]], and that {{it makes sense in context}}, really, I swear?

Justifying edits are to be avoided since they are one of the signs of Administrivia/ConversationInTheMainPage. To a fan of the show they look nitpicky; to someone who's not a fan, they're annoying and look like {{fan dumb}}, possibly turning them off from trying the show. Don't make the writing weaker in order to try and cast your show in a better light. The way a work [[PlayingWithATrope plays with any given trope]] says little or nothing about its overall quality, in either direction. If an example is ''factually'' incorrect, remove it entirely and explain in the "edit reason" field or the discussion page. Finally, remember that acknowledging that it's a justifying edit [[HypocrisyNod doesn't mean that it's okay to make it]].

Justifying edits usually come from a fundamental misunderstanding of what "{{trope}}" means (or, for that matter, what "justified" here refers to). The point of tropes is that they ''work''; that's why they're used so much. They're natural and useful story elements, often shortcuts that eliminate scads of boring exposition. Since tropes [[TropesAreNotBad are not inherently bad]] to begin with, there's no reason to "defend" your favorite show by "justifying" its tropes. In short, tropes are "justified" in the way of "it makes an in-universe sense"[[note]]"to give you a better idea, think "explained"[[/note]], not "it is good that this trope happens"[[note]]"justify" does have 2 meanings, although the latter is used more often[[/note]]. If you see the latter, that's Justifying Edit.

# Trying to justify some tropes (like ActionGirl, {{Determinator}}, {{Yandere}}, or BarbieDollAnatomy) is completely silly. Not only is the trope [[TropesAreNotBad not inherently negative]], the trope is inherently not justifiable. It just exists, usually as an expected staple of a genre.

Justifying edits usually come from a fundamental misunderstanding of what "{{trope}}" means (or, for that matter, what "justified" here refers to). The point of tropes is that they ''work''; that's why they're used so much. They're natural and useful story elements, often shortcuts that eliminate scads of boring exposition. Since tropes [[TropesAreNotBad are not inherently bad]] to begin with, there's no reason to "defend" your favorite show by "justifying" its tropes. In short, tropes are "justified" in the way of "it makes an in-universe sense", not "it is good that this trope happens". If you see the latter, that's Justifying Edit.

Justifying edits usually come from a fundamental misunderstanding of what "{{trope}}" means (or, for that matter, what "justified" here refers to). The point of tropes is that they ''work''; that's why they're used so much. They're natural and useful story elements, often shortcuts that eliminate scads of boring exposition. Since tropes [[TropesAreNotBad are not inherently bad]] to begin with, there's no reason to "defend" your favorite show by "justifying" its tropes. In short, tropes are "justified" in the way of "it makes an in-universe case", not "it is good that this trope happens". If you see the latter, that's Justifying Edit.

Justifying edits usually come from a fundamental misunderstanding of what "{{trope}}" means. The point of tropes is that they ''work''; that's why they're used so much. They're natural and useful story elements, often shortcuts that eliminate scads of boring exposition. Since tropes [[TropesAreNotBad are not inherently bad]] to begin with, there's no reason to "defend" your favorite show by "justifying" its tropes.

* If it's being argumentative or explaining how the above entry is {{not an example}}, then just delete it. Examples are only useful when most people who watch the show in question can at least agree that it uses the trope. If it has a point, you can probably delete the entry that it's responding to as well.

Well, I'll put a stop to that! Time to hit that edit button, send in the [[Administrivia/ExampleIndentationInTropeLists second bullet point]] and let the site readership know that [[WordCruft actually, don't forget that, to be fair, it's entirely possible that, what really happened is]]...

You click the link. You read the entry. My, this is a good one. Way to call out those Hollywood hacks on their use of a nonsensical device. Oh, how silly these shows are, using such a silly and obvious tro...