To-do list:

• Examples require the Ship Sinking scene to be, in some way, specifically about the characters it's sinking and require the work contain some in-universe acknowledgement about the possibility of the two being a couple. Remove any examples that don't fit. Progress is being tracked using the Ship Sinking Wick Cleaning sandbox.

Original post

This Thread

That thread was trying to figure out what Ship Sinking actually means. There were a few attempts to come up with a clear definition-

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16343113800A23179400&page=2#comment-38

"a scene blatantly set-up to demonstrate that a ship is ridiculous" (Adept)

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16343113800A23179400&page=2#comment-44

"a moment which specifically exists to make it clear that two particular characters are not, or will not become, a couple."

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16343113800A23179400&page=3#comment-51

WICK CHECK

I also did a wick check to figure out how Ship Sinking is being used currently- I found that, off-page, it was actually mostly used as a pothole, like "Alice and Bob are flirty until Bob's death in s3 sinks the ship". So I also took 40 random examples from the subpages, since those are easier to identify how theyre being used

I also found this was often being used as sort of, the opposite of Ship Tease. Like, if ship tease is "The work hints that Bob and Alice might get together", then Ship Sinking is being used as "The work hints that Bob and Alice will not get together"

Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 7th 2022 at 10:04:47 AM

Opening. Not sure what to do here, but the very inconsistent usage is still a problem.

In my understanding, at least that's close to what the Laconic is trying to say, is when in an ongoing work there's specific shipping happening in the fandom, and later in the story, intentional or not, the two characters become very unlikely to be together.

That sounds redundant with Abandon Shipping.

Some thought questions for people who don't want to read through the thread:

• Ship Sinking purports to trope the in-universe moments where a couple does not get together. (at the very least, that's the razor-thin reason it's in not in YMMV/).
  • Does it work better in YMMV, or would it be redundant with Abandon Shipping or some other trope?
  • How would we make an objective version workable, considering the unworkable usage?
• Are prior moments that can reasonably called Ship Tease (I say "reasonably called" because the thread also noted Ship Tease is also likely vaguely defined) necessary for Ship Sinking to occur?
• Can a Ship Sinking moment be called while the work is ongoing? (I brought up How I Met Your Mother's ending^note where the title and the entire show make you think Ted will get with the woman he dates in season 8, the mother of his children, only for the very last scene of the show to reveal that she's dead and he ended up with one of the other main characters, whom he had previously broken up with, instead as an example of a work where the ship was, well, raised from the depths of the ocean at the literal last minute)

To the first question, "a couple doesn't get together" is obviously not noteworthy unless the possibility of the pair becoming a couple is previously acknowledged. This possibility doesn't have to be shown through Ship Tease, but it could just be that the characters themselves discuss the idea before dismissing it.

Re YMMV and Abandon Shipping: Well, "the possibility of a ship happening in canon has been effectively dashed to zero" is not the same as "fans no longer ship the pair", but there might be a room for disagreement in whether the "possibility of the pair becoming a couple" exists before the "sinking" moment. For example, if a story involves a Love Triangle between Alice, Bob and Charlie, and it ends with Alice and Bob hooking up, does it "sink" Alice/Charlie or Bob/Charlie if it's obvious from the start that Alice will end up with Bob?

Edited by Adept on Dec 25th 2021 at 10:49:29 PM

I'm starting to wonder if a good play for this is just to make it an exampleless Fan Speak page.

I think this should be YMMV if we go with the definition of the work debunking the idea of a couple getting together, because it's YMMV if fans were shipping those characters to begin with.

I was under the impression that Abandon Shipping is when a work kills a lot of interest in a ship due to the introduction of some element (e.g. unintentional Squick) suddenly making it undesirable. Ship Sinking is when the work basically goes "this relationship is never happening in canon."

I feel like this should be a Definition-Only Page. I'm pretty sure it's an actual term, but the widespread and all-consuming nature of shipping means it's not entirely noteworthy.

Edited by Karxrida on Dec 25th 2021 at 7:11:22 AM

I don't know why I didn't already mention this (I thought about it earlier, but must have forgotten), but I think this should be YMMV even if we make it a Fan Speak page, similarly to what we did with Jossed not too long ago.

I do think there's a real objective concept here- a moment, deliberately and objectively in the story, which makes it clear that these two characters are not love interests. Good examples-

• In Avatar, at one point the main characters watch a play about their lives, which depicts Zuko and Katara as love interests. They react with horror and confusion
• In Sherlock, John asks if sherlock has a girlfriend, which sherlock misinterprets as John hitting on him, and says he's not interested. John quickly corrects the misunderstanding, and says he's straight

There are a number of these examples which don't really fit into anything else and are clearly there to overtly state to the audience that this is not a romantic relationship

I do however agree that the retroactivity is a problem— this is subverted so often that it can be hard to tell what is a real sinking and what is a trick until the end. I can see a requirement to wait, either until the end or at least the end of the season/installment/etc

I mean, we definitely need better guidelines if we keep examples. Would it count for pairings that are popularly shipped but never teased in the actual work? Or for pairings that nobody actually shipped in the first place?

^ My thought, personally, was that it would count for pairings which were mentioned— in any way— in the text. Not requiring an actual romantic tension or Ship Tease, just any acknowledgement of the concept of these two characters being together

So, the Sherlock/Watson or Katara/Zuko examples would count, even with no ship tease, because they are specifically mentioned in order to be shot down. Pairings like Hermione/Draco Malfoy, or Steve/Bucky from the Avengers, while popular with some fans, are never even vaguely referenced in the canon text, so cannot be Ship Sinking.

Edited by Tremmor19 on Dec 26th 2021 at 1:11:50 PM

See, the one that comes to mind is from House of Anubis. The pairing of Patricia and Jerome (Patrome) was pretty popular after season 1, when Patricia lacked an actual love interest and fans thought they had a lot of chemistry. The pairing was never actually teased in any real way, their moments were down to Shipping Goggles, and I say this as a former Patrome shipper. But then in season 3, Patricia asked him out on a date in order to make her ex jealous, and he agreed, only for the date to turn out as one big prank on Jerome's end (where he intentionally dialed up the love talk to freak her out), and then they both admitted they didn't like each other and ate cupcakes.

This was a pairing that never existed outside of the imagination of (some parts of) the fandom, but then they went and had a scene mocking the idea of the two of them being in love. I'm torn on whether or not it would qualify as Ship Sinking in this case.

More problematic though are works like Warrior Cats, where relationships change all the times due to the whims of the creators. A pairing that seems dead in the water in one series might suddenly be revived several books later.

Edited by WarJay77 on Dec 26th 2021 at 1:11:51 PM

^ See, to me, that is a perfect example— "a scene mocking the idea of the two of them being in love".

Basically, if the ship is never mentioned at all, its entirely possible the creators had just never even thought of the pairing— we can't mention every two characters that didn't get together. But if the story mocks the concept of the pairing, then we know for sure they thought of it and are rejecting it

But I fully agree that the warrior cats (and soap opera, etc) style relationships are a confusing gray area and I'm not sure what rules to put on that

Edited by Tremmor19 on Dec 26th 2021 at 2:43:49 PM

Do we have any potential crowner options yet, or does this thread need more time? Just curious because we've had a few long threads lately, and I was hoping this doesn't become one of them.

I mean, it's only on the first page, so not everything may have been considered. But questioned so far:

• YMMV
• Fan Speak
• Definition-Only Page
• Merge into Abandon Shipping
• Needs to be intentional by the creator not favoring specific Shipping
• Require prior Ship Tease
• Require the work to be finished

The only change I'd make is not listing Fan Speak and Definition-Only Page separately, because Fan Speak pages are a type of definition-only page already.

I'll wait for more input before making a crowner.

Ill copy paste this defintion i suggested in the previos thread— this is the version i proposed in order to keep this objective, so can go in the crowner

Other than that the crowner list looks good to me

a moment which specifically exists to make it clear that two particular characters will are not, or will not become, a couple.

• the Ship Sinking scene has to be, in some way, specifically about the characters it's sinking,
• and the work contain some in-universe acknowledgement about the possibility of those two as a couple— even if it's just to say "eww! no way!"

so- for example,

Ship Sinking examples

• Harry tells Hermione he sees her as a sister and she agrees with him, although some people in universe think theyre a couple
• Leia and Luke previously kissed, then find out they are long lost siblings
• someone thinks Katara and Zuko are a couple, and they're both horrified and grossed out
• Steve is about to confess a crush on Robin when she tells him she's gay
• the story acknowledges that Sherlock and John might appear to be a couple, but they confirm their relationship is platonic

Not examples

• Katara kisses Aang, Zuko finds out offscreen and doesn't react anymore than the rest of the cast
• Elan and Nale find out they are long lost siblings, but never flirted before or nor does the work suggest they could have been a couple
• Raven dies and everyone in the cast mourns, including her popular shipmate Garfield
• Lots of fans ship Steve and Bucky, but the story never acknowledges this and steve gets married to Peggy

Edited by Tremmor19 on Dec 31st 2021 at 9:09:59 AM

I can add that to the crowner when it's made.

Yeah, this is sort of an issue that's popped up with Ship Tease as well, but what counts as a genuine moment of Ship Sinking and what doesn't can be hard to discern. For instance, She's Not My Girlfriend sees usage as both an example of Ship Tease and Ship Sinking depending on the work, and while many works make it obvious, in others, it can be harder to tell which is which.

Edited by Oshawott337 on Dec 31st 2021 at 9:47:08 AM

^ yeah, thats an issue which is harder to sort out and relies a bit on hindsight. But we can for sure sort out and remove the examples which are pure fanthink from the examples which are objective

So, are we good to make a crowner with these options?

• Make YMMV
• Turn into a Fan Speak Definition-Only Page
• Merge into Abandon Shipping
• Require examples to be intentional due to the creator not favoring specific Ships
• Require prior Ship Tease
• Require the work to be finished
• Require the Ship Sinking scene to be, in some way, specifically about the characters it's sinking and require the work contain some in-universe acknowledgement about the possibility of the two being a couple

Every time I see an option that would remove examples get downvoted, I can't help but wonder if it was by people who like the examples and don't want them removed, even if it would be the best course of action.