Follow TV Tropes

Following

Discussion History Main / PlotHole

Go To

[009] Piledriver Current Version
Changed line(s) 10 from:
n
In addition: I see that the main \
to:
In addition: I see that the main \\\"Some Anvils...\\\" entry has been edited to \\\'\\\'clarify\\\'\\\' that the trope is supposed to reference works that were made better by their heavy-handedness. While I still find that very very subjective, it certainly rules out a lot of the examples cited here. Take your pick, there\\\'s a high probability that the example was cited only because the wiki editor agreed (perhaps very strongly) with the Aesop in question, not that the work was necessarily made better, or because there was an inherent \\\"need\\\" -- barring inherent bias of the wiki editor.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
Nah... Either they are all equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular bias.
to:
Nah... Either they are \\\'\\\'\\\'\\\'\\\'all\\\'\\\'\\\'\\\'\\\' equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular bias.
Changed line(s) 10 from:
n
In addition: I see that the main \
to:
In addition: I see that the main \\\"Some Anvils...\\\" entry has been edited to \\\'\\\'clarify\\\'\\\' that the trope is supposed to reference works that were made better by their heavy-handedness. While I still find that very very subjective, it certainly rules out a lot of the examples cited here. Take your pick, there\\\'s a high probability that the example was cited only because the wiki editor agreed with the Aesop in question, not that the work was necessarily made better, or because there was an inherent \\\"need\\\" -- barring inherent bias of the wiki editor.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
Strongly suggest merging examples here into the main Anvilicious article and putting a redirect here.
to:
Strongly suggest merging examples here into the main Anvilicious article.
Changed line(s) 10 from:
n
In addition: I see that the main \
to:
In addition: I see that the main \\\"Some Anvils...\\\" entry has been edited to \\\'\\\'clarify\\\'\\\' that the trope is supposed to reference works that were made better by their heavy-handedness. While I still find that very very subjective, it certainly rules out a lot of the examples cited here. Take your pick, there\\\'s a high probability that the example was cited only because the wiki editor agreed with the Aesop in question, not that the work was necessarily made better, or because there was an inherent \\\"need\\\" -- barring inherent bias of the wiki editor.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
Strongly suggest merging examples here into the main Anvilicious article and putting a redirect here.
to:
Strongly suggest merging examples here into the main Anvilicious article and putting a redirect here.


In addition: I see that the main \\\"Some Anvils...\\\" entry has been edited to \\\'\\\'clarify\\\'\\\' that the trope is supposed to reference works that were made better by their heavy-handedness. While I still find that very very subjective, it certainly rules out a lot of the examples cited here. Take your pick, there\\\'s a high probability that the example was cited only because the wiki editor agreed with the Aesop in question, not that the work was necessarily made better, or because there was an inherent \\\"need\\\" -- barring inherent bias of the wiki editor.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
Strongly suggest merging examples here into the main [Anvilicious] article.
to:
Strongly suggest merging examples here into the main Anvilicious article and putting a redirect here.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
Nah... Either they are all equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular bias.
to:
Nah... Either they are all equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular bias.

Strongly suggest merging examples here into the main [Anvilicious] article.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
Nah... Either they are all equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular social bias.
to:
Nah... Either they are all equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular bias.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
My point is that this entry seems superfluous and inherently bigoted. If not every heavy-handed \'moral\' \
to:
My point is that this entry seems superfluous and inherently bigoted. If not every heavy-handed \\\'moral\\\' needs to be pushed, who decides which are worthy? Any random wiki editor? (Ever shifting) social consensus?

Nah... Either they are all equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular social bias.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Aren\'t they all?
to:
Don\\\'t they all?

My point is that this entry seems superfluous and inherently bigoted. If not every heavy-handed \\\'moral\\\' \\\"needs\\\" to be pushed, who decides which are worthy? Any random wiki editor? (Ever shifting) social consensus?

Nah... Either they are all equal in the market of ideas, or this entry is just an exercise in popular social bias.
Top