Discussion UsefulNotes / DonaldTrump

I agree with this suggestion. No doubt this page has gotten and will continue to get a LOT of traffic, the larger portion of which will be from people who are not familiar with TVT, don't have accounts here, or won't know to check this discussion page for further info. Heck, I've had an account here for years and still found it a little weird that no one had added the same disclaimer TVT employs for, say, Sonichu or other flame-baity figures. A simple note stating that moderators have locked the page for the foreseeable future due to the subject's divisive nature should be explanation enough.

To that, we can also add that since the page is locked it's impossible to keep the information up to date when there's some wild new development in politics almost every day. Some of the important events are enumerated in The New '10s (albeit in a tone that conservatives might call liberally biased), but we can assume that a proper entry will only be written after his presidency reaches an end.

Uhhh, yeah, I noticed that too. Also, there ought to be stuff like Mutated Meme (since he basically helped start the #Covfefe meme over a late night post which is now a coffee on Amazon, and I believe a perfume), The Great Wall, Reset Button (he's pretty much undone everything Obama has done, probably intentionally).

Right now, we have three tropes (two of which are arch-enemy tropes). Not sure this is good press.

What do you mean, "good press"?

That's a pretty lousy argument for adding things, though honestly I'd be on board with an explanation as to why the page is out-of-date.

A worse explanation is your proffered examples. Those are all troping real-life, which we adamantly and explicitly don't want to do. We trope media. The reason he has arch-enemy tropes is because they're from fictional works that portrayed him as such. If a Useful Notes/ figure gets tropes, it's tropes from fictional appearances of said figure.

Given that logging those now would absolutely be breaking the Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement... yeah. We can add them when he's behind us.

Also, the information being not updated, isn't even RIGHT.

It says that he was pushed over by 30 votes, giving him 275. This leads to the impression that he just squeezed by getting the election.

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/president

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/26/trump-electoral-college-popular-vote-555148

Hillary lost 232 to Trump's 306, losing by 74 votes. This is not a narrow margin, so the article itself, by trying to prevent edits, is basically telling an incomplete truth. As for the rest, I'm reasonably sure we can throw Cautious Editing Judgement at it, and have mature people. If not, we'll at least have a lot of tropes. Which is a better page anyway.

Offhand, I can think of some tropes: George Jetson Job Security (he fires a few people even those he's hired), The Great Wall, Did You Just Have Tea With Cthulhu (some of his deals with North Korea apply), Locked Out of the Loop (some conservatives don't appear to know the bad things he's done, and the inverse for liberals and what good he's done), Kill the Poor (the perceived effect of his tax cut plan, though arguably some people can say it's zig-zagged), Destructive Saviour (he possibly has helped the country, but he did so by putting the environment off the menu). I can think of good and bad tropes here.

Okay, first of all, Tropes Are Tools, they are not good or bad. Second, all of those seem like they trope real life, and that is something we do NOT do. Simple as that. If you have example from media - that's fine. But please don't try to apply tropes to actual real life events.

As for the votes thing, you can request an edit in the Locked Pages thread in the forum.

^^ Thank you for illustrating precisely why we're avoiding adding tropes.

Edits can be posted to the Locked Pages thread (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=gsjp7dldjh2dwdelcha2hu17&page=829#20725) which only means a slight delay. Information being outdated occurs whenever editors choose not to submit edits. Trump -as Creator- is what we are primarily concerned with, Trump -as President- is an afterthought because he is a Creator first.

Every single other president's individual page has tropes referring to their real life acts: given that the vast majority of them aren't creators. Should they all be axed?

Yes.

So, why no movement on this? Doesn't feel fair that Trump is treated differently from other politicians

If it really comes down to wanting to avoid flame wars, grow a set, place a warning and ban anyone transgressing.

Heh. It never occurred to me to ask what J. stood for.

It stands for "Joker"

LMAOOOOO @ Jhonny.

That's not especially funny.

I guess they will give things some time to cool off before the page gets unlocked.

Either way, I still expect some craziness.

I cannot think of one positive action he has done as president that doesn't have controversial undertones.

Personally, I don't see it getting unlocked anytime soon, if ever. Even after Biden gets sworn in as president and all, Doanld Trump is still an extremely controversial and polarizing figure and one that can still easily set off flame wars, natter and the like (particularly given the current political climate and the nature of the internet) if unlocked unlike other presidential figures. Its likely too risky overall to ever consider unlocking it just because of the subject in particular.

Of course, I am not a mod or what not, so what would I know?

It might be possible this page is never updated until after Trump's death whenever that is, I imagine that might be the only time when the flames cool down enough

Why not just edit it, agree on it, then lock it? You're letting the pro Trump flamers win if you're scared to update this page with facts

As the Troper who wrote that paragraph, I'm not sure if I can provide an opinion. That said, I think the first two sentences are objective descriptions that help illustrate why Trump as a figure was a unique president and should stay in. While I also think the rest of the paragraph is a mostly fair summary of his policies and the events of his administration (save for the "aggressive demeanor" thing, which I concede was an overstep on my part), I agree that redirecting to the Other Wiki for more details is the best solution for the foreseeable future.

Condensing some of the above can make this page more informative without adding any kind of spin. My proposal -

______ In 2019, Trump was impeached by the House for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress due to allegations that he had used his office to pressure the Ukrainian president into investigating Joe Biden, his likely opponent in the 2020 race. This made Trump the third president to be impeached.

He ultimately lost the election to Biden, becoming the first incumbent to lose reelection since George H. W. Bush in 1992. Trump refused to publicly concede the loss, a first since the tradition began in 1896, and actively fought to overturn the results. After election officials and investigators found no evidence of widespread fraud and dozens of judges determined his claims of victory to be baseless, Trump organized a rally of thousands of supporters outside the White House to protest the election's certification. Members of this rally marched to the Capitol and stormed the building, resulting in five deaths. Though Trump finally conceded after the certification, the House quickly reconvened and, for the first time in U.S. history, impeached the president a second time. ______

Concise and objectively true. It avoids emotionally-loaded words (I removed things like "harsh", "aggressive", and "abuse") while providing some context as to what in particular was unusual about these events. I removed things that seemed like *only* his supporters or opponents would mention, like his financial information. Further, I removed references to Republicans and Democrats in order to prevent a "red team vs. blue team" feel. Removed the note that a police officer died, and so on. What's left is sparse but I think gives the reader (especially one of our many non-US readers) useful information on why the end of his presidency was unprecedented in many ways and provoked such strong feelings in supporters and opponents.

Should’ t we mention that he was acquitted from the second one as well?

Frankly, the whole thing strikes me as irrelevant political minutiae. We have Wikipedia for this.

I don't believe events that are known internationally and will be in history books fifty years from now count as minutiae, or that political events are irrelevant to a politician. We have ten giant paragraphs on Rutherford B. Hayes and 12980 word written about the House of Tudor.

I don't mean to be pushy and I apologize if I am out of line. But I don't think banning the addition of basic information is appropriate for a website whose purpose is to share information. The events I described in, I believe, an objective way are important to understanding the political climate of the USA in the 2020s. I'd like to think I am a neutral observer, neither Democrat nor Republican. I don't have an angle here, other than just wanting to treat this page like any other - a touchy subject and one that deserves effort to explain in a fair and unbiased way.

It feels weird that this one specific topic is being censored, like it is part of someone's agenda to keep the information away from everyone. I'm familiar enough with you to know that you're an objective and fair person, but from the outside and to people not familiar with the mods it really just looks like part of someone's agenda to censor basic information. And censorship is kind of scary when it seeps into neutral media. I really don't get it, we have free and open sharing of information everywhere but here and it makes me kind of nervous when we start burying information.

I can understand a mod's perspective as to why they'd want to err on the side of caution regarding Trump - he's still an extremely polarizing figure whose followers are so heavily invested in him that even objectively true information could ignite a flame war if it paints him in a bad light. Easier to lock the page and stick to bare-bones, politically neutral facts than to try to police an edit war.

On the other hand, I also see Nathaniel's point that this information IS objectively true, and relevant to who Trump is as relates to topics involving this wiki's mission. And it being "irrelevant political minutiae" doesn't hold water in my opinion. Compare, for example, Barack Obama's page, which is about 5 times as long as Trump's with plenty of editorializing about the ramifications of his presidency and opinions regarding his personal character. But one paragraph citing objectively true facts and events that happened during Trump's presidency is "irrelevant minutiae?"

I think the paragraph should be put back in.

Paragraph reads fine to me.

Don't know why. Some facts exist.

I agree in principle and think there is a lot of critical stuff that is missing from this page. However, there are also plenty of divisive figures who are not open for Tropers to discuss, and I get the mods wanting to avoid a Flame War for a living person who people are very invested in either defending or tearing down. Recommend writing whatever you want to add in Septimus' thread and hope it catches their attention.

People couldn't even agree that it was his supporters that stormed the Capitol. There were claims and evidence of Antifa/BLM guys also going in and the cops giving up and letting them in after Congress had already been rushed out the hidden exits. Plus, certain politicians and media outlets have harped on that event to the point where it became another political tool.

Putin legitimately runs a corrupt regime. That's something most Tropers would agree on. If Trump could objectively considered a tyrant, his rein was ended remarkably blood free given the storming of the Capitol was marked by mostly "stormer deaths" and relatively little property damage. Given how many, if not most, Tropers are American, the high probability of an edit war makes it hard to approach this.

"There were claims and evidence of Antifa/BLM guys"

there literally was no evidence lol

"Tropers are American"

Wish you guys would finally learn that americans aren't the only ones using internet.

Plus 1 vote for Green Lizard 9's comment.

I'm not American.

Too soon.

How does his indictment affect on his career? No need to mention it otherwise.

Well, it would be a first for a sitting or former president, so I was just wondering.

If it's too soon, that's alright. I just wanted to know.

That should be fine. As long as the explanation doesn't have a political slant, he did give nicknames.

It might be revelant. The problem is both the Reform party and Trump are very contentious. The Reform party is now part of a growing independent movement that helped create the Alliance Party whereas rumors of Trump's political associations have resulted in years of controversy. Despite arguably, being the most libertarian president in decades, many see him as a tyrant. Some see him as a loudmouthed, know-it-all braggert. Others see him as a savior. Others see him as something in between those. Where ever you fall on the scale, the chance of an argument or edit wars erupting is high especially since Joe Biden is (at this moment in time) even less popular than Trump is according to (relatively non-biased) poll sites like Civiqs. Regardless, if you want to pick up that grenade, that's up to you.

Adenav, exactly what I said. The whole 275 thing without update makes it sound like he barely squeaked by, and leads to distorted perception of how the presidency actually went.

Post move somewhere else

Posted my post into the wrong section. Meant to be its own inquiry above. Sorry about that...

Some are saying it might never calm down.”, and this page will be permanently locked.

Think it'll be years at minimum. Even if the country generally looks back on his admin as a Dork Age in a few years, the page will still probably stayed locked until he's mostly passed out of the public discourse and is just remembered as "that TV host who became president". If he continues to remain in the public eye and guide the direction of the party/country for years and years, it'll likely stay permanently locked.

I think this will likely be the case, as there's no sign of him wanting to "go quietly", nd will likely be a controversial figure for decades. Add to this his rabid base of followers, and any public edit is just asking for trouble.

If edits have to be done, admins will have to do it.

If I were an admin, I would keep Trump's page locked out for an indefinite period due to the controversies surrounding him. He's not the kind of person who would retire and enjoy the perks of being a former president, given that even if he semi-conceded (albeit grudgingly after much public pressure), he still feels very bitter to the very end about losing the 2020 election. That a significant chunk of the base feels the election was "stolen" from him is just one good reason why. He reminds me of those rage-quitters in video games if they feel they're losing. I think it would take years before he's a bygone era, and even then, I would vote to keep this page perma-locked.

Add to that the refusal to concede before then.

Ask on the Edit Request thread.

For his overall viewpoint by the public, I would put in this;

Overall public opinion of Trump post-presidency has been extremely negative, with many calling him one of, if not the absolute worst presidents in American history (including Biden, who defeated Trump in the 2020 election). The full list of complaints is so big that it would be impossible to list them all, but common complaints include the very poor and delayed response to the coronavirus pandemic (as well as his infamous comment about injecting bleach into the body), inaction against climate change, allegedly sexist and/or racist remarks (such as claiming that Charlottesville had "very fine people" on both sides), mocking a man with a disability, and his refusal to concede after his loss and making false claims of voter fraud. Trump never achieved an approval rating of 50%, averaging around 45% through most of his tenure, and by the end of his run in January 2021, he had a 39% approval rating, the lowest of his entire presidency, and he even ended up being permanently banned from Twitter that same month for comments on the U.S. Capitol raid, calling the raiders "patriots" in a video. Even in the GOP, Trump has a mixed overall reputation, with many Republicans such as Mitt Romney and Arnold Schwarzenegger disapproving of him.

However, he did have supporters. Trump supporters argue that his administration created millions of new jobs, and claim that the economy under Trump was solid before the pandemic (though this claim can be debatable, as many experts seemed to express concern of an economic recession even before the nationwide lockdowns started). They also cite the border wall and tax cuts as positives, and seem to approve of many of the same reasons people hate Trump like the handling of the pandemic and BLM riots.

Except it's inaccurate to say Trump created millions of jobs as he is the first president to leave office with fewer jobs in the US than when he took office since the government officially started tracking the stats; about 3 million fewer jobs than when he took over from Obama.

Oh yeah. I think he undid the progress because of the incredibly poor handling of the pandemic.

There is a thread to request changes to locked pages here

Agreed.

this.

I agree, at this point it is safe to say that Trump lost the election and will not get a second term.

Agreed.

As the Election in the USA is tomorrow: How long after the Election will the site be updated to reflect the result of Trump or Biden being elected?

As long as it takes. The result will be disputed. If a candidate concedes defeat soon after then we’ll be good to go, but what if they don’t? The counting of ballots could go on until Nov 6, the decision might go to the Supreme Court, who knows? This is not a page that people go to for current news, so jumping the gun would be pointless.

No, too soon and is likely to invite flame wars (like pretty much everything else Trump-related).

It has been a week. Is that not enough time? I understand if we wish to stop at just "tested positive for COVID-19" and then hyperlink to that page to maintain a neutral tone but it seems significant, especially since the USA's response is a reaction to the pandemic.

Mentioning any one of his policies kind of obliges you to summarize all of them, which is no small feat. We should look to other politician pages for guidance, since we'd have to make choices about what is most noteworthy.

• Cabinet/Court Appointments
• Executive Orders/Regulatory Agencies/Federal Employees
  • Travel Ban
  • Lobbying/Ethics
  • LGBT/religious freedom
  • EPA/Climate Change
• Economy
  • Trade Pacts/Tariffs
  • Infrastructure Spending
  • Budget
• Health Care
• Immigration
  • Border Wall
  • Deportation
• Foreign Policy
  • NATO
  • China
  • Iran
  • North Korea
  • Israel/Palestine
• Military/Counterterrorism
  • Syria/Iraq
• Relationship with mainstream news media
  • Accusations against news media
  • Spicer/Conway
  • Bannon and Alt Right
• Twitter
• Relationship with Russia/Intelligence Agencies
  • Accusations of Voter Fraud
  • Probe into Russian hacking/election interference
• Business/Legal Entanglements
  • Tax Returns
  • Trump University
  • Emoulements Clause
• Scandals/Controversies
  • Access Hollywood Tape

That's just off the top of my head; the man is turning institutions inside out. In for a penny, in for a pound. Where do you propose we even begin?

We cannot begin to cover the issues on which he has contradicted himself - and those are most of them.

I'm just saying, if this really is a Useful Notes page, it'd be useful to know the things he's done

It's only been a month into his administration. Give it a year and we'll know what policies have already taken root and whatnot.

Yeah, we might just want to leave it be for now. Useful Notes is basically about any real life thing or person that has been the subject of popular media, and an aid to people who are diong research for stories or would like to know the difference between how something is portrayed in fiction and how it actually is.

We aren't a news website or an encyclopaedia, and if people want up-to-the-minute information about his presidency they can check wikipedia or the news. We shouldn't be too hasty to update the information when it's going to take a while to see how it turns out anyway. Arguably, what we should be doing is stuff like talking about Alec Baldwin parodying him on Saturday Night Live, and providing as much information as necessary to explain his appearances in entertainment.

Trump does provide unique challenges to T Vtropes in that he comes from popular culture in a way no politician ever has. I mean Ronald Reagan was an actor but he didn't appear in many good movies and he was a governor of California.

Trump on the other hand was the host of a popular reality show, and before that was famous enough that he often appeared as Real-Person Cameo in many TV shows and movies, and also wrestling entertainment.

I don't think that's the problem. Analyzing his public image before he ran for president is easy compared to wading into his earth-shaking ascendancy in politics.

The Big Bopper

I think we could do a Warts and All approach on this article, tell what he's done that seems bad, offer a flipside. Tell the good stuff, offer a flipside. As it stands now though, we have a woefully incomplete article because everyone is a afraid of insulting people. I'm more insulted by an incomplete picture that basically only sees him as a tv personality, and has two arch-enemy tropes with one other trope.

I suspect that nobody wants to touch this article because it would require a lot of effort to bring it up to standard. If only I weren't such a procrastinator...

Speaking as someone who dislikes Trump, and who feels that the Useful Notes page should be expanded...I disagree with most of the reasons above:

1) Trump is an internationally renowned figure. Even before Trump became a candidate. His The Apprentice show made him world famous, as did his appearances in WWE and his cameos in Fresh Prince of Bel-Air and so many other movies. Like Home Alone 2 and so on.

2) It's unlikely stuff like what Trump said in his campaign are known globally more than "You're fired" and so on.

3) Some of the entries about Trump show up in John Oliver's tvtropes pages, and the explanations for that are there for fans of John Oliver and other shows, and most people around the world don't see those shows as much as you think because of censorship and other issues. And the people who watch those shows, already know who Trump is.

4) Trump's "urine tape" is a bit like David Cameron's "irrumating a pig" controversy. It's perverse fun but it's also topical...stuff like that probably won't be as big a deal as we think it does...ultimately Cameron is known for Brexit which made him one of the worst PM of all time. Trump will likewise be known for one of his policies and stuff that happens on his watch. What that will be, we have no way of knowing for now...

Well if there is one thing Richard Nixon is NOT known for it's any political stance he actually held.

Seriously, could you tell me what Nixon did on the environment, transportation, health care or Native Americans? And those were major policies of his where he accomplished or tried to accomplish important things.

Trump may well be best remembered for the memes. But we have the curse of the early birth...

I don't know whether or not there are any edits pending in the locked threads discussion on the forums, but could it just be that nobody wants the headache of taking responsibility for Trump's entry? The thread is locked so that it can't be edited without submitting a completed draft to moderators for approval, and I don't see anybody willing to do that much writing. There's practically nothing yet about what happened since he took office, and I don't blame them. Something new every week, almost every day even, and we can't include all of it. If we start without a plan it'll just turn into his damn Wikipedia page. Not to mention, information will quickly become obsolete and keeping a locked thread up to date could be a nightmare. Furthermore, he is literally the most controversial living person on planet earth right now. It is very hard to write about him in a way that comes across as neutral by the standard of this website. I think the proportion of editors here probably skews liberal — myself included — and even if we just try to report the facts it will come across as Trump-bashing.

I do think his impact on media such as SNL is so important that it ought to be written about, but where to begin? Not much use complaining if we aren't prepared to write it ourselves.

Oh, I totally get that. It's a giant tangled mess that will take months to sort out, if not years. But I think it at least bears mentioning that he's under criminal investigation. Something simple like "As of June 2017, it has been reported by [reputable news organization(s)] that he is under federal investigation for obstruction of justice, collusion with Russia in interfering with a federal election, and money laundering" ought to do it. Given that it's very, very relevant to current media.

And yes, I skew liberal, but as Ana Navarro could tell you, it ain't just the liberals. So what if the facts come across as bashing him? I'd say it's far more dangerous (and wrong) for us to ignore the facts — the very established and indisputable facts, as reported by the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and every network news organization in the Western world — in the service of appearing impartial. Especially given that true impartiality doesn't involve (and shouldn't involve) making both sides look equally good — it involves reporting the facts, without bias (and not mentioning these things, in the service of making him look better than he is for some wrong notion of impartiality, is bias).

I'm sorry. I'm really not angry at you at all, except about the fact that you have an excellent point. I'm angry with site policy and, er, also the whole damn universe right now. And God knows I don't want to take responsibility for this headache (nor should I, given my well-known pro-Hillary bias). I just think it's really, really important that we don't cover this shit up in the service of looking impartial, because especially right now, that is really, really dangerous. We can take the time we need to figure out how to report it, but it needs to be reported.

Okay, let's see what we can do in order to get the ball rolling. I enumerated the problems, but they aren't necessarily insurmountable. First order of business is to check the forums and see what updates, if any, have been proposed. From that we might get the idea of whether the lack of detail is because the mods want the article to be as short and innocuous as possible, or if it's just because no one has proposed an edit that big. If we find that the mods haven't declared it off limits then we'll start collaborating on the proposed text.

WHY, exactly, do we need to mention "that he's under investigation for, among other things, money laundering, obstruction of justice, and possible interference in a federal election"? Does that have ANYTHING to do with fiction or Trump's portrayal in fiction? Especially since he is merely under investigation. He is presumed innocent until proven guilty, is he not? It seems pointless to mention that he is under investigation for this, or that, or whatever. Now if the investigation discovers actual evidence that Trump is guilty of something - then it might be worth mentioning. But until then it seems unnecessary.

....you haven't been watching much SNL, or The Late Show, or SVU, or basically any form of late night comedy whatsoever, have you? It's ALL they're talking about.

I smell bias here.

@ The Big Bopper, agreed and done. Let's get busy. :D

No, I haven't been watching SNL (at first I couldn't even figure out what SNL stands for), or The Late Show, or SVU (not sure what this one is), or basically any form of late night comedy whatsoever. I'm not an American, I don't live in America, adn I don't even know if those shows are (legally) available in our area.

There's more to the world than America and the TV programs there, you know. Please do not assume that everyone else watches the things you watch.

Since you're not an American, you really don't have any business dictating or attempting to dictate the way to handle something that is very, very American in nature and concerns Americans in the main. Just because you don't see it as relevant to media (and haven't seen the media it's relative to) doesn't mean it isn't relative to media, and your determination to attack me for "assuming you watch the things I watch" doesn't speak well of you.

And you can check your attitude, as I've been living in the UK for the last three years and hardly watch any late-night comedy at all. But even if that wasn't true, your superior attitude isn't doing you any favors.

All I did was ask a few questions, nothing more. I did not attack anyone, and I most definitely did NOT try to dictate anything to anyone. You could have jsut answered my questions and that would have been the end of the discussion.

Instead you chose to first accuse me of bias, and now to complain about my attitude.

I'm going to stop here, because this really isn't the place to continue this conversation. If you have anything else to say to me - please use P Ms.

Let's take it easy here. No need to start insulting each other. Rose And Heather, I do not think you should have accused shadowblack of bias or anything without hearing more from them. shadowblack, you have a point that we should be focusing on Trump's pop culture presence rather than going on some crusade to inform the public, which is properly the duty of the news media rather than TV Tropes, but I do think there is a case to be made that the investigation of Trump's administration in connection with Russian election interference has already shaped his portrayal in popular culture, whether you believe anybody committed wrongdoing or not.

Rose And Heather, I'm not sure what you're refering to by "money laundering." All I hear about is that he's been sued in relation to his failure to divest from his businesses, which critics argue violates the emoulements clause of the Constitution. The issue with Russian election interference started out with the investigation of members of his campaign and cabinet such as Michael Flynn and Jeff Sessions having undisclosed conversations/relationships with Russian businessmen and officials, and it was only recently that lawmakers started talking about Trump himself as having possibly obstructed justice by firing FBI director James Comey. If we discuss any charges and accusations against Trump, we have to be scrupulously accurate and specific while keeping in mind that very little—if anything—has been proven yet.

Now, I have not been watching any late night shows lately, so can you perhaps make a list of a couple of notable episodes involving parodies of Donald Trump, Sean Spicer, etc. so we can have a "portrayals in fiction" list? For that matter we should list any movies, wrestling promotions, etc. that he appeared in before he became president.

I just posted a request for information about the status of this useful notes page in the locked page edit request thread here, and am awaiting an answer.

According to Candi:

1) Any edit requested here has to be written up exactly as it would be if you were going to put it on the page. The mods can go into a post and copy out the formatting.

2) The Useful Notes pages are to help depict factual things better and more accurately when they are used in fiction. Of that information, what will help creators when they go to write a fictional Trump?

3) Sitting presidents' pages are never unlocked.

Karxrida said:

"I don't think sitting President's pages are edited to be up-to-date, either. I think we wait until they are out of office."

Yeah, her page needs to update. Trump may not have won by a landslide as he claimed—he lost the nationwide popular vote—but the ballots are all counted and his electoral college victory is an accepted fact.

Maybe that happened "automatically" when it was moved from "Creator" to "Useful Notes"? idk

Correct me if I am wrong, but Useful Notes pages don't get YMMV and WMG subpages. In fact, I don't think they get ANY subpages.

Memes, perhaps?

Maybe they could get their own works page(s)?

Wikipedia calls it part memoir, part business advice book.

I'm sure he isn't the first to be both a creator and a useful notes on tv tropes. Lots of tv people have gone into politics in the past, like Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Those two did it before tv tropes was started in 2004, so perhaps their pages were useful notes to begin with, but i would be more surprised if there was no one since who received tv tropes recognition, or who was reclassified for bureaucratic reasons. There's a chance he was the first page started as a creator page and converted to a useful notes page, but if I had to guess I'd say that even the odds of that are low.