2

It has only been a few days since we declared as a synonym of , because it added no value at all:

Should plot-inconsistency be scrapped in favour of plot-explanation? [**VOTING CLOSED**]

Deeper discussion: Let's nuke [plot-inconsistency]!

Now there is already a new contestant to replace this useless tag since it has become unavailable.

This question was tagged by the user. In fact it is however asking for an explanation of a plot point, so I retagged it as .

I am afraid people will just use now that is gone, which undermines the very goal we were trying to reach by removing that tag.

There is exactly one question under that tag, which asks about a verified movie mistake and where to find it:

In which scene is the White Van in Braveheart?

I can see how the tag makes sense in this case, because the user is not asking if something is a mistake, but asking a valid question about the mistake itself.

However, it is only one question so far and the tag has a high potential for abusing it as a replacement for tag-inconsistency. I created a tag wiki that tries to discourage users from using it that way, but the question arises:

Do we need at all and is the abuse risk worth the very few questions that fall under that category?

The one question that uses it could probably be retagged, for example with .

| |
5

I can see your point to a degree - people might resort to , and ignore when they are asking a question about an inconsistency rather than a production error.

However production mistakes are a legitimate interest of people - they are listed in IMDB.

Options include:

  1. Making it a synonym of - as said above, I don't think this works as production mistakes are a legitimate use of that tag
  2. Making it a synonym of a new tag - clarifying that its production, not plot issues
  3. Just relying on the tag wiki to point people in the right direction.

In the case of the last two - people are still going to abuse it, but I don't see how we can make this watertight.

I know that I've put options in this answer - but on reflection I favor option 2 - the creation of and making a synonym of it. I'll treat a vote for this as a vote for that option - unless you make a contrary comment.

Update

Ok, I made the change is now a tag, and I've created a bunch of synonyms to direct people to use this take in preference to movie-mistake(s)

| |
  • 3
    How about a catch all tag "what-the-hell"? – JohnP Jun 5 '14 at 14:56
  • Very good points. That still leaves us with the question which option to take. – magnattic Jun 5 '14 at 14:57
  • 2
    Especially the second option sounds very good, given that "movie mistake" is quite a broad and fuzzy term anyway. The first not so much, as it actually should apply for non-plot stuff. And the third, well, is what we're currently doing, nothing, though that doesn't mean it's a bad option. – Napoleon Wilson Jun 5 '14 at 14:57
  • I favor the production-mistake tag too – iandotkelly Jun 5 '14 at 15:01
  • 3
    Its also more broad too - covers TV production mistakes. – iandotkelly Jun 5 '14 at 15:03
  • I like this. Production mistake sounds good. However, only if people are willing to answer that sometimes these things are just mistakes, with no deeper meaning behind them (e.g. this question that I finally answered, with 21 upvotes, that was clearly just a mistake). – Andrew Martin Jun 6 '14 at 8:25
  • 1
    @AndrewMartin That would be exactly the kind of question where the tag would not apply, though. That's a plot-explanation question where it turns out the answer is "It's a mistake". [production-mistakes] would be for questions about the mistake itself, like the Braveheart Van question above. – magnattic Jun 6 '14 at 14:55
-1

Oddly, I think it could be taken care of by scrapping all of them (or declaring them synonyms) of either plot-continuity or plot-sequence. This would include movie-mistakes, plot-explanation and plot-inconsistency.

My reasoning is that if it is a mistake/inconsistency, it interrupts the sequence and/or continuity of the film. If it is a deliberate mistake, it also needs explanation as to why it upholds the continuity of the film. For the explanation side of things, if it is something that you wonder about when watching the film, it takes you "out" of the experience and the flow of the film, thus interrupting the continuity.

Because of that, it would also encourage better answers, as you would need to explain why it is either a mistake, a turning point or a focus or...you get the idea.

| |
  • 1
    Are you saying we should replace plot-explanation with plot-continuity as well? I am not sure that makes sense or is very clear. If not, I don't see how plot-continuity would be anything but a replacement for plot-inconsistency, which decided we don't need. – magnattic Jun 5 '14 at 14:42
  • @atticae - You asked the question. I just provided something I thought would cover all of them in one. – JohnP Jun 5 '14 at 14:44
  • I did not mean this in an offensive way, I just wanted to know if I understood your point correctly. I am still not sure I interpreted your post right. – magnattic Jun 5 '14 at 14:46
  • @atticae - No offense taken. You asked, I suggested. People are free to agree or disagree :) – JohnP Jun 5 '14 at 14:46
  • 1
    Could you please verify if that's what you meant? :) Replacing plot-explanation with plot-continuity? You said "scraping them all", but did not explain what "all" is. – magnattic Jun 5 '14 at 14:48
  • 1
    @atticae - Done. – JohnP Jun 5 '14 at 14:53

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .