- 11,728
- 7,501
Make sure to read my response as well.
(Only for the 2016 show, which I created profiles for, which has absolutely nothing to do with previous franchise. it's is own separate show)
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Removing WOG from Ben 10
- Thread starter AmonInChains
- Start date
(Only for the 2016 show, which I created profiles for, which has absolutely nothing to do with previous franchise. it's is own separate show)
- 14,158
- 7,408
I didn’t understand everything, i had to read five whole pages about the subject. But from what i understood, they are removing things like “the author said this on Twitter” and similar sources. So we’re going to keep as canon only what is already inside the work itself?
I also read the supporters’ comments, and their arguments seem stronger. I also fully agree with removing anything that only has Twitter statements as evidence. However, things that are already canon within the work and that Twitter only elaborates on a bit shouldn’t be a problem to use.
I also read the supporters’ comments, and their arguments seem stronger. I also fully agree with removing anything that only has Twitter statements as evidence. However, things that are already canon within the work and that Twitter only elaborates on a bit shouldn’t be a problem to use.
- 11,728
- 7,501
Every single profile that I have ever made and every Content revision thread that I have ever done on this website, I have their entire catalog saved.
I'm willing to dig through entire thing of all of it in order to correct anything, if it was mistakenly approved by the staff, in a peaceful manner.
A show and it's character species statements that are shown and actual word of god that effects power scaling are two different things. Thanks, best regards
I'm willing to dig through entire thing of all of it in order to correct anything, if it was mistakenly approved by the staff, in a peaceful manner.
A show and it's character species statements that are shown and actual word of god that effects power scaling are two different things. Thanks, best regards
- 823
- 793
- Thread starter
- #205
After reading the thread, it disappoints me to see how people didn’t understand ANYTHING about it. What the thread is trying to do is simply get rid of the WOG statements; I think I made that point very clear in the OP.
Now, then have some people arguing for it
Therefore, regarding what I’m trying to do as the OP, I am in total disagreement with those justifications, both because they should not be made in this thread, as I already mentioned, and because the evidence presented is only “supplementary material.” If you really want to prove those claims, do so with material from the series itself, and refrain from using WoG, which is exactly what I stated in the OP should be kept completely removed.
Now I have to go, I'll be checking it quickly from work any other reply.
And pls, don't detail the thread.
Now, then have some people arguing for it
Not only that, many say “additional material from the series” and provide NO evidence whatsoever in return, with still having powerscaling questions.
Therefore, regarding what I’m trying to do as the OP, I am in total disagreement with those justifications, both because they should not be made in this thread, as I already mentioned, and because the evidence presented is only “supplementary material.” If you really want to prove those claims, do so with material from the series itself, and refrain from using WoG, which is exactly what I stated in the OP should be kept completely removed.
This one seems more detailed tho. I will check it after work. However, I repeat that this is NOT the CRT to re-add the stuff.
Now I have to go, I'll be checking it quickly from work any other reply.
And pls, don't detail the thread.
- 9,120
- 9,977
To clarify, my post was verifying whether the scans listed were proper supplementary material to depictions in the show.
I'm not saying to leave them as they are. I personally did not write these descriptions.
My stance isn't removing the proper supplementary material.
My stance is revising the descriptions to include the source depiction with the supplementary material.
- 3,940
- 2,046
bunch of these were other people having fun with the thread
anyways
- 21,515
- 36,071
My stance is still the same, as just finding actual examples of stuff in the show has no bearing on the use of only WoG to justify all of this shit, like its great if you can find actual real examples from the show now but newsflash that should have been done from the start instead of justifying things on the sole basis of WoG before without actually having proper justification from the show.
So yeah my vote stays the same because literally all this fixing yall are doing is just in service to OP and yall aren't even realizing yall lowkey agree hence you starting to find ways to legitimately justify with shit in the show like yeah? Thanks for showing the use of WoG for this stuff was wrong ig and that using actual scans for the show takes priority over having scans aside from people spamming questions to those who worked on a project or the show
So yeah my vote stays the same because literally all this fixing yall are doing is just in service to OP and yall aren't even realizing yall lowkey agree hence you starting to find ways to legitimately justify with shit in the show like yeah? Thanks for showing the use of WoG for this stuff was wrong ig and that using actual scans for the show takes priority over having scans aside from people spamming questions to those who worked on a project or the show
Ghengiroo115
She/Her- 2,422
- 1,914
Quick question, sorry if this was obvious or if it was already mentioned in OP and I just somehow missed it.
To clarify, is the suggestion to remove just WoG statements, or is this removing everything not referenced in the show like comics, guidebooks and stuff like that?
To clarify, is the suggestion to remove just WoG statements, or is this removing everything not referenced in the show like comics, guidebooks and stuff like that?
- 823
- 793
- Thread starter
- #211
The CRT only refers to WOG shit, idc about other stuff. It's explicitly in the OP.
However can be used for other people in another threads ofc(and don't expect another Ben 10 CRT from me lol)
However can be used for other people in another threads ofc
Ghengiroo115
She/Her- 2,422
- 1,914
- 11,728
- 7,501
If votes for regular users are counted then
Agree with removing WOG used for power scaling,
Disgaree with removing writer statements about characters species, dna, clothing and personalities that doesn't effect power scaling.
Agree with removing WOG used for power scaling,
Disgaree with removing writer statements about characters species, dna, clothing and personalities that doesn't effect power scaling.
- 3,940
- 2,046
same goes for me (also some abilities that shouldn't be affected)
- 13,826
- 19,645
I don't think WOGs are the sole reason for which these things were added in the profile. For instance, here in this thread where Universe and Nullvoid being High 3-A was accepted includes blatant statements from novel as well authors as well as show itself. But in the profile only one statement was added which is of Author. So while in the threads there has been shown support for the statements made by author in different medias, in the profile editor decided to post only one scan, which i feel is more of a editing issue not a evaluating issue.
- 5,048
- 4,067
The OP looks good. I agree with the removal of WoG.
- 3,940
- 2,046
- 21,515
- 36,071
I feel like we all know there's a difference between writers and WoG making statements in a void naturally just speaking about the content at their own discretion that are supported by the media they worked and supplements what's already there rather than people spamming their walls with leading questions for powerscaling to try and get a desired tier for something.
I'd like to think its easy to spot the difference between the two but regardless alot the "rebuttals" here reads like is this "we couldn't get away with ONLY using leading questions to get WoG so others shouldn't too" like yeah duh?
Writers statements made on their own without the battleboarding and leading questions just in supplemental material isn't even a target to this CRT so really stop derailing as that stuff isn't even targeted by the OP, besides if its valid supplementary material going by our new canon standards no one will gaf about you using it anyways
I'd like to think its easy to spot the difference between the two but regardless alot the "rebuttals" here reads like is this "we couldn't get away with ONLY using leading questions to get WoG so others shouldn't too" like yeah duh?
Writers statements made on their own without the battleboarding and leading questions just in supplemental material isn't even a target to this CRT so really stop derailing as that stuff isn't even targeted by the OP, besides if its valid supplementary material going by our new canon standards no one will gaf about you using it anyways
GeneralSol16
He/Him- 1,735
- 781
Since everything has been cleared up, I agree with this, remove WoG.
But just for the sake of doing it McDuffie's law doesn't exist.
But just for the sake of doing it McDuffie's law doesn't exist.
Saqphire
She/Her- 1,574
- 1,885
I said next for a reason lolah yes bro we use this for cosmology and Alien x are we in danger??
.jpg)
Also can't WoG statements just get invalidated through semantics debates?
- 21,515
- 36,071
Shit it doesn't even need that sometimes, WoG can contradict themself a lot on their own, like I love my guy but James Gunn says a LOT of different things when its interview or Q&A time when new projects are rolling around and some of that shit ends up contradicting other stuff he said before and its like
WoG statements can contradict the source material at time or even contradict previous WoG so like ultimately just using shit directly from the show or valid supplementary canon material should always take priority, let alone when it comes to people spamming them specifc leading questions with powerscaling in mind
- 13,826
- 19,645
I'd one question i have been planning to ask, by our current canonicity standard, we allow creators to decide the canonicity of the material and Duncan is the creator of Ben 10. So his clear cut statement regarding canonicity will be held true?
- 11,013
- 15,067
The source material should always take priority over WoG statements. No ifs, ands, or buts
Saqphire
She/Her- 1,574
- 1,885
E.g. Bruno Velazquez (who's not even a writer for GoW) contradicting the novels and Ghost of Sparta lolShit it doesn't even need that sometimes, WoG can contradict themself a lot on their own, like I love my guy but James Gunn says a LOT of different things when its interview or Q&A time when new projects are rolling around and some of that shit ends up contradicting other stuff he said before and its like
WoG statements can contradict the source material at time or even contradict previous WoG so like ultimately just using shit directly from the show or valid supplementary canon material should always take priority, let alone when it comes to people spamming them specifc leading questions with powerscaling in mind
- 13,826
- 19,645
Thats basic standard we have been following. My question is about canonicity not powerscaling or statement WOG made regarding some character which contradicted or havent being depicted in the show.
- 5,398
- 4,845
Hellformer
He/Him- 2,631
- 2,359
Welp my points were covered by Firestorm and Lort
Shadowslaya!
He/Him- 170
- 107
I disagree with everything.
- 823
- 793
- Thread starter
- #231
Shadowslaya!
He/Him- 170
- 107
I do agree with this though.
- 15,278
- 22,535
Yeah, remove the WoG screenshot and link from the verse. Shit like 26-dimensional or multiversal+ question is crazy
- 3,250
- 1,788
We don't use WOG for powerscaling or something else, just for know about Aliens and their abilities and physiology. Are you agree with this?
- 15,278
- 22,535
As long as the statement isn't an answer to a leading question, then they're fine.
- 13,826
- 19,645
I'd only one question about clarification of the stance and whats being accepted. Per our rule we allow Creators statement regarding canonicity. So will their statement about canonicity and not power scaling (Although it was already a unstated rule to not allow any WOG unless supported in the show) still hold true?
- 3,250
- 1,788
I agreed with DemonicDude
- 11,728
- 7,501
you can take a look at my response for my reboot verse if anything you agree to be removed or change let me now as it's just mostly alien's armors and species stuff.
BoastJr
He/Him- 2,774
- 4,001
