Epic Literature must be ANNIHILATED

[Maikolpry]

A while ago, I made a post in the Epic Literature thread debunking Achilles’ powers and abilities, and I also argued that the verse should be deleted.

My reasoning is that, since these are ancient texts that have been translated and retransmitted multiple times, there cannot really be a single “canon” version of the characters’ works. Because of that, the page ends up depending heavily on whichever version the profile creator used. In some versions, certain things may be stated that are not present in others, there may be translation errors, and so on, which makes the canon of these stories unreliable.

On top of that, epic literature is not a genre that most people take the time to read carefully in order to verify feats, especially across multiple versions. And even worse, almost none of the pages list the book/chapter used as a reference. The only one that does is Gilgamesh’s page, and in the references it literally just says “The Epic of Gilgamesh” yeah bro, no shit.

 

[Re5yh]

Following

 

[Oiguana2701]

My reasoning is that, since these are ancient texts that have been translated and retransmitted multiple times, there cannot really be a single “canon” version of the characters’ works. Because of that, the page ends up depending heavily on whichever version the profile creator used. In some versions, certain things may be stated that are not present in others, there may be translation errors, and so on, which makes the canon of these stories unreliable.

Would that not be applicable to most very old books? For example, Frankenstein has had many translations and differences, though on an obviously smaller scale, but we still have it on the wiki.

On top of that, epic literature is not a genre that most people take the time to read carefully in order to verify feats, especially across multiple versions. And even worse, almost none of the pages list the book/chapter used as a reference. The only one that does is Gilgamesh’s page, and in the references it literally just says “The Epic of Gilgamesh” yeah bro, no shit.

That's just a flaw of the profiles, not a reason to delete them. It's not even the only verse with that problem, with other book verses, such as Goosebumps, not having a single scan or reference. We just need people to help with that.

 

[Apex_Predator_GX]

Sadly, Epic Literature is really outdated at the moment. It’s basically a result of being created in the 2020s and most of its supporters having left the wiki since then.

 

[Tllmbrg]

Would the solution not be to just enforce a strict citation standard?

 

[Maikolpry]

Would not be applicable to most very old books? For example, Frankenstein has had many translations and differences, though on an obviously smaller scale, but we still have it on the wiki.

But at least the Frankenstein books have a clear canon, but books like the Iliad and the Odyssey are from ancient languages that were translated into more ancient languages and then the same cycle continues until the current languages, which means that a lot is lost.

That's just a flaw of the profiles, not a reason to delete them. It's not even the only verse with that problem, with other book verses, such as Goosebumps, not having a single scan or reference. We just need people to help with that.

Well, at least some pages have scans. Here, the pages literally don't have scans; instead, they use false information. And as I mentioned before, if someone wants to check, they should look at the multiple versions of a very long book instead of a book with a clear canon.

 

[Maikolpry]

Would the solution not be to just enforce a strict citation standard?

That doesn't fix the issue of unreliable canon.

And most of the people who made the profiles left the wiki, and that would require someone else to read the books and do a rework. Until that happens, the pages will be of poor quality, and I think it's better to delete them than wait for someone to deign to improve them.

 

[Oiguana2701]

But at least the Frankenstein books have a clear canon, but books like the Iliad and the Odyssey are from ancient languages that were translated into more ancient languages and then the same cycle continues until the current languages, which means that a lot is lost.

I mean, that is an issue, but couldn't we like, pick a specific book to use? For example, for Iliad, we could use this specific book. Obviously, in that case, it wouldn't really be the original story, but it would fix the pseudo-composite issue.

Well, at least some pages have scans. Here, the pages literally don't have scans; instead, they use false information. And as I mentioned before, if someone wants to check, they should look at the multiple versions of a very long book instead of a book with a clear canon.

In Goosebumps, which is what I'm guessing you were referring to, when I first started my project of saving the verse, there were like 3 pages with scans, none with references. However, I managed to save pages and fix those issue. Look at how some of those pages used to look, and look at how they are now. If just the scans are an issue, we have a good amount of people who would likely want to help.

 

[Apex_Predator_GX]

That doesn't fix the issue of unreliable canon.

And most of the people who made the profiles left the wiki, and that would require someone else to read the books and do a rework. Until that happens, the pages will be of poor quality, and I think it's better to delete them than wait for someone to deign to improve them.

If your thread gets accepted, could you please notify me so I can save the code for the pages in sandboxes? I’m a bit busy right now and can’t keep following the thread.

 

[Maikolpry]

I mean, that is an issue, but couldn't we like, pick a specific book to use? For example, for Iliad, we could use this specific book. Obviously, in that case, it wouldn't really be the original story, but it would fix the pseudo-composite issue.

It’s like trying to save the verse by doing mediocre or bad things, instead of just letting it die, which would honestly be better.

In Goosebumps, which is what I'm guessing you were referring to, when I first started my project of saving the verse, there were like 3 pages with scans, none with references. However, I managed to save pages and fix those issue. Look at how some of those pages used to look, and look at how they are now. If just the scans are an issue, we have a good amount of people who would likely want to help.

Yes, but at least they have one canonical book to help with, not multiple versions.

 

[Oiguana2701]

It’s like trying to save the verse by doing mediocre or bad things, instead of just letting it die, which would honestly be better.

Why is that solution bad, specifically? If we did my idea, it wouldn't really be a composite anymore and have a way to get the scans. I think there's no real issue with what I'm suggesting, unless there's something I'm missing.

 

[Maikolpry]

Why is that solution bad, specifically? If we did my idea, it wouldn't really be a composite anymore and have a way to get the scans. I think there's no real issue with what I'm suggesting, unless there's something I'm missing.

The translation might contain mistranslated or inaccurate information. For example, Achilles' profile gives him the Sound Manipulation for killing 12 Trojans with war cries, but the most widely accepted translations state that he only sacrificed them with fire. The profile also includes invulnerability, which appears in some translations but is not present in the original Iliad. And we would have to check which version to choose and why that one is preferable to another.

 

[Oiguana2701]

The translation might contain mistranslated or inaccurate information. For example, Achilles' profile gives him the Sound Manipulation for killing 12 Trojans with war cries, but the most widely accepted translations state that he only sacrificed them with fire. The profile also includes invulnerability, which appears in some translations but is not present in the original Iliad.

Sure, I understand this issue.

And we would have to check which version to choose and why that one is preferable to another.

Doesn't seem that hard. We have a general discussion thread for this verse, so I don't think it would be impossible for us to find the best version of the story to put in the wiki.

By the way, this isn't really related, but we should have a place to put ''pseudo-composites'' like those, like cryptids or mythology. We really don't have a place for those currently.

 

[Maikolpry]

By the way, this isn't really related, but we should have a place to put ''pseudo-composites'' like those, like cryptids or mythology. We really don't have a place for those currently.

In fact, that's the main problem and what made me create this thread; things with unreliable canon like cryptids, mythology, folklore, creepypastas, etc., are not allowed on this wiki, but Epic Literature is, which is why I created this thread.

 

[Oiguana2701]

In fact, that's the main problem and what made me create this thread; things with unreliable canon like cryptids or mythology or folklore, etc., are not allowed on this wiki, but Epic Literature is, which is why I created this thread.

I think we should probably make a staff thread or something for this, but I'm guessing FC/OC is the most fitting place to add those pages?

 

[Maikolpry]

I think we should probably make a staff thread or something for this, but I'm guessing FC/OC is the most fitting place to add those pages?

Probably Alt Battles Wiki

 

[SomebodyData]

I don't mind just picking out specific translations to base the page on. I only think we should strive to pick the most accurate one, which will probably require discussions to do so.

Outright deleting the profiles imo, should be a last resort.

 

[Maikolpry]

After hearing all the opinions, I think I'm going to change the approach to one where the goal is to apply this idea of choosing a reliable source.
But there's still the issue that the version might contain false or poorly translated information.

 

[Oiguana2701]

But there's still the issue that the version might contain false or poorly translated information.

I don't really see the issue in this necessarily. We are going to base the page off the adaptation especifically and disregard others. Also, this is something to discuss in the general discussion thread, where we shall talk and find the most accurate one.

 

[Maikolpry]

Okay, but what do we do about the low-quality pages now? For example, Aquiles is left without skills or stats.

 

[Oiguana2701]

Okay, but what do we do about the low-quality pages now? For example, Aquiles is left without skills or stats.

For now, I would suggest not doing anything with the pages, and to discuss which versions of each story we should choose. After that's done, it's probably better to remake the profiles in a sandbox and make a CRT to revamp the entire verse.

 

[Maikolpry]

For now, I would suggest not doing anything with the pages, and to discuss which versions of each story we should choose. After that's done, it's probably better to remake the profiles in a sandbox and make a CRT to revamp the entire verse.

Yeah, but the low-quality pages that shouldn't be used are still there.

 

[Oiguana2701]

Yeah, but the low-quality pages that shouldn't be used are still there.

I mean, the best for now to do with those is add an {{Outdated}} until we can revamp them

 

[Lukewoesal007]

I'm not necessarily against the presence of "epic literature" (thought it probably shouldn't be classified as a singular verse on the wiki), but I agree we need to heavily revise how those profiles incorporate evidence. I reckon each page should be based on (and draw exclusively from) one specific translation and edition of the original work that is cited/stated clearly in the page proper. Otherwise, citations should include the internal division and the line or passage number, so they can be easily verified. For instance, we might cite this version of The Iliad of Homer in the bibliography:

Homer. The Iliad of Homer. Translated by Richmond Lattimore. Introduction and notes by Richard Martin. University of Chicago Press, 2011.

Then, for the numbered line-by-line citations, it would look something like this:

Homer, Iliad 22.306–328, trans. Lattimore.

This references lines 306 through 328 of Book 22 of the aforementioned translation and edition of the original work.

If this is feasible, then it should solve most of the current issues with the profiles, and if it isn't, then they should be deleted.

 

[Oiguana2701]

I'm not necessarily against the presence of "epic literature" (thought it probably shouldn't be classified as a singular verse on the wiki), but I agree we need to heavily revise how those profiles incorporate evidence. I reckon each page should be based on (and draw exclusively from) one specific translation and edition of the original work that is cited/stated clearly in the page proper. Otherwise, citations should include the internal division and the line or passage number, so they can be easily verified. For instance, we might cite this version of The Iliad of Homer in the bibliography:

Then, for the numbered line-by-line citations, it would look something like this:

This references lines 306 through 328 of Book 22 of the aforementioned translation and edition of the original work.

If this is feasible, then it should solve most of the current issues with the profiles, and if it isn't, then they should be deleted.

That's what my idea is about.

 

[Greg_the_master_of_gods]

I think they should be removed until somebody finds a reliable way of doing them.

 

[Maikolpry]

I think they should be removed until somebody finds a reliable way of doing them.

The outdated template is fine