• 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.

A case for a verse pages restoration

Status
Not open for further replies.
2-A and haxxed af. The the degree of the hax might depend but yeah.

There is a possible 1-B thing but I'd rather try and make a CRT for that later rather than starting with BAM sudden 1-B verse.
 
******* rip SCP

Also @Andy MGQ is like weirdly similar to UT despite coming out two years before it. It has the deconstructions of RPGs, the monster and human coexistence plot, and eerily similar smaller plot points, etc. You could honestly make a vague plot summary that describes both.
 
If it makes you feel any better, I still have zero 1-A verses or respectably haxxed verses so my position is still very bad
 
I mean, it kinda is how it is already. As long as you can actually quantify characters and feats and it's not just **** with no plot or an excuse plot. Really case-by-case and I'm iffy on what some crazy people may try to push for.
 
@AS I assume so?

@Andy So can I flex on you with the Cthulhu Mythos since I've read at the Mountain of Madness once or twice.
 
Well, my concern has always been that we would get in trouble with Fandom, who have explicitly told me that we are not allowed to feature any remotely sexual images whatsoever in the wiki, and that the pages would eventually turn too risque in themselves, but as long as there is a coherent story that is not exclusively about sex, and the pages are kept completely clean and up to standard, I suppose that I am personally fine with it.

It still seems safest to ask the Fandom staff about it first though.
 
Yes, that is why I said that I would personally be fine with clean pages.

It still seems safest if somebody verifies that our interpretation of the Fandom rules is correct though. We have had a few incidents when I have had to rescue several of our members from getting banned by Fandom for posting risque or controversial images.

We would likely have to mention in footnotes in the profiles that they should be kept clean in any case, to avoid what I mentioned above.
 
I mean if they allow MGQ to have its own entire wiki and Fandom allows it on multiple other indexing wikis i dont really see why we would need to verify it with Fandom...
 
Like I said, MGQ content is all over Wikia. If we stay reasonable compared to the MGQ Wiki we shouldn't have any issues with our downplayed versions of it.

I don't mind a note though. It could be included in a potential Discretion Notice.
 
Given that A) None of the sexual stuff is posted here and B) None of the sexual stuff needs to be discussed in detail here to analyse the character's powers, I am fine with this.
 
Well, I have already agreed with this myself. I just think that it seems better to confirm that our interpretation is correct.
 
Should I contact Fandom, or is somebody else willing to handle it?
 
@Weekly And you know why you shouldn't be doing that instead of just pointing out the problems with the downgrade from the beginning right?
 
Yup

The downgrade existing in the first place is the first problem

But im not going to derail this thread over SCP so please drop it
 
@Ant Like I said, given how this kind of content is featured all over Wikia, I really doubt the neccessity of that.

Although I'm going to sleep now.
 
Well, okay. As long as the pages are clean, and have footnote instructions to not add any erotic content, it should probably be fine then.
 
Just wanted to point out that Ant's greenlight is post 69.
 
I was asleep and it seems like the concencus is agreement if I am right.
 
If they are to be restored, I will let Saikou handled the pages since page were outdated. I will still be willing to help with missing abilities and feats.

My personal position was to bring the verse as SFW without the uneeded contents like I believe they were beforehand and just like current adult-verses accepted on the wiki.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Dalesean027
RWBY 8-A Restoration
Replies
39
Views
2K
Dalesean027
Dalesean027
Sir_Ovens
The Absolute State of Verse Specific Powers and Abilities
Replies
36
Views
2K
Agnaa
Agnaa
Qliphoth_Bacikal
High School DxD Physiology Pages Addition
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
Qliphoth_Bacikal
Qliphoth_Bacikal
Frieza_force_soldier_100
Restoring Welcome to the Game verse and profiles
Replies
25
Views
1K
Mr. Bambu
Mr. Bambu
Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
99K
McFriesGuy075
McFriesGuy075
Back
Top