• 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.

Are Newgrounds Characters allowed on Vsbattles?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Redacted_Flinn

Redacted_Flinn

275
35
You can probably guess what I want to discuss by the title... Since we already have some Newgrounds stuff like Sonny and Friday Night Funkin, I wanted to know where the limit to this stuff was... I wanted to make a page for Hobo from the Hobo fighting game series. I just wanted to make sure what the rules were since Vsbattles seems to be getting more and more strict as of late...
 
Will post quick before I sleep I suppose. But in Sonny's case, it has been transferred to things like Mobile apps and Steam iirc. But even before it was on Newgrounds, it was on Kongregate I think. I'm unsure about Friday Night Funkin, aside from Pico appearing in that series. But he was originally from Pico's School series. I also vaguely recall us allowing the Eddsworld series too. Personally, I think Auron the Paladin series would also be fine. But I am unsure what the exact upper limit is at the moment.
 
I wouldn't really draw a distinction between Newgrounds and other websites for storing flash animations/games.

Really, it just needs to pass our general notability guidelines. Since those websites usually have view counts, the standard 1 million views should be a fine default bar.
 
Agnaa said:
I wouldn't really draw a distinction between Newgrounds and other websites for storing flash animations/games.

Really, it just needs to pass our general notability guidelines. Since those websites usually have view counts, the standard 1 million views should be a fine default bar.
Click to expand...
I think that seems sensible. 🙏

Do we need to adjust any wording in our rules accordingly? I think that it is currently focused only on YouTube views. 🙏
 
Eh, probably not. We can't meaningfully rewrite that wording for every website where content can be uploaded.
 
I meant to make the wording more general for online video content, rather than only mentioning YouTube. 🙏
 
Ah okay, perhaps something like:
For non-curated online content that's not created by bigger companies we generally require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own, unless that website is known to count views in a way that under-represents or over-represents them compared to websites such as YouTube.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you. That seems quite good to me. 🙏❤️

What do the rest of you think?
 
Thank you for helping out. ❤️🙏
 
Redacted_Flinn said:
You can probably guess what I want to discuss by the title... Since we already have some Newgrounds stuff like Sonny and Friday Night Funkin, I wanted to know where the limit to this stuff was... I wanted to make a page for Hobo from the Hobo fighting game series. I just wanted to make sure what the rules were since Vsbattles seems to be getting more and more strict as of late...
Click to expand...
99.9% sure a Hobo profile would be ok
 
As long as it isn't fan content featuring copyrighted characters (IE. Power Star, SMBZ), it's allowed. Even if these series heavily tend to make references to other series for the sake of humor (IE. Henry Stickmin, Epic Battle Fantasy), so long as these stories are original (And/or they decide to remove the copyrighted references in updated versions of the installments), they are allowed to be here.
 
So would this be an acceptable modified wiki rule text? I think that our current version only mentions YouTube videos specifically. 🙏

"For non-curated online content that's not created by bigger companies we generally require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own, unless that website is known to count views in a way that under-represents or over-represents them compared to websites such as YouTube."
 
Last edited:
Notability isn't exactly a problem since people get hella nostalgic for Newgrounds stuff. Personally, I think the ones with set universes like Friday Night Funkin and Madness Combat would merit profiles more than profiles for Idle Game #425235. Definitely avoid Re******d Animal Babies, though. That show would violate FANDOM guidelines with some of its edgy nonsense.
 
Antvasima said:
So would this be an acceptable modified wiki rule text? I think that our current version only mentions YouTube videos specifically. 🙏

"For non-curated online content that's not created by bigger companies we generally require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own, unless that website is known to count views in a way that under-represents or over-represents them compared to websites such as YouTube."
Click to expand...
Hello.

Did we ever apply this change? 🙏
 
That hasn't been applied, but I think it would be a good change to apply.
 
Okay. If the revision has sufficient support to apply, would you be willing to handle it please? 🙏
 
You and I are the only ones that have commented on the wording, and Griffin has said he agrees with my point. I'm not sure if that's enough support.
 
Antvasima said:
So would this be an acceptable modified wiki rule text? I think that our current version only mentions YouTube videos specifically. 🙏

"For non-curated online content that's not created by bigger companies we generally require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own, unless that website is known to count views in a way that under-represents or over-represents them compared to websites such as YouTube."
Click to expand...
@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Just_a_Random_Butler @DarkGrath @Dereck03 @Planck69

Does this seem acceptable to you? 🙏
 
Actually, gonna delete those and respond on your wall. This is a staff only thread and, as far as I can tell, you didn't get permission to post.
 
Antvasima said:
So would this be an acceptable modified wiki rule text? I think that our current version only mentions YouTube videos specifically. 🙏

"For non-curated online content that's not created by bigger companies we generally require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own, unless that website is known to count views in a way that under-represents or over-represents them compared to websites such as YouTube."
Click to expand...
This is ok.
 
Antvasima said:
So would this be an acceptable modified wiki rule text? I think that our current version only mentions YouTube videos specifically. 🙏

"For non-curated online content that's not created by bigger companies we generally require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own, unless that website is known to count views in a way that under-represents or over-represents them compared to websites such as YouTube."
Click to expand...
As mentioned in this thread I think there are a number of tricky challenges with such a flat number for a wide variety of different content.
I suppose a rule like that can work, but I would prefer to use a formulation that has a stronger emphasis that this is for media that can be considered equivalent in all considerations to English YouTube. In the current formulation, one may argue that anything that faithfully counts votes isn't included in under-representation, but I would argue that applying that to a Japanese novel, with Japanese speakers being just 10% as many as English speakers, makes for a bad measure of notability.
I'm also not sure if we generally would want to apply the same standards to novels and videos. Novels sell less on average and get less "casual views" as they are a greater time investment. What is outstanding for a novel in viewership may be underwhelming for a video.
This also needs a clause regarding works with no view count at all.
 
So do you have any reasonable and workable suggestions for improvements in my wording, DontTalk? 🙏
 
Maybe something like:
"For content published on YouTube, or online content for which one can expect similar viewer numbers to be equally reasonable to reach, we require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own. This doesn't apply for entries created by bigger companies and for entries for which no viewer numbers can be determined. The former are generally allowed, while in the latter case, case-by-case consideration is required."
Click to expand...
This still doesn't really tell us what the limits for, say, English Webnovels would be, but I lack the overview of that community that would be needed to formulate good goalposts.
In the end, many edge cases likely should just get some case-by-case consideration.
 
DontTalkDT said:
As mentioned in this thread I think there are a number of tricky challenges with such a flat number for a wide variety of different content.
I suppose a rule like that can work, but I would prefer to use a formulation that has a stronger emphasis that this is for media that can be considered equivalent in all considerations to English YouTube. In the current formulation, one may argue that anything that faithfully counts votes isn't included in under-representation, but I would argue that applying that to a Japanese novel, with Japanese speakers being just 10% as many as English speakers, makes for a bad measure of notability.
I'm also not sure if we generally would want to apply the same standards to novels and videos. Novels sell less on average and get less "casual views" as they are a greater time investment. What is outstanding for a novel in viewership may be underwhelming for a video.
This also needs a clause regarding works with no view count at all.
Click to expand...
I can agree with this. Plus people easily get nostalgic for media with less than a million views, sometimes more so than media with 1m+. That isn't mentioning things like cable TV shows these days. New episodes of Teen Titans GO, for example, would be lucky if they ever break 200k views on airing.
 
DT's reword is fine, too.
DontTalkDT said:
This still doesn't really tell us what the limits for, say, English Webnovels would be, but I lack the overview of that community that would be needed to formulate good goalposts.
Click to expand...
It's really hard to draw these lines. I've seen works with <150 views per chapter get published. Maybe this shouldn't be surprising since most books that get published don't have an online demo run of any kind.

Plus, engagement compared to views can vary a lot; going down this list finds stories which have barely a dozen comments, and stories which have almost two hundred, with a comparable amount of boosters. And going through AO3 you can see stories with 1 comment per 40 views, and stories with 1 comment per 500 views.
 
I do not particularly mind DontTalk's new draft text, with the exception that repeating the word "case" three times in a row doesn't sound very eloquent in terms of sentence structure, so an alternative would be appreciated. 🙏
 
How about "while for the latter" instead of "while in the latter case"?
 
Thank you. So this then?

"For content published on YouTube, or online content for which one can expect similar viewer numbers to be equally reasonable to reach, we require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own. This doesn't apply for entries created by bigger companies and for entries for which no viewer numbers can be determined. The former are generally allowed, while for the latter, case-by-case consideration is required."
 
Yep!
 
Thank you. Is it acceptable for the rest of you here if we add that rule text to our Editing Rules page? 🙏
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Quibster
Would Mahoako be allowed on the wiki?
Replies
1
Views
785
Setsuna_tenma
Setsuna_tenma
Psychomaster35
Is this verse allowed? (Nezumiman)
Replies
1
Views
436
BestMGQScalerEver
BestMGQScalerEver
ThePrimalHunter
Rules On Rematches
Replies
1
Views
474
Flashlight237
Flashlight237
Just_Butchering
The Boys - Homelander (and Soldier Boy) resistances adition (plus Neuman resistances)
2 3 4
Replies
135
Views
6K
Dinozxd
Dinozxd
RanaProGamer
My First Outerversal Thread | Doom Patrol TV Show
Replies
4
Views
472
ByArrow
ByArrow
Back
Top