• 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.

Author Page Canonicity - SCP Meta Problems, Part 3/∞

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can talk with Kepekley via fanfiction.net.

He will hopefully be allowed to return in a few months, like CursedGentleman was, after which I can restore his administrator position.
 
The verse is too restrictive, lets fix it by making it MORE restrictive. Good idea.

If youre going to do that you may as well just delete the verse
 
WeeklyBattles said:
The verse is too restrictive, lets fix it by making it MORE restrictive. Good idea.
If youre going to do that you may as well just delete the verse
Click to expand...
Making it less restrictive means that we get more of these dimensionality/canonicity/whatever discussions that make a single verse actively mess with how we tier and look at pages.

I can't think of a single other verse where we had to argue about "metanarratives", "author page tales", or "collaborative fiction"
 
I honestly wouldn't mind deleting the verse if it is increasingly just an inconsistent mess without coherent continuity, that also does not fit into our tiering system, but it depends on what Matthew thinks.
 
@Ant The problem is its not incoherent or inconsistent, but the rules we have in place right now are restrictive to the point that it makes them incoherent due to forcibly ignoring a lot of details to try to make new consistency where there already IS consistency
 
Can you explain why the rules are causing this issue?

As in, what issues the rules are specifically causing. I'd like examples.
 
Its like taking a verse like Naruto and trying to scale it so that we only go by their consistent feats instead of everything in the verse and ignoring everything else as inconsistent and then trying to understand the story based solely on those few feats. You can apply this to any verse and it would turn out the same; as an incomprehensible mess.

SCP has legitimate consistency without the rules saying we cant use tales like we used to
 
Its like taking a verse like Naruto and trying to scale it so that we only go by their consistent feats instead of everything in the verse and ignoring everything else as inconsistent and then trying to understand the story based solely on those few feats. You can apply this to any verse and it would turn out the same; as an incomprehensible mess.

Last time I checked, Naruto doesn't let whoever makes an account on their official forums who gets approval from the audience write their stuff.

You actually do have rules saying you can use tales like you used to, it's called extended canon.

And yet we still have this.
 
No, it isn't.

The only thing that regulates pages are admins in regards to removing shitposts, and the audience in terms of downvoting.

You can write about a dancing, outerversal penguin, and if the audience likes it, it would be canon.
 
Because what is and isn't canon is determined by the audience?


I've already gone over consistency issues. Heck, there is an entire SCP about how trying to make a timeline for the verse literally rips it apart. I can just namedrop 001 and how nearly each one tries to tell a different version of the Foundation's history, how 106 has nearly three backstories now, how some say the Foundation started as an offshoot of Area 51 in the 70s, or of an American organization in 1800s, or has existed for eternity. I could keep on going, but I'm certain that it would be pinned on a multiverse. Thing is, if you want to call all of that part of a multiverse, then there's no way of telling which version is the "mainstream" Foundation version.
 
On consistency. I think there's enough consistency for our uses.

001s telling different versions of the Foundation's history is in-universe explained by many of them being fake to stop curious researchers from finding out the truth.

I'm not familiar with 106's backstory, so I can't tell if that is an actual problem, or just due to some unread tales that explain which one is real.

I think it speaks volumes that in over 4000 articles and way more tales there's only 1 inconsistent backstory problem without a satisfactory resolution. That seems like way better consistency on a per-page basis than most fiction.
 
You say that like people are purposely making tales that make the verse less consistent when the opposite is the truth, i can show you a series of tales by several different authors that all follow the same line of canon consistency.
 
And yet, here we are arguing about the canonicity of an author page, and having three debates in the past couple of weeks alone on our tiering system.
 
@Agnaa 106's accepted backstory is a mutated WW2 soldier but there's a very blatant alt universe version where he's the result of Doctor Scranton going into the Darkness Between Dimensions (SCP-3001)
 
WeeklyBattles said:
@Agnaa 106's accepted backstory is a mutated WW2 soldier but there's a very blatant alt universe version where he's the result of Doctor Scranton going into the Darkness Between Dimensions (SCP-3001)
Click to expand...
What confirms that's alt-universe?

What's the baseline universe?
 
Canonicity =/= consistency. Tiering system =/= consistency.

If the problem is the weird debates that arise, I'm not sure if that's a reason to delete a verse, but I could slow down with my creation for threads about these issues.
 
Dargoo Faust said:
What confirms that's alt-universe?

What's the baseline universe?
Click to expand...
Because Scranton still existed in the baseline universe

The baseline universe is the one where 106 is the mutated soldier. I kinda expected you to know this given how much you like to argue against it.Baseline universe and alt universes are commonplace in SCP.
 
There's nothing saying that's the baseline universe. Give me a quote, or evidence.

According to the Canon Page, I'm just as right as you on the issue.

"It's up to you, as the reader, to decide what you believe and what you embrace as the heart of the universe."
 
@Dargoo In a verse where the supreme being is literally a force that controls writers and authors who make articles for said verse, why wouldnt they be canon?

Having wierd characters that are tricky to fit into the tiering system isnt uncommon. We're not changing the tiering system for them, jyst trying to figure out where they stand.
 
And who's to say Swann's the official writer of the site, and everything they write is law?

There's nothing saying what the baseline of the universe is. If there are "many, overlapping canons", isn't the best idea to treat them as that? Seperate canons?

"It's that we have a multitude which touch, cross, and dip into each other."
 
Swann is, swann is the one to say that.

Baseline universe is the one that correlates with the article, this was actually confirmed by the Black Queen who constantly visits alt universes
 
What article? There's > 4000 of them.

I'd like to know what is the "regular" universe, and what is "alt canon", and why they are like that other than your personal opinion.
 
I honestly don't want to debate this because it's not an issue of concern at the moment. The problem as of now is the state of SCP and why everyone wants to delete it.

Creating a new CRT every other week for SCP gets annoying and it's exhausting to debate this. I understand where Ant is coming from and I agree with him that it's nonsensical to keep making these threads.

What I do care about however, is how after 5 separate threads, we still don't have any progress on SCP's issues. We've just been piling up issues that don't matter and ignoring the issues that do. This entire thread shouldn't have been made in the first place. High 1-B is still not a thing, when are we getting back to that? Can we please finish up our prior problems before we create more of them?

Author pages can be a problem for another day, at this rate, SCP will never get fixed and will be deleted. I don't want a verse I'm so invested in to just disappear.
 
those 4000 are the canon baseline universe. There are tales that correlate to whats in the article and tales that dont. The ones that dont are alt universe versions of the SCPs in their respective articles, this is often flat out stated to boot.
 
I personally agree with Dargoo, but it is probably best to wait to see what Matthew thinks.
 
WeeklyBattles said:
those 4000 are the canon baseline universe. There are tales that correlate to whats in the article and tales that dont. The ones that dont are alt universe versions of the SCPs in their respective articles, this is often flat out stated to boot.
Click to expand...
There's inconsistency in the 4000 articles themselves.

4001 says the Foundation started from the ACSI in the late 20th century, whereas several other ACSI scips don't see it as anything other an a wild-western incarnaton of the Foundation (specifically that one that delt with time travel).

If the "4000 articles" are canon, I once again point here: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-4010

If you're telling me that the 001 entries might not even exist, why is Swann scaling to literally everything else in the verse?
 
@Ovens I've been bumping the High 1-B thread for months.

I've been trying to solve these smaller things since they'll actually hit a resolution, when something like the High 1-B is getting stonewalled by both sides.
 
This thread should be closed and opened again when our prior problems have been solved. This thread stagnated progress. I've been meaning to ask Dargoo and Weekly if we could have private discussions about the verse in order not to stir up anything here. But my messages don't seem to be reaching their walls on mobile.
 
@Dargoo How does an SCP that can create timelines make all the articles not canon?

All of the 001s are confirmed to exist, they just hide the true 001
 
Look, at this rate, I'm tempted to just throw my hands up and let you guys have at it with the verse.

If/When it comes crashing back down and causes the wiki more trouble than its worth, hopefully I don't have to argue through this again and the evidence will be self-explanatory.

I'd like to wait for Matt's input.
 
If this does get closed, it should be after Matt comments, and those interested should figure out somewhere (possibly on the discussion thread) how we should go about getting the High 1-B change confirmed or denied.
 
WeeklyBattles said:
All of the 001s are confirmed to exist, they just hide the true 001
Click to expand...
n order to prevent knowledge of SCP-001 from being leaked, several/no false SCP-001 files have been created alongside the true file/files. All files concerning the nature of SCP-001, including the decoy/decoys,

There's no such confirmation. We get a maybe at best.
 
I agree this should be closed.

We should take one thing at a time, as these constant revisions are killing what motivation I have to edit for the verse I have left.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JustANormalPerson01
What happens if an in-verse author writes anti-feats?
Replies
2
Views
541
TheGatememer
TheGatememer
Mr. Bambu
  • Locked
The Death of SCP
8 9 10
Replies
361
Views
89K
Mr. Bambu
Mr. Bambu
Peppersalt43
SCP-098 Profile Revision
Replies
8
Views
1K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
la_abeja_azteca
  • Locked
the foundations profile is poopoo doodoo
Replies
6
Views
1K
Robo432343
Robo432343
Tllmbrg
  • Locked
I have another batch in me (SCP-001, SCP-4051, SCP-4119) CRT
Replies
8
Views
1K
Tllmbrg
Tllmbrg
Back
Top