• 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.

Fixing the Situation With Locations...

That seems very similar to what I was proposing???? Do we want to have profiles that may be bland but heavily affect characters or not???
 
I thought that Sir Ovens just wants us to add footnotes with possible embedded links to characters that cannot use all of their abilities outside of specific locations.
 
What is the difference here? We already don't take these things into account. What makes that suggestion any less pointless than those presented in the OP?

I also never replied to this.
AKM sama said:
The only thing I can say at this point is that it isn't some CRT where something is objectively correct and another thing is objectively incorrect. This is regarding what policies we want to have, and we can pick and choose on that. We both can agree to disagree on this idea, and I feel there was already enough disagreement on it in the first thread, and while you thought this needed another discussion because you were not satisfied and wanted to make another attempt to explain your position
Click to expand...
But your points do not make sense in my opinion. I'm not simply saying "I don't agree with you" I'm willing to compromise if actual points are made and repetitive arguments that haven't already been heard are made. But as of now, nothing like that has happened.
AKM sama said:
sometimes we just have to accept that not everything goes the way we want in a community as big as this.
Click to expand...
Yet you have continually simply stated things like "I disagree with this" without giving anything that helps the situation or further proves your point, and people are agreeing with you.

Forgive me, but that is wrong.


I'm fine with people disagreeing with me, and I'm well aware that not everything may go the way I want, this thread is a compromise, just like the last. I've already crossed out sections of the OP because they have actually had reason to be declined, which is fine, but I at least want a reason, and one that hasn't already been addressed at that, before people begin agreeing with arguments that make little sense and acting like it has been completely debunked.
 
Sir_Ovens said:
As an aside, could we maybe make location profiles specifically for characters who's powers are intrinsically tied to them?

For example, certain Cuphead characters have no powers outside of the ones that they get from manipulating their boss arena. Or how in order to fight Castlevania Dracula, you must be inside his castle.

I think a small section or note should be made standard for such pages to indicate that certain characters can't right outside these locations.
Click to expand...
Or for two other examples: Gehrman, the first hunter cannot leave the Hunter's dream and the Void Entity cannot leave the void(physically anyway).
 
KieranH10 said:
Why are we bothering to make Location Profiles if the literal only thing we're going to take into account is what they look like?
Click to expand...
We're not, you just can't accept that we're not allowing pages you want. Scarlet Witch could make any area into Westview. The location isn't special, her ability is. Why split it across multiple pages? It's more reading, a waste of time.
KieranH10 said:
You think it is good that no Location on the wiki will be 100% valid for a profile? Meaning non of them are legit and literally shouldn't exist by current standards.
Click to expand...
I think it's good that people have to make arguments as to why a location page should exist. Debate's good.

Kieran, I'm sorry, but sometimes things come down to a matter of opinion. I haven't "disproven" your points because they're not points, they're your opinion, and I can't exactly make that cease to exist or change your mind on something you've dug yourself into. You haven't disproven my points either, because they're also my opinion.

And I feel that less pages is more user-friendly. Less jumping around. You only need one tab open to reference a character. That's 100% good.

I agree with Ovens though.
 
Last edited:
Promestein said:
We're not, you just can't accept that we're not allowing pages you want. Scarlet Witch could make any area into Westview. The location isn't special, her ability is. Why split it across multiple pages? It's more reading, a waste of time.
Click to expand...
There are so many pages that I'd 'want' to make but am absolutely sure I wouldn't be able to. I'm not doing this because I want to make them, I'm discussing because I think it's genuinely wrong that they shouldn't be allowed.

Westview would technically also come under Ovens point. Wandas kids cant exist outside of it.
Promestein said:
I think it's good that people have to make arguments as to why a location page should exist. Debate's good.
Click to expand...
That's not what I said. By the standards that are being argued, there wouldn't be a discussion. They wouldn't be allowed.
Promestein said:
Kieran, I'm sorry, but sometimes things come down to a matter of opinion.
Click to expand...
I know.
Promestein said:
I haven't "disproven" your points because they're not points, they're your opinion, and I can't exactly make that cease to exist or change your mind on something you've dug yourself into.
Click to expand...
I haven't dug myself into anything. As I said with AKM, this thread is a compromise and I've already ditched ideas I thought were good because of that. Again, I just genuinely think that this is important and that the 'opinions' you have wont benefit the wiki at all.
Promestein said:
And I feel that less pages is more user-friendly. Less jumping around. You only need one tab open to reference a character. That's 100% good.
Click to expand...
I believe giving users more information is much more important than secluding said information to make less work.
Promestein said:
I agree with Ovens though.
Click to expand...
Oven's point is very similar to my own.
 
KieranH10 said:
I believe giving users more information is much more important than secluding said information to make less work.
Click to expand...
We are giving them more information, and it's not secluded. It's on one page! The more pages you split something into the more likely it is someone will miss something in several pages' walls of text.
 
I feel like there's a lot of conflict about what the intent for location profiles really are and we should straighten those out first so the things we put on them more accurately show what we're going for.

If we want to index locations, some locations shouldn't be allowed for VS matches for obvious reasons like variable geometry or inconsistent sizes.

If we want to use locations for VS matches, some profiles shouldn't be made due to mundane architecture or repetitive settings.

Also certain locations are literally just Civs so in the case of Wakanda, that shouldn't be a location page, it should be a Civ page.
 
Sir_Ovens said:
If we want to index locations, some locations shouldn't be allowed for VS matches for obvious reasons like variable geometry or inconsistent sizes.

If we want to use locations for VS matches, some profiles shouldn't be made due to mundane architecture or repetitive settings.

Also certain locations are literally just Civs so in the case of Wakanda, that shouldn't be a location page, it should be a Civ page.
Click to expand...
I don't think the first point matters very much; the specifics aren't hugely important with how most people approach versus threads, it's the broad strokes of the location that're more important.

Otherwise agreed.
 
There are many reasons that we have to create location pages. Cosmologies, Versus Threads, and benefiting other profiles in many ways are just a few. Each just as important as the last imo.
We need to account for every reason they would be made.
 
Last edited:
Bump.

The talk has seemingly slowed down.
The current consensus seems to be:
Agree: (15, 7 Staff)

Disagree: (7, 4 Staff)
  • AKM sama (Seems to generally disagree with the OP, and prefers Zarks version)
  • Promestein (Seems to disagree with what should qualify for a profile, generally agrees with Zark)
  • Antvasima (Agrees with AKM and Promestein)
  • NomsNoms (Supposedly agrees with AKM, Prom, and Bambu)
  • The_Impress (Believes irregular structures should be completely disallowed, profiles for sub-location of existing areas should be disallowed, believes the Hazards section isn't needed)
  • DaReaperMan
  • Tllmbrg

Neutral: (4 Staff)
  • Mr._Bambu (Agrees with the points he hasn't commented on, disagrees with Merging Formats, believes if a Profile is better covered by another format, it should be that, neutral on changing "Passive Effects")
  • Sir_Ovens (Hasn't given a major stance)
  • DarkDragonMedeus (Has stated the OP has made good points, but wishes to be considered neutral)
  • DontTalkDT (Uncertain, opinions seemingly generally similar to what is being proposed, minor differences)

However if I got anyone in the wrong category, please let me know.
 
Last edited:
I have noted what people disagree on. Those that are listed as agreed seemingly agree with the OP.
 
I don't know why you're listing people who are just here to give likes, too. The only relevant people are those who made arguments.
 
Also, all three bureaucrats disagree with much of this.
 
Actually, I more so said I agree with some of the points, so I think Neutral fits where I am more accurately.
 
KieranH10 said:
Bump.

The talk has seemingly slowed down.
The current consensus seems to be:
Agree: (12, 4 Staff) Keeweed, TheDivineHost, MidnightDawn1, Colonel_Krukov, Therefir, AbaddonTheDisappointment, XSOULOFCINDERX, Fastestthingalive50, KingTempest, Greenshifter, Emirp sumitpo, ElixirBlue

Disagree: (4, 3 Staff) AKM sama (Seems to generally disagree with the OP, and prefers Zarks version), Promestein (Seems to disagree with what should qualify for a profile), Antvasima (Agrees with AKM and Promestein), NomsNoms (Supposedly agrees with AKM, Prom, and Bambu)

Neutral: (4 Staff) Mr._Bambu, Starter_Pack, Sir_Ovens, DarkDragonMedeus

However if I got anyone in the wrong category, please let me know.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this. Some opposition disagrees with the OP in general.
Neutral agree with most points and disagree with certain others afaik.
 
Lol, ok.
Does anybody else have anything further to add?

The current consensus is still this by the looks of it.
KieranH10 said:
Agree: (12, 4 Staff) Keeweed, TheDivineHost, MidnightDawn1, Colonel_Krukov, Therefir, AbaddonTheDisappointment, XSOULOFCINDERX, Fastestthingalive50, KingTempest, Greenshifter, Emirp sumitpo, ElixirBlue

Disagree: (4, 3 Staff) AKM sama (Seems to generally disagree with the OP, and prefers Zarks version), Promestein (Seems to disagree with what should qualify for a profile), Antvasima (Agrees with AKM and Promestein), NomsNoms (Supposedly agrees with AKM, Prom, and Bambu)

Neutral: (4 Staff) Mr._Bambu, Starter_Pack, Sir_Ovens, DarkDragonMedeus
Click to expand...

If nobody has any further points to give, am I ok to apply what has been agreed upon?
 
No, I am afraid that you are not. You do not have nearly enough onesided staff consensus for that. Also, I did not have the impresssion that so many staff members agree with you. Perhaps all staff here can state their current positions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Locked
Slightly adjusting our rules for bolded "powers and abilities" links
Replies
32
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Flashlight237
  • Locked
About The "Others" Section
2 3
Replies
84
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima
DMUA
Removing Power of the Verse from Verse pages
2 3 4
Replies
147
Views
18K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Jinx666
'Continuity' Section for Verse Pages
Replies
37
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Expectro2000xxx
Absolute Zero Standard Revision
Replies
33
Views
2K
DontTalkDT
DontTalkDT
Back
Top