• 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.

Franchise-specific discussion rules revamp

Status
Not open for further replies.
IdiosyncraticLawyer

IdiosyncraticLawyer

Username Only
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
2,855
3,287
Currently, many franchise-specific discussion rules we have are ill-explained/outdated. This thread is my attempt to address this; I'll prepare a write-up for the page after the discussion finishes.

Firstly, I've analyzed all of the current franchise-specific discussion rules, found the threads and diffs that added them, and drafted separate proposals for what we should do to each of them. Bleach, DC Comics, Dragon Ball, and Naruto were skipped because I've previously independently revamped them, and Marvel was skipped because Ultima's in the middle of revising it and I'm waiting for him to finish.

Avatar: The Last Airbender​

Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Ben 10​

  • Do not try to upgrade the cosmology or the cast to 1-B based on the statements from the Naljians or their toy. Although one of the them stated that "there are only 26 dimensions that matter", there is not enough sufficient evidence to scale them to such level, as they only have one appearance and statement in the entire series, and the mentioning of dimensions doesn't automatically fit the criteria in our Tiering System for the purpose of tiering.
In addition, although the Naljian toy was stated to be more advanced than the Omnitrix, when it replicated Gwen Tennyson's form, it displayed a clear inability to copy her powers accurately, instead using pink disks to replace the energy disks. As such, it is very difficult to imagine that it can copy the powers of a Celestialsapien when it could not fully replicate the powers of a lower tier species.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

Black Clover​

  • Please do not attempt to change the statistics of Asta with Black Divider without new, relevant information from the anime or manga, based on whether or not it scales above Licht's Conquering Eon. This topic has been addressed numerous times, with the majority of prevailing arguments being shown and refuted here, and it has become tiring to deal with them over and over again. This discussion rule was agreed on here.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

DOOM​

  • Please refrain from trying to downgrade DOOM from Low 1-C via Davoth not being at full power. This has been discussed numerous times across a number of threads, and has been rejected by multiple sources.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Final Fantasy​

  • Please avoid creating content revision threads questioning the legitimacy of Sephiroth's supernova feat. It has been discussed several times and accepted as valid. This does not include any future revisions after the Final Fantasy VII remake.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Ichiban Ushiro no Daimaou​

Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

Kingdom Hearts​

  • Please do not attempt to downgrade Kingdom Hearts on the basis of Xemnas' boss fight and subsequent skyscraper throwing. Logic and scaling through the lore is a far better indicator of the series' overall power, as like many RPGs, the vast majority of events lack direct physical destruction or area of effect.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: I couldn't find any instances of this happening in my research, and given how old this rule is, it seems outdated and unnecessary. Unless someone can provide evidence that this rule is still necessary, as AP ≠ AOE doesn't need to be repeated for one specific franchise, we should remove this rule.

Medaka Box​

  • Do not try to upgrade Ajimu Najimi or Hanten Shiranui from Medaka Box to unreasonable degrees. Given that they come from a metafictional parody manga, that mostly revolves around deconstructing, circumventing, dissecting, and exaggerating plot conveniences, and does not remotely make sense from a power-scaling perspective, their statistics are very hard to gauge. For the same reasons, also avoid using them in serious match-up threads. See here for an example.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Minecraft​

  • Based on context provided by this interview, the End Poem has been deemed insufficient to base profiles, statistics, et cetera on. To summarize, it has been decided that the End Poem is both insufficient to prove potential ratings and considered too questionable in its legitimacy (refer to the aforementioned interview) to support it as justification for any use on this wiki.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

My Hero Academia​

  • Do not make revisions regarding Aoyama's Navel Laser Quirk being lightspeed. It has been frequently depicted to be far slower than that with Anti-Feats such as being on par with Class 1-A's other ranged attacks, and being dodged by beginning of series Mina Ashido. Aoyama has also shown that the beam can display properties a laser does not, such as keeping it stationary and using it as a sword.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

My Little Pony​

Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Nasuverse​

  • Do not attempt to downgrade the tier 1 ratings of Nasuverse characters. Its cosmology, consistency, and ratings have been debated heavily over the years, and attempts at downgrades have frequently been rejected before (Examples include: this, this and this. Threads that compile evidence for the tiers can be seen here and here). Debates over this have grown tiring, and proven to be a waste of time for all parties involved.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

One Piece​

  • Don't create threads to upgrade One Piece, based on Chinjao supposedly splitting an ice continent, until the story provides us with more evidence, and avoid using statements only to support it.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule seems outdated, as a calc for this feat's high-end only got 7-A, which wouldn't be an upgrade because Chinjao's weakest key is already 7-A+, so we should remove it, especially considering the main cast is already many tiers above this feat.
  • Please do not try to scale Zoan Queen's attack potency to Big Mom by using their fight at Udon, as Queen did not inflict any real damage to Big Mom and was terrified that she would kill him. Not to mention that Big Mom only collapsed from exhaustion and not from Queen's Brachio Bomber.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

One-Punch Man​

  • Do NOT post any threads or comments about Saitama being limitless, omnipotent, or that "he is a gag character who is never meant to lose". This is an illogical line of reasoning that does not fit in with our system, employs a very liberal use of no-limits fallacies, and defeats the base purpose of indexing character statistics. Please note that due to the highly repetitive nature of this particular discussion, failure to follow this rule may result in a block without any particular warning.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

Pokémon​

Click to expand...
  • Do not try to downgrade Arceus, the Creation Trio, and any characters who scale from them based on them being harmed by Pokémon who are consistently shown to be below 2-B/2-A in statistics. This is because those events have been discussed to exhaustion and dismissed as Plot-Induced Stupidity or Game Mechanics. The lore that has been established and the feats they have showcased across all medias, which solidly place them at 2-B/2-A, should take precedence over these inconsistencies.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: These rules are fine to keep, but given how similar they are, I would advocate for merging them into one rule forbidding cross-scaling between the casual and cosmic-tier Pokémon. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Star Wars​

Click to expand...
Evaluation: The first half of this rule is fine to keep, but I don't believe the second half is repetitive enough of a discussion to warrant a rule, so we should remove it. I will link the thread in my rewrite.

Super Smash Bros.​

  • Please do not attempt to establish Super Smash Bros. as canon in any way for the involved franchises. It completely fails to fulfill our canon crossovers requirements, as it obviously lacks sufficient solid interactions and references to the events in many of the canons to fit into their established continuities. To consider it as canon would require a great deal of assumptions to the point of borderline fanfiction. For further information, see here, and here.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

To Aru Majutsu No Index​

  • Please avoid trying to upgrade To Aru characters to Tier 1-A or above, as this is highly contradicted by other parts of this work of fiction.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: As this rule's been around since before discussion rules had a page and from a time when the 1-A standards were drastically different, it's not a relevant problem anymore, so we should remove it.

Toriko​

  • Do not attempt to upgrade the Toriko character Acacia/Neo to Multi-Galaxy level based on an outlier that contradicts every other established feat from the main cast.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: I don't believe this topic has had enough discussion to warrant a rule, so unless someone can provide proof that it's a problem large enough to need a rule, we should remove it.

Touhou Project​

Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Yu Yu Hakusho​

  • Don't attempt to upgrade S-class characters in Yu Yu Hakusho to planet busters, as this has previously been discussed over and over and has turned redundant.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is from before discussion rules had a separate page; unless we have evidence that this is still a relevant problem, we should remove it.

Cool Cat​

  • Please do not try to add any characters from the Cool Cat series. They lack any legitimate or notable feats to index, and the author has been notoriously touchy regarding copyright for it. Our staff have also grown tired of the repeated requests to allow this.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. I will link the threads in my rewrite.

Suggsverse​

  • We have very repeatedly discussed this issue, and have reached the conclusion that the verse in question will never be allowed to have profiles in this wiki. There are several reasons for this, including its severe lack of notability and writing quality. Meaning that it is too inconsistent and incoherent for our members to properly analyze, and that it is obscure to the point that most of them cannot even get a hold of all of the source texts for reference. It is also completely incompatible with our tiering system, given that it was mainly created in order to flood wikis such as our own with hundreds of tier 0 pages. As such, please follow suit and do not try to argue for allowing it again, as it only serves to waste the time of other members.
Click to expand...
Evaluation: This rule is fine to keep. The thread that prompted its addition wasn't moved with the forum, so I'll link the conversation on Antvasima's wall instead.
Secondly, I believe we need some consistent rules in writing for when and how to write franchise-specific discussion rules. Off the top of my head, I believe an issue should have had at least three rejected CRTs trying to change it for a discussion rule to be warranted, after which adding it would require a staff discussion thread to approve it. When written, the discussion rule should do its best to cover the reasons for barring a topic and should link to the threads that prompted its addition and the thread that approved it.
 
 
I do not think that it seems appropriate to sweepingly mass-revise our discussion-rules page in a rushed manner, and definitely do not want you to embed links to message wall threads into it. I would rather not get my own spammed by irate Suggs-fans for example.
 
Also, for gods' sakes, please stop spamming bumps to far more policy revision threads than I and our community are remotely able to keep up with at the same time, without properly considering if they are genuinely crucial and beneficial for our community or not.
 
Last edited:
Huh, I never got a notification for this.

Now then. This is absolutely a horrible idea to try and discuss multiple verse discussion rules in a single thread. Each of these have a specific context and history that needs to be taken into account, and a couple outright are not applicable anymore.

For example, you listed that the Pkmn rules regarding scaling to the Creation Trio should stay... Despite the fact we already use them for scaling. The rule is insanely outdated and should in fact be removed. You also cited the Star Wars ruling regarding Vader, which historically was a topic indeed spammed, and the only reason it doesn't get brought up much nowadays is precisely because of the existence of this rule. Star Wars supporters (those that are still active on site) acknowledge the fact Vader receiving any form of scaling via Sidious, whether in Legends or Disney canon, is heavily contradicted by the source material showing the relationship between the two as one where Vader has always been co-dependant on his master and is genuinely unable to stand up against him.

These are just the two examples I'm familiar with.

So all in all, discussions for each should be handled in their own dedicated thread imo.

As for rewriting a few, I suppose. But again, personally would greatly prefer this be discussed individually and not on a massive thread jumping all over the place.
 
I strongly agree with Lephyr here. These types of revisions require careful case by case well-informed context evaluation, not a sweeping sledgehammer approach.
 
Antvasima said:
I do not think that it seems appropriate to sweepingly mass-revise our discussion-rules page in a rushed manner, and definitely do not want you to embed links to message wall threads into it. I would rather not get my own spammed by irate Suggs-fans for example.
Click to expand...
Antvasima said:
Also, for gods' sakes, please stop spamming bumps to far more policy revision threads than I and our community are remotely able to keep up with at the same time, without properly considering if they are genuinely crucial and beneficial for our community or not.
Click to expand...
Understood, very sorry. If this type of revision is inappropriate, you can close this thread immediately.
 
Antvasima said:
I do not think that it seems appropriate to sweepingly mass-revise our discussion-rules page in a rushed manner, and definitely do not want you to embed links to message wall threads into it. I would rather not get my own spammed by irate Suggs-fans for example.
Click to expand...
I honestly agree with this sentiment. We should honestly make a rule about not making mass-sweeping revision threads affecting multiple verses in a single thread like this. They should all be done verse-by-verse on a case-by-case basis with prior heavy discussion from the verse experts.
 
Evaluation: I couldn't find any instances of this happening in my research, and given how old this rule is, it seems outdated and unnecessary. Unless someone can provide evidence that this rule is still necessary, as AP ≠ AOE doesn't need to be repeated for one specific franchise, we should remove this rule.
Click to expand...

Considering this is already brought up in the Attack Potency page:

The attack potency depends on the energy output of a single attack, not the area of effect of the attack.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind it being removed.

For the record, the rule is incredibly old and seemingly came from this thread.
 
IdiosyncraticLawyer said:
Are we actually using this thread, then?
Click to expand...
KLOL506 said:
We probably should not.
Click to expand...
Well, I just thought that we can maybe make an exception for the rule that Bobsican mentioned, but handle any other examples individually.

Anyway, is it fine if we remove the Kingdom Hearts rule that was mentioned above then?
 
Antvasima said:
Well, I just thought that we can maybe make an exception for the rule that Bobsican mentioned, but handle any other examples individually.

Anyway, is it fine if we remove the Kingdom Hearts rule that was mentioned above then?
Click to expand...
Sure, and perhaps the first Pokémon rule and the Star Wars rule Lephyr mentioned too?
 
Okay. I think that you can probably do so then.
 
No I did not. I only agreed about Kigdom Hearts, as I asked the verse's supporters for input.
 
Thank you for helping out. 🙏

Should we close this thread then?
 
Antvasima said:
Thank you for helping out. 🙏

Should we close this thread then?
Click to expand...
This part of my proposal wasn't commented on:
IdiosyncraticLawyer said:
Secondly, I believe we need some consistent rules in writing for when and how to write franchise-specific discussion rules. Off the top of my head, I believe an issue should have had at least three rejected CRTs trying to change it for a discussion rule to be warranted, after which adding it would require a staff discussion thread to approve it. When written, the discussion rule should do its best to cover the reasons for barring a topic and should link to the threads that prompted its addition and the thread that approved it.
Click to expand...
 
I think that it simply needs to be a very bothersome, persistent, problematic, and strongly rejected topic.
 
Antvasima said:
I think that it simply needs to be a very bothersome, persistent, problematic, and strongly rejected topic.
Click to expand...
I'm fine with dropping the specific requirements for now if you think that way. You can close this now, then, and I'll look towards revising specific rules later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sans2345
Death Forest General Discussion Thread
Replies
0
Views
400
Sans2345
Sans2345
ImmortalDread
  • Locked
Tokyo Revengers: Discussion Rule
2 3
Replies
100
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
ImmortalDread
  • Locked
Most Important Discussion Rule Section - Staff Thread Creation Guidelines
2
Replies
63
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
DarkGrath
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Rules Revision
2 3
Replies
93
Views
8K
Antvasima
Antvasima
IdiosyncraticLawyer
  • Locked
Clarifying the number of staff necessary to approve Tier 1 and 0 revisions
2
Replies
67
Views
4K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top