• 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.

Goosebumps Verse Page CRT

Gewsbumpz_dude

Username Only
3,612
851
The verse page of the Goosebumps verse has been messy for a while now. I planned on doing this over a year ago but for some reason I just stopped, but now I'm here to fix that issue with this rewrite, making it less ideally less convoluted/messy and contains every single profile of the verse complete with there being sections for each canon. Hopefully, this isn't controversial.
 
Last edited:
Agree.

Question: wasn't R.L Stine profile not allowed for some reason?

As I think he was previously deleted
It got nuked during Zark's CRT, it was removed because something about all-powerful author avatars not being allowed on the VSBW, although he very well isn't treated as all-powerful and there are characters in the verse that are stronger then him (I.E. Slappy).
 
It got nuked during Zark's CRT, it was removed because something about all-powerful author avatars not being allowed on the VSBW, although he very well isn't treated as all-powerful and there are characters out there that directly scale to him (I.E. Slappy).
2-C Slappy?..Neat!.

Btw who are the other universe level characters in the verse?
 
2-C Slappy?..Neat!.

Btw who are the other universe level characters in the verse?
Arguable, but there is no way that is going to be accepted on here, lol.

I've actually done quite a lot of scaling offline and there is a surprising amount of characters/artifacts that have universal feats. We have two examples of those right now on the wiki (I.E. The Reality Hole [which I will eventually do a CRT] and the Verona XG-20). Along with other examples like the Blob from The Blob That Ate Everyone (If you read the book, you would know that the twist ending was that the entire story took place inside a story made up by the Blob. Characters inside said story reference there being a universe so you can say the story that the Blob wrote contained a universe).
 
Arguable, but there is no way that is going to be accepted on here, lol.

I've actually done quite a lot of scaling offline and there is a surprising amount of characters/artifacts that have universal feats. We have two examples of those right now on the wiki (I.E. The Reality Hole [which I will eventually do a CRT] and the Verona XG-20). Along with other examples like the Blob from The Blob That Ate Everyone (If you read the book, you would know that the twist ending was that the entire story took place inside a story made up by the Blob. Characters inside said story reference there being a universe so you can say the story that the Blob wrote contained a universe).
Cool!

Good luck then with those CRTs.
 
The update looks fine. Can't say much regarding tier 2 stuff though.
 
So, should I just apply the changes now since it already got approved by an admin (and I don't want this to be in CRT purgatory, I have more stuff in the pipeline after all) or should I wait for more input?
 
I actually had my comment ready to go in my message box and didn't post it. I am a terrible user of this site and have no idea what i'm doing anymore.

I'm not knowledgeable on the verse, but I can generally agree with the new stuff, as most of it seems logical and reasonable.

@Starter_Pack while you are a supporter of the verse, your input would be appreciated here. This has generally been agreed upon by two staff members already. (Myself and LordGriffin)
 
I'm just gonna go ahead and add the changes, no one (including staff) really seems to have a big issue against it and if they did I imagine they would have made that known a long time ago.
 
As I have detailed in the following thread, removing all character image link galleries, along with the "For further information about this series see this wiki" section, is indeed controversial and not aligned with our intended standards, and potentially sets a bad precedent, so you will need to convince me that this is for the best before this change can be accepted.

 
Before you make this thread repeat please read the OP and any input from our staff or anyone who contributed to this thread importantly. This thread is not long.

Goosebumps is a verse with dozens of identical characters, keeping identical lists is absolutely pointless.

I'd like to remind you that our standard format does not "prefer galleries" and gives every example section in a bullet pointed list format, so just because the majority of verses use galleries, it has never been a requirement, or even officially preferred by the wiki to use them. So that point is incorrect.
 
That point is correct. As I have repeatedly explained to you, our standard format pages work much the same way, and we would not have included character image gallery linking instructions if that was not our intended preferred standard, and it sets a bad precedent to revert verse pages that already have image gallery links included to simple link lists, as other members could also start to do so because it is less time-demanding for them.

Also, our rules clearly state that you need to follow instructions from bureaucrats when they explain intended wiki policy issues, but you have kept being relentlessly argumentative and uncooperative for a prolonged period of time despite this, and given how tired and overworked I am, wasting time on this argument is starting to get rather annoying for me.
 
Ok, so I have a solution. Once again I am only trying to help here, to be clear.

Remove the unclear language from the page which is causing the dozens of verses to continue to be created incorrectly.

Simply add an actual viewable gallery to the standard format where the current bullet pointed list is.

Problem solved.

However if my opinion is not wanted here then I guess I can ignore these clear flaws and let the problem you have addressed continue for the foreseeable future.

It doesn't really affect me either way but I thought I'd at least try to help.
 
Galleries for characters in verse pages has always been our standard practice, unless the characters don't have any image. The standard format page, while it does not explicitly say that, it is not hard to understand the intention behind it from whatever is already written there. There is a simple fix to it instead of arguing at length over it.

Currently our standard format says this:
  • A list of the character profiles belonging to a certain series or franchise. Add links to all of the associated pages available in the wiki.
  • Organise them into factions or tiers, so they are listed together with similar characters.
  • Do not insert pictures and/or links for not yet created profiles.
Reading the third point and the gallery instructions that follow, it is assumed that galleries are preferred. We just need to modify the third point to something like this:
  • Using galleries for character profiles is preferable if they have images. Do not insert pictures and/or links for not yet created profiles.
As for the Goosebumps page specifically, I checked how it looked before the edit and I feel that was better than the current version. When a person comes to a verse page, they mostly want to find the character they are looking for and doing so in a long list like that would be troublesome and uninteresting. Images speed up and process and also look aesthetically better.
 
I am fine with AKM's solution. Thank you to him and Kieran for helping out.
 
Thank you for being reasonable.

Would you be willing to apply your suggested clarification text @AKM sama ?
 
Well, it seems practical if we apply the brief clarification text as well, or would that be inappropriate, AKM?
 
To be fair. I think it would be worth at least asking some staff members in a thread what they think some solutions could be. This community is good with ideas, and generally helpful.
 
Okay. Would you be willing to create a staff forum discussion thread for your suggestion, @AKM sama ?
 
No, I am applying the change. It's very minor, is already the standard practice, and I don't think it is worth the trouble of creating a thread.

EDIT: applied.
 
Okay. Thank you. I think that we can close this thread then.
 
Back
Top