Inclusion/Notability of Verses in VsBattle Wiki (Staff Only)

[Antvasima]

Bambu seems to make sense above as usual.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I find myself in agreement with the views expressed by @Mr._Bambu, as they accurately encapsulate the sentiments that I had intended to convey. I would like to extend my appreciation towards @Mr._Bambu for their contributions to this thread and for effectively conveying my thoughts.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

There is nuance here, there shouldn't be any hard rule requiring either fan translations or official ones over the other.

One or the other could be incorrect, and it's in that instance where we would look at the raws, and get a translation of it from someone who speaks the language to see which is correct.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

There is nuance here, there shouldn't be any hard rule requiring either fan translations or official ones over the other.

One or the other could be incorrect, and it's in that instance where we would look at the raws, and get a translation of it from someone who speaks the language to see which is correct.

That's perfectly fine. Like I said, I don't really understand the arguments that official translations are bad, but I can accept knowledgeable folks' positions in that scenario. But we do need the ability to determine that for ourselves, so the raws are very much important.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

This is how it usually goes; fan translation says 1 thing, official translation says another, we get someone to look at the raws to confirm which is correct, which we then use.

The raws will always take precedence, however it would be unreasonable to expect us to go through an entire series in raws, and get those translated.

If both the official and fan translation say the same thing, it's most likely correct, could they both get something wrong? Sure, but it's probably not going to be a lot of instances where that happens, seeing as multiple people will have looked at the same thing, and concluded the same thing, albeit sometimes the fan translator becomes the official translator.

That said if someone can prove that a fan translation or an official translation is wrong, using the raws, that should always take precedence. Basically if you assert that a translation is wrong, you have to prove it with the raws, until then the official or fan translation is fine, is my opinion.

 

[ImmortalDread]

This is how it usually goes; fan translation says 1 thing, official translation says another, we get someone to look at the raws to confirm which is correct, which we then use.

The raws will always take precedence, however it would be unreasonable to expect us to go through an entire series in raws, and get those translated.

I do not consider this to be an unreasonable request. If the proposed upgrade of a cosmology is being considered, and I have identified an inconsistency within the translations, it is within my purview to request a thorough search for the original raw text to verify the veracity of the proposed upgrade.

If both the official and fan translation say the same thing, it's most likely correct, could they both get something wrong? Sure, but it's probably not going to be a lot of instances where that happens, seeing as multiple people will have looked at the same thing, and concluded the same thing, albeit sometimes the fan translator becomes the official translator.

If both translations are consistent with each other, then there is no cause for concern regarding the proposed upgrade/downgrade/content revision.

That said if someone can prove that a fan translation or an official translation is wrong, using the raws, that should always take precedence. Basically if you assert that a translation is wrong, you have to prove it with the raws, until then the official or fan translation is fine.

I do not object to the use of fan translations as long as they do not conflict with officially published translations.

Again, at which draft are you opposing? This is the last draft adjustment.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

I am not opposing anything, the last draft is fine.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

In cases where there is ambiguity or conflicting information regarding the proximity of when the work was written and when the author claims to have interacted with powerscaling, such works shall not be considered for inclusion within the wiki

To clarify does this mean if the author knew about powerscaling while or before writing their story it can't be indexed?

 

[DontTalkDT]

It is prohibited to include any verses or personal works of VS Debaters within the wiki.

I think this should either just be

It is prohibited to include any personal works of VS Debaters within the wiki.

or, if the verses thing is important

It is prohibited to include any personal verses or personal works of VS Debaters within the wiki.

Otherwise it sounds like one is not allowed to include any verses at all <.<

That aside, it's a weird edge case but I will say it anyway: Official proper publishing with a reasonably big company and stuff should supersede all other rules IMO.
If by some miracle some member here becomes the movie director of a multi-million dollar movie we will list it regardless.
If the director of the latest Nintendo title is a big vs-debater and makes their game Tier 0 that's something we need to live with.
Neither would we decide not to list the latest Marvel run, even if people all decide not to buy the comics for some reason.

In the examples I mentioned that's clear. Of course, for some smaller less-known companies we might need to go case-by-case. Although I personally advocate that anything that gets products into physical stores on a more than regional scale is safe.

And do the rules have to mention Suggsverse as example? Feel like we give the guy too much of a platform.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree with DT's wording

 

[Antvasima]

I think this should either just be

or, if the verses thing is important

Otherwise it sounds like one is not allowed to include any verses at all <.<

That aside, it's a weird edge case but I will say it anyway: Official proper publishing with a reasonably big company and stuff should supersede all other rules IMO.
If by some miracle some member here becomes the movie director of a multi-million dollar movie we will list it regardless.
If the director of the latest Nintendo title is a big vs-debater and makes their game Tier 0 that's something we need to live with.
Neither would we decide not to list the latest Marvel run, even if people all decide not to buy the comics for some reason.

In the examples I mentioned that's clear. Of course, for some smaller less-known companies we might need to go case-by-case. Although I personally advocate that anything that gets products into physical stores on a more than regional scale is safe.

I agree with this.

And do the rules have to mention Suggsverse as example? Feel like we give the guy too much of a platform.

Yes, we already have a special rule for the egomaniacal verse in question. That seems sufficient.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I think this should either just be

or, if the verses thing is important

Fixed

Otherwise it sounds like one is not allowed to include any verses at all <.<

That aside, it's a weird edge case but I will say it anyway: Official proper publishing with a reasonably big company and stuff should supersede all other rules IMO.
If by some miracle some member here becomes the movie director of a multi-million dollar movie we will list it regardless.
If the director of the latest Nintendo title is a big vs-debater and makes their game Tier 0 that's something we need to live with.
Neither would we decide not to list the latest Marvel run, even if people all decide not to buy the comics for some reason.

It is important to note that exceptions to established protocols and procedures should not be considered as the default course of action. It is also assumed that this issue has been previously addressed in a manner similar to the treatment of stories on the platform Wattpad.

Tho, I will tweak and revise the regulation. Here is the draft:

It is prohibited to include any personal verses or personal works of VS Debaters within the wiki, except in cases where the work has been officially published by a reputable and well-established company with a significant level of distribution and recognition in the industry. This includes, but is not limited to, large movie productions, major video game releases, and popular comic book runs. For smaller or less-known companies, decisions may be made on a case-by-case basis. It is recommended to consider the level of distribution and recognition in determining whether to include the work in the wiki.

Although I personally advocate that anything that gets products into physical stores on a more than regional scale is safe.

Unless the notability requirement is not enough, then no.

 

[ImmortalDread]

To clarify does this mean if the author knew about powerscaling while or before writing their story it can't be indexed?

I apologize for my previous oversight in not responding to your comment in this thread. In response to your question, it would be important to consider whether the author in question has demonstrated a pattern of utilizing power scaling in their work. While it is important to be inclusive and not overly strict in our evaluations, it is also essential to exercise good judgment and use common sense in determining whether to include such works in the wiki. It is recommended to consult with relevant authorities and experts in the field to ensure that a well-informed and appropriate decision is made.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that ImmortalDread's following draft text looks very good:

It is prohibited to include any personal verses or personal works of VS Debaters within the wiki, except in cases where the work has been officially published by a reputable and well-established company with a significant level of distribution and recognition in the industry. This includes, but is not limited to, large movie productions, major video game releases, and popular comic book runs. For smaller or less-known companies, decisions may be made on a case-by-case basis. It is recommended to consider the level of distribution and recognition in determining whether to include the work in the wiki.

 

[JohnConquest1]

Sorry if this is barging in, but after seeing this topic I felt it would be that some of topics from this section of the profile deletion request thread would be worth covering in this revision. Mainly in regards to notability in fanfiction and parody.

 

[Antvasima]

No problem. It seems fine if you comment here.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I'm very iffy on allowing a debater's creations solely because they managed to get a publisher. That does not necessarily mean a multi-million dollar creation, fellas- there are very small publishers out there.

There isn't tons more to say, I just don't think being a published work should supersede the idea that a work inspired by VS debating ought not be documented here due to contamination. It doesn't become less contaminated because people like it.

 

[Antvasima]

That seems to be a good point, yes.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I'm very iffy on allowing a debater's creations solely because they managed to get a publisher. That does not necessarily mean a multi-million dollar creation, fellas- there are very small publishers out there.

There isn't tons more to say, I just don't think being a published work should supersede the idea that a work inspired by VS debating ought not be documented here due to contamination. It doesn't become less contaminated because people like it.

Sorry if this is barging in, but after seeing this topic I felt it would be that some of topics from this section of the profile deletion request thread would be worth covering in this revision. Mainly in regards to notability in fanfiction and parody.

That seems to be a good point, yes.

As previously noted, and as outlined in the original post, there is a possibility that a subsequent discussion thread may be established to address the removal of verses that are considered to be of low quality and popularity, as well as those that are in violation of the regulations established in this current thread. The purpose of this thread would be to safeguard the authenticity and reliability of the content within the wiki, and to ensure compliance with the established guidelines and regulations.

 

[Crabwhale]

Neutral here, leaning on disagree. I think our current standards are about alright concerning these kinds of things, but I'm not hugely opinionated on the matter.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I would like to respectfully request that someone bring AKM's expertise to the discussion by pinging them, as they are a knowledgeable member in regards to interpreting and evaluating policies.

 

[Antvasima]

I would like to respectfully request that someone bring AKM's expertise to the discussion by pinging them, as they are a knowledgeable member in regards to interpreting and evaluating policies.

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT

We would appreciate some help here please.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Furthermore, for your reference and review, I have provided a link to a sandbox demonstration of the design in question. This can be found under the 'Verse Pages' section, which will allow you to gain a better understanding of its appearance and functionality.

 

[Jasonsith]

Why popularity even matters when the true criteria should be the structure of the works - do they even get a proper story and get published as copyrighted works? (Okay real world is a special case as some fictional verses borrow from real world items)

... Or are they some fan fiction or collective fan writing that resemble more towards "original characters" and "fan made characters" that fit more into FCOC VS?

Not to even say there are a lot of verses well known all over the world except in the US - those verses should stay more than some popular collective fan writing written in English.

The OP may not be very good in English (sorry to say that) the phrase needs to be refurbished to reflect what the OP intends without any confusion because the current proposed writing may accidentally remove a lot of worthy verses.

 

[ImmortalDread]

You may hold the personal belief that popularity should not be a factor in consideration, this is not in line with the structural system of the Vs Battle Wiki, which does take it into account.

Additionally, the inclusion of “worthy” verses in question may violate current Vsbattles rules. My intention is to formalize these unspoken guidelines through draft creation. While you may disagree with the system, please refrain from making negative comments about my proficiency in the English language.

Furthermore, I would like to remind you to review the final section of my original post, in which I clearly stated that a separate thread would be created to address and remove any verses that are in violation of the Vs Battle Wiki's guidelines.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes, if we do not take popularity into account, our wiki would get swarmed and bloated by extremely obscure verses that nobody cares about or is willing or able to verify the information for. My apologies, but we are not going to lessen our restrictions in this regard.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I appreciate your assistance, Ant. My intention is aligned with this purpose. I am looking forward to receiving feedback from AKM, as their expertise in evaluating policies is highly valued, as evidenced by their previous evaluation of the Content Revisions System Staff Thread in collaboration with @Crabwhale.

 

[Antvasima]

I will remind him again.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Yes, if we do not take popularity into account, our wiki would get swarmed and bloated by extremely obscure verses that nobody cares about or is willing or able to verify the information for. My apologies, but we are not going to lessen our restrictions in this regard.

Apologies for commenting here, but I think this is very hard to apply a strict rule for. After all, some obscure verses may have a not insignificant number of supporters on this site. If a verse is not very popular, but has a handful of knowledgeable supporters (maybe even a staff member), should we really disqualify it on the basis of popularity alone? Furthermore, some obscure verses are very limited in content; There's one verse I'd like to add that is a 37 chapter web comic that could be read and analyzed in a single afternoon, so even someone 100% unfamiliar with it could easily verify the information within (especially if a verse creator is doing their part and making sure new profiles have scans and references). These issues do not universally apply to obscure or unpopular media.

All that aside, I think we'd be denying our own purpose if we made everything a popularity contest. Every verse is important to someone out there, and I think any verse that has knowledgeable people working on it is important enough to be indexed. Not to mention, popularity is a highly subjective thing, and what is or isn't popular varies wildly depending on who you talk to or what region of the world you're in.

 

[Antvasima]

It is a necessary safeguard restriction. As I mentioned, this issue is adamantly set in stone for the safety and integrity of our wiki as a whole, and as such it is not up for discussion. My apologies.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

It is a necessary safeguard restriction. As I mentioned, this issue is adamantly set in stone for the safety and integrity of our wiki as a whole, and as such it is not up for discussion. My apologies.

So we can just arbitrarily decide a verse doesn't belong because not many people know about it, regardless of how accurate or well-formatted a profile is? What does any of that have to do with integrity or safety?

 

[ImmortalDread]

It appears that you have not reviewed the thread in question, which clearly outlines the absence of any set objectives for our popularity contest.

It is impractical to set hard defined viewer number limits, however, in general, preference shall be given to officially published works or at least very popular privately published standalone original works that are not fanfiction.

In addition, popularity is one of the factors considered when adding a verse to the wiki. It is not a strict requirement, but it should be taken into consideration. We will not add a verse that is relatively unknown, has poor narrative elements, and is not officially published. A verse that has a significant number of knowledgeable members but lacks popularity may seem illogical and contradictory. If a verse has many supporters, it is likely to be at least somewhat famous.

All that aside, I think we'd be denying our own purpose if we made everything a popularity contest. Every verse is important to someone out there, and I think any verse that has knowledgeable people working on it is important enough to be indexed.

I must respectfully disagree with this assertion. The argument that every verse's inclusion should be justified solely on the basis of its perceived importance to certain individuals is fallacious and undermines the necessity of established guidelines and regulations. Such a logic would ultimately negate the very purpose and function of rules.

 

[Antvasima]

Dread is correct, and this is supposed to be a staff only discussion thread. My apologies for being blunt, but please stop derailing any further here.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

I must respectfully disagree with this assertion. The argument that every verse's inclusion should be justified solely on the basis of its perceived importance to certain individuals is fallacious and undermines the necessity of established guidelines and regulations. Such a logic would ultimately negate the very purpose and function of rules.

That's not my point. A verse that is well-researched and deemed accurately portrayed has no reason to be deleted. How popular, exactly, are the Chinese novels that regularly crop up here in the US? Those verses are often well-researched and indexed, but they have little to no popularity outside their country of origin. Should we delete those verses on that basis?

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

It's not derailing to discuss one of the core aspects of verse inclusion here. That is literally what this thread is about, Ant.

 

[ImmortalDread]

As previously mentioned by @Antvasima, it is important to avoid derailing the thread. With that said, in response to your question:

Regarding Chinese novels that may not be as extensively popular outside of China: The regulations in place for the wiki do not solely consider popularity among English readers, but rather take into account global popularity. The presence of a community and interest within a specific region or location, as long as the novel is translated, justifies the inclusion of a novel in the wiki.

 

[Antvasima]

Fujiwara, you are still not allowed to respond here, and we are not going to open the floodgates to any extremely obscure, unpopular, and poor quality verses that have only every been read by their creators and a small number of acquaintances.

 

[AKM sama]

I'm very iffy on allowing a debater's creations solely because they managed to get a publisher. That does not necessarily mean a multi-million dollar creation, fellas- there are very small publishers out there.

I agree with Bambu here.

I am mostly fine with everything else here.

In such cases, the use of re-translations done by VSBW participants will be accepted to prove the unreliability of publicly available material.

I think this statement should be worded in a way that maintains a level of flexibility in determining what is right and what is wrong. Something like "re-translations done by VSBW members can be analyzed to prove the unreliability", because we don't have official translators in our midst either. They can be right or wrong depending on the scenario, so I'll steer clear of any statement that by default puts "VSBW fan translations" above official translations.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I agree with Bambu here.

This will be discussed in a separate thread!

I am mostly fine with everything else here.

Thanks for evaluating!

I think this statement should be worded in a way that maintains a level of flexibility in determining what is right and what is wrong. Something like "re-translations done by VSBW members can be analyzed to prove the unreliability", because we don't have official translators in our midst either. They can be right or wrong depending on the scenario, so I'll steer clear of any statement that by default puts "VSBW fan translations" above official translations.

So, I revised the guideline once again and here is the end form:

In situations where the reliability of publicly available material is in question, the analysis of re-translations performed by members of the VSBW may be used as a means of evaluation. However, it should be noted that these translations may not necessarily be considered superior to official translations and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

 

[Jasonsith]

Sorry for any potential unintended harm caused.

Back to topic:

This will be discussed in a separate thread!

Thanks for evaluating!

So, I revised the guideline once again and here is the end form:

In situations where the reliability of publicly available material is in question, the analysis of re-translations performed by members of the VSBW may be used as a means of evaluation. However, it should be noted that these translations may not necessarily be considered superior to official translations and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

This is good to go.

---

My amendment will be as follows:

"The VS Battles Wiki is, first and foremost, a fictional character indexing site. All featured characters in our profiles should originate from actual stories, from works that are reasonably notable or popular outside of versus debating communities containing a story properly written by an author or co-authors and properly published by a publisher or publishers. A story includes a plot, a fictional setting, and having a defined canon. At the very least, the setting should be entirely fictional in nature, with no true bearing over the real world."