• 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.

Kirby Cosmology Upgrade Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stop being rude to Eficiente. He is just trying to do his job here.
 
Also, should I ask a few administrators to help out here, if DontTalk, KingPin, and Ultima are uninterested?
 
Peptocoptr27 said:
Here's a new summary. I'll my best to respond to the misunderstandings caused by the last one without repeating too much of it.

Koeru (越える vs 超える)
Here, I'll highlight the most important detail of the Jisho page, since many people don't see that the two definitions are associated with a specific form of Koeru. As you should now see, Koeru can mean either one, but each specific variation of it only has one meaning. I guess it is easy to miss when you're not looking for it, but number 1 is 越える and number 2 is 超える.

越える is used when going beyond a place, a time, or a point. (e.g. crossing the boarder, stepping over the finishing line, staying up passed midnight, etc.)
超える is used when it's about exceeding a certain quantity, standard, or limit. (e.g. living beyond 100 years old, going over quota this month, luggage went overweight, flu cases increased beyond 100,000, etc.)

It's only when the subject of Koeru is of an ambiguous nature that either one can be used. When you live "beyond" 100 years for example, it doesn't matter if you consider 100 years a passing point or a standard for longevity, so both are usable depending on your interpretation since what you mean is just as easily understood either way. This is how it works within this specific context, but in the context of this upgrade, the difference absolutely matters hence why we're having this discussion. We need to know whether Koeru refers to crossing the subject (space-time/dimensions) or being superior to it, and thanks to the distinction, the answer is staring us right in the face. It's a superiority (超える). If Koeru merely translated to "beyond" like the english word regardless of the lead kanji, I would say that the safest interpretation would be the lowest one that reveals nothing new, but the kanjis used tell a different, more specific story.

Jigen 次元
Here is once again the WordHippo page for Jigen as per Effi's request. In it, we see that it translates both to "dimension" and "dimensionality". This is because no matter how you look at it, the term translates specifically to mathematical dimensions. It's not a one for one translation of the English word "dimension". You can even see that in the examples at the bottom.

Here is the actual dictionary definition of Jigen, which reaffirms the point made above, along with providing similar examples. It also provides two secondary definitions for Jigen, none of which make any sense in the Kirby statements at hand. Hence why I said earlier in the thread that I looked for alternatives as to what they could mean and found nothing that makes sense except for the conclusion I came to.

Here is the Jisho page for Jigen, which, unlike the other Jisho pages, bothers to define the word "dimension" in order to make it clear that it's not a one for one translation of that english word. That's the point of the #3 slot on this page. It's not a third potential translation of Jigen, because it would ultimately be made extremely redundant by the first, which should already encompass it. It's a definition that's meant to specify what they meant by "dimension" in the first place. For the other Jisho pages, this isn't a necessity like it is for this one. Even more proof that Jigen is very specific in what it means when referring to "dimensions". This is backed up by my previous two sources which are deemed reliable, so I hope you get the idea.
jqjR7ft_d.webp

jhXmN8t_d.webp

X6WxAqW_d.webp


While the Wikipedia page for Jigen does state that a divergent/repurposed expression of it translates to "the world", that's simply another instance of the subtleties of variants in the Japanese language. The term used in this section is Ijigen, not Jigen. It's similar enough to draw a connection, but once again too different to treat them as mutually interchangeable. I also find it kind of odd how the legitimacy of my claims was brought into question due to one of my sources being a Wikipedia article, but now the only element of substance used against my conclusion is a Wikipedia article. So not only is it the least reliable source out of the ones I've provided, but it doesn't even contradict my point.

FAQ Low 1-C Standards (Qualitative Superiority)

Now that we know that Jigen is defined as physical dimensions, we know that the statement about AD being superior to them grants it higher dimensionality (in a verse that already has 4 dimensional space-time continuums), making it 5D. It's that straightforward. You can't be superior to the very foundation of any and all 4D structures without being 5D, and the FAQ still agree with that.


To conclude, here's what needs to be evaluated
The legitimacy of my linguistic claims. If they're correct, so is this upgrade. There's no way around it. As everything outside of those claims is largely irrelevant in comparison, this needs to be the number 1 focus.
Click to expand...
@Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @GyroNutz

Would any of you be willing to evaluate this post and Eficiente's following responses please?
 
That is true. You should also make an effort to be polite, Eficiente.
 
Antvasima said:
@Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @GyroNutz

Would any of you be willing to evaluate this post and Eficiente's following responses please?
Click to expand...
I'm not even sure what's going on here. Tier 1 is out of my depth as the whole dimensionality/transcendence meaning flys over my head. I'd rather leave it up to more capable staff members who specialize in that area or at least know it to a decent degree. I don't want to agree/disagree with something I haven't fully grasped the concept of yet. My apologies.
 
Antvasima said:
That is true. You should also make an effort to be polite, Eficiente.
Click to expand...
Please don't assume people's correct to be offended on how they portray things right away. If they're inaccurate, our "be nice is the number 1 priority" policy normalizes and leaves at nothing that they're inaccurate, they can victimize themselves as far as they can get away with. He refers to my last comment here, I didn't call them "all" pushovers for disagreeing, I pointed the possibility of there being pushovers in the thread, which is very evident by the context of the thread and something I should be perfectly free to say. Any staff can pick on that in any thread and bring it up in a way to improve the thread while not calling any 1 person a pushover since they don't it for sure since it's a conclusion they made, as obvious as it is for them personally.

Arceus0x immediately reacted potraying it as me having dissed a bunch of people, Eseseso later brought it out for no reason of a literal urge as linked before saying I called everybody a pushover for disagreeing and later as a whataboutism to shield himself. I shouldn't have been "more polite" than to aim something bad in a vague and dubious way, if that gets them then they shouldn't be on the wiki until they change that attitude, they shouldn't have been so emotionally unstable and obsessive about it, nor should that even lead to being apathetic towards me.
 
Eficiente said:
Please don't assume people's correct to be offended on how they portray things right away. If they're inaccurate, our "be nice is the number 1 priority" policy normalizes and leaves at nothing that they're inaccurate, they can victimize themselves as far as they can get away with. He refers to my last comment here, I didn't call them "all" pushovers for disagreeing, I pointed the possibility of there being pushovers in the thread, which is very evident by the context of the thread and something I should be perfectly free to say. Any staff can pick on that in any thread and bring it up in a way to improve the thread while not calling any 1 person a pushover since they don't it for sure since it's a conclusion they made, as obvious as it is for them personally.

Arceus0x immediately reacted potraying it as me having dissed a bunch of people, Eseseso later brought it out for no reason of a literal urge as linked before saying I called everybody a pushover for disagreeing and later as a whataboutism to shield himself. I shouldn't have been "more polite" than to aim something bad in a vague and dubious way, if that gets them then they shouldn't be on the wiki until they change that attitude, they shouldn't have been so emotionally unstable and obsessive about it, nor should that even lead to being apathetic towards me.
Click to expand...
I don't even give a damn about the pushovers thing anymore, i've been called worse. What i am being angry about is the fact that you have failed to make a proper rebuttal to pepto in the past like year or so and then you just gave up on replying entirely leaving it up to others. If you think you are right for disagreeing the prove why you are right and if you are not then why disagree at all?

Edit: you did reply in the end but you never did finish what was started and when Pepto refuted your points you just acted like it's not your business anymore
 
As said before, I believe my last post on that covers it, even with the comment he made after it. If not then may any staff tell me what did I miss or if they have doubts after they evaluate the matter. This is not a big deal, it's downright insignificant, have some self awareness on how you got angry over this and what I said.
 
Arceus0x said:
Man's too scared to reply
Click to expand...
Arceus0x said:
[...] What i am being angry about is the fact that you have failed to make a proper rebuttal to pepto in the past like year or so and then you just gave up on replying entirely leaving it up to others. [...]

Edit: you did reply in the end but you never did finish what was started and when Pepto refuted your points you just acted like it's not your business anymore
Click to expand...
The reason Eficiente didn't want to make another response is because the debate about this upgrade is reaching its end, and other staff members are going to evaluate the last few responses that were made, which were made with the knowledge of the fact that they were going to be evaluated. Instead of making this debate needlessly drag on, he found that the previous response he already sent is suitable to be evaluated, and that a new one wouldn't be necessary. So, in a way, it goes without saying that Eficiente isn't going to make further responses, and common sense dictates that he doesn't seem scared. The individual detail of a person not doing something is not evidence of being scared; that would require further context at least implying so, and the further context implies the contrary, as I described.

Stay on track please. Eficiente's way of debating being abrasive is bothersome, but your mockery and complaining only makes the thread a worse environment. It adds controversy, and Peptocoptr27 wrote that this discussion is getting tiresome for him, so if you add more stress to the staff members, it's making yourself disadvantaged. You want his idea to get accepted, and the process of reaching a conclusion will end up taking longer, probably much to the annoyance of Peptocoptr27.
 
James_Plays_4_Games said:
The reason Eficiente didn't want to make another response is because the debate about this upgrade is reaching its end, and other staff members are going to evaluate the last few responses that were made, which were made with the knowledge of the fact that they were going to be evaluated. Instead of making this debate needlessly drag on, he found that the previous response he already sent is suitable to be evaluated, and that a new one wouldn't be necessary. So, in a way, it goes without saying that Eficiente isn't going to make further responses, and common sense dictates that he doesn't seem scared. The individual detail of a person not doing something is not evidence of being scared; that would require further context at least implying so, and the further context implies the contrary, as I described.

Stay on track please. Eficiente's way of debating being abrasive is bothersome, but your mockery and complaining only makes the thread a worse environment. It adds controversy, and Peptocoptr27 wrote that this discussion is getting tiresome for him, so if you add more stress to the staff members, it's making yourself disadvantaged. You want his idea to get accepted, and the process of reaching a conclusion will end up taking longer, probably much to the annoyance of Peptocoptr27.
Click to expand...
eh, fair nuff
 
Eficiente said:
Please don't assume people's correct to be offended on how they portray things right away. If they're inaccurate, our "be nice is the number 1 priority" policy normalizes and leaves at nothing that they're inaccurate, they can victimize themselves as far as they can get away with. He refers to my last comment here, I didn't call them "all" pushovers for disagreeing, I pointed the possibility of there being pushovers in the thread, which is very evident by the context of the thread and something I should be perfectly free to say. Any staff can pick on that in any thread and bring it up in a way to improve the thread while not calling any 1 person a pushover since they don't it for sure since it's a conclusion they made, as obvious as it is for them personally.

Arceus0x immediately reacted potraying it as me having dissed a bunch of people, Eseseso later brought it out for no reason of a literal urge as linked before saying I called everybody a pushover for disagreeing and later as a whataboutism to shield himself. I shouldn't have been "more polite" than to aim something bad in a vague and dubious way, if that gets them then they shouldn't be on the wiki until they change that attitude, they shouldn't have been so emotionally unstable and obsessive about it, nor should that even lead to being apathetic towards me.
Click to expand...
Okay. Never mind then.

We still need some staff members to help evaluate this thread though, and I have recurrently had a hard time trying to make many of them interested in this regard lately.
 
LordGriffin1000 said:
I'm not even sure what's going on here. Tier 1 is out of my depth as the whole dimensionality/transcendence meaning flys over my head. I'd rather leave it up to more capable staff members who specialize in that area or at least know it to a decent degree. I don't want to agree/disagree with something I haven't fully grasped the concept of yet. My apologies.
Click to expand...
No problem. I hope that we will get replies from other staff members here though, as Pepto seems to make good arguments.
 
Peptocoptr27 said:
Here's a new summary. I'll my best to respond to the misunderstandings caused by the last one without repeating too much of it.

Koeru (越える vs 超える)
Here, I'll highlight the most important detail of the Jisho page, since many people don't see that the two definitions are associated with a specific form of Koeru. As you should now see, Koeru can mean either one, but each specific variation of it only has one meaning. I guess it is easy to miss when you're not looking for it, but number 1 is 越える and number 2 is 超える.

越える is used when going beyond a place, a time, or a point. (e.g. crossing the boarder, stepping over the finishing line, staying up passed midnight, etc.)
超える is used when it's about exceeding a certain quantity, standard, or limit. (e.g. living beyond 100 years old, going over quota this month, luggage went overweight, flu cases increased beyond 100,000, etc.)

It's only when the subject of Koeru is of an ambiguous nature that either one can be used. When you live "beyond" 100 years for example, it doesn't matter if you consider 100 years a passing point or a standard for longevity, so both are usable depending on your interpretation since what you mean is just as easily understood either way. This is how it works within this specific context, but in the context of this upgrade, the difference absolutely matters hence why we're having this discussion. We need to know whether Koeru refers to crossing the subject (space-time/dimensions) or being superior to it, and thanks to the distinction, the answer is staring us right in the face. It's a superiority (超える). If Koeru merely translated to "beyond" like the english word regardless of the lead kanji, I would say that the safest interpretation would be the lowest one that reveals nothing new, but the kanjis used tell a different, more specific story.

Jigen 次元
Here is once again the WordHippo page for Jigen as per Effi's request. In it, we see that it translates both to "dimension" and "dimensionality". This is because no matter how you look at it, the term translates specifically to mathematical dimensions. It's not a one for one translation of the English word "dimension". You can even see that in the examples at the bottom.

Here is the actual dictionary definition of Jigen, which reaffirms the point made above, along with providing similar examples. It also provides two secondary definitions for Jigen, none of which make any sense in the Kirby statements at hand. Hence why I said earlier in the thread that I looked for alternatives as to what they could mean and found nothing that makes sense except for the conclusion I came to.

Here is the Jisho page for Jigen, which, unlike the other Jisho pages, bothers to define the word "dimension" in order to make it clear that it's not a one for one translation of that english word. That's the point of the #3 slot on this page. It's not a third potential translation of Jigen, because it would ultimately be made extremely redundant by the first, which should already encompass it. It's a definition that's meant to specify what they meant by "dimension" in the first place. For the other Jisho pages, this isn't a necessity like it is for this one. Even more proof that Jigen is very specific in what it means when referring to "dimensions". This is backed up by my previous two sources which are deemed reliable, so I hope you get the idea.
jqjR7ft_d.webp

jhXmN8t_d.webp

X6WxAqW_d.webp


While the Wikipedia page for Jigen does state that a divergent/repurposed expression of it translates to "the world", that's simply another instance of the subtleties of variants in the Japanese language. The term used in this section is Ijigen, not Jigen. It's similar enough to draw a connection, but once again too different to treat them as mutually interchangeable. I also find it kind of odd how the legitimacy of my claims was brought into question due to one of my sources being a Wikipedia article, but now the only element of substance used against my conclusion is a Wikipedia article. So not only is it the least reliable source out of the ones I've provided, but it doesn't even contradict my point.

FAQ Low 1-C Standards (Qualitative Superiority)

Now that we know that Jigen is defined as physical dimensions, we know that the statement about AD being superior to them grants it higher dimensionality (in a verse that already has 4 dimensional space-time continuums), making it 5D. It's that straightforward. You can't be superior to the very foundation of any and all 4D structures without being 5D, and the FAQ still agree with that.


To conclude, here's what needs to be evaluated
The legitimacy of my linguistic claims. If they're correct, so is this upgrade. There's no way around it. As everything outside of those claims is largely irrelevant in comparison, this needs to be the number 1 focus.
Click to expand...
@JustSomeWeirdo @Crabwhale @DarkGrath @Moritzva @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Duedate8898 @Planck69 @UchihaSlayer96 @Maverick_Zero_X @LordTracer @Emirp sumitpo

Would any of you be willing to help out with evaluating this post, as well as Eficiente's responses afterwards, please?
 
It feels like a large portion of this upgrade is arguing linguistics and semantics more than any concrete contextually supported feats or statements that are Low 1-C to me, at least based on the replies. Can anyone just post the statements in question and their context beyond "X is beyond space-time/4 dimensions"?
 
Planck69 said:
It feels like a large portion of this upgrade is arguing linguistics and semantics more than any concrete contextually supported feats or statements that are Low 1-C to me, at least based on the replies. Can anyone just post the statements in question and their context beyond "X is beyond space-time/4 dimensions"?
Click to expand...
i mean the OP has most of it, unless Pepto doesn't mind specifically posting stuff here again
 
I want to make it clear that even though I am sick to death of this thread, I'll still stand by my ideals til the end. It's what kept me going for so long, except now I'm even willing to settle for an FAQ edit if it actually shuts down the upgrade for real this time.

My upgrade is arguing linguistics, but that doesn't mean it's arguing semantics. What you're using is essentially the same argument as this one used earlier in the thread, which I debunked. If statements matter, then kanjis matter. No way around it. And if the statement says AD is superior to the 4 pre-established physical dimensions of the verse, then it's explicitely 5D and does not require additional context to back it up even according to the FAQ, which makes sense since you can't be superior to the very foundation of every concievable 4D structure without being 5D. Still, I can bring up some additional context if you can tell me why it even matters in this case.
 
Peptocoptr27 said:
I want to make it clear that even though I am sick to death of this thread, I'll still stand by my ideals til the end. It's what kept me going for so long, except now I'm even willing to settle for an FAQ edit if it actually shuts down the upgrade for real this time.

My upgrade is arguing linguistics, but that doesn't mean it's arguing semantics. What you're using is essentially the same argument as this one used earlier in the thread, which I debunked. If statements matter, then kanjis matter. No way around it. And if the statement says AD is superior to the 4 pre-established physical dimensions of the verse, then it's explicitely 5D and does not require additional context to back it up even according to the FAQ, which makes sense since you can't be superior to the very foundation of every concievable 4D structure without being 5D. Still, I can bring up some additional context if you can tell me why it even matters in this case.
Click to expand...
Please quote people next time you wanna respond to them
 
 
Okay. You only need to read the arguments though.
 
What exactly are the arguments here?

Just looking at the OP it seems that this upgrade is very reliant on just retranslating. In that case, I'm going to say now, I will not be giving my opinion in that instance. I've said many times before, that I don't think I can give proper input on stuff like this since I myself don't understand the language, especially since it's Japanese which seems to always translate to english in a variety of ways.

If there's more to either sides argument for this besides that, then I'm happy to help. Otherwise, leave me out please.
 
Duedate8898 said:
What exactly are the arguments here?

Just looking at the OP it seems that this upgrade is very reliant on just retranslating. In that case, I'm going to say now, I will not be giving my opinion in that instance. I've said many times before, that I don't think I can give proper input on stuff like this since I myself don't understand the language, especially since it's Japanese which seems to always translate to english in a variety of ways.

If there's more to either sides argument for this besides that, then I'm happy to help. Otherwise, leave me out please.
Click to expand...
There's more, but this is the most important part, so you might be best left out of it unless you would like to discuss with my Japanese translator.
Firestorm808 said:
What is the current agreed cosmology structure?
Click to expand...
It's a 2-C multiverse in a wacky space that connects universes together in space and time.
 
Firestorm808 said:
What is the current agreed cosmology structure?
Click to expand...
See here. There are realities of unknown and universe size, and something called Another Dimension which is a multiverse, as unintuitive as it sounds by its name. Another Dimension is located between those other realities and has weird rules on how it works.
 
Do we have in-game sources that support/imply what the OP is saying about the tweet? There's the not much given on the first post.
 
Firestorm808 said:
Do we have in-game sources that support/imply what the OP is saying about the tweet? There's the not much given on the first post.
Click to expand...
There are, but again, I have to ask why that's needed when the wording in the statement makes it so that AD is superior to the pre-established physical dimensions of the verse. That literally makes it blatantly 5D in this case, and even the FAQ agrees, as stated above.
 
Peptocoptr27 said:
There are, but again, I have to ask why that's needed when the wording in the statement makes it so that AD is superior to the pre-established physical dimensions of the verse. That literally makes it blatantly 5D in this case, and even the FAQ agrees, as stated above.
Click to expand...
you need to explain to him what stuff ingame makes it 5D since tweets by themselves are nothing
 
I'm not staff but I've literally had this same "translation" debate with Mario threads. Japanese is a language that's very expressive and can mean many different things. What we've done in the past and should do here is acknowledge the credibility of Nintendo's translations in English and see if they line up with the Japanese interpretation Pepto is making, which I'm pretty sure they don't. If multiple translations interpreted it differently and not in a manner that can support Tier 1 than perhaps we should trust in Nintendo themselves rather than some user who can obviously be biased.

Also, due to Japanese being expressive it leads to a situation where both sides CAN be right and also wrong simultaneously, making this circling we've seen prominently in the thread. These kinds of topics should in my opinion be treated with high scrutiny as anyone can use different meanings of Japanese to support an upgrade to a verse or downgrade.

With all this being said, I personally disagree with the OP still for the basis that their entire argument relies on linguistic interpretation in which case we should focus on what the professional and official translation teams have consistently translated the very same Japanese into within the primary source, not a tertiary source Twitter post.
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
I'm not staff but I've literally had this same "translation" debate with Mario threads. Japanese is a language that's very expressive and can mean many different things. What we've done in the past and should do here is acknowledge the credibility of Nintendo's translations in English and see if they line up with the Japanese interpretation Pepto is making, which I'm pretty sure they don't. If multiple translations interpreted it differently and not in a manner that can support Tier 1 than perhaps we should trust in Nintendo themselves rather than some user who can obviously be biased.

Also, due to Japanese being expressive it leads to a situation where both sides CAN be right and also wrong simultaneously, making this circling we've seen prominently in the thread. These kinds of topics should in my opinion be treated with high scrutiny as anyone can use different meanings of Japanese to support an upgrade to a verse or downgrade.

With all this being said, I personally disagree with the OP still for the basis that their entire argument relies on linguistic interpretation in which case we should focus on what the professional and official translation teams have consistently translated the very same Japanese into within the primary source, not a tertiary source Twitter post.
Click to expand...
Pepto seems to claim they can back themselves up with in-game sources though
 
Firestorm808 said:
It would be very helpful if they could be provided soon.
Click to expand...
Until Pepto is free i will try to argue here.
I will be quoting info from his Low 1-C blog.

To begin with, this is how AD functions:
"It makes up the space between dimensions, and allows its users to travel to any point in space-time, including the distant realm of the Dream Kingdom and practically every time period as shown with Galacta-Knight and HR-D3."

Next is the galacta knight pause screen description which we always treat as important canon lore as pause screens always lore dump everything and so far haven't been contradicted:

その力ゆえ おそれらてきた、全てを ほろぼし

かねない 古の剣士。クローンではなく、未知なる

異空間ロードから 時空をこえ よびさまされた。

様ざまな時代で ふういん されてきた きろくが

残るが、しょうめつ させることは できていない"

Translated (by the doc above): "An ancient swordsman who can destroy everything due to his strength. Not a clone, he was awakened from an unknown another dimensional road beyond space-time. Records remain that he has been sealed in various eras, but he has never been terminated."

The kanjis used for "space-time" are "空間"(space, as the dimension of height, depth, and width within which all things exist and move) and "時間"(time). The kanjis that ended up being translated as "beyond" are "超えよ", which means "exceeding", meaning that Another Dimension's road is outright superior to space-time along with being outside of it."

So we already see here that AD connects timelines together throughout time and spa e and is stated to be outright beyond it.
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
I'm not staff but I've literally had this same "translation" debate with Mario threads. Japanese is a language that's very expressive and can mean many different things. What we've done in the past and should do here is acknowledge the credibility of Nintendo's translations in English and see if they line up with the Japanese interpretation Pepto is making, which I'm pretty sure they don't. If multiple translations interpreted it differently and not in a manner that can support Tier 1 than perhaps we should trust in Nintendo themselves rather than some user who can obviously be biased.

Also, due to Japanese being expressive it leads to a situation where both sides CAN be right and also wrong simultaneously, making this circling we've seen prominently in the thread. These kinds of topics should in my opinion be treated with high scrutiny as anyone can use different meanings of Japanese to support an upgrade to a verse or downgrade.

With all this being said, I personally disagree with the OP still for the basis that their entire argument relies on linguistic interpretation in which case we should focus on what the professional and official translation teams have consistently translated the very same Japanese into within the primary source, not a tertiary source Twitter post.
Click to expand...
These seem to be good points.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

William_Joee
Doraemon L1C Cosmology Upgrade
Replies
2
Views
432
William_Joee
William_Joee
Wikisource
Summer Time Rendering: Introducing the cosmology
Replies
1
Views
547
Wikisource
Wikisource
A Kirby topic
Replies
13
Views
1K
Eseseso
Eseseso
Reiner04
  • Locked
Dragonball: 1-B Timeline
2
Replies
67
Views
4K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
RM97
Vampire Hunter D: Cosmology Upgrade (1-A??????)
2
Replies
74
Views
11K
Setsuna_tenma
Setsuna_tenma
Back
Top