Our rules regarding composite profiles (Staff only)

[Antvasima]

There is technically likely enough support, but given that Dargoo Faust had objections previously, it might be best to ask him to comment here again first.

Is somebody willing to help out with this?

 

[The_Impress]

I remessaged him, but I reckon in the meantime we should get started on deleting the profiles everyone agreed on deleting.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you.

It is probably best to know for certain which rules that we should follow first.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Parts 1 and 3 are fine, and I already vetted them and proposed a new version of the former.

• In the event that a character has no linear canon, but rather treats all of the related works as being canon without much context as to the order of events, a profile detailing all of their feats at once may also be acceptable.

I've already given my say on this, but to reiterate:

Continuity and canon are already basic requirements for a verse being viable on this site. This rule contradicts our previous discussion on continuity requirements as it says that we can force a continuity for cataloging purposes when one doesn't clearly exist.

So I think the second bullet should be removed.

 

[Agnaa]

I think that may require its own discussion thread as it would affect a lot of verses, one notable that comes to mind is Mario.

But in short, I agree with your point Dargoo but I can see why people would disagree and I wouldn't be very upset if we kept things the way they are now.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

I mean, 'the way things are now' includes the rules we've already agreed on regarding canon and continuity, they just don't seem to be applied much or recognized in revisions like these, I guess.

I agree with you though, for the most part.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think we already had discussions for the difference between having no canon or continuity at all, and just having a very loose canon or continuity.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

I think we already had discussions for the difference between having no canon or continuity at all, and just having a very loose canon or continuity.

You do realize the rule is worded as "no linear canon", correct?

I am talking about no canon or continuity at all. Having a canon so interpretive that compositing is necessary to get a semblance of a profile is just not having a canon at all.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I was more so talking to Agnaa. But I do what you said was in line with what I said.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I am obviously against wording our rules in such a manner that we would have to delete all Mario profiles, and similarly structured prominent franchises, possibly including Pokemon.

 

[Agnaa]

Less "delete all Mario/Pokemon profiles" and more "Separate them into each piece of linear canon" (so profiles just for Super Mario Galaxy, profiles just for Paper Mario, etc.) So while not quite as disastrous as what you're imagining, it would be a whole lot of work.

 

[Hellbeast1]

^^

 

[Antvasima]

It still doesn't seem like something that the staff have the time and resources to deal with.

 

[DarkGrath]

One thing that should be noted about that second rule is that it still wouldn't be defending composite or made up profiles at all.

Think about it like this. Let's say a profile for a character without a clear continuity was made. Their depictions all take place in the same timeline, it's just not clear what order they take place in. If we only used abilities that they should logically keep between depictions, then a profile that contains all of their abilities wouldn't be a "made up" character. There would still be a place and point in time where that character, with all those abilities, actually does exist within the continuity. The only reason we'd need to put them all into one profile is because it would not clear which depiction specifically would have been the latest in the timeline, and therefore we wouldn't know which depiction specifically had all of their previous abilities.

By no means would such a profile contain a composite character (as it still wouldn't include abilities from other depictions in different canonicities) and it wouldn't be a made up character (since they would have had all of their stats at some point). As such, they should be allowed.

 

[Antvasima]

DarkGrath seems to make sense to me.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

And optional equipment can also help.

 

[Sera_EX]

Characters with no clear continuity more-often-than-not don't belong on this site to begin with. Otherwise having canon standards is counterintuitive. There's little room for exception here.

 

[Sera_EX]

Pokémon and Mario have continuity and canon, so I'm not seeing why exactly they are being attacked as if they are the same as the likes of a composite character.

 

[The_Impress]

And even stuff like Looney Tunes and Mickey Mouse tend to have different canons in the form of reboots, they have little to no need being composited

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree with Sera, anyone who's actually played the games back to back have made it perfectly clear that Paper Mario, Mario & Luigi, Super Mario Galaxy, and pretty much each and every spin off are all parts of one big canon. It just so happens that the games are out of order in terms of story telling. Plus, all the games published by Nintendo are 100% canon; example of composites would be using feats from comics, cartoons, ect in addition to the games.

It's more like each game functions the same way as all the different episodes of Popeye; a lot of episodes do show canonical connections to previous episodes, but it can safely be said that a lot of those episodes are out of order.

 

[Dragonmasterxyz]

I think people are confusing "no clear continuity". With franchises in which each form of media, spin-off, etc are all canon. Franchises like Digimon, Mario, etc all have extremely wide canons that all come together. They have a solid canon, it's just not in a Manga vs Anime type of way.

 

[Antvasima]

So do we need to better clarify this distinction in the rules I posted above, and in that case how?

 

[Agnaa]

Why are you talking about this here?

 

[Agnaa]

Explain Scooby Doo lore on message walls, not in a staff only thread about composite profiles.

 

[Antvasima]

So do we need to better clarify this distinction in the rules I posted above, and in that case how?

^

 

[DarkGrath]

Well, it's already generally a rule not to make profiles for characters with no clear canonicity at all (as far as I remember). That's the only thing that really needs to be clarified here, so I'm not sure if any changes need to be made.

 

[GoCommitDi]

They've actually referenced older shorts multiple times, heck, theres even a spinoff based on the Duck Dodgers short from 1953

 

[Antvasima]

"Do not create composite profiles, as they contain highly inflated statistics and do not represent a reasonable canonical version of the character at any given point in time.

So can I apply all of this, or are there parts of it that need to be modified, and if so, how?

 

[DarkGrath]

I think it can be applied.

 

[Agnaa]

Maybe we should wait for Dargoo's response, since he's the one that took issue with it?

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. I suppose that we should wait again.

 

[Antvasima]

I just asked Dargoo to help us finish this.

 

[Antvasima]

If he doesn't respond soon, I will have to apply the suggestion that I posted earlier.

 

[Agnaa]

I'm a little bit hesitant to rush it through without a response, as he just finished his exams recently, and it's Christmas right now. I think some more leniency than usual may be justified.

 

[Joaco0902]

I agree with Agnaa.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

I still disagree with it, but I suppose I'm outnumbered on the matter.

Perhaps I can make a seperate thread detailing the issues of using profiles that fall under the second point in VSes, but you can go ahead and apply the suggested changes.

As for my latency in responses, I was spending time with family, although I should have been clearer that I would be busy on the holidays.

 

[Agnaa]

Alright, with that response and with us running out of posts, it seems fine to apply the suggested changes.

 

[Antvasima]

I have applied the changes: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/index.php?title=Editing_Rules&diff=5752447&oldid=5659074

Thank you to everybody who have helped out with this thread.

 

[DarkGrath]

Can this thread be closed then?