• 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.

Profile Deletion Requests Thread - 15

Status
Not open for further replies.
See, it doesn't lift over 39,000 kilos though. If you look at the calc that's linked to on the page, that's if the skeleton has full golden armor and is holding two gold blocks as well. It's not holding two gold blocks. It can't even hold one. The armor itself is only 1083.3 kilograms in weight total.
 
I don't think you're picking up what I'm putting down.

The 39,683.3 kg value comes from the weight of a player with full golden armor, combined with two gold blocks in each of their hands. A skeleton cannot naturally spawn with gold blocks. It cannot have gold blocks in its hands without console commands/cheats, which aren't canon. It cannot dual wield without console commands/cheats, which aren't canon. It can only spawn with a bow in its hand. It can naturally spawn with armor, which is presumably why that calc was linked.

Lifting the armor would be a Class 5 feat. That's the upper limit. That's the "At most."
 
Wanking lifting strength isn't cause for deletion though, neither are mssing abilities that can just be added
 
It shouldn't even be a page, though. It would be like making a profile for Link riding Epona. It should be a key, or just mentioned in the mobs' pages.

But I'm not going to talk about it anymore until someone with a name that isn't blue comes along, in order to avoid clogging the thread.
 
It seems better if you simply correct the errors in the page.
 
Spider Jockey is considered its own mob in Minecraft. I think some games have a good argument for fodder swordsmen/archers having separate pages from a fodder horseman.

Link riding Epona is never treated as its own separate character, while "soldier riding a horse" often is, I think Spider Jockey is a more playful version of this.
 
Personally I think it should be a key, since it's just merging two already existing characters into one profile.
 
A key for what, though? Spiders and skeletons have different profiles.
 
Remember11

Provides no actual evidence for its character's ratings, one of whom is Low 1-C with no proof on his profile whatsoever. Not only that but its abilities are completely unsubstantiated by quotes or scans.
 
Looks like A6colute made those pages in 2015. It's something that should be handled by the audit group members that verse is assigned to.
 
It's not unnecessary. Thank you for bringing it into light. The verse definitely needs some work if it is to be saved from deletion. I'll bring it up in the audit group.
 
DatOneWeeb said:
A key for the Spider Jockey. We can add them to both.
Click to expand...
Having one identical key (identical to the point of referencing the exact same character) on two different profiles seems weird. I think having its own page is much better.
 
Spider Jockeys aren't considered their own mob, though. They don't have a namespaced ID or a spawn egg. To summon them in creative, you have to use commands to summon a skeleton with an NBT tag that says it's riding a spider.
 
Oh, adding a key to the skeleton profile might be fine then.
 
A very minor character who doesn't have much abilities worth indexing, only a statement of being at a certain level of power and plenty of unknown ratings. I don't see the point, nor any harm in keeping it, but leaning towards deletion.
 
Being on two feckin panels doesn't warrant a profile,excessively minor, delete it and Frog Ma too for similar reasons

By this logic I can make profiles for individual Hand Ninjas, bloating a verse only makes it a pain revising it
 
They aren't nameless lookalikes though. I'm pretty sure we're allowed to have minor characters as long as the verse has notable characters and the minor ones have something to properly scale to.
 
AKM sama said:
Agreed. I deleted them.
Click to expand...
Please remember to always check for the regular wiki pages that link to the deleted profiles, and to update these accordingly.
 
Also, thank you to everybody who are helping out.
 
BigSmoke4269 said:
Also, Emmet Brickowski has bad formatting and should be deleted.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's pretty terrible but how about we make a thread to try to fix it. I'm sure there's enough people out there knowledgeable on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

DivinumAeterna
Regarding the standards of Team Profiles
Replies
4
Views
549
DivinumAeterna
DivinumAeterna
Antvasima
  • Locked
Slightly adjusting our rules for bolded "powers and abilities" links
Replies
32
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Jinx666
'Continuity' Section for Verse Pages
Replies
37
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
DMUA
Removing Power of the Verse from Verse pages
2 3 4
Replies
147
Views
19K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Armorchompy
  • Locked
Minor Team Profiles Change
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Armorchompy
Armorchompy
Back
Top