• 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.
Yeh, I made him a page ages ago. But the Death Battle profiles were denied every time I've asked for the already discussed reasons, so
 
Thank you for helping out.
 
I handled it earlier.
 
As the only supporter of the verse, I request for deletion of this page in grounds of being redundant:

 
I'm wondering whether or not these pages should be deleted. The Powers and Abilities section on both is improperly formatted, and they either have weak justifications for their stats or none at all. They could probably do with a clean-up, but it wouldn't fix the un-calced, estimate-driven statistics.
 
I have deleted them.
 
It's better than before, at least, and the character itself seem to be legit.
It needs some clean up and evidences for the stats, though.
 
I deleted it earlier.
 
Thank you for helping out.
 
Easy delete. Took care of it.
Swing and a miss I guess?
 
It got reposted I think, I stated on the report thread.

Edit: It's an OC page
 
Last edited:
I gave them warnings. Thank you for helping out.
 
It seems like I did not notice the calculation in the durability section.

I have restored the page, and cleaned it up a bit.
 
Okay. Thank you.
 
@Robot972 That blog post you linked has no comments; it doesn't seem accepted. Unless you linked the wrong blog.

Also "much higher" isn't a thing, it should be "higher" or "far higher".
 
If the calculation has not been accepted, it cannot be used as a justification yet.
 
@Robot972 That blog post you linked has no comments; it doesn't seem accepted. Unless you linked the wrong blog.

Also "much higher" isn't a thing, it should be "higher" or "far higher".
It was accepted on a thread in the old forum that appears to have been erased.

But if the profile gets deleted and I ask for an evaluation, will the calc ever be acknowledged? Have two other calcs that have been waiting a month now.
 
Thread acceptances feel a little dicey to me, but idk our regulations around it. Can you find the thread here and see who evaluated it?

Maybe, who knows, it can take a while to get to everyone's calcs. You thinking it won't get evaluated isn't a good reason to leave up a profile with uncalculated statistics.
 
Can't find it on here so I'm 99% certain it never got carried over. But fine, delete the profile and I'll post it to the calc eval thread to see what happens.
 
Another solution would be to just politely ask whoever accepted the calculation to comment directly in the blog via their message wall in the wiki.
 
Can't access it on the old forum either and I don't recall who commented, so it doesn't matter. I'll just do a new calc eval.
 
Okay. You can ask some calc group members directly via their message walls, and tell them that I sent you, in order to try to speed things up, if you wish.
 
Back
Top