• 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.
The problem, AKM, is what qualifies as "worthy of indexing". Currently, it's a poorly defined, subjective matter.
 
"Low-powered characters are allowed to be featured here as long as the characters come from popular/notable verses that are overall worthy of indexing (meaning ones focused on either some form of fighting and/or the supernatural), they are important to their stories, and the profiles are reliable and well-made, although sitcom characters, ones from more realistic romantic comedies, and similar should be avoided. This wiki's main purpose is to index characters, not to feature fights between them."
Is this a better wording then, or does somebody have a better suggestion?
 
We could also skip the parenthesis if you prefer, and ask for input in a staff forum thread.
 
Under those rules, we primarily just need to decide if we are to keep "Dude with a gun" pages.
 
The problem, AKM, is what qualifies as "worthy of indexing". Currently, it's a poorly defined, subjective matter
That's what it's always going to be though. You can't quantify what is and isn't worthy of indexing without running into a lot of "what about X though". We shouldn't make an entire page or multiple pages of 10-Bs with no extra features, but a page or two for the protagonist or secondary protagonist should be fine.
 
Well, I am afraid not everything can be objectively laid out. Some things will always be subjective and we will have to look at them on a case-by-case basis. Both Jabami and Bulma's dad only have a single power "Genius Intelligence", but one is okay and the other is not. Both Arthur Fleck and Farmer with Shotgun are humans with guns. But one is okay and the other is not. But yes, this can be discussed in detail in a staff thread if people are willing to make one.
 
That's what it's always going to be though. You can't quantify what is and isn't worthy of indexing without running into a lot of "what about X though". We shouldn't make an entire page or multiple pages of 10-Bs with no extra features, but a page or two for the protagonist or secondary protagonist should be fine.
We can do a far better job than we currently are. We can absolutely set at least base guidelines for what we're looking for, and Antvasima's proposal is far better at doing that. That way, if we are debating a page's deletion, we at least have solid guidelines to stand by. I think Antvasima's wording, or some slight variant of it, is best.
 
Ant's wording is literally the current rule we have, with stuff added in the parenthesis which I think will make Jabami invalid because it's not a fighting verse and neither supernatural.
 
I think that AKM is correct, and that we should use the wording without the parenthesis for the moment. Anything more than that can be decided later in a separate staff forum discussion.
 
If people insist, I will go along, but I can absolutely guarantee that this subject will come up and be disputed due to lack of clarity again. Do feel free to ping me there when it happens.
 
"Low-powered characters are allowed to be featured here as long as the characters come from popular/notable verses that are overall worthy of indexing, they are important to their stories, and the profiles are reliable and well-made, although sitcom characters, ones from more realistic romantic comedies, and similar should be avoided. This wiki's main purpose is to index characters, not to feature fights between them."

So is this slight tweak fine to apply for the moment?
 
It's fine. It's just the current rule with more emphasis on the sitcom part. If a staff thread is created on this topic by anybody, feel free to ping me there.
 
Do I have a problem with the page? No.
Am I still mad about Cool Cat? Yes.
Therefore, if he gets deleted, so does Yumeko.
It took all of less than an hour for it to be brought up again goddamnit.

... They aren't remotely comparable.
 
"Low-powered characters are allowed to be featured here as long as the characters come from popular/notable verses that are overall worthy of indexing, they are important to their stories, and the profiles are reliable and well-made, although sitcom characters, ones from more realistic romantic comedies, and similar should be avoided. This wiki's main purpose is to index characters, not to feature fights between them."

So is this slight tweak fine to apply for the moment?
Seems fine to me.
 
Sitcom characters on principle shouldn't be here. If you genuinely want to debate the legitimate powers of Barney Stinston, this is not the place for you.
 
Also, neither Yumeko nor Cool Cat are sitcom characters.
 
I agree with spencer being deleted but sam has more than enough legitimate combat feats to stay
Tbf he does seem to have a supernatural ability to set stuff on fire so that could be worth indexing and used for unusual battles
 
Honestly icarly could potentially be an exception seeing as they all have some stuff that would legitimately be used in fights (Carly with prep gaining access to a team of special ops marines, Freddy being able to hack the us military and build IEDs, etc.)
 
Honestly, thinking on it a bit, Nickelodeon and Disney brand sitcoms in general would probably be exceptions solely due to the fact that their aim to be wackier to appeal towards a younger audience gives them stuff that would actually be index able and useable in a combat scenario, something a lot of grounded in reality sitcoms aimed towards adults lack. Hell even shows like drake and Josh have High 8-C weapons with prep time and Megan with prep time puts Kevin from Home Alone to shame.
 
Can we stipulate that the indexing of proper intellectual characters showcasing above average levels of human intelligence while also using said intelligence in combat or combat-esque scenarios should be allowed? This would allow Kakeguri and No Game No Life characters to have profiles.
 
(I don't see anything wrong with the online summary)

According to Derek, the book hasn't even been released yet, despite everything else I've seen telling me that it was released in 2010, so right now I'm waiting until the new movies come out. That isn't my point. My point is that is a gambler who hasn't ever been in a fight before is allowed, so Cool Cat, who has 9-C/9-B equipment and plenty of combat experience, should be as well.
 
Last edited:
Cool Cat was just a dumb memetic troll joke page that put us in the crosshair of potential controversy. It will not be added ever, and has nothing to do with this. Stop causing drama. We have talked about this issue extensively previously, so I would appreciate if you permanently drop the issue.

Anyway, I will add the modified rule text.
 
I'm sure we agreed on deleting the Mythology page once the main clean-up on removing pages was done.
The "rules" section should just be inserted on the Editing Rules or so, although it seems that was already done now that I'm looking, I don't know why Ant finds the page suitable to remain when it has been agreed on being removed.
 
Last edited:
I already explained that it is convenient to list the many small mythology-based old books verses in a single page, to make them easier to find for our visitors, and to let us list the members who are knowledgeable about mythology to easily find and contact them when needed.
 
We can just turn that into a category then link it there.
The list of members can just go to the Knowledgeable Members List (Wiki Terminology), and TBH I think it should be remade as a good portion of the listed ones are no longer into it out of easily only originally covering something that is now deleted.
 
That is not nearly as efficient, and the current page does some good and no harm. It should stay.

I would appreciate if you stop bringing up this subject.
 
Well, the staff agreed on that alternative, not what you brought up at the time (Which you just seemingly assumed was accepted out of nowhere, respectively).
I'm fine with it staying if the other staff that agreed on the above (AKM Sama, DarkDragonMedeus, The imp-press, etc.) are fine with that.
However, the way the supporters/opponents/neutral section is handled was still left up in the air at the time.
 
Deleting it for no useful reason, when it is more beneficial to keep it, remains unacceptable to me in any case.
 
Back
Top