• 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.

Regarding the deletion of the Wilford Warfstache page

Status
Not open for further replies.
Antvasima said:
I still do not think that we should feature people who simply host a show or review games and aren't fictional, much less from an actual story.
I don't think anyone (is their right mind) is trying to make a page for Maximilian Dood, unless you are directly referencing Nostalgia Critic and AVGN, which in that case I don't have a strong opinion about one way or another.

I feel that so long as it's a legitimate work of fiction and is able to be applied through our revision process (CRTs and so forth), then it counts.
 
In Epic Battle Fantasy, except for the first game there are no characters appearing from other franchises it seems, which can be boiled down to developement laziness, so no, my point is still true. It's the reason there is no Filthy Frank Youtube Profile on the wiki, since characters scale from possible copyright infringement
 
Also, by the way I think this thread has served its initial purpose, so can someone close this?
 
Darkanine said:
Again, why is obscurity a problem? Fiction is fiction, popularity should be irrelevant.
Obscurity's a problem because sometimes people within vsbattle spheres can publish things for the sake of being powerful, and these stories would be completely insular to the vsbattle scene, no-one will know about it outside of it. We shouldn't allow stories with this level of obscurity.

And we can't just write down a list of all of them, we need a broad rule to cover them.
 
No one is just going to write or publish anything for the sake of being stupid powerful for versus debates, and if that's the case said person has way too much time on their hands. Writing crap is awful, same with making games or anything. It can be a long process and almost certainly not worth the effort
 
People have 100% done it before.

And considering how loose we are on certain mediums where they don't need a publisher (webcomics, video games, now youtube videos) obscurity needs to remain a rule.
 
Sera EX said:
Unless you're Suggs.
Sadly there's more than just Suggs doing stuff like this.
 
If it's that obscure I doubt most people will care enough to make profiles, and they look pretty easy to spot.
 
Yobo Blue said:
If it's that obscure I doubt most people will care enough to make profiles, and they look pretty easy to spot.
Well the author might add them, and they sometimes get a few fans in the vs scene, but I'll digress.

Even if they are easy to spot, we still need a rule to point to. I've never seen this "no obscure verses" rule be applied in an unjustified place, most profiles that get reported for deletion get reported for other reasons.
 
That seems like a rule that would be nigh-impossible to word and seen as a point of contention that will probably strain our already terrible relation with other websites.
 
It's already been worded and been around for years and hasn't caused a strain. I think it's fine.
 
I'm pretty sure what we have now isn't quite the same, unless I missed something going over the rules when I joined.
 
I don't really get why being "obscure" is such a problem. I get that it would lower the number of supporters, but as long as justifications are provided, it should be ok.
 
DMB 1 said:
I don't really get why being "obscure" is such a problem. I get that it would lower the number of supporters, but as long as justifications are provided, it should be ok.
It's never been applied as "slightly obscure". It's been used to delete profiles that are so obscure that 0 people know about it outside of vs debating communities, or profiles that are so obscure and in another language that scans can't be reliably translated to verify statistics.
 
Yeah. Obscurity isn't a problem as long as it is known enough that people would be able to help out with the ratings and featuring it wouldn't just be pointless thing.

Deep Sea Prisoners works for example are fairly obscure but they do have a dedicated fanbase and I've seen quite a few members here who are familiar with the verse.
 
I think the Warf should be let back.

So when do we make a petition to let back in Adam from Adam Ruins Everything?
 
Agnaa is correct. In addition, we wouldn't remotely be able to ensure the quality of pages for extremely obscure self-published fictions that almost nobody knows about.

Adam Connover is a real person hosting a show, yes. He is not fictional.
 
Yobo Blue said:
That seems like a rule that would be nigh-impossible to word and seen as a point of contention that will probably strain our already terrible relation with other websites.
That poor relation is entirely on them though. We have made a continuous policy to play nice with other communities and not provoke them.
 
The vs debating scene is nothing but politics for a lot of people, people that act as if it's the end of the world if their favorite characters aren't rated like they want. We can't do anything more about it than we already have.
 
Eh. I guess you're right on that. This thread should probably be closed. Maybe a new thread staff only thread would be best for this topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top