• 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 SCP Canon

Numbersguy said:
Why can't we do composite and kill the entire flock of birds with one stone?
Click to expand...
Because this isn't a composite profile, this is a fanfiction profile. It can be affected by literally any person on this planet with an access to the internet. Versions of certain characters heavily contradict each other narratively and have entirely separate purposes. Not to mention lolfoundation articles and other more lighthearted tales. In any case profiles like that (and 682's current profile for that matter) are better off being made on the FC/OC Wiki rather then here.
 
@Myriad Thats not even close to how SCP articles work. They have to go through an extremely strict system of approval by verteran writers with experience writing for the verse, are almost always deleted, and even the vets themselves will delete, rewrite, and revise their own work if it doesnt meet the standards of the site. SCP isnt even close to fanfiction.
 
SCP is fluid fiction, not fanfiction. Nobody can just waltz in and just say "alright, this is how it is now and anyone who disagrees, bugger'em." Like I just said, somebody is overseeing this stuff- it doesn't just happen. The stories are reviewed over and over. If anyone could mold the verse there would be hundreds of thousands of SCPs.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Only reasons why our pages are composite is because people want to exaggerate the SCP powers and end up creating characters who do not exist in any of the separate SCP canon.

My solution: use keys. Do not cross-scale powers, feats, or AP just so you can make the lizard unreasonably OP by ignoring how the verse works.
Click to expand...
Agree
 
It's hard to have hundreds of thousands of SCPs when the site literally restricts the numbers of SCPs that can be made at a time.

And no SCPs ( and certainly not tales which is where you find most of your information) do not go through a "strict system of approval" (it's not clear what this system exactly is as Weekly failed to describe it) by other writers, they follow several guidelines (that depending on the quality of the work can mostly be ignored) followed by a like/dislike voting system.

Much more importantly then that however is the fact that this isn't nearly as relevant as Weekly and other members are making it out to be. I'm not referring to any discontinued or revised tales and SCPs and certainly not any that have been outright deleted from the site. I'm referring only to currently available works. This argument is irrelevant to the subject at hand which is the fact that different canons/characters differ extremely from one another and from writer to writer. The point remains, anyone can write whatever they want about a character as long as it sufficiently falls in line with the guidelines of the site.
 
No, anyone cannot just write whatever they want as it would be rejected and deleted. The guidelines are extremely strict and their standard for the quality of non joke pages is extremely high.
 
Your points are convincing so far Weekly, but what do you think about Modern_Arasmus's comment on reddit, and what position does that individual hold on the SCP wiki? Is he enough of a veteran to be a trusted authority for that statement?
 
How about this, then. Somebody make an SCP. Since Erasmus (Who has been contributing for less than a year of the site's existence) is now our guide in this, let's just have someone submit an SCP with some bogus flaw in logic somewhere. If it's accepted, hey, they know their shit and not everything breaks through. If it isn't, we go from there. We're jsut gonna go around and around in circles about the fact that SCP Foundation doesn't just accept every single page it gets.
 
There is absolutely no need for such measures.

The SCP site makes it more than clear that there is distinction between different canons. Furthermore, writers have been sufficiently vocal on this matter, like Erasmus, for this discussion to not be necessary.
 
Different canons =/= Not canons. If you truly believe anyone can just walk in, submit their stuff, and it will be accepted, prove it.
 
Modern Erasmus is an authority/staff member there. Him saying tales that are not written by the original author aren't canon holds a lot of weight.
 
Though I am not knowledgeable on SCP, is there a bigger problem with the verse if this issue keeps coming up over and over again? If it is anyone's guess as to what is cannon and outsiders can add on to the cannon in a pseudo-fan fiction, how reliable is it?
 
The canon of the verse is the mainlist articles and the experiment logs.

Tales are stated by WoG to only be canon if they are made by the original author of a SCP, and said WoG specifically uses SCP-682 being cursed with 1-B immortality as an example of something that isn't canon because it's from a tale that wasn't created by Gears, the guy who conceived 682.
 
It's called the cano hub. We can't disregard the tales as they exist as their own entities. Even the wiki itself states that it's canon is fluid, and that even though it doesn't fit, doesn't mean it's not canon.

This is literally the same as the Cthulhu Mythos and Demombane. One is the original, and the other is a completely different story with the same original elements.
 
Just saying that, at the very least, tales are completely underneath articles in canonicity. Tales that contradict the original article shouldn't be canon just because they upgrade the verse.

Even Experiment Logs that stray too far from the original get removed, since SCP-2722 vs. 682 is going to get retconned out of existence soon.
 
True, but that doesn't mean we should throw tales out all together. As we've said before, we can separate main articles from their tale counterparts through keys, or separate profiles. Worse comes to worst, we composite the profile altogether.
 
I feel like our best bet is keys between the main article/log "canon" and various tale canons.

From there, if users wish, blogs can be made for "composites" of the various SCPs.

Optimistically, we just treat tales as a secondary canon where we use them unless they contradict the "main canon" where we disregard them. Though, I like my first suggestion better.
 
As I have said many times before, it wouldn't be called the Canon Hub if it wasn't in some way relevant to the SCP verse in general. If we go strictly by the articles, the Library and all its texts wouldn't even exist.

All the time and effort that the people of the wiki put in to build up the verse would be for naught. Hell, even some articles wouldn't exist without other articles. There is an entire verse here, not just articles. We can't undermine the canon hub as mere fan fiction.
 
As I have said many times before, it wouldn't be called the Canon Hub if it wasn't in some way relevant to the SCP verse in general.

If is called the Canon Hub because it's composed of a few gajillion of different interpretations of the verse. Different headcanons.
 
Alright. Here we are. That admin whose comment is used to support this stuff. I messaged him. I asked him some questions. Here are his statements (I'll include a screenshot- for reference, I said something like "you've caused a teensy bit of a ruckus" etc etc). I'm constantly on Reddit anyways so... you know. So. Here's his answer to each question.

Q: Are tales ever able to be considered canon?

A: SCP doesn't have a hard canon period. Articles aren't necessarily canon except to their own content and other stories they reference.

This means nothing on the site is considered a hard canon at all. Nothing can be more canon than another thing.

Q: Did Gears leave the wiki or stop posting for any reason and if so, what is the guideline for being considered truly "canon"?

A: Gears retired as an admin like 8 years ago and doesn't often return to vote or comment etc. He's a busy guy with a large family to take care of.

I asked this just for validation of a fact that Gears had indeed left, so the idea of "Only canon if Gears wrote it" doesn't hold weight

Q: If you answer no, tales are not canon, could the original author of the SCP swoop in to state that the tale is perfectly acceptable and thus could be considered canon?

A: Sure, authors can say whatever they want about their own works.

Q: Do the admins of the SCP wiki enforce any types of guidelines for submissions, making it less than likely something of inadequate quality will slip through, and if so, do these guidelines apply to stories, tales, and canonical lore as well, thus separating the SCP wiki from other groups such as the Creepypasta fandom?

A: Yes, the voting system. Articles that reach a score of -10 or lower are deleted following a 24 hour waiting period.

So stuff is watched over. Before being put on the wiki, people vote.

Hope all of this helps.

https://imgur.com/a/rT8Uu
 
stuff like this was why i was proposing, for at least 682, to treat each canon as a different entity, although with 682 it wouldn't change too much, since you woul have it's normal form (with the possibility of the LFB being canon), a "the ones who live on" version (the canon where 173 was the koitern and killed a third of the LFBs), and CE (where he was deaths steed), including any more possible canons, although maybe making the article start with the base 682 and have a thing at the top to let you go to different forms if they are too different, but they probably aren't meaning fully different (at worst, in tier, at best, at all, since LFB and "the ones who lived on" 682 are literally the same creature)
 
This means nothing on the site is considered a hard canon at all. Nothing can be more canon than another thing.

How did you draw that conclusion from his answer?

I asked this just for validation of a fact that Gears had indeed left, so the idea of "Only canon if Gears wrote it" doesn't hold weight

This refers to SCP-682 related tales.
 
Also I'd like to point out to those unaware that some main-site articles contradict each other. The different SCP-001 proposals all coexist so that different interpretations of how the SCPverse started can be written, and it's left ambiguous as to which one is canonically true. To add muddiness to these waters, some other SCPs reference dates earlier than the SCP foundation was said to have started in some of those proposals.
 
I'm aware of all of that. The problem is that these things only refer to the SCPs themselves, the experiment logs and the likes. Not tales.

Some tale contests in the main site outright allude to tales not written by the author of the skip being non-canon.
 
Agnaa said:
Also I'd like to point out to those unaware that some main-site articles contradict each other. The different SCP-001 proposals all coexist so that different interpretations of how the SCPverse started can be written, and it's left ambiguous as to which one is canonically true. To add muddiness to these waters, some other SCPs reference dates earlier than the SCP foundation was said to have started in some of those proposals.
Click to expand...
yes

to clarify, not only do a likely infinite amount of alternate realities exist in the scp-verse (evident form literally everything to do with SCP-507), but due to SCPs like 2000 and 2003, not only can time set backwards an unknown amount of years, but future events can be affected

so canon is extremely fluid, making all event able to be simultainiously happening in various alternate universes, and alternate timelines and even narritives in some cases (like what happend with 3812)

plus i think the earliest known date or origin for the foundation was around the end of the american civil war and was basically an stealth unit, whose members where classified and stuff like that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Peppersalt43
SCP-098 Profile Revision
Replies
8
Views
1K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
Comiphorous
SCP-682 adapted to VSBattles and is missing a weakness (NEEDS STAFF)
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
JustANormalPerson01
It seems our lizard finally made contact with some narrative hazards
Replies
22
Views
5K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
Comiphorous
SCP ROBLOX EDITION (PRESSURE) minor crt
Replies
2
Views
470
Comiphorous
Comiphorous
AmogusSusfunni
SCP-2317 downgrade
Replies
4
Views
2K
AmogusSusfunni
AmogusSusfunni
Back
Top