• 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.

Standard Format for Verse-Specific P&As Proposal

Status
Not open for further replies.
I made these pages a while back. Since this is about Verse-Specific P&A pages, I was wondering if they'd be useful as far as a "suggested format" goes.

Though, as has been expressed before, this should be an optional thing. Less of a requirement, more like a guideline
 
I'd think one for physiology pages, then another one for manipulating exotic elements (think stuff like this), and another one for techniques/martial arts (like this) would be best, of course there will be cases that overlap these "categories", but I'm mainly proposing the idea first so there's some slightly more elaborate use of a suggested format if deemed fine, otherwise we should focus on the physiology stuff as over half of the current verse-specific P&As on the site are of that kind (frankly they should get their own category, but that was declined when I asked).
 
Would it be fine to work on basically a general template for them that users can just go differently from if desired? That way it'd be possible to standarize this stuff while also avoiding the previous concerns of having to reformat basically every single current verse-specific P&A
If it is optional/not mandatory that is probably fine, but we mainly just need a page that explains what a "Verse-specific Powers and Abilities" page is, how it should loosely be set up, including adding two standard categories at the bottom (one "Verse-specific Powers and Abilities" category and one for the relevant verse), and that these should be turned into regular pages, not blog posts, before they are linked to in powers and abilities sections.
So are any of our members here willing to help out with this, or should we close this thread?
 
It looks like a decent draft, but a mandatory "Users" section does not seem to fit with our current verse-specific powers and abilities pages.
 
Yeah, that's why the following was added:

The following is a basic template to act as a baseline idea of how a page of this sort could be structured, but users are free to go differently as long they respect general wiki-wide grammar and formatting standards.

As you know, in lack of previous formatting standards, currently Verse-Specific Powers and Abilities page vary wildly in terms of layouts, so this is merely a basic template to help users structure new ones, so this is the best way to go about it unless we'd be willing to reformat every single current one to a set standard.
 
Okay. That is good then, but I still think that a "Users" section may be redundant. 🙏
 
Would you prefer if that was just changed to "Examples", so only some notable cases are listed for further clarification, while also making a category per respective Verse-Specific Power and Ability? That way it'd minimize redundancy while retaining a manner to easily look for the users of a respective Verse-Specific P&A.
 
That seems like a good idea, yes. Thank you. 🙏
 
So is Bobsican's draft page acceptable as it is, or does it need a partial rewrite? And if so, is somebody here willing to help out with it please? 🙏
 
I'm unable to access my computer at the moment, so I can't assist with editing the draft. However, apart from the initial use of "Verse-Specific Powers and Abilities" in the introduction, I recommend using "verse-specific power" or "verse-specific power/ability" instead of repeatedly stating "Verse-Specific Power(s) and Abilit(y/ies)" each time you refer to a verse-specific power. We only capitalized the first letters of the words present in "Verse-Specific Powers and Abilities" for the title's sake, no? Also, I think this repetition makes the text feel verbose. And this way, you won't get confused with the number agreement because I saw an instance where you said "Powers and Ability" in the article. Also, "unecessary" is an incorrect spelling.

Besides these issues, I think the draft is good.
 
Last edited:
I'm unable to access my computer at the moment, so I can't assist with editing the draft. However, apart from the initial use of "Verse-Specific Powers and Abilities" in the introduction, I recommend using "verse-specific power" or "verse-specific power/ability" instead of repeatedly stating "Verse-Specific Power(s) and Abilit(y/ies)" each time you refer to a verse-specific power. We only capitalized the first letters of the words present in "Verse-Specific Powers and Abilities" for the title's sake, no? Also, I think this repetition makes the text feel verbose. And this way, you won't get confused with the number agreement because I saw an instance where you said "Powers and Ability" in the article. Also, "unecessary" is an incorrect spelling.

Besides these issues, I think the draft is good.
Feel free to edit accordingly when you have the time.
 
Does it seem like a good idea to add some version of the contents of the following draft page to a new "Standard Format for Verse-Specific Powers and Abilities" page?

So is Bobsican's draft page acceptable as it is, or does it need a partial rewrite? And if so, is somebody here willing to help out with it please? 🙏
@Agnaa @DarkGrath @Mr. Bambu @Catzlaflame @Just_a_Random_Butler @Dereck03 @IdiosyncraticLawyer @GarrixianXD @Damage3245

Are any of you willing to evaluate this please?
 
My apologies to Butler for including you again, despite that you already responded above. 🙏
 
No problem. Thank you for helping out. 🙏🙂
 
I'd think we got sufficient input to publish the page, I'd think any further changes would be minor ones or would be manageable with a new thread if needed.

So I'll just be asking here for permission to post the page.
 
Bump.

At this point it doesn't seem there's any major objections.
Yes, but there haven't been any confirmations either, and it seems inappropriate for me to clear this by myself.
Are you willing to check through the following draft and make corrections where/if necessary before it is officially published please?

@DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Agnaa @Just_a_Random_Butler @DarkGrath @Dereck03 @Planck69 @Shadowbokunohero @QrowBarr @Crazylatin77 @Zaratthustra @ElixirBlue @Tllmbrg @Nehz_XZX @Therefir @IdiosyncraticLawyer @GarrixianXD @Catzlaflame @Vzearr @FinePoint @LephyrTheRevanchist

Are any of you willing to help us out here please?
 
I can read through it and try to make it easier to read if that's all right. You can undo anything that you feel doesn't fit.
Thank you. That would be appreciated. 🙏❤️
 
Okay. Thank you. I will check. 🙏❤️
 
Bump.

I think we're well at the point where any further changes could just use a new thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top