• 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.

Suggestions for improvements (New forum)

Why not simply make the popular vote worth one staff vote, with a minimum of two to pass?
This prevents low-quality revisions from being passed, still gives the staff almost complete control, but doesn't completely nullify regular users either. Obviously give some grace for new votes to be gathered.

It already basically works this way with "uncontroversial" revisions.
It would give a minor representation in more controversial ones.
 
FinePoint said:
Why not simply make the popular vote worth one staff vote, with a minimum of two to pass?
This prevents low-quality revisions from being passed, still gives the staff almost complete control, but doesn't completely nullify regular users either. Obviously give some grace for new votes to be gathered.

It already basically works this way with "uncontroversial" revisions.
It would give a minor representation in more controversial ones.
Click to expand...
I suppose that might be an idea. What do you think AKM?
 
Mr._Bambu said:
For context on what FinePoint is asking this about, I believe this is the thread.


The thread suggests allowing a game's godmode gamemode be approved for scaling.
Click to expand...
The context is the discussion which happened right before this in this same thread.
Also, way to tack on your opinion as fact at the end there.
The fact that I've expressed dissatisfaction of the current system in the past isn't really relevant to the suggestion itself.
Why else would I suggest it change?
 
Last edited:
That would only apply to cases where there is an even split regarding what to do and I prefer those cases be handled with more care on a case by case basis. The best way to handle those cases is call out for more neutral staff members to take a look. From what I can see in that particular thread, 1 admin and 2 thread mods disagreeing while only 1 admin agreeing tip the scales in favor of the disagreeing party, because not all staff positions are created to evaluate threads. But it looks close to me and I'd suggest getting more opinions either way.
 
AKM sama said:
That would only apply to cases where there is an even split regarding what to do and I prefer those cases be handled with more care on a case by case basis. The best way to handle those cases is call out for more neutral staff members to take a look.
Click to expand...
Could you be more specific? Which staff positions are worth something? Which aren't? Is it really wise to give the community which drives 90% of CRTs no power at all, as opposed to just a little bit? Is there any tie-breaking mechanic implemented for when more staff members don't care or aren't knowledgeable enough? Some verses are both complicated and obscure.
AKM sama said:
From what I can see in that particular thread, 1 admin and 2 thread mods disagreeing while only 1 admin agreeing tip the scales in favor of the disagreeing party, because not all staff positions are created to evaluate threads. But it looks close to me and I'd suggest getting more opinions either way.
Click to expand...
I really hate that my specific thread was even brought up. I was continuing the conversation here, not trying to lobby for my temporary benefit. I genuinely think that some regular user representation is good for the entire wiki. Though, thanks anyways. I can try to find more people for it.
 
All staff positions are worth something in different areas, but thread moderators, administrators, and bureaucrats are technically the ones who are supposed to have staff authority when evaluating regular content revision threads. Calc group members and consultants are the ones who are supposed to evaluate discussions about calculations and related policies though.
 
I suggest for adding the category [[Category:Shrine Maidens]] (or alternatively [[Category:Miko]]) as an occupation. There are several characters fitting the definition, but I have not decided the best name for this category.
 
It seems harmless to me, but let's wait for a bit more input first.
 
I think that we have some categories for that sort of thing, but they are not really necessary, especially if mass-editing in these areas is initiated when the time and energy would be better spent on other wiki projects.
 
Antvasima said:
I think that we have some categories for that sort of thing, but they are not really necessary, especially if mass-editing in these areas is initiated when the time and energy would be better spent on other wiki projects.
Click to expand...
Maybe you are right since the wiki's profiles still need cleanup. Here is some problems:

1. There are certain two profiles which I don't know how to add {{Discussions}} template because of their unusual name: (´･ω･`) and @Meow-Meow.

2. There is a matchup which is still recorded in old wiki thread format. The matchup is Undertaker (WWE Immortals) VS Kane (WWE Immortals). Everyone can find the matchup record error in their "Other" section.
 
1) I could not find them with our tags search function, so I think that we will have to not include the discussions template for these two pages.

2) I found the accurate link, and replaced the old nonfunctional one.
 
As long as the explanation is good enough to understand, it can probably remain as it is. I also do not have the time and energy to properly replace all of the screencaptures at this time.
 
Antvasima said:
As long as the explanation is good enough to understand, it can probably remain as it is. I also do not have the time and energy to properly replace all of the screencaptures at this time.
Click to expand...
Okay, if it serves its purpose well enough, then it can stay as it is but if the relevant pages that are explained happen to change even more in the future, then this might need to be done eventually.
 
I suppose so, yes, but I am very overworked, so it is hard to fit into my schedule.
 
Mariogoods said:
I suggest for adding the category [[Category:Shrine Maidens]] (or alternatively [[Category:Miko]]) as an occupation. There are several characters fitting the definition, but I have not decided the best name for this category.
Click to expand...
Just to give some input, it is my opinion that we need less categories, not more- there's tons of the things that generally only clutter a page and obfuscate the actually important ones.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
Just to give some input, it is my opinion that we need less categories, not more- there's tons of the things that generally only clutter a page and obfuscate the actually important ones.
Click to expand...
What sort of categories would you remove then?
 
Mr._Bambu said:
Just to give some input, it is my opinion that we need less categories, not more- there's tons of the things that generally only clutter a page and obfuscate the actually important ones.
Click to expand...
I mean categories no matter how much can't really do that considering they're in the bottom and need to be actively open now so
I would say there're better categories to add, mainly sub tier categories which I think we really should have as it'd make match finding for those who care for that much easier
 
Tllmbrg said:
I mean categories no matter how much can't really do that considering they're in the bottom and need to be actively open now so
I would say there're better categories to add, mainly sub tier categories which I think we really should have as it'd make match finding for those who care for that much easier
Click to expand...
That sounds like a lot of work if we were to implement that. How long would we be occupied with that?
 
We could make it a gradual thing as literally any user can add categories without even entering the source code of the page plus all pages have their tier listed on so they'd know what to add

Also another category I'd support adding is Tabletop/Board Game Characters (I see D&D is labelled as a board game so unless we also add Tabletop category we should use Board Game for consistency sake)
 
Tllmbrg said:
I mean categories no matter how much can't really do that considering they're in the bottom and need to be actively open now so
I would say there're better categories to add, mainly sub tier categories which I think we really should have as it'd make match finding for those who care for that much easier
Click to expand...
Categories absolutely can though? If we have a thousand categories and 750 of them contribute zilch to a page, that makes it less likely for the average user to go into a category that will help them on this wiki.

I agree, actually, about sub-tier categories. I think that would be actually useful. But then we have things like a character's profession, which is marginally less useful.
 
Well, I do think that sub-tier categories would indeed help with making matches, so I wouldn't mind helping out with that if it was decided that we should implement something like that.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
Categories absolutely can though? If we have a thousand categories and 750 of them contribute zilch to a page, that makes it less likely for the average user to go into a category that will help them on this wiki.
Click to expand...
I mean, most of the times nobody just goig directly to categories but instead just searches through an entire one to find matches.
Outside match making and knowing what pages to alter in case of a tier or power revision we don't use the for much so
Mr._Bambu said:
I agree, actually, about sub-tier categories. I think that would be actually useful. But then we have things like a character's profession, which is marginally less useful.
Click to expand...
I'll at least agree sub categories take a priorty category making wise so until we get that I won't push for profession ones
 
I don't think that there is any pressing need to remove categories completely at the moment, unless they are really stupid, but we also should not start to add new ones that are not useful.
 
I once had the idea of adding characters' known heights and weights to their pages since a majority of calculations revolve around using a character's height for pixel scaling striking strength.
 
Antvasima said:
No. It would be a tremendously time-consuming project for virtually no relevant gain whatsoever.
Click to expand...
I guess you're right; well, I have another suggestion.

I think there should be revisions and additions to the Small Size page. Because for one, I recently discovered that the starting height for dwarfism is 1.47 meters (4ft 10in). So, I think the type 0 level should look like this:

Type 0 (Dwarf): Characters far smaller than an ordinary human. The size for this level begins at 1.47 meters tall.
 
Last edited:
CreatorJoe said:
I guess you're right; well, I have another suggestion.

I think there should be revisions and additions to the Small Size page. Because for one, I recently discovered that the starting height for dwarfism is 1.47 meters (4ft 10in). So, I think the type 0 level should look like this:

Type 0 (Dwarf): Characters far smaller than an ordinary human. The size for this level begins at 1.47 meters tall.
Click to expand...
While I'm not sure how much of a purpose this would have this would sort of fit with how we define Large Size Type 0 using the tallest known human in history.
 
Last edited:
Nehz_XZX said:
While I'm not sure how much of a purpose this would have this would sort of fit with how we define Large Size Type 0 using the tallest know human in history.
Click to expand...
That's the idea, but there are other characters on the wiki that are taller than a meter and yet shorter than 1.47 meters. I think 1 meter is pretty circumscribing for Type 0.
 
Last edited:
Under the What's New tab, the What's new option and New posts display basically the same thing: the thread with the most recent reply.
Why not make the latter display threads in the order they were posted? I've complained in the past that this format prioritizes bloated threads over new ones, this might be an elegant solution over having to set my own filters every time.
 
I think that we use the initial level of small size mostly as a gauge from relatively small animals, and that it would risk to offend lots of people if we use real world dwarfism as the lead definition.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AKM sama
New Staff Promotions
2
Replies
67
Views
5K
Lloydblitzed
Lloydblitzed
H3110l12345I20
Composite Tree VS Tournament, redo of the dead meme CT!
Replies
14
Views
530
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
Sans2345
Looking for matches for Jugannave (Tier 9-C)
Replies
1
Views
680
ThePrimalHunter
ThePrimalHunter
Antvasima
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Warning Tracker
Replies
0
Views
4K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Mr. Bambu
Feed Me Your Wretched Anime Suggestions
6 7 8
Replies
284
Views
12K
Armorchompy
Armorchompy
Back
Top