Suggestions for improvements (New forum)

[Omnificence]

I was also thinking about adding some new forms of Immortality to the wiki. Here's what I had in mind.

Amortality: The user exists as an unborn, rendering them unable to die due to not being alive, to begin with. The user may not have been alive at the very beginning of time or even before creation. The user essentially lives in a state of unbirth, neither living nor dead. Granting them resistance to abilities such as life and death manipulation. However, they are still susceptible to abilities such as being erased from existence.

Immortality via Evolution/Adaptation: The user is or can become immortal due to their evolutionary process, as users adapted and evolved into physical immortals to different situations at a near-/constant state. If users began as mortal, they can not only become immortal in one way but also gain other forms of immortality as well, be it magical, genetic, etc. with new powers, skills and capabilities.

Retroactive Immortality: The user is immortal in the sense that when they do die, they won't stay dead. This could be the result of instant resurrection, being reborn, transferring one's mind/soul into a clone, etc. Unlike other forms of immortality they can still die from any cause, like physical trauma, disease, or simply aging, but the user will always come back to life.

These are just some examples.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

I was also thinking about adding some new forms of Immortality to the wiki. Here's what I had in mind.

Amortality: The user exists as an unborn, rendering them unable to die due to not being alive, to begin with. The user may not have been alive at the very beginning of time or even before creation. The user essentially lives in a state of unbirth, neither living nor dead. Granting them resistance to abilities such as life and death manipulation. However, they are still susceptible to abilities such as being erased from existence.

Immortality via Evolution/Adaptation: The user is or can become immortal due to their evolutionary process, as users adapted and evolved into physical immortals to different situations at a near-/constant state. If users began as mortal, they can not only become immortal in one way but also gain other forms of immortality as well, be it magical, genetic, etc. with new powers, skills and capabilities.

Retroactive Immortality: The user is immortal in the sense that when they do die, they won't stay dead. This could be the result of instant resurrection, being reborn, transferring one's mind/soul into a clone, etc. Unlike other forms of immortality they can still die from any cause, like physical trauma, disease, or simply aging, but the user will always come back to life.

These are just some examples.

Amortality is just type 5. Like, almost word-for-word type 5.

Retroactive immortality is already covered by types 3, 4, 6, & 7.

Evolution/adaptation feels way too specific to be applied to more than a handful of profiles at most, and even then those profiles could be covered by reactive evolution + whatever forms of immortality reactive evolution would grant.

I really don't see why any of these are necessary when what we have now already covers them well enough.

 

[Antvasima]

That would be the biggest possible problem with the idea, but I think it might be helpful mainly to get more exposure to CRT that otherwise might get ignored, especially for smaller verses or verses that aren't really that popular here.
It sometimes happens that while skimming thought the content revision section I miss multiple times CRT that might interest me, but with this method the name of the verse would be high-lighted and as such it would be easier to see.
It would also make the staff members immediately aware of the argument of the revision, so that if its something that they know (like a revision for specific hax or Tiers) they would know immediately if they can help or not.
However, it would obviously need some regulamentation to make sure that the same revision doesn't get spammed multiple times, and maybe we could also restrict how many revision a user can post in a certain amount of time to prevent the thread to be too loaded with comments.
It's definitely not a perfect method, but I think that if properly used it might help in some cases, especially with some lesser known verses.

Well, it may be excessive to actually follow the content revision and questions and answers boards, given how many threads there are (I only follow the staff board and news and announcements), but our staff browsing through them to check for thread titles that seem significant is another issue.

Anyway, the main issue here seems to be that the thread starters could rate their threads in a system of significance in the new wiki management thread, and as such give our staff more information than otherwise.

Okay. Would one of you be willing to write a draft with proper instructions for the first post of the new thread?

So about this...

 

[Antvasima]

@Starter_Pack @Elizhaa @AKM sama @Mr._Bambu @DarkDragonMedeus @DontTalkDT @ThanatosX

See my last preceding above post please.

 

[ThanatosX]

I can work on a draft for the first message in the week-end, if everything goes well.
If I am able to finish it I will post it here.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I suppose those details looks fine on paper.

 

[Antvasima]

I can work on a draft for the first message in the week-end, if everything goes well.
If I am able to finish it I will post it here.

Thank you for helping out.

 

[ThanatosX]

Here is a rough draft of the possible initial message. Sorry in advance if there are some grammatical mistakes.

This thread can be used to link revisions regarding changes to verses or profiles so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough attention, users can politely ask staff member to give it a look throught the message wall.

User can link the revision here, but discussions regarding said revisions must be made in the respective thread to prevent derailments.

The comments should contain all of this informations in them: “Priority” in a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important; “Verse” to specify the verse the revision is aimed for; “Description” with a small summary of what the revision will modify; a facoltative “Note” part for any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

Remember that a revision must contain all of the necessary informations regarding the topic that it tackles, with links and evidences to support the upgrade, downgrade or modification in general. Don’t link in this page revisions that are incomplete or that are lacking to prevent too many spam messages.


IMPORTANT NOTES:

This thread is to give users one more way to get attention from both other users and staff members, but since there are many daily revision the request should contain as many details as possible to attract more interest and to give everyone more informations.

Here are some important rules that should be noticed:

• Users can post the revision once and can bump it after 30 days from the first post, but the latter should be done only if the thread have a low partecipation
• Only a single revision for verse can be posted here every 72 hours, after which a new revision about the same verse can be posted again.
• Each user can post only one revision every 72 hours.

All of the rules above are made to prevent too many spams in the thread, so follow them as much as possible.

If the revision is accepted or rejected, the users can edit their comments to add a “Closed” on top of it, so that the staff members can know which revisions still needs to be evaluated.

 

[SuperStar]

Here is a rough draft of the possible initial message. Sorry in advance if there are some grammatical mistakes.

Looks nice

 

[Bobsican]

I also think it looks good.

 

[Antvasima]

I tried to clean up the language flow of the draft a bit below, but it could still do with some improvements.

For example, the priority scale needs to be clarified and defined better, and 72 hours/ days is likely a considerably too narrow time limit.

"This thread can be used to link to discussions in the content revision forum regarding changes to verses or profiles, so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough attention, users can politely ask a few staff member who are listed in the related verse page or the knowledgeable members list to give it a look via their message walls.

Members can link to the revision here, but discussions regarding said revisions must be made in the respective thread to prevent derailments.

The comments should contain all of this information in them: “Priority” in a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important; “Verse” to specify the verse the revision is aimed for; “Description” with a small summary of what the revision will modify; and a “Note” part for any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

Remember that a revision must contain all of the necessary information regarding the topic that it tackles, with links and evidence to support the upgrade, downgrade or modifications in general. Don’t link in this page revisions that are incomplete or that are lacking to prevent too many spam messages.

IMPORTANT NOTES:

This thread is supposed to give users one more way to get attention from both other users and staff members, but since there are many daily revisions the request should contain as many details as possible to attract more interest and to give everyone more relevant information.

Here are some important rules that should be noticed:

• Users can post each revision once and can bump it after 30 days from the first post, but the latter should only be done if a thread has a low participation.
• Only a single revision for each verse can be posted here every 72 hours, after which a new revision about the same verse can be posted again.
• Each user can post only one revision every 72 hours.

All of the rules above are made to prevent too much spam in the thread, so follow them as much as possible.

If a revision has been accepted or rejected, the member who posted a request for it should edit their comment to add a “Closed” on top of it, so that the staff can know which revisions that still need to be evaluated."

 

[ThanatosX]

I tried to clean up the language flow of the draft a bit below, but it could still do with some improvements.

For example, the priority scale needs to be clarified and defined better, and 72 hours/ days is likely a considerably too narrow time limit.

"This thread can be used to link to discussions in the content revision forum regarding changes to verses or profiles, so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough attention, users can politely ask a few staff member who are listed in the related verse page or the knowledgeable members list to give it a look via their message walls.

Members can link to the revision here, but discussions regarding said revisions must be made in the respective thread to prevent derailments.

The comments should contain all of this information in them: “Priority” in a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important; “Verse” to specify the verse the revision is aimed for; “Description” with a small summary of what the revision will modify; and a “Note” part for any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

Remember that a revision must contain all of the necessary information regarding the topic that it tackles, with links and evidence to support the upgrade, downgrade or modifications in general. Don’t link in this page revisions that are incomplete or that are lacking to prevent too many spam messages.

IMPORTANT NOTES:

This thread is supposed to give users one more way to get attention from both other users and staff members, but since there are many daily revisions the request should contain as many details as possible to attract more interest and to give everyone more relevant information.

Here are some important rules that should be noticed:

• Users can post each revision once and can bump it after 30 days from the first post, but the latter should only be done if a thread has a low participation.
• Only a single revision for each verse can be posted here every 72 hours, after which a new revision about the same verse can be posted again.
• Each user can post only one revision every 72 hours.

All of the rules above are made to prevent too much spam in the thread, so follow them as much as possible.

If a revision has been accepted or rejected, the member who posted a request for it should edit their comment to add a “Closed” on top of it, so that the staff can know which revisions that still need to be evaluated."

Looks much better now.
For the time limit I am neutral, but maybe a week could be better.

 

[Antvasima]

"This thread can be used to link to discussions in the content revision forum regarding changes to verses or profiles, so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough attention, users can politely ask a few staff member who are listed in the related verse page or the knowledgeable members list to give it a look via their message walls.

Members can link to the revision here, but discussions regarding said revisions must be made in the respective thread to prevent derailments.

The comments should contain all of this information in them: “Priority” in a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important; “Verse” to specify the verse the revision is aimed for; “Description” with a small summary of what the revision will modify; and a “Note” part for any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

Remember that a revision must contain all of the necessary information regarding the topic that it tackles, with links and evidence to support the upgrade, downgrade or modifications in general. Don’t link in this page revisions that are incomplete or that are lacking to prevent too many spam messages.

IMPORTANT NOTES:

This thread is supposed to give users one more way to get attention from both other users and staff members, but since there are many daily revisions the request should contain as many details as possible to attract more interest and to give everyone more relevant information.

Here are some important rules that should be noticed:

• Users can post each revision once and can bump it after 30 days from the first post, but the latter should only be done if a thread has a low participation.
• Only a single revision for each verse can be posted here per week, after which a new revision about the same verse can be posted again.
• Each user can post only one revision per week.

All of the rules above are made to prevent too much spam in the thread, so follow them as much as possible.

If a revision has been accepted or rejected, the member who posted a request for it should edit their comment to add a “Closed” on top of it, so that the staff can know which revisions that still need to be evaluated."

Okay. How about this then?

We still need to define a proper priority scale though. Help from our staff and the rest of our community in this regard would be very appreciated, as would input and evaluations regarding the above text.

 

[AKM sama]

The comments should contain all of this information in them: “Priority” in a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important; “Verse” to specify the verse the revision is aimed for; “Description” with a small summary of what the revision will modify; and a “Note” part for any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

This part can be formatted like this,

The comments should contain all of this information in them:

Priority: in a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important
Verse: to specify the verse the revision is aimed for
Description: a small summary of what the revision will modify
Note: any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users

Rest looks good.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. So something like this then:

"This thread can be used to link to discussions in the content revision forum regarding changes to verses or profiles, so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough attention, users can politely ask a few staff member who are listed in the related verse page or the knowledgeable members list to give it a look via their message walls.

Members can link to the revision here, but discussions regarding said revisions must be made in the respective thread to prevent derailments.

The comments should contain all of this information in them:

• Priority: On a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important.
• Verse: To specify the verse the revision is aimed for.
• Description: A small summary of what the revision will modify.
• Note: Any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

Remember that a revision must contain all of the necessary information regarding the topic that it tackles, with links and evidence to support the upgrade, downgrade or modifications in general. Don’t link in this page revisions that are incomplete or that are lacking to prevent too many spam messages.

IMPORTANT NOTES:

This thread is supposed to give users one more way to get attention from both other users and staff members, but since there are many daily revisions the request should contain as many details as possible to attract more interest and to give everyone more relevant information.

Here are some important rules that should be noticed:

• Users can post each revision once and can bump it after 30 days from the first post, but the latter should only be done if a thread has a low participation.
• Only a single revision for each verse can be posted here per week, after which a new revision about the same verse can be posted again.
• Each user can post only one revision per week.

All of the rules above are made to prevent too much spam in the thread, so follow them as much as possible.

If a revision has been accepted or rejected, the member who posted a request for it should edit their comment to add a “Closed” on top of it, so that the staff can know which revisions that still need to be evaluated."

We still need some guidelines for what the 1, 2, 3, 4 scale numbers should mean exactly though.

 

[AKM sama]

I'd say
4 for straightforward changes for a few characters where everything is blatant and sourced.
3 for bigger revisions involving many additions for characters
2 for revisions for a significant part of the verse
1 for controversial revisions involving controversial verses/characters

or something like that. If someone has a better idea, feel free to expand upon.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes, further input would be very appreciated.

 

[ThanatosX]

I like this classification, it should work.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. The wording needs to be cleaned up and possibly expanded upon though.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. So something like this then:

"This thread can be used to link to discussions in the content revision forum regarding changes to verses or profiles, so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough attention, users can politely ask a few staff member who are listed in the related verse page or the knowledgeable members list to give it a look via their message walls.

Members can link to the revision here, but discussions regarding said revisions must be made in the respective thread to prevent derailments.

The comments should contain all of this information in them:

• Priority: On a scale from 1 to 4, with lower numbers being more important.
• Verse: To specify the verse the revision is aimed for.
• Description: A small summary of what the revision will modify.
• Note: Any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

Remember that a revision must contain all of the necessary information regarding the topic that it tackles, with links and evidence to support the upgrade, downgrade or modifications in general. Don’t link in this page revisions that are incomplete or that are lacking to prevent too many spam messages.

IMPORTANT NOTES:

This thread is supposed to give users one more way to get attention from both other users and staff members, but since there are many daily revisions the request should contain as many details as possible to attract more interest and to give everyone more relevant information.

Here are some important rules that should be noticed:

• Users can post each revision once and can bump it after 30 days from the first post, but the latter should only be done if a thread has a low participation.
• Only a single revision for each verse can be posted here per week, after which a new revision about the same verse can be posted again.
• Each user can post only one revision per week.

All of the rules above are made to prevent too much spam in the thread, so follow them as much as possible.

If a revision has been accepted or rejected, the member who posted a request for it should edit their comment to add a “Closed” on top of it, so that the staff can know which revisions that still need to be evaluated."

We still need some guidelines for what the 1, 2, 3, 4 scale numbers should mean exactly though.

I'd say
4 for straightforward changes for a few characters where everything is blatant and sourced.
3 for bigger revisions involving many additions for characters
2 for revisions for a significant part of the verse
1 for controversial revisions involving controversial verses/characters

or something like that. If someone has a better idea, feel free to expand upon.

I like this classification, it should work.

Okay. The wording needs to be cleaned up and possibly expanded upon though.

@AKM sama @Promestein @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou

Your input about the suggested new wiki management thread would be appreciated here.

 

[Arceus0x]

here's a suggestion, unless im missing something.

I want to be able to see the threads i've made in the pasr as all we can see is our past comments and replies.

 

[Antvasima]

That probably isn't very high priority at the moment, and likely hard to apply. My apologies.

You can use this page to search for them though:

https://vsbattles.com/watched/threads

 

[Antvasima]

Never mind. I will ask about it.

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

Um... Not sure what's happening but they need instructions

Crow (Real World)

The Crow is a black corvid present worldwide. They are omnivorous and have an incredibly diverse diet, being able to adapt extremely well to human life, human change and urban cities. They are also present in many cultures due to their appearance and way of living. Tier: 10-C, higher via...

vsbattles.fandom.com

Gorilla

Gorillas are magnificent creatures, representing the strength and beauty of the wild. They evoke a sense of awe and respect.Sigourney Weaver The Gorilla is the largest genus of primate that currently roams the Earth, and is one of the closest living relatives to humans apart from chimps...

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

here's a suggestion, unless im missing something.

I want to be able to see the threads i've made in the pasr as all we can see is our past comments and replies.

Pretty sure you can already do that though? Just go to your own profile and click the find tab. Unless you're talking about something different.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the information. It is very helpful.

 

[Arceus0x]

thank you very much, i couldn't find that feature cause...idk why

 

[Antvasima]

Um... Not sure what's happening but they need instructions

Crow (Real World)

The Crow is a black corvid present worldwide. They are omnivorous and have an incredibly diverse diet, being able to adapt extremely well to human life, human change and urban cities. They are also present in many cultures due to their appearance and way of living. Tier: 10-C, higher via...

vsbattles.fandom.com

Gorilla

Gorillas are magnificent creatures, representing the strength and beauty of the wild. They evoke a sense of awe and respect.Sigourney Weaver The Gorilla is the largest genus of primate that currently roams the Earth, and is one of the closest living relatives to humans apart from chimps...

vsbattles.fandom.com

This is the wrong thread to mention these types of issues, but Damage reverted the edits, and I gave the newbie an instruction message:

Yusuf616

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

This is the wrong thread to mention these types of issues, but Damage reverted the edits, and I gave the newbie an instruction message:

Yusuf616

vsbattles.fandom.com

Oh... Wait... I thought I put it in the reports section I'm confused

 

[Antvasima]

No problem.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

@AKM sama @Promestein @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou

Your input about the suggested new wiki management thread would be appreciated here.

I don't have anything to add in regards to that post and I agree with what's being suggested.

 

[Ogbunabali]

@AKM sama @Promestein @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou

Your input about the suggested new wiki management thread would be appreciated here.

The proposal looks good to me.

I think for the priority it should be 3 tiers instead

3 - Calc, or straightforward ability additions, adding scans, etc

2 - Bigger additions like new tiers, or some verse wide changes, etc

1 - Controversial additions like tier 1, Conceptual Manipulation, etc

 

[Antvasima]

Couldn't we include straightforward tier changes from accepted calculations in AKM's suggestion for type 4 instead? Still, I suppose that type 2 and 3 are similar. What do you think @AKM sama ?

 

[Ogbunabali]

The tiers are going to be vague regardless, and mainly reliant on the short description provided in any case, so I think less is more in this case.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[AKM sama]

1 - Controversial additions like tier 1, Conceptual Manipulation, etc

I'd also include controversial revisions involving controversial verses/characters here. Something like revising Goku or any controversial character from HST should fall under this if the revision is controversial. It's really hard to define what is "controversial" though since it is based on context.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, so are you otherwise fine with Ogbunabali's suggested structure?

 

[Ogbunabali]

I'd also include controversial revisions involving controversial verses/characters here. Something like revising Goku or any controversial character from HST should fall under this if the revision is controversial. It's really hard to define what is "controversial" though since it is based on context.

Yeah, that as well.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, so are you otherwise fine with Ogbunabali's suggested structure?

@AKM sama

 

[Omnificence]

I once suggested this in The remains of the Tiering Revision, but I'll post it here anyway.

was gonna suggest that maybe we should separate the different kinds of speed such as attack, reaction, and travel speed on character pages like this:

Attack Speed:

Reacton Speed:

Travel Speed:

I came up with this idea based upon the profile layout on DebatesJungle. I personally think this is more organized and would differentiate the different traits of a character related to speed.

But that's just me.