The Backrooms shouldn't be allowed. (STAFF ONLY)

[Moritzva]

Recently, I saw the following thread on The Backrooms.

I do not think The Backrooms have any place on the wiki. Here is why.

The Backrooms is a relatively disorganized, SCP-esque verse heavily reliant on community input and spread out across many mediums. Unlike SCP, there are many different avenues of creation, from Wikidot to Fandom and anywhere else. There exists no singular, concrete sense of canon, and only various different websites that put up their own vague rules.

The most common reason I see for it's approval is the presence of SCP. There are problems with this.

First off, SCP is already a highly contentious verse that finds itself in conflict quite often. I am not going to repeat the many, many arguments against it's presence, as they have been debated elsewhere. It only barely stays on because of it's high barrier of entry and high centralization.

So, why are we allowing the same thing, but with a lower barrier of entry and lower centralization?

The Backrooms are often said to be allowed with a split between Wikidot and Wikia. Aside from both being purely community splits, this doesn't properly define what is allowed on the wiki or not. What stops someone from making an interpretation from another community? Reddit? Some other website? It's not like these two are supported by the creator of The Backrooms. SCP has one website that is allowed, and it is the SCP wiki. Nothing else.

Not to mention, the barrier of entry is objectively lower on all counts. This isn't debatable, it just is. Standards exist, but it's nothing compared to the rigorous standards of SCP and their singular wiki. If a high barrier of entry is one of the most referred to arguments for SCP's continued existence, why are we lowering the bar so easily?

SCP is closer to an exception than the rule. It has always teetered on the edge of what is allowed, and The Backrooms are blatantly past said line. Allowing The Backrooms sets a precedent allowing wide-input community projects with worse content moderation onto the wiki, which I can't allow in any capacity. I want to stop this before the ball gets rolling any further.

 

[Crabwhale]

Agree with this.

 

[KatBoi69]

So you're arguing that the wiki Backrooms articles shouldn't be allowed, or ALL backrooms content shouldn't be allowed?

 

[Moritzva]

So you're arguing that the wiki SCP articles shouldn't be allowed, or ALL backrooms content shouldn't be allowed?

My post makes it quite clear what my stance is. The Backrooms does not fit the very strict standards that only barely allow SCP to stay.

 

[KatBoi69]

My post makes it quite clear what my stance is. The Backrooms does not fit the very strict standards that only barely allow SCP to stay.

It isn't entirely clear to me, because you refer to all of The Backrooms, as though the wiki encompasses all backrooms content. There is non-wiki backrooms content.

 

[Moritzva]

When there's so much content spread over so many mediums for a verse, the question of "What part of The Backrooms are we talking about?" becomes a legitimate question, it's usually a pretty good idea to pull the plug then and there.

 

[Roachman40]

I agree with completely deleting the wikidot version of the backrooms, although im kinda iffy on deleting other backrooms content unrelated to the wikidot shit.

Kane Pixels Backrooms series is a good example, it has a consistent canon and is generally considered its own thing.

 

[KatBoi69]

When there's so much content spread over so many mediums for a verse, the question of "What part of The Backrooms are we talking about?" becomes a legitimate question, it's usually a pretty good idea to pull the plug then and there.

I really disagree with the idea that a verse spread across multiple mediums automatically needs to have its plug pulled. That would mean many, many media franchises on the wiki would need to be removed.
I agree that trying to index three separate wiki continuities is a bad idea, both in terms of time/resources and yeah, general sense making for any kind of discussion/debate, or anything else you'd do on these forums.

Overall, though, backrooms fiction that meets general wiki standards is fine to index.

 

[Moritzva]

I agree with completely deleting the wikidot version of the backrooms, although im kinda iffy on deleting other backrooms content unrelated to the wikidot shit.

Kane Pixels Backrooms series is a good example, it has a consistent canon and is generally considered its own thing.

Then we delete all wikishit and whatnot first, then come back with the exceptions (e.g. things with consistent canon and without the "anyone can write" aspects) and determine if they fit our standards in a way all other verses would. Simple as that.

 

[Roachman40]

Then we delete all wikishit and whatnot first, then come back with the exceptions (e.g. things with consistent canon and without the "anyone can write" aspects) and determine if they fit our standards in a way all other verses would. Simple as that.

sounds good to me

 

[KatBoi69]

Then we delete all wikishit and whatnot first, then come back with the exceptions (e.g. things with consistent canon and without the "anyone can write" aspects) and determine if they fit our standards in a way all other verses would. Simple as that.

Redacted. See below.

 

[Arceus0x]

i believe that the fully consistent kane pixels series should have its own profiles once it has enough stuff to actually profile. His series is influenced only by him and his interpretation of the Backrooms.

 

[Moritzva]

If that's the case, then we can address that separately and argue it for its own merits afterwards.

I would like to completely quell the fire and clear out the field before deciding what should be allowed and why. I wish to set the standard of caution and inspection to make sure people don't get carried away like they did in the last thread.

 

[Jibz]

Im fine with it as long as we have a clause that once the wikidot becomes more established and cohesive its allowed to come back. I do not wish for an end to the wikidot's reign at this site (the prime hub for backrooms content at this point). As others have pointed out, there are backrooms related content that are cohesive and consistent both scaling and story wise (Kane Pixels) that shouldn't be subjected to this rule.

Other then that, im fine with it. It'll probably take atleast over a year for backrooms to even be cohesive enough to be allowed, if at all since once the trend dies, i presume the wiki will die aswell.

 

[Moritzva]

If Wikidot's general ruleset changes in a way that can truly rival whatever our standards at the time (e.g. be comparable to SCP), then we can probably argue that when we get there, yes.

I don't know a lot about Kane Pixels to tell, but if it's written by a closed group then it's already probably free from issues and would be allowed. I just don't want people seeing it and using it as a jumping board to add any Backrooms content.

 

[KatBoi69]

If Wikidot's general ruleset changes in a way that can truly rival whatever our standards at the time (e.g. be comparable to SCP), then we can probably argue that when we get there, yes.

I don't know a lot about Kane Pixels to tell, but if it's written by a closed group then it's already probably free from issues and would be allowed. I just don't want people seeing it and using it as a jumping board to add any
Backrooms content.

Ok, so now that the subject has come up...what are those potential issues and what are those standards?

I've seen this nebulous appeal to "issues and standards" come up multiple times when discussing wiki fiction, but said "issues and standards" are never cited directly, and I'd like to know if the policies being referenced are codified, as regular policies on the wiki, in a centralized and easy to read location.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

This thread seems to be clinging onto the idea of people indexing anything Backrooms related.

Which is weird considering the OP linked a thread where the consensus was the opposite. Also, making a separate thread seems kinda redundant.

The idea was that we should only index the Wikidot, and maybe the Liminal Archives, since they're the only wikis with rules strict enough to avoid having clusterfucks and wankfests.

The same cannot be said for the Fandom Wiki, which we decided to exclude.

The point of "What if someone brings another interpretation from other websites" completely falls apart when you discard stuff like the Fandom Wiki.

Also you can't use that for the Wikidot, since bringing stuff from other websites into that site is forbidden.

Kane Pixels's continuity is non scalable aside from 1 entity so idk why people are bringing that up.

 

[The_Impress]

This is basically a subjective proposal, so probably get the vote counter up.

Should I just shift this to Staff Discussion? Otherwise this may get cluttered.

 

[Jibz]

This is basically a subjective proposal, so probably get the vote counter up.

Should I just shift this to Staff Discussion? Otherwise this may get cluttered.

Sure, if it ends this more quickly.

 

[Agnaa]

As before, I would prefer to wait until one of these avenues of canon reigns supreme and the others die off before indexing any of them.

 

[Greatsage13th]

Very strong disagreement here.

If Wikidot's general ruleset changes in a way that can truly rival whatever our standards at the time (e.g. be comparable to SCP), then we can probably argue that when we get there, yes.

Pretty sure it's very well organized and does not have much extended canon when compared to scp. Last time @Bobsican said that he could at any time, add a tier o penguin to the backrooms wikidot and to that I retort, they'll not even allow it if it goes against their lore of the backrooms. So no. It does not even remotely fall under the category of a disorganized wiki.

 

[The_Impress]

stop feccin derailing this isn't the scaling thread

 

[The_Impress]

Also I'mj just shifting this to a staff thread now

 

[Moritzva]

What in the goddamn happened while I was sleeping?

 

[Moritzva]

Very strong disagreement here.

Pretty sure it's very well organized and does not have much extended canon when compared to scp. Last time @Bobsican said that he could at any time, add a tier o penguin to the backrooms wikidot and to that I retort, they'll not even allow it if it goes against their lore of the backrooms. So no. It does not even remotely fall under the category of a disorganized wiki.

It has been around for far less time than SCP, arguing it has "less extended canon" is fallacious and doesn't have regards for popularity, centralization, or time.

If you may, could you prove how the process is nearly as time-consuming and arduous as the dreadful SCP process (which still doesn't have a "secure" place on the wiki, given people's distaste towards having SCP on)?

 

[Moritzva]

This thread seems to be clinging onto the idea of people indexing anything Backrooms related.

Which is weird considering the OP linked a thread where the consensus was the opposite. Also, making a separate thread seems kinda redundant.

The idea was that we should only index the Wikidot, and maybe the Liminal Archives, since they're the only wikis with rules strict enough to avoid having clusterfucks and wankfests.

The same cannot be said for the Fandom Wiki, which we decided to exclude.

The point of "What if someone brings another interpretation from other websites" completely falls apart when you discard stuff like the Fandom Wiki.

Also you can't use that for the Wikidot, since bringing stuff from other websites into that site is forbidden.

Kane Pixels's continuity is non scalable aside from 1 entity so idk why people are bringing that up.

The fact that you aren't even sure on what is allowed by our own rules ('maybe' Liminal Archives) is proof enough of how insecure and uncertain Backroom's acceptance was and how it was not made clear what could be allowed and why. Not to mention, I am of the opinion that neither fit our standards for the reasons listed above.

The question is simple. Do they fit our standards or not? The previous thread did not give ample proof, explanation, or reason for a matter this boiling hot and contentious.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

I agree with Moritzva's points

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

The fact that you aren't even sure on what is allowed by our own rules ('maybe' Liminal Archives) is proof enough of how insecure and uncertain Backroom's acceptance was and how it was not made clear what could be allowed and why. Not to mention, I am of the opinion that neither fit our standards for the reasons listed above.

The question is simple. Do they fit our standards or not? The previous thread did not give ample proof, explanation, or reason for a matter this boiling hot and contentious.

I said "maybe Liminal Archives" because the initial premise was to index the Wikidot and then introduce the Liminal Archives in the future. The two continuities are similar, but the former is more popular.

The question here is... What standards? Where are those standards written?

 

[KatBoi69]

The question here is... What standards? Where are those standards written?

As someone who asked this question earlier in the thread, seconded. I think people are uncertain because the standards haven't been defined.

Literally just need a link to a page.

 

[Moritzva]

The standards on SCP-esque verses not being written out properly are part of why we are having this problem in the first place, yes, but we should stick to precedent and define the rules as they come.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

As someone who asked this question earlier in the thread, seconded. I think people are uncertain because the standards haven't been defined.

Literally just need a link to a page.

So we're arguing without any basis?

 

[KatBoi69]

The standards on SCP-esque verses not being written out properly are part of why we are having this problem in the first place, yes, but we should stick to precedent and define the rules as they come.

Ok, as far as I can tell, the precedent is, "SCP is fine because it has a review process for new articles. Some people are unhappy because the verse is sprawling, controversial, and maybe has some intentional wank," but there isn't any solid evidence for the latter point beyond a bunch of tier 0's....and imo controversy isn't a great reason not to index something unless it's blatantly offensive.

I think this entire situation is a good argument for why we need written standards for the evaluation of whether or not a wikifiction verse can be added to vsbw. It could even just be "Here's what scp does. These are the reasons it's tolerable. Here's a bullet pointed list of what a different wiki verse needs to be acceptable."

 

[Promestein]

We may as well be debating what Jeff the Killer fanfic to index. People have struggled and debated SCP's appropriateness for the wiki for a long time over a lot of things - Backrooms is far less centralized, because it's a creepypasta, so any 10 year old will do whatever they want with it. At the very least wait for things to develop more.

 

[Uninown]

with such a fragmented and haphazardous canon where it can be hardly determined what falls under fanfiction material and what does not, I believe this should be a no-brainer for the most part, yuh.
since I feel there's no need for me to regurgitate the points already drawn by Moritzva and co. supporting the deletion of the verse for the meantime (at least, until offshoots with a more-centralized sense of self can be properly indexed), it goes without saying that I'll hop in that same boat as well

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

We may as well be debating what Jeff the Killer fanfic to index. People have struggled and debated SCP's appropriateness for the wiki for a long time over a lot of things - Backrooms is far less centralized, because it's a creepypasta, so any 10 year old will do whatever they want with it. At the very least wait for things to develop more.

That's wrong, since you have to be a certain age to join the wiki and immature behavior results in warnings and then a ban.

 

[Promestein]

God knows everyone listens to the wiki age requirements. You're also missing the point if you think that matters.

 

[Moritzva]

That's wrong, since you have to be a certain age to join the wiki and immature behavior results in warnings and then a ban.

Ah yes, and only 18 year olds and above are allowed to use Pornhub.

 

[KatBoi69]

We may as well be debating what Jeff the Killer fanfic to index. People have struggled and debated SCP's appropriateness for the wiki for a long time over a lot of things - Backrooms is far less centralized, because it's a creepypasta, so any 10 year old will do whatever they want with it. At the very least wait for things to develop more.

Can I ask a question related to this comment?

We have multiple JTK profiles. What gets those indexed, even though that content is similarly born of a meme post/creepypasta?

 

[Promestein]

I mean I think most of those should be deleted, but getting into that is off-topic

 

[Greatsage13th]

I mean I think most of those should be deleted, but getting into that is off-topic

Fair example to use tho.