The Current Ruling on YouTube profiles and other issues

[Yobo_Blue]

So, there have been numerous issues brought up in this thread regarding our ruling on actors and stage personas. The problem mentioned was that various rules and guidelines regarding profiles that this bans are A. Massive double standards, B. Very arbitrary, and C. Extremely vague. This thread is intended to discuss if changes should be made and the specifics of those changes.

The rules in question:

• All characters in VS Battles wiki profiles should originate within actual stories, from notable or popular works.
• Do not create any joke profiles, as they do not fit into our tiering system. Also avoid creating profiles for fan characters, advertisement characters, YouTube personalities, music videos, memes, stage personas, and the like. If you wish to create such profiles, feel free to do so in the Joke Battles wiki instead.
• It is also prohibited to create profiles for fictionalised stage personas for other reasons, whether these have their origins in music videos, educational programs, or otherwise: For one thing, it is inappropriate for largely underage wiki members to discuss which real people that would hypothetically be most capable of killing each other, and for another, a vast majority of these artists are extremely willing to file lawsuits against anybody who uses their brand for which they own intellectual property rights, regardless whether or not these are meant to be used for commercial or fair use purposes. It would be recommended and preferable to avoid adding such profiles to Joke Battles as well.

(Note that the thread in question contains a lot of context for this discussion, and it would likely be extremely beneficial to look it over in some capacity)

 

[Andytrenom]

The most important I have regarding this issue is, what differentiates a fictional character from a stage persona? I don't really follow music and wrestling and other stuff that closely so I don't have much of an idea.

 

[Agnaa]

I'm neutral on whether the rule should be changed or not, but I want it to be enforced consistently.

 

[Antvasima]

You should preferably cite all of the current rules, and what you want to modify and why.

Anyway, as I mentioned previously:

We are mainly a site about fictional story characters.

YouTube and TV show hosts are just themselves, and not part of a storyline, regardless of special effects. The difference with hosts of cooking shows or news anchors is very thin, and it is very unwise to start to tear up our bulwarks to allow a stream of nonsense into the wiki.

If people want to create such profiles, they can always use Joke Battles. It is not that big a deal.

 

[Antvasima]

@Andytrenom

As I mentioned previously, we are not experienced lawyers, so it is hard to precisely cover every angle. We mainly just intended to keep away show hosts who are playing themselves without an actual storyline.

 

[Andytrenom]

I am unironically starting to question if the Real World can be allowed here..(It is useful for scaling purposes, at least I can understand that)

Also Ant I think the OP just wants profiles for fictional characters in a fictional setting to be allowed even if they are based on real life people, like how Mike Tyson from Punch out is allowed.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

As as been stated on the other thread, the difference between a YouTubed portraying obvious fiction and a reporter covering real life events is very large, even only looking at the outlandishness of the topics they cover.

The idea that a storyline is what is necessary for viability is also untrue, as many cartoon characters lack that in any capacity as well.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

I am unironically starting to question if the Real World can be allowed here..(It is useful for scaling purposes, at least I can understand that)

Also Ant I think the OP just wants profiles for fictional characters in a fictional setting to be allowed even if they are based on real life, like how Mike Tyson from Punch out is allowed.

Yes, the discussion here is (at least partially) to understand when something is no longer considered real

 

[Agnaa]

As as been stated on the other thread, the difference between a YouTubed portraying obvious fiction and a reporter covering real life events is very large, even only looking at the outlandishness of the topics they cover.

The idea that a storyline is what is necessary for viability is also untrue, as many cartoon characters lack that in any capacity as well.

What are your thoughts on profiles for professional wrestlers?

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Even going by Antvasima's definition, wrestlers have linear storylines, fictional backstories made for their personas, and have a clear outlandishness to them as far as I know, so I would say they are fair.

 

[YungManzi]

Pro wrestlers are literally fictional characters in an action play; most of which don't even share the same name as the actor who is portraying them.

 

[Antvasima]

The difference between infotainment show hosts like Adam Connover and a News Show host genuinely is very thin. I still think that we should try to keep the wiki as streamlined and focused as possible, to not allow in real people.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

I don't believe Adam Conover has many of the things mentioned above, so that has no real bearing on the argument, though I could be mistaken.

 

[Agnaa]

I'd like to echo what Ant said earlier.

You should preferably cite all of the current rules, and what you want to modify and why.

I can't agree/disagree with any changes if none are suggested, after all.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, if other staff members have suggestions for how to make our current rules less vague/more easily understood, I am open for suggestions.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

I'd like to echo what Ant said earlier.

I can't agree/disagree with any changes if none are suggested, after all.

I will do so in a bit.

 

[Andytrenom]

I would but I need my original question answered first

What differentiates a fictional character from a stage persona?

 

[Yobo_Blue]

My current circumstances dictate that I will not be able to respond for a while. I apologize for the inconvenience.

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

@Andy

I think I can try and answer that. Just a heads up, I will likely be going to bed shortly. I think a good way to do this would take some borderline senerios and decide what they are, and then use them to set a standard

A fictional character in the form of an actor would have something like The End is Nigh. It is probably the closest to the line you can get. it has actors playing themselves in an apocolyptic senerio, but they decidedly are characters since the irl person Emma Watson probably would not actually go and almost kill multiple people with an axe (there is more to that case but you get the example). I think what breaks this is that they are never meant to claim that the actual real life person is like this, albiet incredibly close.

Yhatzee as he is seen on Zero Punction would be a stage persona. There is no 4th wall between him and his audiance, even if he is basically a cartoon in his reviews. They are not even breaking a 4th wall either, one just simply does not exist. I am aware Minecraft has a similar total absense of a 4th wall, but even so, they are explicitly a video game. Yhatzee (the persona) may be a being that has tortured and killed several people, has a complete hatred of his fellow man, put broken glass into his eyes on more than one occasion, done his hair with a vacuum cleaner, been sanctioned multiple times, used a time machine just to assault at least one member of Queen, etc. but Yhatzee (The person with that nickname) has not done this, and most of his traits are just his nihilism diled up to the extremes and things that someone with his dialed up traits my theoretically do given the chances.

I guess a good way would be able to distingush between the 2 is, "Is There A 4th Wall?" If a character can break a 4th wall, then obviously one must exist. That means this is not just a stage persona. If an author being part of that world is breaking that 4th wall, then that is an author avatar and not an author themselves. If a character talking with their author is just something that happens then any quivolent of a real character is probably just them. Obviously we need to hammer out this a bit more, but I think this is a good way to draw a line at the very least

 

[Sir_Ovens]

I feel like a good way to draw the line is if we ask 2 questions:

1) Is it fictional?

2) What is the content of the verse in question?

For example, the first question is easy to answer. Is Ben Shapiro playing a character? No. He is not fictional and this should not be on this wiki. Is Adam Conover a character? Yes. He's not the real Adam Conover in the show and he has fictional powers to boot.

Second question. If the content of the verse in question has a plot or story element, it leans more towards the fictional side and is thus, something that our wiki can index. If it's a talkshow host or a youtuber using effects and editing to spice up their content, it is not fictional, and should thus not be allowed.

To add to this, audience interaction plays a big role in this as most fictions are contained, with 4th wall breaks either being a gag or some narrative element. If the guy in the show is just straight up adressing the audience as a form of interaction, it's not very fictional at that point.

Again, intent is key. A talkshow host interacts with his audience because he has topics of contention and he's being himself. Filthy Frank uses his interaction with the audience as a vessel for humour. He's not doing it to discuss real world issues, he's doing it because it's funny. It's the equivalent of a found footage movie, as he's recording himself in a fictional environment that just happens to present itself to us in the form of a recording.

 

[Agnaa]

What counts as a plot or story element? Does it need to be a continuous story or is even 1 minute of an arc enough to be considered enough fictional content to be indexed here?

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Again, intent. If a talkshow host makes a funny skit within his show to illustrate the absurdity of a political issue or such, it can't be counted as something worth indexing.

If Filthy Frank asks his audience to send him videos worshipping Chin Chin, it's because it further advances the plot while being a creative and funny way to interact with his audience.

Take educational children's programming for example. There is audience interaction and there is a plot. Same thing.

 

[Agnaa]

Yes but is Adam Conover having a plotline throughout each of his episodes considered something worth indexing?

This seems to just be pushing the envelope forward to allowing more profiles without solving the issues brought up (too vague, too arbitrary).

 

[Sir_Ovens]

We are a power indexing site. If Adam Conover has no powers but fulfils our wiki standards, we shouldn't have him on the site. It's like having a soap opera show being indexed. Perfectly fine, but a waste of our time, considering the lack of feats.

The indexing comes first after all, and I'm sure some people are interested in knowing just how powerful Frank is.

Also, I personally wouldn't want to index a verse such as Desperate Housewives. Because there is practically no one interested in the powers and abilities of a single middle aged woman. But I would want to index a verse like Brandon Rogers, because there are feats.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

So maybe a rule enforcing the fact that we are an indexing site first and foremost, and that the profiles added should have some semblance of combat applicable abilities to suit the context of a fictional battle.

 

[Andytrenom]

Just Superhuman/supernatural abilities should be fine. I don't think being combat applicable has to be a necessity.

 

[Agnaa]

Adam Conover has powers but has been repeatedly debated over, remade and redeleted in the past with our changing rules on this.

But your position is Adam Conover's fine? I'm just trying to find some concrete examples of where you'd draw the line at, beyond "Talk shows aren't allowed."

 

[Andytrenom]

Actually my suggestion also may not work, a 10-A boxing show that is really popular would not be disallowed from the wiki as far as I know.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

I believe the television version of Adam works, as his YouTube self is used as a method to deliver real world issues and has a very loose plot.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that Iapitus' point of no 4th wall between the person and the audience is one good way to distinguish between a fictional character and a stage persona.

Sir Ovens also brought up a good point. A character should be explicitly fictional, as part of an actual story with a plot, and not merely a real person who is acting out of character for his or her usual personality.

 

[Agnaa]

Okay, so some other examples.

Are YouTube reviewers with frequent skits and an overarching lore, such as Angry Joe, Angry Video Game Nerd, JonTro, Linkara, and Nostalgia Critic (who all used to have pages) allowed?

Are professional wrestlers, such as Brock Lesnar and Stone Cold Steve Austi (who both used to have pages) allowed?

Are corporate mascots allowed if they have a plot? If a character like Ronald McDonald, Lucky, the Trix Rabbit, the Cocoa Puffs bird, the Kool-Aid Man allowed to have profiles if they have story elements?

Are jokey advertisement characters with an overarching plot, like Terry Crews and Isaiah Mustafa, allowed to have profiles?

EDIT: Also, for the thread's information, here's where Adam Conover's profile deletion was discussed.

 

[Antvasima]

1) No, there is no 4th wall, and they are not explicitly fictional and part of a storyline. If we start to get too lenient, demands of allowing increasingly real world people will arise. I would prefer if we stick to at least reasonably streamlining our focus and content.

2) The mascots and advertisement characters are not a part of coherent storylines. I would much prefer if we do not allow any incoherent figments to be featured here.

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

Well, first off, I am not familiar with most of those. I am told Awsomeverse in regards to the nostaliga critic does have an overarching and collective lore, but I cannot speak for it myself. Jontron over all is more of a stage persona than a character, although someone like Jaque would be a character. However, if AVGN were to be made in regards to that game that was made, I think that would be more than fine

I can actually link a video about the interesting nature of professional wrestling and the real world. I do think they are characters, but everyone should have an understanding before we make a choice on this.

Are there specific works for these characters? if so, then perhaps.

 

[Agnaa]

@Ant 1) That seems like a really tough argument to make for a lot of those characters. I agree with the leniency but that's what I think this attempted reform of the rules would lead to. This thread came about to get characters like Brandon Rogers (Character) solidly accepted under the rules.

2) The Old Spice advertisement characters definitely are part of coherent storylines. I'm not sure about the other ones I listed since I'm admittedly not very familiar with their advertisements.

@Iapitus You think a verse can be partially not allowed on the site yet partially allowed? (Jontron is a stage persona but Jacques is a character). And I was talking about the AVGN series, not so much the game.

Alright.

There are specific works but they're usually just 30 second advertisements. But Ronald McDonald has a TV Show, and others likely have other secondary media through various promotions.

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

I would also say again, tho, Is there a 4th wall? I don't think just cuz they are "characters" the verse should be allowed. Now that I remember, Jaque is also an irl bird and John basically just gives him a cyborg voice, so I do not think so. I would actually say something like Filthy Frank is more applicable for a profile (not just the book) than most of those dudes just because of the lore and such.

Someone like Armored Skeptic would be a harder case imo. And i do think McDonald could have one since its a full blown TV show. Once you reach that level then it becomes pretty clear

 

[Andytrenom]

There's something I want to say about the storyline rule, I don't think it's actually a requirement. Something more important would be taking place in a fictional setting and having a defined canon

To clarify what I mean, take the example of the The Butto. The game it comes from doesn't really have an actual storyline but it is contained within a fictional world and the information about the machine is well defined and consistent within the game. So the profile is fine.

The "should purely takes place in a fictional setting rule" may appear to exclude White Face since his game can be interpreted as being set in the real world. But his case is a very special one.

 

[Antvasima]

I was referring to the Youtube reviewers. I also updated my post to address the advertisement characters/corporate mascots issue.

I am neutral about the wrestlers.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Not going to go through all of them, but I can cover some of them. JonTron is not a fictional character. He's an actual person with a stage name. His show deals with real world issues in a satirical way.

WWE is practically a never ending tournement arc. It's characters are fictional, and to prove that all you have to do is look at Dwane Johnson. He's not a wrestler in every movie he's in, he's just acting. He's a character in WWE.

Plus you're telling me, this is genuine?

 

[Agnaa]

How can you guys tell if there's a 4th wall or not?

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

@Andy

well, White Face is breaking the 4th Wall by technically being set in the real world, so it can likely pass