The SCP Mass Exodus

[Sir_Ovens]

Since the removal of SCP has been all but set in stone, I think it's best that we talk about the crucial next step.

We have around 448 pages to archive lest they be deleted. I have reached out to a few friends from other wikis who would be happy to host us and amongst them I have found that Vs. Battles Wiki and VsDebating Wiki are the best alternatives under such short notice. Although I'm not opposed to suggestions.

Upon agreement on a replacement wiki, we will need to discuss the order in which we move the pages and how to split the workload. Volunteers looking to help us move will be much appreciated and really lessen the amount of time and effort we spend on this project.

Although I will say, I'm really only in this position because no one else wants to be, so if anyone wants to step up and take charge themselves I won't be opposed to it.

Godspeed, gentlemen. And may Swann guide you.​

 

[Phoenks]

I still don't understand, why can't you guys just put them into VSBW sandboxes for the sake of preservation and then work on making a vs-wiki for Internet verses like SCP in the meantime.

I don't really see the point in having SCP be the only verse that exists on these random vsbw adjacents. Would fit a lot better if you had a unique site.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I will publicly say what I said to Ovens in private: I feel a separate archive-wiki for the SCP profiles is better than relying on an imperfect other. My old wiki has people using it that may mess up the process and the other one is (obviously) not on Fandom, and so cuts off certain options of ease like potential botwork (or at least, bots we already have made for Fandom). The former problem can be mitigated by being very careful in locking down all profiles the instant they're made, but it just takes that much more work. I don't know whether the latter issue can be solved.

So, I consider a new wiki built specifically for this purpose to be by and far the best option. I can can offer my help in the process for either a replacement Fandom wiki or a new one.

Regarding this:

Although I will say, I'm really only in this position because no one else wants to be, so if anyone wants to step up and take charge themselves I won't be opposed to it.​

I reckon people wouldn't want me leading such an effort, but I would be willing to do so, too.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Content Moderators and above can view deleted profiles. It'd be easy for us to look at them at any point, so I'm not sure what the rush is.

 

[Catzlaflame]

idk if this was already the plan or not, but we can use the export/import media:wiki function to do the transfers.

Only thing is:

1. It NEEDS to be a media:wiki site that we transfer it too, and It would be more convenient if it was a Fandom->Fandom transfer because then we don't have to worry about the interwiki prefix shit (so like, it would work for that first site you link, but would be easier with the second one)
2. The biggest pain is the links, external links can transfer fine (so like scans on imgur would move), but images uploaded to the wiki... nah. Though, the same would remain true if we manually moved the pages, so its not like this is specific to this method.
3. Another thing to consider is that I actually do not know what fandom's file import limit is, so we'll have to work around that potentially. Although, it would still be astronomically quicker I think.

I don't mind helping, but it would need to be after May 9th (finals lmao, assuming I'm not too depressed from failing), and after I finish my current bot project (The "Notable Matchups" project, which is in its final stages of completion btw).

Examples: https://testofthecatz.fandom.com/wiki/Thor_(Marvel_Comics) https://testofthecatz.fandom.com/wiki/SCP-0001_(Meta_Ike's_Proposal)

 

[Tllmbrg]

This should work, we'll probably spend time switching scans afterward (All stuff that's either cited or from one source should be easy enough to put again)

But this should be hig help also I have Uni in general so my participation will be limited

 

[Hl3_or_bust]

Perms given from @Mr. Bambu

I still don't understand, why can't you guys just put them into VSBW sandboxes for the sake of preservation and then work on making a vs-wiki for Internet verses like SCP in the meantime.

I don't really see the point in having SCP be the only verse that exists on these random vsbw adjacents. Would fit a lot better if you had a unique site.

For one, even if this was split across several different sandboxes, they would be inordinately large and would require a lot of work to make it easy to find specific SCPs that can be circumvented by just transferring them to another wiki, either as the new home or so they can be transferred at our own pace later.

Making a whole new wiki would involve a lot of moderation work that the main SCP people are unable or unwilling to take on. They're already staff here, having to undergo the process of moving a 200+ page verse is a big deal already, and it only gets worse having to set up systems on a whole new wiki for them and nothing else. It's simply a huge waste of time and effort for little to no real return, especially when most sites just copy-paste vsbw's tiering system for the sake of ease of use anyways.

 

[Antvasima]

I personally think that it seems most convenient to move the pages to a Fandom-hosted wiki.

 

[KLOL506]

Couldn't we make this SCP-oriented wiki a sister wiki of ours? And then add another sub-forum in this site like we do for FC/OC and Joke-Battles? Or would it be too much moderation work?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Making a whole new wiki would involve a lot of moderation work that the main SCP people are unable or unwilling to take on. They're already staff here, having to undergo the process of moving a 200+ page verse is a big deal already, and it only gets worse having to set up systems on a whole new wiki for them and nothing else. It's simply a huge waste of time and effort for little to no real return, especially when most sites just copy-paste vsbw's tiering system for the sake of ease of use anyways.

I don't think it would really require much moderation work, although the addition of adding infrastructure involves adding more to the workload I suppose.

Adding this to an existent would require more moderation, though, which I think is the trade-off.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Couldn't we make this SCP-oriented wiki a sister wiki of ours? And then add another sub-forum in this site like we do for FC/OC and Joke-Battles? Or would it be too much moderation work?

That would take a request to the forum manager. @Antvasima

 

[JohnConquest1]

I'm going to add to this, and harkon back to what I said on the deletion thread. When you make massive policy changes you risk becoming entirely incompatible with everything on this forum. I'm going to be brutally honest, don't expect interwiki vs debates, or don't expect interwiki vs debates if they are allowed to pan out all too well.

 

[Agnaa]

I still don't understand, why can't you guys just put them into VSBW sandboxes for the sake of preservation and then work on making a vs-wiki for Internet verses like SCP in the meantime.

Because there's a very narrow band of verses like SCP. Many other internet verses are allowed on VSBW, and the rest are allowed on FC/OC. The main SCP wiki is going to be one of, at best, a handful of verses that aren't allowed on either.

I don't really see the point in having SCP be the only verse that exists on these random vsbw adjacents. Would fit a lot better if you had a unique site.

It wouldn't be the only verse on those; there's already other profiles on both of 'em.

Couldn't we make this SCP-oriented wiki a sister wiki of ours? And then add another sub-forum in this site like we do for FC/OC and Joke-Battles? Or would it be too much moderation work?

At that point, why bother?

I don't understand why the pro-deletion (we'd still be spotlighting and intermingling SCP with our systems here) or anti-move-to-FC/OC (if we're devoting people to moderate this sort of thing, can't FC/OC just integrate those people into a dedicated staff team) groups would be fine with that.

 

[Seol404]

All SCP-J pages can be moved to JBW. I'm not sure how many there are but it shouldn't be too difficult a task to move them over.

 

[Agnaa]

All SCP-J pages can be moved to JBW. I'm not sure how many there are but it shouldn't be too difficult a task to move them over.

Will that cause any issues with cross-scaling, since some of their stats are based on non-J pages?

 

[Seol404]

Will that cause any issues with cross-scaling, since some of their stats are based on non-J pages?

Links to wherever the main pages are archived can be preserved, unless the people who are archiving the pages opt to archive the -J pages in that location too.

 

[Phoenks]

Because there's a very narrow band of verses like SCP. Many other internet verses are allowed on VSBW, and the rest are allowed on FC/OC. The main SCP wiki is going to be one of, at best, a handful of verses that aren't allowed on either.

I fail to see how this is an issue?

I am saying it would be very beneficial to just have a scaling wiki dedicated particularly to things like SCP, Backrooms (also banned on FCOC), the other one that starts with "R," and similar verses. You wouldn't need a very big staff team and the site would have a very clear objective that's not hard to fulfill.

If your only argument against that is "well there's not enough content" I fail to see how that is a problem whatsoever. You do realize that if SCP was put onto a Bambu wiki or some other random inactive wiki, it would still be the only thing there, right?

Also, 400+ pages is MORE than enough for a site so Idk where that concern even comes from. There's 8,000+ SCPs, hundreds to thousands of Backrooms entities and locations, and same thing with RPC. Not including the potential for other things to be on there as well.

It wouldn't be the only verse on those; there's already other profiles on both of 'em.

Uh, bro, they are extremely inactive... and there's like... a couple. Also, what's the point of making another VSBW-ripoff. We have enough of those already. Unoriginal, lot of work for minimal gain. Not really a worthwhile endeavor.

 

[Agnaa]

I fail to see how this is an issue?

I am saying it would be very beneficial to just have a scaling wiki dedicated particularly to things like SCP, Backrooms (also banned on FCOC), the other one that starts with "R," and similar verses. You wouldn't need a very big staff team and the site would have a very clear objective that's not hard to fulfill.

It just seems pretty pointless, making an entirely separate website just for 2-3 series. Like it's an excessive way of responding to something extremely narrow. Like creating an entirely separate wiki just for Suggsverse and any tier 1/0 cosmologies not meeting FC/OC's standards. Or an entirely separate wiki for humans with guns that aren't allowed profiles like Cool Cat.

It seems like a waste to do it for one specific niche thing.

You do realize that if SCP was put onto a Bambu wiki or some other random inactive wiki, it would still be the only thing there, right?

It wouldn't be. Bambu's wiki has over 1600 characters, Zark's wiki only has a few dozen characters but it also started recently, CSAP has over 10k pages.

Also, 400+ pages is MORE than enough for a site so Idk where that concern even comes from. There's 8,000+ SCPs, hundreds to thousands of Backrooms entities and locations, and same thing with RPC. Not including the potential for other things to be on there as well.

It's not about the raw content, it's that it's an extremely niche conceptual idea that makes me find it weird.

Our categories are currently:

• Notable, serious, combat-related stuff that doesn't violate copyright.
• Stuff that violates copyright and/or isn't notable.
• Stuff that isn't serious.

Adding an extra website just for "collaborative internet fiction" just doesn't feel as coherent.

You could equally instead make the category "series that aren't allowed on vsbw that start with S", to let in Suggsverse as well while excluding RPC and Backrooms. That would have hundreds of pages, but why would you make something so conceptually arbitrary?

Uh, bro, they are extremely inactive... and there's like... a couple.

Yeah. I thought you were under the impression that they were completely barren. Given how you've, multiple times, said SCP would be the only verse on them.

Also, what's the point of making another VSBW-ripoff. We have enough of those already. Unoriginal, lot of work for minimal gain. Not really a worthwhile endeavor.

Now this is just confusing; you spent the rest of this post advocating for us to create another VSBW derivative, and were responding to me arguing against making another VSBW derivative.

 

[Phoenks]

It just seems pretty pointless, making an entirely separate website just for 2-3 series. Like it's an excessive way of responding to something extremely narrow. Like creating an entirely separate wiki just for Suggsverse and any tier 1/0 cosmologies not meeting FC/OC's standards. Or an entirely separate wiki for humans with guns that aren't allowed profiles like Cool Cat.

It seems like a waste to do it for one specific niche thing.

I'd rather hear what the SCP supporters have to say. I don't think you speak for all of them when you say a wiki specifically for them is a waste.

I personally don't think it's pointless either.

It wouldn't be. Bambu's wiki has over 1600 characters, Zark's wiki only has a few dozen characters but it also started recently, CSAP has over 10k pages.

Didn't know that CSAP was in the conversation.

And, as for Bambu's wiki. From a glance at the site most of the profiles are pretty bad and outdated. Site doesn't seem to be monitored to the extent VSBW is. And so, I would say SCP would really be the only thing worth going there for if it was added.

Our categories are currently:

• Notable, serious, combat-related stuff that doesn't violate copyright.
• Stuff that violates copyright and/or isn't notable.
• Stuff that isn't serious.

FC/OC is not where you can just dump all the stuff that doesn't qualify for VSBW. I don't know who got that idea.

We will choose ourselves what goes on there. Site is currently in the need of a pretty substantial overhaul in the first place, which we are currently trying to discuss.

Adding an extra website just for "collaborative internet fiction" just doesn't feel as coherent.

I don't know why this is an argument.

Also, it doesn't NEED to be connected to VSBW lol. That doesn't really matter. I am thinking of it as a separated entity.

Yeah. I thought you were under the impression that they were completely barren. Given how you've, multiple times, said SCP would be the only verse on them.

Obviously not literally the only verse, but the only verse that would be notable on the site. For the reasons I explained when talking about Bambu's site.

If they decide to go with CSAP or some other wiki that has fully established itself, this doesn't apply.

Now this is just confusing; you spent the rest of this post advocating for us to create another VSBW derivative, and were responding to me arguing against making another VSBW derivative.

It's not a VSBW derivative though. It's its own unique thing since VSBW specifically will not index them.

A VSBW derivative, in this context, would be a site that wants to index stuff VSBW already indexes. VSBW is planning to remove verses like SCP, and I recall Backrooms was already booted.

Not sure what's confusing.

 

[Agnaa]

Backrooms (also banned on FCOC)

I'm also very very surprised by this, given how other collaborative fiction and even mutable creepypasta is allowed on FC/OC. I get the reason for disallowing SCP of it being too much work for staff to monitor, but why the exclusion of specifically other things that look too similar to SCP? How am I supposed to tell if something like The Holders would be allowed?

FC/OC is not where you can just dump all the stuff that doesn't qualify for VSBW. I don't know who got that idea.

I don't know where you got that either, since it's not what I said.

Also, it doesn't NEED to be connected to VSBW lol. That doesn't really matter. I am thinking of it as a separated entity.

Ye that'd be better, but a connection was something people were discussing earlier.

It's not a VSBW derivative though. It's its own unique thing since VSBW specifically will not index them.

A VSBW derivative, in this context, would be a site that wants to index stuff VSBW already indexes. VSBW is planning to remove verses like SCP, and I recall Backrooms was already booted.

Not sure what's confusing.

Ah, I've always seen "VSBW derivative" used to mean "site that uses VSBW's systems". Since most of them, historically, have covered things VSBW wouldn't (Bambu's wiki, for example, covers creepypasta) or in ways VSBW wouldn't (i.e. Outlier Battles Wiki).

 

[Mr. Bambu]

(just gonna interject and say that while I did make VS Debating Wiki in 2016, it's not really "my site" and I haven't actively contributed to it since 2018, when I joined here as CGM; I'm not operating a competitor, however insignificant, to this place- I just own the skeleton of a wiki with some of the infrastructure already in place. I say this to prevent misunderstandings I could feasibly see arise)

 

[Phoenks]

I'm also very very surprised by this, given how other collaborative fiction and even mutable creepypasta is allowed on FC/OC. I get the reason for disallowing SCP of it being too much work for staff to monitor, but why the exclusion of specifically other things that look too similar to SCP? How am I supposed to tell if something like The Holders would be allowed?

I can't speak for the entire FC/OC team but I myself have been pretty against a lot of the stuff that FCOC currently indexes and as I said we're currently conversations to try revising the site and its standards.

It's been difficult with a change of bureaucrat and small staff though. Site is a bit of a mess right now.

But I will say I don't know why we're comparing the Backrooms internet series to someone's fan fiction roleplay lol. Those are completely different subjects.

As for the Jeff the Killer thing, I'd rather it not be there but, again, currently in discussions.

I don't know where you got that either, since it's not what I said.

Sorry, I got the impression that you thought FCOC was just a place for fictions that don't make certain vsbw criteria, when that's not really the case...

 

[Agnaa]

I'm realising this has drifted from the topic of the thread, so I've responded on your wall instead.

 

[Tllmbrg]

I don't mind a dedicated wiki

 

[Sir_Ovens]

I also don't mind a dedicated wiki if someone can make the proper infrastructure for it.

 

[Antvasima]

Couldn't we make this SCP-oriented wiki a sister wiki of ours? And then add another sub-forum in this site like we do for FC/OC and Joke-Battles? Or would it be too much moderation work?

That would take a request to the forum manager. @Antvasima

I do not know. It depends on if other staff members here think that it would be better to make a clean break or not, but I am not inherently opposed to the idea.

Otherwise, Fandom does have an inbuilt forum system of its own, but it isn't nearly as efficient.

 

[Apeironaxim]

Got permission from Ovens.

Another option to consider/put on the table could be All Fiction Battles Wiki. It's a Fandom wiki and also hosted/owned by a VSBW user, Oblivion Of The Endless. Last I heard he seemed fine with hosting the SCP profiles, so some conversation could be had there.

 

[Antvasima]

Unlocking to bring up something that hasn't been tackled.

Will the RPC Authority profiles remain or be deleted?

They were initially allowed due to being presented as having a similar quality control process to SCP; is that still considered valid, or would the encroachment of a few battleboarding-related pages into SCP be perceived as putting RPC at similar risk?

Oh damn, I forgot about the last outstanding example in that category.

The Holders is a bit different. It had similar roots in imageboard fiction, with new entries contributed anonymously, but from the start it had a limit on how many "Holders" there were; 538. Updates slowed once that limit was hit, and stopped entirely around 2014 or so.

I think that has it avoid the risk of outside influence even more strongly than SCP/RPC do. But, if the plan is to just delete all collaborative web fiction, it'll have to go too.

So should the RPC Authority and The Holders pages be moved to the same new wiki as the SCP Foundation pages?

 

[Antvasima]

Got permission from Ovens.

Another option to consider/put on the table could be All Fiction Battles Wiki. It's a Fandom wiki and also hosted/owned by a VSBW user, Oblivion Of The Endless. Last I heard he seemed fine with hosting the SCP profiles, so some conversation could be had there.

Well, if you all want to create an affiliated specialised SCP statistics wiki, I think that can be considered to get its own forum section here, if the other bureaucrats accept it, but we cannot host a new sub-forum for a general copycat wiki.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

So the options are:

• Off-Fandom wiki, which sacrifices much of the use and ease in comparison with other options
• An existent copycat wiki that's willing to take them on, with some concerns regarding wiki-specific content and, depending on the activity and nature of the copycat, perhaps some level of interference requiring advanced maintenance
• A new wiki built strictly for archival that covers all bases but comes with the added cost of requiring infrastructure being added in (a copied version of the Tiering System, ability pages, various stat pages, etc)

That last one also comes with the argument of being a "sister wiki", but I dislike the notion personally for being very niche in purpose.

If it is decided to create a new wiki (which I will reiterate the opinion that it is the best option), every member of the archival group could be assigned the role of administrator or bureaucrat (the latter being core members, such as Ovens, Tllmbrg, and Hl3). This would allow the locking of all profiles to prevent outside interference.

The greatest concern thereafter is vandalism via uploading new content not meant to be included in the archive. Is there any solution anyone more tech savvy could offer for this? I'm unfamiliar with the capabilities of bots, but one imagines that would be a likely avenue of problem solving.

 

[Agnaa]

The greatest concern thereafter is vandalism via uploading new content not meant to be included in the archive. Is there any solution anyone more tech savvy could offer for this? I'm unfamiliar with the capabilities of bots, but one imagines that would be a likely avenue of problem solving.

Maybe we could ask Fandom for advice on how to stop plagiarism on a wiki intended for archival.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Could. I don't expect them to be open to lending much manpower on special assistance, but it's feasible that there might already be a solution made up.

 

[Antvasima]

I do not think that Fandom allows locking all of the pages in a wiki.

 

[Antvasima]

So should the RPC Authority and The Holders pages be moved to the same new wiki as the SCP Foundation pages?

Also, about this...

 

[Mr. Bambu]

The Holders appears to be more or less a closed canon, with the website since deleted and archived. It should by all accounts be immune to the manipulation that SCP is vulnerable to.

RPC is essentially the same case as SCP, just without having reached the same level of severity yet. I would agree with it's removal.

 

[The_Smashor]

I hate that this is something that even needs to be discussed, but the SCP profiles do need to be archived.

Fandom wikis are cheap to make and maintain, so you can probably just make a wiki dedicated to the SCP profiles and paste 'em all there (Replacing some of the links with direct VSBW links). Basically make a 4th Versus Family Wiki dedicated to SCP. Just add discussion of SCP stuff to this forum similar to how Joke Battles wiki and FC/OC Battles wiki work. I'm sure there's no shortage of people who would be willing to moderate it. Maybe we could add RPC Authority to this wiki as well.

In fact, I've been thinking of a website dedicated to characters who just barely don't qualify for VSBW for quite a few years now. Series that aren't viable for VSBW but you'd want to have more moderation than JBW and FCOC. Series that don't work due to VSBW's (debatalbly overly) high standards, but would probably work for a series like Death Battle.

Some series that could qualify for this theoredical wiki:

• SCP Foundation, RPC Authority and other series that are just a little too open-ended to work by this wiki's standards
• Advertisement Characters without major non-ad appearances (Segata Sanshiro, Ronald McDonald, Mr. Clean, Old Spice Terry Crews)
• Series that are mostly origional, but have enough unofficial crossovers to not work on VSBW (Like Animator vs Animation and Death Battle)
• Series that are just a little too risque (Such as Monster Girl Quest) (A little iffy, I'd be willing to remove this part)
• Series that honestly were kinda just deleted from VSBW for no good reason (Like Cool Cat and SCP)
• Possibly Internet Personalities? (Like Scott the Woz)

Series that wouldn't qualify include:

• Blatantly totally versus-unviable series with literally no superhuman, supernatural or combat feats
• Risque verses that dosn't have enough to work with outside of NSFW content to really work
• Series that were deleted just because nobody was working on them, and if people actually properly researched them would be 100% allowed (Such as Masadaverse)
• Series that are blatantly just fanfiction (Such as Super Mario Brothers Z or Mega Man 8 Bit Deathmatch)

IDK what we'd call it. "VSBW Rejects Wiki" would be the most accurate, but also a bit disrespectful.

 

[Agnaa]

To nitpick at those standards a little...

• Blatantly totally versus-unviable series with literally no superhuman, supernatural or combat feats

Cool Cat was deleted for landing in this camp.

• Series that are blatantly just fanfiction (Such as Super Mario Brothers Z or Mega Man 8 Bit Deathmatch)

"Too many unofficial crossovers" and "internet personalities" both run into this issue a fair bit. Feels weird to not just put them on FC/OC.

And for the general idea, I think it kinda sucks to officially split those sorts of things into other aspects of that network. If we're going to host them, they may as well be on the same wiki. FC/OC was a distinct thing long before I arrived and if I had say today I'd merge it with VSBW (other battleboarding websites discuss all sorts of characters in the same space without receiving flack for that permissiveness). JBW makes sense as a distinct entity, especially with its recent effort to improve profiles that just dryly index jokey source material, to rather include jokes of their own.

But I recognise that my view is likely to be overruled, so it is what it is.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Series that are just a little too risque (Such as Monster Girl Quest) (A little iffy, I'd be willing to remove this part)

The premise for the mentioned game is that when you lose, your character is raped by monsters. He is an implicit child.

I'm against the notion of a sister wiki by default, but I would die on the hill of not allowing that shit.

 

[Antvasima]

The premise for the mentioned game is that when you lose, your character is raped by monsters. He is an implicit child.

I'm against the notion of a sister wiki by default, but I would die on the hill of not allowing that shit.

Agreed. Also, Fandom itself has official rules against that kind of content.

 

[AKM sama]

• An existent copycat wiki that's willing to take them on, with some concerns regarding wiki-specific content and, depending on the activity and nature of the copycat, perhaps some level of interference requiring advanced maintenance
• A new wiki built strictly for archival that covers all bases but comes with the added cost of requiring infrastructure being added in (a copied version of the Tiering System, ability pages, various stat pages, etc)

I am fine with either of these options.