• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

VSBW Profile Standards (Staff Only)

That game rule can be argued against. It says food mascots are unacceptable but doesn't give a clear reason as to why.
 
Sure, but at least that's a more productive discussion than the common sense stuff. It's a concrete piece of regulation we can argue the merits of and come to a consensus on.
 
Can I be honest for a second? I think the first rule covers most of your issues. It's clearly defined and any arguments against it would be the "subjectivity" arguments debunked numerous times (other than semantic arguments). At this point it's about finding those that break that rule. We can do the same for the other rules.
 
All featured characters in our profiles should originate within actual stories, from notable or popular works.

That definitely eliminates amateur works. We should stick to professional verses anyway. That alone disallows OCs and Suggsverse for example.

Edit: Teeny-tiny gripe though. It should be "from actual stories", not "within actual stories".
 
Antvasima said:
Something like this perhaps then?

"It is allowed to create profiles based on original games that were made to sell merchandise. However, games that revolve around existing advertisement icons, such as fast food and cereal boxes, are not sufficiently independent/do not stand on their own, and are as such considered unacceptable."
Click to expand...
Just a recap of what Agnaa is referring to.
 
@Ven

Fien.

@Ant

I think it should also be mentioned that we are currently dealing with an over inflation of profiles (hundreds get added every month), so we have to excuse ourselves from obscure verses due to our reliability decreasing due to lacking the resources at the moment to actually fact check everything. Yes, I know the audit group is going to be a thing but that's only a few people with specific duties. That's enough of a reason to not include obscure works, especially in current times.
 
Should we change the wording to this instead?

"It is allowed to create profiles based on original games and other media that were made to sell merchandise. However, media that revolves around existing advertisement icons, such as fast food and cereal boxes, is not sufficiently independent/does not stand on its own, and is as such considered unacceptable."
 
@Sera

That seems like a good suggestion. Feel free to write a draft for a regulation.
 
Antvasima said:
Should we change the wording to this instead?

"It is allowed to create profiles based on original games and other media that were made to sell merchandise. However, media that revolves around existing advertisement icons, such as fast food and cereal boxes, that is not sufficiently independent/does not stand on its own, is considered unacceptable."
Click to expand...
I would prefer this
 
Thank you, but this is still supposed to be a staff discussion.
 
Agnaa said:
I don't want to needlessly overhaul the fundamentals of how we do the system
Click to expand...
I misunderstood you, then, and apologize for that. I thought when you were explaining that we'd be keeping the rules the same, you wouldn't be including the minor edits that you listed in that post, which gave me the impression that a lot of previous ground we tread was shoved under the rug.

If we're still seriously implementing those edits, I'm fine. As long as the problem gets solved at the end of the day, I'm satisfied.
 
Thank you for helping out and trying to be reasonable.
 
So what I take from all this is that if a non-staff user replies on this thread and acknowledges and apologizes for commenting on a staff-only thread, they get yeeted, but if they don't know, care, or acknowledge that this is staff only, they get to stay?
 
What was his question? I'll try and answer it to the best of my ability.
 
Okay, to answer, it usually also depends on if a non-staff comment seems to be constructive or disruptive.
 
What does that have to do with this particular discussion?
 
You are derailing, and I do not think that your suggestion is practically applicable. I would appreciate if you respect that this is staff only and leave. Thank you.
 
1: Derailing

You guys were literally just talking about this.

2: Not applicable

Yeah, it is. Just delete obscure profiles with nothing in the gallery.
 
I just feel like since we have, like, every single notable character on here, getting rid of obscure characters would prevent almost every new profile from coming up. I'm fine with the rules being stricter, but flushing away just about every new profile doesn't seem like it'll be good for the wiki.
 
@BigSmoke You can message a staff member through their message wall, and they'll iterate your points and problems on this thread for you. No need to comment yourself anyhow.

Sorry for messaging myself btw
 
BigSmoke4269 said:
My MAIN question was why don't we have source material for obscure characters in the gallery?
Click to expand...
I think you're talking about links to scans to provide proof for feats for obscure characters, something that we don't use the gallery for, although I agree that for characters where other users weren't consulted for stats proof should be provided on the profile so unfamiliar users have a reference in a thread. I've brought up a solution previously although it was immediately shot down, sadly.

This isn't really related to this thread though. You can respond to me on my message wall and maybe we can come up with something practical that also solves the problem you're speaking of.
 
Thank you. I think that we should return to discussing the main topic then.
 
Agnaa's post sums up what we want to do, methinks. It's just a matter of wording it for the site rules.

If those are implemted I'm satisfied for now; it checks all my marks with the issue profiles.
 
Is somebody willing to start writing drafts for that? I can probably help with improving on the language flow.
 
Just so we're on the same page, we're going with the "no amateur verses, only professional works" metric, yes? I hope so.
 
Sera EX said:
Just so we're on the same page, we're going with the "no amateur verses, only professional works" metric, yes? I hope so.
Click to expand...
I wasn't planning on it, here's the post that Dargoo and I agree over. That's essentially "codify what we do already, and write a few extra rules".

I did really try to emphasize that we need staff agreement on these solutions before we can start drafting or implementing them, but there didn't end up being much discussion either way on them...
 
I think the line for original works is competently drawn already.

I truly hope so. Mere original works is what I meant by "amateur profiles", and if the line truly is drawn between the two, I suppose simply applying it to any potential verse that violates that metric should suffice.

This does mean the majority of Newgrounds and Youtube content.

The majority, not all of them, as both do feature professional works as well (especially Youtube).

If that's all said and done, I'll leave the rest to you.
 
Well here we come to the disagreement between the staff. I'm fine with the majority of YouTube and Newgrounds verses we have on the site, but you're not. So I'm not convinced that it is all said and done.
 
I didn't say I had a problem with the majority of Youtube verses here. I'm admittedly not aware of them to begin with. I'm speaking of Youtube content in general. Let's say I take your word and most of our Youtube files are perfectly fine; That only means those verses are part of the few exceptional content on Youtube that's professional. I'm not sure if we currently have any amateur Youtube verses here. If we do and you think those specifically are okay the we're in disagreement.

As for Newgrounds. We never truly finished the "Are Newgrounds profiles allowed" discussion anyway, so we shouldn't even have Newgrounds-only verses here. Now in the case of Madness Combat, which has been hosted on Youtube as well, that's another scenario. I'm referring to Newgrounds-only, if you understand my meaning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Locked
Music stage personas (Staff only)
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Mr. Bambu
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
Replies
37
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
LordGriffin1000
  • Locked
Human Statistics Scaling Standards in Fiction (Staff Only)
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
LordGriffin1000
LordGriffin1000
Regarding Page Names (Semantics)
Replies
18
Views
1K
KLOL506
KLOL506
Agnaa
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Links Revision
Replies
11
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top