• 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.

Regarding the SCP Canon

Kepekley23

Kepekley23

VS Battles
Retired
15,332
7,563
I will go to bed as soon as I post this, so I will have to make it quick.

Introductio
Currently, we seem to consider anything stated on the SCP tales to be canon, since many of 682's powers come from tales written years after Gears left the wiki

However, this approach is, in my view, flawed. Tales that are not written by the original writer of the SCP are not canon to the article, with only a few exceptions. This doesn't come from my mouth, but the mouth of Word of God. From a verse that fully depends on it.

This approach also contradicts what is stated in our SCP page:

Also, please take into account that due to the fact that the SCP Foundation has no solid canon, but a "fluid" canon which is subject to different interpretations and headcanons by various members, and Tales are essentially a sort of psuedo-fanfiction, it is best if a Tale was written by the original author of the SCP/is considered an integral part of the "mythos" related to the SCP before you use it to index powers.

- SCP Foundatio

And they are right; tales are fanfictions that get upvoted based on how good the plot is. That's why a tale that reveals what 447 does when it reaches a dead body shouldn't remotely be canon, because it goes against the point.

So, what I'm proposing is:

- Only scale tales to the articles if they were written by the original author

In this case, Experiment Logs would become the next best thing to draw OP abilities from.
 
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Although, since there is the new implication of "muh composite hierarchy makes canon", would it be better to have different pages to the characters that pertain to certain tales? Such as the SCP-682 who is the child of the Scarlet King, The SCP-682 who is the steed of the horseman of death, etc

It would certainly be better than mixing everything into a giant mess of a page
 
I believe I've stated my stance on this topic before, and that was that there is a way to view all SCP canon as canon, and that is to treat each canon hub as it's own universe. After all, the canon hub is called the cano hub for a reason.

I agree that the profiles need adjustment, but I disagree that they need to be scaled to the original author's works.
 
I also agree with this ( especially sicne your dealing with these types of characters original author does sound like the best way to handle it.)
 
Kep is making the argument that we are disregarding the SCP verse page rules and should keep our profiles scaled to the original author's works on the SCP Wiki.
 
Sir Ovens said:
Kep is making the argument that we are disregarding the SCP verse page rules and should keep our profiles scaled to the original author's works on the SCP Wiki.
Click to expand...
Then we will have tons of content revisions threads saying "Add X, add Y, add Z".

Plus, those are their rules, not ours, we don't have to obey them.
 
I think there is a misunderstanding. Kep is saying that we are disregarding the SCP verse page rules on '''our''' wiki.
 
Sir Ovens said:
I think there is a misunderstanding. Kep is saying that we are disregarding the SCP verse page rules on our wiki.
Click to expand...
Ah, then we delete the statement? Considering most of our stuff is composite
 
Either we composite our pages, or we separate the diffrent canon hub versions of each character into different pages.
 
Only reasons why our pages are composite is because people want to exaggerate the SCP powers and end up creating characters who do not exist in any of the separate SCP canon.

My solution: use keys. Do not cross-scale powers, feats, or AP just so you can make the lizard unreasonably OP by ignoring how the verse works.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Only reasons why our pages are composite is because people want to exaggerate the SCP powers and end up creating characters who do not exist in any of the separate SCP canon.
Click to expand...
We would have banned composite profiles long ago with that mindset though. But seperate keys are fine, but not separate pages.
 
@Saikou No its not, it's a study of ALL interpretations of 682 from every universe with information that is backed up in 682s Library entry
 
Numbersguy said:
Too much work, doing a composite is easier.
Click to expand...
See, this is one of my issues here.

Doing what's "easier" isn't what we're supposed to be doing on this wiki. We shouldn't be going around making profiles that are problematic just because they're "easier" to make than ones that are genuinely reliable and helpful to the common visitor.

If the entire wiki were to operate on the mindset of non-composite profiles being "too much work", then not only would we have far less profiles than we currently do, but our representation of certain verses (Marvel, DC, Image Comics, the Cthulhu Mythos, etc.) would be far beyond unreliable.
 
EliminatorVenom said:
I agree about making separate keys.
And fully agree with @King, we shouldn't do what is "easier".
Click to expand...
Yeah, the keys are fine. Because doing seperate pages is going to be not worth the effort because some will have stats "missing" or something.
 
I still need to actually find time to work on canon shit. That said, this clarification is actually pretty important, and thus might factor into that. As I said before, guys like 682 are currently kinda clusterfucks based on pretty much anything that's ever featured it and isn't an obvious joke (as in, he doesn't have "Can be killed by drunk driving" under his weaknesses), which needs changing.
 
Currently I'd go for having separate keys on pages for separate canon hubs, and disregarding non-noteworthy standalone tales. However, I'd defer to Weekly/Azathoth's opinion on this.
 
Thing is, unless its explicitly shown or demonstrated to be an alternate universe counterpart (such as the alternate universe future 682 being the Steed of Death or the instances of different SCPs from the Black Queen's studies), there is almost never an actual difference between what you guys are considering 'canon' and 'composite'. Its less 'non-canon' and more 'expanded canon', taking what is in the articles and expanding on it as a means of fleshing out the characters.
 
I disagree with this. A lot.

A long while back I attempted to argue the point for Creepypasta profiles and compared them to SCP. While I stand by that belief, people brought up a valid point- the stories on SCP Foundation have to be accepted by an admin, a person who literally runs the verse. Like Weekly and others said, this is just an expanded canon. Excluding this would be tantamount to disregarding any comic book not written by the original creator of the character.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Peppersalt43
SCP-098 Profile Revision
Replies
8
Views
1K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
Comiphorous
SCP-682 adapted to VSBattles and is missing a weakness (NEEDS STAFF)
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
JustANormalPerson01
It seems our lizard finally made contact with some narrative hazards
Replies
22
Views
5K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
Comiphorous
SCP ROBLOX EDITION (PRESSURE) minor crt
Replies
2
Views
469
Comiphorous
Comiphorous
AmogusSusfunni
SCP-2317 downgrade
Replies
4
Views
2K
AmogusSusfunni
AmogusSusfunni
Back
Top