• 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 "Taken as a joke" profiles in the wiki

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bobsican

Bobsican

He/Him
21,625
6,271
This has been brought up as that it needs to be updated:

"Preferably avoid adding character profiles that may be inappropriate or perceived to be in poor taste. This may include characters, weapons, etcetera, that are ill-suited for a statistics-indexing wiki, due to having no reliable feats, or ones from media which may be too controversial or otherwise unnecessary to be featured. This includes content that would strictly be added as a joke, for example Barney the dinosaur or the Teletubbies."- Editing Rules

What exactly applies as "a joke"? Especially considering we have profiles that fit the criteria and have been accepted anyways. Aka, this many o here.
 
Possible, but the phase needs to be more elaborated as a "joke" is very subjetive by itself, that and the fact staff takes care already should some mean stuff happen.
 
In any case, I believe this rule is now outdated with the Standard Battle Assumptions's rule about the state of mind, which make them willing to kill. So, less Spite Thread will happen.

  • State of mind: In character, but willing to kill. The characters will employ their usual battle strategies, including flaws such as being casual, however, must be willing to kill the opponent even if they usually won't.
    Furthermore characters will not give up of their own accord. That means a character that is uninterested or sees no chance of winning won't simply leave and characters wouldn't simply become friends with each other. This doesn't prevent a character being made to give up, because the other character manipulates them via things like, for example, mind control, fear inducement, psychological tricks or superhuman charisma.
 
Well, it's as loose as the conception of humor

But the main idea is if the profile is purely a joke

For example, Ovo was made for the meme, but his profile lists everything straight up.

Meanwhile, profile made for memes and have wanked profiles like....

....

Actually pretty sure the line between Barney and Ovo is arbitrary honestly
 
Ant will find his way here anyways

Dunno if there are any specific mentions
 
Maybe some Discussion Moderators should do the job, as the area they work in is mainly this sort of stuff.
 
This really feels like a very arbitrary rule.

If there are inherent issues to featuring these characters, then I would like to see an explanation of what they are. Because right now it feels more like bias against a certain type of character than an actual safety precaution.
 
In that case, there´s no need for further contacting, they´ll just notice this is around via the tags.

Thanks for the support.
 
I'm neutral regarding this, but I think it's how the profile is made is what matters. Like the statistics should be based on clear cut feats or calcable feats; not some random joke/gag feats. The Thomas profile actually did do some calcs and made with some form of professional effort, but Barney the Dinosaur once had a Galaxy level rating based on a feat that was too vague and probably just a bad joke.

So, it really depends on context.
 
I mean, she is very knowledgeable and wise on this topic, so that´s why I bothered to contact her.

In that case, I´ll also contact PaChi2 too.
 
Also, Galaxy Barney!? Please give more info here, as the thread turned into a Barney CRT somehow.

Anyways, we still need more input, TBH.
 
Of course, that´s why I linked to another thread to continue that thing separately.
 
I mean...if the profile has legitimate feats and comes from a completely original source, like Thomas or Shrek or whoever, I don't see why they can't be allowed. Being a "joke profile" shouldn't mean that they are automatically destined for the Joke Battles Wiki, unless they are writte as a joke.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I'm neutral regarding this, but I think it's how the profile is made is what matters. Like the statistics should be based on clear cut feats or calcable feats; not some random joke/gag feats. The Thomas profile actually did do some calcs and made with some form of professional effort, but Barney the Dinosaur once had a Galaxy level rating based on a feat that was too vague and probably just a bad joke.

So, it really depends on context.
Click to expand...
I can agree with this, but we preferably need input from several more administrators.
 
The answer is simple:

Are the profile's current explanations, ratings and powers suited for VsBW? Then it stays.

Are the blahblahblah suited for JokeBattles wiki? Then it has to go.

For example Mr. Popo and the joke battles version of meme Mr. Popo. If the profile includes memes and comical stuff it is not reliable and thus does not belong here.
 
I think we already got more than enought input.

I´ll even do a summary of the stuff overall:

The rule should just be edited to something like this:

"Preferably avoid adding character profiles that may be inappropriate or perceived to be in poor taste. This may include characters, weapons, etcetera, that are ill-suited for a statistics-indexing wiki, due to having no reliable feats, or ones from media which may be too controversial or otherwise unnecessary to be featured. This includes content that would strictly be done as a joke (Which would belong in Joke Battles Wikia instead), for example TFS Mr. Popo, which is far different than a "actual" profile."
 
Sorry, I´m still practicing that thing.

At least I just edited it to be fixed.
 
This seems less example-specific:

"Preferably avoid adding character profiles that may be inappropriate or perceived to be in poor taste. This may include characters, weapons, etcetera, that are ill-suited for a statistics-indexing wiki, due to having no reliable feats, or ones from media which may be too controversial or otherwise unnecessary to be featured. This includes pages that would strictly be written as a joke, and as such more suitably belong in the Joke Battles wiki."
 
I agree with this. It doesn't matter how a profile is used, as long as it's written as any serious profile would be. Anyone making a joke profile just gets the boot, no need to ban profiles to "prevent" it.
 
While I'd be okay with this Barney file, and ant's revision here, remember that on vsbw you have to actually prove the character has these abilities. If you are to migrate Barnet you're gonna be hard pressed to keep stuff like conceptual immortality.
 
Okay, I was just removing the wank anyways.

"He comes to life through a child's imagination"

So long a child knows who Barney is and is willing to make him back, Barney gets conceptual immortality.
 
Starter Pack said:
I mean...if the profile has legitimate feats and comes from a completely original source, like Thomas or Shrek or whoever, I don't see why they can't be allowed. Being a "joke profile" shouldn't mean that they are automatically destined for the Joke Battles Wiki, unless they are writte as a joke.
Click to expand...
^ This.
 
I'd be okay with profiles for anything I guess, but don't we have to keep up a standard? People come here looking for the level of characters that are...not this. People come here and see Barney, we might not be taken seriously. Think Death Battle compared to Animation Rewind.

If everyone else is okay with it, sure. Just pointing this out.
 
Cal plz. That's an even worse argument than the one currently used. If we kicked out characters just because they're not "serious", that'd be silly.
 
@Andytrenom

True enough. This is an entertainment wiki after all.
 
So should we replace the regulation text with my new version?
 
Antvasima said:
So should we replace the regulation text with my new version?
Click to expand...
Probably, just also add a link to Joke Battles Wikia so questions made by new users about stuff like "What is Joke Battles Wikia?" don´t needlessly pop up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MasqueTLDF
  • Locked
DxD Rule addition: Class Scaling
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
MasqueTLDF
MasqueTLDF
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
30 31 32
Replies
1K
Views
93K
Comiphorous
Comiphorous
CurrySenpai
  • Locked
The Potential Return of Blox Fruits and how its deletion may affect verses.
2
Replies
71
Views
6K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Mr. Bambu
  • Locked
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2 3
Replies
80
Views
8K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top