Thread:Mesektet/@comment-366087-20151224042015/@comment-3581997-20151225014516

You give us far too much credit he hasn't lost it's focus, it didn't have one to start. Take it from someone who put in a-lot of hours just to build it up to this level, it used to be much worse, the mark I Admin of this place was removed after a year for basically being a troll, not responding to users and posting whatever he wanted, so hate to break it to you but this isn't the ruins of something great, it's a structure starting to take shape bit by bit. That said I do realize we have much much more to do to create stability.

The issue with the level of heroes is that we can not turn into a dictatorship, we, and I include you in that, exist to preserve information in a comprehensible state. We divide it up by who can cover what and remove it when it devolves into dibbling disconnection, but there is a solid line when we start telling people certain character's aren't important enough to be heroes or villains. Basic Outline though; do they create conflict, do they resolve conflict, can you find enough info on them in that role to write an entire page, is the information accurate and relevant? The No Generic Heroes is for things like keeping neighbors who have all of two lines with Superman off, for keeping every single bloody Pokemon from being considered a hero by mere merit of they exist on the show/game. But to dismiss Sharon Spitz, mindless as that show was, is to say, "Hey, your hero isn't important enough for us cause she isn't punching robots in the face". The rule doesn't exist to dismiss Slice-of-life heroes, it exists to dismiss satellite characters, folks who do little more than smile and are in the main character's line of sight for all of two scenes.

I am willing to review and revisit a few of our rules and enforce polcies that are being ignored, but I won't help remove any article just based on the merit that the character is boring or flat. It's about story function not personal taste we must remain objective.