The Heroes HFH mentioned a guideline where the winning nomination is headlined if the nomination with more votes gets downvoted correct?
If both nominations are both downvoted to one vote despite the upper votes they've got, is there still a chance for them to be headlined despite some nominations will get headlined if the higher nominations are downvoted, but if the problem occured to either two or three of the least are in a tie?
It concerned ever since my downvote for Ash Williams, basically both Ash and Spider-Man (Marvel) are the only nominations downvoted and i'm concerned about the next month's featured hero.
Basically, the headlined article is determined by the following equation.
X - Y = Z
X = Number of "For" votes
Y = Number of against votes
Z = Total Value
Whichever nomination has the highest value without any third-party conflicts is the one that gets headlined.
For example, Ash Williams has 8 votes and 0 downvotes (your downvote doesn't count because we've had heroes from exploitation works nominated and even headlined in the past), and Spider-Man has 5 votes and 1 downvote, this would mean if they were the only nominations, Ash would be the one that will be headlined.
There is a user that is changing the Anti-Hero Category to Do-Gooder for a Heroes Wiki Page of Jake Paul the character for the YouTube series on the same channel with the same name. I have proof on why the character is in fact without a doubt an anti-hero.
1. They are a Heroic Criminal. They are the type to not really go by the law almost being like Chaotic Good through their ways but mostly against or retaliating a lot against the law. This can be easily categorized with the "Anti-Hero" trope since a lot of Anti-Heroes are known to be Criminal-like.
2. As to explain from them being part of the Category for Heroic Crimianl they are often Mischievous. They get into all kind of trouble. Almost as type of Thrill-Seeker which isn't really a Do-Gooder type. And a lot of Anti-Heroes qualify if they are a type of Thrill Seeker, or are Mischievous, Chaotic Good, or some Heroic Criminal.
3. They don't even have a Pure Good Category at all. I'm not saying ALL Do-Gooders have to have the Pure Good role. However, what I have to say to this is that the character Jake Paul and not the actual person but the character has corrupting traits throughout the vlog getting into a lot of micheif. Which is explained a lot onto Shane Dawson's video of him theorizing he is a "sociopath" which I am not going to really say he is one for this arguement. But like the videos of him saying a lot of stuff and doing a lot of stuff that is crazy and wild that wouldn't really make him much of an innocent Do-Gooder of a purely innocent character but rather more of a crazy wild anti-hero like the many others that get into a lot of relentless ongoing mischeif throughout the vlogs with their pranks and a lot of the countless craziness put into their videos like them burning their furniatures, and pranking their recruits, and so on.
Overall, Jake Paul is in fact without a doubt an "Anti-Hero" than a "Do-Gooder". So, I'd ask if you'd tell that user to quit categorizing him as some Do-Gooder.
We don’t use the Anti-Hero info box anymore. Villains Wiki removed the equivalent Anti-Villain info box awhile back, so we did the same just recently. Please do not re-add it back, as it is counterproductive.
I liked to file a compliant on this newcomer named The Beautiful People due to her weird & somewhat conceited messaging (I don't know if she's supposed to funny or if she's threatening any of the admins there) for it is quite worrysome due to her lack of improper induction & her ignoring what is it happening around the other wiki sites & it's true avid users since the COVID-19 pandemic came has changed a lot of things for the worse. & I think it'd be a good idea to do a quick IP background check on her immediately to find out who she is (it's hard to say if she's another troll's additional sockpuppet or she's a different troublemaker seeking attention).
I'm not sure who it is, their editing patterns don't match any known troll I've seen before (correct me if I'm wrong). I'll send a request for an IP check during the weekend just in case, if you can provide me the link for that, I'll be much appreciated.
I just informed the said user right away today about letting people in on both of our 2 famous wikis' sister wiki sites despite the distasteful software change after I talked to Jester of chaos about what happened, but I strongly recommend her to first start off with a proper iintroduction of herself before talking to me again in the future. Starting fresh is better than the other way around.& I know I had to come to him first because he & I have been friends for years. That's why I listen to him,
The migration from MediaWiki to UCP software will definitely have some problems at first, but don’t worry, I’m certain FANDOM staff will eventually fix many of the major issues in the near future and overtime, users will get the hang of it.
Hey there! Two days ago, Jacob gave Ash Williams a downvote over on the HFH page. Normally, I wouldn't care too much about this (and even then, might just be bias on my end), but the reasoning itself is strange. Here's what Jacob said:
"As much as I've wanted to see who gets to be headlined for Halloween next month. I'd like to come in and say Ash Williams doesn't seem to get my point of view and I'd clearly fail to see how he could fit in the whole Halloween situation. Now before you start asking me why am I against Ash Williams' nomination, well there are two reasons. One, he was viewed down as controversial for many reasons, even I'd don't understand how horror movie fans were complaining about The Evil Dead in the first place before its reputation got positive but to how I've see it, maybe at first it was because of the disturbing scenes that are beyond gory and how it failed to establish Sam Raimi's reputation before the 2000's Spider-Man film trilogy. Secondly, He doesn't seem to fit the Halloween tradition because of the tone in his respective film series and character. Granted, undead zombies are also part of the Halloween fun but the problem with my opinion on this is the movie itself, in my opinion it's just exploitation in my eyes, But I'd respect the decision of him getting headlined."
Do you think this downvote is legible to stay put, or do you think it doesn't work in Ash's defence and should be nullified. Me, ShockwaveDude, and Mekaiser noted its strange nature over on the Villians Wiki Discord, so I figured asking you on it feels like a safe bet to see if it should stay. In my own thoughts, the argument itself is weak, as several explotative villains have been headlined in the past, such as Ryūko Matoi, Homer Simpson, and SCP-999. In addition, two other proposals this month (L Lawlet and Charlie Magne), also could qualify as explotation.