It is one thing to re-add something it is another to blatantly undo an admins edit. I give this refresher as you have been doing similar for years and your next block will/would be permanent, Dr. Facilier does not contradict the tone enough nor does being a PE in a kids film automatically mean they are a Game Changer as plenty of media aimed at kids have them. Hell Dr. Facilier barely counts per the votes because of hindsight on his goal meaning the damnation of many souls vs it being an easy sell on him counting since a lot of it was fairly standard and even then it was desperation on his part to the point take out that one scene he'd not count.
Game Changer is for those who contradict the tone to the point it borderline changes the type of story not simply a somewhat dark villain. Ex: King Sombra in his debut was far darker than the others and taken dead serious in a story that never happens for that particular take (yes his last appearance is less dark but debut was enough given he wasn't around much in the reappearance otherwise he'd likely be taken out of it) or for Disney Judge Claude Frollo who does things unheard of for any kids film with a brutal death of a mother, the near drowning of an infant, attempted genocide and basically rape in a film where when not around isn't different from your normal kids film especially with the sequel which was far more lighthearted given Frollo wasn't around. I bring up these up as you have a seeming far less strict criteria then the wiki does given some past experiences like Gutt and Rumpelstiltskin.
You make a fair point there. I'm sorry about undoing your adminstrative edit. It's not very respectful to say the least. But allow me to explain myself.
It's just that all the qualifications of what a villain qualifies as GC is very complicated. ANd I'm trying my best to understand it. I mean, Some have no comedic tendancies, others do while still make the film darker. But one thing I always thought being a game changer relies on not how serious a villain is played that makes them count, it's their actions and how much of a threat they possess. That's why I thought Rumpel and Gutt would count because they're downplayed GC's, despite their comedic tendencies.
With Rumpel, while he's very over-the-top and comedic, the film doesn't gloss over the fact that he's a vicious Manipulative fiend who tricks Shrek into a Deal with the Devil that will end up with him being erased from existence at the end of the day, and consequently becomes a vicious dictator who destroys the Kingdom of Far Far Away, presumably killing and imprisoning hundreds of people in the process. Honestly, Rumpel's goal of making sure Shrek no longer exists seems pretty game changerish to me.
As for Gutt: it's also downplayed, as the film remains pretty light and he doesn't drain the comedy from a scene, but Gutt is the first true antagonist of the series since Soto. He's even worse than Soto as he does what he does for greed, power, and revenge, whereas Soto wanted to avenge his fallen pack. Due to the resources he commands, he's also a much more powerful threat than Soto was. He also was willing to kill Manny's family for nothign but petty revenge. That sounds pretty dark to say the least.
But the point is, I will respect your wishes on whatever qualifies as GC and what doesn't. Just wish we could find an official solution for it like we did with the Pure Evil proposals.
The issues is when some are comedic it is in a way that isn't really funny or its extremely brief, Rumpel and Gutt it distracts from their actions and don't contradict the actual tone much. Rumpel's removing Shrek was merely a twist to explain how he got power vs that dark in and of itself with it similar to say a time travel plot to explain how a bad future happens yet he's so over the top we can't take it that serious. Gutt is much like Rumpel over the top and his attempts to kill Manny and co. is standard villainy at it's finest with him being the first evil one since Soto but even Soto wasn't played for laughs making Gutt even more evident on the tone not being drastically changed.
GC can't really be settled like we did with Proposals for many reasons would not understand the meaning along with it far more easy to lie on what the work is like unlike the PE one.
Hmmm...Like for example the scene with Frollo he is supervising someone being whipped, just as his new Captain of the Guard Phoebus arrives.
"You know, my last Captain of the Guard was um... a bit of a disappointment to me. [whipcrack followed by a loud scream of pain; Phoebus cringes while Frollo smirks] Well, no matter. I'm sure you'll...whip my men into shape."
Hmmm...I think I understand your point now. Basically the darkest villains have very brief and cruel jokes that are meant to drive sadism and fear into the hearts and souls of their enemies. Or as TV Tropes calls it Evil Has a Bad Sense of Humor.
The jokes would not be funny to anyone other than them (except maybe the audience depending) or one minor comedic line not a regular habit of the character. Yes the characters in-universe do not find it funny and that trope does often play a part in the few comical ones.
Hey Ngh93, I just wanted to say that I'm sorry for what happened. Please forgive me. Look, I know I create galleries and that lots of them have more than 40 some even reach a hundred and there's nothing harmful with that. Please apologise to me because you just harassed me because it wasn't a nice message at all. In fact, you need to apologise to the other admins like Queen Misery for your actions. From now on, you need to stop acting like a child and start being your real self okay? Please apologise to me, Queen Misery, B1bl1kal and the other admins and see if you can finally get back to what your doing at the moment. You got that asap?
Look King578 I’m genuinely sorry I snapped at you. I just was getting rather annoyed with all those gallery message which made me think it was you who was harassing me, but it turned out to be the other way around. I didn’t mean to sound so insulting or hateful. Ya know what they say “two wrongs don’t make a right.” Usually I am a quite cordial and polite person. Next time I will be more careful with what I say and restrain my agitation and temper. I promise you that.
Can you forgive me?
HailToTheKing978 wrote: Would you please give me a hand to see if you can edit Kazar/Gallery by adding info and quotes on it please?
Ok but next time! MAKE CAPTIONS FOR YOUR IMAGES BEFORE PUBLISHING! I'm getting rather iridated with your sloppiness and laziness!
ADD THE CAPTIONS YOURSELF BEFORE POSTING! It's a rule to add captinos to photos it says on the wiki rules!
Finished but please do me a favor.
Promise me this you will not create any more captionless galleries. Please! Do you have any idea how much stress you've put me and other users though with that?😡 It's a HANDFULL of stress an frustration. I mean, Honestly. it's really a pain when you leave 100s of photos for us to label. Not to mention lazy and against wiki rules to include textless galelry pags.
Kindly please promise me you will NEVER EVER EVER create another gallery page with captionless images? Thank you. That'd save us tons of stress.
galleries are only meant to have 20 - 40 images max, any more is considered spam.. we all have different tech and images eat up the most data out of all stuff, it is unfair and also pointless as we are a text-based wiki, not an image-sharing site.
Queen Misery wrote: galleries are only meant to have 20 - 40 images max, any more is considered spam.. we all have different tech and images eat up the most data out of all stuff, it is unfair and also pointless as we are a text-based wiki, not an image-sharing site.
Actually, I don't remember there being an image limit. Lots of galleries have more than 40 some even reacha hundred and ther's nothing harmful with that. The point is he's adding random images and requesting me to do stuff he could easily do himself.
Hey Ngh93, could you give me a hand with something? The biography and personality on the Brooks & Elwyn article are shorter, so I was thinking if it needs to be longer by getting expanded, rewritten and cleaned up as well as adding Quotes to it. What do think about that asap?
Also, I need a hand with The Beast (Stuart Little) because the Biography, Personality and Quotes are also short and need to be longer by getting expanded, cleaned up and rewritten. You agree with that asap?
Hey Ngh93, could you also give me a hand with something? The history, gallery, trivia and personality on the Rookery article are shorter, so I was thinking if it needs to be longer by getting expanded, rewritten and cleaned up. What do think about that asap?
Would someone like to please expand the Wolf Leader article before the end of this week. I don't want this article to get deleted. We need History rewritten, expanded and cleaned up as well as Personality, Appearance, Trivia and Gallery filled in please? Could somebody please help other admins fill it all in? I'm not exactly an expert on villain summaries. If there's anyone who is an expert on these things, please let me know okay? That said could we please have History, Personality, Appearance, Gallery and Trivia expanded, rewritten and cleaned up asap? The longer we wait, the more likely it's gonna get deleted.
Well, it says that the leader is the only wolf in the remake to be brutal, sadistic and ruthless unlike the wolves who attack Beast, Belle and Maurice in the original film as they are not really villains and just act like normal wolves. Could we please have History, Personality, Appearance, Gallery and Trivia expanded, rewritten and cleaned up already please? I don't want this article to get deleted.
The least you could have done was move that image I previously made into a gallery instead of removing it fully from the page, renaming the file then deleting it. I'd like an apology please, I'll let it rest after this and I'll admit I didn't handle this too well but I did work hard trying to get that image to look as good as possible.
Make comments like this again: "No offense, but only a total moron would remove Scar from the Pure Evil list." and I will block you. Understand? You have a bad enough record as it is on insulting other users, please don't make it worse.
I am genuinely sorry about that. was only putting my firm opinion on the thread and I honestly didn't mean any disrespect. I guess I got a little carrried away.
You see, I added the phrase "no offense" to show that honestly disrespect was not the intention of mycomment. I just felt like I needed some way support my beliefs more firmly, but still try to speak out my point in a civilized manner. Unfortuanely, people just keep taking my comments the wrong way. Now I understand that that's not a good way to do it. For so many reasons.
Whatever the case, I promise not to put any more derogatory stuff in my comments ever again. I mean after all, I am extremely devoted to this wiki. And I don't mean to start arguments or rile up anything.
Thanks for the warning. I promise you I will heed it. You have my word. I promsie I won't add any more insulting comments ever again.
You have my word, sir.
When I make a promise, I am truly determined to do whatever I can to keep it. You can most definitely rely on that.
So bottom line—From this day forth, I promise will be more extra careful about what I write. And that’s a vow I intend to keep at all costs.