Since we're ranting, I'm disappointed in the lack of engagement between creators. Creepypastas became famous through sharing stories, everyone seems to be focused on their own OCs than promoting diverse content.

@TheTimeJumper300 True... and I honestly don't like how the wiki itself views creepypasta as a franchise rather than a Subgenre

I'm honestly curious since I've been here for a while but the statements "not supposed to be a collaborative universe" and "lack of engagement" sound like they could mean well but the wording comes off kinda...broken?

Didn't some Creepypastas get created with anonymous users literally banding together to create their own characters/narratives without confirmed credit to who made what? That and, nowadays, you'll find people using the wiki to receive peer feedback on their work and improve on what they need to for better writing practice and - sometimes - adding into the legend effect via realism? If not that, then they add to the original concept as well as create their own to continue the cycle like before. Additionally, aren't most Creepypasta meant to take place in the same universe because they're urban legends? Otherwise, it's just a horror story being told without much of that sense of it being an urban legend.

It's somewhat hard to label this a franchise too since that could apply to essentially anything. Hazbin Hotel / Helluva Boss, DHMIS, Cuphead, etc. All random examples but all of which that may have a linked fandom that can share traits to a franchise via the marketing/merchandise, sequels/prequels, spinoffs, OC creation, and other things. Plus, I have to be frank, this wiki also accepts various forms of work than just OCs...hence the categories. It's just that we focus more on the OCs because it's in the name. Creepypasta Files Wiki. Because, you know, we mostly do fact-files for the characters instead?

If you plan to take your business elsewhere because the wiki just isn't your fit, you might have better luck looking into Creepypasta.com or Creepypasta Wiki instead for a better alternative. It's up to you if you want to stay or not, this is just a Fandom wiki after all, nothing is really keeping you from branching out to other sources. However, judging by TimeJumper's self-made category of "Pine Valley" to introduce their own works in both discussion-posts as well as regular pages, one of you seems just fine to use the wiki itself 😂

Because of the vague definition of Creepypastas, it's hard to tell what counts and what doesn't since the "subgenre" is just described by the web as: "A type of horror-related legend or story that has been shared and copied around the Internet". To me, the term maybe should have been more specific but - because of the timing from when this started - it made sense for early depictions. Nowadays, it's harder to specify what counts and what doesn't. I think it depends on the author really at this point.

Still, I'm interested having been here for about 3-4 years and reading these types of creations; what do you think the best term and example for "Creepypastas" is if the most popular definition isn't really fitting anymore?

The Name creepypasta is just Copypasta but replaced with Creepy and creepypasta can't be a franchise since the franchises you mentioned have companies while Creepypasta lacks companies and have multiple stories that don't connect to each other also most pastas have known Authors like Victor surge, Sesseur, SlimeBeast, Pureslime, Snuffbomb, etc and my Only Complaint is that People think of creepypasta as a Universe like scp, no it isn't like SCP, it was never supposed to be like that and also I consider SCP to be Creepypasta due to the way it started, Same goes for trevor henderson and Creepypastas fails to be "Urban legend" since Honestly doesn't look like it due to a few pastas failing to act like a urban legend like Look at Sonic Exe, it's just a terribly written story so creepypasta is just a bunch of horror stories spreaded through the internet,

Yeah...that's kind of why I asked you what is the best definition/example of a Creepypasta from your perspective. Because the definition is still the one you're going with yet aren't happy with for that exact reason.

Fair enough about the fandoms I mentioned since they do have company-like presences which have the topic(s) as their brand. However, they also have the same sort of situation present here in Creepypastas. For example, for our terms, we have the Slenderman movie made by a company-like presence. We also have Slender: The Arrival and several other content creators using Creepypastas to create their own platforms online from inspired sources. But, we don't own all that content ourselves as fans, it's just who helps to produce it. This is just the fandom side which makes OCs/stories for fun as well as creating steps into possible careers in similar fields.

Also, Creepypastas can have multiple stories that connect, it's just the how that seems to upset you. Jeff the Killer literally spawned Liu and Nina, two well-known OCs in the fandom. Slenderman spawned in almost half of the OCs we see today, for good and for bad. Zalgo? He was an internet meme turned deity for the same reasons as Slenderman really. But, in its prime meme time, he was found across several comic strips. Hell, the first exposure I got was from bloody Garfield of all things. Many were just making creepy references to the entity by any means, leading to the growing popularity and fanon depiction with him being an overpowered yet malicious deity.

I don't think you understand that the urban legend side of things does somewhat condone why they all exist collectively in the same universe, especially ours. Otherwise, by default, they'd be fictional horror stories told across a digital campfire without much sense of fear because you know they're faked. Stories like Ted Caver, Kisaragi Station, and even Candle Cove would lose their significance by the readers if they were confirmed to be fake throughout. A good attempt but still. It is pretty strange to bring up Sonic.exe since it was just a cringy story turned into a series of games inspired by the original content, technically making it an actual urban legend by the fans' iterations over the years.

In my eyes, that's the issue with this nowadays: they're losing their touch with how believable it can seem when you hear about a notorious serial killer or two roaming aimlessly around highly populated areas in the US or something along those lines. Some OCs aren't always like this and fair enough to them. But, I've been here for 3-4 years and can say with confidence most will be.

It's not really uncommon to hear/predict a criminal got away with their crimes and gets to continue living their regular life until they're caught. But, it's relatively weird to hear about a mass homicidal maniac commit murder against a large enough number of people in such short notice and practically skip town for the next time they murder without many leads other than online speculation from "Creepypasta" fans. That and a dense-enough area of people never knowing their "legend" despite the alleged fame to be mentioned here.

However, once again, it's more the approach you don't like and that's honestly fine. But now you're backtracking from what you've said in a previous statement:

"I honestly don't like how the wiki itself views creepypasta as a franchise rather than a Subgenre"

Now you're writing:

"Creepypasta can't be a franchise since the franchises you mentioned have companies while Creepypasta lacks companies and have multiple stories that don't connect to each other also most pastas have known Authors like Victor surge, Sesseur, SlimeBeast, Pureslime, Snuffbomb, etc"

...So, what exactly is the "rant" about? You saw the Capture and Protect Service Creepypasta presumably and seemed to be mad at that one concept which has an honestly easy enough solution with creating a lesser banded together idea of "Mythbusters" or "Ghostbusters" instead.

You know, weird and creepy blogs/vlogs made by a group of people trying to understand if some urban legends are true like what some people do in reality with Big-Foot, the Loch Ness Monster, Chupacarbra, etc? That would be more ideal for both parties here and bring back more collaborative efforts to engage creators together with either stories or characters.

Also, why are you insistently bringing up SCPs from that one creation? Yet, on the flip-side, you've just stated again a contradiction:

"Also I consider SCP to be Creepypasta due to the way it started, Same goes for trevor henderson"

...So, what are you actually ranting about when you - the same guy who hated how Creepypastas and SCPs seem to be interchangeable - acknowledges and believes both are the same regardless? What does that have to do with our wiki? Because we talk about OCs/characters through fact-files most of the time instead of strictly narratives like some other sites tend to do? I'm confused, are you mad at us or mad at the internet doing what it wants? 😅

Fine then, you have a point

I don't have an issue with the OCs, you're right the wiki leans heavily into the characters rather than their stories. However, there still needs to be stories. It's easy enough to say that the character is psychotic, sadistic, etc., but it doesn't mean anything if it's not demonstrated. The Bartender is an excellent example, one I took inspiration from. It goes deep into the character's profile while also linking its stories, essentially citing its sources.

While you say that there's input from other users, I have yet to see anything other than jokes. Considering how sensitive people can be towards their work and the inconsistent definition trolling/bullying, I've been hesitant on giving feedback. I've read some amazing stories here but they don't get any love. I don't know if anyone wants their stories to be famous, but there are some serious contenders that deserve some shine.

@Vyfourthaccount It was a huge mistake on my part introducing the CPL: both for the name (yikes) and the impact it had on the site. I wanted to get rid of it or at least change the contents, it wasn't my intention to canonize everything. I was originally just going to add some classic characters and a few of my own, but I made the "genius" decision to open it to everyone. I just wanted participation, I didn't anticipate the outcome.

Alright then

@TheTimeJumper300

"There still needs to be stories"?

...But the wiki has allowed them for a while now, even before I was made staff on the site-

I'm confused why you joined an OC-dominated wiki for the most part and claim there's no stories here to be had. Because, even on the fact-files themselves, they can give a summary/rundown of what the origins are. We've even advised some users to create separate pages for the origins if needs be (e.g. Laughing Jack and its separate origins). If not that, we also allow narratives in general for any other story-telling.

In terms of the "input from users", it was more popular back when I first began with some of the staff and development from there. Even if it's brief in the comments or DMs on Discord, it's still there whether or not you want to trust in it. Hell, I've given out reviews in comments/DMs in the years I've been here to creators and it did have an effect on them (for better or for worse). Sometimes, it's not really present on the wiki for neither one of us to confirm from outside sources. But, having heard some people seek it out on other sites and DMs for feedback, I'd like to assume for the better they're telling the truth. Even if some users might come off like "yes-men" to certain concepts, we do try to be as fair as we can be on this site like the Creepypasta Wiki does in their own time.

Additionally, with regards to the Capture and Protect Service...I hate to say it but virtually nobody past a certain year seemed all too bothered by its existence, for good and for bad as well. If some people wanted it to be incorporated into their story, fair enough then that's engagement/awareness to the concept. However...a good chunk of the site just makes characters apart of Creepypasta on their own terms. I haven't really seen anyone link up to the idea besides an old contact I knew called "Idea Informative" who wrote S.A.K.A. And, I feel that was indirect/unintentional if anything.

At the time, it was a concept active users wanted to flesh out on the site. Nowadays, it's been relatively quiet and that likely is because the creator made their own wiki which goes into some more details about it with some the creators of their own characters. I'm not sure about the current state of it since all is quiet but I'm sure the creator is busy with other things and could have lost interest in the idea as time went on. I do gotta apologise a bit since that's what I thought the rant was leaning into about the idea since both are similar with the "capture/study" and using Creepypastas for governmental usage.

Besides that though...I can't name on the spot any creator who made their stories/OCs relate to the Capture and Protect Service. Plus, if you wanted it removed, you should have just informed a member of staff instead for better convenience for all parties. Trying to shift the blame with a semi-factual rant doesn't really justify now trying to claim owners are "too sensitive" to feedback when I haven't heard either one of you speak up past the Capture and Protect Service creation. Really, I say this with some confusion yet again, why are you ranting this early to your "returns" to the site as though you didn't come back willingly to still try and use it, even when acknowledging how you don't really enjoy it nor the topic of choice anymore?

"I just wanted participation, I didn't anticipate the outcome."

Then just follow my recommendation of revamping the idea by downgrading the "service" to "community service"? And having creators of their own choice partake in the revamp to introduce more characters/origins you might actually enjoy? Unless you've fallen out of interest with the concept entirely, just revamp it and try to look past the errors of what you wanted versus what you got. It's happened to me and several others where a creation gives off the wrong impression when it shouldn't have but the "taking responsibility" part doesn't really justify shitting on creators like they were the issue for your mistake via miscommunication all the way back in 2018. It's even more unreasonable when you consider the fact the majority of users here seem more at peace with their own terms/conditions rather than adapting with this concept overall.

If I can create criticism via the comments with some success, so should you. That being said, you shouldn't be overly judgemental/cynical with how you approach this since this is some users' first time actually branching out to a public audience for considerably genuine feedback.

Like I said before, some people might have had "yes-men" in smaller circles with all of the same sort of idea. So, when coming here and getting told their idea isn't "up to snuff" like they thought it was will make them defensive and close off from further help (especially since the wiki can have 13 year olds at the youngest from Fandom's account policy). I've ran into individuals like that and - whilst I used to act more stuck up and strict about it - I can say now that doesn't come without much reason. Even when I thought I was in the right and claimed people were "too sensitive for feedback", sometimes it was how the criticism was dished out that caused the defence in return. For example, I used to just point out the flaws, tearing into the writing and character development from top to bottom and then just expect them to use that to "get better". How is that constructive? I spent 2-5 minutes just scrolling through and merely pointing out errors, anyone could do what I did and that doesn't mean they were equally as productive.

Now, I try to offer some recommendations and assist directly where I can in hopes that might be a better approach to how people view criticism on the site and maybe in general when branching out for different opinions. It works at times and other times, it doesn't. But, it's a step in the right direction. To me, if someone joins the wiki and does write for the sake of shits and giggles with seemingly no care about what they put out, then I get the argument when they suddenly act all serious about it as though we were taking themselves seriously. But, for some, they do want advice/feedback where it is needed and do intend on wanting to get better.

Although, I feel you're more or less acting this way because of the "inconsistent definition trolling/bullying" is giving reason as to why you don't want to be held responsible for a "bad" review on a creation. It's just my perspective on the topic since, yeah, I can agree to an extent some people may try to report/comment on how simple statements can be considered bullying. Trolling/bullying to me is the intentional act(s) where a person (the troll/bully) will incite malicious and/or hateful behaviour for the sake of provoking someone (the trolled/bullied) with little to no reason other than mere entertainment/sadism. The last part is very crucial since that's what sets it apart for some of the cases here with feedback. Someone calling a creation shit just because and laughing at it would be tipping into that territory more so than someone actually taking the time to read and point out certain perspectives/aspects that wouldn't make sense in the long-term for the character.

That being said, if a user chooses to deny or outright isn't ready to want the criticism despite your best efforts, you're not obliged to keep going as much as they are. That's sometimes how it is. They can easily take business elsewhere or even return back to their respective sites, you shouldn't force yourself to tolerate rejection when you tried your best. I'm saying this yet again from experience, it won't always work out between the reviewer and the creator. And, some people choose to go elsewhere as a result.