Talk:The Backrooms/Archive 1

Wikis

I noticed this page includes the logo of the Backrooms Wikidot. Should more coverage on the Backrooms wikis be added? Vortex (talk) 00:26, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I've removed it, per WP:NOR. Other wikis do not qualify as reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:35, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: Wait what? Since when did images qualify as sources? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

It's the logo someone at the wiki invented; seems like WP:OR to me. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

It's also worth noting that most of the content on this page is based on this source, "The Ghost In My Machine" which seems to be a personal site. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:34, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: I understand that but since when did WP:OR apply to images? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

What's the difference between the image from the Backrooms wiki and one I made up right now on the spot? Not much. Feel free to take it to a larger forum. I'm like to see some more eyes on the article, which will hopefully result in a good gutting of poorly sourced cruft. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: Well I'm just trying to understand how WP:OR applies to images as to my knowledge OR only applies to info that was added without a source that is basically someone's own knowledge. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I've posted an entry at the OR board to get additional feedback on whether or not sourcing images from a wiki violates policy in this case. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:04, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm back to editing the page. Jamie, not to invoke WP:WAX but I was basing this article a bit on SCP Foundation, which also includes a logo and multiple sources from the SCP Wiki. Plus, that article is rated as a Good article, so I thought it'd be fine to include the Backrooms logo from Wikidot here (just like that article does). Guess WAX really affected things here lol. I've left some additional comments on my edit summaries. Wetrorave (talk) 12:16, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

At a glance, it appears that the SCP Foundation article is largely about the idea and the wiki; presumably, the sources there have significant coverage of the wiki. I haven't read all of the sources here, but so far I haven't seen significant coverage of the Backrooms wiki here. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:11, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2022

Footnotes 1 and 5, which refer to articles written by writer, researcher, and journalist Lucia Peters at the website The Ghost In My Machine as sources, are noted throughout the Wikipedia entry as "self-published sources" and their reliability called into question. There is also a note at the top of the page asserting this same point. This is an incorrect classification, as she is considered an expert in the field of creepypasta and online urban legends and folklore, of which the Backrooms are an example.

The edit request is to remove the "self-published source" designation from both the footnotes and the top of the pagw, and also to include the writer's full byline, Lucia Peters, in any citations of her work throughout this Wikipedia entry. 

This writer has been widely published at various news outlets discussing creepypasta, folklore, and other internet horror topics, including Bustle.com and The Toast, as well as being cited as a source by other news outlets such as Popsugar and Scary Mommy discussing these same topics. She has also written a book on a subgenre of urban legends, Dangerous Games In The Dark, which was traditionally published by Chronicle Books in 2019. Additionally, she has appeared on numerous podcasts as an expert on creepypasta and internet horror, including Way Too Interested episode 12 alongside author Chuck Wendig. She also is a verified Twitter user. (See below for relevant links and sources.)

Wikipedia's policies state that self-published expert sources "may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published be reliable, independent publications." As this writer's work demonstrates, she is considered an expert in the field and has numerous bylines to support her status as such. Accordingly, this source should not be considered a "self-published source"; it is more correctly classified as independent journalism.

Relevant sources to support this edit request:

Author archives at The-Toast.net: https://the-toast.net/author/lucia-peters/

Author archives at Bustle.com: https://www.bustle.com/profile/lucia-peters-1908056

Selected relevant Bustle.com articles: https://www.bustle.com/life/what-is-dear-david-here-is-everything-writer-adam-ellis-has-tweeted-about-his-haunted-apartment-from-start-to-finish-7714979 https://www.bustle.com/articles/136890-is-the-creepypasta-noend-house-real-the-haunted-house-legend-goes-a-long-way-back

Cited as source: Popsugar: https://www.popsugar.com/entertainment/crime-scene-what-is-elevator-game-48160395 Scary Mommy: https://www.scarymommy.com/elevator-game

Way Too Interested episode (interviewed as subject matter expert, featuring author Chuck Wendig): https://waytoointerested.com/creepypasta

Dangerous Games To Play In The Dark (Chronicle Books, 2019): https://www.chroniclebooks.com/products/dangerous-games-to-play-in-the-dark

Verified Twitter profile: https://twitter.com/luciapeters FancifulUmbrella (talk) 15:05, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: It is still a self published blog. Having been published on more blogs, The Toast is a daily blog..., questionable and unreliable sources WP:RPS, writing a book that lists games to play, and having been interviewed on a podcast does not change the self-published nature of their blog. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:25, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

a 4chan board posted??

I noticed that at the start of Origin and description it says "The Backrooms originated from a 4chan board posted on 12 May 2019". I believe that you cannot post boards on 4chan and instead create threads within boards that act as permanent categories of the site and then post replies within those threads. I think this should therefor instead read something along the lines of "The Backrooms originated from a thread posted on the /x/ board of 4chan on 12 May 2019" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:6A7C:6E50:E4F2:ED58:8E8E:3388 (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I think it means it came from a post on a 4chan board. But I don't know 4chan and I'm not sure how it works. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 22:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Changed. Wetrorave (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Animal crossing

There is an animal crossing fan creation of the Backrooms that is notable.

• https://www.google.com/search?q=animal+crossing+backrooms&rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS895US896&hl=en-US&prmd=isnv&sxsrf=APq-WBtVPld-eEW7k-m932iAUtYYWODTlA:1648604165409&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjGz52N2ez2AhX0DkQIHeXTCXkQ_AUoA3oECAIQAw&biw=1024&bih=653&dpr=2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.148.167.84 (talk) 01:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

A Google search doesn't make something notable. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

it is a google news search with lots of notable links. 98.148.167.84 (talk) 14:42, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

https://screenrant.com/animal-crossing-backrooms-build-meme-creepypasta-new-horizons/

https://www.sportskeeda.com/esports/animal-crossing-new-horizons-player-recreates-infamous-backrooms-set-game 98.148.167.84 (talk) 14:43, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2022

It’s incorrect to assert that The Backrooms film series was a main influence for Severance. Production on the tv show was wrapped prior to Kane Parsons’s first video in Jan 2022. The term “film series” should be edited out here: “The creepypasta and the film series were one of the main influences for AppleTV+'s Severance.” 71.225.247.199 (talk) 15:44, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:51, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2022

Add original caption for 4chan image: "If you're not careful and noclip out of reality in the wrong areas, you'll end up in the Backrooms, where it's nothing but the stink of old moist carpet, the madness of mono-yellow, the endless background noise of fluorescent lights at maximum hum-buzz, and approximately six hundred million square miles of randomly segmented empty rooms to be trapped in.

God save you if you hear something wandering around nearby, because it sure as hell has heard you." Athrixx (talk) 01:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Corrección

NO es correcto Backrooms es real 2A0C:5A81:6209:5F00:DDC5:E5EC:35C1:E1CC (talk) 11:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Backrooms new level

Ivauvu (talk) 15:34, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Ivauvu (talk) 15:35, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Not sure what you need. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 15:36, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Origin and Description - Noclip Reference.

The term 'noclip' originated with id's Commander Keen in late 1990 and entered into common gaming lexicon from 1993 onwards after the release of the first Doom videogame, more than a decade before the release of Valve's Source Engine in 2004.(14.2.76.241 (talk) 05:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC))

Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2022

Add the A-Sync Picture TheTopazRuby (talk) 01:02, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Picture from the video game not a screenshot.

The caption of the image of the Backroom's video game may need to be changed. It states that the picture is a screenshot from the game, but screenshots are usually thought of as static images. Because the picture shows movement (specifically the screen effect) it is better described as a GIF and should be named as such. 90.139.88.55 (talk) 06:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

most accepted theory

The 3-level theory is not "the most accepted" theory. 204.100.235.143 (talk) 16:49, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Do you have sources saying otherwise? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:52, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

i dont think so other than primary ones 204.100.235.143 (talk) 19:54, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Primary ones aren't acceptable for this. The sources already there are enough to prove that it's the most accepted theory (I could be wrong though but that's not changing without non-primary and reliable sources). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:58, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

because those are outdated 98.148.167.84 (talk) 03:58, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately if the only up-to-date sources available are primary it's going to stick. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 12:59, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

These sources might not be solid, and some are primary, but maybe they could help?

First of all, the 3 recognized wikis.

The Tech Support wiki recognizes 0-99 as their "Normal" levels. Sources:

http://backrooms-wiki.wikidot.com/normal-levels-i

Two Tech Support Users (EpicNecromancer, Lifemoth)

The Fandom wiki recognizes the main 9. Sources:

I am a mod on the Fandom. If you need proof, here: https://backrooms.fandom.com/wiki/User:PuppyBorkbutaccountgotwiped

https://backrooms.fandom.com/wiki/Level_List#The_Main_Nine

Another mod (Egglord1)

I can get more people to confirm if needed

The Liminal Archives doesn't recognize pages as "normal" or canon, but their first 12 levels are used as core pages. Sources:

http://liminal-archives.wikidot.com/backrooms-limspace-system

Two Liminal Archives users (LPP, Bloof)

Kane Pixels is an independent canon so we can only go off of videos, but we can clearly see distinct levels here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4dGpz6cnHo&t=338s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4dGpz6cnHo&t=347s

Neither of these areas fit the description given of 1 and 2, only fitting 0. While 1 and 2 may exist in the Kane Pixels canon, they are not proven to be part of the canon. In the future, this may be changed.

I believe there was a source for the main 3 on 4chan a while ago, which likely is where this information came from, however it is not cited in the article and is not widely known about.

In addition, while the general theme of the first 3 are widely the same on all of the wikis, they are not the same. Taking Level 1 as an example:

Fandom version:https://backrooms.fandom.com/wiki/Level_1

TS version: http://backrooms-wiki.wikidot.com/level-1

LA version: http://liminal-archives.wikidot.com/level-2/ (It's listed as two because LA has a different naming scheme. It's the same level, counting 0 as 1.)

Even most "Purists" (My name for people who just like the original post and don't feel the same about the newer material) that I've seen recognize up to Level 4.

Let me know if there is anything else that needs to be done, but here is my proposal:

Since the general agreed upon canons are so disjointed, we have a few options:

1. Only list Level 0. since it is the one universal level (Though it has differences between media), it can be listed.

2. List the main levels of every canon

3. List the first 12 of each wiki, as they are around the same theme. Then, have benchmarks at 2 4 8 and 10.

4. List the second Kane Pixels level chronologically

Better yet would be to not list canons, and instead focus the page around other aspects in my opinion.

I have been in this community since July, and I've found that it's a nightmare to align views of the Backrooms. On the Wikipedia page, the displayed content will always be either extremely long in order to equally represent each canon or be unfair.

That being said, I have read large amounts of all 3 wikis, especially the first 12 and I believe that I am qualified to write a summary of the needed levels provided that there is a disclaimer. PuppyBork (talk) 00:30, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

None of those sources are remotely acceptable. Please read WP:RS to get a better understanding of our policy. In short, user-generated content such as wikia, fandom, and wikidot do not qualify. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:54, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Whatever "most accepted theory" is decided on, it should not be called a "theory." This word implies that it is potentially real, which is unacceptable on Wikipedia. Perhaps it can be called the "most popular version of the urban legend." 24.231.109.214 (talk) 13:49, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

The sources may not be acceptable as citations for including a fact in an article, but we're talking about removing a fact from an article. So while they may not be acceptable citations, they are sufficiently convincing that the "fact" currently put forward by the article is in fact incorrect and should be removed. Wikipedia should not leave information on the site it knows to be incorrect simply because it can't formally cite a source for doing so.

As for adding the new interpretations, that would require reliable sources. I may suggest the confic magazine, which has published two relevant articles I will link, one which includes a description of the rise of the backrooms from its conception on 4chan to the Fandom Wiki to the Wikidot, and the other of which goes over the differences between the Wikidot and Liminal Archives wikis.

https://www.conficmagazine.com/post/we-will-all-go-together-when-we-go

https://www.conficmagazine.com/post/war-in-confic-the-fictional-rivalries-between-confic-communities

For a third and final point, the subject of the documentation in this case is the sites themselves, the article is focusing on the various interpretations of The Backrooms across the internet and the wikis are just that. The article would not cover the sites to describe some external object using them as sources - it is describing the interpretations the wikis give and there is no more reliable authority on what a website says than the website itself. It would be like an article on yellow journalism showcasing quotes from famously unreliable news sources as examples of their unreliability - the article would of course cite the yellow journals themselves for the quotes regardless of how accurate or inaccurate they are as news sources because their articles will always be 100% accurate representations of themselves since they are themselves. When writing on the subject of the interpretations the wikis give - what the wikis say - the most reliable possible source in this case is the wikis themselves, even if they wouldn't normally be considered reliable sources under other circumstances. Subliminalist (talk) 03:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

What does “TS” stand for, it’s the wikidot 98.148.167.84 (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Edit request: April 15th, 2022

In the “Film” section, the date of Found Footage is said to be filmed in 1996, however, 8-9 seconds into the video, the clapboard sets the date to “7/4/91” Not0nshoree (talk) 22:38, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

The link to "liminal spaces" is wrong

The link destination is not connected to the meaning of the word in the context of the text. Hipppiainen98 (talk) 08:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

The link is a redirect https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Liminal_Spaces&redirect=no to the correct page https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Liminality#Photography_and_Internet_culture

but the preview is wrong because Liminal_Spaces page was deleted. It could be updated to point more directly to that section of the Liminality page. Breezyblock (talk) 18:52, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• THE BACKROOMS.gif

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• The backrooms recreation digital.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

The Backrooms original picture date is wrong

The date on the Wikipedia page is not "12 May 2019", actually is "22 April 2018", original post link: [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by EnderIce2 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

"noclip" origin

The text says 'when they "noclip out of reality in the wrong areas," which is a video game-related term originating from Source Engine games'. But this can't be right. Noclip has been around since the original Doom (1993) or earlier; Source wasn't around until 1996 or something. 216.19.187.249 (talk) 08:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

This is true. "idclip" is the cheat code to walk through walls.

Here is a reference from a source port but it was part of Vanilla Doom. It goes back at least as far as Doom and I'm not aware of an earlier game with "clipping".

https://zdoom.org/wiki/Cheat_code#Doom Breezyblock (talk) 15:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2022

There is no description of the origin of the backrooms, only who started it. For those unaware of the origin, the backroom originated trillions of years before the big bang. it was originally created as a prison to hold the most powerful gods and suppress the power they hold.Brauz (talk) 18:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC) Brauz

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Games section incomplete

The games section for backrooms is incomplete. The Roblox platform has also created a number of games, based on backrooms, called Apeirophobia (which means the fear of infinity) and another one, just named backrooms. The games have enjoyed a massive amount of play and there are even some Roblox YouTubers like SkeeterSk00ter who have made videos about the game.

I think the article or at least the games section is incomplete if you don't take the large amount of Roblox games and Roblox YouTubers into account — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.255.89.215 (talk) 09:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Backrooms orgin

I found 9 Images of the backrooms that are posted before the popular post from 12 May 2019. The oldest one is from 8 April 2018. Link of it is here:

https://archived.moe/b/thread/765236633/#765241975

Don't delete the edit about orgin that I made! It's all real. User674832 (talk) 10:13, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Reverted per WP:SYTNH and WP:RS. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:41, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2022

Add the following under a “Music” heading:

The band Pando references The Backrooms in the second verse of their 2022 song, “Face Your Fears”. Tyfarnsworth (talk) 01:49, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done There's no indication that Pando meets our notability criteria. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:27, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2022

Change the mention of entering "levels" in Impact and popularity > Film because it contradicts "The plot of this series is not influenced by other works such as the Wikis" later on. (The wiki has levels, but the plot of the series is not influenced by the wiki.) VeryRealTrueFacts (talk) 04:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: VeryRealTrueFacts, welcome to Wikipedia! I don't believe a contradiction exists here. Those unfamiliar with the deeper lore presented by the wikis will think that "levels" is nothing more than terminology to differentiate the visually distinct sections, so they won't see a contradiction when they reach the sentence you mention. I suppose the phrasing could be changed to something like ... and entering different sections, but this would be going out of our way to remove mention of the levels when there is an entire section dedicated to them. Any editor (including yourself once you are autoconfirmed) is free to disagree with me, as is the cycle Wikipedia, and make such an edit. Happy editing! —Sirdog (talk) 14:12, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 08 September 2022

Please change:

The Backrooms is an urban legend and creepypasta describing an endless

to

The Backrooms is a Creepypasta and Collaborative horror fiction project describing an endless

Calling it an "Urban legend" implies that some people might believe it is a real.

The SCP Foundation is described as Collaborative fiction and I think that the Backrooms would also qualify for that description. There has also been a huge interest in Backrooms content, especially on Youtube.

I'm guessing this is in part because of how relatively easy it is to make videos and other digital media in this universe.

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ––FormalDude (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2022

2603:7000:7E03:8027:E936:CAF0:8E1B:DDC (talk) 01:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC) In the film section it says in the backrooms found footage timeline it wasn't 1996 the backrooms warps time itself into the future at the beginning of the video it says on a clapperboard that the date is 7/4/91 <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4dGpz6cnHo/ref>

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 3mi1y (talk) 06:35, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Photo Backrooms.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Urban legend?

The first sentence states:

   The Backrooms is an urban legend and creepypasta describing an endless

Calling it an "Urban legend" implies that some people might believe it is a real.

The SCP Foundation is described as Collaborative fiction and I think that the Backrooms would also qualify for that description. There has also been a huge interest in Backrooms content, especially on Youtube in 2022. I am guessing this is a result of Kane Pixel's Backrooms series. Breezyblock (talk) 20:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Original Creator

The creator of the backrooms is called Juan de Dios Gómez, a Mexican who created two works inspired by a job as a guard in a limited space in Mexico City and some other anecdotes made him make two books that we know today as backrooms. DamianX1230 (talk) 01:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

This statement accomplishes nothing. Please name the books that are relevant to your statement. Nodekeeper (talk) 08:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2023

2604:3D08:178D:FE00:6580:DB1C:B98D:1E10 (talk) 06:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Phil is a all power full being that can destroy planets and is in lvl 727372

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 07:57, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

why isn't there an official picture of the back rooms for the article?

is it because of something? 208.58.192.69 (talk) 21:51, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

there is a notice on the talk page here that explains why the image was removed from the article. hope this helps. Frost.xyz (talk) 21:45, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm having trouble finding the notice, your link seems to direct back to this question on the talk page. Was wondering the same thing as the anon, sorry if I'm missing something obvious somewhere. --Aabicus (talk) 10:39, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@Aabicus: We couldn't verify the copyright of the image. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 01:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2023

Change from: "...uploaded to the YouTube channel of then 16-year-old director Kane Parsons (Kane Pixels on YouTube). It is presented as a 1996 recording of a young cameraman who accidentally enters the location, ..."

To: "uploaded to the YouTube channel of then 16-year-old director Kane Parsons (Kane Pixels on YouTube). It is presented as a 1991 recording of a young cameraman who accidentally enters the location, ..."

Although not majorly important in the complete context of the article. I think it's important to stay true as the description of the video in question (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4dGpz6cnHo) indicates September 23, 1996 as the date the footage was found, and at 0:09 seconds into the video, the clapperboard indicates the date of recording as 7/4/91 (1991).

It might also be reasonable to simply state the date of recording as "It is presented as a 1980-1990s recording" indicating a wider time-frame as the exact year isn't exactly important since "Backrooms" found footage videos are usually around the late 80s to 90s. Although it should be changed from a "1996 recording" since that is entirely false as per the actual video.

Additional Change: Change from: "Parsons introduced plot aspects such as ASYNC, a "shadowy organization" which opened a portal into the Backrooms in the 1980s.[4][20]"

To: "Parsons introduced plot aspects such as ASYNC, a research lab which opened a portal into the Backrooms in the 1980s.[4][20]"

Although the ABC article states the fictional company ASYNC is a shadowy organization, Kane (creator of the Backrooms-ASYNC story) directly stated that the referenced ABC article is false and ASYNC is not a shadowy organization in the official Kane Pixels Discord Server (https://i.imgur.com/ffbIS8j.png, https://discord.com/channels/948681259889094766/948681259889094769/1038630661516427395, server invite code "kanepixels").

I think it should be noted that additional speculative information should not be added into the "Youtube" area of the article

BigBirdBanditX201 (talk) 12:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@BigBirdBanditX201:  Kind of.... This is really, really hard to do without adequate sourcing from media. I changed it to "in the 1990s" as you suggested, and changed "shadowy organization" to just "organization". I also removed the "additional speculative information" that I think you were talking about. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 00:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2023

"Leaded by the fictional character Ivan Beck, the vice director of the institute," Change 'leaded' to 'led'. HundredthCape5 (talk) 12:09, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@HundredthCape5:  Not done This sentence has now been removed, as we don't need detailed lore info in the article. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 01:00, 11 February 2023 (UTC)