Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia?

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page has been put on Wikipedia:Unusual articles#Comics and animation.

[edit]

Does it fit there, or should we remove it? 67.209.128.30 (talk) 13:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it fits there since thhis page is not an article Ca talk to me! 13:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe move it to Wikipedia:Unusual articles#Other pages then? It does seem unusual, but probably not in that category. 67.209.128.30 (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I moved it yesterday to the Other pages section (which non-article pages are put), before I found out about this discussion. Xeroctic (talk) 09:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i checked recently, its linked on the box describing "enshittification" 159.48.95.69 (talk) 19:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I rewrote the entire description for that entry due to tin foil hat POV pushing, btw 67.209.128.50 (talk) 14:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rosie's Cameo in BFDI (topic copied from Rosie O'Donnell talk page)

[edit]

On January 1st, BFDIA 17 released and in that episode Rosie O'Donnell and one of her kids, Clay O'Donnnell, appeared in cameo roles voice acting as Spool and Mirror respectively. I'm aware of "Wikipedia:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia?" but not long at all after that episode came out an editor immediately went to this page and added a hidden editor-only message saying "DO NOT add Battle for Dream Island here" which to me feels unnecessary and very much biased against BFDI.

Surely the idea of "this person was in this thing" should be documented on a persons page page, regardless of Wikipedia's "measure of notability" determining that BFDI isn't able to have an impartial page due to lack of news coverage. It's also worth pointing out that Rosie currently on her page has appearances in media listed that appear to not have Wikipedia pages. Would that not be bias against BFDI to include those other not notable things but exclude BFDI for no reason other than an apparent dislike towards BFDI from at least a fair few regular Wikipedia editors? (I've read everything on the talk page of the BFDI essay. You cannot deny that there are a fair few Wikipedia editors that actively dislike BFDI. Even if it is for somewhat justifiable reasons such as young BFDI fans making edits that other editors have to clean up that is still bias, and Wikipedia should not be biased.)

Also something else I've just thought about while writing this. I'm not sure if Wikipedia has specific rules in place for what should or should not be mentioned in a list of things a person has been in but if such a thing does not exist it might be a good idea to make such rules.

(This is a topic I just posted on the Rosie O'Donnell talk page but then I noticed that no one has been on that talk page since 2023 and I figured it would be a good idea to also post this subject on the BFDI essay talk page. I would like to apologise if this isn't okay to do. It's also worth putting this here anyways because this stuff also applies to all other cameos of people with Wikipedia pages such as TomSka, Jacksfilms, Kevin MacLeod, The Brothers Chap, and if we are including Inanimate Insanity in the discussion Christian Potenza. It would be good to get a firm stance on this since that would help minimise back and forth editing on any of those peoples pages.) ZestySourBoy (talk) 06:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ZestySourBoy: this should probably just stay on that article's talk page. Try not to split consensus between different talk pages, although you could make a short notice here directing to the talk page for participation, instead of copying it all. You can ping the editor who added the notice (see here) on Talk:Rosie O'Donnell to notify them of the discussion, too. ObserveOwl (talk) 10:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree, however, that some broader discussion, maybe here or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, is warranted concerning mentions on other articles such as Jacksfilms and The Brothers Chap. ObserveOwl (talk) 11:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise for copying the post over. I do still think this is worth being here anyways so that we can discuss non-Rosie related things. Wikipedia really needs a consensus on how to list projects a person has been in else editors will be forever stuck having to waste their time getting into edit wars trying to debate what things should be credited to people. As an editor for various Fandom wikias I don't want to make Wikipedia editor's jobs difficult. ZestySourBoy (talk) 23:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody Just removed BFDI from Rosie Page Because of the fact that it is unsourced, and so. 108.7.229.224 (talk) 18:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

This is one of Wikipedia's essential-reading essays, of where it might as well be considered that instead of salting such pages we can just make them into fully protected redirects to this page. 67.209.128.50 (talk) 14:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the vast majority of cases, redirects on the main (article) namespace should redirect to articles on that namespace. See Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects. There are some redirects from the main namespace to the Wikipedia (project) namespace, like About Wikipedia and Disambiguation page, that deal with Wikipedia-specific policies, guidelines and other information pages. These make the exception rather than the rule; BFDI isn't solely related to Wikipedia. ObserveOwl (talk) 16:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New sources for Battle for Dream Island's notability

[edit]

After doing research on another matter about if the guest voice actors that have appeared on Battle for Dream Island should have their appearances on BFDI credited to them on their Wikipedia pages, I ended up stumbling on a potential unseen news source that could add to BFDI's notability.

https://www.etonline.com/rosie-odonnell-on-why-shes-happy-being-single-and-bonding-with-daughter-dakota-exclusive-205270

This article briefly mentions BFDI. It's probably not enough of a mention to cause a page to be created but combined with the news article that touched on the BFDI & II 2024 Tour we're getting closer and closer to substantial news coverage. If I remember correctly the 2024 Tour news article was considered partial credit for notability, this news article probably would be the same. Not enough by themselves to base an article on but could be used as sources when the BFDI page does inevitably come to fruition.

I also want to link two other things that I don't think I've seen discussed here.

https://knowyourmeme.com/editorials/guides/what-is-bfdi-mouth-and-how-did-it-make-its-way-into-so-many-youtube-videos--2

There is this Know Your Meme editorial thing that details the meme of the BFDI mouth assets getting used all over the internet. I don't know if Wikipedia likes KYM but I think at least this might be another thing that can be used once we do actually get a page even if this link in and of itself can't be used as a sign of notability.

https://www.fandom.com/articles/fandom-battle-of-fantasy-foods-winner

I know this is a Fandom link but this is not a link to a fan run wiki, this is a link to the Fandom article about the Battle of the Fantasy Foods 2016. I think BotFF has been brought up before but I'm not sure if this article was ever brought up. Since this is a proper article from the Fandom company instead of a fan run wiki thing this should count for something. Again maybe not something that proves notability in and of itself but at least something that can be used to add more information to the inevitable article once we do prove it's notability.

So yeah still nothing that outright proves notability, though at this point it's gonna happen soon, but I thought I'd show these off so that once we've got a BFDI article we know what extra stuff can be included. Stuff like Rosie's kid being a fan and guest voicing on the show, the BFDI assets being frequently used all over the internet, and Yoylecake winning Fandom's Battle of the Fantasy Foods 2016. ZestySourBoy (talk) 05:01, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first one doesn't count for notability as it is a trivial mention, which doesn't count for significant coverage as outlined on the general notability guideline. A whole Wikipedia article needs enough content to stand on its own. It wouldn't entirely be the same, as the Tour source provides greater detail on the Tour, despite both these sources not saying that much about what BFDI is. The only content on that etonline.com news piece that could be inserted to a BFDI article would be that Rosie's kid is a fan and that the series "was a very big hit in 2009 on YouTube", which doesn't help support an entire Wikipedia article on the subject and the last fact is not even correct, it started on 2010.
About the Know Your Meme editorial piece, there doesn't seem to be a clear-cut consensus on this discussion, but it appears that the general feeling is that it is situated between marginally reliable for uncontroversial claims about entertainment to outright unreliable. According to The Wall Street Journal, the writer of that BFDI mouth article, Philipp Kachalin, has written for memepedia.ru, which doesn't inspire confidence as a reputable source (looks like a blog and I couldn't find Memepedia's editorial staff page), so it's questionable to claim that Kachalin is a subject-matter expert.
Per this, it seems that Fandom news stories is more akin to a blog without any reputation being clear. That news story in particular doesn't say what BFDI is, either, just that a fictional cake on that series won some non-notable prize, which might not even be due weight for an article about BFDI. ObserveOwl (talk) 10:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey owl, I'm just here to ask if youre actively against the idea of adding bfdi to some people's pages because they have had roles in recent episodes, or if you're just trying to help us w the citations and stuff. Dont take this as an insult please I'm just asking a question :p 222.152.234.67 (talk) 12:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't really know. I don't often work on biographies of actors, and our guidelines on filmographies don't help. I have attempted to provide what other relevant policies and guidelines say, but I acknowledge I'm not the ideal editor to be discussing this stuff. Hopefully the post at WT:ACTOR will bring actual experienced eyes to the issue, but I imagine that no experienced user will be willing to drag on this years-long BFDI debate on Wikipedia, and edit wars by new users will continue on each individual actors' pages until maybe an admin protects them. Genuinely sad and stressful to see the edit histories. :( ObserveOwl (talk) 12:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Why_is_BFDI_not_on_Wikipedia%3F&oldid=1267289394"