Wikipedia talk:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia?

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

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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

Dude the fact that this show has Kevin Macleod, who has made the most popular pieces of music in Youtube media, Gooseworx the creator of one of the most popular Youtube web series, TomSka who has made the creator of asdfmovie, ROSIE O' DONNEL A ACTUAL CELEBRITY WHO HAS STARRED IN NICKELODEON AND AMERICAN DAD, and many other famous youtubers, has a billion views on yt winning 2 awards like there has to be some vias here dude MrMosesStuff (talk) 02:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Bias* MrMosesStuff (talk) 02:36, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't think all these accusations of bias everywhere are getting constructive. The essay explains why it doesn't have an article; there is not much reliable and independent coverage the article could cite from. I think the main question is why mainstream media is not covering BFDI, not Wikipedia. ObserveOwl (talk) 06:56, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

That's not even fair at that point bro they got a celebrity on it, get two awards it's still not connected enough to mainstream? That's BS. Seems like bias to me. Like what do they want, Donald Trump in BFDI? MrMosesStuff (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

We want articles about BFDI on CNN, in The Times, The New Yorker, Journal of Cinema and Media Studies etc. Even Screen Rant might be of interest. See WP:GNG or take the time to read the essay. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:29, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Should we make all BFDI-related titles redirect here?

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)

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)

What about while the mainspace page is salted we can just make the draft version redirect here instead? 89.33.114.2 (talk) 08:37, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information § Hatnote?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information § Hatnote?. Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC) For including a hatnote to this essay in an article with the same acrynoym.

Add a note for mentions?

It seems as if many people misinterpret this page as a COMPLETE ban on BFDI, which has led to many edit disputes, such as those of Jacksfilms and Tomska, this note would hopefully clear the waters a little bit, and could help with confusion and people using this page as a blanket statement for removing any reference to the series. Kyllstru (talk) 23:17, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @Ca @ObserveOwl @AlphaBeta135 @Xeroctic 89.33.114.2 (talk) 08:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

A sentence on the starting paragraphs clarifying that the essay doesn't apply to mentions would be nice. It could perhaps link to Wikipedia:Notability#Notability guidelines do not apply to content within articles or lists. ObserveOwl (talk) 14:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

So just like how on Wiktionary notability is completely optional and even one citation from one source is fine? (wiktionary:object show) 67.209.130.11 (talk) 02:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Wiktionary does have criteria for inclusion requiring three independent quotes spanning at least a year. Quotes from social media sites like Twitter are allowed on Wiktionary, so it shouldn't be hard to find citations for that entry. But I fail to see how Wiktionary has to do with this. ObserveOwl (talk) 02:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

FYI: wiktionary:object show survived, but wiktionary:OS mockup got instantly RfD'd. (that was probably a social stress test) 67.209.130.11 (talk) 13:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

An OS mockup is literally just a mockup of an OS, so it's not an idiomatic term. But object shows have multiple common characteristics besides being shows about objects. ObserveOwl (talk) 13:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Is anyone ever going to record a Spoken Wikipedia of this?

The Spoken Wikipedia request for this essay (see above, especially for reason) has been up for weeks, but still, no one is recording it.

Pinging: @Ca @ObserveOwl @Xeroctic @AlphaBeta135

67.209.130.11 (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

I do not see why a spoken version of this hyper-specific essay is needed. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

accesibillty reasons, also some people prefer listening over to reading 159.48.95.69 (talk) 19:17, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

The quickest way may be to do it yourself, otherwise you will have to wait for someone willing to do the job who agrees with you that this is a good idea. And they have to notice the banner somehow, which most editors won't since they've never heard of this essay. From where I'm sitting the idea appears at best harmless. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

i plan on doing one soon lol, when I get the time really 159.48.95.69 (talk) 19:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

All sources I could find for BFDI's notability.

This is a collection of all the sources I could find that could probably be used in a potential BFDI article or just to clear up its reasoning for not being on Wikipedia, Wikiquote, or Wikitionary. (Wikitionary does mention object shows but not any specific ones, which I feel should be added) This contains sources I have found in this talk page (to which I will give credit) and a few tidbits of information I found.

This article does briefly mention BFDI. Most likely not enough to give BFDI a page on its own, and I realize it is a trivial mention, but it should be at least something. This KYM article details the influence of the BFDI mouth, made specifically for BFDI and having a greater cultural impact than most people even realize. This next one does use a Fandom link, but everything in it is factual and unopinionated. The Battle of the Fantasy Foods winner was BFDI's very own Yoylecake, winning against Pitt Cola with an approximately 9:1 ratio of votes! (These links found by ZestySourBoy)

In 2022, BFDI won the Cartoon Crave "Favorite Web Program" award with a whopping 63% of the votes out of 5 contestants! (Inanimate Insanity, another popular object show, also being a contestant.) Also, a lot f notable people have made small cameos in BFDI, most notably Kevin MacLeod as Pan Flute (who isn't just a cameo, but now a well-established character), but also Homestar Runner, Bryant Oden, (Creator of The Duck Song), TomSka, and even Clay and Rosie O'Donnell. Those people are definitely notable. Cary Huang, creator of The Scale of the Universe who also has his own minor planet, doesn't have an article, most likely because BFDI would almost have to be mentioned. Even if there may not be enough notable articles (Which I highly doubt there's a lack of, they just may not be page-1), there have been a lot of notable people and a lot of notable recognition from said notable people.

Also, It's pretty clear you just hate BFDI, removing LITERALLY any mention of it. I don't care about the lack of a page. I'm upset about the fact you try to deny its existence for no reason. In Rosie O'Donnell's page, in Kevin MacLeod's page, any mention of it, just reduced to dust. Sumaesioso (talk) 17:55, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

There's a thorough list at Wikipedia:Source assessment/Battle for Dream Island, if you want to check or add to it. etonline.com is a trivial mention; this type of coverage is quickly disregarded in articles for deletion discussions, as quick mentions can't hold an entire article on the subject. The KYM and Fandom sources are questionable, see my comment above.

Cary Huang doesn't have an article because there have not been enough in-depth reliable independent sources that could be cited for his life and career info, at least they have not been found. Recognition from notable people is cool and all, but an article about Cary would need to cite high-quality sources nonetheless.

Check out Talk:Rosie O'Donnell#RfC: BFDI inclusion in Filmography section - there's an ongoing discussion about the mention on Rosie's page with significant support. The series is mentioned on TomSka and jacksfilms. Kevin Macleod mentions the Bops, Famous Ditties & Instrumentals album, a collaboration with BFDI if I remember correctly. Lack of notability doesn't mean it can't be mentioned on other articles. ObserveOwl (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

There are sources reporting on The Scale of the Universe that describe Cary a bit, of course, but don't provide that much biographical detail other than their city and age at the time. Cary, whose name was used for 10003 Caryhuang, is explained here by the IAU, which is probably the best source that I've found on Cary, albeit being too short on detail, too.

Someone has pointed out an article about Michael Huang before here, which is great for notability, but additional sources are needed for up-to-date info. ObserveOwl (talk) 18:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

ObserveOwl, agree with you on #1, but #2 does not count towards notability, as it is a local source. — 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they) ^talk/edits 00:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Fair. ObserveOwl (talk) 06:43, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2025

Change the short description from "Essay on editing Wikipedia" to "Essay on why a certain topic is not allowed on Wikipedia". 67.209.129.173 (talk) 07:59, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Seems a bit redundant to the title, to be honest. ObserveOwl (talk) 10:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 14:28, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

inanimate insanity

inanimate insanity should be blacklisted too as it's just as popular as bfdi and has even less reliable secondary sources than bfdi (bfdi has like 2 and ii has none at all) and is just as likely for someone to attempt a draft for since it has a movie Radman the 12th (talk) 16:23, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

The difference is that II is arguably less popular than BFDI, and has less people attempting to make a page out of it. Also, the movie came out 2 to 3 months ago, so if nothing happened back then, its most likely not happening now. 155.135.55.233 (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

there is a draft about the movie and what I think might be an edit war on List of depictions of Steve Jobs Radman the 12th (talk) 21:05, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Season vs. series

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

In a recent edit, instances of "season" were replaced with "series". While I personally don't disagree too strongly with this, the edit summary does beg the question: How is "season" less neutral than "series"?

WP:CONCISE is about brevity, but the issue appeared to be about word choice, not brevity, so the editor probably meant to cite WP:PRECISE. However, both shortcuts link to sections of a policy regarding article titles, so neither of these would apply here. If the issue was that the word "season" had arguably been causing this essay to have a North American bias, then MOS:ENGVAR would be a more relevant shortcut to cite.

Also, the use of "season" in this context isn't necessarily unprofessional, as that is what is usually used in North America to refer to a set of episodes. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

The official jacknjellify channel refers to them as seasons. I believe it was fine as it was. ObserveOwl (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Question

Does it mean that BFDI will not be on WP until more reliable sources for it are made? However, does it mean that "object show" is still fine to be on Wiktionary? 49.145.107.76 (talk) 00:49, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes - when reliable, independent sources provide enough information about BFDI, the article can be made, after discussion at deletion review.

Yes - it can stay at Wiktionary, as long as the criteria there are met, but this essay is about the English Wikipedia. ObserveOwl (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

In addition, this also means that "Object Show Community" should not be added to the OSC disambiguation page? 49.145.107.76 (talk) 01:11, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Not for now, since there is no article about the community, and it's not mentioned anywhere else on Wikipedia. Disambiguation pages are supposed to direct readers to other existing articles. ObserveOwl (talk) 01:40, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Question: Do things need citations to be on wiktionary? 49.145.107.76 (talk) 11:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

This is a question to be asked on Wiktionary, perhaps at wikt:Wiktionary:Information desk, but basically, yes. ObserveOwl (talk) 12:19, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Possible source

It appears the idea of inanimate object characters goes back to November 2002, when publisher Todd Zapoli published a comic called "Inanimate Objects", that featured talking objects with faces. This likely may've been the inspiration of object shows in the first place. Is this reliable? 49.145.107.76 (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

What you presented here is a primary source. Sources that are required for notability are works like news, reviews, magazines, journals, etc., that analyze other topics - secondary sources. That page doesn't describe what object shows as a whole are, and it may be original research to claim that object shows are inspired by the comic, without a reliable source making the connection. ObserveOwl (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

1. The concept of anthropomorphism (including the personification of objects) dates back centuries.
2. As ObserveOwl said above, no credible source as of writing this has made an appropriate connection of the comic to the history of the OSC as a whole. Adding your original interpretation of the source is against Wikipedia guidelines. — 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they/it) ^talk/edits 14:36, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Moses talked to a burning bush. I don't know if it had a face. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:11, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Point A: Cary himself once described Battle for Dream Island (originally titled Total Firey Island) as a "spin-off" of Total Drama Island.

Point B: I used to watch an HBO Family show called A Little Curious when I was little, and as a TV show featuring anthropomorphic objects, it predates the example you've mentioned by a few years. Going back even further, it could be argued that some illustrations of the nursery rhyme Hey Diddle Diddle are examples of early non-animated precursors. I'm not trying to insinuate that either of these may have also inspired BFDI though. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 22:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

is it possible to make a simple English version of this article?

what it says on the tin. considering the scope of simple English (people whose first language isn't english, young people, and people with learning disablities), I think it could be valid maybe. but at the same time, this essay is pretty specific. 159.48.95.69 (talk) 19:47, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

The title for BFDI is also protected against recreation on the Simple Wikipedia, and it's also on the other wiki's title blacklist, so no (other than admins). The simple notability guideline is similar to the one on this wiki. ObserveOwl (talk) 19:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

IMO, these efforts to get any mention of BFDI into any article on en-WP etc, are way into WP:DISRUPTIVE WP:ADVOCACY. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:12, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Per the hidden note that says do not revert edits that simplify the essay's grammar, this essay is already (sort of) supposed to be written simply to begin with. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)