This is anessay onnotability. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one ofWikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not beenthoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcuts WP:BFDIWP:BFDI WP:OSCWP:OSC WP:Object showWP:Object show

This page in a nutshell: Popularity does not confer notability. There arealmost noindependent reliable sources coveringBattle for Dream Island or any other web series of the object show genre. Therefore, such topics are unsuitable for articles on the English Wikipedia. However, there arealternative outlets that have information onBattle for Dream Island and similar content, see§ Conclusion.

Logos for the series

Colored logo

Monochrome logo

Battle for Dream Island (BFDI) is an animatedweb series onYouTube created by Chinese-American twin brothers Cary and Michael Huang. Even though the series has over 2 billion total views,^[a] you may be surprised to learn that it does not have an article here on Wikipedia. This is because it fails thegeneral notability guideline, which means it has received almost no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Sincenot enough of these sources have been found, a Wikipedia article about the series would currently be unable to follow policies concerningneutral point of view andverifiability. However, sources have been found for another project of the Huang brothers:The Scale of the Universe.

This essay explains whyBFDI pages have been repeatedlydeleted and were eventuallycreation protected (or "salted") so that onlyadministrators can re-create them. If you are new to Wikipedia, then this essay is for you. For experienced editors, this can also be a case study on Wikipedia's core policies and guidelines likenotability,what Wikipedia is andis not, anddisruptive editing.

Other franchises likeHenry Stickmin andInanimate Insanity (the latter is based onBFDI) may also be popular, but they fail to meet the said policies and guidelines. Other examples of non-notable topics that have been the subject of repeated creation attempts are listed atWikipedia:Deletion review/Perennial requests. As such,several users have used the term "WP:BFDI" to broadly reference the fact that a subject'spopularity does not guarantee notability. These policies have nothing to do with the quality of the works themselves, but rather, are meant to reflect whether or not a subject is capable of having an article written about it from a neutral point of view.

That said, Wikipedia's fundamental goal is to be a "sum of all human knowledge", and it may be considered incomplete due toBFDI's exclusion. You might be able to contact reputable publications or people who specialize inInternet culture and get them to cover the show. In the meantime, you can contribute to otherwikis which may not necessarily have the same purposes as Wikipedia (seethe list below).

Frequently asked questions relating to this essay can be found on the correspondingFAQ page.

Battle for Dream Island (2010–present, abbreviatedBFDI^[b]) is an animatedweb series onYouTube created byjacknjellify, a channel owned by Cary and Michael Huang. The web series featuresanthropomorphic objects competing in a series of contests for a prize. After each contest, the viewers are invited to vote for or against a character being eliminated the next episode.

A popular interactive visualization tool made by the same creators of the series thatis on Wikipedia isThe Scale of the Universe, whichhas attracted significant coverage from reliable sources.^[1][2][3] It was featured onNASA'sAstronomy Picture of the Day,^[4] and inspired theKurzgesagt app "Universe in a Nutshell".^[5][6] This led to theInternational Astronomical Union naming minor planet10003 Caryhuang after one of the creators.^[3]

On Wikipedia, articles must be written from aneutral point of view. This is one of Wikipedia'sfundamental five principles. Wikipedia's notability system is crafted around this concept. There should be enough sources for us to see what the significant points of view on a topic are. For example, if there are multiple reviews published aboutBFDI, we can talk about what the critics liked and what people thought about it.

It is also important for sources to be reliable. Websites hostingself-published and/oruser-generated content likeFacebook andFandom are unreliable because anyone there can publish anything, including false and/or biased information. People who disapprove ofBFDI could write (or pay someone to write)unduly negative reviews about the show, which would not be representative of the true consensus of critics. This is why sources need to be reliable. A reputable publication would see if the review came from a professional critic and if they are being genuine.

On Wikipedia, the wordnotability is very different from how it is used by everybody else. Normally,notable is just another word for being important. However, on Wikipedia,notable means that an article about the subject can be written such that it

1. has aneutral point of view
2. isverifiable with reliable sources
3. gives detailed, encyclopedic coverage of the topic.

There have been countless failed attempts to find sources which fit these criteria. Notability is an extension of Wikipedia'sverifiability andneutrality policies.

It is also important to notice the plural inreliable sources.

Common sources found in attemptedBFDI articles areIMDb andFandom; these websites areuser-generated since anyone can edit their content. Wikipedia holds articles to a much higher standard of reliability, where the facts are almost guaranteed to be correct, hencereliable. Other common sources are YouTube links to the web series itself. However, they do not contribute to notability as they areprimary sources not independent from the subject. Articles that predominantly base their information on primary sources are less objective, especially when interpretations of these sources come from, in this case, a hugeBFDI fan.

A common misunderstanding is that notability exists purely to limit knowledge to only what is deemed "important". This is not true. Here is Wikipedia's founder on its purpose:

Our goal is to document knowledge in an organized fashion, no matter how mundane or important they are. If an unbiased, reliable article could be made aboutBFDI, such an article would have been made a long time ago.

A similar case occurred withSMG4, an Australian-based YouTube channel that createsMachinima videos featuring characters fromSuper Mario and otherNintendo franchises.^[8] After extensive discussions over notability, SMG4 ultimately became a redirect toGlitch Productions, an animation company run by SMG4's creators.^[9] As forBFDI, however, there are no Wikipedia articles or lists that meaningfully dedicate a section toBFDI (seeSpecial:Search/"Battle for Dream Island"). This means that unlike SMG4, aBFDI redirect cannot lead anywhere and thus cannot be created.

YouTube, Fandom, and IMDb are some of the most common sources found in pages aboutBFDI. All three sources are considered generally unreliable because they areuser-generated andself-published sources. Generally speaking, Fandom and IMDb can be edited by anyone with an account without editorial oversight. YouTube videos can be considered reliable sources if they are published by reputable agencies, such asReuters, or by subject-matter experts, such as a renowned professor.

BFDI videos published byjacknjellify are consideredprimary sources. These videos do provide insight for those unfamiliar with the show; however,any interpretation made by Wikipedia editors (e.g.character development, canonicity ofBFDI media, and "theories" aboutBFDI) must be backed with a secondary source. Not doing so would violate theno original research policy. Not only that, videos are limited to the creator's perspective, compromising the videos' objectivity.

While a subject's popularity may suggest notability, it does not automatically guarantee notability in the context of Wikipedia. Though the channel hostingBFDI has over 3 million subscribers and over 2 billion views,^[10][a] these numbers do not justify the creation of aBFDI article on Wikipedia. Usually, when something is popular, many reliable sources report on the subject, making it notable. However,BFDI is an exception, with editors being unable to find any reliable sources that have reported on this show.BFDI's popularity can be seen through the existence of numerousFandom pages,^[11][12][13] but it cannot appear on Wikipedia unless notability is demonstrated. It should be noted that other independent animated projects such asThe Amazing Digital Circus andLackadaisy have Wikipedia articles because of their notability, not necessarily because of their popularity.

Likewise,notable subjects are not always well-known. For example, countless bridges, highways, railroads, and cities have extensive coverage despite not being very popular or well known outside of a specific geographic region. For example,Interstate 238 in California has reliable coverage detailing the highway's history, even though the highway is not well known outside of the Bay Area.

Wikipedia has apage type called "drafts", on which new articles can be developed before being published as actual articles that would appear on search engines. Since drafts and user pages are not usually found by casual readers, editors do not need to worry about them getting deleted just because of bad writing or a lack of sources. A draft is usually not deleted unless ithas not been edited in six months or it meets any othercriteria for speedy deletion.

However, drafts aboutBFDI have often been deleted through numerousmiscellany for deletion discussions. Users who participated in these discussions agreed that these drafts had many bad edits and that the drafts being submitted for review and declined over and over againused up editors' time. For example,one deleted draft about a similar web series was submitted for review and declined over ten times.

While editors are permitted to storedrafts in their userspace with the possibility of becoming actual articles, editors may not use their userspace to indefinitely hostpages that look like articles. These are often indexed on search engines and make Wikipedia look more like a webhost,which it is not. Wikipedia is aformalencyclopedia, not a dumping ground for non-notable topics.

User pages are for collaboration and communication, with the ultimate purpose of maintaining one as part of a Wikipedia editor'sefforts to build an encyclopedia. Therefore, user pages cannot have "fake articles" about topics that are not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia, such asBFDI.

In order to compensate for the lack of critical reviews and analysis from reliable sources, many attemptedBFDI articles often are plot-only summary of works.Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Instead,Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Entries only consisting of plot summaries are better suited for alternative wikis such asIMDb orFandom. Remember that Wikipedia is for everyone, not just fans of a certain series, and that Wikipedia must abide by aneutral point of view–showing that people both like and dislike a certain piece of media.

Disruptive editing, even if it is meant toget a point across, is simply prohibited.

In manydeletion discussions relating toBFDI, many editors reached a consensus thatBFDI is not notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. In spite of this, pages aboutBFDI were constantly recreated against consensus several times,wasting editors' time in the process. As a result of tendentious recreations, pages that include in their title any variation of "Battle for Dream Island" or "BFDI" are blocked from recreation in a technical level (i.e.creation protection andTitleBlacklist).

On Wikipedia, "gaming the system" is the act of using the rules against their intended purpose to engage in unacceptable behavior.Wikipedia is not a government entity where the rules are written in such a way thatunintended consequences are allowed to occur. Instead, rules are written with the goal of improving Wikipedia; likewise, certain rulescan be ignored should they inhibit said improvements.

There is consensus against recreating articles aboutBFDI, leading tocreation protection andTitleBlacklist. However, these protections only block the creation of the exact title, which may becase sensitive. Due to their limited scope, there were attempts tocreate pages against consensus using name and spelling variations ofBattle for Dream Island, such asBattleFor Dream Island,Battle fordreamisland,Battle for BFDI, andJacknjellify. Having multiple articles with similar name variants and/or in different namespaces, especially if they are indexed in search engines, would create confusion with regard to which article is the actual one intended for the topic.

Currently, attempts to create aBFDI article are simplytoo soon. If you have found more sources that coverBFDI and are not already listed on thesource assessment table forBFDI, you can share links to such sources on this essay'stalk page or theBFDI draft'stalk page. If you can show that there is now significant coverage inreliable sources that areindependent ofBFDI, then you can start adeletion review with new evidence and rationale included.

In the meantime, you can contact reliable sources and ask them to coverBFDI. Here are some suggestions: keep your message brief, explain why you like/dislike the series, describe what sets it apart from other content, and mention the popularity it has garnered. These are some indicators of the existence of a substantial fan base, which can be a factor in their decision on whether or not to cover it.Always stay polite, and if the answer is no, move on.

The first known attempt to create an article aboutBFDI occurred inDecember 2010, of which the article was speedy deleted forhaving noclaim of significance. Over the years,BFDI became the subject of article recreations by various users, resulting in speedy deletions (often for the same reason) and latercreation protections. In an effort tocircumvent this restriction, name variants of the same topic were used in page titles, such as "Battle for BFDI" and "Jacknjellify". Users have also created draft pages about this topic, such as "Draft:Battle for Dream Island" and "Draft:Battle for BFDI".

BFDI becameincreasingly popular in the late 2010s, coinciding with the popularity of its fourth season,Battle for BFDI, which was released in 2017. This led toBFDI pages being recreated, deleted, andcreation protected more frequently. Usersnominated these pages for deletion and the consensus amongst them favored deleting most of them and imposing indefinite creation restrictions on some of them. As part of these restrictions, in September 2020, the term "Battle for Dream Island" was placed underTitleBlacklist with other related terms being added in subsequent years.^[c] In 2022, administratorTimwirestored theBattle for Dream Island article and wasreprimanded by theArbitration Committee for doing that. Later that year, adeletion review was made to addressBFDI page recreations. In 2025, followinga discussion on the administrators' noticeboard,Draft:Battle for Dream Island was recreated by administratorFOARP.

Certain articles, lists, and disambiguation pages unrelated toBFDI werevandalized simply due to their titles matching the names of settings and characters from the series.

The article on theFederal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information wasvandalized and reverted multiple times because the agency's official abbreviation happens to be BfDI (German:Bundesbeauftragter für den Datenschutz und die Informationsfreiheit). Two instances ofarticle hijacks occurred on 20 August 2023 (1 and2), both of which werecopy-pasted fromthis Fandom page. SinceSeptember 2024, the article has been placed under indefinitesemi-protection to mitigate vandalism. The articleDream Island is also a frequent target.

Disambiguation and list pages likeDream Island (disambiguation),Woody (name) andBFB have faced similar issues as editors have added non-article entries in these pages. Perdisambiguation guidelines, these pages should not have non-article entries.

There are a few ways for pages likeBFDI to get deleted:opening a deletion discussion,proposing a deletion without any discussion, andspeedy deletion. Administrators will usually speedy delete newBFDI articles as they are oftenrecreations of deleted articles. In the past, these articles were speedy deleted under criterionA7 for "not indicating the importance or significance of the subject", though the series now definitely shows a claim of significance.

While articles are subject tonotability guidelines where significant and reliable secondary sources are required, drafts and user pages arenot subject to such rules. However, these pages, along with other namespaces, are still subject to other sets of rules likewhat Wikipedia is not. Drafts can benominated for deletion, although this usually involves conduct like tendentious resubmissions. In order for a draft to not get declined after a review, it should have plenty ofreliable sources. Keep in mind thatself-published sources anduser-generated content such asYouTube videos andFandom wikis are consideredunreliable and therefore donot count.

Meanwhile, there are plenty ofalternative outlets for information aboutBFDI where you can contribute. For example:

Remember, even these alternative outlets have their own rules. Before you contribute to a wiki, you should familiarize yourself with its rules. For example:

• Administrivia on TV Tropes: TheAdministrivia namespace on TV Tropes is for TV Tropes-related rules and editing guidelines.
  • If there is a trope listed in one article, but there is no context or no explanation in the part^[g], it is likely to be removed.
• Namuwiki (Korean)
  • Main page rules
  • Work page rules

• Battle for Dream Island(Q66121500) atWikidata
• I have a Wikipedia article now? 🤩 (but it's not BFDI), 2024 video with Cary Huang
• Media related toBattle for Dream Island at Wikimedia Commons

• Wikipedia essays about media
• Wikipedia essays about notability
• Wikipedia essays about deletion
• Essays about what Wikipedia is
• Wikipedia behavioral essays

• Wikipedia semi-protected project pages