Talk:Minecraft Manhunt

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Minecraft Manhunt/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: 9koyami (talk · contribs) 06:45, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: ModlordD (talk · contribs) 16:31, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

GA Notice

GA Notice
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Minecraft Manhunt in which you've been a major contributor, and has been nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. ModlordD (talk) 16:31, 7 March 2026 (UTC)ModlordD
· · ·

ready for review

hi ModlordD, i consider the minecraft manhunt article to now be ready for a GA review! as per your recommendations, i've edited the article to be in full compliance of GA criteria 1b & 4 (previous fails). criteria 2b's hold (dead/paywalled links) has also been accounted for.

additionally, here's a list of section-by-section changes i've added:

lead:

• slight WP:PEACOCK and WP:WEASEL wording changes
• emphasizing when minecraft content was revitalized per WP:DATED
• uploaded "five hunters" to "six" as per the (as of writing, unreleased, but upcoming) march 8th release
• revitalizing claim only found in student publications, and has been removed

format:

• the section has been re-formatted to incorporate basic game rules in a way which doesn't violate WP:FANCRUFT or WP:JARGON
• retooled wording to generalize the identity of the runner, as episodes have included other or multiple runners
• the attached citation in the first sentence did not originally establish the win condition of defeating the ender dragon. as "completing the game" is defined by the same condition in both minecraft and minecraft manhunt, an additional citation has been added to better emphasize this
• the hunters' goal of killing the runner before the game is beaten is more explicitly defined
• the compass' parameters are more explicitly defined
• the use of overpowered strategies is limited, as per dream's production outline
• improvised strategies, a cornerstone of the format's gameplay, are briefly mentioned
• pointing out dream as the player character in the image

variations:

• fixed one of the video links going to the wrong video entirely, alongside fixing its incorrect release date
• awkward phrasing throughout the paragraph has been changed
• the titles of the variations themselves are added within the paragraph

development:

• the conception of the series has been expanded with additional pertinent information
• rewording of elements in the second & third paragraphs

staging allegations:

• miscellaneous phrasing fixes have been added
• additional emphasis on terminology/gameplay mechanics is placed
• reformatted explanation to avoid redundancy against previous sections

episodes:

• the format of the table has been changed to reduce its overall size on the page
• a lead sentence differentiating main episodes from spin-offs is added
• a (lightly) colored winner column from previous edits has been added, as i've found it not to be a violation of WP:COLOR

reception

• the three sections: "critical response", "viewership" and "cultural legacy" - are now reduced to two, "viewership and cultural impact" and "critical reception"
• list of used sources has been expanded, to better affirm broad popularity
• instances of "words to watch" terms have been rewritten or phased out
• explicit critic/journalist reviews have been defined
• claims of viewership have been cited, with previous unsupported claims removed

references:

• all article links have been properly archived on archive.org
• the citation format is now consistent throughout
• the original paste link had a typo, so it didn't properly redirect
• several citations that initially appeared in the wrong sections have been fixed

if there are any additional fixes i need to make, please let me know! 9koyami (talk) 12:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@9koyami, the standard process is to wait for the reviewer to give their suggestions first. Best of luck with the GAN! 11WB (talk) 14:12, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

the article had already been in the process of section rewrites at the time of the review (which came only eight hours after submission, i was expecting much longer of a wait time) and a hold was provided so these could be completed. i apologize! 9koyami (talk) 18:58, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Second review (March 8, 2026)

I'm nearly ready to pass your nomination, however there are some minor errors you must fix before I give you the pass. Keep in mind I put my previous review on the article itself; this was an error and I meant to put it here. My apologies for that. Seeing as most of your criteria was passed anyway, I don't feel the need to restate every single parameter; I will likely do this on the final review, which will hopefully be the next one if all goes well.

The first citation creates an instant verifiability failure. The reference itself is fine; it links to an article now and it supports your claim. However, a citation that says one outlet and links to another creates the failure. After some research online it appears that Paste itself was purchased by AV Club, however this must be made clear within the citation. Either you can find the original Paste URL on an archive, or likely the easier option, identify the current website. This was the most severe offense.

"Minecraft Manhunt gained widespread popularity on YouTube, with individual videos accumulating tens of millions of views" is cited to refs 17 and 18. Reference 17 is a PC Gamer article about the Dream cheating scandal, and reference 18 is a Kotaku article about someone bringing a Dream SMP flag to an anti-vaccination rally. While both articles incidentally reference Dream's popularity, neither is primarily a source about Manhunt's viewership figures. This isn't a failing issue necessarily, I will pass it since it does state it, I would recommend finding a more direct source to better support this claim.

The previous version included Dream's wins at the 2020 and 2021 Streamy Awards (Gaming category) and Content Creator of the Year at The Game Awards 2021, all properly cited. These have been entirely removed in the new version. This removes concrete, verified, third-party recognized evidence of cultural impact. The GA criterion for broad coverage requires that the article address the main aspects of the topic. Award recognition at major industry ceremonies is directly relevant to a "Cultural legacy" or "Viewership and cultural impact" section. These awards should be reinstated. Curious to see why you decided to remove these.

I'm not 100% familiar with the Minecraft Manhunt series, but looking at the episode list, there does seem to be a hiatus from the series between episodes 34 and 35. If reason exists, it was not given, which can count as a notable omission.

A portion of your article relies entirely on two Reddit posts made by Dream himself (ref 8 and 9). Posts can be easily moderated or deleted in a variety of ways. These need to be archived, or referenced in another way. I'm aware that Wayback Machine specifically is blocked from archiving Reddit posts, so potentially trying out a different archiver or finding an article that cites the post is in question.

Lastly, references 20 to 22 should be archived.

I'm aware that this might've read as potentially harsh, but keep in mind that we are now looking at minor discrepancies (aside from the first one) and not glaring issues. You have done very well creating this article. I do like all your changes, from the ones that are fixes to the ones that have added better quality. The remaining issues are comparatively minor and well within reach, and I look forward to seeing your next round of edits.

ModlordD (talk) 00:57, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

here are fixes in accordance with your review:

• citation 1 has been rebranded from paste to the a.v. club. this is now fixed.
• citation 17 will be replaced in this context, replaced with citation 1 which states: "His latest video, which pits Dream against four hunters, has pulled in 11 million views in just three days, and earlier installments of the series have netted over 30 million views." this is now fixed.
• however, citation 18 states: "Known for his “Minecraft Manhunt” videos that garner tens of millions of views," though incidental, the article as a whole emphasizes the popularity of dream's channel and series, making a proper claim. keeping it alongside the new source. unchanged.
• the streamy awards & game awards articles have been readded and archived, with a basic assertion "Dream has won" alongside it, to avoid further "words to watch" violations. this is now fixed.
• addressing the episode list mention - there was no real "hiatus", dream simply uploaded less to his channel at this time. unchanged.
• i've managed to get around archive.org not having worked the first time, and both reddit comments are now archived on old.reddit.com. the claims made, unfortunately, both are too relevant to omit yet too out of the way for a journalistic article. this is now fixed.
• any other citations that weren't previously archived, now are. this is now fixed.

hope this meets all of your criteria! let me know if there's anything else i can do! 9koyami (talk) 03:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

to address the "why" in removing the streamy/game award links, they were actually in my source list for the rewrite, i'd just forgotten to re-add them cause they didn't directly mention manhunt. my mistake! 9koyami (talk) 03:14, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Minecraft YouTuber Dream pays cash bounties for his friends to hunt him down?

• Source: https://www.dexerto.com/youtube/dream-reveals-he-pays-minecraft-manhunt-hunters-for-early-kills-final-videos-arent-first-takes-3307583/
• (“If the hunters kill the runner at any point before the video would be a good video, like right off spawn, they get a cash prize of an undisclosed amount,” Dream said.)

• ALT1: ... that YouTuber Dream pays cash bounties for others to hunt him down, in Minecraft?

• Source: https://www.dexerto.com/youtube/dream-reveals-he-pays-minecraft-manhunt-hunters-for-early-kills-final-videos-arent-first-takes-3307583/
• (“If the hunters kill the runner at any point before the video would be a good video, like right off spawn, they get a cash prize of an undisclosed amount,” Dream said.)

• ALT2: ... that YouTuber Dream pays cash bounties for his friends to hunt him down, in Minecraft?

• (Source: https://www.dexerto.com/youtube/dream-reveals-he-pays-minecraft-manhunt-hunters-for-early-kills-final-videos-arent-first-takes-3307583/
• (“If the hunters kill the runner at any point before the video would be a good video, like right off spawn, they get a cash prize of an undisclosed amount,” Dream said.)

• Reviewed:
• Comment: Main hook's a more upfront & friendly version, ALT1 is a reference to the popular "...in Minecraft" meme, and ALT2 is a combination of both, to better generalize the idea.

Improved to Good Article status by 9koyami (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

9koyami (talk) 05:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC).

• @9koyami: Hello and welcome to DYK. Not a review, but just wanted to ask if these hooks are based on fiction or real world fact? Please see WP:DYKFICTION, considering the terms "cash bounties" and "hunt". If it is fiction, then this needs revision. Thank you. M. Billoo 04:15, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

@M.Billoo2000: hello! after reviewing WP:DYKFICTION i strongly suggest ALT2 be chosen of the three. the cash bounties are real (the youtuber dream pays friends that he plays against an actual "bounty" to kill him in-game early), though "hunt him down" is better said in ALT2: "hunt him down in Minecaft" better emphasizes the distinction. 9koyami (talk) 04:32, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Marking for review, anyone can do. M. Billoo 08:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Support ALT2. New reviewer, second opinion needed. {{GearsDatapack|talk|contribs}} 15:20, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

• It think it would be better to remove the comma in ALT2: "...to hunt him down in Minecraft". Not sure if that requires a separate hook proposal and review. Toadspike [Talk] 07:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Third review

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Notes

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	Prose is clear, concise, and accessible to a broad audience throughout. The lead accurately summarises the article's content without excessive length. No significant grammar or spelling issues were identified across three revisions. The staging allegations section handles a potentially contentious subject with appropriate neutrality and factual precision. Earlier concerns regarding WP:PEACOCK, WP:WEASEL, and WP:DATED phrasing have all been resolved.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	Article complies with MoS guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. The episode table is appropriately structured with a lead sentence. The reception section is correctly divided into two subsections.	Pass

2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	All references are presented consistently throughout. Archiving has been completed comprehensively across revisions, including previously flagged entries for Reddit comments (refs 8–9), Guinness World Records (refs 20–21), and the YouTube official blog (ref 22).	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Inline citations are present for all challenged content. Sources include established gaming publications (Kotaku, PC Gamer, Polygon, Ars Technica, Screen Rant, Paste Media Group), official records bodies (Guinness World Records), and industry award organisations (Streamy Awards, The Game Awards). Primary sources are used appropriately and without undue interpretive weight. The Reddit primary source citations (refs 8–9) are used only for straightforward first-person statements of fact by the subject.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research identified. Interpretive claims are attributed to named sources. The production section accurately summarises cited source material without synthesis.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No copyright violations or close paraphrasing identified. Quotations are brief and properly attributed.	Pass

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article addresses format, production methodology, series variations, the staging controversy, a complete episode list, viewership, critical reception, and award recognition. This constitutes thorough coverage for a web series article. The Streamy Awards and Game Awards content was reinstated in the final revision, adding an important aspect of the series' cultural impact.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The article stays on topic throughout. The staging allegations section contextualises the speedrunning cheating incident only to the extent necessary to explain its relevance to Manhunt. Game mechanics are described economically without unnecessary technical detail.	Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The article represents all relevant viewpoints fairly. The staging allegations are presented chronologically and factually, with Dream's response given equal weight to the allegations themselves. Critical reception is fully attributed to named journalists and publications. No editorial bias was identified.	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Comment	Result
No evidence of edit warring or content disputes. The article has been actively and constructively improved across three review revisions. Nominator has primarily worked on this article themself.	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	Both images carry non-free use rationales appropriate to their use within the article. Copyright statuses are tagged.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Both images are directly relevant to the article's subject. The infobox thumbnail illustrates the series' visual identity, and the gameplay screenshot of Dream in the Nether dimension illustrates the core format described in the text. The caption appropriately disambiguates "Dream (the player)" from the subject's name.	Pass

Result

Result

Notes

Pass

After three rounds of revision, the article meets all six good article criteria. Concerns raised across the review process, including WP:DATED phrasing, source attribution inconsistencies, missing archive links, reception section restructuring, and the reinstatement of award coverage, were all addressed responsively and thoroughly. The article is well-sourced, neutrally written, and appropriately broad in its coverage of the subject. Passing as a good article.

Discussion

Awesome job!

Add all manhunts

Maybe start adding daquavis, baablu and others? Because not only dream makes manhunts ~2026-28722-33 (talk) 10:09, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Not done. This article is about the web series created by Dream, not about anybody or anything else. Strugglehouse (talk) 15:55, 14 June 2026 (UTC)