Talk:Wilbur Soot

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2024

Due to the allegations of Wilbur by streamer Shubble not being included in the wiki page, I am requesting to edit in order to include the allegation information within his Wikipedia page.

Shelby's Stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzkS1_Pu6Kw

Wilbur's Response: https://x.com/WilburSoot/status/1762505851699380353 Manwithafriend (talk) 19:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself.

Also note that allegations of wrongdoing on a WP:BLP would require more reliable sources, these are both user-generated. If this has been covered by news outlets or other reliable sources it can probably be added. Jamedeus (talk) 20:17, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

You want a reliable source: https://www.themirror.com/entertainment/celebrity-news/wilbur-soot-apology-shubble-allegations-362564, another one? here: The US SunYouTuber Wilbur Soot blasted for ‘brushing it under the rug’ as he returns to social media 4 months after ‘...Musician and streamer Wilbur Soot has been blasted once again by fans for returning to social media several months after he was accused of abusing an ex-....10 Jun 2024, that reliable enough? ADD THE ALLEGATIONS! The Linear (talk) 19:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

allegations are nothing without proof Axzyr (talk) 21:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I agree with what you said. And after looking on your profile or user page I fully understand why you are a Wilbur supporter there's a lot of evidence support to the Shelby abused Wilbur situation but not the Wilbur abused Shelby situation literally to my knowledge that has the only piece that Shelby has spoken on about the Wilbur allegations is her actually coming out against Wilbur in February of 2024 but you look at the time period that Shelby had spoken that with this particular topic of Wilbur you can see various bruises and bite marks and various other injuries and I feel like pictures of Shelby during this time you see none of that HiimowoomgYT (talk) 19:25, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

yikes...

Kid, based on your profile you are way too young to be caught up worshipping an abuser. BromoPhenethylamine (talk) 02:22, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

that's why I'm not :shrug: Axzyr (talk) 12:52, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

HE FUCKING ADMITTED TO IT! 149.115.66.106 (talk) 04:25, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Share a reliable source that meets wiki standards instead of yelling Altruisticmeta (talk) 22:27, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Admissions are proof 149.115.66.106 (talk) 22:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

ok share a reliable source for the admission and I'll personally make the edit myself Altruisticmeta (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

 Done I've already covered some of it. I'll continue working on it tomorrow and the day after. It's a genuine shortcoming for Wikipedia to fail covering this for so long. It's notable, clear as day.

Brynn Who Likes Editing | chat w/ me! 11:49, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

The allegations re-talk

want a reliable source: https://www.themirror.com/entertainment/celebrity-news/wilbur-soot-apology-shubble-allegations-362564, another one? here: The US SunYouTuber Wilbur Soot blasted for ‘brushing it under the rug’ as he returns to social media 4 months after ‘...Musician and streamer Wilbur Soot has been blasted once again by fans for returning to social media several months after he was accused of abusing an ex-....10 Jun 2024, that reliable enough? ADD THE ALLEGATIONS! The Linear (talk) 19:53, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

The US Sun is apparently considered an unreliable source for whatever reason? I'll try and add that other source into the article, the Mirror one. Kaivangelion (talk) 02:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Kaivangelion The Linear (talk) 08:17, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Not that I disagree with adding something about the allegations, as he's practically fallen out of the public face and almost everybody he previously knew no longer associates with him, but by no means is The Mirror considered a reliable source for contentious topics such as this. Again, let me reiterate that I wouldn't be against adding content about it due to not only his response and the falloff of his public image as a result of the situation, just making a correction here regarding Wikipedia standards on sources. B3251_(talk) 01:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Hey, so are we doing anything about the new allegations? or are we just going to ignore them like the last time:

Wilbur Soot Grooming Allegations Explained... (Exposed by Rue) The Linear (talk) 12:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I would add that one [and the other one] but unfortunately the editors on this article are strict and only want certain sources? I'll look around Kaivangelion (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

sick, cheers. The Linear (talk) 17:22, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Also, it feels very unfair that we can't add these things, even Soot himself confirmed 2/3 of the allegations, why can't we add his own truths? The Linear (talk) 17:26, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

A truth which caused him to lose 250,000 fans, an incredible loss, the likes that not many youtubers or youtube users have seen. The Linear (talk) 17:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

That's what I'm confused about as well. Plenty of articles use Twitter as a source, mainly for announcements or statements from the subject of the article. I don't get why we can't source it here. Kaivangelion (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I think all you can add from 𝕏 is WP:ABOUTSELF what Wilbur has said about it, which as we all know is a very poor address of the situation and may be worse than just not including it at all. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

@Kaivangelion Please keep in mind that it's not us editors who are being strict regarding this, it's just that coverage about this situation was never picked up by any sources considered to be reliable enough for contentious topics. It's not our decision, it's according to the Wikipedia guidelines. I have had my edits reverted by high-ranking editors when I was a new editor for similar reasons. I personally won't stop you if you so choose to add information regarding this because was once familiar with this topic I don't oppose adding it, but technically speaking because none of the sources that have reported on the topic are considered reliable enough for serious topics (only coverage really came from low-quality tabloids). Because of that, another editor who is familiar with Wikipedia guidelines will likely remove it (again, as it has been a few times as far as I'm aware). B3251_(talk) 18:44, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I believe that regardless of what reliable sources we can find, due to the consensus agreement of this article requiring a paragraph for allegations, it fits under the category of WP:IGNORE and an unbiased section covering the allegations and their effects on his career should 100% be published Bastubunny (talk) 01:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

ah yes. uploading a video on tiktok where you laugh about an apparently traumatic experience, then ask for the video to not be spread around. EXTRAORDINARILY trustworthy material for wikipedia right there Axzyr (talk) 21:48, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Are we adding it yet???????? An Update Video The Linear (talk) 14:30, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

what do you want them to source using that video? He vaguely referenced not accepting things social media says about him. He doesn't mention anyone's name or any specific actions or labels Altruisticmeta (talk) 14:15, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

surely the use of self published sources would be viable in a circumstance where it acts as a primary source, no? so something like "in 2024 streamer shubble (shelby grace) discussed being abused by an ex-boyfriend <link to stream>, later confirming that it was gold" (obviously needs workshopping) could work? unsure, but i do think that it really needs to be added, considering how much of his current reputation is centred around it. Tertiaryapocalypse (talk) 10:46, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

If you can find a stream where she actually says his name. She was very very careful to not do that. He doesn't ever say her name, she doesn't ever say his Altruisticmeta (talk) 11:34, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

I believe that it is a shortcoming of this page that there is no mention of the allegations at all. Whether you believe them to be true or not doesn't matter. His image is tainted by these allegations, and it seems deceitful to not mention them at all. For example socialblade could be used as a source to report on the substancial amount of subscribers he lost. Perhaps a controversy subsection could be added onto the online career section.

As for sources on the allegations themselves I believe the article from the mirror would be considered the most reliable out of all that reported on it. Addionally An explanatory supplement to Wikipedia's Reliable Sources guideline states that Content uploaded from a verified official account may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability which would allow the usage of a video covering the topic by a verified Youtube channel. Midnightmurders (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Unless a piece of media explicitly states it caused the drop in subscribers, etc, assuming the two are connected is original research and is not allowed. The Mirror seems to be a tabloid website (no idea if it's the same as Wikipedia:DAILYMIRROR but even if assuming not it seems like a tabloid), and while the overall incidents might be notable if there is other sources found, Wikipedia is not a gossip forum and shouldn't be echoing a tabloid. As for the "verified official account," there has been no official upload by either of them afaik, and again Wikipedia's not for gossip. Realtent (talk) 19:45, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Discussion of removing photo

See Talk:Nihachu#Removals of pictures by TA and please comment there. Realtent (talk) 15:02, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

I don't think the person doing the edits is going to participate in this topic, but in good faith, I am. I think the picture is fine to stay up. It has historic merit of that time period of streaming regardless of how things ended up later. Altruisticmeta (talk) 22:07, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

While they participated in conversations at the other talk page, they kept trying to push their preferred version against consensus in the meantime. I reported them at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring and I'm probably not going to touch either page until the case is resolved just to keep the logs clean for admins. Realtent (talk) 23:57, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Reopening this after a couple of weeks have passed: having very little knowledge of either party, this image seems inappropriate for inclusion on this WP:BLP given their relationship appears to have lasted only a few months. That Sembowski was 18 during their relationship, which she has repeatedly characterised as abusive, should disincline editors from keeping this image in the article.

I will check back to see if this garners any responses. Becsh (talk) 00:04, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

When you put it that way, yeah, it does seem not great to put in the article. Having let it sit for a few weeks, I'm changing my opinion on the matter from keep photo to no opinion, as I don't have a strong preference. Looking back on it, I reacted too aggressively in discussions on the topic and should probably keep out as talk continues. Realtent (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

About the abuse allegations

@Mangroves: I've noticed you've deleted my coverage on the abuse allegations. Your rationale is that "The Mirror is a tabloid of dubious reliability." The BLP editnotice says to not add content cited only to tabloids. This is not what I did; I also added a citation to Shubble's stream. As far as I'm aware, this is compliant with BLPPRIMARY And I'd like to see your reasoning behind claiming it is of dubious reliability, because The Mirror is nowhere to be seen on the list of frequently discussed sources. Brynn Who Likes Editing (talk) 10:00, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not the person who removed this or that you mentioned in your comment, but I feel I can still add to this by pointing you in the right direction.

While I have no reason to doubt the claims against Gold, and I do believe it would be important to document them, the lack of correct, reliable sourcing is where this falls apart.

The Mirror is indeed on the linked Perennial sources list, see WP:DAILYMIRROR. While it doesn't flat out say that it is completely unreliable, it is correct to say that it has disputed neutrality and reliability.

Additionally, the references to Grace's stream VODs cannot be used as they are links to reuploads on unaffiliated, third-party YouTube channels. We would need direct sources, from Twitch or from an official channel to even consider these for use within an article.

Due to the above, we cannot include these allegations as they are not correctly sourced. If you can provide multiple, actual, reliable sources, then we can consider addition. Strugglehouse (talk) 11:34, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

This is The Mirror US (which is a different branch of The Daily Mirror), and therefore it may not be subject to the same scrutiny. The Mirror US is not on the list.

And it's not like Shubble's stream is the only other thing here, here's Soot's official Twitter account response, and Dream's official Twitter account response to that.

Brynn Who Likes Editing | chat w/ me! 11:46, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

The Mirror US, as you said, is a division of The Daily Mirror. I very much doubt that The Mirror US is held to a brilliant, high standard as opposed to The Daily Mirror. They are both tabloid newspapers, owned by the same people. WP:DAILYMIRROR applies to both.

Gold's Twitter post could potentially be used, but we definitely cannot include a lot of the information that you added. The post says that he is responding to allegations by "an ex-girlfriend". This does not mention Grace's name (or anyone's name), and does not mention all specifics. Adding these just from this source would be WP:OR.

From the source, we could include something like:

On 27 February 2024, Gold responded to allegations of abuse from an ex-girlfriend. He said that he "understood ... that his behaviour was consensual" and that he "recognise[d] that [she] has processed and expressed feelings or hurt".

All we can do with this Twitter post is quote it. We cannot add any more specifics on the person or the abuse without reliable sources. Strugglehouse (talk) 12:28, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Looking back, I realize that it was probably a bad idea to include that clip of Shubble's, as it was from a fan channel. But I think that The Mirror has some use, as it is a yellow on the list (as opposed to a red). Of course, the source is biased, and I think some parts of it would be inappropriate, so... I'll write something in my sandbox, and when I'm done I'll ask for approval. Brynn Who Likes Editing | talk w/ me! 12:53, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

As I said before, I understand that The Mirror is not fully deprecated as a source, but it should be considered carefully, taken with a grain of salt, and not used if it is the only source available.

If you think you can write something that works, by all means give it a go. Just make sure you follow Wikipedia's rules and guidelines, and source things correctly. Strugglehouse (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll open a new topic when I'm done. Brynn Who Likes Editing | talk w/ me! 14:29, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi, you may not be aware but biographies of living persons have stricter sourcing requirements, especially for material that is sensitive or potentially damaging (which this definitely is). A tabloid + some primary social media postings is definitely not good enough to support the inclusion of allegations of sexual violation. ꧁Mangroves꧂ 16:32, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for this. I'm working on what to add in the article on my sandbox, and I'll be sure to word (and source) things more carefully. When I'm done, I'll create a new topic where I'll ask for feedback before addition. 🎆 Brynn Who Likes Editing | talk w/ me! 16:45, 29 July 2026 (UTC)