Wikipedia:Why was BFDI not on Wikipedia?
 | This is an essay on notability. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community. |
 | This page in a nutshell: |
Battle for Dream Island (BFDI) is an American animated web series on YouTube created by twin brothers Cary and Michael Huang. The show, which as of 2026 has over 3 million subscribers, was not covered by a standalone Wikipedia article for almost 16 years. This is because BFDI did not receive enough significant coverage in independent, reliable sources to meet the general notability guideline until late 2025. Articles without such sourcing would not meet the requirements for neutral point of view and verifiability.
This essay explains why BFDI pages were repeatedly deleted and eventually creation protected (or "salted") so that only administrators could re-create them, until the article was finally recreated. 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 like notability, what Wikipedia is and is not, and disruptive editing, as well as on how consensus can change.
Other franchises like Henry Stickmin and Inanimate Insanity (the latter being inspired by BFDI) may also be popular, but they still 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 at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Perennial requests. As such, several users have used the term "WP:BFDI" to broadly reference the fact that a subject's popularity 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.
Policies and guidelines
Inclusion criteria and neutrality
On Wikipedia, articles must be written from a neutral point of view. This is one of Wikipedia's fundamental 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 about BFDI, we can talk about what the critics liked and what people thought about it.
It is also important for sources to be reliable. Websites hosting self-published and/or user-generated content like Facebook and Fandom are unreliable because anyone there can publish anything, including false and/or biased information. People who disapprove of BFDI 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.
Specific criteria
On Wikipedia, the word notability 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 if it
- has a neutral point of view
- is verifiable with reliable sources
- 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's verifiability and neutrality policies.
It is also important to notice the plural in reliable sources.
IMDb and Fandom were common sources found in attempted BFDI articles; these websites are user-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, hence reliable. Other common sources are YouTube links to the web series itself. However, they do not contribute to notability as they are primary 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 huge BFDI 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:
| “ | Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing.—Jimmy Wales[1] | ” |
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 about BFDI, such an article would have been made a long time ago.
A similar case occurred with SMG4, an Australian-based YouTube channel that creates Machinima videos featuring characters from Super Mario and other Nintendo franchises.[2] After extensive discussions over notability, SMG4 ultimately became a redirect to Glitch Productions, an animation company run by SMG4's creators.[3] As for BFDI, however, there were no Wikipedia articles or lists that meaningfully dedicate a section to BFDI (see "Battle for Dream Island"). This means that unlike SMG4, a BFDI redirect could not lead anywhere and thus could not be created as such.
Reliability of specific sources
YouTube, Fandom, and IMDb had been some of the most common sources found in pages about BFDI. Such sources are considered generally unreliable because they are user-generated and self-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 as Reuters, or by subject-matter experts, such as a renowned professor.
No original research and primary sources
BFDI videos published by jacknjellify are considered primary sources. These videos do provide insight for those unfamiliar with the show; however, any interpretation made by Wikipedia editors (e.g. character development, canonicity of BFDI media, and "theories" about BFDI) must be backed with a secondary source, otherwise they would violate the no original research policy. Additionally, these videos can only show things from the creator's perspective, compromising their objectivity.
Popularity is not the same as notability
![](/everything/wiki/File:Habana_-_Restaurante_"Dos_Hermanos".jpg)
While a subject's popularity may suggest notability, it does not automatically guarantee notability in the context of Wikipedia. Though the channel hosting BFDI has over 3 million subscribers and over 2 billion views,[4][a] these numbers alone would not have justified the creation of a BFDI article on Wikipedia. Usually, when something is popular, many reliable sources report on the subject, making it notable. However, BFDI had been an exception, with editors being unable to find independent, reliable sources that significantly covered this show until 2025. BFDI's popularity can be seen through the existence of numerous Fandom pages,[5][6][7] but it was not able to appear on Wikipedia unless notability was demonstrated. It should be noted that other independent animated projects such as The Amazing Digital Circus, Happy Tree Friends and Lackadaisy 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.
Non-mainspace pages
Drafts
Wikipedia has a page 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 it has not been edited in six months or it meets any other criteria for speedy deletion.
However, drafts about BFDI were often deleted through numerous miscellany 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 again used up editors' time. For example, one deleted draft about a similar web series was submitted for review and declined over ten times.
User pages
While editors are permitted to store drafts in their userspace with the possibility of becoming actual articles, editors may not use their userspace to indefinitely host pages that look like articles. These pages make Wikipedia look more like a webhost, which it is not. Wikipedia is a formal encyclopedia, 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's efforts to build an encyclopedia. Therefore, user pages cannot have "fake articles" about topics that are not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia.
What Wikipedia is not
In order to compensate for the lack of critical reviews and analysis from reliable sources, many attempted BFDI articles often were 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 as IMDb or Fandom. Remember that Wikipedia is for everyone, not just fans of a certain series, and that Wikipedia must abide by a neutral point of view–showing that people both like and dislike a certain piece of media.
Disruptive editing
.jpg)
Disruptive editing, even if it is meant to get a point across, is simply prohibited.
In many deletion discussions relating to BFDI, many editors reached a consensus that BFDI is not notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. In spite of this, pages about BFDI 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" had been blocked from recreation in a technical level (i.e. creation protection and TitleBlacklist).
Gaming the system
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 that unintended consequences are allowed to occur. Instead, rules are written with the goal of improving Wikipedia; likewise, certain rules can be ignored should they inhibit said improvements.
There had been consensus against recreating articles about BFDI, leading to creation protection and placement on the TitleBlacklist. However, these protections only blocked the creation of the exact title, which may be case sensitive. Due to their limited scope, there were attempts to create pages against consensus using name and spelling variations of Battle for Dream Island, such as Battle For Dream Island, Battle for dream island, Battle for BFDI, and Jacknjellify. 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.
Consensus can change
Whilst repeatedly making the same proposal without presenting new evidence or arguments is potentially disruptive, it is still the case that, even when something has been rejected many times, it can still be accepted. Therefore, in the case of BFDI, the article was eventually created because new instances of significant coverage had been published, and consensus about the notability of BFDI changed accordingly.
History
Creation attempts
The first known attempt to create an article about BFDI occurred in December 2010, of which the article was speedy deleted for having no claim 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 later creation protections. In an effort to circumvent 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 became increasingly popular in the late 2010s, coinciding with the popularity of its fourth season, Battle for BFDI, which was released in 2017. This led to BFDI pages being recreated, deleted, and creation protected more frequently. Users nominated 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 under TitleBlacklist with other related terms being added in subsequent years.[b] In 2022, administrator Timwi restored the Battle for Dream Island article and was reprimanded by the Arbitration Committee for doing that. Later that year, a deletion review was made to address BFDI page recreations.
Eventual creation
In 2025, following a discussion on the administrators' noticeboard, Draft:Battle for Dream Island was recreated by administrator FOARP based on new sources that had emerged in the intervening time since the previous AFD. After the publication of additional instances of significant coverage of BFDI, and a month of various editors contributing to the draft as well as a deletion review, consensus about the article's notability had changed, and the draft was moved to mainspace.
Other pages
Certain articles, lists, and disambiguation pages unrelated to BFDI were vandalized simply due to their titles matching the names of settings and characters from the series.
The article on the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information was vandalized and reverted multiple times because the agency's official abbreviation happens to be BfDI (German: Bundesbeauftragter für den Datenschutz und die Informationsfreiheit). Two instances of article hijacks occurred on 20 August 2023 (1 and 2), both of which were copy-pasted from this Fandom page. From September 2024 until the BFDI article was created, the article was placed under indefinite semi-protection to mitigate vandalism. The article Dream Island is also a frequent target.
Disambiguation and list pages like Dream Island (disambiguation), Woody (name) and BFB have faced similar issues as editors have added non-article entries in these pages. Per disambiguation guidelines, these pages should not have non-article entries.
Deletions
There are a few ways for pages to get deleted: opening a deletion discussion, proposing a deletion without any discussion, and speedy deletion. Administrators would usually speedy delete new BFDI articles as they were often recreations of deleted articles. In the past, these articles were speedy deleted under criterion A7 for "not indicating the importance or significance of the subject", though the series now definitely shows a claim of significance.
Conclusion
While articles are subject to notability guidelines where significant and reliable secondary sources are required, drafts and user pages are not subject to such rules. However, these pages, along with other namespaces, are still subject to other sets of rules like what Wikipedia is not. Drafts can be nominated 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 of reliable sources. Keep in mind that self-published sources and user-generated content such as YouTube videos and Fandom wikis are considered unreliable and therefore do not count.
However, even when an article has been deleted many, many times on Wikipedia, that doesn't mean it necessarily has to remain deleted forever, since consensus can change, particularly with new evidence.
To publish content about BFDI that is not suitable for Wikipedia, there are plenty of alternative outlets where you can contribute. For example:
- Fandom
- Fanlore
- Giant Bomb
- Battle for Dream Island at IMDb
- Know Your Meme
- Miraheze
- All The Tropes (A fork of TV Tropes)
- BFDI wiki
- Namuwiki (Korean)[d]
- TV Tropes
See also
- Wikipedia:Bare notability
- Wikipedia:Before they were notable
- Wikipedia:But it's true!
- Wikipedia:Deletion review/Perennial requests
- Wikipedia:Existence ≠ Notability
- Wikipedia:Fancruft
- Wikipedia:Just because BFDI has an article doesn't mean you can add fancruft about it
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections
- Wikipedia:Minimum coverage
- Wikipedia:Popularity does not guarantee notability
- The opposite: Wikipedia:Obscure does not mean not notable
- Wikipedia:Red flags of non-notability
- Wikipedia:Salted drafts
- Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
- Wikipedia:Why is BFDI on Wikipedia?
- Wikipedia:Subjective importance
- Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews § "They want it"
- Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not Fandom
- User:JzG/And the band played on... (This page was created back in October 2006, over 3 years before BFDI debuted its first episode, but this still applies to topics that have almost no notability for an article)
- Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability
Notes
- ↑ As of September 2026
- ↑
- "Battle for BFB", "Cary Huang", and "Michael Huang" in February 2023
- "object show" in March 2024
- "Battle for BFDI" from November to December 2024
- "BFDI" in December 2024
- ↑ The first а is in Cyrillic script; see WP:MIXEDSCRIPT
- ↑ Before reading the Namuwiki article, you should understand the wiki's inside jokes, such as the use of strikethroughs on some of the content that is considered humorous.
References
- ↑ Roblimo (28 July 2004). "Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales Responds". Slashdot. Retrieved 28 April 2014.
- ↑ "About SMG4". YouTube.
- ↑ SMG4 log and SuperMarioGlitchy4 log
- ↑ "About jacknjellify". YouTube.
- ↑ "Home". Battle for Dream Island Wiki. Retrieved 2 June 2023.
- ↑ "jacknjellify". Wikitubia. Retrieved 2 June 2023.
- ↑ "Battle for Dream Island". Object Show Fanonpedia. Retrieved 2 June 2023.
External links
- I have a Wikipedia article now? 🤩 (but it's not BFDI) on YouTube — 2024 video with Cary Huang
- How an internet series broke Wikipedia on YouTube — 2026 video on BFDI's Wikipedia history