Talk:Toby Fox

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) 15:39, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the creator of Undertale called his game an "8/10, niche RPG game"?

• Source: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/undertale-launched-a-year-ago-today

• • ALT1: ... that the 2015 video game Undertale, by Toby Fox was given to Pope Francis? Source: https://www.polygon.com/2016/7/6/12105428/pope-undertale-youtuber/
  • ALT2: ... that Toby Fox made Undertale? Source: https://www.pcgamer.com/the-making-of-undertale/
  • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by 1timeuse75 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

1timeuse75 (talk) 11:29, 30 January 2026 (UTC).

• Suggestion Another potential hook option:

• ALT3: ... that Toby Fox programs his games using speech-to-text software due to wrist pain? Source: https://www.eurogamer.net/toby-fox-making-healthy-progress-on-deltarune-chapter-2

I'd be happy with any of the above. asex twin^{talk · contribs.} 08:32, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

From the Undertale article: ALT4: ... that a multi-million selling game compiled almost entirely by Toby Fox was inspired by a single Wikipedia article? Source: https://www.pcgamer.com/the-making-of-undertale/--Launchballer 10:22, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

• ALT5: ... that the 2015 Undertale character Sans by Toby Fox is a costume for the Smash Ultimate mii gunner? Source: https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/09/05/fans-lost-it-over-sans-being-announced-as-a-smash-ultimate-mii-fighter KrispyBlueJays (talk) 05:07, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

ALT5 would really only appeal to video game fans. ALT3 and ALT4 are probably the better options here, with a slight preference for ALT3 since ALT4 could be perceived as navel-gazing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:18, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Ok, how about: ALT6: ... that a multi-million selling game compiled almost entirely by Toby Fox was inspired after he read an article about arrays? Source: https://www.pcgamer.com/the-making-of-undertale/ 1timeuse75 (talk) 16:52, 8 February 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: None required.

Overall: this reminds me, I really need to play Undertale sometime. Anyhow, article is neutral, long enough, this was nominated right after it was promoted, and spotchecks check out. No qpq required and no copyvio to be seen. Shame there is no image of him :). Hook-wise, I find ALT0, ALT1, and ALT3 interesting. ALT4 is also interesting, but the navel-gazing concerns are valid and also it doesn’t cite to this article, so possibly disqualifying. If the promoter goes with ALT1, I’d recommend ALT1a: "... that Toby Fox's video game Undertale was given to Pope Francis? (Taking a closer look, I’m not entirely sure ALT1 verifies) 1brianm7 (talk) 05:50, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

@1brianm7: just to clarify, is alt1 (and alt1a) approved or not? your last sentence indicates some doubt. ltbdl (love) 17:23, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Looking again, I'd say they are approved. The Polygon article takes the claim from Matpat into its own voice, so it verifies. 1brianm7 (talk) 18:01, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Where Fox was raised

@1timeuse75 @Gfollower

I saw there was recently a dispute for the inclusion of "raised in Boston" for the lead. The reason the article says raised in Boston in the lead is, I believe, due to this comment from Toby Fox in a 2018 interview: 生まれてから今まで、ずっとボストンに住んでいます." (I've lived in Boston my entire life, from birth until now.) I'm assuming this since the line it cites in personal life is the only other Boston-related line. Though, this does contrast New Hampshire Union Leader since it says he graduated High School from Manchester Central High School, and even directly says "born and raised in Manchester" for Fox. Furthermore, it goes on to say "Many websites associate Fox with Boston, but he assuredly grew up here."

So, what should we do? I find Fox's 2018 quote kind of strange considering the "birth" part, maybe there's a mistranslation with what I'm using, I don't speak JP.
TheSilksongPikmin (talk | contribs) 10:42, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Pinging @Travis Mulch, since he was the one who expanded the lead. 1timeuse75 (talk) 10:52, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

the union leader paper is correct, it also includes an interview with his mother which does give it legitimacy (its also more recent). my best guess for the 2018 quote is that toby was trying to avoid sharing info related to his hometown.

so i guess its up to you guys whether we keep it or not Gfollower (talk) 11:12, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Yeah that's probably a likely reason he said that. I'll wait for Travis Mulch to respond since they're the one who did the expansion.

In my opinion it probably should say "born and raised in Manchester" since we have a source that verbatim says this. And considering he graduated High School from Manchester, it is sort of weird to say raised in Boston since those years are normally considered the raising period. TheSilksongPikmin (talk | contribs) 11:23, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

@1timeuse75 @Gfollower@TheSilksongPikmin @Monathephantom I'm really cautious about using the Union Leader citation for anything other than the most basic details due to WP:BLPPRIVACY concerns. The birthplace is fine because it'd conflict his own reliably sourced statements otherwise (he never said he was born in Boston, just that he's from there), he has older brothers and saying the subject's birth order is house style, but that's it.

Details about Manchester are exclusively sourced to Union Leader, where any additional use can seem predatory and bordering on doxxing, considering it wasn't that long ago that the Wikipedia article openly named his parents (we shouldn't do that!) At a featured article level, we need to worry far less about the comprehensiveness of details and far more about whether or not they're a legitimate privacy risk. I've already reduced the Union Leader article's use to the bare minimum and that's where it should stay. Remember, WP:BLPs are highly regulated and we should remember that Toby Fox is still a public figure. Travis Mulch (talk) 15:18, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Fair on BLP concerns,but I'm still not the biggest fan of saying "raised in Boston" when we have a source directly stating "raised in Manchester".

Would altering the lead to simply say "Born in Manchester, New Hampshire", excluding the "raised" part be a fine compromise with you? It'd avoid the conflicting a source bit without also adding info that borders on doxxing. TheSilksongPikmin (talk | contribs) 16:05, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Remember that this is the interview where Fox's own mom both would not let Toby be interviewed and Mark even explicitly says "She asked that I not disclose the city where her son lives." There's basically no room for debate, we have to go off of what Toby says. Birthplace is inherently due information, the birth order is due because of Toby's regular mentions of his brothers, but basically nothing else is. Travis Mulch (talk) 16:17, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Alright, yeah it can be kept. But it's not the most important info for the lead so I do still think excluding the raised part entirely and just saying "Born in Manchester, New Hampshire" can work for the lead. But, if we want raising location in the lead then Boston works per your reasoning. TheSilksongPikmin (talk | contribs) 16:21, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

I think Boston should be at least mentioned since he's pretty closely tied to Boston. This is probably something we should seek a WP:3O about. Travis Mulch (talk) 16:24, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

A possible alternative could be noting in the lead that Northeastern is in Boston, so it would say "Born in Manchester, New Hampshire" only in paragraph 2, but then paragraph 3 would say "During his time at Northeastern University in Boston" or something of the sort, so both cities still get mentioned in the lead. But that's just my opinion, a third opinion would be preferred. For now, I think it's fine to leave it untouched, you've explained why well. TheSilksongPikmin (talk | contribs) 16:31, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Still a bit cautious about the phrasing, because, whatever's undue for Union Leader should be comparatively due if Toby says something himself. I'll go with whatever the 3O says and won't object further. Travis Mulch (talk) 16:35, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

if toby's privacy is our utmost priority for this page then ideally we would have to omit any mention of manchester (in favor of boston) and/or remove the union leader citation entirely, otherwise we could say "born and raised in manchester" or just "born in manchester" and leave the rest ambiguous.

to me, it makes no sense to go half and half (born in manchester, raised in boston) when we're already "lying" about him being raised in boston (pre 2010) despite the existence of sources that say otherwise.

regardless of what we do, that entire sentence just doesnt contribute much to the article anyway. two paragraphs down in the early life section, its already stated that he was born in manchester, minus the raised part. intentionally leaving it ambiguous protects his family, and allows that entire section to avoid any mention of what his life in manchester was like, since its main focus is on what games inspired him as a kid and what he was doing to hone his skills. Gfollower (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

@Gfollower I'd suggest you read the policies covering "Privacy of personal information and using primary sources" and "Use of names" before attempting to continue this conversation. There's an ongoing third opinion request to resolve this matter. Please don't interfere. Travis Mulch (talk) 23:49, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

thanks travis Gfollower (talk) 23:53, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

It's actually not a mistranslation. I just checked, and it's probably the most direct statement "Tricky Tony" Fox has ever made. Monathephantom (talk) 11:16, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

@TheSilksongPikmin Here's what I'm proposing:

1) "Born in Manchester" (Lead, paragraph 2)

2) "(Northeastern University) in (Boston), where Fox continued to reside." (Lead, paragraph 3)

3) "As of 2018, Fox resided in Boston, Massachusetts." (Personal life)

Do you think this would work and we could disregard the 3O? The lead has to be rewritten after we finish up the main text anyway. Travis Mulch (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Personally I think this is perfect. I like the As of 2018 addition as well. TheSilksongPikmin (talk | contribs) 05:46, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Retracting 3O and making the mentioned edits. Travis Mulch (talk) 05:59, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Signature inclusion/removal

Per @SnowFire's edit here (which I've chosen to revert, but want to further discuss), and the "Signatures of living persons" essay, I'd just like to talk about the choice to remove the signature. The essay's nutshell is that there's "no consensus on inclusion/removal, secondary reproduction should be prioritized, and there are questions of whether reproduction enables identity theft."

Let me say off the bat that absolutely nobody's gonna steal Toby's identity with a simplified "T" & "F". But, I also understand how removal can relate to Toby's (not really well-established, on his part) want for privacy. Toby's signature has stayed roughly the same. I don't think this should be an isolated removal, personally. These past few years, Toby's been actively signing things, and stuff with his signature gets posted online.

If an argument's "identity theft" or misuse, see the Beatles. The most widely forged signatures in history that have plagued collectors for 60 years. Yet all four members openly have them on their pages. Celebrities like Dwayne Johnson probably have a market for signed memorabilia, but Wikipedia isn't there to be a signature authenticator for verification. Unless there's a legitimate, present risk of including someone's signature, I don't feel it should be removed. But I'm welcome to hearing more about it. Travis Mulch (talk) 01:48, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to the talk page. My reasoning has nothing to do with identity theft. Nor even Toby's preferences. Wikipedia doesn't really care too deeply about a subject's desire for privacy. The problem for me is just relevance, but it's a big problem. The Infobox is not for every single true fact, and not every field needs to be filled out. See MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE; it's meant to be a compact guide to "key" facts. The signature isn't important enough to be "key", he's not known for his signature. And even "facts" is not trivial here, we're ideally looking for a signature (adjective) signature (noun), not just a random signature he once made. I'm not sure if such a thing exists, and if it does it might need a source.

Basically, less is more. This rule is unfortunately mostly honored in the breach. Grab a phone and go to the 2026 Iran war article and see just how many screens of infobox you have to scroll past in the mobile view. This article's infobox isn't as badly off, but being disciplined about just the relevant stuff is how it stays that way. (And from a sheer matter of screen real estate, signatures take up even more room than the usual text trivia.) I don't think the signature is relevant enough here. (But hey, people who click on the Commons Category link or the Wikidata item can still find the signatures?) SnowFire (talk) 02:15, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

I wouldn't say purpose weighs the same between family/children & what's pretty much an ornament. The signature's importance to the subject shouldn't apply to people who don't have a market for their signature's historical & monetary value. Given that, applying it selectively, and not broadly, calls into question that value in other signatures which don't have it. But, we can verify he often signs like that: (1) (2) (3) Travis Mulch (talk) 02:40, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

I also wanna add that if we're defining signature viability based on signature notability, a majority of celebrities immediately fail. Travis Mulch (talk) 02:44, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I think signatures should not be included on articles on random celebrities too, barring the exceptionally rare cases of people whose signature itself is famous somehow and this fact is sourced (John Hancock the most famous example). The fact that some other articles include a signature of questionable relevance simply means the problem isn't restricted to just here. I made the adjustment here because you posted in the WP Discord asking for peer review & feedback, and I think that removing this signature will make the article better, setting aside "other stuff". I'm not going to edit war it in, but I do hope to convince you that it's not a good inclusion on the merits. Set aside the other articles, ignore them - do you think that the signature is "paying its weight" in screen real estate? That Fox's signature is relevant in this specific article? Imagine if the tyrant chief editor of Wikipedia said that to keep the signature, we had to remove one sentence from the lede. Would you say yup, we should pay that price, the signature is that important? If so, then maybe keep it. (I am not actually saying to do this of course, it's just a thought exercise.) SnowFire (talk) 03:01, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

For screen real estate merit, it's already set to 100px. It used to be larger. I agree with the idea that Toby's is tall. Most signatures are wide & long, Toby's is basically square. But also, if you think removal here's better, then you should think about (and I'd agree with) the fact there should be stronger consensus/discussion about random signature placement in articles.

The way I see it, for someone like Toby, who's done two big things and a lot of small things, there isn't disproportionate weight between his "Other names" or his signature, and a lead sentence about specific Early life details, or him composing a couple tracks for some indie games. I'd trade minor details in a lead for a stronger infobox.

I get what you're saying, but I'm gonna go with a middle ground on this one: resize it, 100px -> 60px. Small enough so it's still legible (it's a simple signature, anyway), but I do consider it worth keeping until there's a wider consensus. Travis Mulch (talk) 03:25, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Can we pls replace Toby's face to foam Toby Fox?

It would be funny but we can still include the public face of what Toby Fox looks like in Career so its less confusing. Im pretty sure its the "up to date version" or at least the latest one unless that goes against wikipedia's rules not to have unserious or funny images.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Undertale/s/fd49aQyBoK ~2026-51681-72 (talk) 10:36, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

see the discussions on the archives for why an image that obscures tobias vulpes' face isn't particularly useful for knowing what he looks like consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 11:20, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

The current use in "Personal life" is perfectly relevant & compliant with policy. It's literally the bottom-most section. The first thing you see is the only quality photo we've managed to license through Creative Commons. There's no rule against Wikipedia "not to have unserious or funny images", so I don't know what you're talking about. Travis Mulch (talk) 14:11, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Suggestion

It is expected that before nominating an article for FAC that the subject is well-researched, therefore I suggest looking for academic sources that discuss Toby Fox. They might be useful, or they might not. Nevertheless, this should be done before nominating it for FAC. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

@Vacant0 I can attest through previous research that basically everything that's autobiographically relevant to Toby's article, that isn't a WP:RS or WP:BLPPRIVACY risk, will be found in a reliable web article. There have been books/journals written about Toby's work, but actual research into Toby as a person is either non-existent or really badly sourced.

The Undertale Anomaly, the closest thing to a book about Toby, is completely unusable due to how it sources basically all its facts to information stolen from Wikipedia and random social media posts from throughout the years. It's basically one of those "Toby Fox Net Worth Age Wife Children in 2026" clickbait-type articles, in book form.

Journal articles aren't much better. They're far more about analysis of Toby's work that's relevant to Undertale and Deltarune's own articles, rather than Toby himself. I've looked for some journal articles with biographical information and found very little, and the rest of it was unreliably sourced and/or already covered by a reliable source. Note that I wasn't extensive in doing this, but an analysis-type section would be really undue for Toby's BLP given the subject matter that analysis covers. Travis Mulch (talk) 00:06, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Okay, good to hear. Yes, academic sources can more commonly be found for video games, rather than their developers. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:53, 28 September 2026 (UTC)