Wikipedia talk:Why was BFDI not on Wikipedia?/FAQ
 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
 | Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the corresponding page Wikipedia:Why was BFDI not on Wikipedia?. They address concerns, questions, and misconceptions which have repeatedly arisen on the talk page. Please update this material when needed. |
Why did so many other web series have Wikipedia articles before BFDI?
Citing other articles about similar subjects to justify notability is a common and generally hit-and-miss argument; it is a form of whataboutism, which is an informal fallacy. While those articles exist, they might not be necessarily notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Editors do not have the time to check every single article in existence and nominate non-notable subjects for deletion. Web series like Skibidi Toilet, Homestar Runner, and Homestuck have articles because they have coverage in reputable journalistic sources () and scholarly analysis. BFDI did not have this type of coverage until 2025, so it had been a non-notable topic for an article.
But BFDI has over 2 billion views. It is as popular as those web series you mentioned earlier! Why didn't it have an article sooner?
Why did The Scale of the Universe get an article first?
Because multiple independent, reliable sources have been found that cover SOTU in significant detail; enough for that topic to pass for inclusion on Wikipedia under the general notability guideline. However, this would not be the case for BFDI until 2025.
Why were Wikipedia editors biased against BFDI and against creating an article for this series?
Wikipedians have not been "biased" against BFDI. The creation of a Battle for Dream Island article was simply not allowed because the topic lacked notability and overly enthusiastic fans repeatedly recreated it despite consensus having favored its deletion at the time. This behavior was disruptive and wasted the time of those who had to delete and salt (i.e. protect a page from creation) the pages created by these said fans, which is why it was blacklisted on Wikipedia.
Did this essay apply to other Wikimedia Foundation projects (e.g. non-English versions of Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons)?
No, this essay only addresses policies and guidelines and user conduct on the English Wikipedia. However, this answer should not be interpreted to justify adding BFDI onto other Wikimedia projects without understanding and following their own policies and guidelines. Non-English versions of Wikipedia, for example, have their own notability guidelines.
The Huang twins have done tie-ins with far more famous companies who have made merchandise with them. That should've made BFDI notable, right?
Even if we had the reliable sources to verify that, they alone wouldn't have made BFDI notable. A hypothetical article on Wikipedia about the series would explain to a layperson (someone who isn't a part of the object show community) what BFDI is about. We are talking about the series, not the merchandise.
Was this essay supposed to be a policy?
No, essays are not policies, so don't treat this like it was. It explained how the existing general notability guideline applies to BFDI, since it had become a common question, but that didn't make it a policy in itself.