Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Source assessment/Battle for Dream Island

Battle for Dream Island (BFDI) is an animated web series on YouTube created by Cary and Michael Huang, published on the YouTube channel Jacknjellify. For many years, it had been a target of excessive article creation attempts and associated disruption, detailed in Wikipedia:Why was BFDI not on Wikipedia?. It was also the only media series listed under Titleblacklist.

Posts covering Battle for Dream Island that originate from YouTube and Twitter are already covered by WP:RSPYT and WP:RSPTWITTER respectively.

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
"BFDIA 6 Well Rested, MAP Reanimated [BACKUPS OPEN]". pkbnews.in. 2023-09-03. Retrieved 2023-12-04.
 Yes No Poorly written, AI-generated content heavily paraphrased from Fandom Yes ✘ No
Hinatsu, Satomi; Huang, Cary (2019). Battle for Dream Island: Official Character Guide. Scholastic. Retrieved 5 December 2023.
 No Was written by the production team. Yes Yes ✘ No
"Battle for Dream Island (Web Animation)". TV Tropes. Retrieved 2023-12-04.
 Yes No TV Tropes is a wiki, anyone can add information to it, true or false.

(WP:TVTROPES)

Yes ✘ No
Huang, Michael; Huang, Cary; Bryant, Kenzie (2010-01-01), Battle for Dream Island, Jacknjellify, retrieved 2023-12-04
 Yes No IMDb is a wiki.

(WP:IMDB)

Yes ✘ No
"Battle for Dream Island". www.wikidata.org. Retrieved 2023-12-04.
 Yes No Wikidata is a wiki! Yes ✘ No
Troitino, Christina (2016-10-05). "The Real Business Behind Fantasy Food". Forbes. Retrieved 2023-12-06.
 Yes No Written by a Forbes contributor (WP:FORBESCON) No Mentioned in passing in the caption of an image. ✘ No
Tutnick, Emily (2025-06-01). "Alumni Spotlight: Adam Katz". USC Cinematic Arts.
 ~ Interview with someone who has worked with Jacknjellify Yes No Only mentions BFDI in passing with a mention of the 2025 tour ✘ No
No The article disclaimer states, "This article is a paid publication". No Although Hindustan Times is one of the largest newspapers in India by circulation, the article disclaimer states, "This article [...] does not have journalistic/editorial involvement of Hindustan Times." Yes ✘ No
The Harvey School. The Pulse.
 ~ "I think that the source can still be independent, since [Taylor Grodin] didn't work in BFDI at the time that the review was published." – ObserveOwl No "without a clear reputation for fact-checking and made by a student without qualifications for film/TV reporting or criticism (not reliable for facts or due for opinions)"
– ObserveOwl 		Yes ✘ No
Yes No Powered by IMDb, a self-published source No "doesn't have enough information to be significant coverage"
– ObserveOwl 		✘ No
WordPress sites (1 2)
 Yes No WordPress sites are usually self-published ~ Varies ✘ No
newsnownigeria.ng (1 2)
 Yes No No authors listed, poorly designed

"It just has a lot of characteristics of a content mill that just wants ad revenue without regards to accuracy. If it is a small news source, it probably isn't reputable enough."
– ObserveOwl

(websites do not appear to exist anymore)

Yes ✘ No
MSN (1 2 3)
 No "[G]etting these created was a paid effort."
– Flyinakite 		No Ditto Yes ✘ No
No Same as MSN No Ditto ~ Maybe? It goes into detail about JnJ's team. ✘ No
No Same as MSN No Ditto ~ Maybe? It goes into detail about JnJ's team. ✘ No
No Listed as an "impact feature" with no author (similar to the above entry), so likely to be a paid article. No Ditto ~ Goes into a decent amount of detail about a team member and in-person events the show has done. ✘ No
No Official listing for an event they did. No While The Miami Times may be reliable, anyone can create an event on their website. No Has almost no details about the show itself. ✘ No
Yes Appears to be independent. ~ ScienceFiction.com is cited in a decent number of places around Wikipedia, and while not a particularly established media outlet, appears to have an actual editorial team. No Only mentions the show in the context of a treat inspired by its content, in an article about treats from fantasy shows. No coverage on what Battle for Dream Island itself is. ✘ No
Yes Appears to be independent. Yes Local newspaper published by Black Press. No Only a passing mention in an article about someone else. ✘ No
Yes Yes While WP:BUSINESSINSIDER has no consensus in terms of general reliability, editors believe their culture-related articles to be reliable. Amanda Perelli, one of the co-writers, did go to the event herself. ~ Only mentions the show in the context of internet content creators meeting up in events. No coverage on what Battle for Dream Island itself is, but decent amount about the event ~ Partial
Yes Yes Published by a university press No Battle for Dream Island is only mentioned once when referring to the main subject of the paper, a video game. ✘ No
Close replica of an MSN article? (This article was, however, written by a different person) No "Under30CEO doesn't have a proper editorial structure hence failing WP:RS" – GSS (2019) ✘ No
Yes No Clearly AI-generated and entirely false. No ✘ No
Whateley, Dan; Bradley, Sydney; Perelli, Amanda; Weiss, Geoff (22 April 2025). "The trade war is coming for influencer plushies". Business Insider.
 Yes Business Insider's reliability is designated as no consensus. No Even with the article briefly mentioning Jacknjellify, the article primarily talks about the general impact of tariffs on the plush market. ✘ No
Yes No Other articles published under the same writer, and on Nerdbot in general, are blatant advertising and/or appear AI-generated. Yes ✘ No
Kaiser, Hein (19 June 2025). "'BFDI': Online series continues to soar". The Citizen. Archived from the original on 26 June 2025.
 Yes Non-interview portions of the article provide substantial and sufficient secondary coverage. Yes Yes ✔ Yes
Unthank, Kennedy (22 August 2025). "jacknjellify". PluggedIn.
 Yes Plugged In is a publication by conservative Christian advocacy group Focus on the Family, which was last discussed at RSN here. Yes ? Unknown
Yes ETonline [to be determined] No Passing mention. ✘ No
Yes No Fantasy Land News is operated and written by only two people, and may qualify as a self published source, see below entry also. No Three sentences are about BFDI at large, the remaining little coverage is about an upcoming screening for a specific episode. ✘ No
Yes No Ditto, additionally, portions of this article originally appeared to contain phrases commonly generated by LLMs (archive). Article later had a minor rewrite after the author "[dove] into some of the BFDI fandoms’ passion for the show" and "realized that the article would be subject to calls for “Get us our Wiki Page!”" which removed some of those phrases as part of copyediting and added additional details (archive). No Five sentences are about the BFDI series, the remaining coverage is about an upcoming screening for a specific episode and general assertions of popularity. ✘ No
Yes No See above entries for Fantasy Land News. No Brief information about new locations for a theatrical airing of an episode, three paragraphs about the show are taken from the previous articles. Other information, if any, is copy and pasted from other sources, most non-independent. ✘ No
Yes Yes WP:PEOPLEMAG No Main focus is on Rosie O'Donnell's child. BFDI is only mentioned 3 times without elaboration. ✘ No
Yes No Only goes into brief detail about the screening of an episode with a quick summary of the ending of the episode before. ✘ No
Yes Appears to be independent. Yes Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Comics Beat on BFDI Around 2.5 paragraphs of original coverage that isn't from or restated from the interview. ? Unknown
Yes Yes Analysis on the essay's talk page Yes Around 4 paragraphs of original coverage specific to BFDI. ✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Press releases

[edit]

Although the following sources are from reputable news media, they do not count toward general notability guidelines because they are non-independent press releases from Peter Ruette, a member of Jacknjellify. Relevant discussions on the WP:BFDI talk page appear here:[a][b]

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
No "Impact Feature" as the writer implies WP:PRSOURCE. No Press release. ~ Somewhat goes into detail about Battle for Dream Island. ✘ No
"The Creative Lead Animator Behind Jacknjellify’s 'The Power of Two'" Associated Press / CBS4
 No No Ditto. ~ ✘ No
"Jacknjellify Celebrates Over 16 Years of Animation Excellence and Online Influence" via EIN Presswire / pix11.com / 8 News Now
 No No "Per KLAS: This content is not written by or endorsed by "KLAS", its advertisers, or Nexstar Media Inc." ~ ✘ No
No No Per WLNS: "This content is not written by or endorsed by "WLNS", its advertisers, or Nexstar Media Inc." ~ Has a decent amount of detail about the event but few details on the show itself. ✘ No
No No Per KGET: "This content is not written by or endorsed by "KGET", its advertisers, or Nexstar Media Inc." ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Wikipedia talk:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia?/Archive 2#Giving bfdi reliable sources
  2. ^ Wikipedia talk:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia?/Archive 2#News coverage - New Sources