Talk:2b2t/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Rejection

I do not agree with the rejection. At worst, the draft should have been declined with ample explanation of why multiple independent in-depth sources about the subject that are vetted at WP:VG/RS are not sufficient for GNG or how the topic at large is contrary to Wikipedia's purpose. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:45, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@Hellknowz: I agree. The topic is undeniably notable, having mentions on several gaming news sites and even some mainstream media like The Independent and Newsweek, as well as a mention from Pearson Education. This is also the best draft for the topic as far as I know (Draft:2b2t (server) and Draft:2builders2tools). Side note: I’ve also created the article for Mineplex, the only other Minecraft server with an article being Hypixel. Anyways, I’m not too familiar with the drafting process. What will happen now that it’s rejected? Will it be deleted? I might save this draft to submit later if it gets any attention later, especially considering that the server’s 10 year anniversary is not far away. Melofors (talk) 04:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Infobox

What infobox should this article use? The 2 other Minecraft server articles use Template:Infobox software. I'm not sure if that infobox would be suitable for this topic. Melofors 23:37, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

I used Infobox software. Melofors 23:04, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• IronException 2b2t Spawn Render July 2019.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:51, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• IronException 2b2t Spawn Render July 2019.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Do not submit blogs or opinions as 'sources', they are not verifiable material

The article will be deleted otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hgxdfe (talk • contribs)

You can't claim something spurious like this and then continuously revert others while removing valid sourced content and instead introducing unreliable sourcing. You have not in any way justified removing valid content. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:57, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

They are correct that we should not source or cite what any player on the server would say, as that can be completely made up for attention or deception, which it was. I have removed this part and we should avoid doing that in the future, as it is strong bias. Just because a player owns a blog website they can write anything on does not make anything they say a valid source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.63.157 (talk)

Describing oldness of the server

@Daysant1144: My mistake, the cited source http://www.oldest.org/entertainment/minecraft-servers/ puts 2b2t as 4th oldest not 3rd oldest, I misremembered. The other sources do indicate that they have had map resets, but given WP:SYNTH I don't think adding a qualification like that will hold. Leijurv (talk) 18:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
It is the 2nd oldest.

Master Builder 3. 0 Advanced

The space after the 3. is probably unnecessary and looks wrong in prose while referring to the title (obviously, keep it in the citation). Perhaps we could make it 3.0, and use Template:Sic which applies here perfectly? @Melofors: what do you think? Leijurv (talk) 18:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Okay, so I changed the citation from the other one to the current one, which refers to the title using "3.0" and not "3. 0". Melofors 21:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Official website

I do not believe the "website" linked in infobox (https://reddit.com/r/2b2t) satisfies WP:ELOFFICIAL, particularly "The linked content is controlled by the subject". Reddit is user-generated content and it does not look like all the posts are made by the server's owners. In fact, they all are made by users. I've never seen subreddits used as official websites, and I am almost certain this is not appropriate. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:37, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I also agree. 2b2t used to have a legitimate website called 2b2t.org, which is currently down. The website's archived, so you can still see it. Melofors 14:57, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

The posts are not made by the server's owners, however they are the only moderators. This means that they enforce the rules and write the sidebar. Furthermore, the pinned posts (there aren't any at this moment) are decided by them. You can see this in /u/2builders2tools. They make announcements by posting to that subreddit then pinning to the top. I called it an official web presence because in the ingame tab menu, it lists only two websites, being reddit.com/r/2b2t and donate.2b2t.org. There's also an email, but that isn't really necessary to include. Leijurv (talk) 18:30, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

That's a lot of conclusions to make to decide on something that should be an obvious "yes". Basically, OR. This is why I am very skeptical that we should include it as an official "website". —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Well I don't know what to tell you. I don't think I can write a citation for the fact that when you join the server the tab menu lists that subreddit and his gmail and says "these are the only official websites and contacts". The website is currently down. https://i.imgur.com/QNQx7VB.jpg I mean can I cite this? lol. It's the only official way in which he interacts with the community, posts announcements, etc. Leijurv (talk) 21:11, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

2b2t.org looks like the official website. If it's down temporarily, we can add it later. And it's not like there needs to an official website link. Most subjects don't have one and they're fine. An official website is already an exception to the normal external links as being sources of further information. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:26, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Size

@Hellknowz: I'm not sure if I agree with what you said here about the "Size" field in the infobox. I think that in this case the meaning of Size is clear? It's the size of the server. How much space it takes up. No? Even though the subreddit sidebar is primary, I think it would be a valid source for how large the map is (under WP:LINKSINACHAIN, and in particular, WP:SELFSOURCE). I propose citing the subreddit sidebar and adding back the Size infobox field as 5518GB. Leijurv (talk) 00:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

The |size= of the infobox is for software package size -- basically its deployment. The value you mention includes stored data, which isn't software size. In fact, the software isn't even the server -- it's Minecraft's server code. I don't know if there even is any custom server code/mods. In any case, this cannot be explained in the infobox (nor does any source explain it that I know of); and it fails infobox main purpose because it would not be consistent with all the other software articles. This can be mentioned in prose, which it already is. Since it uses a secondary source, adding another primary source would not be appropriate. Besides, Reddit is user-generated content and never acceptable for proper sourcing. And something that only appears in primary sources is generally not suitable for inclusion, because content to include is chosen based on coverage in secondary sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:24, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. I was mistaken. In fact, the Software infobox doesn't even fit this topic, as it isn't a software. Melofors 15:37, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Reddit being user-generated content: I'm referring to the sidebar, which is set by the server owner? A statement from him is the only possible source, no? I'm not sure why you don't think it passes WP:SELFSOURCE, can you explain? Leijurv (talk) 18:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

We shouldn't be using primary sources to begin with. If it's not covered in secondary sources, then then it's not a prominent fact. If this was an official website with a value that's well-explained, I would agree that a mention in prose would be fine. Here, we have to further conclude that the sidebar can only be edited by mods and that the mod who edited it is the owner of the server -- this is the sort of stuff that we should really avoid doing. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD ?? The issue here is that there is no other official web presence for communicating with the community. The subreddit is it. Maybe this could be explained in prose? I don't know. Leijurv (talk) 21:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Context of what is sourced is important. Primary sources focus on facts that they consider important, which is not what secondary sources or we might necessarily cover. In other words, here we didn't decide that mentioning server world size is important and then looked it up from a primary source. Instead, we saw the size mentioned on the primary source and then added it. Why not mention daily player count or amount of traffic per month? Size is a statistic we included because the server owners listed it, and that's a classic reason why primary sources are mostly bad for deciding on content, not that we can't source something that we decide needs to be included. In the end, I don't really object that much to it being mentioned in prose after the secondary source. The concern was about the infobox. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

All right, I can agree with that. Thanks for explaining! Leijurv (talk) 21:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I also don't understand your point on why that makes the Size invalid. No one will be reading the mediawiki source and noticing that it refers to a software product; I'm just referring to the final product as rendered to readers. It will just say "Size", and the only reason why someone would misinterpet that as "software package size" is if they read the source, no? Why does consistency with other software articles matter? We're misusing the software infobox anyway, since this is fundamentally not a piece of software. :) Leijurv (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, since it's not a piece of software, then why are we even trying to add size? It seems the only reason is because it's a field in the software infobox and because the subreddit happens to list a Minecraft world "size" number. The problem, as I said above, is the context. What does this number say to a general reader? What's the difference between 5 and 5000 GB? Unless we add a note explaining this, it's just a random number from a reader's perspective unless they are familiar with technicalities of Minecraft servers. And by consistency I mean consensus that has been applied to all the other articles. There's (apparently) consensus to list software size. If this article is to be an exception to listing the actual server software size and instead some other number, then the question is whether we should and how do we explain it? Which is going back to only being able to cite primary source indirectly, which doesn't actually explain the number. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Alright I'll concede this. Just "Size: 5000gb" wouldn't make sense to someone not familiar with how this kind of server operates. The size should only be in the text of the article, not in the sidebar. Leijurv (talk) 21:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Housemaster or Hausemaster

Talking about this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2b2t&diff=930489266&oldid=930471362 I'm not sure if a forum username of "HOUSEMASTERRR" is credible enough (how do we know that that's actually him??). All other sources seem to indicate Hausemaster. IDK. Leijurv (talk) 21:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

An addendum, I don't think that edit should be reverted entirely, but definitely some parts of what it does are not clearly desirable. Removing the sourced $20/mo sentence should probably be reverted since it's an important part of what it's like to play on the server. Leijurv (talk) 21:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

If we are only describing the founder, then it is well known by the community that it is Housemaster. The current owner, if there even has been a change of ownership is unknown. The other sources claim Hausmaster or Hausemaster, which is just an adopted community name for the current owner, not coupled to the minecraft account name. If you look up Hausemaster on a website that displays name histories, you can see that that account was renamed and possibly deleted in 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.63.157 (talk) 22:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't agree. Yes, he may have originally been known as Housemaster in 2010, but he is now widely known as Hausemaster, and I've personally never seen him referred to as Housemaster. The Independent, Newsweek, Kotaku, and Rock Paper Shotgun, all mention him as Hausemaster, and I can't find any sources refer to him as Hausmaster. The only source for Housemaster is a primary source, a game forum thread. Also, I see no reason for why you removed the first paragraph in the history section. —Melofors 23:20, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

What is now widely known doesn't matter and neither does what gaming articles with little or no research write the current name as, we only care about the original founder, as known then officially. That's what founder means. Not by one of their rumoured minecraft accounts, current or not. If you want to be accurate, then the oldest news article source says the founders are anonymous. Stating the wrong name as currently is just giving false credit to whoever took over the name (as Mojang frees up names) in 2015. The mentioned articles clearly are just copying eachother (two of them are copies from same author..), and the kotaku article writes "Hausmaster". The RPS article is unreliable as the information given there is from a player, and was written one year after the name was changed. That's why I've also removed it as we should avoid mentioning player names here or cite them for anything. The "fact" about the garry's mod server, and its owners is false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.63.157 (talk) 00:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

In my eyes, the Minecraft account is neither here nor there, all that matters is the name that he is known by / name he goes by, no? Could just say "anonymous owner, known as Hausemaster" or something to that effect? I agree that stating "founded by Hausemaster" is likely not correct, and is clearly disputed. I suggest dropping that entirely, and just saying "founded in 2010". Leijurv (talk) 04:02, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I have made that edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2b2t&diff=930652672&oldid=930602929 Leijurv (talk) 23:50, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Disagreeing with this edit and the last one by Melofors. The problem still remains, and with how it is currently written implies the founder and owner is the same person, which might not be true as this remains unclear. It should be clear that the founder is Housemaster, while the current owner is unknown but referred to as Hausemaster, which players only know about through brief ingame interactions, though it's been impossible to confirm (if they are the same person), and presumably the different name is only because the Housemaster name was already used by another account. The latter name only became more popular recently since a player grabbed the name, and used it to their advantage (on the server). It should be rewritten or worded differently to clarify this, as to not miscredit or mislead readers, perhaps a site that shows minecraft account name histories could be used as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.63.157 (talk) 02:07, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Minecraft account history as a direct source would be a little iffy and maybe bordering on WP:OR. But I agree some clarification could take place. How do you think it should read? I definitely think that putting an offhand mention of "Housemaster" in the first sentence is just inviting people to edit it to Hause, as we clearly saw happen which caused the page to get protected. So we should only open this can of worms down in History, where proper context can be given. Perhaps something like this?: The 2b2t Minecraft server was founded in late 2010 by a player who goes by Housemaster. It is disputed whether or not the ownership of the server has changed hands, but the current owner goes by Hausemaster or Hausmaster. Leijurv (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

It should be that while the founder is unknown or Housemaster (if allowed), the current owner is referred to as Hausemaster, but somehow clarify this is not going by the minecraft account name, which most readers will assume. There is however no source for what the "owner goes by", as the name was chosen by players, not by the owner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.63.157 (talk)

Using Minecraft account history or forums posts is most definitely WP:OR/WP:SYNTH and in no way acceptable for sourcing. I think this whole discussion is losing track of WP:V and proper sourcing. We only report what reliable secondary sources say with very few exception for some primary source info. Yes, those sources are sometimes wrong and often incomplete. But it is most definitely not appropriate to do personal research to correct them. For example, no sources said anything about "anonymous" or "disputed". Relevantly, WP:TRUTH. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:57, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Right now no source has been reliable and we even had to remove one as it was sourcing a joke wiki that has since been deleted. Why such a source was accepted to begin with is questioning. Anyone can put up such a blog site and write whatever they want. Why would that be allowed but not a 'primary' source? And yes, the vice article from 2015 claims anonymous, and appears like they are directly quoting the owner which they reached out to (they claim). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.63.157 (talk)

Thanks for weighing in on OR. Anonymous is a fact (no source has his real life identity). "Disputed" should probably be removed though. Leijurv (talk) 23:52, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2020

none of the history or story of 2builders2tools is included. I am a minecraft fan myself and I would like to right the story of 2b2t but its page is protected. Sam.awk (talk) 22:03, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- ferret (talk) 22:05, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I would use youtubers (like FitMC), reddit pages like 2b2t reddit, and other written histories of 2b2t Sam.awk (talk) 22:44, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

These are not reliable sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 23:05, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

oldest anarchy server in minecraft

@Melofors: Can we keep in the phrase "oldest anarchy server in Minecraft"? I think you know the reason lmfao. Can we compromise on you rephrasing the rest of it but keeping that first sentence? Leijurv (talk) 00:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

I did keep the phrase in the article, it's in the second sentence. Maybe you didn't see it properly? https://i.imgur.com/xspu42p.png —Melofors 16:21, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate that but imagine if it had "the oldest anarchy server in minecraft" that would be so epic (its not critical just a suggestion) Leijurv (talk) 20:10, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Oh, haha. I get you. Will do. —  Melofors  TC  20:13, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

thanks lmao Leijurv (talk) 21:09, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Why is the phrase italicized? The original rationale that it is a tagline or slogan is not really valid. Wikipedia does not include promotional taglines unless you can show secondary sources discussing it. And it would not be in lead, but in marketing or reception section. Kind of like films do with WP:TAGLINE. In this case, just because they describe themselves like that does not mean it should be included. This is classic WP:ABOUTSELF. Anyone can invent any tagline they want, true or false, which is why we use secondary sources to decide what should be included. If sources say that 2b2t is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft, then that can be included without any special formatting and undue attention. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

All right. Fair point on the tagline. Let's keep it, as you say, without any special formatting or undue attention (i.e. no italics). Leijurv (talk) 01:10, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

FWIW: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Leijurv&oldid=936155614#2b2t%20italicization Leijurv (talk) 01:23, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Miraheze link?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2b2t&diff=940173781&oldid=940164815

Does this pass WP:EL? I think it might fail WP:ELNO #11 or #12... Leijurv (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: The Miraheze wiki is a fan wiki, which does fail #11 at WP:ELNO. It is an open wiki, and I don't think most would say it has a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors, so it fails #12, as well. —  Melofors  TC  04:18, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2020

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I, supported by my peers, would like to add some information regarding the history of the server and its multiple factions, such as the Fourth Reich, Imperium, and the Spawnmasons. I would also like to add information regarding famous builds, from the replication of the Jesus statue to a statue to the height limit depicting a picture-perfect image of Hitler. I could understand if you wouldn't want to add this, but I think it would be interesting to add a history section about the server. I hope this is alright!

Sincerely, The 2b2t Community Valkoorsky18 (talk) 19:06, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- ferret (talk) 19:07, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Culture

I’d think that it’d be doing the server justice if we included a culture tab detailing the timeline of events on 2b2t, clans, how new players experience the server, etc. Prodbyr3yy (talk) 19:49, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

There are many YouTubers and subreddits that include the history and stories of the server so I think that it’d be giving the server the recognition it deserves. Prodbyr3yy (talk) 19:51, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

I also think that would be a good section! The issue is that one would need to find reliable sources (YouTube won't count). That's the tricky part :) Leijurv (talk) 21:08, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

And if the other sections on the talk page lead me to any conclusions, it would be that the 2B2T Fan Wiki on Miraheze would be considered unreliable, with the same fate befalling r/2B2T, as well as 2B2T youtubers such as FitMC and SalC1. 🜚 Yatagarasu 🜚 complain at me and my work HERE 18:01, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Advice on sources?

Hey editors. I am familiar that a source that comes from the r/2b2t subreddit should not be reliable sources, but what about posts/comments by the server's owner where he often posts announcements to the server? Are they reliable sources?

Thanks, and happy editing! dibbydib ^💬/_✏ 04:15, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

That's completely kosher, BUT only as long as it passes WP:SELFSOURCE. For example, the citation in the lead has "according to the server owner", so inlining like that is probably good. We use selfsources for the current size of the server, and the month that it was founded in. Just make sure it passes criteria 1 ("The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim.") and perhaps explain why you think so, e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2b2t&diff=934552373&oldid=934499943 Leijurv (talk) 04:34, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Actually, for this reason @Melofors:, I'm not sure if I agree with https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2b2t&diff=941703652&oldid=941382617 In my eyes, it clearly passes WP:SELFSOURCE? Leijurv (talk) 04:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: I agree. I was thinking about adding some other information from the subreddit recently. In a post by the owner here, he stated that the server is hosted in New York City. Could we integrate that into the article? —  Melofors  TC  21:05, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Georgebush420

There hasn't been a proper discussion on this topic, and so I decided to bring it up. There seems to have been a few mentions of an owner known as Georgebush420. On this oldest.org list (removed as ref for unreliability), 2b2t's founders were listed as "Georgebush420 and Hausemaster". The placement of Georgebush420 before Hausemaster makes it seem as if Hausemaster is merely a co-owner. Also, the following is said by James Rustles in this RPS article:

"It used to be a Garry’s Mod server," says James. "The basic story is that this guy who ran the Garry's Mod server started a Minecraft server with the same premise – that you can do anything you want – and this was then given to one of his friends, who we know as Hausemaster. But 2b2t began —

Furthermore, I came across something interesting in an archived Facepunch thread (archived here). User "HOUSEMASTERR" commented stating that he is the server's "co-owner together with a buddy in real life." This "buddy" may very well be Georgebush420, as it was previously stated by James Rustles that Hausemaster was a friend of the Garry's Mod server owner. The fan-made Miraheze wiki also claims Georgebush420 to be the original creator of 2b2t, as seen here.

I am also aware that many people claim Georgebush420 and Hausemaster as being the same person.

What are your opinions for including Georgbush420 in the article? —Melofors 22:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

It's dumb that's what. The quote just describes both games, they're sandbox games, inherently "do what you want" style games. It's also straight up wrong with no source for the ownership claim. I also hope you realize that "james rustles" isn't a real person but a literal meme (google jimmy rustles). This person is also the same person that sniped the Hausemaster name (or part of the group) and has since been pushing it so they can further deceive players, and clearly they have been successful. There is no source or proof of georgebush420 being an owner ever or founder. It's a massive in-community joke. Including it in this article just makes it look even worse if not outright a joke. Now that I see you linking the terrible fan wiki I now you're not serious anymore. Instead of keeping the article simple without bullshit you're inflating it just to make it look larger than its subject actually is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.63.157 (talk) 02:53, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't intend for the fan wiki to be included as a source in any way, I was just sending it here to show what the community thinks of the topic. I also don't have intentions to inflate the article, I am merely suggesting the inclusion of a topic. The James Rustles info has had coverage by RPS, so I included that in the article. —Melofors 14:25, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

this is so sad can we cite fitmc videos? xD Leijurv (talk) 18:43, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

I have heard that George Bush in an alt of Hause's >>BEANS X2t 15:15, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

False Information

2b2t is not an anarchy server, Get more information here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGmXxaeA600&t=1367s — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.255.206 (talk) 21:14, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for stating this; however this in-server drama does not reflect the play-style of the server itself, which has always been described as anarchy. Backdoor events like this have become part of 2b2t, there is even a paragraph about the backdoors on this article. This server has, and has always intended to have no rules or authority, in that case it makes the server Anarchy. I do appreciate the comment, though. dibbydib ^💬/_✏ 23:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

"2b2t's world is also the longest-running unaltered map in the game, which hasn't been reset since its founding"

This is simply untrue. The oldest unaltered map that hasn't been reset since it's founding is on the server MinecraftOnline.com. It started on August 4th, 2010, and their map was never reset. As it stands, this page is edit protected so I am unable to fix it, but it's simply false that 2b2t's map is the oldest. MinecraftOnline's map, Freedonia is. Source: http://minecraftonline.com/wiki/Timeline

--44trent3 (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Please find a WP:RS reliable secondary source for this and I will make this edit. Thanks! (also keep WP:SELFSOURCE in mind; the claim as the oldest unaltered map is quite self-serving, so in my opinion a self source would not be acceptable here) Leijurv (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

According to this article by GamesRadar+, the server's map has not been reset since its creation on August 4, 2010. I'll edit the article. —  Melofors  TC  19:26, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

You can't use that to claim that 2b2t is specifically the second oldest, that's WP:SYNTH. You have two sources saying this server was founded in August and this server was founded in December, and you've synthesized the conclusion that there were none founded in between, therefore making 2b2t the second oldest, which is an invalid conclusion to draw. But changing up the article to instead call 2b "one of" the oldest is more valid, since we now have a WP:RS that there is an older one. However, that itself is pretty close to textbook SYNTH lol, since, again, you're pulling a (admittedly obvious in THIS case) conclusion from a combination of two sources. I almost don't even agree with that change either lol Leijurv (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I clarified this on the Wikipedia discord here, and the edit from "the longest-running" to "one of the longest-running" is acceptable since we have Wikipedia:Conflicting sources, and finding an accurate description is not WP:SYNTH in this case therefore. However you definitely cannot say "second oldest" unless there's a source that specifically says that. In fact, the first cited source says third oldest. I don't think this is worth resolving; "one of the longest-running" is probably fine. :) Leijurv (talk) 18:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, in the future, please consider using the edit semi-protected template for requests like this, see the immediately previous section ^ for an example. Leijurv (talk) 19:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

MDY dates?

Hello editors, I noticed in the article that it used MDY dates, but no part in the article does it state that is mainly located in (or associated with) America or any other countries that use the MDY date format, and that there is clearly no need to use the {{Use MDY dates}} template.

Should it be removed? dibbydib ^💬/_✏ 00:08, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Many of the cited sources use M D Y and are written in American English, but I don't think it's necessary to bureaucratize the date formats though so the template can stay off. Just my opinion. Leijurv (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

In addition to Leijurv's comment, the server owner had actually stated on the subreddit here that the server is hosted in New York City, in the United States. —  Melofors  TC  19:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Rename to 2B2T

2B2T is an acronym, standing for 2 Builders 2 Tools. I suggest that we rename the article to 2B2T since acronyms are always capitalized. RteeeeKed (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Seems to me like it's an abbreviation of 2builders2tools which is already lower case? All the cited sources say 2b2t, none say 2B2T. WP:COMMONNAME. Acronyms aren't always capitalized on Wikipedia. See Laser. Leijurv (talk) 06:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

 Redirected 2B2T to 2b2t. dibbydib Ping me! ^💬/_✏ 01:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Poor referencing

The first line of the page says 2b2t was founded in December 2010. There is then a link to the 2b2t website which only goes back to March 18, 2013. The latter date is obviously much later in time (three years even), and as such this not a valid reference for this particular line.

Also, with regard to reference #7, "Celebs Pulse" appears to be a content farm

These are just two which immediately spring to mind. I am certain there are more. Someone needs to go through the references with a fine-tooth comb.-AlphaAlex115

The archive link to the original site is from 2013, but shows that the site claimed costs back to 2010. It is definitely a primary source, of course. -- ferret (talk) 17:57, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I stand by my initial reasoning on this. We have many many secondary sources claiming 2010. 2b2t's website itself claims December 2010. I don't think it is relevant whether or not the website existed then, only if the Minecraft server itself did, so I'm not concerned about the Internet Archive only going back to 2013. December, as the last month of the year, passes WP:SELFSOURCE since it is the least self-serving possible claim for age. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2b2t&diff=934552373&oldid=934499943 Leijurv (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I was not aware that primary sources claiming facts about themselves without proper evidence proved anything. To be honest, it is "unduly self-serving" because that date means 2b2t would be the oldest anarchy server. It is thus not out of the question that the owner would want to claim such an age on the website, a website that didn't even go up until three after the server supposedly began.

Also the second reference is actually just the same exact thing. It's a primary source claiming a fact about itself with no support. It honestly appears like it's been added for padding. Even if you think the first primary source is credible and necessary for whatever reason, I think you'll agree with this second point.

But a handful of the sources afterward I think are reasonable. -AlphaAlex115

"I was not aware that primary sources claiming facts about themselves without proper evidence proved anything." No worries. That's why I linked the policy WP:SELFSOURCE that does state that. It is not unduly self serving because we are just relying on that self source for the month, not the year. The year 2010 is well supported by other secondary sources on the page (pick almost any). I believe you may be misreading the citation for minecraft-server-list, that is just being used to cite the fact that the server is Java Edition 1.12.2. I'm not sure why you are categorizing that as "claiming a fact about itself with no support", it looks to me like it is an independent website from 2b2t? How is it about "itself"? (also, please use four ~s to sign your comments :)) Leijurv (talk) 18:34, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but reference [2] (the minecraft server list) is also used to support the claim that its "intial realease" was "December 2010; 9 years ago" (see infobox). So it really is not "just being used to cite the fact that the server is Java Edition 1.12.2." It's being used to support the claim about the date.

"it looks to me like it is an independent website from 2b2t?" The owner posted it. That's how that website works. So it is a primary source, and frankly it's a reiteration of the first reference. It's therefore an instance of padding.

"self source for the month, not the year." Reading the article, I don't think that is clear at all. The website says December 2010, as does the wiki page. Not sure why you believe the reference only supports the month.

"The year 2010 is well supported by other secondary sources on the page (pick almost any)." This I actually agree with (see my comment where it says "But a handful of the sources afterward I think are reasonable"). My issue is that a primary source is being used to support the claim when there's reason to doubt the primary source's credibility (so it can be the "oldest anarchy server" etc. - see previous comment). -AlphaAlex115

You are correct. That's my mistake, sorry. I was misreading the infobox. I will edit this. I don't know how minecraft-server-list works, do we know for a fact that the person who got that posted was Hause? Regarding the reference for the month, if we have multiple citations, it is acceptable to have a source "refine" another and provide additional detail. It wouldn't add anything to reader's understanding of the page to, for example, reorder the citations and rewrite it as December[1] 2010.[2][3]. That would likely be WP:CITEKILL, especially in the lead sentence. And again, there would be reason to doubt the self source's credibility on its own, but we have WP:RS backing up the year. Leijurv (talk) 19:00, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2b2t&diff=951944090&oldid=951285176 Leijurv (talk) 19:02, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Placement of renders

I think the two renders at the bottom of the article should be in the history section, and be side-by-side. Otherwise, it should be in a Gallery section, or at least not in the Reception section. —  Melofors  TC  06:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

I watch the page so I get email push notifications. I added the Gallery section lol Leijurv (talk) 06:10, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh. Yeah that makes sense. The difference is insane, by the way. I wonder if there are any pre-Rusher era renders like that. —  Melofors  TC  06:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

2b2t History

Yes there are 2 other talks about this topic, I just wanted to know if "In game map structures" and "notes on the server" does count as a credible source... There are several Map Downloads made by the community each of them archiving a piece of history of the server, even if it doesn't count, can we use the actual server map? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Square365 Favor (talk • contribs) 03:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Surprisingly, I think the answer might be yes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Video_games Leijurv (talk) 03:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Popbob?

Should POPBOB be add to article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.23.18.103 (talk) 00:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Leijurv (talk) 23:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Removing a source

Hi, all. Since this page seems frequently monitored and the source in question is utilized multiple times, I think discussing it on the talk page first is wiser. The Apostolacus source (“Analogies of Religious Violence…”) has several major issues and we ought to address them in order to improve the page. 1. It is almost definitely not an academically-reviewed paper (it appears to be for a university-level course). 2. The source appears to have been added by someone who knows Apostolacus or Apostolacus herself (the paper named the author as “Kit” but the article attributes it to a “Katherine,” inclining me to believe that the person in question knows Apostolacus well enough to know what “Kit” is short for). 3. The article refers to the paper and author in-text, which is inappropriate considering the paper is not a revolutionary nor notable study. My suggestions: we retain the context that the paper provides on 2b2t but remove direct reference to the paper within the article. Further, additional sourcing is always a plus. If anyone disagrees, let me know. Otherwise, I’ll make a few edits and do my best to keep everyone in the loop. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it up! No disagreement on point 1, but I have to disagree on point 2. I don't think that abbreviation implies that. It was added by Melofors, and if you look at his user page here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Melofors&oldid=952747651 you can see that he put his birthday as 2006, which does not line up with being friends with a university student in 2016. I've also talked with Melofors about this page a lot and there's been no indication of that. But that doesn't matter so much. The rest sounds fine to me. So you're suggesting to leave the references, but remove all actual in-text descriptions of the paper. So, remove In Analogies of Religious Violence in Minecraft, a paper by Katherine Apostolacus, both places it shows up? Sounds fine to me. Leijurv (talk) 16:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Also might be worth considering giving the same treatment to Minecraft server Leijurv (talk) 16:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Wonderful, and glad that it was an entirely good-faith edit! The source seems like a great resource and I think you and I are in total agreement on the adjustment to the page. Thanks, Leijurv. Cheers ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

"cheating" or "hacking" or something else entirely

It was me who reverted the change from "cheating" to "hacking" a month ago, but I've thought on it more and I'm not sure it's right. For one, the event that I was referring to isn't actually in the article, so that was sorta unsourced (WP:OR). Especially as a second part of the sentence about having "no rules", cheating doesn't make much sense, since the article it links to says right in the lede "Cheating in online games is defined as the action of pretending to comply with the rules of the game, while secretly subverting them to gain an unfair advantage over an opponent.". Well that clearly isn't what's happening here since 2b2t explicitly has no gameplay rules. At the same time, I'm not quite sure that "hacking" is perfect, but I think it's certainly closer to accurate. Maybe later in the article it could be clarified what it means to have a modified client (i.e. something that subverts Minecraft's "rules" but not 2b2t's "rules"). In any event, I'm thinking to change "griefing and cheating are common" in the first paragraph to "griefing and hacking are common". Thoughts? Leijurv (talk) 23:30, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Alright, no one cares, so I'll make this change. WP:SILENCE Leijurv (talk) 23:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Phrasing of "anarchy"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

@BLDM: Regarding your revert of my revert - I believe that the sources do support the previous phrasing, which was already the result of a compromise on here. Please see WP:BRD - when your edit to the phrasing was reverted by me, that's the point where discussion on here might have ideally begun. Regardless. You say It's a Minecraft server, not a server "in" Minecraft, but when you look at the first cited source here, you see the worst place in Minecraft, Anarchy servers are a dark tradition within Minecraft, and 2b2t is an "anarchy server," the oldest and most infamous of its kind. Also see here with the oldest servers in Minecraft, and here with The Worst Place in Minecraft and the largest, longest-running unaltered server in the game. All of these support the phrasing of "anarchy server in minecraft". None say "anarchy Minecraft", and only one says "Minecraft server" in a title. The wording of "oldest Minecraft anarchy server" is clunky adjective stacking, and isn't in line with our cited descriptions, which repeatedly describe it as just a "server" or an "anarchy server" and later (in the sentence) adding the qualifier "in Minecraft". On top of which, the previous sentence in the lede reads "2b2t is a Minecraft multiplayer server", so it's already established. We are using "server" as an abbreviation for the rest of the lede and then the entire article; see Since the server has virtually no rules and the server was reported. We need to introduce this abbreviation for it to work: we start with Minecraft multiplayer server then in Minecraft then in the game. However, the qualifier is needed in the "oldest" because of previous consensus regarding MinecraftOnline, which is the oldest non anarchy server. See Minecraft server and this removed footnote. For these reasons, I believe the wording should remain as the previous consensus which was oldest anarchy server in Minecraft. Leijurv (talk) 21:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

We are not bound to the exact phrasing used by sources.

I think it is necessary to establish that the server is an extension of the game, rather than a core part of it (which "server in Minecraft" somewhat implies). Do you think this concept is not supported by existing sources?

I've reviewed the previous discussion of this that you referenced, and there was no significant argument on either side for reaching a consensus. You only stated that "oldest anarchy server in Minecraft" would be so epic and even offered that this phrasing is not critical just a suggestion. BLDM (talk) 00:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Correct, we are not. But we can look to those sources to see how this server is described colloquially. My thought was that when we aren't sure how to word something, it's very reasonable to see how it's been described in the sources we rely on. As one example, calling it a "server in Minecraft" comes across as problematic to you, because of the concern that it might incorrectly lead a reader to believe that this server is a core part of the game, as opposed to a player-hosted server. Right off the bat, I think that the confusion goes in the opposite direction. For example, "Minecraft world" makes me think of a world within the game - like the Overworld or some such core game thing. If I read "world in Minecraft" I'd think of something that was created independently using Minecraft, maybe a downloadable build. Regardless, I believe that a misunderstanding of that degree is correctable by seeing the previous link - Minecraft multiplayer server. We can also look at precedent on other pages - for example Mineplex specifically calls out its partnership with Mojang. I'm not sure what audience would make this misunderstanding in one wording but not the other to be honest. I think the increased confusion in the wording with adjective stacking outweighs this. To address your concern though, I think the proper avenue would be to reword the lede elsewhere to say that this is player-owned. For example, imagine if the first sentence was reworded to 2builders2tools (2b2t) is an independent Minecraft multiplayer server founded in December 2010. That would be one way to clear up that potential confusion, but, personally, I don't think that's necessary, because all the linked background information demonstrates that these servers aren't a core part of the game. I think that per WP:ONEDOWN we should consider the audience that will be reading this article as people who are familiar with, well, one level down: they are familiar with the concept of Minecraft, or game servers in general, and they're reading about this specific one. I think that the sources repeatedly saying "in Minecraft" / "within Minecraft" should nudge us in the direction of considering that wording acceptable to a general audience. We aren't bound to it - necessary versus sufficient and all that, but it acceptably gets the point across. The concept of this being an independent player-run server is well supported by the sources and described throughout the text. I see the problem with "oldest Minecraft anarchy server" as confusing adjective stacking. There is no need to repeat Minecraft in that way to achieve the point of the sentence, which is to convey to the reader that this is a very old server, and among the anarchy variants, the oldest. It muddies the point to have that word in the middle. The "in Minecraft" serves to qualify the "oldest" claim - without it, we would simply have "oldest anarchy server", which, as I said earlier ^, is insufficiently clear for WP:ONEDOWN readers: it may refer to multiplayer servers in general. As I describe above, we need to follow WP:EXPLAINLEAD (in particular: The lead of the article should tell a general reader ... what needs to be learned first in order to understand the article.) and WP:UPFRONT, since the main article text simply says "the server", we need to go through what that means precisely, regarding "in the game" and how we call out the server owner being anonymous etc. The lead-in from "Minecraft multiplayer server" -> "in Minecraft" -> "in the game" -> "the server" is what I'm talking about regarding WP:UPFRONT. Making it "stutter" the first thing ("Minecraft server") twice doesn't help anything since we're still going to the same destination, except this second repetition isn't linked to the proper articles to help the reader understand (per WP:EXPLAINLEAD). In that previous discussion I was kidding around with Melofors, who I know from elsewhere. Consensus is a normal and usually implicit and invisible process across Wikipedia. Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus. (from WP:CONSENSUS). By building on top of edits made by other people, I implicitly agree with what they changed. Leijurv (talk) 01:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Here's some precedent from two of the three(?) other Minecraft server articles:

• Mineplex: Mineplex is a Minecraft minigame server
• Hypixel: The Hypixel Network is a Minecraft minigame server

Based on these articles, perhaps we can compromise with something like:

2builders2tools (2b2t) is a Minecraft anarchy server founded in December 2010. It is the oldest anarchy server for the game, as well as one of the oldest running servers of any variety.

This removes the adjective-stacking, removes some redundancy, and still establishes that it is an extension of the game.

Minor point regarding talk page responses: WP:BECONCISE please - that wall of text was hard to parse. BLDM (talk) 01:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Right. And we have 2builders2tools (2b2t) is a Minecraft multiplayer server founded in December 2010. That's a fair addition of "anarchy". It's what makes this one unique after all. Might have to work out the links - would "server" link to Minecraft server? But otherwise that sounds fine for the first sentence. For conveying its independence / extension though, I don't see how it's any better than before. I actually still think "for the game" implies the opposite of what you intend - it reads to me as if this is some kind of DLC / world within the game. Just the word "for" though. I'm not sure how to properly word this, sorry, but something about the "for" implies like, responsibility, or ownership. As in it was created for Minecraft to be the anarchy server. Then again, the very first sentence would be a little too "load bearing" if we filled it up with something like "2b2t is an independent Minecraft anarchy multiplayer server". I do still think that the "for the game" is better as "in the game" and even better as "in Minecraft" though. Or maybe "independent" could be "player-run"? What do you think about balancing the "claim to fame" (oldest anarchy, most covered, etc) versus "background info" (this is player-run, unofficial) in ordering the lede? I'm not sure what the right answer is for order. Leijurv (talk) 03:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, sorry for only giving a partial reply tangent, let me fix that. To your initial concern, I think it is necessary to establish that the server is an extension of the game, rather than a core part of it (which "server in Minecraft" somewhat implies)., is this not already addressed the same way in this article as it is in those others? By leading with "is a Minecraft server" in the first sentence? I don't know why this article would need additional rewording of the next sentence to get rid of "in Minecraft" - if all the sources phrase it that way, I think that contradicts the idea that that phrasing would confuse people into thinking it's official. Leijurv (talk) 03:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

For linking we can follow those precedent articles. In this case, it'd be: Minecraft anarchy server

Maybe, based on the Independent article:

2builders2tools (2b2t) is a Minecraft anarchy server founded in December 2010. It is the oldest server of its kind, as well as one of the oldest running Minecraft servers of any variety.

BLDM (talk) 03:38, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The anarchy link doesn't make sense in my opinion - we clarify at the bottom of the lede what it means for Minecraft, and it isn't really what that links to. I think "multiplayer" could belong though. I also think "of its kind" is a little bit of a speedbump in reading - probably fine to leave that as "oldest anarchy server in the game" or some such, the referentialness of "of its kind" is a little too much brevity. Also, I'm unsure where / what you've exactly pulled from the Independent, can you clarify? Thanks!

2builders2tools (2b2t) is a multiplayer Minecraft anarchy server founded in December 2010. It is the oldest anarchy server in the game, as well as one of the oldest running Minecraft servers of any variety. Perhaps? Though, I still do not see any problem with "in Minecraft" that isn't also present for "in the game"/"for the game". Leijurv (talk) 03:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The anarchy link would perhaps need to be a separate discussion, as that is not a new addition to the article. "Multiplayer" is not in the precedent articles, and probably shouldn't be given the inclusion of Minecraft server (see its definition).

Here's the full Independent quote I'm referencing: 2b2t is an “anarchy server,” the oldest and most infamous of its kind.

My stated concerns with "server in ..." still remain.

A slight tangent, but this made me notice that the Newsweek article is seemingly the exact same as the Independent one... BLDM (talk) 04:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

That... is true. Wow. The Independent appears to have been published some time later, and it has © Newsweek at the bottom. My mistake on the anarchy link, I was confused. But still, the discussion was about "Minecraft server" versus "server in Minecraft", and the Indepenewsweek does still have the other two: the worst place in Minecraft, Anarchy servers are a dark tradition within Minecraft. The "of its kind" sort of throws a wrench in the flow of the paragraph - what kind? In the article it makes sense because the same sentence previously called it out as an anarchy server, therefore that is the category we are "comparing within". When separated out into the next sentence, it isn't immediately obvious if this is the oldest anarchy server, the oldest server in Minecraft, or the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft. Frankly, I don't see the problem with the previous phrasing, at all, and the concern with it that you cited is addressed by rewording the previous sentence + looking at the other server articles. The stated concern was that it could make people think that this is a core part of the game, but... that doesn't really make sense, and it's fixed in the previous sentence. As you say, we don't need to say "multiplayer" because the linked article Minecraft server clearly explains how they're player-run. You've said that it somewhat implies that 2b2t is... somehow official? not player-run? a part of the game itself? But didn't say how. Where is this implication coming from? How does "server in Minecraft" trump the previous link to "Minecraft server"? Leijurv (talk) 04:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Restored WP:QUO just for the time being, per my initial comment at the very top about the WP:BRD ordering here - the previous wording stood for nearly the entire article's history, and there were no interceding edits between the "B" and the "R", so this does apply. Leijurv (talk) 05:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The sentence that has been proposed removal has, as Leijurv said, remained in the article since the beginning of its creation without being contested. The current sentence is easier to read and makes more sense, and changing it to 2builders2tools (2b2t) is a multiplayer Minecraft anarchy server founded in December 2010. It is the oldest anarchy server in the game, as well as one of the oldest running Minecraft servers of any variety. is redundant as it mentions the same words multiple times, breaking the flow of the lede. Though articles do not need to follow the wording of sources (and are often actively discouraged to) most sources contain similar wording to the current wording. Either way this argument remains at a standstill with no clear consensus to be reached. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 07:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I think you and Leijurv are neglecting the context of these quotes being used to support the "in Minecraft" phrasing. I think it is fair to say that the server experience is contained "in Minecraft" (and the supporting quotes seem to be referencing that), in the sense that people use the Minecraft client to play on the server. However, the server itself - a separate entity - is not contained within Minecraft (think hosting). This entity, not the experience, is what is being referenced to as the "oldest" in the sentence at issue. For example, given this distinction, I have no objections to the following sentence in the lede which references the world experience:

2b2t's world is also one of the longest-running unaltered server maps in the game

Do you both agree that these are distinct things?

Additionally, Leijurv's above concern with "anarchy" may actually be relevant here. We are currently stating that it is an anarchy server, but changing that definition later in the lede. Does "anarchy-style" make more sense given this issue?

I've found that "oldest of its kind" is a commonly used phrase on Wikipedia in this order, and this usage is supported by the Newsweek ref. Here's a revised lede proposal based on precedent:

2builders2tools (2b2t) is an anarchy-style Minecraft server. Released in December 2010, it is the oldest of its kind, and is among the oldest servers of any variety.

and perhaps an expansion of its style definition should immediately follow.

BLDM (talk) 15:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I think you could be reading too much into this word. The entity versus the experience also doesn't make sense here to me. The world is pretty much inseparable from the entity, you "experience" 2b2t just as much as you "experience" 2b2t's world, there's no real difference between those concepts in practice. People use the Minecraft client to play in the world, play on the server, play the server, I've heard phrasings all across the board. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but does (think hosting) mean that you believe wording "server in Minecraft" implies Minecraft (Mojang?) is hosting 2b2t, but wording "Minecraft server" does not imply that? I'm sorry I just don't see this implication at all. Also see what I said ^^^ up above relating to WP:ONEDOWN, and why I think this implied misunderstanding is wholly implausible.

What is the context of the source exactly that you think we're missing? The Facepunch Era - Anarchy servers are a dark tradition within Minecraft. In a standard game, you are dropped into a randomly generated world, where you mine for resources and build structures, one block at a time. This seems pretty clear cut. The server is within Minecraft. I don't see context modulating that to "game world" instead of "server". And The worst place in Minecraft is clearly (to my eyes) referring to the server conceptually - its culture, its toxic chat, etc. Not just the world map file.

I'm not sure what is gained by just adding "-style". I do see a benefit to moving up the explanation though. And/or, we could remove the link to avoid being misleading prior to the contextualization. On top of which, I don't see any problem with how you moved the founding date to the second sentence, that's fine & and I could live with that. It could aid understanding for the "oldest" qualifier. However, I do dislike the change from "founded" to "released"; does that not go against what you've been saying about words implying officialness? "Released" has a large connotation of like, a launched product or DLC put up for download. I think "created" or "founded" work better than "launched" or "released".

Currently, I think the best combined wording would be: 2builders2tools (2b2t) is an independent anarchy Minecraft server. Founded in December 2010, it is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft, and is among the oldest running servers of any variety. In the context of Minecraft, an “anarchy server” is understood as a multiplayer server with "scarce or no server-wide rules," though this definition is flexible. 2b2t is in part famous for its complete lack of regulation once in-game. 2b2t's world is also one of the longest-running unaltered server maps in the game, which has never been reset since its creation. Or perhaps, to prevent breaking the flow, it could be "anarchy Minecraft server.[a]" with a footnote for "In the context ... once in-game". Leijurv (talk) 17:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Let's focus on rewording the "in Minecraft" portion first, as that's the primary subject of this discussion.

Can you propose a version that doesn't contain "oldest anarchy server in ..."? I will assume good faith here, but given the older discussion you had regarding this phrasing, I'm concerned that there may be an unstated reason you're attached to this specific word ordering.

I'd even accept a previous version of the problematic sentence as progress with regard to that concern, despite the distinction issue:

It is one of the longest-running servers in the game, as well as the oldest anarchy server.

Otherwise I don't see progress being made here. BLDM (talk) 18:30, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The wording makes sense to me, Berrely doesn't see a problem with it, it has been the consensus of the article for basically its entire history, and I've given several reasons why the rewords are worse and euphemistic and reasons why the existing wording doesn't really have problems (such as looking at the sources, looking at WP:ONEDOWN, looking at grammar/flow, and looking at WP:EXPLAINLEAD).

I'm curious what you think my unstated motivation is. Are you referring to how this phrase is commonly used to identify the server? That isn't unstated, it's come up before. It's not a coincidence - it's a fine way to phrase it, so many people use it? There really aren't that many variants to choose from of "oldest anarchy server in Minecraft".

Can you propose a version that doesn't contain [...]? Conversely, assuming the equivalent faith: Can you propose a version that does contain it? Is there an unstated reason why you're shying away from this phrase? Frankly, I haven't heard any reasons other than a very strange contrived scenario based on the word 'in' somehow confusing someone into thinking 2b2t is operated by Mojang.

Otherwise I don't see progress being made here. Then this might end up with no consensus on this particular phrase. (Not to discount, however, your points that I agreed with above regarding rearranging/changing the lede otherwise) Leijurv (talk) 19:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

In the previous discussion of this you stated that changing:

2b2t is one of the oldest running servers in the game, as well as the oldest anarchy server.

to:

2b2t is one of the oldest running servers in the game, as well as the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft.

Was not critical just a suggestion. In fact, it added unnecessary redundancy. Given that, would you agree to restore the previous wording with some minor changes while we continue this discussion?

It is one of the longest-running servers in the game, as well as the oldest anarchy server.

In my opinion, this version makes more sense as it removes the redundancy, and "one of the longest-running servers in the game" is perhaps more significant.

BLDM (talk) 20:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I hope you would agree nothing here is critical; it's just what wording is best.

No, I think that phrasing was worse, if I remember correctly it was the result of confusion regarding server age and sourcing and such. 2b2t was previously described as the oldest server, but that was downgraded to "second oldest" then "one of the oldest". When the sentence was originally written, it made sense to put the "more impressive claim to fame" (if you will) first. Presently, every Minecraft server article that we have is "one of the oldest" iirc, so putting that first is not really important. The actual important thing here is that this one is THE oldest anarchy server in Minecraft, so that's why that goes first. I am a little disconcerted by perhaps more significant; how could it be more significant to be among some vague number of "old-ish" servers, than to be the single oldest (and most infamous too) in its category? For those reasons, I didn't particularly like the previous phrasing which stood as 2b2t is one of the oldest running servers as well as the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft. for some time. restore the previous wording with some minor changes The "minor change" here is the removal of the phrase that we are discussing, "in Minecraft". So that isn't minor. It comes across to me like you're looking to get rid of this phrase by any means necessary, and I still haven't heard a good reason why. For example, if server in Minecraft is the issue with the current phrasing, and Minecraft server is the way to fix it, why are you now suggesting server in the game? Doesn't it have the exact same problem as in Minecraft (namely, the usage of the word in)? Do you have a thought on what I said here? Leijurv (talk) 20:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I think this is becoming WP:DIS/WP:TE. I have made numerous attempts to propose new wordings. My most recent attempt was this change, which doesn't solve the primary issue, but is a step in the right direction:

It is the oldest anarchy server in the game, as well as one of the oldest running servers of any variety.

- which was based on a proposed compromise by you, but you have reverted it anyway. Why do the first three lede sentences need to begin with "2b2t" to identify the subject? Why does it not make sense to replace the redundant mention of "Minecraft" with "the game" (the specific change you "hypothetically" proposed)?

BLDM (talk) 23:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

There was no consensus on here yet, so you should not change the article regarding the exact thing in question. I could say the same thing about WP:DIS and WP:TE. If anything, the consensus would be against you with Berrely supporting the existing wording. WP:BRD: Don't restore your changes or engage in back-and-forth reverting. Also WP:NOCON: In discussions of proposals to add, modify or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit.

Perhaps instead we could agree on here, then edit the article with explicit agreement instead of implicit, which can harbor miscommunication.

You have proposed many things, but the reasons you cite are contradictory to each other and don't make sense to me as I pointed out above in my most recent message ^. It comes across to me like you're looking to get rid of this phrase by any means necessary. The sentences do not have to begin with "2b2t". I don't think "it" sounds good as the beginning of the sentence, but we could talk about it on here, since we're already discussing any and all potential changes to the first two sentences. The alternative could be "the server", but that sounds quite weird. It would be something like "2b2t is a server. The server is the oldest server". Using the established abbreviation of 2b2t for 2builders2tools is fine with me. It appears you don't like the 3-way repetition of "2b2t". First I'm hearing of it. Sounds reasonable, so I would support replacing "2b2t's world" with just "The world" or "The server's world" in the third one, if you'd like. Regarding "in Minecraft", which is the entire topic here, please refer to my original message where I explained my reasoning. I may have missed it, but I didn't see any addressing of / reply to this: since the main article text simply says "the server", we need to go through what that means precisely, regarding "in the game" and how we call out the server owner being anonymous etc. The lead-in from "Minecraft multiplayer server" -> "in Minecraft" -> "in the game" -> "the server" is what I'm talking about regarding WP:UPFRONT. Making it "stutter" the first thing ("Minecraft server") twice doesn't help anything since we're still going to the same destination, except this second repetition isn't linked to the proper articles to help the reader understand. The same thing applies with repeating the third item as opposed to the second. Additionally, based on a proposed compromise by you - if you pull out just the part you like from a compromise, it ceases to be a compromise. What about this: 2builders2tools (2b2t) is an independent anarchy Minecraft server. Founded in December 2010, it is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft, and is among the oldest running servers of any variety.[a] (with a footnote to the explanation of what "anarchy" means in this context) The world is also one of the longest-running unaltered server maps in the game, which has never been reset since its creation. (I explicitly support this and would realize it into the article if you agree) This gets rid of two of the three "2b2t" leads that you don't like, moves "anarchy" to the first sentence like you suggest, removes "multiplayer" like you suggest, moves the founding date to the second sentence like you suggest, and rewords "one of the oldest" to "among the oldest" like you suggest. Obviously, this lead is going to change as an outcome of this, the question is how. I'll wait until you explicitly agree before making any change to it. Leijurv (talk) 23:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv and BLDM: this argument currently seems to be at no consesensus. Both parties have refused to make a compromise and seem to be influenced by an external reason to reword or keep this sentence. Either way this argument is clearly at a standstill and going nowhere, so I believe it is suitable to close this discussion with no consensus. Consensus can change, and a new discussion may be reopened to rediscuss this. But this discussion seems to have led nowhere and will likely result in the article retaining its current revision. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 08:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2020

47.20.143.245 (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I wanna make this article and others as accurate as possible

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:41, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Subreddit as a source

The 2b2t subreddit is currently being used as a source for two claims in the lede. This is a WP:SELFSOURCE, and in my opinion meets all the criteria for such except the following: There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity I could not find any reliable sources noting the subreddit as "official" or the sidebar information representing the "server owner", as the article currently claims.

The reliability of this source has been discussed before [1] [2].

@Leijurv: In regard to WP:SELFSOURCE, please explain how there is no doubt to the authenticity of this source as being information from the "server owner" or even official. You have previously stated that The posts [on the subreddit] are not made by the server's owners, however they are the only moderators, which suggests that the "server owner" has no involvement in the source? BLDM (talk) 20:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

We are not citing the posts made on the subreddit, but the sidebar. The server owner does not make the posts, but they are the moderators. Therefore the server owner is involved in what we cite. This is a bit unorthodox for sure, but I think it's well founded in this specific case. I mostly look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Video_games. Of course, this is discouraged, but we can technically cite the game. For a server like this, with the admin being anonymous, I do not think there is any better source. The subreddit is visible and verifiable, see my imgur link here. It is very hard to find proper sources for sections about the plot or setting of a video game without using the game itself. In many of these sections, the game itself is used as a source, but make sure that it is not the only source. In this case, we are balancing the server admin's modern-day claim against one of the secondary sources from 2015. In neither case are we solely relying on the subreddit. I believe this is permissible for that reason. Leijurv (talk) 20:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Therefore the server owner is involved in what we cite.

This seems like you're drawing an unverifiable conclusion.

The subreddit is visible and verifiable

Verifiable as an official "discussion" board perhaps - again, you are concluding yourself that certain information from that discussion board is attributable to the "server owner".

Are there any sources that clarify this involvement? If not, I'm not sure how you can say there is no doubt to the information's authenticity.

BLDM (talk) 20:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm relying on WP:EDITDISC and this. There is no prohibition on original research or synthesis on here in order to make a consensus-based decision on what is citable in the main page. If all sources needed sources on themselves we'd be in an infinite loop. Anyway. In this case, the tab menu of the server states that the subreddit is among the only three "official websites and contacts". The newsweek source also links this subreddit. On top of which, the moderator of the subreddit (reddit user u/2builders2tools) commonly posts information relating to the server before it happens, pins posts, adds motds from the subreddit, etc. I don't think there is much reasonable doubt that this person is also the server operator. And even if that specific account is not, the subreddit is called out in-game as "official". The sidebar of the subreddit contains this information, which is only changeable by the moderators of the subreddit. Leijurv (talk) 01:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Would you be open to changing the attribution to a variation of "according to the server's official subreddit"? I agree that it is likely that the subreddit is operated by people associated with the server's operations (i.e. staff), but I don't think we can conclude that it's the server owner. BLDM (talk) 03:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah something like that would be good. Maybe we could go like "according to the sidebar of the official subreddit" or "according to the moderators of the official subreddit"? Just so we clarify that this isn't just any old post on the subreddit, but something from the moderators. Leijurv (talk) 03:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I have made this edit: [3] Leijurv (talk) 02:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Umbrella section for the flurry of content changes just now

@BLDM: (no issue with the other smaller edits that I don't mention, up to and including when AnomieBOT edited)

• [4] You're right, the source does say founders, so this is a good edit. However, I think we could make it a little more clear. Perhaps "one founder, the current operator, is referred to as Hause / Hause / Hause"? Because the idea of "the current owner is named hause" (which is well sourced) was lost, so I think we could consider reintroducing that. I also have an additional thing as this relates to the other hause edit which I'll say later on.
• [5] Just want to say that this is not a minor edit, and was contemporaneous with the events on Rusher. Please only use the minor edit checkbox where applicable. The actual change to the article is fine, however.
• [6] Yep. The source does say "separate" indeed. This is accurate wording to the source, but in my opinion makes the article harder to understand. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
• [7] As Berrely and I have said probably four or five times now, the "no consensus" applies to the area we were discussing, which is primarily the first two sentences of the article. Many of the things you proposed (including this specific thing of removing "multiplayer") I agreed with. But please consider just bringing it up on here, it doesn't take much time. Especially within a day of discussing the exact same thing and coming to "no consensus".
• [8] Yep, "some" is probably fine here. There's always the WP:OR of assuming that the sources we have are all that exist - we can't say that just because the majority of the sources we have say X that a majority of sources say X. I might remove the "some" entirely to be honest, it's similarly WP:WEASEL. Something like The server has been described as "the worst Minecraft server" by Robert Guthrie of Kotaku[4] and Andrew Paul of Vice?
• [9] Please see here for my previous musings. Basically, the word "cheating" has a connotation of breaking the rules of a game or gaining an unfair advantage. I don't think that applies here, really. It isn't against the rules, and everyone's doing it. It's basically the norm and not the exception. So that's my reasoning for the "hacking" word. Which is why this is interesting, because it previously linked to Cheating in online games which says that part: Cheating in online games is defined as the action of pretending to comply with the rules of the game, while secretly subverting them to gain an unfair advantage over an opponent. This doesn't much apply. There is no pretending, there aren't even any rules to comply with. However, your link to Cheating in video games actually seems much better: Cheating in video games involves a video game player using various methods to create an advantage beyond normal gameplay, in order to make the game easier. Surprisingly, I actually think it makes sense to have the word in the article be "hacking" but it links to an article about "cheating". So, no disagreement here.
• [10] I have to disagree. 2b2t is one single world, it isn't split up into levels. The linked article says the total space available to the player during the course of completing a discrete objective, and that just doesn't describe what's happening here. There is no discrete objective, and there is no segmentation of the game into different spaces available for different tasks, the entire area is always accessible if you travel.
• [11] Please see #Housemaster_or_Hausemaster. There is a lot of past discussion about this. About this one + the removal of "hausmaster". There is a lot of disagreement on whether or not we can say that the person or persons currently referred to as "hausemaster" (aka: the server owner that people call hausemaster) as described in our sources, is actually one of the founders.

tl;dr confusion about hause (founder? owner? operator?), maybe "most" / "some" shouldn't be there at all, the "level" link doesn't make much sense Leijurv (talk) 02:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh boy...

1. The content of the Vice article seems to suggest that the founders (plural) remained owners Example: its upkeep of ninety dollars a month is maintained at almost no cost to its founders.. This is conflicting with the other sources that refer to a sole founder/owner.

2. I'd classify this as a grammatical change, which is fine under WP:ME. Let's stick to content issues though.

3. I think it is easier to understand "separate queue" vs "priority queue" here for those unfamiliar with the concept.

4. Small and likely uncontested changes should not need talk page discussions.

5. Removing "some" would be fine with me.

6. Yay!

7. How about the "Nether" and "End" dimensions/levels of the game? Maybe it's that article that should change, since there does not seem to be a more appropriate one.

8. It doesn't seem like any sources support this distinction, so I'm not sure there's anything that can be done here?

BLDM (talk) 03:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Conflicting sources on the founder / owner situation was what led to the previous state on the article what with owner is commonly referred to as, which, admittedly, is awkward phrasing, but it avoids making a claim as to whether that's the owner's actual "name" (well, not name, but identifier). An IP suggested looking at Minecraft name changes too. Ugh. Maybe the best thing is "The server's management is referred to as"? Or "The ownership is collectively referred to as"? I'm really unsure.

A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Um, wasn't there a dispute happening at the exact same moment regarding Rusher and whether TheCampingRusher belonged on it?

Fair point. Someone who's never heard of the queue before might find it easier to understand a separated line versus the phrase "priority queue" which might not parse as well. Edit: Maybe "separated prioritized queue"?

Small and likely uncontested changes should not need talk page discussions. For sure! In general this is absolutely true. E x c e p t, we had just closed as "no consensus" a very long talk page discussion regarding a potential rephrasing of those exact sentences, and had gone over this exact potential change as well as other such "small" changes.

I'll remove "some" in the way I suggested above, sounds good.

Right, I'd have less of a problem with linking to Level (video game) if we had something like, for example, "2b2t's overworld is the largest explored dimension of Minecraft" or some such. We aren't talking about any dimension specifically, but rather the entire collective Minecraft world that has never been reset. There's nothing notable / mentionable about any dimension specifically here. Even still I don't think a Minecraft dimension is a video game level. There is no single discrete objective, is the missing component. It's an open sandbox game! But for sure, a Minecraft save on a whole is not a video game level. It would be more appropriate to for that to link to Saved game than to Level (video game).

It doesn't seem like any sources support this distinction Well, look at the first quote in "History": The basic story is that this guy who ran the Garry's Mod server started a Minecraft server with the same premise – that you can do anything you want – and this was then given to one of his friends, who we know as Hausemaster. This supports the founder being different from the owner (who we currently know as Hausemaster), doesn't it? Leijurv (talk)

Um, wasn't there a dispute happening at the exact same moment regarding Rusher and whether TheCampingRusher belonged on it? Edit unrelated to WP:D issues. Again, stick to content discussion here.

Maybe the best thing is "The server's management is referred to as"? Or "The ownership is collectively referred to as"? I'm really unsure. When the sources use whatever variation of "HauseMaster", it is in reference to a single person - so I don't think we can go that route.

separated prioritized queue Sounds like it could easily be confused with the concept of a priority queue - which, if I understand correctly, is not how that separate queue functions.

We aren't talking about any dimension specifically, but rather the entire collective Minecraft world that has never been reset. Maybe "world" isn't the right word? Is it only the overworld that's the longest-running? Those dimensions are generally referred to as separate worlds (and are filesystem-wise).

This supports the founder being different from the owner (who we currently know as Hausemaster), doesn't it? I question the reliability of that quote, and Newsweek says: created in 2010 by a user named Hausemaster.

BLDM (talk) 21:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Is it only the overworld that's the longest-running? Oh jeez. Well, technically, yes. Because the nether and end weren't added until 2011. But, none of our sources talk about differences between dimensions and age. It's just the entire world. Maybe we could have "2b2t's world save" or "2b2t's map" or some such, linked to Saved game? Maybe a link isn't even needed here though, since the concept of a sandbox game's entire universe just might not have an applicable article.

"Priority queue" could certainly be confused with that. (for all I know it could function that way though). Whatev, separate is fine.

I don't want to "die on the hill" of the owner/founder/operator stuff, but I can already predict someone else might (and has in the past). ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ At least the page has gotten semi-protected since that last time. Leijurv (talk) 02:22, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

since the concept of a sandbox game's entire universe just might not have an applicable article. Maybe open world (subset of level) is more appropriate? BLDM (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Lol, I can't believe I missed that. Yes. I don't think a link is necessary, but if it'll be linked, that should be the target. Leijurv (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Triumph Books references

So there are three books published by Triumph Books (two are in this article, one was recently removed for the reason I'm about to state) about Minecraft that mention 2b2t.

1. July 2014 — The Ultimate Minecraft Creator: The Unofficial Building Guide to Minecraft and Other Games
2. April 2015 — Master Builder 3.0 Advanced
3. April 2016 — Ultimate Guide to Mastering Minigames and Servers

Now, I found that all three of these have copied information. In the quotes, below, I'll bold the copied phrases.

The first book states:

So... 2b2t is crazy. It is a world where the idea is that anything goes, at all, and is not supposed to be reset ever. Unfortunately, it was reset once recently, due to the need for an update, but this is actually kind of good because as 2b2t goes along, it gets outright wild. This server is really like no other, and in fact, it's like no other thing in gaming. Because people cheat wildly, grief relentlessly and absolutely wreck the area for thousands of blocks around the spawn, 2b2t's landscape turns into a nightmare wastleland which you will probably not survive. Be warned: 2b2t is not for the faint of heart or the sensitive. You will die, people will attack you and wreck/steal whatever you have, and you will very likely run into some offensive language and behavior here. That being said, it's an experience like no other and completely fun, if you're ready for what awaits you.

[...] Where 2b2t is all chaos and no direction, A'Therys Ascended is just about the opposite of that. This is [...]

The second book states:

So... 2b2t is crazy. It is a world where the idea is that anything goes, at all, and is not supposed to be reset ever. Unfortunately, it was reset once recently, due to the need for an update, but this is actually kind of good because as 2b2t goes along, it gets outright wild. This server is really like no other, and in fact, it's like no other thing in gaming. Because people cheat wildly, grief relentlessly and absolutely wreck the area for thousands of blocks around the spawn, 2b2t's landscape turns into a nightmare wastleland which you will probably not survive. Be warned: 2b2t is not for the faint of heart or the sensitive. You will die, people will attack you and wreck/steal whatever you have, and you will very likely run into some offensive language and behavior here. That being said, it's an experience like no other and completely fun, if you're ready for what awaits you.

[...] Along with 2b2t, Hypixel and WesterosCraft, the MindCrack server sits among online royalty when it comes to public servers.

Everything in the first book is original so we can include everything from there. The second book copies everything from the first book (that giant paragraph in the quote), except for one sentence later in the book (the one about "online royalty"). The third book had only one sentence mentioning 2b2t, and that sentence was copied from the second book (the "online royalty" sentence).

With that being said, how could we reword the sentences? Should we completely remove the third book, only keeping the first book and the one original sentence from the second book? I think that's what I will do right now, but tell me if you have any objections.

Possibly, one thing we could do is say something like this: Book 2 and Book 3, published by Triumph Books in 2014 and 2015 respectively, both stated that [...] —  Melofors  TC  16:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

The copied quotes mentioned in the Book 2 description should be moved to the description of Book 1. I do wonder if that "online royalty" quote is even worth noting after that. BLDM (talk) 17:58, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Yep, I did that right after. And yeah, the online royalty is a minor mention, but I still feel like it's notable. Is this edit good? —  Melofors  TC  20:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm fine with that revision. Sorta feel like Ultimate Guide to Mastering Minigames and Servers shouldn't be included at all, but not sure what policies/precedent there is for notability of clearly copied content. BLDM (talk) 20:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Displaying website(s) in external links

So there are a few things about this that have been on my mind.

1. There's another website

So in External links, the official website, 2b2t.org, is listed, but there used to be another official website, 2b2t.net (currently down). Here's an archive of that website from June 2012 (currently down). Should we add it to the list?

2. Is 2b2t.org down?

The website itself is still there. It's just blank. So does it make sense to say its "down"?

3. What should "archived" be linked to?

After the link, it says "(currently down; archived)", the word "archived" linking to the oldest archive of the website in 2013. I think it'd make more sense to link to here, which shows a timeline of all archives of the website to choose from.

Please tell me what you think! —  Melofors  TC  06:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

1. Is there a reliable source asserting that 2b2t.net represents the same entity as 2b2t.org? Does this link provide any additional information about the subject (not contained in other sources or 2b2t.org)?

2. Leijurv previously linked this screenshot from the server which includes "website: 2b2t.org (currently down)". It's "down" in the sense that the informational content is currently unavailable, but could become available in the future.

3. I think the link text should then be changed to something like "Archive snapshots of official website".

BLDM (talk) 14:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

1. There doesn't seem to be any any sources at all mentioning 2b2t.net, as that website was only active in 2b2t's early years. The website is similar to 2b2t.org in that it introduces the server, gives updated player counts and world file sizes, donation info, etc.
2. Berrely changed "down" to "inactive", which I agree with.
3. So you're proposing it should look like this: (currently inactive; archive snapshots of official website)

I disagree and think the linked text should simply be "archived", because if we're using your suggestion, why is it currently (currently inactive; archived), and not (currently inactive; archived snapshot of official website)? The word "archived" still makes sense if we link to the timeline of archives instead of a single archive. Or could we just call it "archives"? That might make more sense here.

I also just realized that the majority of the archives (178/223) are from after the website went inactive, and so if people go to the link and click the archives, they'll mostly be useless and confusing. Could we maybe change it to (inactive November 8, 2015 – present; archived)? This way, people will know which archives have informational content and will not have to waste their time. —  Melofors  TC  05:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@BLDM: As for 2b2t.net, I found that the word "2b2t" links to 2b2t.net in the June 2012 PCGamesN article here, so I think that's sufficient enought to include it as an external link? —  Melofors  TC  21:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah, nice find for 2b2t.net - certainly establishes it as the same subject at that time then. Should be a bit cautious though because it looks like the domain expired at some point and was re-created in 2015 (based on WHOIS), so the current owner might not be the same.

With WP:EL in mind, do archives of that site provide any information not already in the article? Seems very similar to the already linked 2b2t.org. BLDM (talk) 22:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

No, there doesn't seem to be anything on the website that wasn't later added to 2b2t.org. Mostly everything was copied over to 2b2t.org word for word. I'm not aware of any guidelines, but including it may still be helpful for people researching the server who never knew that there was a second and older official website. —  Melofors  TC  08:49, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Generally archives external links simply have the text "Archived on the Wayback Machine" or just "Archived" — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 05:54, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Nature as a sandbox game

I don't want to be a stickler for no good reason about WP:OR, but I believe this second sentence could be reworded to avoid conveying something that's technically WP:OR (or maybe WP:SYNTH): with its nature being the "ultimate expression of the core mechanic of the game." This is a reference to Minecraft's nature as a sandbox game. How do we know it's referring to that? What do we think about rewording it to like core mechanic of the game." Minecraft is inherently an open-ended sandbox game. Per this. Leijurv (talk) 22:38, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: Good catch. But then shouldn't we have a source for the fact that Minecraft is a sandbox game? —  Melofors  TC  08:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not certain. WP:CITE: Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations, anywhere in article space. I don't think this is likely to be challenged. And either way it links to the Minecraft page which goes into it in depth. I don't think it would hurt to add a citation, but I don't think it's a problem that there is no citation currently, if that makes sense. Leijurv (talk) 21:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: Oh okay, makes sense then. You can go ahead and make the edit then. —  Melofors  TC  21:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Section to go into detail about the server

I'm looking into creating a section that goes into more detail about the server, such as the spawn area (the destruction of spawn, and the whole "escaping spawn" thing), hacked clients (how they've become commonplace on the server), griefing, the toxic nature of the server, etc. This information doesn't belong in History, nor in Reception (the Reception section does have minor mentions of what I intend for the section to be about). The problem is, I don't know what to name this section. The only two names that have come to mind are "Culture" and "Playstyle". However, information about spawn doesn't fit in either of those topics, and toxicity isn't exactly a playstyle. Culture is the best possible name I could think of.

This section is needed because it is a general rule that what is stated in the lead should be expanded upon throughout the rest of the article. However, nothing is expanded upon on these subjects, and there are only a few minor mentions of these subjects in Reception. If anyone has any ideas, please respond! —  Melofors  TC  22:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Definitely "Culture". I have some experience in these matters and would love to help out :)

It might actually be a good idea to take the "before/after" renders that Thebes made out of Gallery and up into this section, could do a nice left-float, right-float to complement talking about how spawn is messed up. Like you said, the Kotaku source is best for this. Here's some bits from it that I think could be useful:

As for etiquette, if you can build it, it’s yours, and if you see someone, you can kill them.

But really, conflict with 2b2t veterans was inevitable. The server buckled under the strain of so many players—even a tiny fraction of Rusher’s fanbase could completely overwhelm 2b2t’s hardware and make it unplayable. And if the server managed to survive the overload, most of its roster was filled by Rushers, not veterans.

Long-timers of 2b2t are usually hostile to most newcomers (which they call ‘newfags’), so they took to killing Rushers whenever possible. Rushers, who outnumber the original players heavily, responded by destroying bases, resources caches and dismantling large monuments that had stood peacefully for years. This prompted veteran players to start treating Rushers more seriously, as much as giving a shit about anything went against the spirit of the server.

Still, the newcomers were not a good fit with the existing culture of the server: they’ve tried to make certain areas ‘friendlier’, and often treat the server as a loose Factions-style map.

Unable to deter the Rushers with simple murder and destruction, some veterans of the server have resorted to more devious means of attack. The denizens have worked to make spawn completely uninhabitable.

Veterans have also begun construction of massive resource-eating machines that lag the server, hoping to make the server unusable for TCR and his fans. One recent strategy involves placing objectionable content, like genitalia and loli paintings, around spawn points and the major thoroughfares in an attempt to get TCR’s videos taken down. At the very least, the lewd content makes it hard for new YouTubers to continue publicizing 2b2t, since nudity puts videos at-risk of violating YouTube’s terms of service.

In the process, the experience is creating entirely new 2b2t-ers out of Rushers, because any fan who sticks around long enough is bound to have a tolerance for profanity, lack of rules, and general edgelording. 2b2t might be at war, but when the dust settles, 2b2t will have recruited more people to keep the spirit of the worst server on Minecraft alive for years to come.

From Newsweek:

There are no such rules on the anarchy servers. They are by nature inhospitable—in general, players are advised to bury their supplies, arm themselves to the teeth and be prepared to die many times over.

Since then, the battle lines have become more ambiguous: 2b2t's oldest users have retreated to edges of the map to preserve their settlements and sit out the siege in peace, leaving the newbies to attack each other.

To traverse 2b2t is to feel lost and overwhelmed, and to play is to accept this pain and confusion as a condition of existence. The ordeal begins even before you enter: The queue to join the server is over 1,000 players long. A very slow-moving countdown appears on screen; when it reaches zero, you're allowed in.

Hidden across the landscape are some especially cruel traps: fake sanctuaries that explode in flames, pits that drop you into a river of lava and false floors that open into prisons built from obsidian, with no way to dig out. (Players entombed there have no choice but to log out and sit through the queue all over again.)

To navigate this land requires an arsenal of hacked clients—altered versions of the game with enhancements, similar to cheats, like X-ray vision or teleporting. Popular cheats include the power to see through walls to find supplies and victims and one to improve aim. (This might explain how a figure in the far distance was able to shoot me down with a crossbow. In the dark.)

Nazi propaganda, racist slurs and a succession of death threats pour into the chat window with mechanical efficiency. Their sheer volume negates the effect, and they become part of the background. I want to beat this. I want to feel at home in chaos.

"Exploring 2b2t is like archaeology.… There's so much that it says about the nature of Minecraft itself and about the design of the game. 2b2t deserves a book."

2b2t provides a meta-narrative beyond the game, similar to the halftime show during sports broadcasts. Players post about the server on YouTube and Reddit, like amateur sports analysts.

2b2t gives players free rein to abuse, destroy and self-destruct. It is essentially nihilistic, as players thrash against the walls of their virtual cage, taking out their disaffection on the same technology they are addicted to. Their behavior is more than not safe for work: It is not safe for life itself.

Perhaps enduring this noxious landscape is ultimately 2b2t's true appeal.

Nobody survives very long in 2b2t—the pride comes from having died there.

From Vice:

Later, as I pass a floating swastika while shrugging off the latest barrage of anonymous insults I realize maybe 2b2t doesn't represent the pinnacle of human ingenuity. But it still might serve a different purpose: The mapping of a collective mindscape, our virtual id, visualized and digitized for all time. The highs, the lows, the nagging voices of criticism, the thoughts we'd rather not share—who hasn't felt all of these at some point?

In some ways, 2b2t is a more accurate depiction of humanity than I initially thought. Whether or not intended by its creators, the game gives imagery to an unrestrained stream of populist consciousness, the total summation of a certain segment of our species. 2b2t is like any other human mind: An infinitely expanding plane, filled with ideas both beautiful and terrifying, with an occasional voice on the wind making you feel like a fucking idiot.

From Rock Paper Shotgun:

I’m standing in a wasteland. For thousands of metres in any direction there is nothing but a jagged causeway of stone blocks. Huge monoliths of stone pierce the sky here and there, like the buttes of Monument Valley. There are no trees and no grass in sight. No sheep, no cows, no life at all. If I was to pick a direction and run in a straight line, I would only make it about 1500 blocks before I collapsed and died of starvation. As if things weren’t bad enough, there is an endless stream of voices telling me to kill myself. Welcome to 2b2t. In every sense of the phrase, it is a “hostile environment.”

Ok quote dump over. I think there's enough here to write a quite detailed Culture section, to be honest. What do you think it should cover, more specifically? Leijurv (talk) 06:10, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Basically, think of this section as the place where people will really get to know the server and what it's like to play on it. When people read that section, they'll get a good run-down of what to expect on the server.

Here's something like what it would be like:

The spawn area is blah blah blah. It is seen as a dangerous area blah blah blah, and a common cause of death is starvation from attempting to escape spawn. Tall lavacasts [go into detail of what this is] inundate the area blah blah blah. Hacked clients are very commonplace and are seen as normal on the server blah blah blah.

Griefing is also very commonplace blah blah blah. Many players gear themselves and prepare to die many times.

The server is known for its toxicity [go into detail].

Obviously, it'll be a lot smoother and detailed than that (and don't worry, everything will have citations!). —  Melofors  TC  08:01, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Let's work on it here:

2b2t's nature as an anarchy server has resulted in a very inhospitable environment.[n] Players are given free rein to their impulses in a no-rules environment that has become essentially nihilistic.[n] Supplies need to be hidden, players need to be armed, and even still should expect to be killed repeatedly.[n] This is exacerbated by the server being set to "hard" mode, with player-versus-player combat enabled throughout.[p] Long-time players are often actively hostile to new players on the server, whom they call "newfags".[k]

I’m standing in a wasteland. For thousands of metres in any direction there is nothing but a jagged causeway of stone blocks. Huge monoliths of stone pierce the sky here and there, like the buttes of Monument Valley. There are no trees and no grass in sight. No sheep, no cows, no life at all. If I was to pick a direction and run in a straight line, I would only make it about 1500 blocks before I collapsed and died of starvation. As if things weren’t bad enough, there is an endless stream of voices telling me to kill myself. Welcome to 2b2t. In every sense of the phrase, it is a “hostile environment.”

— Rock, Paper, Shotgun - Brendan Caldwell

Before even joining the server, there is a slowly moving queue that can stretch into the thousands.[n] The spawn area, where players first join the server, is a dangerous place.[n] Traps are deliberately placed throughout: pits of lava, areas lit on fire, and portals that lead to lava or enclosed areas of obsidian that force players to disconnect and reconnect, waiting through the entire queue again.[n][r] The actual landscape is a "rocky deathtrap in constant upheaval".[r] Some players create large obstacles called "lava casts", in which water and lava are repeatedly poured down staircases of stone, creating massive monoliths of jagged stone.[r] Inexperienced players can take dozens of attempts to escape the spawn area, not even counting the possibility of being killed by another player.[r] Roisin Kiberd of Newsweek suggests that enduring this challenge could be part of the true appeal of 2b2t; since nobody survives for long, there could be pride for simply having died there.[n]

Experienced players reside far away from that spawn area, in relatively increased safety to play the game and build.[n] The further from spawn you travel, the prettier the server becomes.[p] The server has no etiquette regarding ownership; anything you build can be considered yours, until someone else finds it and destroys it.[k] Anyone you find can be killed on sight.[k] Many experienced players have multiple alternate Minecraft accounts, which can sometimes be completely different identities.[r]

Sometimes, despite all this, the community does come together.[r] There are yearly April Fools' Day events where the server changes to a custom map for a few days, and players can gain friendships or trust with each other.[r] There have also been "spawn incursions", in which dozens of players come together to take control of spawn for a time, such as to build a large base, kill many new players, or destroy other bases.[r]

Players often use a "hacked client", which is an altered version of Minecraft which introduces abilities that are not in regular Minecraft, such as X-ray vision and improved bow aim.[r][n] These clients are a necessity in order to navigate this environment, with popular mods granting radar and the ability to see through walls, such as to locate potential victims before they see you.[r][n] New players without these clients are at a disadvantage due to large limitations in what they can see.[r]

The server-wide chat is often filled with Nazi propaganda, racial slurs, and death threats; 2b2t is known for this offensiveness.[n][r]

Later, as I pass a floating swastika while shrugging off the latest barrage of anonymous insults I realize maybe 2b2t doesn't represent the pinnacle of human ingenuity. But it still might serve a different purpose: The mapping of a collective mindscape, our virtual id, visualized and digitized for all time. The highs, the lows, the nagging voices of criticism, the thoughts we'd rather not share—who hasn't felt all of these at some point? In some ways, 2b2t is a more accurate depiction of humanity than I initially thought. Whether or not intended by its creators, the game gives imagery to an unrestrained stream of populist consciousness, the total summation of a certain segment of our species. 2b2t is like any other human mind: An infinitely expanding plane, filled with ideas both beautiful and terrifying, with an occasional voice on the wind making you feel like a fucking idiot.

— Vice - Andrew Paul

Note: [n] means newsweek, [k] means kotaku, [p] means the 2b2t photodiary from pcgamesn, [r] means rock paper shotgun.

—  Melofors  TC  18:42, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok I will edit ^ above. Leijurv (talk) 19:55, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you, it looks amazing! —  Melofors  TC  07:19, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Captions of the renders

I've just made this edit. I think it adds a much-needed sense of scale. For example, the article prose now states that you can walk about 1500 blocks without dying of starvation (without hacks), so I think it makes sense to explain that this area of destruction visibly extends far beyond that.

I also think it might be neat to add a similar explanation to the other render, but I'm not sure how to phrase it, or if it's needed. This is because it's taken at an angle and I can't clearly state what is what. Perhaps something like The left-right centerline of this render is the z=0 highway, spanning from x=-3000 on the left to x=-400 on the right.? Leijurv (talk) 21:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Or maybe The left-right centerline of this render is the -x highway, stretching from (-3000,0) on the left to (-400,0) on the right.? But that sort of implies that the left and right edges of the render can be described by a single coordinate ugh Leijurv (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: Thanks, that was a much-needed edit for readers to get a good sense of scale, and it does go great along with the "1,500 blocks" thing. I reworded it a bit. For the angled renders, I don't think it's necessary to go into the specifics and go into detail about coordinates and such. Maybe something like The render displays the -X axis of the world map from 400 to 3,000 blocks from the map's center. Also, would we need a source for information like that? It doesn't feel right to be able to throw in info like that in the caption without a source. —  Melofors  TC  22:55, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

I believe we can Technically cite the game: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Video_games. But. Citing isn't the only way to pass WP:V. For example, how do we know these images are even of 2b2t? It's trivially verifiable just by logging into the server, of course. Or looking at the various images shown in our sources. Same goes for "how can we verify that this picture is truly of X" for any article about X, in general. (Very little of Commons has WP:RS saying that the pictures truly are of what they claim). Here's one example: to verify that the top render is truly 4000 blocks in diameter, you could simply zoom into the image and count the squares. Also you can align the renders mentally - the top of the isometric one has the mountain-cut-in-half that's also top center in the layers of spawn one. But whatever. What if I asked thebes to add this information (what coordinates are being shown) to the reddit post that I sourced the images from? Maybe that would help? Leijurv (talk) 23:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: If so, then we don't need it, but if it gives extra verification, then yeah, go for it. What do you think about the caption I suggested? —  Melofors  TC  23:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah that caption sounds good Leijurv (talk) 03:05, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2b2t/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 05:54, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Starting review. Hope to have some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 05:54, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

1. GACR#1a. Well written: the prose is clear, concise and understandable.
2. GACR#1a. Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
3. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
4. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
5. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
6. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
7. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation – not applicable.
8. GACR#2a. Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
9. GACR#2b. All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
10. GACR#2b. All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
11. GACR#2b. All quotations are cited and their usage complies with MOS guidelines.
12. GACR#2c. No original research.
13. GACR#2d. No copyright violations or plagiarism.
14. GACR#3. Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
15. GACR#4. Neutral (NPOV).
16. GACR#5. Stable.
17. GACR#6a. Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.
18. GACR#6b. Images are relevant to the topic with appropriate captions.

I'll be using the checklist above to register progress. No Great Shaker (talk) 06:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello No Great Shaker, thank you so much for picking up this GA review! I've been working on this article for just under a year and I figured I could save you some time. :) Firstly, this article is very source-constrained. Not that many WP:RS have written about 2b2t, it feels like squeezing water from a stone sometimes. The nineteen that are cited are pretty much all that exists and could ever be cited, unless a journalist picks up and writes something new. There is much more 2b2t content on the internet of course, which is what makes this difficult: the WP:UGC drowns out the WP:RS.

Anyway, some of these sources are weird. There have been discussions (at length) on the talk page & archive regarding which uses of 2b2t official pages pass WP:SELFSOURCE. We currently cite 2b2t's official web presence for two things: 1. The month in 2010 when 2b2t was founded: December (other sources say 2010, but not the month) 2. The current statistics about the server: 8 terabytes file size, 510,000 players. It is the current vague consensus that these two things pass WP:SELFSOURCE, the first one for sure, and the second one tentatively, with WP:INTEXT attribution ("according to the server owner" and such). Some WP:RS have written about the server file size, but per WP:LINKSINACHAIN they are simply reporting what the server owner has said, he is truly the only possible source for this. The question at play is the first criteria for WP:SELFSOURCE which I personally think is satisfied completely. For example, we have another WP:RS saying two million people watched a YouTube video about 2b2t over 4 months in 2016, in comparison to that, 0.5 million people joining over ten years sounds actually too low to me.

Of course, I'm completely open to discussing / reevaluating any sourcing decisions, some of them may have been misguided :)

Regarding GACR#6a: The 2b2t logo is normal fair use for a logo. For the renders, it is a pleasant surprise that they are actually usable on Wikimedia commons. The stars aligned there. It survived a four month long deletion request on commons here that saw multiple admins of both enwiki and commons weigh in. The idea is that the renders are so high level that the copyright held by the players that placed and broke blocks is "de minimis", the Minecraft procedural terrain generation is also a tiny part of the image (so, also DM) and doesn't show human creativity, the Minecraft program being used to place these blocks holds no copyright, the textures used in the render are free and not from the Minecraft game, the program used to make the render is licensed under GPL, and the creator of the image licensed the output under a proper license. Yeah, stars aligned.

Finally, regarding GACR#5: there were indeed a flurry of edits on Oct 2/3 to try and fix it up to a potential GAR, but almost all were before the nomination :) Leijurv (talk) 19:51, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Leijurv, and thanks for the information which will be helpful for me doing the review. I'm going to be busy offsite most of today but hoping to progress this soon and let you have some feedback then. All the best and keep safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 04:44, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Review

Hello again, Leijurv, and I'm pleased to tell you that the article ticks all the relevant boxes above so I'm promoting it to GA. I just made a couple of tweaks which you can see. It's very well written, all within scope with good sourcing and useful, illustrative images. I found your explanation above to be helpful, especially about the renders because I would otherwise have had to ask you about them; as things stand, I believe they are fair use. I well understand what you say about excessive UGC on the internet – I've encountered the same problem when trying to expand articles about early football!

Anyway, well done. I'll do the necessary and close the review. All the best and keep safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 07:44, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@No Great Shaker: Thank you so much! —  Melofors  TC  08:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

And you, Melofors. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Apostolacus reference

What do you guys think about the Apostolacus research paper ref? It's marked as potentially unreliable and doesn't seem to be published, yet it's used four times in the article. How do you think we should handle this? —  Melofors  TC  20:22, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Previously we just marked it as unreliable and removed WP:INTEXT (discussion here), but let's resolve this for real, I agree. It looks like we are under WP:SCHOLARSHIP for this question. This is publicly available and it is an essay, but I don't see any reason to believe it's for a doctorate. I'll look for some of the other things mentioned there. Leijurv (talk) 20:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

[12] Now, specifically to Academia.edu, due to their model as "review along the publication, not before it" makes the point moot. But nevertheless, since you CAN publish stuff on Academia.edu without prior review, no one can be sure whether the work is of high quality or junk just by the fact that you managed to publish it. Granted, sometimes junk research gets through the peer review process as well, but there is reasonable assumption that the research is good, if peer-reviewed at a decent conference or published in a decent journal, while with Academia.edu it is fair to say it is probably exactly the reverse situation: one has to assume it is junk, unless proven otherwise by going to the site and reading the comments (if any). So, the site that it's published on is not doing any favors. Looks like it could be WP:UGC / WP:SPS. I also don't see any citations of it. Are there any comments on academia? I might not be looking in the right place, but I see nowhere to make a comment? Leijurv (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Like Pbritti said in the last discussion, this looks to be university level. I looked up what appears to be the professor ("Dr. Patrick Mason") and the course name ("Religion, Violence, and Peace") and it looks like it could be this course?

Yeah, it looks to me like this can't be considered a WP:RS. I see no indication that it has been vetted by the scholarly community, been peer-reviewed, or had significant scholarly influence in the field. It also very clearly is not for a doctorate or any graduate level coursework at all, but rather an undergraduate essay for a state university. The only positive thing I could say is that it very likely was supervised by recognized specialists in the field (Dr. Patrick Mason), per WP:SCHOLARSHIP. But this is not enough.

@Melofors: I'm in agreement that this source is unreliable. As to how to handle this, it looks like we could do without three of the four usages, as they are accompanied by several other reliable sources. But we should make sure. For example, one of those usages is for the list of names for the founder, we should make sure that all 3 listed variations still exist in the other two sources (Kotaku and Newsweek) after this one is removed. I suppose we just remove the two sentences cited to this under Reception? Or maybe we could find an alternate source to let us keep cataloging of events within 2b2t finding an audience beyond those who have played on the server? I'm not sure. Leijurv (talk) 20:44, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: I agree, it seems like we're dealing with WP:UGC here. Also, a simple Google search of the article results mostly in links to this article and other Wikipedia mirror sites (as well as other language editions), mixed with a handful of minor mentions across the Internet and 2b2t subreddit. But anyways, if the article was peer reviewed and vetted (even if it's in a comment), would that allow us to cite it here?

As for removing the sources, here's what I think: we can remove the first and fourth usages without any alteration of the text, as there are other reliable inline citations for it. As for the second usage, I don't think there are any other sources that use "HauseMaster", so we can remove the reference, but we'd have to change the text to "commonly referred to as Hausemaster or Hausmaster.[2][4]" As for the third usage, I agree that we'd have to remove those two sentences (:( sad), unless we can find another source talking about the "cataloging of events" on the server, in which case we can keep it but alter the text a bit. It's kind of sad though, because it might just make the article look worse, adding yet another usage to the references we've milked from 15+ times. Thoughts? —  Melofors  TC  22:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

But anyways, if the article was peer reviewed and vetted (even if it's in a comment), would that allow us to cite it here? It doesn't matter, but WP:SCHOLARSHIP. I think the answer is a solid "it depends".

Removing HauseMaster sounds good to me.

So, I think the encyclopedic value of cataloging of events within 2b2t finding an audience beyond those who have played on the server is that it conveys the very true idea that there are way more people that are interested in this server than actually play on it. Which is an oddity, in video games. I'd generally imagine that most subreddits about video games are closer to a subset of those who play the game, not a superset. I think this idea is worth keeping in some form. For that reason I've taken a quick look through the other sources. Newsweek says this: 2b2t provides a meta-narrative beyond the game, similar to the halftime show during sports broadcasts. Players post about the server on YouTube and Reddit, like amateur sports analysts. Kotaku also has a brief mention of the idea of new players being mostly tourists which I think is an interesting word choice. Honestly I think Newsweek alone could replace Apostolacus for that. But maybe rewording it is also a good idea. Maybe something like Events on 2b2t are of interest to a large audience, beyond those who have played on the server, and are shared on YouTube and Reddit? Leijurv (talk) 03:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2020

in 2b2t there are multiple spawn protections and guards to make sure noobs do not enter. such as a massive trench surrounding spawn, the server destroying all the trees to make sure noobs don't get wood, and using incursions to make sure YouTubers like Mr beast and dan tdm have a very hard time spawning in and go as far as to lag the server to make sure they lag out Star platinum za worldo (talk) 23:23, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Non-notable. See WP:N for more information on notability guidelines. SWinxy (talk) 23:45, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Detail about the lack of player punishments

I think there needs to be a little more detail about the almost total absence of player punishments for behaviour on the server since that is one of it's most defining features and contributes to many of the server's other features. In particular, I thought a short passage about the very few exceptions to the absence of punishments would be a good way to convey this, but what I added was poorly sourced so it was reverted. I'll quote it here for reference in the hope that someone has a better source for the "ban" history than stuff from 2b2t.miraheze.

The server is infamous for having almost no consequences for any type of behaviour, but using hacks or exploits that make the server unplayable for other players can result in a player's "priority queue" being removed. This has occasionally happened to players that repeatedly built "lag machines" which slow down or even crash the server, or repeatedly used exploits that cause other players to be locked out of the server. As of the end of 2020 there are zero confirmed cases of any player ever being banned to the extent that they cannot join the server.

MasterTriangle12 (talk) 12:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

MasterTriangle12, please cite a reliable source for your changes, then consensus can be decided as to whether it should be added. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:59, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

That was the point, I couldn't find one and was hoping someone else could. Best I found was https://2b2t.miraheze.org/wiki/Punishments. Feel free to delete this section if nothing is found after a while. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Miraheze is not a reliable source as it is a user generarated encyclopaedia. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 07:20, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

2b2t.miraheze

External links should include a link to the 2b2t.miraheze wiki. ELNO says "except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors", and I think that applies here. It has a lot of information, so I think anyone wanting to learn more about the server would find it useful. Benjamin (talk) 05:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2b2t/Archive_1#Miraheze_link?

I am an admin on 2b2t.miraheze.org, and, trust me, it does not have a substantial history of stability nor a substantial number of editors.

I agree that it does have a lot of information, but it is essentially all unreliable firsthand accounts + hearsay, which is WP:ELNO #2 (unverifiable research). I agree that it could be useful to someone wanting to learn more about the server, but I would respond to that with the first item at WP:ELNO. Leijurv (talk) 07:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Where else should a reader go if they want to learn as much as possible about the culture and history of the server? Benjamin (talk) 07:56, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

The external links section is designed to direct a user to less reliable primary sources. A self-published, unofficial Miraheze wiki with a history of first hand accounts and unreliable information does not fall under that category. — Yours, Berrely (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:05, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't answer my question. Do you think that if you wanted to learn more about it, it would not be useful to read? Of course by its nature it's not very reliable, but it's the most comprehensive collection of information about the server there is. Benjamin (talk) 10:14, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Hm? This isn't a valid argument at all. "I want this link because I think it would be useful" is all fine and good, but Wikipedia policies and guidelines are more important. Leijurv (talk) 10:31, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Why do we have policies in the first place? To aid in improving the wiki. Don't lose sight of that ultimate goal. Why would the link make this a worse article? Benjamin (talk) 10:39, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Because it may contain unreliable unverifiable information. Wikipedia is not a indiscriminate catalogue of further research links, but only those that have demonstrated encyclopedic value (with few exceptions). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Are you really saying that if you wanted to learn as much as you could about the server, you would simply throw up your hands and say "It's unreliable, it's no good, I can learn nothing from this!" when you came across the wiki? Adding the link wouldn't turn this into an "indiscriminate" collection of links, that's just silly. Benjamin (talk) 11:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

We're not Google. Someone wanting more information, including what we consider unreliable, is free to search the internet. -- ferret (talk) 14:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Of course, but by that logic, we might as well not include much of this article at all. It's all online anyway... Benjamin (talk) 16:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a policy or guideline backed argument to make? As already noted, the External Link guidelines exclude Wikis that don't have a substantial history of stability. An editor who happens to be an admin for that Wiki attests that it does not. The guideline exists to prevent us having to sit here and get wishy washy about whether something would be useful. All kinds of things are useful. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of them. -- ferret (talk) 16:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Do you have an argument to make based on actually improving the article, rather than blindly following policy? That's a fallacy; including one link doesn't mean we have to include others. Benjamin (talk) 16:34, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Alrighty then. Looks like we're at a dead end. Including this link is not an improvement to the article, as you've provided nothing as to why it meets the standards for inclusion. Guidelines are against it. Those guidelines exist because the community has a consensus that such links do NOT improve articles. It's fine you disagree with it, but this discussion clearly is against your position. -- ferret (talk) 16:41, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Should Hausemaster be mentioned in the infobox? If so, how?

Someone added Hausemaster to the infobox, but under the author tag, which was somewhat misleading. This edit was since reverted, though I think Hausemaster should be mentioned in the infobox. Maybe using the developer tag, or a custom infobox with a creator tag like what Build the Earth has. Mentioning Leijurv, since they reverted the edit. Invalid^OS_talk 13:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

A couple of months ago I submitted a proposal about a Minecraft server infobox (see here), but it was not approved of. I'd be glad if there was renewed interest in it, even if it was a more generalized infobox, as suggested in the proposal. SWinxy (talk) 21:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I actually created one as well, but it was similarly denied. I think if another proposal was to be made, it would need to clearly outline the benefits. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 07:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

One was created previously, but was deleted via TfD. I don't think such a proposal would pass. Invalid^OS_talk 13:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

We could probably use {{infobox website}} for this - maybe add some extra parameters? I think that'd be better than {{infobox software}}. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 10:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I agree, it has a lot more params for it. This would prevent the need for an additional infobox. — Yours, Berrely (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

We don't have to switch the infobox template. As with all templates, we can create our own labels and data values ourselves, but whether we should is a different question. SWinxy (talk) 03:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Unprotection Request

Can someone unprotect 2b2t? thanks.2600:1700:6180:6290:FDB9:42AC:DD23:6780 (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Not the correct place for this, it should be at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Even then, a reason is required for unprotection. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:37, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The article is subject to vandalism and other unconstructive editing. Anything less than protection has not been successful. There is no reason to believe anything has changed. You can request edits here. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:38, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Unreliable source?

How is the academia.edu source unreliable? @Trappist the monk: tagged it as possibly being so without explanation, so could you explain your rationale here? X-Editor (talk) 05:58, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

See: Talk:2b2t/Archive_1#Apostolacus_reference Leijurv (talk) 03:12, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: Thanks for the link, but the issues brought up in the original discussion have not been solved and I think it should be resolved. X-Editor (talk) 03:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)