Talk:2b2t/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Berrely (talk) 15:50, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

2b2t's destroyed spawn-in area

• ... that 2b2t, a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010, has gone to war against YouTube for the future of the server? Source: [1]
  • ALT1:... that 2b2t is a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running on the same map since 2010, with no player-bans and a hands-off administrator?
  • ALT2:... that 2b2t, a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010, has seen over 510,000 distinct Minecraft players join and explore its 8 terabyte map?
  • ALT2a:... that 2b2t, a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010, has seen over 580,000 distinct Minecraft players join and explore its 9 terabyte map? Site was updated over the course of this DYK, these are updated figures from there.
  • ALT3:... that 2b2t is a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010 with a world of over 8 terabytes in size?
  • ALT3a:... that 2b2t is a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010 with a world of over 9 terabytes in size? Site was updated over the course of this DYK, these are updated figures from there.
  • ALT4:... that 2b2t is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft, and over half a million players have joined and left their mark on it?
  • ALT5:... that 2b2t is a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010, making it the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft? Source: 2b2t is an "anarchy server," the oldest and most infamous of its kind. [2]
  • ALT6:... that 2b2t is a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010 with an initially procedurally generated world now exceeding 8 terabytes in size?
  • ALT6a:... that 2b2t is a no-rules Minecraft multiplayer server running since 2010 with an initially procedurally generated world now exceeding 9 terabytes in size? Site was updated over the course of this DYK, these are updated figures from there.

• Comment: GA review. The alt hooks are a WP:SELFSOURCE from 2b2t's official web presence, the relevant quote is 2builders2tools is a minecraft server with the goal to never reset the world in a free for all no rules pvp environment, with little modification to the vanilla survival gamemode. The world is nine years and seven months old, with a size of 8376 GBs and over 513,255 players visiting at least once (see GA review). The main hook is from Kotaku, and the quote is pretty much just the title of the article. I would prefer ALT2 the most.

Improved to Good Article status by Melofors (talk) and Leijurv (talk). Nominated by Leijurv (talk) at 18:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC).

• This interesting article is a newly promoted GA and is new enough and long enough. The hook facts for ALT1, ALT2, ALT3, ALT4, ALT5 and ALT6 are cited inline, but I am not approving ALT0 as it is not stated in the article, as far as I can see. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. The image is licensed as CC BY-SA 4.0, which is not compatible with Wikipedia according to this page. No QPQ is needed here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Thank you for the review! Wow I did not realize that 4.0 was not compatible. Does that mean I have to remove it from the article? I'm sure I could ask the author to rerelease under CC BY-SA 3.0, would that be sufficient here? Leijurv (talk) 18:18, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Thanks again, I went ahead and did that. I asked him to edit the release to 3.0 and he did, and I updated the commons page accordingly :) Leijurv (talk) 18:26, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations. The image is now appropriately licensed and could be used with the hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:41, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

• Returning to WP:DYKN per resolution of discussion on image licensing at WT:DYK#2b2t. Yoninah (talk) 12:38, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

• I am undoing the hook changes just made by Leijurv because it appeared that I had approved the new versions when I had not done so. @Leijurv: If you wish to suggest a change to a hook, you need to write the hook again as "ALT3a" or whatever, or strike out the original text and add the new text. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:19, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry! I've done so, the "a" variants are updated. Leijurv (talk) 08:13, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

• Reopening nomination in anticipation of getting a final tick. Here is the discussion on licensing that took place at WT:DYK#2b2t:

Discussion at WT:DYK

Template:Did you know nominations/2b2t is currently in Prep 3. I would be glad of another viewa on the status of the image. When I reviewed the article, the image was licensed as CC BY-SA 4.0, which is not compatible with Wikipedia, and when I queried this it was changed to CC-BY-SA 3.0, which is, but see here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC) @Cwmhiraeth: I took that web archive as a timestamp. You can see it live on reddit though, here. If you need proof that the license was actually edited from 4 to 3, you can look at the previous internet archive from June here where it says 4.0. I had mentioned to the author that there was a potential of being on the front page, and I'm sure he would edit the comment any which way is necessary if need be, including releasing the image into the public domain entirely. If there are other concerns, I believe they may be addressed by my comments on the GA review on the matter here or on the Commons DR that I linked from there. Thank you for checking closely though! :) Leijurv (talk) 23:10, 2 November 2020 (UTC) I'm out of my depth here, which is why I asked for others to look at it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 3 November 2020 (UTC) Since the preps are being promoted pretty quickly, I'm returning the nomination to WP:DYKN until this issue is sorted out. Yoninah (talk) 12:36, 3 November 2020 (UTC) CC-by-4.0 is fine for files, just not for text: "According to the WMF legal team, CC BY-SA 4.0 is not backwards compatible with CC BY-SA 3.0. Therefore, mixing text licenses under 3.0 and 4.0 would be problematic, however media files uploaded under this license are fine." from: Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright - Dumelow (talk) 07:53, 4 November 2020 (UTC) Dumelow, would it be appropriate then to move this back to the queue? — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 19:45, 4 November 2020 (UTC) With a second opinion saying the license is suitable, I plan to move this to a prep area, unless there are other objections? — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 20:37, 6 November 2020 (UTC) This is not how we do things. Everything is recorded on the nomination template so administrators and other editors can refer back to the discussion. So far nothing has been posted on the template about whether the licensing is ok or not, and no one has administered a final tick. The hook should be returned to the nominations area until the template is correctly filled out. Yoninah (talk) 18:18, 7 November 2020 (UTC) I can't speak for Berrely but am I not correct when I see that Cwmhiraeth gave a check mark on the hook, then said Congratulations. The image is now appropriately licensed and could be used with the hook., then asked on here for a second opinion, then Dumelow said CC-by-4.0 is fine for files, just not for text? There is a final tick, a question was raised about licensing then resolved? Leijurv (talk) 22:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC) @Leijurv: The hook was promoted and the template closed without any reference to the discussion over here. Anyone who refers back to the template discussion will see a question mark with no resolution. If Berrely is in such a rush to promote the image, he should ask other editors to sign off on the template before he closes it. Yoninah (talk) 02:12, 8 November 2020 (UTC) Okay I don't understand why this can't just happen. Are you saying that I should go on that page and write an explanation that Cwmhiraeth was unsure about a license and Dumelow clarified, with a link to here? And that's it? What am I missing here, let's go do it? Leijurv (talk) 04:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC) OK, I'm reopening the template, listing the discussion here, and asking someone to formally sign off on it. Yoninah (talk) 13:15, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• As I am completely unfamiliar with image licensing, I'd appreciate it if Dumelow or Nikkimaria could weigh in here and give it the final approval tick if the image licensing is in order. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 13:20, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• A second reviewer has confirmed the image license is suitable for inclusion, specifically stating that per WP:FAQ/Copyright, the image's license is correct and can be used on Wikipedia. I waited 3 days for a reply on the DYK talk page and received none, so I assumed it would be okay to move it back to the prep queue. Yoninah I am confused about what else I should've done, other than pinging Dumelow again, which I didn't do, as I didn't want to be an annoyance. Please tell me, other than a reviewer specifically stating that the license can be used on Wikipedia, what could be a "final tick". I appreciate you have more experience in this field than me, and I may be wrong, but I am quite confused as to what should happen. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 14:15, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• @Berrely: this is a self-inclusive template. You may go to WT:DYK to solicit other opinions, but the final tick has to be placed here before you can close the nomination. After you solicited the other opinions, you needed to ask them to place an approval tick on the template. Ensuring proper procedure is not an annoyance. (In the hours I spend checking hooks for promotion, I am constantly pinging nominators and editors to settle on and sign off on the final hook.) Right now any editor or administrator who has a question about the hook while it is in the prep sets or queue will come back to this template and see the last tick on the page is a question mark. The last tick should be an approval. Let's see what our resident licensing expert Nikkimaria has to say about the image licensing. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 14:33, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• @Yoninah:, I appreciate your help with this and I apologise if my earlier comment sounded a bit rude. I agree it may be beneficial to wait for a second opinion on the license. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 14:39, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• Since it appears that the original author has released it CC BY-SA 3.0, I do not anticipate there being a problem with running the image. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:13, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you. Based on Nikkimaria's and Dumelow's comments, I am restoring the tick per Cwmhiraeth's review. @Berrely: you may go ahead and promote it now. Yoninah (talk) 15:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Combine halftime with cataloguing of events?

@X-Editor: What do you think about maybe putting together the earlier bit about amateur sports analysts next to the later bit about events finding an audience beyond those who play on the server? Without being SYNTHy I think we could probably connect the dots stronger about how the "fans" of the server are a much greater group than the actual players, which is actually pretty non-standard for video games (I believe). It also would be a good opportunity to paraphrase that quote - I'm not sure about this multi sentence quote, it threw me off a bit while reading because seeing the wikilinks made me think the quote was over and we were back to wikivoice. Maybe better to summarize. What do you think? Leijurv (talk) 21:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: What you're proposing sounds a lot better. Go ahead and change it. X-Editor (talk) 00:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv:The wording of your edit is good enough imo, but why did you add back the acedemia.edu source? X-Editor (talk) 00:43, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@X-Editor: why did you add back the acedemia.edu source Can you link me to the diff where I did that? I'm having a hard time seeing where in my edit I touched the academia.edu source :) Leijurv (talk) 01:38, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: Actually, you never removed it in the first place, I just forgot to. X-Editor (talk) 04:10, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: I removed the questionable source and moved the other content to where it should be. X-Editor (talk) 04:20, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Highways/dug/pave

We should add an external thing for the highways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captainluigi (talk • contribs) 09:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —  Melofors  TC  06:36, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2021

I would like to add some things to the culture section as I don't think this was made by a 2b2t player as 2b2t isn't all nihilistic and there are many establishments friendships and many large settlements where 2b2t players are peaceful while this isn't always noticeable to a new player is existent as these "events" are usually for people who are established enough to be trusted 123xz22187 (talk) 12:40, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:46, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

the culture section as I don't think this was made by a 2b2t player No need to worry, it was. Leijurv (talk) 19:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Is Celebspulse reliable?

The source is used once in the article and I'm unsure of its reliablity. X-Editor (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@X-Editor: It has since been removed. There was a discussion here that concluded it to be generally unreliable. —  Melofors  TC  17:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Melofors: Seeing as the source is unreliable, how are we going to remove it from the article? X-Editor (talk) 18:04, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@X-Editor: You already removed it yourself here. —  Melofors  TC  21:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Melofors: I’m talking about Celebspulse, not sportskeeda. X-Editor (talk) 22:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021

2b2t now is updated to 1.16.5 and is no longer 1.12 MR magnan (talk) 11:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done I did a quick search and seems like as of a few hours ago 2b was still 1.12... but regardless if it is, it can't be added until a reliable source publishes that information (since I used a synthesis of a few reddit posts for that information, which obviously isn't reliable)   melecie   t 11:22, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Exploit

Should the recent news of an exploit be included in this article?[3] X-Editor (talk) 02:55, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah! Not immediately, but very soon. There are a number of mistakes in that article and I have messaged the author to see if they are willing to correct them. It's Saturday though, so they probably won't reply until Monday at least. But yeah absolutely it's extremely exciting to finally get another WP:RS about 2b2t, means there's finally something to do in this article! Leijurv (talk) 03:06, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: What mistakes did the author make? Glad you've contacted them. I'm also glad to finally see another RS covering 2B2T, seeing as there hasn't been one since 2016. X-Editor (talk) 15:03, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@X-Editor: Speaking of another RS, there's also this if you are not aware. But it would make the article a WP:COI since it mentions leijurv in it. —  Melofors  TC  17:41, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

It wouldn't make the article itself COI (that's not a thing), it would simply be him with COI, thus he should take particular care editing the topic (and declare COI if he intends to do any significant editing). Anyone else could cite and use that source without COI concerns. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 17:46, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

It's an interesting question. I think that windowscentral isn't RS. And even then, windowscentral only mentions me as credit for one of the images (correctly, as I wrote the program that made it). I don't think that's COI. Kotaku doesn't mention me at all. But the primary source that Kotaku cites, the YouTube video, mentions me a number of times, and I helped do things such as edit the script for that YT video, and make more images and videos for that YT video. I don't feel like I have any stronger COI than before, I've been playing on this MC server for years. It's just recently that a few articles have been written about my data analysis. Shrug. I'll be sad if I have to stop editing the article entirely. But my understanding is that at-worst I'll just have to not edit whatever is written about the exploit. Because I have no COI with the server itself, it's just that I helped the people who were exploiting it for the last while. Leijurv (talk) 18:42, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Alright, a new WP:RS came out and I think it's sealed the deal: I certainly cannot edit mainspace about this due to COI sadly (under my current understanding of COI). Take a look at this PCGamer article: [4]. They copy-paste huge swaths of the explanation I wrote on my GitHub. Honestly it feels excessive and doesn't seem like fair use (but of course I won't do anything about it lol). It also uses the heatmap image I made. Well I suppose that's a good thing because I could (and probably will, why not) upload that to Commons since it's something I fully made myself.

I also definitely think that this is an example of citogenesis. The phrases has at times been named the 'worst' Minecraft server in existence and The community around 2B2T and the way it has developed over the years is why it was featured in the 2019 exhibition Videogames: Design / Play / Disrupt at London's V&A Museum really makes me think that they used this article (not to mention the fact that they use File:IronException 2b2t Spawn Render July 2019.png and File:ThebesAndSound 2b2t Layers of Spawn Render February 2020.png).

All in all, I sadly think I will have to take a back seat on any&all editing to the 2b2t article relating to this. By which I mean only editing this talk page and not those passages of the main article.

Funny idea, but does this make me an expert source?? WP:SPS Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.[8] My work in the relevant field has indeed been previously published by reliable independent publications, PCGamer and Kotaku. It would be great if this means I can do things like say "no, PCGamer got the capitalization wrong, it's 'Nocom' not 'NoCom'". Can I?? Lol. Leijurv (talk) 19:52, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Hellknowz:@Melofors: Seeing as Leijurv can't add anything, are any of you willing to add the content? X-Editor (talk) 01:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Of course, I would like nothing more than to write about this, but I will read up more on WP:COI so as to be exceedingly careful. To start off, I have declared my COI here in the way that it suggests in WP:DCOI. Per WP:DUE I would imagine a paragraph or two at the bottom of #History. I am perfectly willing to draft something like that, but all else being equal, someone else probably should, so as not to be unnecessarily COI. I am sure User:Melofors would be willing :) Leijurv (talk) 05:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

On it sir. —  Melofors  TC  06:07, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

First draft done. I'll later edit it with info from the PCGamer article. —  Melofors  TC  16:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Super cute, good job! Leijurv (talk) 19:07, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: Wait, you worked on the nocom exploit? X-Editor (talk) 21:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Ctrl+f for leijurv in the PCGamer one. Or watch the video linked there by FitMC. Or click the link to the GitHub that I wrote. :) Leijurv (talk) 22:29, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

He's the "machine-learning expert" in the article :P —  Melofors  TC  00:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Melofors: Thanks! X-Editor (talk) 21:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: On the topic of the heatmaps, could you upload them to Commons? I think the 4K heatmap from your GitHub would work well beside the paragraph. Alternatively you could also use an MP4 file since there are some really cool timelapse heatmaps of yours which would display the extant of the accuracy of the player tracking. —  Melofors  TC  00:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I agree. I think these visualizations would be great to put into commons. I would love if the full dataset would be published as well (ie on archive.org), copyright or no. SWinxy (talk) 00:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Public access would be awesome. If the "privacy" of far out base locations is a concern, the data could be limited to a reasonable range around spawn, which would still be useful. --Sokuseno (talk) 16:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

@Melofors: Uploaded it to commons:File:2b2t Nocom Overworld Heatmap.png and, as a treat, I've done so at 8K resolution while previously I had only released 4K. :) Leijurv (talk) 04:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Leijurv: You got it sir. Added. —  Melofors  TC  04:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

The author of the Kotaku article was on vacation last week, but he's just replied to me a few minutes ago. The article has been updated with a bunch of fixes that I sent him through Twitter DM, mostly just typos. For example, he called PaperMC a company, while really it's just an open source project, that has been corrected. He said "Fr1ken" while it's really "Fr1kin". And perhaps most importantly he edited the postscript to less directly and needlessly accusatory that "we" (the exploiters) are stereotypical 2b2t griefers who build swastikas and such (not true). Et cetera. So, "have at it", I no longer have any hesitation or reservation about writing more in-depth about this. The paragraph is already written but if anyone feels like expanding it or additionally citing PCGamer or something like that, feel free! Leijurv (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Stylization of Nocom

I’d like to reach consensus on how to stylize Nocom…should it be all caps or just the first letter? I’ve seen it put both ways in the community. InvadingInvader (talk) 12:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I think it should either be Nocom or NOCOM. NoCom feels weird, but it properly suggests the origin of the name. SWinxy (talk) 14:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

It's Nocom. I hereby WP:SPS declare it. :) Leijurv (talk) 18:15, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

COI edit request

Typo: please change storage of in-game items in and player-built to storage of in-game items and player-built Leijurv (talk) 04:34, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done Eevee01^(talk) 09:55, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Vice data inaccuracy

The 2015 Vice article reports a file size of "almost 800 gigabytes", which is outdated by over a year (I assume the author took the statistic from here: https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/servers-java-edition/pc-servers/2207148-2b2t-org-the-biggest-and-most-popular-minecraft). Official historical data shows the size was actually ~950 gigabytes at the time of the article, making "In October 2015, storage usage had increased to almost 800 gigabytes" false. I replaced it with official data from around the same time. —  Melofors  TC 04:34, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

No mentioning of bases?

I heard that there are really impressive builds on the server, but I cannot find any here. Thoughts? Notifing Melofors and Leijurv due to their experience in-game and on-wiki. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I believe that it warrants some mention as to the challenge some players set themselves of creating impressive bases under anarchy conditions. JC aka Jthekid15 (Communications) 16:13, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. However, I cannot found any sources, so I ping the two for some help. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 16:15, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Recent edits from Cacti

@CactiStaccingCrane: I have reverted a good portion of your edits, for the following reasons:

• Special:Diff/1076318925 and Special:Diff/1076319550 The 2b2t server software was not written by Hausemaster. 1.12.2 is not a "stable release". The language of the software is not English, Minecraft supports many languages. Platform 1.12.2 was accurate, as that's the protocol that is spoken between the client and server. "shorten as" is not proper grammar at all. Additionally, MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE applies perfectly. If you read the caption, you will see that it does indeed visually illustrate the spawn region, in a relevant way to the associated text.
• Special:Diff/1076321172 This level of information makes a game journalist considered it one of the most impactful event in the server's history. Not proper English grammar. Instead, This level of information makesmade a game journalist considered it one of the most impactful events in the server's history. And probably "made" should be "caused ... to".
• Special:Diff/1076321927 Absolutely wrong edit. The information is wrong and the reason for making the edit is wrong. The server's culture began in a Garry's Mod server, where a player started a Minecraft server for his friends This doesn't make any sense. How can a Minecraft server be started in a Garry's Mod server? This makes significantly less sense than the quote. Additionally, stating this as a fact in Wikipedia's voice is wrong. See WP:WIKIVOICE.
• Special:Diff/1076322482 I have reverted this in the past too. The relevant information is not present in the article body. Also you mean succinct, not succulent. Please seek consensus for this disputed change before remaking it.
• Special:Diff/1076322986 Makes the gallery worse for no reason other than it's "traditional"? I disagree. Additionally, removing the block figures, again, makes the article worse. For example, the body of the article explains you can travel a certain number of blocks before starving to death. Giving a scale to the renders aids in understanding relative to such figures.
• Special:Diff/1076323059 Same reason as previous, but additionally setting width makes no sense and makes the images confined to a square boundary when they are rectangular.
• Special:Diff/1076323166 Same reason as previous.
• Special:Diff/1076325577 and Special:Diff/1076325920. Real name is not relevant, I err on the side of not including personal information. Additionally, the idea that group of older players came together, and the idea that the 2b2t server hardware was strained, is sourced to Kotaku (which was cited on the previous sentences). Please don't call it original research unless you look at the cited sources and see if the content is supported. I understand that there was no citation at the immediate end of that sentence, but you should still check the sources cited throughout that area of the article to see if this can be fixed. See WP:CITETYPE, a citation can go at the end of a sentence or at the end of a paragraph. Additionally, see MOS:IMGSIZE which states Except with very good reason, a fixed width in pixels (e.g. 17px) should not be specified. This ignores the user's base width setting, so upright=scaling factor is preferred whenever possible.[nb 3] As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed width than 220px (the initial base width), so I have removed both of the 300x300px. Same citation thing applies to the lag machines and TCR YouTube takedowns, Kotaku citation supports it.
• Special:Diff/1076326847 and Special:Diff/1076327431 Consensus on linking the website in the infobox was established on the talk page, please seek consensus for this disputed change.
• Special:Diff/1076328562 While moving sections around, the quote was removed. Since the edit summary did not mention this, perhaps it was unintentional?
• Special:Diff/1076329134 The previous issue was caused by not having a citation at the end of every sentence, so I've added these back for clarity.
• Special:Diff/1076332727 I didn't actually revert this one, I just wanted to ask for clarification. Isn't that podcast also a primary source? It's me speaking, and also I wrote the GitHub, seems like both are equally valid?
• Special:Diff/1076334593 I am not opposed to the idea of turning this quote into a paraphrase, but this particular conversion lost basically all of what they had to say about 2b2t that was interesting.
• Special:Diff/1076334931 This diff is impossible to read given how the sources were swapped in order. I just undid the source change for my own peace of mind, it shouldn't actually affect anything. (I didn't undo the removal of the "quasi-mythical" quote)
• Special:Diff/1076338978 Same reason of WP:WIKIVOICE for replacing the paraphrasing back with the quote. Additionally, the maintenance tag is not explained. Was it because of how you replaced quotes with paraphrasing, or was it unrelated paraphrasing? I don't know since the tag is not explained.
• Special:Diff/1076335316 What?? Category:Anarchist communities is communities who practice anarchism, which is a different thing than anarchy. Looking at the other articles in this category, 2b2t clearly does not apply. 2b2t does not practice the political theory of anarchism, or really any political theory, it's simply a Hobbesian state of chaos.
• Special:Diff/1076339370 Nonsense, we don't make the article worse because a long caption is somehow laggy to edit in your browser. No way.

I am a little annoyed that you made all these mistaken edits so fast that, judging by the timestamps, I have now spent longer picking through them and finding the mistakes and explaining them on here. You made more work for me than the time it took you to do these. I don't think that's a fair thing to do. Leijurv (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Leijurv, hanks for explaining all of the reverts, but I would try to explain at least some of my edits in chronological order:

• You said that 1.12.2 is not a stable release, and I agree on that. However, the picture depicting spawn after the 2010-2016 time frame, so I don't get your point that the picture explains the time period.
• My fault, I am not the best at grammar.
• Agree, but I don't really like excessive quoting per this guideline. Perhaps paraphrasing the quote would be better?
• Agree, no doubt it is controversial.
• Agree that I should not change on the block figure and the type of gallery used.
• <see above>
• <see above>
• Ah, the source should be there then, at the time I saw the sentence it is not sourced. I would also agree that having the real name of TheCampingRusher is not very relevant here. I also agree to not use px, but the image is way too small to see without having to click on it. I would make adjustment to the graph to make the numbers in the axis bigger.
• Agree that it is controversial, I should establish consensus
• Yeah, my fault, I should keep the quote on
• The Newsweek source does not verify these claims, only the Kotaku source do.
• Yes, both of them are valid for sourcing, but I would prefer to use your GitHub page as it can be archived. I am open to adding back the podcast however, but I don't see any point of doing so.
• Well... it is a bit difficult, as the quote must satisfy the wikivoice. I think it is a bit too editorializing, and a more neutral explanation I reckon is better.
• Placing the sources next to Hause's username make it more specific. It was intentional by me.
• The reason I added that tag is because of excessive quoting and some parts of the article potentially violate sources' copyright. I pass the article through the [5] and also found some parts which is not quoted to plagiarize sources as well.
• Agree, but I added back the "Anarchy" category as it is relevant.
• The browser just freak out when it saw the image and it was back to normal again when I removed the alt-text, which is a duplicate of the citations.

Yes, I do make a lot of controversial edits, and I promise to use the WP:edit summary to make all of them clear next time. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 00:55, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

your point that the picture explains the time period I didn't say this, but I get the idea. Yes, you are correct that the image did not make much sense up in the History section. It was quite some time ago (late 2019) that that image was added, my vague recollection was that the infobox pushed all the way down to be next to the text about Culture? I'm sure this has changed a lot as the article has been edited. Regardless, I think it makes sense where it is right now, which is next to the text about how far you can travel before dying of starvation.

I don't think the two quotes in History are long enough for that to be an issue. I think this could apply to the Vice quote though. If you want to replace one with paraphrasing, that one would maybe be a good idea. However, I haven't done it, because the quote is really well written and I don't think paraphrasing would...... work. I think it would lose a lot of what makes it interesting and relevant. Or maybe it should be shortened.

That's a good idea, it would be good if the graph image were modified so the numbers are bigger in the image. I like the graphs on the top right of climate change, maybe something like that format and size.

On removing the newsweek source from that line, and the podcast source, sounds good.

No, the quote doesn't have to satisfy WP:WIKIVOICE. The problem is the difference between "X happened" and "the server owners said that X happened". In other words, it's okay to replace a quote of "we did X" - server owner with an explanation like "the server owner stated that they did X", but it's not okay to just replace it with "they did X". Because if you remove the "according to the server owner", then suddenly instead of hausemastervoice it's being said as truth in wikivoice.

I just looked through most of the comparisons on earwig, and I don't think I'm seeing what you're seeing. Can you be more specific? I went through it to find one unquoted example, and I got to the seventh source comparison before I found In 2016, on both Newsweek and The Independent, Roisin Kiberd described 2b2t as a malevolent form of Minecraft, a place of beauty and terror., which doesn't use quote marks, but it's clearly attributed to who described 2b2t as such, so I don't think there's a copyright issue. Would it be possible for you to instead add a maintenance tag on the specific sentences you see issue with?

Sounds good! Leijurv (talk) 03:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback! I added the copyright tag where I think there's an issue. Other than that, I reformatted some of the quotes to a box to be consistent with other video game articles. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 08:18, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

"Too bee too tee dot org" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Too bee too tee dot org and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 4#Too bee too tee dot org until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Partofthemachine (talk) 21:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

"Leijurv" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Leijurv and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 13#Leijurv until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

"No Server November" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect No Server November and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#No Server November until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Changing the first two sentences

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.

---

A while ago (before I knew about WP:BRD and other Wikipedia policies) I made some edits changing the first two sentences but they got reverted. I was just wondering why that is. Can somebody tell me why? Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 06:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

The first few sentences were discussed thoroughly at Talk:2b2t/Archive 1, on top of significant WP:EDITCON. If you're referring to specifically this revision, then the intro of 2b2t (2builders2tools) is the oldest anarchy server[a] in Minecraft simply doesn't provide enough context to the reader. The linked phrase "Minecraft server" is critical to explaining what this article is about. The current phrasing does that well. Leijurv (talk) 07:51, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that is the latest revision stating this. How about I provide a link in this way: 2b2t (2builders2tools) is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft. Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 08:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, in the edit, the word server is a link to the page Minecraft server Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 15:55, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

But anarchy server means something specific, so the newer version I came up with is better Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

That link style is discouraged per MOS:EGG.

We would need a very good reason to not begin the article with "2b2t is a Minecraft server...". Refer to MOS:FIRST for why. Leijurv (talk) 19:48, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Well then, how about this: "2b2t (2builders2tools) is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft[a]". I am unsure whether "The second part of the first sentence and the second part of the second sentence fit in better together." is a good enough reason but I'd like you to state if it is or isn't Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Again, no, having the text "server in Minecraft" link to "Minecraft server" is less than ideal, per MOS:EGG. The text 2b2t is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft is already present as the 2nd sentence, there is no need to have it be the first sentence. Quoting from MOS:FIRST: The first sentence should tell the nonspecialist reader what or who the subject is, and often when or where. It should be in plain English. For this reason, the first sentence as it stands follows the MOS, as it says in plain English that 2b2t is a Minecraft server founded in 2010. Note that 2b2t is a WP:GA which means it must follow MOS:LEDE per WP:GACR. I'm giving reasons based in Wikipedia guideline (WP:MOS) why the current way is better, but I have not heard any reasons from you why your rewrite is better. Please explain why you want to change it? Leijurv (talk) 20:32, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I already stated that the reason was that I felt that the second parts of the first two sentences fitted in better as one sentence. But I cannot find a way to do this without violating the policies you mentioned. Therefore, the consensus will be that nothing changes Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2022 (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.

Introduction should be altered

The phrasing 2b2t is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft should be removed from the article entirely in my view. I base this on the reasoning that this is a meme-quote, popularized by FitMC. It gives the article an unserious presentation.

This is how I suggest the introduction should be reprashed: 2b2t (2builders2tools) is a Minecraft server founded in December 2010. 2b2t is one of the oldest running servers in the game. Additionally, 2b2t's world is one of the longest-running server maps in the game, which has never been reset since its creation. The server is an anarchy server, meaning that it has virtually no rules or authority. Griefing (the act of destroying or vandalizing other players' creations without permission) and hacking are common amongst players, with virtually no risk of getting banned.

What the introduction is currently like, for comparison: 2b2t (2builders2tools) is a Minecraft server founded in December 2010. 2b2t is the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft, as well as one of the oldest running Minecraft servers of any variety. Additionally, 2b2t's world is one of the longest-running server maps in the game, which has never been reset since its creation. As the server has virtually no rules or authority, griefing (the act of destroying or vandalizing other players' creations without permission) and hacking are common amongst players, with virtually no risk of getting banned.

I would like to hear what people think of this change. Torbslifre (talk) 17:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Correct, the phrase describing 2b2t as the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft is a popular slogan / tagline / catchphrase that is commonly associated with 2b2t discussion online. I'm not sure I see how it detracts from the article though. I suppose the relevant guideline might be WP:FORMAL, but I don't see how this goes against that guideline. If someone is already vaguely familiar with this tagline, then having it as the 2nd sentence will help the reader to quickly determine if they're at the "right" article (quote from MOS:LEDE). If someone isn't familiar with the tagline, then there is no downside, as the sentence makes sense in context and properly aids in introducing the reader to what 2b2t is. In short, I disagree that using this phrase makes the article have an informal WP:TONE or similar, and actually I think it vaguely helps follow the spirit of MOS:LEDE. Leijurv (talk) 21:07, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Side note, there's still a need to resolve {{context}}. I agree with the motivation, but not motivated (hah) myself to propose a solution. SWinxy (talk) 05:12, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

New information

A while ago, along with changing the first two sentences (Which should stay as "2b2t is a Minecraft server..."), I added information about a Youtuber called FitMC. I can see why it was reverted as it was unsourced, and in the next edit the source was not reliable. But recently, I found information in this cited source[6] cited in multiple areas of the Wikipedia article, about FitMC. Does this justify adding the information? If it doesn't, then show the Wikipedia policy or WP:MOS section it violates Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 20:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't think any discussion about FitMC is relevant in the introductory part of the article. If other articles have done so, that is their prerogative. As for the specific wiki policy violation, I think this was already discussed in the first heading by Leijurv? 5aturnius (talk) 15:21, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

@Saturnius1145 I do not intend to add the info in the introduction, I intend to add it in the player influx section. FitMC is mentioned in several other cited sources as well and is already mentioned in the Nocom exploit section. And if by first heading you mean the "Changing the first two sentences" topic, that discussion was about changing the first two sentences, not adding info about FitMC so it hasn't been discussed yet and doesn't fall under WP:EDITCON if that's the policy you're referring to ~~ Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 21:23, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• 2b2t newLogo.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• Old 2b2t logo.webp

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Old 2b2t logo.webp

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Reset date

Due to the findings of the group of mappers who made the 256k^2 mapping project (a respected group of players I might add)(https://www.reddit.com/r/2b2t/comments/t287n9/1170gb_of_2b2t_256000%C2%B2_mapping_project_info/hykeupy), it was found out that the map has actually been reset once, sometime in early 2011 (earliest possible date is February 9). This earliest version was on CraftBukkit Beta 1.2. The belief that the current world was created in December 2010 is thus erroneous and, through lack of correct knowledge (and properly also to flaunt the server’s age even more), has been spread around as the truth. Now I know I can’t cite this Reddit post, but there must be someway to get more information on how this knowledge was achieved and put it in the article in a verifiable way. Nervelita (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Unless a reliable source publishes that information, we can't use it. We have to go with what reliable sources print, and a Reddit post, no matter how respected the OP is, isn't that. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm familiar with the 128k^2 and the 256k^2 projects - I'm in their Discord and wrote the Baritone plugin that filled the gaps in the 128k^2 download. I completely agree that the current 2b2t map must have been reset in Feb 2011 or later, and the start date of Dec 2010 for the current map is untrue. Sadly, WP:VNT. There is no reliable source that claims this yet, so, we can't say it in the article. Leijurv (talk) 23:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I see, Thanks for responding. Nervelita (talk) 02:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

More background

Reading the GAR, I think it would be helpful to have a Background section to briefly introduce what Minecraft and a Minecraft server are, and any other context on Minecraft culture that would be useful for a general audience to understand how this subject works. czar 08:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I've added a sentence and changed the lead sentence in an attempt to add some background information. Steelkamp (talk) 07:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

The new sentence is good, I'm not sure about the change to the lead (WP:BRD). I think that "server for the game Minecraft" and "Minecraft server" are essentially equivalent in information conveyed, whereas the latter makes more sense I think. A new sentence in Background is great, but I don't know how to make the lede first sentence better. "Minecraft game server" (linked) perhaps? I think it's good as is, to be honest. Leijurv (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

The issue with the first sentence is that it does not say what Minecraft even is. Nowhere in the lead does it mention that Minecraft is a video game. Steelkamp (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't think that is strictly needed - that's more than one level of abstraction away from this article. 2b2t is a Minecraft server, a Minecraft server is a game server for the video game Minecraft, Minecraft is a video game, etc. See Talk:2b2t/Archive_1#Phrasing_of_"anarchy", quoted 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. Someone who doesn't know what a video game is, what Minecraft is, or what a Minecraft server is, will have a hard time understanding this article, so (roughly approximately speaking) per WP:ONEDOWN it's fine to just link Minecraft server and let them click it if they don't know what it is. Leijurv (talk) 19:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)