User:Spr1ggs

To Do

Ongoing Work

• Hasan's page
• Hasan and Destiny Break Up Over Kamala Misinformation‎‎
• Dan personal video uploads
• Why Intel's Meltdown Might Be A Huge Opportunity on Dan's page.

Paused

• Daliban clips

Ideas

• League page, tracking every league arc. Show chatters banned, rank achieved, win rate, duo partners, how many chatters banned.

• destiny's sc2 history

• editor timeline, timeline of youtube editors

• Page dedicated to people who threatened to kill destiny

• bets section on dan's wiki

• sections for every wiki video relating to dgg feedback on subreddit/chat logs

• Shit that has gone down while destiny is on vacation

• Every game Destiny has played and links to vods.

• Redo initial created pages(mike, denims).

Individuals

• Dan
• Hasan
• Vaush
• The serfs
• Demonmamma
• Bob7
• MrGirl
• boogie
• (maybe)sneako
• fuentes
• stardust
• vivianwulf
• Lauren southern
• adam and sitch
• doug of 8k
• jstlk
• ANIMATOR ARC
• Andrew Wilson
• lonerbox
• kaya(moistcritical orbiter)
• more melina arcs
• Brittany simon
• Xanderhal
• President Sunday
• keemstar
• Train

General wiki thoughts

What pages take priority, why was x page done before y?

When fleshing out articles, I hadn't the faintest idea what should be included in a page. When Destiny first introduced the wiki he just wanted a "random accounting of shit that has happened". Well there's a lot of shit that has happened with a lot of people, and it quickly became overwhelming to decide what pages were important to complete and how to organize all the information in a coherent and useful way. So I figured the best way to go about this was to start small, and write articles with people who I was fairly certain would never appear on stream again. This way I could conceptualize what a fully fleshed out page should look like, without creating too much redo work for myself once i've "figured it out". MikefromPa seemed to fit that caricature perfectly. Mike's status as a Hasan "orbiter", and general apathy towards debates, would make it highly unlikely he would ever cross paths with Destiny again. So I began work on his page, and created a rough outline of what I felt should make up an individual's page. From there, I went to Denims, yet another Hasan orbiter who was also unlikely to appear on stream with Destiny ever again. Her page was different given the interpersonal drama she had been involved in, so this provided a good litmus test for my ability to stay neutral and give an accurate recounting of events that occured on stream.

At this point, I have completed a full recounting of on-stream events involving Mike and Denims, both of which finally had pages that I felt sufficiently met the standard of "random accounting of shit that has happened". That being said, the duration of their amiability towards Destiny was quite short-lived, which meant the amount of items to add to their respective pages was limited. Furthermore, I did not yet feel comfortable with the structure of the pages I created until the very end of Denims' page, so the prospect of moving on towards "more important" pages like Hasan or Vaush seemed like an endeavor to create more redo work for myself when i've established a structure i'm content with. From here, I searched for the right orbiter who had the following traits:

1. Unlikely to appear on stream ever again.
2. Had both negatively received and positively received onstream appearances.
3. Had enough onstream appearances to create a respectably long wiki page.

This ultimately led me to Lav. By the time I started her page, I thought she was well and truly gone from the "orbit"(little did I know) given the intense circumstances surrounding her departure. Furthermore, I felt she would be the perfect candidate to hone whatever format I hoped to create for the "more important" pages. I was around halfway through her page before I was finally content with it's section structure and content. However, in the interest of finishing a job I started, I still felt inclined to wrap up her page before moving on to more important pages. Around two videos before the completion of her page, she somehow managed to enter and leave the orbit in a relatively short time span. During this time, I was pressed to recount the newly transpiring drama(often times on the same day said drama occured) all for the sake of moving on to the more important pages I finally felt comfortable working on. The drama passes, Lav is once again removed from Destiny's orbit, and her page is finally complete(barring the occasional grammatical issues I catch to this day).

Hasan's page was ultimately decided as the next page to work on for a few reasons:

1. Hasan is Destiny's supreme stream antagonist to this day.
2. There's droves of content worth recounting that Destiny has engaged with Hasan directly on or has reacted to.
3. The frankly embarrassing status of the wiki's largest pages(at the time) being a twice fallen-from-grace orbiter whom nobody outside of dgg would care to read about, and two Hasan orbiters.

I considered working on Vaush for reasons similar to Hasan, but he has more or less faded into irrelevance following his "fortress arc", and his videos would be fairly difficult to dig up given that he was friends with Destiny during the Nebraska days. Instead, I decided to prioritize Hasan's page, as the Israel/Palestine arc was heating up and Hasan finally lifted his embargo on reacting to all Destiny-related content.

What is notable?

Who are we to judge what is notable or not? Add every appearance, and let the reader decide what is worthwhile to them. While some chatters may find the most notable sections on Hasan's page to be the times where he and Destiny had dinner with one another, the more serious discussions may be the most noteworthy to others. Each should be given their spot on a page and equal coverage.

What is "responsible coverage"

In the interest of giving each individual/article a fair recounting(and to avoid kiwi farms/dgg circlejerk accusations), pages should not entirely consist of negative interactions, nor should they entirely consist of positive interactions. A good faith effort should be taken to ensure that every individual's onstream interactions(be it negative or positive) be given the light of day for future readers(withstanding any requests from the individual attributed to the page and overtly harmful information).

That being said, it is not practical to validate every claim made by any one person in a given video/source. The claims made by an individual should stand on their own, the validation of said claims should be verified in the breadth of content covered on the page. Take for example the jstlk "rape-gate" section. Upon viewing the summary of the ordeal, Jstlk noted an omission of a relevant conversation which christened the meme. The following were the major factors influencing my next steps:

1. The conversation occurred on Jstlk's own stream, and while tangentially related to a discussion with Destiny, I questioned if such a section belongs on a "destiny wiki", given that destiny has never reacted to that particular conversation.
2. Jstlk's youtube channel is banned. Properly sourcing and citing this full conversation(as traditionally done) would be quite difficult. The only youtube source I could find was some vtuber interjecting their own opinion throughout the ordeal.
3. I started that section at the behest of another user, and simply wanted to get such controversial coverage out of the way before less than charitable individuals would consider covering it(that being said, the initial post was charged with my opinion through some poor wording choices which were eventually rectified).
4. Given that more pressing pages needed to be worked on, dedicating more time than necessary on this page would not be ideal.

As a result, I concluded the following: While it may not be necessary to create a section dedicated to Jstlk's claims of "destroying" 4THOT in a prior conversation, it should be expected that said conversation is available in his wiki in some form given the controversial nature of "rape gate", and for the sake of providing a fully contextualized recounting. Furthermore, while such a conversation is tangentially related to Destiny, it did not actually involve Destiny, nor did he ever react to this video. As such, a middle ground was taken. Within the body of a quote for the "rape gate" section, a timestamp to a youtube video where the "rape gate" meme was initially christened was provided(to reiterate, the only video to come up after an hour of earnestly searching was some vtuber). In the future, Jstlk's page should be more fleshed out to ensure it is not limited to the scant(and frankly negative) appearances it currently has, and will even include his conversation with 4THOT(barring any apprehension to such a section from either Jstlk or 4THOT).

Proper section structure and evolution WIP

In the beginning, there was Mike from pa.

On Brevity WIP

While creating a 10,000 word page on an hour long discussion is not ideal, providing only two sentences for a discussion covering a vast array of subjects is also insufficient. A nuanced philosophical conversation with Rem is never going to be summarized in a paragraph, and Destiny debating about power supplies with Dan isn't going to need 10,000 words to describe. Striking a balance is key;be concise, yet thorough. Try to encapsulate the mains points, without overwhelming the reader with oceans of text.

When I initially created the Jontron page, I felt proud of how much intricate detail I provided for each and every talking point. However, a discord user/friend of the stream(Linusred), pointed out that nobody would bother reading so much text for an hour long discussion. He went so far as to provide a "reading time" calculator showing it would take an inordinate amount of time relative to the length of the video to get through the entire page. In the end, I settled for a high level summary, with a collapsible section for the more intricate details should it be of interest to a reader.

On AI/Chatgpt

I generally abstain from using chatgpt for pages unless I am having difficulty getting the verbiage just right for a particular section, or looking for inspiration on formatting/writing. I find that it is fairly easy to tell when a section has been purely made using such tools, and that doing so detracts from the overall quality of the page and wiki as a whole.