User:Spr1ggs

To Do

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

General wiki thoughts

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.