Talk:MrBeast

Kris Tyson article?

Should we make a Wikipedia article for Kris/Chris Tyson? HiGuys69420 (talk) 08:22, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

The results of a previous discussion was to merge that article with this one. Originalcola (talk) 18:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

But that was a while back when Tyson had less publicity. Now there's a bunch of articles about that person and I think a rediscussion is due. Pyraminxsolver (talk) 04:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Yea we definitely need to discuss if Kris gets an article or not HiGuys69420 (talk) 03:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

an article is warranted for tyson, the old ruling is outdated and not enforceable. he is all over the news currently, one of the biggest stories in the world. higuys if you want you can definitely make an article NotQualified (talk) 18:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I back this. The Ava Kris Tyson allegations (predatory behavior) could be classified as something separate to Jimmy Donaldson's. The allegations against her were generally directed at her, Donaldson simply had to deal with it as an agency backing Tyson (which ended up with her leaving Donaldson's company). The main article should be on her page, not Donaldson's. Faiiwastaken (talk) 07:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I think Ava deserves her own article at this point given how several sources and news articles have covered her with her as the focus and only mentioning MrBeast in passing. Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 21:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Based on the available sources now, it would make sense to create the article. There is also a lot in the allegations subsection on here that would rather belong into the article of Tyson. It is too detailed for this article, but since there is no other place to add it, it is on here.Vestigium Leonis (talk) 08:58, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

There is a draft at Draft:Kris Tyson waiting for review. If you guys could help, that will be greatly appreciated. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 20:09, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Should there be an article for Mrbeast (the person) and a separate one for the corporation BEAST HOLDINGS, LLC/ the channel and companies.

Should there be a separate page for the company BEAST HOLDINGS, LLC. and the person (Jimmy Donaldson) Mrbeast, as the current article has to both talk about an individual as well as a corporate entity and YouTube channel? Legendarycool (talk) 06:08, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

No, i do not think that two seperate articles are needed. Gilliebillie🤡 (talk) 08:01, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

No. There is no precedence in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and seems like an attempt to deflect criticism of Donaldson by obscuring them with needless links.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 08:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Controversy

Why is nothing mentioned about the recent accusations of Ava Kris Tyson? Gilliebillie🤡 (talk) 20:36, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

At the time of your question, there was a paragraph discussing it. Since then that paragraph has received its own heading: MrBeast#Tyson allegations and reactions. abcasada (talk) 16:23, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2024

Correct the table in the "Awards and Nominations" section. The 2022 awards have the Year and Ceremony section swapped/shifted. For the 2022 + 12th Streamy Awards, the Year and Ceremony column values need to be swapped. For the 2022 + 2022 Kids' Choice Awards, the columns need to be shifted to the left. Goosler13 (talk) 01:09, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Goosler13, Thank you for telling this. I changed it. Gilliebillie🤡 (talk) 07:24, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

ava chris tyson's controversy exposed some of the shady stuff mrbeast did

look it up on twiter, p'm going to sleep 217.24.171.179 (talk) 19:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

"Donaldson is one of the most well-liked YouTubers on the platform" is no longer true

"Donaldson is one of the most well-liked YouTubers on the platform"

Public consensus has turned very sour towards him, even more so with the new video from DogPack 404 released today. 199.107.198.251 (talk) 08:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately he still has 300M+ subscribers. And until something big happens, the big PR control he has is not going to disappear. ItzSwirlz (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Given all the substantiated allegations of 2024, as covered by RS and featured in this article, we need a relevant and recent RS still stating so. Else, its just fluff language and violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 08:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

"dogpack404" references

As other editors have note, jist take a lool at the recent article edit history, @Spinixster keeps deleting "dogpack404" from the article even when it is being reported by RS.

The article currently mentions the Youtube videos released by dogpack404 and the subsequent fallout being covered by RS but @Spinixster keeps deleting the author of those videos names with no explanation provided.

Moreover, @Spinixster just edited the article (less than an hour ago) with the stated summary that it was to change a copyrighted image *but still went ahead and deleted dogpack404's name from the article in a surreptitious way*.

Several editors have noticed this, such as @HumanRightsIsCool, and it seems a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest violation. We need uninvolved editors on this highly visited article.

I would ask for @Spinixster to achieve Wikipedia:Consensus here on the TP before further editing.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 09:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

1. Saying that I keep removing "dogpack404" is wrong. I have only done it once and once only. I don't understand the need to twist my edits like that. I suggest you look at the diffs before accusing me of such things.

2. WP:Wikipedia is not censored, but that does not mean we have to include every single bit of information there is. The information was already tagged as being excessive. See WP:TMI#Balance.

3. I don't care about MrBeast. I don't watch his videos. He doesn't know that I exist. Suggesting that I may have a conflict of interest because I am following guidelines is wild.

You say to follow "consensus", yet you have not established any sort of polling or RFC for a consensus for keeping or removing dogpack404. When there's no consensus, editors will follow what the guidelines say. You can't trash someone over not following a consensus that no one has ever said or established; we aren't mind-readers, and that may violate WP:OWN.

Now, I'll back off of this conversation. Do whatever you want to do, but I hope you don't accuse me of anything further for my mental health's sake. Spinixster (trout me!) 09:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Ownership of content states "Disagreements should be calmly resolved..." and this is not what you have done in the essay above. This is a Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons so making substantial edits and not describing them in the summary of changes will be seen as either Wikipedia:Conflict of interest or Wikipedia:Undue. This is the main issue in your editing. Perhaps it was mistake? If so, acknowledge it and move on.

Glad to hear you are taking a break, as per your statement. Health comes first.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 10:01, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Can I add dogpack404 back until we agree on the talk page? HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 10:35, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I vote yes. Please add. RS already cover it and it is not Wikipedia:Undue.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 10:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Please do not cast WP:Aspersion and claim that somebody has a conflict of interest. That's a serious allegation. Please WP:AGF. Di (they-them) (talk) 11:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

As per Wikipedia:Casting aspersions "...without evidence, especially when the accusations are repeated...". This means you are wrong @Di (they-them) since this is neither repeated nor without evidence. I would encourage you to also refer to the fact that @Spinixster edited a highly contentious article while describing his edit as something else.

You are right that we should assume good faith and that is proper. But you are plainly mistaken in your previous assertion.

Have a good day.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 12:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@CFA why did you remove the word "Dogpack404" we're discussing in talk page can you add it back until we're done HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 15:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

No, it is not relevant here. Please see WP:BLPNAME. Namedrops are not useful in articles. C F A 💬 15:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

You linked me to a section called "Privacy of names". The username "dogpack404" isn't private. And the whole section is about dogpack's videos, how is he not relevant? Are you a fan of MrBeast and you don't want people to hear the allegations, or is there a rule I didn't read. Can you copy and paste a rule that doesn't allow dogpack to be named HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 15:47, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

These type of aspersions are not helpful here. I don't watch MrBeast. I don't care about him. Promotional namedrops do not belong in articles, especially when the person is an otherwise private individual. The WP:ONUS is on you to find consensus for inclusion, which there is clearly not at the moment. C F A 💬 15:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

There is consensus. The person who created this discussion on the talk page agrees with me. Also when most of the paragraph is about dogpack, name dropping isn't promoting any more than if you leave his name out because the whole section regardless is promoting his videos HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 16:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

No, there is definitely not consensus. The only people who support keeping the namedrop are you and the IP above. There are at least 4 other people that disagree with you. C F A 💬 16:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

You are factually wrong @CFA. Only two editors, you included, have stated one way or another, a preference for deletion. That's your first mistake.

Your second is you referencing privacy of names. As per your link, "...the name of a private individual" and "...in terms of a single event." do nit apply here. This is not a private individual being named here and they have releaser multiple exposes that have been dutifully covered by RS. That's your second mistake.

Finally, you cite Wikipedia:Casting aspersions on the topic of including the username "dogpack404". It makes absolutely no sense and I have no idea what you could possibly mean.

This inclusion is supported by RS and it is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Excluding it when you say you dont know anything about the topic is tantamount to Wikipedia:Edit warring. If you feel very strongly about this then I suggest you go find an uninvolved administrator or create a RfC.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 17:14, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree. There is consensus here. One editor withdrew from discussions making it only 1 single editor, @CFA, publicly opposed to this username inclusion.

68.188.156.135 (talk) 17:18, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Can I ask which references include the dogpack name. There are a lot of refs to wade through. Thank you. Knitsey (talk) 17:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

That is not how consensus works. There is more opposition, in addition to here, at User talk:HumansRightsIsCool#August 2024. Are you a fan of MrBeast and you don't want people to hear the allegations, or is there a rule I didn't read is clearly an aspersion. tantamount to Wikipedia:Edit warring is quite the claim when it has been repeatedly re-added by one editor despite being removed every time. I only removed it once. The ONUS is on you to find consensus for inclusion. You can start an RfC if you want to. I think the problem here is that you are too involved with the topic, not that I am uninvolved. I only found this article because an edit was flagged on Recent Changes, and based on the articles I've read, this seems to be a trivial namedrop only there to promote. C F A 💬 17:27, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@TheWikiToby I don't want dogpack 's name in the article to promote him. I want it because it's extremely relevant to the paragraph. I don't know any other page that talks about another YouTuber but is afraid to name drop them. I've never seen it before. Also I wasn't making an aspersion, i was just asking if you like MrBeast and hate dog pack, I wasn't trying to attack you, but only to know your motive of the edit. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 18:18, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

You pretty clearly casted an aspersion, at least in the way you phrased it.

Are you a fan of MrBeast and you don't want people to hear the allegations, or is there a rule I didn't read?

Using the word or in between two possible answers, one of which accusing someone of a literal Conflict of Interest, makes it seem like you're extremely confident in someone doing foul play despite lacking any amount of evidence. Anyways, please read WP:BLPNAME. TheWikiToby (talk) 18:28, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Remember, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Just because it's verified doesn't mean it should be included, and the responsibility for justifiable inclusion is on the individual who wants to add it in the first place. Per BLPNAME, the inclusion of someone's name (whether it may be a private name or online username per following the spirit of the rule) shouldn't be included, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. (BLPNAME)

And yes, you are absolutely casting aspersions when you say Are you a fan of MrBeast and you don't want people to hear the allegations? Brother, removing a name following legitimate policies isn't a COI. Plus, the aspersion doesn't even make sense... AGF TheWikiToby (talk) 18:17, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

im on vacation at a hotel right now. I just realized this whole thing is pointless so bye. I'm going to sleep in this nice bed at this hotel HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 18:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Have a good vacation. TheWikiToby (talk) 18:33, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 August 2024

Please reorganize the templates per WP:ORDER and remove a duplicate protection template.

−

{{short description|American YouTuber and businessman (born 1998)}} {{pp-extended|small=yes}} {{unreliable sources|date=August 2024}} {{Redirect|Mr. Beast}} {{pp-blp|small=yes}} {{use American English|date=September 2022}} {{Use mdy dates|date=August 2024}}

+

{{short description|American YouTuber and businessman (born 1998)}} {{Redirect|Mr. Beast}} {{pp-blp|small=yes}} {{unreliable sources|date=August 2024}} {{use American English|date=September 2022}} {{Use mdy dates|date=August 2024}}

Regards, Kurnahusa (talk) 00:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done C F A 💬 00:24, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

MrBeast signature

Investigating the source of the signature and taking recent allegations into account. It seems likely that the signature could be fake.

It should probably be removed or replaced with a confirmed signature. 2001:9B1:26FB:6500:F273:4551:70FA:DF97 (talk) 16:40, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

DogPack's videos haven't reached journalists that much yet. I would say WP:TOOSOON, we could dispute this once his latest video is reported on by the news. 71.143.223.97 (talk) 11:35, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

some unsorted references in case editors decide to add the recent controversy

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/01/us/mr-beast-youtube-inappropriate-language.html https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/streamers/news-former-mrbeast-employee-dogpack404-served-cease-desist-letter-days-releasing-video-calling-youtuber-fraud https://www.polygon.com/24211562/mrbeast-recent-controversies-ava-kris-tyson-fraud-video-beast-games https://www.complex.com/pop-culture/a/brad-callas/mrbeast-employee-debunks-fraud-allegations-former-worker https://futurism.com/the-byte/allegations-mrbeast-contest https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/streamers/news-participant-won-1-million-defends-mrbeast-former-employee-claims https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/streamers/news-former-mrbeast-employee-dogpack404-served-cease-desist-letter-days-releasing-video-calling-youtuber-fraud 71.143.223.97 (talk) 11:30, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

DogPack404

So assuming that the previous conversation has been closed due to it mainly derailing to talking about aspersion as well as HumansRightsIsCool seemingly deciding to abstain from further comments regarding this, I'd like to open up a new discussion regarding the inclusion of his username within the overall contents of the article as the arguments for his exclusion are quite weak when you take into consideration that "DogPack404" is an username with WP:BLPNAME as the contents of the section aren't exactly applicable towards a handle that has literally been described by the sourced Polygon article as being an anonymous handle. Maybe I just didn't understand it all but if this is the only reason why his name has been excluded from the article, then I'm not exactly convinced. SuperSkaterDude45 (discusión) 08:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

The Polygon article mentions his handle/username but still primarily focuses on and refers to him as an anonymous source. This seems to be the case in most of the news coverage I could find, which is probably why it was not included initially. I'm not sure why WP:BLPNAME would apply to a username, but to me it's inclusion seems trivial and ultimately doesn't add or remove anything to the article or the allegations and could serve; the important thing is that they are an anonymous MrBeast employee. Originalcola (talk) 11:54, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

@Originalcola: I'd agree if it weren't for how ever since the Chris Tyson incident, several former employees or at the very least people involved with Mr. Beast have come forward with their own set of accusations within the same general time frame with the current wording being considerably ambiguous such as the following: On the same day, one of Donaldson's former employees released a YouTube video accusing Donaldson of rigging contests, running illegal lotteries, and deceiving his fans. Sure, DogPack is the biggest figure involved in these allegations, but we shouldn't assume the average reader already knows about information that isn't as trivial as some would like to portray it, especially as again, DogPack is an alias and not his actual legal name. Another point of contention is how similar arguments have been brought up by other YouTubers and employees before and after July 2024 as well as topics such as the Beast Games incident being brought up by other employees of Mr. Beast. SuperSkaterDude45 (discusión) 02:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

The existence of other allegations or him being the biggest figure involved, whatever the veracity of these claims, do not necessarily constitute an argument for the inclusion of the username Dogpack404. That was what I was commenting on as that was what you mentioned and was the topic of the previous discussion, nothing else. If you want to add other allegations, make sure to follow Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons and to give them due weight. Originalcola (talk) 08:31, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Originalcola: The other allegations are already mentioned in the article itself with sources. Once again, the existing wording is needlessly vague when you consider that existing references use his username and that other highly edited articles on Wikipedia tend to include government names of individuals involved in either bringing light to allegations or in some controversy in relation to public figures so again, I'm failing to see a valid reason over the omission of an anonymous handle that reliable sources already use when it comes to descriptions. SuperSkaterDude45 (discusión) 07:38, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Should Mack be added as a Current Member of the MrBeast crew?

It seems like he is one. If someone finds anything that suggests he is a member of the crew, please provide that. Master106 (talk) 02:42, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Delware

@HiGuys69420: Including Delaware's alias is an unnecessary break in flow imo. Considering that the offender has only been mentioned once in one sentence so far, including the fact that he's called Delaware makes the sentence sound pretty weird when you read it.

In a second video, the uploader interviewed another former employee who described poor working conditions, as well as Donaldson hiring a registered sex offender, "Delaware", who was charged with... TheWikiToby (talk) 17:36, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

ok HiGuys69420 (talk) 19:00, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Looking at the article, it appears that is his name, not an online handle or an alias which adds further weight to this argument as per WP:BLPNAME. Originalcola (talk) 12:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)