What Celebs Look Like Without Fame
Mateus Lima • 6 days ago
+33
Entertainment
Uploaded by Evilthing Mar 21, 2024 at 01:23AM EDT
Origin Entry: Sweet Baby Inc Detected Controversy
File type: png
Resolution: (693px x 712px)
File size: 249 KB
More:
![Sweet Baby Inc.'s Wikipedia page is missing key facts - here's the unbiased context Wikipedia's page covering the Sweet Baby Inc. fallout isn't quite as accurate as it could be ADAM VJESTICA 15 MAR 2024 2 D Share Sweet Baby SHORTCUT SKINNY The Sweet Baby Inc. Wikipedia page isn't as accurate as it could be • The page fails to include context and focuses on one side of the events The fallout over a Steam Curator Group has caused a dispute between some gamers and those within the industry The controversy surrounding Sweet Baby Inc. - a narrative consultant company whose mission is "to tell better, more empathetic stories while diversifying and enriching the video games industry" - continues to rumble on as gamers and gaming journalists staunchly defend their version of events. The fallout, which began when an SBI employee took exception to a Steam Curator group called 'Sweet Baby Inc. Detected', has now been officially documented by Wikipedia. But it's missing a key detail and isn't completely accurate. Not only does the Wikipedia article incorrectly claim that the 'Sweet Baby Inc. Detected" group was "encouraging players to avoid the games as the studio promoted a 'woke agenda"" - it also says, "The group received increased attention in February when a Sweet Baby employee asked others to report it for failing Steam's code of conduct." community r/KotakulnAction. Employees said a small degree of harassment was directed towards the company following this attention,!!!] which increased in January 2024,[18] when a Steam user created a curator group listing Sweet Baby's work,[19] encouraging players to avoid the games as the studio promoted a "woke agenda".[20][18] The curator group received increased attention in February when a Sweet Baby employee asked others to report it for failing Steam's code of conduct.1211 Within weeks, the group had more than 210,000 followers122) and a First, the group did not fail Steam's code of conduct, which is evidenced by the fact it's still live. The creator, Kabrutus, also allegedly received an email from Valve that confirmed the group wasn't in breach. According to The Shortcut's research, there was also no encouragement given to "avoid the games" that Sweet Baby Inc. had been involved in. As the group's 'About' page clearly states, Sweet Baby Inc. Detected is: "A tracker for games involved with Sweet Baby Inc." We haven't found evidence of this to date. However, and more importantly, the Wikipedia page doesn't mention that the same Sweet Baby Inc. employee who wanted the group removed then encouraged people to report the user so that their personal Steam account would be banned.](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/002/777/139/5c9.png "Wikipedia")
![you reliable sources? ikipedia NOTFORUM ntionally uscating facts via offission [hide] This is direct criticism directed towards the Wikipedia editors responsible for the SBI-article as well as those here on the Talk-page refusing to correct misinformation. Repeatedly, registered editors have replied with "do you have reliable sources?" when people explained how the current version of the article is plain wrong. When sources are being mentioned, it is dismissed under the guise of "social media posts are not accepted on Wikipedia". That much would be somewhat okay (albeit still weird in the year 2024, when much official stuff takes place on Twitter and co.), if the consequence then would have been to remove the article due to a lack of sources that display the entire situation. This didn't happen as of now. Instead, websites such as Kotaku, IGN, Eurogamer, Polygon and others are accepted as "reliable sources". The issue here is that all these websites have long joined an ideological side in this dumb "culture war" or whatever you want to call it. I'm not calling for any side, the point is: These traditional news media all intentionally omit key information from their articles, because only so can they push the narrative that SBI critics are "evil". Altright, nazis, women hater, homophobes, transphobes, racists, bigots, etc. - these websites call everyone who dares criticizing SBI that, whether it is directly so or via established wording (like calling it "GamerGate 2.0" which has long since strongly connotated to all the aforementioned insults). And these websites are now accepted as "reliable sources" by Wikipedia-editors such as "Rhaine", "Dumuzid" or "MrOllie" or "Jester". Instead of listening to the people voicing their criticism (we're not doing this for fun ...), we're being further vilified by being told that we "believe" something, when all we're doing is pointing out factual errors. We're being told to make this Talk-page a "battleground", which for all the time being was not the case, again, we were only pointing out factual errors. At this point, it is SO weird how all these registered Wikipedia editors fail to grasp what the issue is: That by omitting one side of the ongoing situation entirely, you create a false image of the situation as a whole. It doesn't matter what side I'm on, behavior like this would be bad for any ongoing situation. Nobody her wants you to change the article to say "the critics of SBI are heroes, fighting for justice". No, all we desire is that you include EVERYTHING in the article. IF that is not possible because you insist on your "social media posts are not allowed as source", then the only reasonable cause of action would be to remove the entire article. Take it offline, wait until the situation is over, then report after the fact when all facts are bared in the open. Right now, the article only benefits bad actors who will use it as ammunition for their agenda ("See, everyone, even Wikipedia says these guys are bad!!1, it's OFFICIAL!!!1"), allthewhile you kept saying that you have no interest in taking a role in this situation. Well, you're doing that right now in this moment. A neutral position would either add key information to the article or, if that's not possible, unpublish it until further information becomes available. After being threatened by Wikipedia editor Jester, I expect the worst after posting this topic, but I also hope that this reaches someone in position of power on Wikipedia who wants to prevent Wikipedia becoming an anti-factual place that exists for pushing agenda that certain editors find themselves siding with. One last time: The critics of SBI are not nazis, nor women haters, nor racists or anything like that. The current version of this Wikipedia-article insinuates exactly that, though. I won't accept being called that. I have done nothing to deserve it. Thx. 2003:D8:8F3C:E000:B8F6:2724:3492:FC17 (talk) 02:35, 13 March 2024 (UTC) Just to be 100% clear, the underlying complaint here, whether true or not, is that these consultants were responsible for more diversity in video games? Do I have that correct? Dumuzid (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC) No.](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/002/775/246/7ab.png "As with Gamergate, so with this")
Comments (11)
Add a Comment
Image Details
12,698 views (6 from today)
Uploaded Mar 21, 2024 at 01:23AM EDT
Origin Entry
Tags
About the Uploader
Evilthing
Treasurer & Elocutionist & Media Chauffeur
Top Comments
SomeDudeWithNoLife
Mar 21, 2024 at 12:06PM EDT
Szuja
Mar 21, 2024 at 06:40PM EDT in reply to