Talk:Wplace

More info

I think that it'd be good to add more detail to the article if someone writes about how the servers have crashed multiple times due to the user overload CoolestViki (talk) 19:11, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Uhh... What? From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 11:14, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

No mention of vandalism?

Vandalism of artwork (e.g. blanking, swastikas, LGBT flags, national flags/symbols, etc.) is a common experience in wplace which should be added to the article eventually. Any sources talk about this? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

"Such rules result in frequent wars between users, where every author tries to finish their own picture, sometimes destroying previous or neighbouring images" is already in the article. Although if you'll find any sources, please add a line about vandalism on the page, I am myself experienced it on the website several times) From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 04:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Not only that but deltarune references are literally everywhere.Alexceltare2 (talk) 15:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

"No need to highlight it"

There's really no such need. If you look closely there are a ton of Undertale, Touhou HK references. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 17:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

No no. The Deltarune and Trans art is overrepresented and this needs to be addressed. Alexceltare2 (talk) 11:57, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

We already have a mention of trans art, but I am against highlinghting Deltarune, since there are other games too, and it feels cursed in the text. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 12:26, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Political activists

Bro some user also write Nazi and fascists things and attacks minorities and ethnic groups tho Erichatd (talk) 21:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok. If you don't have a source, we won't allow to add this as you know. When you'll have a source, come back and we will be glad to see it in the article. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 07:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

https://www.reddit.com/r/WplaceLive/s/6UqKO1FNmUhttps:// www.reddit.com/r/WplaceLive/s/paPO8IFSaUhttps:// www.reddit.com/r/WplaceLive/s/GTDqiUWz9U 88.170.94.34 (talk) 20:59, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

That cannot be a source sadly. Try to seek some news published by some websites like BBC, New York Times, or a lot smaller ones. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 05:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Moderators chaos

Moderators use their own preference to judge and censor arts, and ban users.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WplaceLive/comments/1mw67j7/comment/n9v7v82/ Credit2633 (talk) 16:59, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Let's wait until we'll have more reliable sources on this. I would personally like to add this on the page, but we don't have enough info. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 04:40, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Reddit is not a valid source to use on Wikipedia, see WP:SOCIALMEDIA. UppercutPawnch (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

If they don't publish their full policies on some website, you will never have a chance to add this. This reply doesn't need a response. Credit2633 (talk) 05:48, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Dispute over claim of creator

@Celtoi Given that I and 2 other editors in the page history have indicated that citations are unreliable, I am bringing this to the talk page. First of all, per WP:RSPLINKEDIN, we generally don't cite LinkedIn accounts unless they are verified or if the user's identity is confirmed in some way. Murilo Matsubara's account is not such a case. When you then replaced the source with OpenCritic,you cited is a source that is only reliable for aggregate reviews of games per WP:VG/S. Additionally, the source that THAT article cites (Dualshockers) is unreliable in general as well per WP:VG/S, specifically WP:VALNET. If you have another source to back up the claim of authorship, please make sure it is a reliable source per Wikipedia guidelines. I am not comforted by your statement We can make exceptions. in reference to LinkedIn, so please know that edit warring can result in you being blocked from Wikipedia. UppercutPawnch (talk) 05:57, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Yeah, I wanted to start this talk page myself, although you're highly agressive here, so please, be more rational and always assume good faith, as we with @1isall do.

Let me ask you - what do you want from this situation? We don't have reliable source? Well, if a jouranilist form BBC or The New York Times writes an article, where he mentions Matsubara as the creator, will that mean that we can cite it now? Like, nothing has changed, the original sources are the same, just a journalist from reliable source mentioned an unreliable source. That's also the reason why we should take reliable/unrealiable thing less personal and strict.

We have about 5 sources mentioning Murilo as the creator, written before this article on Wikipedia, which should mean that they are not self-sourcing each other. Various posts on Facebook and Twitter also mention Matsubara. Also recommend you seeing this source on this topic written on "kingofgeek". I don't know if this source is considered unreliable by you, but I think it is more reliable than others.

Next, there is definetly a man named Murilo Matsubara who is a developer, see GitHub page. As I've said, do you really think that a random man will say that he is the creator of such popular website? + Spanish Wikipedia mentions Murilo without any sources, and no one talks about this.

So, we can clearly see that Murilo is a real developer, and about 5 sources aside from LinkedIn say that he is the developer. Only based on LinkedIn and GitHub we can already write that he is the creator without citing these srouces. I'm not good at Wikipedia guidelines because I'm a WikiDragon who is more interested in article being reliable and easy to understand for readers, and almost never cares about Guidelines, because Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, and we should often ignore all rules in order to avoid bureaucracy. So please if you can, check guidelines and say if this source is reliable. But even if it isn't, I will still insist on Murilo Matsubara being in the article per all what I have said above. Thank you. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Celtoi Facebook and X/Twitter are also generally unreliable because they're self-published sources. WP:RSPFACEBOOK, WP:RSPTWITTER. Same for GitHub, as its contents are mostly user-generated. We have to cite reliable sources. If there's currently no reliable source saying that Matsubara is the developer, that claim can't be included in the article. If a reliable source confirms it later on, then we can include it. Until then, it won't be mentioned in the prose.

Also, it doesn't say anywhere on Wikipedia:WikiDragon that "WikiDragons ignore guidelines". Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 19:07, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Of course they are, I just cited them as a "logical" source, not an actual that can be used in the article. Same for GitHub.

See this source also. As in Spanish Wikipedia, we don't need a good source to publish an information. We have about 5 sources on this topic, and one of them is GameSpot that is considered reliable. So, if we have a reliable source, case closed?

Also, Wikipoedia is a place where everyone forces two sides of the rules: ignore all rules or act in accordance with guidelines. Most people choose second, which makes Wikipedia very ordered, although we should always remember about the other side. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 04:14, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Checking in with @UppercutPawnch. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 14:48, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Howdy, faith complaints aside, I share the consensus that Gamespot is a reliable source and the article does not have any visible issues that would make it unreliable for this article. UppercutPawnch (talk) 20:33, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Useful links

• Official subreddit
• Find alliances around the globe
• PixelArtVillage – recommended for converting images into pixel art
• wplace.org – another tool for generating pixel art
• Blue marble tutorial (may be outdated) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirTorukk (talk • contribs) 19:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Image

Uh... @1isall, @UppercutPawnch, anyone? I found out that the second image was deleted, but why? There was no consensus on this topic.

I understand why you think we should have only one image. But I think that a single image of Tokyo area illustrates it very bad. Similar to r/place article, that has 3 images, I think to illustrate art on a smaller size and for reader to understand better smaller drawings and the idea of Wplace it would be better if we had another illustration. Maybe Moscow wasn't the best example here, but we can make a photo of some area ourselves that would fit such idea. Wplace is a website, it's not some kind of a privately-published work with a very strict usage. Every single article about Wplace has some image, we can take literally anything from there. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 14:52, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you remember this? Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 August 19#File:Wplace moscow.png

I'm sure @Tarlby can explain why the image was deleted. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 15:12, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

The image functions identically to the Tokyo screenshot. It's simply for illustration without any educational value being taken from it. Those fair use images on the r/place article work because they actually have historical significance to r/place. The first 3 document the final state of the 2023, 2017, and 2022 events because, remember, r/place was a time limited project, and the "FUCK YOU SPEZ" properly conveys the activism that took place there.

What exactly does the reader lose from the Moscow image being deleted? Nothing. That image was there for the sake of being there. Its purpose, illustration, is already fulfilled with the Tokyo image. Per WP:NFCC, copyrighted material should be used as sparingly as possible. And yes, those pictures are copyrighted. Wplace itself doesn't own the fan-art it hosts, but every one of those drawings were drawn by someone, and someone owns those drawings, especially the fan-art of other pieces of copyrighted media. That is what makes it non-free. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 18:27, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Hope this answers your question, @Celtoi. Also, the non-free content criteria (NFCC) is a policy with legal considerations. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 18:33, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Wait, from where do you know that the drawing is the property of the one who have drawn it? Is it written somewhere? I absolutely believe that similar to r/place article we can make more than one image, and I understand why you've deleted the Moscow image, but what about finding an image that can better illustrate the artworks on a smaller are aiwht more details? A single image definetly won't clarify the questions of a reader who isn't familiar with the concept. So please tell where you found the information that drawings are owned by the artists. From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 07:19, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Whoever draws something owns the drawing, and if that drawing is fan-art of other media like a video game, then whoever owns that media probably also owns that drawing. That's how that works. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 18:31, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

It works where? Where is that written? Law of US? Policy of the website? As far as I know often everything that is in the website is the property of the owner of the website.

I genuinely believe that we could've added anoher image. Maybe something like from this or this, no? From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 07:17, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

@Celtoi If we add those other images from the websites you linked, we're going to run into this same problem. @Tarlby already explained why we don't need another: the Tokyo (first) image already conveyed the visuals of Wplace in an encyclopedic way, while the Moscow (second) image was just for show. Per Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria#3a, multiple non-free contents shouldn't be used if one can convey enough information. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 11:55, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Semi-Protection

As far as I know, this article was semi-protected, due to a big number of small vandalic edits. But now it isn't protected. What I don't understand here? From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 08:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

Launch Date Inaccuracies

The launch date listed is incorrect, but I do not actually know when it was launched. All I know is that according to this reddit post (https://www.reddit.com/r/TheBlueCorner/comments/1l3yudv/world_map_rplace_just_dropped_you_know_what_to_do/), it's sometime in or before June. Chartghol (talk) 08:12, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Building on this — that Reddit post you linked ("World map r/place just dropped, you know what to do") appears to have been posted by Murilo Matsubara himself, the site's developer. A near-identical plug for wplace.live was posted around the same time in r/Rplace by the same account: "Since there's no r/place this year, let's cook up our own", posted 13:08 UTC, June 5, 2025 — slightly earlier than the post you found, and the earliest mention I've come across so far.

The account behind these posts, u/xdmuriloxd, also posted about a project called "osucraft" in April 2023: "I made circle game in cube game", and osucraft is documented as Matsubara's GitHub project (mymatsubara/osucraft). This makes it likely that both posts trace back to the same person.

One thing worth flagging: the wording of the r/Rplace post reads more like someone sharing something they came across than something they built themselves. I don't want to speculate on why that is, but given the apparent connection to Matsubara, it seemed worth mentioning here.

As you note, none of this is a reliable secondary source, and for what it's worth the current July 21, 2025 launch date in the article isn't sourced either. So this looks less like "new evidence vs. sourced claim" and more like neither date having a real citation. Might be worth removing the specific date, or softening it to something like "launched in mid-2025," until a reliable source turns up. ヲヲ (talk) 02:34, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Image Part 2

@Celtoi Your recent changes involving the new Gaza image seem to have caused the same WP:NFCC#3a problem that was discussed a while back. I'm not sure if we should update the image with that, or keep the old Tokyo one. But we can't have both.

Pinging @CrowbarCatalyst, uploader of the Gaza image, and @Tarlby. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 11:51, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Well I just decided to make both, since one side wants this image, and another side wants different image, so I thought it was logical to have two images, considering that Gaza image is really about political activism, and is really needed here for demostrative purposes. So I thought we can make an exception? From Alba, Celtoi, (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I think this one could get a pass since it has an actual specific purpose which is to portray activism on the site, though I would prefer an image showing text on the site since the current one just shows a bunch of flags. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 03:06, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Fair point, the Gaza image does seem relevant to the section it was moved to. I guess it meets 3a after all. I have struck out part of my initial comment due to this. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 13:32, 28 September 2025 (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:

• Wplace Israel void screenshot.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Source for The Swarm and void-based factions?

However, due to the growing amount of players using this practice to express themselves and the involvement of void-based factions like The Swarm (a community using a black void as their main support for artistic expression, usually known as the antagonistic community in reddit events), Wplace updated their rules to allow voiding with some conditions.

Pretty sure we need a source for this if not multiple;

1. I couldn't find any mention of The Swarm, nor any other mention of an in-game alliance system in the sources. Alliances are mentioned in the article about Andorra, but only in a matter outside of the website, like Discord servers. In my opinion, mentions of 'The Swarm' needs to be removed (or cited from a reliable source).
2. 'a community using a black void as their main support for artistic expression' sounds biased, and should be sourced and reworded or removed
3. I found no mention of a rule update to allow voiding on any of the sources. The current rules allow it, yes, but theres no mention that the old rules did not. (Note that the same criticism applies to the earlier mention: In the spirit of protecting users' creations, the rules of Wplace used to state that voiding was prohibited.I)
4. Heavy reference to voiding as 'artistic expression' across the voids section, without a source and over and over; to me this reads as both biased language and unnecessary fluff. It's better to reword this by saying that it is 'seen by X' as artistic expression, providing a source as well.
5. 'Unfortunately this caused...' same as above
6. 'This progressively caused voids and the communities associated with them to be seen as bad.' By who, and what is the source?

I am still new to Wikipedia editing, so I'd be happily proven wrong about these, but just from my experience of using Wikipedia over years, its missing key things that almost every Wikipedia article has. I'd love for a more experienced editor to comment on this in case some of my criticism is wrong.

Thank you! Noamyc (talk) 18:22, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for correcting what I might have gotten wrong or appear biased when I wrote these parts. I wrote most of it from experience, and thought I added the "citation needed" tag where it was needed (my bad if I forgot, the intent was really not to make it biased).

Unfortunately discord messages cannot be linked as direct sources, unless a media use it. I think it's the same for reddit, and most sources for the swarm (and voids in general) as well as their activities are there. We could maybe provide images to show how voids are sometimes used for art instead of destroying, but I'm not sure if it can count as a source at all to be honest.

Voiding was indeed prohibited, however I didn't check if there is an archived version of the rules of wplace to source it. And there's discord messages from admins of the site encouraging people to fight voids... Etc. Same problem as before, no direct accessible sources...

I believe this source issue will result in a lot of info to be removed from the wiki article, if it doesn't get entirely removed. Thank you again for helping to make it better and hope it will stay on Wikipedia! Coco chz (talk) 21:27, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

If I am mistaken and voiding wasn't prohibited, my apologies and I want to be proven wrong Coco chz (talk) 21:29, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

No problem, just trying to maintain it as well as possible. I sent it to a more experienced editor to review but I don't believe they've gotten to it yet.

I don't believe direct images can count as sources, as per Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources, the closest example is a painting under "Primary Sources should be used carefully", it explains that the image itself can be used as a source to describe that is in the image, but not as interpretation, which means that, if we didn't have the article about andorra as a source with a definition of voiding, we could have an image of a void as a source for what a void is, but we can't use it to classify it as artwork or not, as thats heavily interpretive, as far as I understand.

If you want to include references to it being art or not, you would need a source from a Reputable source giving an opinion piece about it, and provided from a Neutral point of view, probably written as something like "According to A, Voiding is [Artistic/Not Artistic/Creative/Not Creative], because of reasons XYZ", and it would require that both perspectives be explored to be valid.

I do believe voiding was prohibited, which is why I kept it with the citation needed tag there, but I wasnt able to find an archived version of the Code of Conduct to source it, which is why I added it to the talk page (in case someone else has it)

I don't know if The Swarm itself is notable enough to be mentioned on the page in general, considering Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), an organisation needs to be mentioned in multiple reliable sources to be considered for its own article, so the link shouldn't have been made red to link to an empty article, and Undue weight, as I'm not sure if The Swarm is large enough to be mentioned by name on the page, especially without a source. Afaik, though these rules are broader, A source about The Swarm needs to mention both The Swarm and say how notable it is to voiding in wplace. Noamyc (talk) 22:10, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Inconsistent regional spellings

This article uses inconsistent British and American spellings. 2600 etc (talk) 21:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Replace the current screenshot with a more recent image?

I think the current Tokyo screenshot in the infobox should be replaced with a more recent image. The previous discussion about the Moscow image seems to have been about avoiding multiple non-free screenshots that served the same purpose, rather than establishing that the Tokyo image should permanently remain there. Replacing Tokyo with a newer screenshot would still leave the article with only one general Wplace image, so I don't see how that creates the same NFCC 3a issue.

The current screenshot dates from when Wplace was only about a month old, while the London image shows the site after more than a year of development and gives a better impression of what the canvas looks like now. The site has been running for over a year, I see no reason why the image should be from the start of the site and not a recent image when the site is actively running and useable. I am not suggesting adding another decorative image, only replacing the existing one with a more representative example. If there was a separate consensus specifically that the infobox must use Tokyo, could someone link to that discussion? I see no reason why it must be an image of Tokyo when any number of locations, including Brazil (The developer's country) and the Gaza Strip (Example of political activism) at a minimum both seem like better examples. Gauzecard (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2026 (UTC)