Talk:Roblox player uncovers cheating, awarded Guinness World Record
Review of revision 4971109 [Not Ready]
 |
Revision 4971109 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 15:19, January 10, 2026 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: This article raises two neutrality concerns:
I also agree with Taichi (here) that the article was likely written by Delaere himself, which suggests a potential conflict of interest due to self-promotion.
Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Revision 4971109 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 15:19, January 10, 2026 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: This article raises two neutrality concerns:
I also agree with Taichi (here) that the article was likely written by Delaere himself, which suggests a potential conflict of interest due to self-promotion.
Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
-- Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 15:19, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
Information and rewrite request
Information is requested:
1) I agree that clarification is required from @Kannotlogin about image. Who photographed you? The photogramer owns the copyright, and needs to confirm release rights. See Wikimedia Commons home page for details of this requirement. (note from Michael.C.Wright's review above)
2) If you are or you are affiliated with article subject, please clarify. (note from Michael.C.Wright's review above)
Rewrite is requested:
1) Update photo author and licence if the images were not photographed by the uploader. (note from Michael.C.Wright's review above)
2) Edit to Special:MyPage by the article author to disclose the conflict of interest, if this is the case. (note from Michael.C.Wright's review above)
3) Date is missing in two English language sources. I request that date is added into the first paragraph and is verified by at least two of the provided sources. See WN:IP for details of this requirement.
Please do these changes immediately, and re-submit for review. Thank you. Gryllida 20:52, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hi @Gryllida. I have completed the requested changes:
- 1. I have edited my User Page to disclose the COI.
- 2. I have added the date (January 7, 2026) to the first paragraph.
- 3. I have sent the VRT authorization email for the photos.
- Please review the article. Kannotlogin (talk) 17:58, 12 January 2026 (UTC)
Stale
19 November 2025 BigKrow (talk) 18:08, 12 January 2026 (UTC)
- While the GWR record date is indeed November 19, 2025, the news event reported here is the reinstatement of the record following the anti-cheat investigation. This decision and the media coverage (Kotaku, PCGamesN) occurred in January 2026. Therefore, this is current news, not stale. Kannotlogin (talk) 18:26, 12 January 2026 (UTC)
Quinten Delaere
It wasn't him it was schlep BigKrow (talk) 18:27, 12 January 2026 (UTC)
Is this Even reliable news?
i don't think so, Roblox news huh? @Kannotlogin BigKrow (talk) 12:51, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
You can't write about yourself
BigKrow (talk) 13:13, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
- Background An 18-year-old Roblox speedrunner named Quinten Delaere (also known online as kannotlogin) was competing in an official Guinness World Records-linked speedrun event on the Roblox game Ultimate Easy Obby. The challenge was to finish the obstacle course as fast as possible. �
- Wikinews
- 🚩 Fraudulent Records Appeared After hours of practice, Quinten set a fast time of 5:48.96 — which he believed should be the record. However, just before the event deadline, three other accounts suddenly posted times about six seconds faster, an improvement that was mathematically impossible under normal gameplay for a run that already had “optimized every corner and jump.” �
- Wikinews
- 🔍 Investigation and Evidence Rather than accepting defeat, Quinten launched a detailed investigation into the suspicious runs. His findings included: �
- Wikinews
- Impossible badge timestamps: Some accounts unlocked badges out of logical order, suggesting teleports or hacks. �
- Wikinews
- Missing game-verified indicators: Legitimate runs automatically award a special Guinness World Record gold medal accessory — the suspicious accounts lacked it. �
- Wikinews
- Expired/inconsistent inventory items: Some accounts held items that shouldn’t have been attainable then, hinting at script-enabled unlocks. �
- Wikinews
- Video and frame-by-frame analysis: Quinten calculated theoretical minimum times based on physics and showed the suspect runs were too fast to be real. �
- Wikinews
- 🏆 Guinness Reinstates the True Record Armed with this technical evidence, Quinten submitted a report to Guinness World Records. After reviewing it internally, Guinness disqualified the fraudulent times and officially validated Quinten’s run as the true world record, awarding him the certificate. �
- Wikinews
- 🎮 Significance This story highlights how a dedicated player used data analysis and meticulous investigation to hold others accountable for cheating and help a major record-keeping organization correct its listings — showing that even in gaming communities, evidence and integrity can make a difference. �
- Wikinews
- If you want more details on how Quinten proved the fraud mathematically or what skills he used, I can break that down too! BigKrow (talk) 13:14, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Kannotlogin BigKrow (talk) 13:14, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
- User is spamming talk page with ai content.
- User fails to realize that the text is writing using legitimate sources.
- A request has been done for a re-write about the article using a different fair opinion.
- This user should stop spamming and rather help us improve the article using legitimate sources as asked. Kannotlogin (talk) 13:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
Formal Declaration: COI and Original Reporting
Per the request of administrator @Michael.C.Wright, I am making this formal declaration to comply with Wikinews policies:
1. Conflict of Interest (COI): I, Quinten Delaere (User:Kannotlogin), declare that I am the subject of this article. I am the person who performed the speedrun and the forensic investigation described in the text. 2. Original Reporting (WN:OR): This article is submitted under the Original Reporting policy. I have direct access to the raw data, evidence, and correspondence with Guinness World Records. I am available to verify any details required by reviewers.
I have also added the {{Original reporting}} template to the main article page. I will refrain from editing the article directly where possible to respect neutrality, and I will await reviewer guidance. Kannotlogin (talk) 14:38, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you. Because you have identified yourself as a real person, we'll need to verify that. The easiest and fastest way is for you to send an email to Scoop@wn-reporters.org from an email address in your public domain quintendelaere.be identifying that Kannotlogin is Quinten Delaere.
- OR gets a bit of a break on WN:Freshness but not WN:Source. Any statement of fact in the article still needs to be verified. Since you are writing about yourself, we'll need to be incredibly transparent, accurate, and neutral in the article to avoid bias or the appearance of self-promotion.
- To that end, I strongly recommend you strip motive entirely from the article and report only verifiable actions and claims. For example, I would rewrite the entire third paragraph to something like the following: Delaere conducted a digital forensic analysis and compiled a report alleging that the new records were fraudulent. The report cited three technical points.
- @Gryllida, please weigh in here if you disagree or have other advice.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 18:02, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for the guidance regarding the Original Reporting policy.
- I have sent the verification email to Scoop@wn-reporters.org from my domain address (@quintendelaere.be).
- I have rewritten some parts of the article to strip all "motive" and strictly report verifiable actions and claims, using the exact phrasing you suggested for the third paragraph.
- Regarding verification: I cross-referenced the facts in the article with the international sources listed (Kotaku [EN], PCGamesN [EN], JeuxVideo [FR], Meristation [ES], KW [NL]). While some additional sources were removed during previous suggestions by another user, the remaining sources should cover all the technical claims made in the text.
- Best regards, Quinten Kannotlogin (talk) 22:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
- An email was received confirming that Kannotlogin is Quinten Delaere.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 13:51, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for the guidance regarding the Original Reporting policy.
Pre Review
Status: Recommend publish
Version evaluated: 4973611
- Copyright:
Not evaluated - Newsworthiness:
Passed - Verifiability: Passed
- NPOV: Passed
- Style: Passed
Notes for author(s):
No notes provided for author
Notes for reviewer:
No notes provided for reviewer
This is a pre-review only and is not part of the official review process. A pre-review is meant to help the author or authors improve the article and increase the likelihood of it passing a formal review. This pre-review was not done by a reviewer and represents a recommendation that can be heeded or ignored.
--~2026-29099-8 (talk) 10:16, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
Review of revision 4973865 [Not Ready]
| |
Revision 4973865 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:48, January 14, 2026 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: I think we are very close to getting this published. However, the January 7th date is not supported in the four listed, non-paywalled sources. The KW article is behind a paywall and therefore not valid for Wikinews. Any statements solely supported by it should be removed. I removed two unsupported statements not related to the WN:5Ws that may have been supported by it. See the edit history for details. Without a source supporting that date, the article is stale, per WN:Freshness. Three of the articles that assert Delaere is finally the official winner were dated [published] before January 7, implying the Jan. 7 date is incorrect.
Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Revision 4973865 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:48, January 14, 2026 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: I think we are very close to getting this published. However, the January 7th date is not supported in the four listed, non-paywalled sources. The KW article is behind a paywall and therefore not valid for Wikinews. Any statements solely supported by it should be removed. I removed two unsupported statements not related to the WN:5Ws that may have been supported by it. See the edit history for details. Without a source supporting that date, the article is stale, per WN:Freshness. Three of the articles that assert Delaere is finally the official winner were dated [published] before January 7, implying the Jan. 7 date is incorrect.
Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
-- Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 16:48, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Michael.C.Wright I have updated the article based on your review and placed the {review} tag back.
- Removed Paywalled Info: I accepted your removal of the KW-sourced details.
- Date & Phrasing: You are correct that the major sources (Kotaku, etc.) are dated January 6, while the physical certificate was received earlier. To be factually accurate and align with the "Freshness" policy, I rephrased the lead to: "On January 6, 2026, international media reported that Quinten Delaere... had been officially recognized".
- This ensures the date matches the verifiable sources provided. Kannotlogin (talk) 17:24, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
Review of revision 4974067 [Passed]
 |
Revision 4974067 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:17, January 15, 2026 (UTC) with the following exceptions:
Comments by reviewer: Particular care was taken during review to manage the inherent conflict of interest by distinguishing Delaere’s own assertions—all of which are supported by listed sources—from media reporting and from Guinness World Records’ documented actions. While the article synthesizes multiple sources, it introduces no facts beyond those reported by independent publications and aims to present them in a neutral, verifiable manner, with careful consideration for WN:COI. Upon reconsideration, I am undoing my earlier OR assessment; authorship alone does not constitute original research, and the article does not introduce facts beyond what independent sources report. Despite being written by the subject, the article is not promotional because it reports only independently published information, clearly attributes assertions, and avoids advocacy or exaggeration, making it a COI-sensitive but policy-compliant synthesis article. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Revision 4974067 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:17, January 15, 2026 (UTC) with the following exceptions:
Comments by reviewer: Particular care was taken during review to manage the inherent conflict of interest by distinguishing Delaere’s own assertions—all of which are supported by listed sources—from media reporting and from Guinness World Records’ documented actions. While the article synthesizes multiple sources, it introduces no facts beyond those reported by independent publications and aims to present them in a neutral, verifiable manner, with careful consideration for WN:COI. Upon reconsideration, I am undoing my earlier OR assessment; authorship alone does not constitute original research, and the article does not introduce facts beyond what independent sources report. Despite being written by the subject, the article is not promotional because it reports only independently published information, clearly attributes assertions, and avoids advocacy or exaggeration, making it a COI-sensitive but policy-compliant synthesis article. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
-- Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 01:17, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
Award
Why is it blurred out? @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 13:29, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
- That might have been a request from Commons' VRT to conceal the GWR logo and Roblox imagery for copyright reasons. Both images have it.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 14:05, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
- Yes it was a request from Commons' VRT. Kannotlogin (talk) 13:48, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
Fyi
No need to add headings in article body, this should be inverted pyramid ideally not wikipedia. Cc @Kannotlogin regards, Gryllida 12:52, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
Delete
This user seems fishy to me, and he disappeared writes about himself Promotional big time then fights with me for deletion tags. What gives? @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 19:22, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
- The article was published and therefore isn't a candidate for {{Stale}} or WN:Speedy.
- I don't believe the article is promotional, as all of the content was already published by the articles listed in the Sources section, making it simply a synthesis article, albeit authored by the main subject of the article. The author was clear and forthright with the conflict of interest statement. They worked with and complied with requests from multiple reviewers.
- If you have a deletion request that falls under WN:DG, that should be posted following the guidance at WN:DR.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 20:11, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
- Another user pointed out they were promotional and both accounts have been blocked. @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
- This story is not notable enough for a news article. @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 23:51, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- Another user pointed out they were promotional and both accounts have been blocked. @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
Related discussions
- Wikinews:Deletion requests#Roblox player uncovers cheating, awarded Guinness World Record
- Category talk:Quinten Delaere#Fishy users (category since deleted)
- Wikinews:Admin action alerts/Archive 13#User:Kannotlogin edit warring with me
- Wikinews:Admin action alerts/Archive 13#Check User
- User talk:Michael.C.Wright/Archive 2#FYI
- Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kannotlogin
- es:Discusión:Jugador de Roblox expone fraude y reclama Récord Guinness
Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 16:05, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
Claude a.i results on kannotlogin
You're right to be skeptical. Looking at the search results more critically, the information does have a promotional quality to it - it reads like polished PR content rather than independent coverage. The sources appear to be press releases or promotional articles rather than investigative journalism.
@Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 14:07, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
Promotional now seen on PL Wikinews
https://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/18-letni_Belg_ujawnia_oszustwo_w_Roblox_i_zdobywa_rekord_%C5%9Bwiata
@Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 18:27, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- You need to report it there.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 21:33, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
My 2 cents
Yes, the Chinese edition of Wikinews also received a machine-translated submission, which was published after being manually revised locally. That approach was not entirely appropriate; however, when discussing whether there are issues with the article, it would be better to focus on the content of the article itself.
Personally, I don't really believe that “one must not write one’s own article” is an absolute principle. As I mentioned, if there is nothing wrong with the article itself, then at most an appropriate disclosure of interest should be required.
I am not familiar with the subject matter of the article or the relevant community context, but at present it appears to have sources and substantive content, and its news value seems acceptable (albeit niche). Of course, any improper conduct on the part of the author should be addressed separately.
It probably shouldn’t be subject to speedy deletion. Awaiting the outcome of the discussion… (after all, there are many participants in this discussion, so zhwn should be able to refer to it as well) ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 10:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Well, the layout and writing style of this article are indeed a bit strange... but perhaps this is something worth reporting in this field? If properly edited, this original material should be useful maybe. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 10:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Pre-archive note update
Before archiving this article, I updated the note at the top. Given the pending closure of the project, there will not be further opportunity for discussion.
As the reviewer, I have not sighted this change and am seeking brief community confirmation that the note and the article’s final status are acceptable, including that it was written by its subject.
@Heavy Water, @Bddpaux, @Acagastya — please weigh in or sight the change. Once confirmed, I will proceed with archiving.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 08:52, 3 April 2026 (UTC)
Removing image?
Quinten Delaere holding his official Guinness World Records certificate after the validation of his record. Image: Kannotlogin.
User doesn't exist? @Michael.C.Wright Don Don 22:59, 10 April 2026 (UTC) When you click on link of Kannotlogin. Don Don 23:00, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- He does indeed exist, just no userpage. Lofi Gurl (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
- He also got a wikinews article about roblox published, i think it's self promotional @Lofi Gurl Don Don 00:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- Shit, really? Lofi Gurl (talk) 00:49, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- What is the full story behind this? Lofi Gurl (talk) 00:50, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- The short version is Quinten Delaere is the real name of the user Kannotlogin. They authored an article (this one) for which they are the subject, and provided a formal COI as requested by Gryllida.
- I reviewed and published the article, determining that the article does not state anything that is not already stated in the listed source articles (i.e., nothing original—all statements are supported by independent sources).
- The long version is contained in a number of discussions, most of which are listed and linked here (above).
- After you've gotten up to speed with all of that, you are very much welcome to weigh in on this discussion regarding the proposed deletion of this article.
- As the publishing reviewer, I've done all I plan to do regarding documenting everything. If you, as an independent reviewer, think it should be retracted, I will not oppose that. If you think it can be kept as is, with the note, which is unsighted at the top of the article, then feel free to sight the note.
- If you take either action, I'll then close the request at WN:DR accordingly and we can move on.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 01:15, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- Every single request for deletion has been made by BigKrow. Why do we keep getting back to this? This users just want this article to be deleted with no valid reason.
- Also, why did you delete my category? Because you @Michael.C.Wright said it could stay because "we have plenty of categories that only have one article". This isn't really fair. This article and its category have been online for over 3 months. I don't get it why there is an issue... The only reason there keeps being an issue is the fact that user BigKrow aka "Don Don" keeps making it one.
- About the note. The note says "This article was written by its subject" that is not a 100% true. I did create the article but you have updated the article a lot so it is not really my text anymore.
- Could you please just let this go @Michael.C.Wright? and maybe bring back the category? Because this is not really fair to me. The user BigKrow keeps spamming this for deletion, etc... Like this thread. He starts by saying something stupid, then go aheads and talks again about the deletion of it. Also does he try to hide his Identity my changing "BigKrow" to "Don Don" visually and he probably planed this with @Lofi Gurl as can been seen on the talk page of Lofi Gurl (this last part isn't a 100% sure but it looks like it...) Kannotlogin (talk) 08:22, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- Holy shit are you fucking high dude? Where is there any indication that BigKrow and I plotted this together? Lofi Gurl (talk) 11:40, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- That answer alone. Kannotlogin (talk) 11:41, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- You been blocked on other wikis your just self promoting Roblox stuff @Kannotlogin Don Don 12:00, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not blocked. In fact, I'm an administrator on the VLS wiki. Check here [1] Kannotlogin (talk) 12:03, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- Delaere is originally from Meulebeke, Belgium. He has been described as a multitalented individual, balancing his studies at Ghent University with his professional interests in software development and acting. In interviews, he has spoken about the challenges of dealing with hackers.
- @Kannotlogin Don Don 12:08, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- Is that AI? 😂 Lofi Gurl (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not blocked. In fact, I'm an administrator on the VLS wiki. Check here [1] Kannotlogin (talk) 12:03, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for making me laugh! Lofi Gurl (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- You been blocked on other wikis your just self promoting Roblox stuff @Kannotlogin Don Don 12:00, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- That answer alone. Kannotlogin (talk) 11:41, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Kannotlogin, I did state that we have other categories containing only 1 article and I still believe the category was okay to have. However, @Heavy Water made that category empty and marked it for deletion. Given they are a long-time reviewer with an established reputation for a deep understanding of our policies, guidelines, and precedent, I tend to defer to their judgement. The note says "This article was written by its subject" that is not a 100% true.You are correct here but a note to inform our readers should still accompany the article. I propose the following updated note:
Note: the bold in the above won't be rendered in the note. It indicates we're currently on the page being linked.This article was initially created by its subject, who disclosed a conflict of interest. The content has since undergone review and substantive editing by other contributors. Further discussion about this article is available on its discussion page.
Also, fairness isn’t the standard here. My decisions are based on WN:DG, WN:NPOV, WN:COI, sourcing, etc...policies and guidelines.
My stance remains; if there is a policy-based issue with the article, it should be identified; otherwise, I see no valid reason to retract the article.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 15:20, 20 April 2026 (UTC)- @Michael.C.Wright, The updated note if good for me.
- I created the categorie so it could be linked to the wikidata. I did that so it would be easier to find the article back and for other languages. Kannotlogin (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
- Holy shit are you fucking high dude? Where is there any indication that BigKrow and I plotted this together? Lofi Gurl (talk) 11:40, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- He also got a wikinews article about roblox published, i think it's self promotional @Lofi Gurl Don Don 00:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- I have updated the note based on this discussion. As noted above, if a policy-based issue justifying retraction is identified or action is taken by another reviewer or admin, I will act in accordance with policy.
- If no policy-based rationale is provided and no action is taken regarding the current changes, pending closure of the project, I may proceed to self-sight the revisions and close the request on procedural grounds, consistent with WN:DG.Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Reviewer) 16:08, 20 April 2026 (UTC)