so Will has this vision™, right? he sees all these kids Vecna’s Demo-creepazoids have already snatched, arranged in like… twelve neat little horror cupcakes. but THEN there’s this ONE EMPTY SPOT in the middle. the VIP square. the Beyoncé circle. the “special boy goes HERE” plaque.

and my brain immediately went: oh that’s for Will.

because tell me why after the vision he goes full art-kid mode, paints this giant Mind Flayer-looking mural with all the little child storage units AND a big dramatic “CENTER OF TRAUMA” section??? tell me that’s not suspicious.

Especially this shot:

plus we STILL haven’t seen that trailer shot:

Vecna literally called him the prototype. PROTOTYPE!! as in “beta-tested supernatural boy who already has powers, thanks for participating in our early access program.”

so yeah I’m 97% convinced the Upside Down has a Will-shaped assigned seat, and Vecna’s plan is just him holding a clipboard like,

“okay children, alphabetized by trauma… and Will goes right in the center so the vibes are symmetrical.”

Eyes on the skis

Four eyes = four deaths = Vecna

He was also watching Max:

“He was so attuned to the forces of nature that many thought that he [mike’s dnd character] would become a ranger or even a druid. But his grandfather was a knight and his father was a knight. So a knight he had to become.”

So a knight he HAD TO become.

im sick.

Not to mention that his mission as a knight is to protect Elven wizard Eleven who is connected to the Eldertree.

and im just gonna leave mike’s s4 dnd hfc character idea here:

this is so heartbreaking.

And let’s not forget: “A paladin who has broken a vow typically seeks absolution from a cleric who shares his or her faith or from another paladin of the same order.” -Dnd player’s handbook

In conclusion, mike’s forced conformity and queerness have never been clearer!!

Thank you for reading! Xx 💙

full pages:

In this scene, El asks the boys what a “friend” is and they explain it to her. They tell her and it’s wholesome. Then Lucas performs a spit swear with Dustin and it’s funny. This conversation was just leading up to a funny bit between the two! Right?

Wrong. Oh my god, WRONG.

I was like actually kicking myself when I realised I missed this detail not just on the first watch but on the second as well.

(I should have put a trigger warning in earlier but I didn’t so I’m editing it in now- TW for: homophobia, attempted suicide, bullying, reference to the AIDS crisis)

“Friend?”

“Yeah, friend: Will?”

El doesn’t understand what a friend is so Lucas gives the example of Will.

“What… is friend?”

“Is she serious?”

Dustin shrugs

“Um… A friend is someone—”

“—Is someone that you’d do anything for”

Lucas specifically referred to Will in his example of a friend. When El asks him to expand on their bond, he struggles to elaborate and seems exasperated with her questions. Dustin isn’t much better. He doesn’t seem to care much for answering her and they both chalk it up to the weirdo being weird.

Before Lucas can even begin his clumsy explanation, Mike jumps in with

“—Is someone that you’d do anything for”

Which is. Wow. He says it so simply, so bluntly, so instantly and he looks overjoyed at the opportunity to talk about his loyalty to not just Will specifically but also the rest of his friends.

And, bless him, he’s literally bouncing on the spot when he says it. This scene is adorable but it’s also kind of heartbreaking, especially when you take into account when Mike tried to end his life at Sattler Quarry to save Dustin’s baby teeth.

He would literally do anything for his friends. This isn’t hyperbole, this is Mike being excited to show El, his new friend, that he’s loyal and protective. He’s not exaggerating when he’s saying he would do anything because friends don’t lie.

And the rest of his friends know this. When Mike is about to jump, Dustin begs him not to because he knows Mike and he knows just how important loyalty and being a protector to his friends is to him.

But the way he says this:

“Someone you would do anything for” It’s like he’s beaming with pride for his friends. He’s ecstatic at the idea of calling them his friends and being able to be there for them, to protect them, and is proud of them for just being themselves.

Obviously, this could include the entire party, especially with how it relates to Dustin and Mike ‘protecting him’ at Sattler Quarry.

But the fact that Dustin immediately follows this up with:

“You lend them your cool stuff like comic books and trading cards”

Okay so maybe we are still talking specifically about Will. In the first episode, Will and Dustin race and Will, the snarky little shit (affectionate), declares that Dustin owes him a comic. This is. This is a pretty blatant reference to Will and Dustin’s friendship.

What he says is also a lot tamer than Mike’s declaration of undying loyalty which reflects Dustin and Will’s friendship vs Mike and Will’s status as besties for the resties. Quite literally.

Besties for the resties.

We should also take into account the fact that Mike most likely didn’t just jump off the cliff only to save Dustin’s baby teeth after seeing the person he would do anything for’s limp body being pulled out of the water. He would do anything for them both.

But the fact that in some sick alternate universe Will Byers was found dead in the quarry and 12-year-old Mike’s body was found there days later should be enough evidence to be honest.

And if El hadn’t have found Mike and Dustin when she did, this would have been their reality. And Mike knew this was an almost certainty, unaware that he would be saved, and he jumped anyways.

And how does that look? In a conservative small town where no major crime ever happens, the adults spread rumours of a 12-year-old Will Byers being hate crimed for being gay after going missing instead of having any compassion towards him or his family because of this child’s supposed sexuality. His body is found not long after he goes missing and within days, the boy he was rumoured to be so close with jumps in after him and dies.

And let’s be honest, Will most likely didn’t get this much shit for his alleged queerness because he liked art or was quieter than most. He may have gotten picked on at school but for his parents to pick up on this? Lonnie was a bastard which is standard I guess. Common knowledge. Like the quarry meaning certain death thing. We knew that. Maybe he just gave him a hard time because he didn’t like baseball (Insert coded heart-to-heart with Jonathan and Will destroying Castle Byers with a baseball bat because he thought his feelings towards Mike were childish).

But for Joyce to bring this up to Hop instead of omitting both slurs and just leaving it at “he’s a sensitive kid” or just her most relentless “find him”s? For her to avoid the question when Hop asks whether or not Will is gay? Huh.

Most probably, he was really- suspiciously- close with a male friend. A male best friend. A little too close and a little too affectionate and for a little longer than is normal for boys to be so close with each other. Maybe this best friend even thinks that befriending Will was “the best thing he’s ever done”.

Mike was willing to die. That’s not fucking normal.

His best friend went missing and bear in mind Mike had little to no evidence that Will was alive at this point. He was presumed dead. Mike was 12 years old when he tried to kill himself. You can’t just chalk this up to trying to save Dustin’s baby teeth.

“You make that jump from this height, that water turns into cement. Hits you like a ton of bricks, break every damn bone in your body.” -Hopper

Mike understood that he was going to die. Outside the fact that it’s common sense and probably common knowledge in a small town, where he’s probably been warned by parents and teachers not to play too close to the quarry, it’s basic physics. He’s a physics nerd. He knew that he would die and he still went through with it.

The fact that they emphasise just how brutal Mike’s end would have been by having Hopper stand there and explain in graphic detail what would happen if someone fell over the edge? And then they send the point home further by having Mike weigh his options for a good while before making the decision to ignore Dustin’s pleas and ,I don’t know, any will that he has left to live? Is insane. No pun intended.

I don’t think I will ever get over the quarry scene. Mike jumps off to ‘save’ Dustin and possibly to join Will, out of love and out of loyalty, but also out of lonliness. Fucking insane. Especially with how that would have looked in a conservative town during the AIDS crisis, if El hadn’t interfered. And how Dustin must have felt after he begged Mike to stay alive for him and saw Mike actively ignore him and try to sacrifice himself to save him.

So yeah. Mike would do anything for them both, to a concerning degree.

But back to S1E2, El asked what a friend was. Lucas hesitated. Mike excitedly said some deep shit. Dustin followed up with something more lighthearted but still painful (lowkey imagining how he must’ve felt after failing to get Will home safe, and then later get Mike not to jump) and—

“—And they never break a promise”

Mike when I catch you Mike.

What promise could Mike be referencing here? Friends don’t lie, perhaps? Yes. That. That’s like the only option at this point, I fear.

And we’re back to Mike specifically describing his relationship with Will. How do I figure this? It’s established right off the bat.

S1E1- Will chucks the die somewhere and he rolls lower than thirteen. Lucas tells him it doesn’t count if Mike doesn’t see it. Lucas is willing to lie. Lucas is willing to break the promise. Mike is specifically referring to his relationship to Will here.

“It was a seven.”

“Huh?”

“The roll: it was a seven. The Demogorgon. It got me. See you tomorrow.”

Will dgaf about winning the campaign if it means lying to Mike. He would never break his promise. (Do not bring up the Season 4 painting right now istg this is pre-the-puberty-amplifying-internalised-homophobia-thing (and also I could go on a whole rant about what Will meant by “ripping of the band aid” there so lmk if you guys would be interested in that))

Immediately, within the first eight minutes of the first episode of the first season of Stranger Things, it is established that Mike and Will do not fucking lie to each other no matter what and they have a bond much stronger with each other than with the other two boys.

What did Will say again?

✅ The roll was a seven.

✅ The demogorgon got him.

❌ He will see Mike the next day.

Oh. Okay. That’s not like. Blatant foreshadowing or anything. This might be a reach but I feel like the fact that Will never lies to Mike but told him that he would see him tomorrow, then went missing, may have amplified Mike’s desire to find him faster or at least served as a way to communicate to the audience that Mike and Will hold their promises dearly and if Will says he’ll see Mike tomorrow, Mike will do everything in his power to see him as soon as possible and this is made further tragic by his attempt to join him at the bottom of the quarry.

Maybe a reach. I’m confident about everything else though so who gaf. Let a girl have fun.

“—Especially when there’s spit.”

“Spit?”

“A spit swear means—Puh—you never break your word. Its a bond”

Comic relief for all the devastated re-watchers, classic. This scene definitely wasn’t intended to be sad but I’m a sap, I fear. Plus the absurdity of Lucas’ spit swear and how seriously he talks about it contrasts how bubbly Mike is when he talks about promises when he is the one who holds loyalty so dearly that he is willing to give up his life for it.

Oh my god, I’ve just had a thunker of a thought. It’s. Oh my god. I’ve had a revelation. But it’s 5 am and I’ve been trying to put my thoughts into words for like a good couple of hours now so. It’s to do with the spit swear thing and how it relates to Mike’s asexual treatment of El until Will’s disappearance. Oh my god. Stay with me. It sounds like such a reach and it may well be but I genuinely unironically think I’m onto something here. Especially with how comedically Lucas’ bits are played out compared to Mike’s. Holy shit. Aaand it’s nearly 6 am. Well. I’ll edit this for basic grammar mistakes later, it's fine.

Okay, I’m gonna end this part here so just let me know if you guys want a part 2 and I’ll tag some lucky individuals in it maybe.

Also let me know if colour coding the characters’ names was too jarring or something? I feel like it helped me get through writing this monstrosity but low-key idk how the rest of everyone will feel sooo just lmk :)

-he said he’s proud of Will in S5 because he stops taking shit from everyone (his exact words) and stand ups for himself

-there’ll be no Stranger Things sequels after S5 and he doesn’t want to play Will again because the ending is too good

-he said he wants to be as good as a person as Will is

-after ST5 he wants to do film/theater (mentioned sadie) and no tv shows

-he, at some point asked the audience “Which character do you think will die in S5?” and “Whats yall fav ship?”

-he said we’ll cry a lot at the end

-in S2 he used to look up videos of ppl having seizures for the possession scene, he only got an acting coach for S5

-S2 was the hardest season to film

-his fav fans are south americans and italians

-his fav place in Italy is Naples (he visited Italy three times)

-he wants to go on Love Island

-he’s afraid of people high expectations for this season

-he’s always wanted to play Spiderman

A story about a potential Netflix plant, misinformation on a Family Guy fanon Wikipedia page, and what this all means for "Stranger Things: Tales of '85" and conformitygate.

This is my second attempt at breaking this story, it's very complex and layered and while I had the right hunch the first time, I did not check my sources carefully enough. I'm not claiming Stranger Things: Tales of '85 is fake, just that there are many inconsistencies surrounding it. Thanks to @disastertourwaterdeepedition, @mel01837, @livinglikelarries, @nuffit, @how-obvious and @arubikhandy0707 from the conformitygate discord server for fact checking and helping me gather the proper information!

Edit: Clarification on the source of the Twitter picture

Table of Contents:

A. Stranger Reports

A1. The Reddit Post

A2. The Twitter Post

B. ACTUAL OFFICIAL INFORMATION (thanks to @disastertourwaterdeepedition )

C. Collider: Trust me bro (thanks to @how-obvious )

D. The Shenanigans of a potential anti-byler Netflix plant (thanks to @nuffit and @arubikhandy0707 )

E. Nikki Baxter's mysterious appearance on Family Guy fanon wikipedia (thanks to @livinglikelarries and @how-obvious )

F. Summary and Concluding remarks

A. Stranger Reports

This deep dive starts with the discovery that the articles with the exact same information started popping up, mostly on the 28th of January (2026), one of the dates on my predicted promotional timeline for Stranger Things content.

They all detail how a new character, Nikki Baxter, in the upcoming "Stranger Things: Tales of 85", was sparking controversy, because she would significantly alter the Stranger Things story and time line [paraphrased].

Screen Rant (Jan 26, 2026):

Dexerto (Jan 28, 2026):

International Business Times UK (Jan 28, 2026):

https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/who-nikki-baxter-tales-85-tinker-netflix-using-rewrite-stranger-things-why-fans-are-1774471

Collider (Jan 28, 2026)

The odd thing was, most of these reports either didn't list their sources at all, or were referring to a Reddit post and/or a Twitter post. Both of those were posted in the time span of one day and are very interesting for different reasons, to say the least.

A1. The Reddit Post

It was posted on Jan 24, 2026. You can fact check this by clicking the link below:

Overall, the post is critical and the comments echo the same sentiment. The source of this post most likely is the synopsis of the Stranger Things: Tales from '85 Chapter Book, listed by Penguin Random House (publisher).

On there, it says the story is for ages 6 to 9. This is pretty weird, as the story officially takes place between S2 and S3 and would require context from the original Stranger Things show, but that one has always been for at least 13+.

A2. The Twitter post

This post haunts me. It was also posted on Jan 24 (2026) on Twitter. This is the ONLY post used by mainstream media that has a supposed picture of Nikki Baxter. Unlike the Reddit Post and the Chapter Book, who refer to the new character as just "Nikki", this Twitter Post uses the character's full name, and this is where all the recent articles are getting it from.

As we can see, the picture is pretty bad quality-wise. It seems like it is a photo taken sneakily with a (phone) camera from another screen. Edit: it was altered to look that way. According to this tweet, it shows a character, Nikki Baxter, wrapped in vines. It raises four questions:

Where does the name Nikki Baxter come from?

Why do people call her "a tinker"?

Why does "BradleysBigBuy" have this picture?

Why do people trust "BradleysBigBuy" as a credible source?

The first two questions will be answered in "Collider: trust me bro" and the last two questions will be answered in "The shenanigans of a potential anti-byler Netflix plant". Before we get into that, we need to know what information is 100% trustworthy.

B. ACTUAL OFFICIAL INFORMATION

Besides the Chapter Book for Stranger Things: Tales of '85, we have two other pieces of official information about the animation.

The official announcement trailer on the official Netflix YouTube Channel, Nov 6 (2025):

This is the ONLY teaser trailer existing of this animation. @disastertourwaterdeepedition works in a related industry and has concluded, using their expertise in the field, that this trailer looks more like a display of concept art than an actual finished product. All the other trailers on YouTube are fan made, probably with AI (ew). Note: this announcement trailer does NOT include Nikki Baxter.

The IMBD page with information on the director, writers, voice cast, producers, sound department, visual effects team, animation department and music composer:

Note: Only Episode 1, of unknown length, has been confirmed. The character list does NOT include Nikki Baxter. There is NO voice actor that is assigned to voice Nikki Baxter.

Edit: the original picture of Nikki Baxter has been found by @digitalembersphinx. It was posted on Twitter on Nov 6 (2026), at the same time the announcement trailer was released. My point still stands: why did mainstream news articles collectively source @BradleysBigBuy 's shitty edit and why is @Updates_SThings the only source of information on this picture?

C. Collider: trust me bro

I traced back the first time Nikki Baxter was described by full name and as "a tinker" to Collider, through the Wikipedia page for Stranger Things: Tales from '85:

This is an article from Jun 11 (2025). Apparently, a sneak peak was shown at the Annecy Animation Festival in France, accessible to invited guests and the press, but not for the general public. And, the author of this article took some... rough notes.

This is where the name Nikki Baxter and her being called "a tinker" come from. In the notes it's also mentioned that the Duffer brothers keep their cards close to the chest. Maybe too close, considering Nikki Baxter has still not been shown in the announcement trailer half a year later, Nov 6 (2025). Not to say that this is not a trustworthy source, but it is surprising this is where this crucial information stems from: word of mouth. Where is Nikki Baxter if she was shown at Annecy Animation Festival? Why did we only get a couple of minutes of concept art in the announcement trailer, when it's half a year later since the Jun 2025 Collider article? Why is her voice actress still not listed on Wikipedia or IMDB?

What's even more interesting though, is that the description from the article of Nikki Baxter's features, "pinkish hair that's short on the sides", matches the Twitter Post.

D. The shenanigans of a potential anti-byler Netflix plant

We return to examine the cursed @BradleysBigBuy. Since the picture in their post matches the description of the Jun 2025 Collider article, let's evaluate if @BradleysBigBuy is posting leaks or just misinformation. It was verified that this account was created in May 2025 and has an instagram of the same name. The name of the Twitter account has changed three times, the last alteration being in July 2025. The handle itself is quite interesting already, it references Bradley's Big Buy, which is a Stranger Things in-universe supermarket located in Hawkins. The WSQK actually promotes ads from it (about one minute into the Twitter video):

Most of their retweets and likes are quite regular for a Stranger Things fan, perhaps with an anti-byler slant. However, occasionally, they throw in posts that seem to be leaks or clues:

This wouldn't be noteworthy in and of itself, as many Stranger Things fan accounts exist that create fake leaks or AI edits and try to hint at conformitygate.

However, together with this being the ONLY source used by mainstream media with the Nikki Baxter picture, it reveals a pattern: the account holder might be somewhat in the know or has some access to BTS information. Nikki Baxter is such a deep cut, it is confusing why someone would doctor an image of her... Unless this is a real leak. Edit: This account did tamper with the OG picture. But...

What's even worse though, regardless if this is a misinformation or a leak account, is that mainstream news outlets are citing it as if it's an official source of information!!! It's honestly infuriating.

This would be the place to wrap up this story, if we didn't stumble onto more conveniently placed misinformation. We have to talk about Nikki Baxter's mysterious appearance on Family Guy fanon Wikipedia.

As an aside, here are a couple of arguments for why @BradleysBigBuy could be a leak or even a Netflix plant account. This is not conclusive evidence.

- It is the ONLY source used by mainstream media of the Nikki Baxter picture and it matches a previous description of her from the June 2025 Collider article.

- The only picture of Nikki Baxter is of her being wrapped in vines... a plant. (idea by @nuffit )

- Most main stream news outlets used it as a "trustworthy" source of information in their reports around Jan 28 (2026). Either they collectively lost their minds and journalistic integrity or they know more than we do about it and were instructed to use it behind the scenes by the Netflix and Stranger things PR and social media teams.

- Through a conformitygate lense: This account is named after a Stranger Things in-universe supermarket, Bradley's Big Buy. It is trying to sell us BTS information. In the same way, the supermarket sells its ads on the semi-fictional radio show the Squawk (WSQK), which is run by Vance and Mindy Flare (Vecna and the Mind Flayer). That radio show is known for selling a false narrative in the same way the entirety of Stranger Things Season 5 has done. Is this Twitter account trying to sell Stranger Things: Tales of '85 to us? Is it trying to convince us that byler is not real? (some thoughts inspired by @arubikhandy0707 )

E. Nikki Baxter's mysterious appearance on Family Guy fanon Wikipedia

This might be the wildest and most confusing find while going down the Nikki Baxter rabbit hole. Mistakes were made in the first version of this post due to the nature of this particular misinformation. Thanks to @how-obvious for pointing it out to me. While looking up Nikki Baxter on the preferred search engine Duckduckgo, a Family Guy fanon Wikipedia page pops up that wrongfully names a character from Rooster Teeth's web series Camp Camp as Nikki Baxter instead of her real name, just "Nikki":

If you follow the Family Guy fanon Wikipedia paper trail, you first encounter the story of Max and Nikki from Camp Camp, where each episode they try to escape a summer camp, and fail. This parallels the story of Max and Holly, trying to escape Vecna's mind, dubbed Camasotz, and fail (potentially). A classic conformitygate reading.

Then, eventually you come across this piece of information:

This does NOT happen in "Cat Fight". @livinglikelarries and her friend had taken the arduous task of watching Season 18 Episode 5 of Family Guy. They confirmed the following:

- Camp Camp and Nikki and Max are NOT featured in S18E05.

- The B plot of Cat Fight is Chris, Lois and Meg ending up in some Christian cult and having to escape. Then, Meg goes home with a Japanese family, thinking she's finally free from her OG family and the Christian cult. But, she actually realizes that she ended up in an oppressive family yet again and is part of an anime. (Angry she's in another prison world, she kills the family. Edit: last part only acc to the fanon wiki btw)

Meg has the same name as the protagonist of A Wrinkle in Time. Meg being stuck again and again in worlds she doesn't want to be in (og family, cult, japanese family, anime), parallels both Camasotz from A Wrinkle in Time and and Vecna's mind in Stranger Things. Another classic conformitygate reading.

Mistakenly taking the information on the Family Guy fanon wikipedia page at face value, leads you into one direction only: interpreting Nikki Baxter as more conformitygate proof!

Of course, knowing that this is misinformation, we cannot make those parallels. Or can we? Anyone can edit the Family Guy fanon wikipedia page, since the majority of fanon wikis are fanfic projects anyway. The question is: Was this a coincidental mistake, a troll or intentional bait?

That's left up to the reader to decide, but consider that the combination of names, Nikki Baxter, does not exist outside of the Stranger Things: Tales of '85 context.

F. Summary and concluding remarks

We stumbled upon multiple glaring oddities:

0. Many articles report the exact same information and criticism on Jan 28 (2026), pointing out the weirdness surrounding Stranger Things: Tales of '85 and a supposed new character, Nikki Baxter.

1. She is only mentioned as Nikki in one official source: a synopsis of Chapter Book for Stranger Things: Tales of '85, which claims to have 6-9 year olds as a target audience, while context is needed from the show's content that is rated 13+. This Chapter Book was referenced by a Reddit post on Jan 24 (2026) that is one of the two sources in most articles reporting on the animation.

2. In both an official announcement trailer on Netflix's YouTube channel and on the IMDB page for the animation, she is not mentioned, does not have a voice actor and no character design. There is also only one episode listed.

3. There is one mention of her first and last name and a small description of her character design in a dubious Collider article from June 2025.

4. Only one picture of her exists, where she's wrapped in vines. It was posted on Jan 24 (2026), on a suspicious Twitter account called @BradleysBigBuy. This is one of the two sources for most articles reporting on the animation.

5. A Family Guy fanon Wikipedia page lists misinformation about Nikki from Rooster Teeth's web series Camp Camp that conveniently creates parallels between A Wrinkle in Time, Camasotz and Vecna's mind.

As Mr. "There are no coincidences", in my opinion, Nikki Baxter is one of the many puzzle pieces in the Stranger Things meta narrative, social experiment and ARG. I urge the reader to try and explain why we are observing all of this at the exact same time. Just this one character is involved in 5 major inconsistencies, that cannot really be explained outside of a conformitygate perspective.

Either you believe all news sources are spreading misinformation by sourcing an AI/fake image, or you think they are referencing an actual leak account and/or Netflix plant Edit: OR THEY ARE SOURCING A HIGHLY FAN EDITED PHOTO, WHILE THERE IS CONCEPT ART ON ANOTHER MORE CREDIBLE TWITTER ACCOUNT

Regardless, why are news outlets not being corrected or given additional context by Netflix and the Stranger Things social media and PR teams?

While I don't think the animation doesn't exist at all, I am actually quite certain there is an animation of some kind due to the IMDB page, I believe that the secrecy around it and the listing of only one episode of unknown length is at least suspicious, considering this animation should have already been months if not a year in the making.

The minimal content we've been provided, the couple of frames and concept art, the Chapter Book with no cover art, that one Twitter "leak", it points to the animation not quite being what it seems. Is it perhaps a narrative device inside this Stranger Things ARG, rather than a television show for 6-9 year olds? I don't know for sure, but I have gathered facts that seem to point towards that conclusion.

Especially the negative focus on Nikki Baxter in the press and the misinformation about Nikki from Rooster Teeth's Camp Camp leads me to believe we are supposed to notice that something's off. Rather than a bunch of coincidences, these inconsistencies seem intentional and purposeful.