Collection2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, credited to a different artist). The original is #13; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
1,885
/ 10,000
wizards inscribed
18.9% of the collection ·
inscribing since Jul 2025 · latest inscription 29 Aug 2026
How to get whitelisted for the 10K collection?
Holding MIM or one of the 1,337 OG wizards qualifies
for the whitelist. Snapshot date to be announced.
Inscription progresssince the first inscription
In the mempoolinscribed, waiting for a block · artwork read straight from the pending transaction
unconfirmed
view
transaction ↗
Latest inscriptionsnewest first, straight from the chain
The sats underneathwhat each wizard is inscribed on
Magic Internet Money · inscription #70
the 70th inscription ever made ·
23 Jan 2023 · block 773,205
Every wizard is its child: each mint spends
#70’s UTXO in its reveal, and that spend is the on-chain proof
of parenthood, the same spend the mempool section watches for.
Ordinals are carved onto specific satoshis, and this collection’s sats carry history of their own: 1,113 of 1,885 wizards (59%) sit on sats from block 9, January 2009, the coins Satoshi Nakamoto sent Hal Finney in Bitcoin’s first transaction. The rest sit on ordinary 2013 sats. Decided per wizard, marked on every card, verifiable in any explorer.
Spent
inscribing0.277 BTC
27,660,208 sats in inscription fees
Bitcoin
blocks500
inscribed across 10 difficulty
epochs
Top artists111 artists total
209
198
180
156
92
81
79
78
77
73
64
44
32
26
24
22
22
19
19
19
18
17
14
14
13
12
11
11
11
10
9
9
9
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
31
flagged for exclusion
dropped from the final index
180total wizards without artistsmetadata is permanent, so a missing credit can never be added after the fact
Irregularities exclusion list for the final indexation
These inscriptions have problems (duplicate artwork or broken metadata) that make them unfit for the final index. They stay listed here so every call can be reviewed by the community before the exclusion list is applied. On-chain metadata cannot be edited, so a broken wizard is fixed by inscribing it again and excluding the broken one.
| Check | Action | Findings | Wizards |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identical artwork inscribed more than once | exclude | 23 | 46 |
| Description is a handle and a number, not a title | exclude | 8 | 8 |
| Description reused across wizards | notification | 28 | 61 |
| No artist credited | notification | 180 | 180 |
Identical artwork inscribed more than once
›exclude23 findings · 46 wizards
The same picture inscribed more than once: same drawing, same colours. Some are identical byte for byte and confirmed by hash; the rest were re-saved between inscriptions, so the bytes differ and they were confirmed by comparing the decoded images, then by eye. A recolour is not listed here: it counts as a different wizard.
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #49; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 644375b0a2abc3aa…). The original is #70; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
Show the other 20 findings
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 505d1db88bcd548d…). The original is #71; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 db33f55f91c86109…). The original is #72; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, credited to a different artist). The original is #78; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #124; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #125; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #132; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #137; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #149; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled; the copy also lost its artist credit to the pipeline). The original is #168; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #195; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled; the copy also lost its artist credit to the pipeline). The original is #214; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 2310fc99c4ec60ed…). The original is #296; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 f3a1e5106f1270ec…). The original is #375; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, same title, same artist). The original is #428; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #467; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy: identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #471; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions are the same picture in the same colours (re-encoded copy of the crown group's 'Join us' palette (see not_duplicates): identical pixels, retitled by the same artist). The original is #480; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 1d8e2f87a755abf8…). The original is #965; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 6dac3adf8885838d…). The original is #966; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 inscriptions share the exact same image bytes (sha256 17cd7e2eba303a1c…). The original is #968; the rest are copies.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
Description is a handle and a number, not a title
›exclude8 findings · 8 wizards
The description field holds an artist handle and a submission number instead of a wizard title.
"michellexxxx #85904" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
"blockwanden #86924" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
"blockwanden #86483" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
Show the other 5 findings
"robbyn.ord #92240" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
"cultistoff #82222" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
"blockwanden #89485" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
"blockwanden #84795" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
"blockwanden #84791" looks like an artist handle plus a submission number that was pasted into the description field by mistake. It needs a real wizard title.
Description reused across wizards
›notification28 findings · 61 wizards
The same description on more than one wizard: the way a re-inscribed copy shows up when the image was re-saved.
2 wizards share the description "goodnight, chain"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "staff of sats"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "wired for wealth"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
Show the other 25 findings
3 wizards share the description "this is fine"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
4 wizards share the description "number go up"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "vires in numeris"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "all in bitcoin"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
3 wizards share the description "magic internet money"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "locked and loaded"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "welcome to mempool"; same artist, so it is worth checking whether it is the same wizard inscribed twice. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "all that glitters"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "sold the bottom"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "running bitcoin finney"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "back to work"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "cpu mining era"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "pull the lever"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "laser eyes activated"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "no second best"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "king of coins"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "quiet accumulation season"; same artist, so it is worth checking whether it is the same wizard inscribed twice. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "ho ho hodl"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
3 wizards share the description "reading the whitepaper"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "fear and greed"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "proof of work"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "join the cult"; same artist, so it is worth checking whether it is the same wizard inscribed twice. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "overdosed on hopium"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "glowing with gains"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
2 wizards share the description "orange pilling season"; by different artists, so this may just be a coincidence of wording rather than a copy. Compare the artwork before deciding: a shared title alone is not a duplicate.
Click either wizard to compare them closely →
No artist credited
›notification180 findings · 180 wizards
Nobody is credited for the artwork.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Show the other 177 findings
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Metadata has no 'artist' field, so the wizard is uncredited.
Description lore what the titles are made of
Every wizard carries a title in its on-chain description, and read side by side they draw on the same small pool of lore words: 40% contain at least one of the twenty most-used. Click any word to pull up every title built on it. The list is alphabetical on purpose, so near-identical titles sit next to each other.
Titled
wizards1885
Unique
titles1845
Share a
top-20 lore word40%
How the wizards came to be thirteen years, one drawing
Everything this page counts descends from a single MS Paint drawing. The story so far, pieced from the collection’s own announcements:
- February 2013
Bitcoin trades under $100 and the mainstream doesn’t get it. When r/Bitcoin’s moderator asks for ad ideas, Mavensbot answers within the hour: an MS Paint wizard, grey-bearded and blue-robed, captioned magic internet money.
- November 2013
The wizard goes up as the subreddit’s ad and becomes one of the most successful ads Reddit has ever run. Within days South Park airs its homage, Cartman as the Wizard King, and weeks later Bitcoin crosses $1,000 for the first time. Bitcoin’s most durable meme is born.
- 2023
Ordinals arrive and the meme follows its money on-chain: a first collection of 1337 wizards, and the $WZRD token, deployed as a BRC-20 on day one of the standard (21M supply, 1,000 per mint).
- March 2024
Inscription #70, a Bitcoin Wizard from the protocol’s very first days, joins the collection, bought by Mavensbot for a reported few bitcoins. Everything since is built on it.
- April 2024
On April 20, Mavensbot etches MAGIC•INTERNET•MONEY into Bitcoin as rune #17, in the first block Runes existed. The meme that started it all becomes part of the chain.
- November 2024
The 10K collection is announced, to be drawn by the community itself. Design guidelines go out (MS Paint aesthetic, fixed palette, hand-drawn lettering) and submissions open in Discord: nearly 6,500 in the first week, close to 60,000 in the end.
- February 2025
$WZRD holders swap into the rune at 13:37 EST, on the meme’s twelfth anniversary. This is where MIM reaches holders.
- April 2025
The migration window closes for good on April 15. The unclaimed 2.4B MIM are sent to Satoshi’s wallet, the ultimate burn.
- July 2025
The first wizards are inscribed as children of #70. From here provenance is on-chain, every mint spending the parent’s UTXO, and every artist has signed a contributor contract so the collection can live under one parent.
- August 2025
Submissions close on August 31. Mavensbot starts working through the pile, approving the pieces that fit.
- September 2025
The community votes: the 1,337 OG wizards and MIM holders get whitelists for the 10K collection.
- June 2026
Curation goes communal: a first wave of roughly 9,200 approved wizards enters a public queue at bitcoinwizard.com, with more waves to follow. Holders and contributors swipe each one, like or pass, while a community team flags duplicates and test inscriptions for the exclusion list this page helps maintain.
- Today
Mavensbot sends the highest-ranked wizards to the mempool, where they inscribe whenever fees touch ~1 sat/vB. The community calls it the Great Inscriptioning; the progress bar at the top of this page is it, live.
All 1,885 of them in inscription order, four at a time, with the counter climbing as they land. A snapshot taken on 17 September 2026: the progress bar at the top of this page is the live figure.
Watch the post on X