User blog comment:Vel!/FGH Gripe/@comment-5982810-20150325004329/@comment-24.103.234.74-20150326001144

(4) The deal is that they certainly are not presented as conjectures currently. In addition, the purpose of the encyclopedia is to document existing work, not to propose new works. Now I know that this rule isn't always followed, but a whole family of conjectures isn't exactly a trivial amount of original work.

On this point I agree. They should be stated as conjectural. But you aren't presenting anything "new" Vel. You forget we are a community. These are conjectures and concensuses reached by the community. Hell, you can even source some of these because googologist's often make claims about the growth rates of their or other googologist's functions. So for example you can say "Sbiis conjectures that f_phi(w,0,0)(n) is the smallest member of FGH to dominate over every function in xE^", and that would be totally encyclopedic.