Talk:YouTube/Archive 2

message: Not "general discussion," but would Google's and YouTube's entire video library be merged into some viral video supersite, or...? This kind of info would probably be important to the article. -- M (speak/spoken) 19:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, that would be Australian dollars considering that the article states it like this: "would pay $US1.65 billion ($2.21 billion)". Gdo01 05:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  So what will happen? 

message: This section needs major work:
# References need to be formatted correctly
# Text needs to be seperated from links
# More sources need to be found that do not include pundits
# Comparisons to previous events have to be cited, determined to be applicable, or deleted
I'd apprecite any help on fixing these issues and any I have not addressed for this section. Gdo01 03:14, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The phrasing is also unclear. Dan Carkner 02:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New York Times Reports Anti-US Videos 

message: Google hasnt bought Youtube yet. They just offically announced that they plan to buy the company soon. No money has changed hands yet.  dposse 20:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's another source  dposse 20:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: You're confusing future tense and past tense. If that article said "Google bought YouTube for 1.65 billion", then you would be right. dposse 21:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: According to the article- they announced the deal Monday, which means that YouTube, unless something hugely catastophic happens, will be bought by Google in the very near future.  But for all intensive purposes, YouTube was bought.  Just not formally yet. Xlegiofalco 22:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an encyclopedia, and formalities matter. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 22:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  not bought yet. 

message: Someone keeps deleting the fact that YouTube was just bought by Google. Hey man FACE IT! It's the truth. Besides, my version, is the most comprehensive and gramatically correct. So please don't misuse it.
:Like i stated above, YouTube is not bought yet. No money has changed hands. dposse 22:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dont mess with the history section 

message: What does the name "YouTube" mean? --WikiCats 12:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hah, called it. www.dvguru.com Inmatarian 03:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name 

message: Google probably noticed their own comparison and took a hint.. Mlm42 15:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube vs. Wikipedia 

message: Is youtube still considered a private company since Google has bought it? xxpor (Talk|Contribs) 18:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: it is still a private company until the acquisition by Google actuall takes placed, which is expected later this year. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 23:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Private Company? 

message: I put a small paragraph about YouTubes new requirement that they have to use antipiracy software. Can someone who has more time than me look through the article and expand the paragraph please? thanks. dposse 22:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also a brief but important discussion of a branch of this at Talk:Acoustic fingerprint. --Amit 07:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New anti-piracy software 

message: I've noticed that editors have been lazy and have not been citing references using proper protocol. Specifically, they have not been entering all of the relevant attribute value pairs when adding a ref. Many just enter the URL and leave it at that. These need to be fixed to adhere to protocol. --Amit 07:05, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur.  It would be even better if they could dig up real citations the way I do (with page-level granularity), but 98% of Wikipedia editors are just too lazy.  For an example of a properly cited article, everyone should see my work at Lawyer. --Coolcaesar 06:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations sloppiness 

message: n e one know?
:perhaps because Google just bought it.   yokyle 00:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Such lameness. The site is back up now. It was probably down to fix something. --Amit 07:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Site down 

message: In YouTube you can find a lot of spam advertisments of a potentialy scam website treasuretrooper.com (and other similar webistes) "that enables (unqualified !) people to earn monthly hundreds/thousands of USD" could spmeone write about how this site works as there is no independent info about it to be found on the net.  We can potentialy save many people from becoming a victim of a freud. Mieciu K 16:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't you mean "victim of fraud" -- or was that a Freudian slip?  What, are you like unconsciously anti-Semitic or something?  --152.163.100.138 17:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  frequent [[treasuretrooper.com]] spam 

message: Perhaps YouTube's amazingly swift rise should be mentioned in the article -- just think about it...this site was founded in August 2005 (it started in a garage).  Barely over a year later (October 2006) it was 'acquired' for $1.65 billion dollars -- talk about a PROFIT for the site's founders!  If YouTube's precipitous (even precarious?) rise doesn't say something great about American-style capitalism (and American-style advertising revenue) I'm not sure what does.  Here's a good link that possibly belongs in the external links section of the article: Videos that Put YouTube.com on the Map.  --152.163.100.138 17:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube's Meteoric Rise -- Deserves a Mention? 

message: Following a DRV, Emmalina, an article that was kept once and deleted once by the AfD process and eventually redirected here, has been unprotected, and the possibility of resurrecitng the article is starting to be discussed at Talk:Emmalina.  Please give your input.  Thanks! --badlydrawnjeff talk 17:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emmalina 

message: I tried to get on the site, but I couldn't get on. I am wondering if it is down or not?68.164.238.179 18:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is it down?

message: template: Google Inc.
--143.182.124.4 19:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Add Google Template

message: I feel this page could benefeit from being permenantly semi-protected. I have been keeping an eye on this page and it is receiving quite a lot of vandalism. If anyone has a better solution, please say so. SilentWind 23:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think permanent as in forever is a good idea.  But definitely for at least a year or so until the current YouTube craze goes away.  --Coolcaesar 03:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Permenant Semi-Protection 

message: I'm not sure if this is worth mentioning (yet, at least), but I found the following: [Click here]. It basically shows the correlation between google buying youtube on October 9th and the levelling-out of popularity thereafter. Hmm? Gregh 23:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well using Alexa and reporting it on a blog is original research so it probably can't be included. Maybe if this becomes more evidant, a news article somewhere will report it. Gdo01 23:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand it's technically not legitimate source of research. But the actual facts and figures are presented and available on Alexa yourself which has proven to be a fairly reliable source of information. I realise that it would perhaps need another month or so to see whether the popularity really has flattenned off. It's perhaps not factual enough to include in a wikipedia article, but I just thought it was an interesting point to make. Perhaps something more factual would be to point out that since google's appearance, FOX, CBS, NBC, ESPN and Comast sports highlights have been removed from youtube. Furthermore, content from UPN, ESPN, MTV, VH1 and more has also been removed. On top of this, some clips from video games and anime. This might be a plausible explanation for the halt in youtube's growth. Gregh 23:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Youtube popularity since google obtained it

message: YouTube will be down for scheduled maintenance, starting around 9:00PM PDT. Whar does that mean? i saw a message on the main page. KanuT 03:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It simply means that they will be working on the site and during that time the site will not be operating. This means thaty videos can't be added or viewed for a peroid of time. --69.156.204.212 04:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube go down? 

message: I'm wondering if this is a widespread or isolated problem with YouTube's comment system. It seems like most (recently, about 100%) of my comments on YouTube, none which would be any more inappropriate than what the other 75% of YouTube users would post, never make it (yet I still get a confirmation message that it was indeed posted). As far as I know, my account is not flagged for any violations, and is functional in every other way. So, if others are having their YouTube comments being dropped w/o any explanation, it might deserve a mention on Wikipedia. It may just be because of busy servers or heavy usage, I dunno, but you'd think that considering how often YouTube goes down for maintenance, they'd fix this problem...  Similar problems include the inability to mix English with Chinese/Japanese (ASCII/Unicode issue maybe?, it was possible about a month ago). Please don't see this as a forum post. Although it may be just my problem, if it happens to affect others, then like I said, it should be mentioned, perhaps under a new "Issues" section. Vindictive Warrior 18:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues with comments on YouTube 

message: Hey, so...is there any way to embed YouTube videos in Wikipages? In particular, I'd like to put the VM promo from Comic-Con on the Veronica Mars page. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNuqjuDWngI Thank you! jengod 21:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that youtube use on Wikipedia is usually not for legitimate purposes, I doubt any system will be created to enable this. Gdo01 00:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol, no chance, SqueakBox 00:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never in a million years. Pacific Coast Highway {Gobble Gobble! • Happy Thanksgiving!} 00:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Embed YouTube videos on Wikipedia?

message: Given there's a pending court case by tube manufacturer uTube aginst YouTube which involves people thinking uTube is YouTube  we should probably consider whether UTube should redirect to YouTube. Not because of legal reasons or anything like that, but the whole uTube/YouTube story has gotten me to think about how redirects like this one could actually cause people to think one thing equals the other, which would be misinformation. I hope this made any sense and that you see what I'm getting at! -newkai t-c 05:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just noticed we have an article on Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment, the mentioned uTube above. Thus I would suggest a Template:Redirect-style disambiguation. -newkai t-c 05:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  uTube to YouTube Redirect 

message: What is Youtubes software and hardware architecture?
Java? PHP? how many servers? 212.83.71.69 21:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software and hardware architecture? 

message: will someone please continue to update the YouTube and Google articles with the infomation that the YouTube/Google deal closed? Also, please add more infomation from the news article  about it. thanks. dposse 21:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  update 

message: Time to archive this talk page? --John Seward 13:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive 

message: i think there should be a article about the resent chain letters on many videos.--76.18.0.54 05:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chain Letters 

message: I suggest we should put in a paragraph about YouTube and their censoring of many YouTube artists. Such evidence is the user 'NickGisburne' who made a video quoting the Quran and had his entire account suspended for simply offending people. Other acts of censorship by YouTube is widely seen.
:Get a verifiable source for that unsubstantiated assertion or else your edit will probably be challenged and deleted. See Wikipedia:Verifiability.--Coolcaesar 18:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube and Censorship 

message: I really think the ONDCP paragraph is a bit too dailykos for wikipedia. 'Propaganda' is a loaded word, and not particularly neutral at that. Is there a better way to write that paragraph that makes it look less like an incidious plot and more like an encyclopedia entry? Kripto 09:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Office of Drug Policy paragraph 

message: They googlized it! Someone should include this in the article. --TheBooRadley 22:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  You Tube is Different 

message: This discussion page was way to big and therefore has been archived.  If you want to continue a discussion please copy and paste it into this page from the archive, do not edit the archive.  Thanks and sorry for any disruptions this may cause. Martin Porcheron 23:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussions archived 

message: As there is no information about how to download and convert youtube flash videos i suggest adding the following link to the article:
:* Downloading and converting Youtube Videos
Worlduser 06:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This page has discuusion on downlaoding off YouTube and even how to play the vids on a PSP! http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=bestforumever&msg=228.1 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Realg187 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested Link Update 

message: I came to find out about N64Kids after seeing them on a tv commercial. I was surprised not to find them. It should be added to the notable list which would mean starting a new page, which I don't have the proper skills to do. N64Kids has been on Jay Leno and VH1. They have a web site here. JoyceD 04:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion for Notable 

message: The name YouTube may refer to the company and the website. Moreover the article begin saying "YouTube is a popular free video sharing Web site " so I think having an  is not incoherent. 16@r 20:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yes though when it says youtube.com was founded feb2005, it means the company. the site went online only on nov2005 (according to the article).capi 00:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Website 

message: Due to being in :Category:Semi-protected, :Category:Wikipedia articles in need of updating, and :Category:Articles with unsourced statements. --SeizureDog 15:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: "...FlashPlayer 8, which uses On2 Technologies' VP6 video codec, providing a large increase in video quality compared to FlashPlayer 7..." "Without this new technology, it's unlikely YouTube would have taken off as fast as it did."
Youtube video player SWF file is version 7 and the video codec used is Sorenson H.263. It could have been version 8 and VP6, but it isn't.
85.107.157.16 20:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly related, the article mentions an update causing videos not to start. The only such problem I've noticed is it tells me I don't have Flash (though I can grab the video link from the source code and view it), and this seems to be a Flash Player bug, not a site problem. 75.153.221.227 08:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  incorrect info in article