Talk:Podcast/Archive 8

message: I believe that there should be a list of Podcasts that are featured on Wikipedia, any oppinions?--Wiggstar69 12:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of featured Podcasts? 

message: People keep adding their podcast related trademark or feel the need to list every podcast aggregator available. Some feel that giving advice on how to manage podcasts and advice on how to make full use of itunes make this a good article. I don't understand why straying from the subject itself is such a trap for so many. It is not the simplest concept to explain and the convolution that this article seems to be constantly entangled with is frustrating and must be equally frustrating for readers. We've all argued about the etymology of the name for too long, it means so little it might as well be lumped in with the history of podcasting itself, an article which is a mess but frankly informative overall if you don't take it too seriously. This article doesn't need to be confusing or a "how-to" guide, a list of podcast related software or links to a podcast directory. It simply needs to inform readers about the meaning and simple mechanics of podcasting. Simply using blog feeds to syndicate media files. Yet every few months I come back to this article and someone has a huge paragraph like this
Podcasting is becoming increasingly popular in education. Podcasts enable students and teachers to share information with anyone at anytime. An absent student can download the podcast of the recorded lesson. It can be a tool for teachers or administrators to communicate curriculum, assignments and other information with parents and the community. Teachers can record book discussions, vocabulary or foreign language lessons, international pen pal letters, music performance, interviews, and debates. Podcasting can be a publishing tool for student oral presentations. Video podcasts can be used in all these ways as well.
Really? Are we taking a bit too much creative liberty here or is it just me? How about this?
iTunes offers the ability to create "Smart Playlists" which can be used to control which podcasts are in the playlist using multiple criteria such as date, number of times listened, type, etc. It is also possible to set up iTunes so that only certain playlists will be synced with the iPod. By using a combination of the two techniques it is possible to control exactly which music and/or podcasts will be transferred to the iPod. The illustration to the right shows one such "Smart playlist" which ensures that only the latest unlistened podcasts will be in the smart playlist. Any podcast which is more that two weeks old is not included, nor is any podcast that the iPod user has already listened to. This smart playlist is synced with the iPod every time the iPod is plugged into the PC, ensuring that the user does not have to listen to the same show more than once. Once a podcast has been listened to, it will be removed from this list as soon as the iPod is synced with the PC. There are many criteria which can control what goes in a smart playlist, such as "name," "artist," "category," "grouping," "kind," "last played," "play count," "rating," "last skipped," and "playlist" and these can be combined with functions such as "equals," "is greater than," "is less than," "contains," "is true," "is false," "is," "is not," "does not contain," "starts with," "ends with," "is in the range," "is before," and "is after". As a result, it is possible to control exactly which podcasts are transferred to the iPod.
simply astonished at this one. Do we really want this article to be full of original research and disinformation like this:
Podcast listeners can listen in one of two ways: through a specialized hardware device called an MP3 player or on a computer using media player software.
This is not true! It is unreferenced because it isn't true and the person who wrote it was did not show due diligence in being the best wiki editor. Specialized hardware device called an mp3 player? How about my cell phone? Stop it with the unrelated subtopics that muck up this aritcle please, I implore you to help readers by keeping this article neat, referenced and free of unrelated content. 
I'm not totally happy with the etymology text as it reads, but I think it is almost good enough and I think it should stick because it's honest and related. Thanks for those who discuss as they edit.
Testerer 04:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Itunes instructionals, disinformation and Juice 

message: I think this would be a good way to eliminate the trivia section (at least part of it). The Mugglecast has no source or anything to do with it, and the Adam curry thing should be put under controversy. For the other parts, I propose to use a section called 'Legal use of the term" or "legal use(s)" My example is here at User:Laaabaseball/sandbox/2 Laaabaseball 09:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting rid of the trivia section 

message: I have changed my criteria for adding a link here.  I don't think we should allow links to a Podcast search engine, because there seem to be about two zillion of those and we'll quickly find ourselves fighting link rot.  What I think we should allow is a link to a list of podcast search engines.  A link to a podcast search site can very well be added here for commercial gain; a list of podcast search sites is a list that helps build up the podcast community.  If we get too many links to lists of podcast search sites, we can use the Google link:www.listoflistofpodcasts.foo score to weed out the non-notable ones.  Do other users here feel this is a reasonable compromise between the need to have at least one link, but have as few links as possible? Samboy 17:35, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As for Podcast players, in order to stop people from listing their commercial player here, I have made the list of players a list of open source players.  People willing to give something away to the community are helping build up the community; others who have a more commercial interest, IMHO, should not have their player listed here.  Again, it's to avoid linkrot and making this page have too many links to be useful to a Podcast newbie. Samboy 17:44, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Open source stuff is definitely worthy of mention, but I don't think open source players deserve any more mention than commercial players just because they release source to the community. Don't turn this into an anti-commercial situation. Mrsteveman1 (talk) 20:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  OK, how is this for removing links 

message: Is 
: In 2005, it was reported that Adam Curry had anonymously edited the podcasting entry on Wikipedia to remove credits from other people and to inflate his role in its creation.[8]
encyclopedic? The ref appears to be a blog with fewer than 2000 readers (subscribers?), and isn't mentioned in Rogers Cadenhead, so i am removing the ref to here:
:   Adam Curry Caught in Sticky Wiki  
(Please replace it if there is evidence that source is ref-worthy.)
Part of my concern is that this reminds me of a long-running struggle that ended with the self-proclaimed genius banned. After Ambition (game) was soundly deleted the 4th time as n-n , there was a period in which something like "Ambition trolling phenomenon" was pushed to stand in for it as the means of promoting it or him. --Jerzy•t 19:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adam Curry & WP 

message: I have found a spectacular way of listening to podcast and i also have this article edited to add this... but somebody just erase what i wrote. My question is simple... Why? If you want to know about podcast im sure you want to know about this voip solution.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfonko34 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The link is a company blog that does not comply with our guidelines for external links. Sorry if I did not make that clear enough. --Tikiwont (talk) 09:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New way of listening podcast, why remove this? 

message: I deleted a section on supposed controversy around the term "podcast" as reflecting technical ignorance because I can find no evidence that a notable controversy ever existed. It was flagged as needing a citation. I believe this was one person's opinion written in the third person to sound objective. --Editor B (talk) 15:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Spelling: is it "Podcast" or "podcast"? --capitalized, or not? I can't imagine it will stay capitalized in standard usage for long, even if it is up, now. But it should be done consistently, one or the other.
Tahrlis (talk) 18:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy Section 

message: It is a shame there is no "list of podcast software" or "comparison of podcast software", as a separate linked article.  It is very hard to find anything for Win98SE.  It is hard to use anything on dialup, because it will suck up all the bandwidth in the background, out of control.  There is little or nothing available as portable apps.  These seem to be good places to start a search: www.podcastingnews.com/topics/Podcast_Software.html and www.podcatchermatrix.org -69.87.204.16 11:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The first link there (a list of podcast clients / podcatchers) is still available via a Google cache.  The unavailability of podcatchers for Win98SE might be explained because podcasting is in a sense a fad (being simply a RSS feed of MP3 links), and people vulnerable to fads are unlikely to be running any operating system older than a year or two.  iTunes itself only runs on Windows XP SP2 or newer, Juice requires an NT-based Windows, and other software requires .NET which would be hard to install over dial-up.  However, jpodder and @podder are both Java-based and should run on Win98SE. One would expect podcast software to be produced by manufacturers of MP3 players besides Apple, if the main objective is to copy MP3s to a device as the become available.  --79.72.89.161 (talk) 12:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Podcast client software 

message: Can we have the Wiki reference/verification tag removed now? I'd argue it's well referenced and the tag is now redundant.Starstylers (talk) 14:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference/citation tag removal 

message: Audioblogging seems remarkably similar to podcasting. Whilst there may be a subtle difference, involving whether or not enclosures are used, I don't think this subtle difference is large enough to warrant another article. I propose redirecting audioblogging to this article, salvaging any worthwhile content. Computerjoe's talk 22:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with audioblogging 

message: I added the word "audio" to the summary. I am new to this field but the summary doesn't say what these streaming digital files offer - I am assuming they are audio, so I've put this word in.  The article assumes us outsiders know what a podcast offers. Perhaps a podcast can be audio+moving images, audio + image slideshow? regards, please correct me if I am wrong. 
---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgaved (talk) 08:46, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In practice, podcasts are almost always comprised of audio and video files. Also note that podcasting does not involve streaming of the content, but syndicated download. I have edited the text to reflect these points more clearly. --Kwekubo (talk) 11:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio only?