Talk:Brooke Brodack

message: WikiProject Biography Assessment
Knocking it back to Start class. Needs inline cites and some cleanup (esp. the lengthy opening section) to warrant a B.
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 01:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: Other people, myself included, have tried to make wikis about popular youtubers. They have been deleted within seconds of them being put onto the site. One of the administrators said, I quote:
What the hell is h doing maing wikis about people like that "there are 85.3 billion other people who put videos on youtube" (she/ he does not realize only 60 billion live in this world). This user should be no exception. She uses youtube to get to fame than gets a wiki made by her? Last I checked she isn't famous. 3/4 of the UK do not know who she is, even people in Africa know who Madonna is. 
Sorry but she's had her 15 MEGABYTES of fame... doesn't the Wiki server cost around $700,000? I have no "beef" with her, there are even more famous youtubers, brookers ranks fourth, yet they do not have their own Wiki.-- 23:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, only about 6 or 7 billion people live in the world.  But Brookers is a quite famous and notable YouTuber! --Nevhood 23:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other deletions

message: I suggest you do a google search of her name, you will find that she is the top result with quite a few news stories. I have included references for one of those - soon to be expanded. Wikipedia:Notability (memes) states that a person who is only associated with their meme should be included on the meme page. This is not the case for Brooke however, she has been given a job by Carson Daly (as stated in the article) which has earned her more than a few news stories. ViridaeTalk 01:06, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She has only been signed on for 'Talent expantion and training'. One article stated she was going to be doing web-based clips for MTV if certain conditions were met.  There are many other MTV talents that do not have mention here on Wiki, and I do not believe she passes the cut.--Bschott 18:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: Her last name is Broderick, not Brodack. It's even explicitly stated in one of her videos. >_>; --Thrashmeister 03:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broderick 

message: We have millions of American parents worried about what their progeny are doing on MySpace and here is a possibly genius 20-year-old who not only can show the way, open doors and minds, but who will most likely survive her 15 minutes, and someone wants to delete her from WP as "not relevant" ... ?
Give me a break already ! Give her space !
jamonbojamonbo
::Wiki is NOT for listing every person that has 15 minutes of fame.  Outside of YouTube, most Americans have no idea who she is. I could understand a merge with the YouTube main article or a merge with a YouTube Celebrity page but she is not notable for her own article. She wouldn't appear in a printed encyclopedia as a seperate entity.--Bschott 13:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a printed article and therefore does not have the same space limitations. ViridaeTalk 13:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, outside of YouTube most Americans have no idea who she is. I could understand a merge with the YouTube main article or a merge with a YouTube Celebrity page but she is not notable for her own article. She is not front page news, merited national TV coverage, or is a commonly known name or topic of conversation. People on the street would not know who she is. --Bschott 13:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nor would the man in the street be able to name many if any of the people in the non celebrity section of List of Internet phenomena. ViridaeTalk 14:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the internet, outside of YouTube, no one really knows who she is.  She is a YouTube celeb, but not notable beyond that yet. If you drop her name on Fark.com, Slashdot, or any of the other widely popular forms or sites, she is just not notable enough for people to know who she is. --Bschott 14:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have anything to back that up? Considering the news coverage she got, you can assume that more than a few people have heard of her. Also remember that YouTube has a traffic rank of 17 (alexa) fark has one of 736 and slashdot has a rank of 165. So someone who has risen to stardom amongst the YouTube community is more than likely to have been noticed by people who frequent other high traffic forums. I think considering the high profile of YouTube and the "first" nature of her contract that it is highly unlikely that Fark and slashdot users are unaware of her existence. (which is actually beside the point, she has had significant news coverage and fark and slashdot are not a measure of someones popularity - they create more short bursts of activity than anything else I know of) ViridaeTalk 22:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text:  I always love the "most people have no idea who she is" argument for notability. Have you heard of William Takacs? I'm pretty sure most people haven't either. Yet in his field he's notable. Same goes for this girl. IN HER FIELD she's notable. --Brother William 01:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Its not up to an admin to decide the notability. The article doesnt fit into any of the requirements for a speedy deletion, so Bschott has taken it to AfD. It is there that a concencus will try to be made. ViridaeTalk 22:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't asking for deletion by an admin. Just an opinion. There isn't a whole lot of need-to-know information, about her, so I don't think this article is a worthy cause. At the moment, she is like the other famous youtube users. Human historian 06:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment, yes, the article is not merited.  She might become something noteworthy in herself in time, but she's not there yet.  (I'd put money on it happening, but it's still the future.)  However, in the context of a historical view of the colossal change of media, Brookers, with her cross-media jump and, more importantly, her validation of online video as a proving grounds for media talent, represents a pivotal figure.  I really mean no offense when I say this:  I find it a bit ironic that a "Human Historian" would argue against the noteworthiness of such a figure.  Really.  Anyway, she, as the aforementioned media phenomenon, deserves a note in at least the YouTube article.  There's my opinion.  63.249.64.32 03:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you can try putting any mention of her on the YouTube article itself, but the community concensus is 'Famous Users' shouldn't be there.  Look at the talk page and history. Anytime she is added, she is immediately removed and the general concensus is she isn't noteworthy to be on the page.  Why she is noteworthy enough to get her own page is beyond me, however there is a merger proposal happening right now that may combine Brookers and Em's pages together into a 'Famous YouTube Users' article and then add in other well known users. So far the concenus on that is 'go with the merger' so the ADF here is pointless as this page may not exist much longer anyway...since it's looking like it will be merged.--Bschott 03:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It's not so much that I'm against mention of her. I just don't think she has enough need-to-know info to have her own page. I don't see what that's ironic. But you all know where I stand on this, so whatever happens, happens. Human historian 06:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insane ! 

message: Brooke Brodack is the FIRST YouTuber to get a contract from Hollywood.  This is a milestone--a piece of showbiz history in and of itself--and so makes her worthy of at least a short entry.  Also, the publicity given her is quite extensive, and so curiosity about her is quite high, and the Wikipedia should respond to that.  If you look on Google News, you'll see that the articles on her in _Variety_, the LA _Times_, and the _Globe_ have been extensively reprinted, including in the foreign press; her story has also been reported NPR, _USA Today_, and in the _Wall Street Journal_ (where she's described as THE "crossover star").
:Oh be quiet, you rambling idiot.
::And where is she now? I don't see her anywhere on actual television. And newspapers are dying for something to wrtie about, (90% of newspapers/magazines is "how are we going to fill up all this space?") so I'm not impressed that she's had articles written about her.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.252.145 (talk) 17:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Milestone

message: I have reverted the redirect to the notable youtube users article because I believe 1. this wasn't done with enough discussion - especially considering the AfD and the discussion above and 2. I believe she warrants her own article.
:She derives her notability solely from YouTube, not from anywhere else. The article in question is an attempt to merge them together to show people who have had significant media coverage in their own countries, of which she appears to be one. There's no point in having her own article - rather it should be part of the YouTube page. (JROBBO 05:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Her notability is now coming from her involvement with the new website as well as her youtube appearances. She has recieved a significant amount of press coverage and so (look at the afd) it was decided that she warranted her own article, unlike many of the others. ViridaeTalk 06:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: This article is one of [ thousands] on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message on the talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material violating someone's copyright. If you are not sure whether the link on this article should be removed or if you would like to help spread this message, contact us on User talk:J.smith/YouTube Linklist. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 00:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that this is one of the exceptions, as the subject of the article is the person producing the videos that the article is linking to. ViridaeTalk 03:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube links 

message: I cant beleive this;its a video blog after all. Youtube has truly reached the pinnacle. Viva la revolution!
:And Turkish of all languages! --Iustinus 22:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the starter of the Turkish article, Turkish users are too much on YouTube but they doesn't know YouTube celebrities too much. Also now she is on other languages. OnurTcontribs 22:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wow. There is actually a Brookers article on a foreign language wiki 

message: They're a pain, but someone needs to get on it. Ichormosquito 18:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs inline citations 

message: So, is it notable for the article? OnurTcontribs 23:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why not.  Ichormosquito 20:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  USA Today interview with Brookers about her haters 

message: "Brodack has been mistaken for a young male boy repeatedly" As opposed to a non-male boy?
194.46.187.196 23:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tautological. Now there's a word.

message: On her recent videos of her QuietRiot account, Brooke revealed that she has scoliosis. OnurTcontribs 16:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You spend too much tim eon the internet.  Nobody cares about her, let's get this article deleted immediantly.214.13.192.187 (talk) 05:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  So what? Most of Wikipedians spend their times on the Internet too. Get a new job troll... OnurTcontribs 21:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Scoliosis]] 

message: User:Apelike put an  tag on the article earlier this month . However, they didn't state why the tag is there. If there isn't a reason in the next few days, I'm going to remove it as a test edit. -wL<speak·check> 07:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neuturality dispute 

message: Brooke Brodacks apparent disillusionment with Youtube, Celebrity and Internet Trolls might be worthy of comment here as a wider cultural issue which faces many of the people who have found fame through the internet but struggle to transfer to the mainstream media. 31.68.130.33 (talk) 14:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparent Disillusionment In Latest Content 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Brooke Brodack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090209221837/http://www.brookerfanatics.com:80/forums/index.php?showtopic=1425 to http://www.brookerfanatics.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1425
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:55, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 10:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Brooke Brodack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061210004651/http://www.iystv.com:80/ to http://www.iystv.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I just found out that Brookers has deleted her channel altogether. Wiki ninjas, please find out when and update the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexy scientist (talk • contribs) 21:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted channel 

message: As of January 2021, she has deleted her original account, so none of the videos mentioned on her page are on the internet - the article even mentions her streaming on defunct websites like stickam, which shows how outdated it is. She currently has around 500 subscribers, and gets around 500 views a month, but does not upload anywhere near regularly. Her Facebook page has less than 200 likes, and she had no real crossover success. I would argue that means she isn't really notable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomMayhew (talk • contribs) 15:14, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion debate