Jump to content

Talk:YouTube

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleYouTube was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 28, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
February 28, 2007Good article nomineeListed
March 20, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
April 4, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
August 17, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
August 9, 2009Good article nomineeListed
March 19, 2018Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 15, 2010, and February 15, 2012.
Current status: Delisted good article


The Revenue figure is either wrong, or the reference is outdated.

[edit]

The Revenue says that it's a 2023 data, but the article it references is from 2022, talking about 2021. Noname MissingNo (talk) 10:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

native youtube subtitles censorship of words in brackets translator into Russian?

[edit]

Is it that Google is complying with the Russian law banning LGBT people? I use a modified translator and it is uncensored on the word lesbian 217.66.154.62 (talk) 15:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC) https://i123.fastpic.org/big/2024/0829/00/4a25e6f4c5ee9ad9ab5a24f752290f00.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.66.154.62 (talk) 15:12, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is the suggestion here? That this claim be added to the page? If so, it needs a notable source, not just a personal claim. ASpacemanFalls (talk) 15:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Topic channels

[edit]

Could there be a section on this article for topic channels? Or is it not notable enough Jorge906 (talk) 16:51, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox screenshot

[edit]

I added a low res fair use screenshot of the YouTube front page to the infobox recently, video thumbnails and all, but it's been pointed out that that kind of thing has been discussed and deleted before at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 September 3#File:YouTube homepage.png, which is all fair enough.

So what became of File:YouTube screenshot.webp, the "equivalent free version" that was cited repeatedly in that discussion and mentioned as a good reason for closing it? It was added to this article in September 2023, but speedy deleted as an "unused non-free media file" a year later, after the infobox image was switched to a free but blankish screen.

Why was a supposedly free image considered non-free? Pinging User:The Quirky Kitty as the image's creator. Belbury (talk) 20:05, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made a screenshot of a the page of a free video where many of the suggestions were also free videos, and blurred the non-free ones. I would still judge it as non-free because it shows YouTube's interface, but it used less non-free material than the screenshot it replaced. Someone replaced it with a mostly blank page because they believe it's free. I don't because there is enough text and icons it might be considered copyrightable. Also, the new screenshot doesn't do YouTube justice because it's blank, while my screenshot represents what viewing YouTube is like. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 02:13, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. And yes, I agree that the current screenshot of a blank logged out page isn't useful, it's not easily recognisable as being YouTube.
I've taken a screenshot of a page of CC-licenced YouTube content, and used that. Belbury (talk) 12:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2024

[edit]

JamesCarrie has completely removed the beginning of the page's openning paragraph, removing pieces of neccessary and important infomation about the topic, so I have made this edit request in the hope that it either gets reverted back to the previous revision by BootsED or that said infomation is added back in a new revision to the page. HelterWiiter7475 (talk) 11:25, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks for drawing attention to it. --Belbury (talk) 11:29, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]