Rupert, I strongly suggest staying away from anything that requires to sentences of explanation.
Let's just ignore the debate about wether youtube is or is not videoblogging and instead for example add sourced references to the timeline as to important events in the history of youtube. In the meantime we can discuss wether youtube is or is not a videoblogging platform either here or on the talk page. Wether it is or isn't should not hold any bearing as to wether it's growth is relevant to the growth of videoblogging... because it's growth parrellels videoblogging... that's all that need really be said as to it's relevence. Any articles that reference youtube and vlogging in the same article would also be extremely interesting... such as an article calling LisaNova or Brookers a vlogger. -Mike On 4/30/07, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah, you and Jen are right about the Vtech stuff. thanks for taking > it out. > > It arose from me wanting to put in more about YouTube and the > increasingly blurred perception of what vlogging is, but not knowing > where to start. The first line of the entry, I felt, excluded the > idea and reality of vlogging as I imagine it's perceived by a lot of > people and was limited to the point of being misleading to a > newcomer. Anyway, to be discussed there, not here. Agreed that > YouTube needs a lot more representation there. Hopefully some happy > Vlogging YouTuber will pitch in. > > Rupert > > On 30 Apr 2007, at 16:26, Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage wrote: > > I've signed up, and I'll try to watch it again. > > There was a time, when I was so broken hearted, love wasn't much of a > friend > of mine. The tables have turned, yeah, cause me and them ways have > parted, > that kind of love was the killin' kind. > > Sorry, I wrote "there was a time" and Aerosmith just started spewing > out all > over the place. > > Anyhow, the entry has been the heart of some virile dispute in the > past. I > don't think the collective "we" should be policing it to ensure it's > homogenous with this group, but I do think we should all edit add/ > subtract > as we see fit, whenever we desire. > > For example, right now I'm going to remove the V tech stuff. Not really > vlogging-related. Also going to remove the Vloggies reference, as > that was > an awards show (self-congratulatory bs is not covered in the charter) > sponsored by a company, and not directly related to the definition of > videoblogging by any means. > > ps I think Irina et al are good peoples, but I have serious concerns > with > the idea of an awards show for videoblogging. They're pretentious and > pointless, and belong on the wall of real estate offices, as Seinfeld > said > earlier this year http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_OqvUbBNA4 > > pss There's only 2 mentions of YouTube in the entire entry, and they > are in > passing. Pretty insular. > > On 4/30/07, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Yeah, what if he's the Wikipedia version of Uma Thurman in Kill Bill, > > and we're the Crazy 88? > > > > Bring it on. Sign up to Watch the Vlog definition article if you > > can, and use your own judgement to see whether the changes you see > > are right, whoever makes them. > > > > I can see how you could get tired of it, Tom, but too many people - > > particularly media people - will continue use Wikipedia as a starting > > point, and it's important that vlogging is correctly represented > > there, not repeatedly vandalised by some random fool. > > > > If we keep up an honest watch of it, sooner of later he'll want to > > find somewhere else to play. > > > > I added a little something about the definition of vlogging, with > > reference to Winer, Cho, YouTube. I think it's reasonably on track, > > but I've never edited Wikipedia before, only consumed in large > > quantities. Don't mind it being changed/removed by rational people, > > of course. > > > > Rupert > > > > On 30 Apr 2007, at 12:15, Adrian Miles wrote: > > > > > around the 30/4/07 Jan McLaughlin mentioned about > [videoblogging] Re: > > > Video Blog Wikipedia Entry that: > > > >I just reinstated MMeiser's previous version. > > > > > > > >Make a minor edit and sign up to "watch" the page. > > > > > > have done so, I guess if enough of us do this then it either > becomes > > > some weird escalated battle or he gives in? > > > -- > > > cheers > > > Adrian Miles > > > this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x] > > > vogmae.net.au > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > -- > Adam Quirk > Wreck & Salvage > 551.208.4644 > Brooklyn, NY > http://wreckandsalvage.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
