wa woo wee wah!
I like!

Um, you realize it looks a bit strange to congratulating yourself on your own announcement, yes?

Anyway, the day was definitely coming when Videosift would be notable enough to deserve its on Wikipedia entry. I don't know if you're familiar with the Wiki:Web policy, but the general idea is that Wikipedia doesn't want to become 'polluted' with links to Jim and Bob's website, but only reference culturally significant sites. They go into some detail regarding what that means.

Having said that, I wholly agree that Videosift is ready for its own Wikipedia entry, simply judging from the external media mentions.

You may think I'm being a silly bureaucrat by mentioning all this, and perhaps I am, but the Wikipedians go mad crazy over their WP:WEB policy and as such, there's two ways to avoid trouble
1. justify the site's inclusion,
2. do mad edits to cite the Sift's noteworthiness (i.e., mentions in non-web-based media for starters).
Popularity/high-usage are helpful too, but the media mentions are especially important.
We have a rather handy list of those lying around somewhere - gotta pick those up and include them there.

I was actually doing the same, only to have the entry be deleted recently. Strange.

Krupo and I are fixing some stuff with it ATM.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

It's kind of an inaccurate entry too. . I hate to say it Snaremop, I appreciate your enthusiasm - but it might be best if you lurk a bit more.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Thanks for the fix-up Farhad and Krupo. Sorry if I sounded a bit cross, but I'm a big Wikipedia fan. I like the idea of VideoSift being included, but I respect Wikipedia's pretty strict submission rules, and I don't want VideoSift to be seen as looking for cheap publicity with a slapdash entry that took a few minutes.

It looks bit better now. Suggestions about additions and general Wiki contributions are more then welcome.

This is a link to the Wiki article

Tossed in more edits; probably need to toss in some sort of full disclosure that people from here did edits, but at the same time, is it possible to write there with any authority without having been around here to know how it works?

I suppose a person with way too much time on their hands could read through the hundreds of Sift Talk entries - but it's probably more efficient this way.

Snaremop, as the leader of the jihad said to Gary Johnston in "Team America"-

"You've got balls. I like balls."

Thanks choggie.

Krupo: If what you are saying is correct, then theoretically websites such as YouTube shouldn't have wikipedia entries, right?

It was slapdash, just to get the name out there.

I made a few more corrections in the spelling department. Let's keep editing to make it the best it can be!

call me silly ... but this wouldn't be a move to proceed with ... unless it was your website. it's not your name to put 'out there'.

anyway ... i've been off for a day or too ... back to sifting!!!

In reply to your comment:
“
It was slapdash, just to get the name out there.
”

No - I assume you're being silly because YouTube was in the news with it's billion+ dollar merger.

Big newsworthy sites are fine... hmm, here's the WP:WEB policy for your benefit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(web)

tl;dr

What kind of response is that?

Well, i just added an infobox i'll have you know.

Nice one Darksun.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Looks great. Thanks all.

Well, can I at least be credited with the idea? I mean sure, you guys wrote everything, but I created the article.

Krupo: Tl;dr means

Too long, didn't read

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

snaremop, Farhad approached me about this a while ago (which I appreciated) - we were working through it with him, providing him with all the details to make a good, valid entry.

I'll give you credit for brashness, but yeah part of what makes a good community is lots of communication between its members. We like it when people tell us about their ideas and work with us.

But ... no harm done, and no hard feelings.

snaremop, there is no crediting in Wiki.

snaremop, you must learn to accept compliments graciously when offered, and soldier on in anonymity when none are forthcoming.

Coming out and just asking for accolades is a bit gauche.

I don't mean to put you down by writing this - I consider VS a friendly environment, which is why I feel comfortable enough to say it - and I'd rather you learn it here from Sifters rather than from anonymous "Real World" people who will give you a much harder time for it.

Take it easy around communities, online communities in particular, get a feel for the pace of how things work, and then feel free to let loose a bit more - i.e., once you know how the community functions. You'll enjoy your Sifting more that way too.

Cool? Cool

Snaremop, calm down a little bit mate. Getting frustrated and stroppy isn't gonna get you very far.
Well done for the Wiki article

I'm sorry, but I honestly didn't mean it in a "frustrated and stroppy" kind of way. I just felt a little agitated because I created the entry, and Krupo and Farhad completely rewrote it (not that what I had written was better, by any means). I just would have liked to be consulted to help write the entry, seeing as I started it. I know it sounds extremely childish to "claim" an entry as though I own it, but I would've appreciated it if Farhad and Krupo asked me to help them write the entry.

Am sorry Snaremop, but respect is earned not given.

Your comment clearly shows you haven't read a single word that was written by the people above.

Oh yeah, i was going to say, can someone send me a thumbnail of a VS logo? i was going to take a screenie, but its the christmas one thats up right now, and i wasn't going to put that one on. Yet.

snaremop, I understand how you feel but I wasn't making edits on Wikipedia as a Sifter, I was doing while wearing my 'Wikipedia hat'.

Not discussing my edits with you directly is not meant as a slight, but is, rather, how one makes edits to Wikipedia in the first place.

If you do need to consult, you do so on the associated "Talk" page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Videosift

I did discuss edits on the talk page, and you are, of course, obviously more than welcome to continue contributing. Do realize, however, that it's extremely counterproductive to accuse people of this or that (in this case, being ungrateful or whatever you want to call it).

Judging from your feeling about the edits to the page, I seriously recommend you study the introductory documents and other protocols at Wikipedia because you seem to betray a bit of a misunderstanding concerning how things work there.

Whereas at a place like Videosift we usually make more suggestions or comments before initiating changes (the star-blog command and star-dead being examples), at Wikipedia the overarching policy is to "be bold" when editing - no one ever means anything personal when they change things, it's a continual iterative process designed to make things progressively better.

That page is nowhere near done yet and will require even more work, but it's still a good start.

I realize the last two paragraphs or so serve as a super-brief summary of Wiki-edit philosophy, but if you're serious about writing/editing Wikipedia pages, I strongly recommend you search out and read some more docs about it - the tl;dr read attitude isn't healthy.

I'm done arguing. You have beaten me. Good job.

And by the way, I did read and comprehend everything you said. I didn't realize that there was a "Talk" page. I regret starting this, as it has earned me a reputation as a wild card offtopic asshole on VideoSift. I apologize to everybody - please forgive me for accusing you guys of anything.

Don't worry son, choggie is too easy to figure out for most folks, (myself included), treat the sift as a type of therapy, or a tree house full of patient, slightly askew, mentors, who will delicately guide all comers through the uncharted regions, with gentle hand slaps, and prompt goading, followed, most likely, with abandonment, banishment, then death by Admin. We all have to go, down to the cold, cold, ground, some day.

*yells* selling thick skins!!! anyone need a thicker skin!??!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Choggie that is the most lucid - and may I say, poignant - thing I've ever read from you. [sniff]

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

And Snaremop - putting my cranky old man persona to the side for a moment, allow me to say something nice about you- You embody two of my favourite sayings: "fortune favours the brave" and "90% of life is just showing up". So, you've got the basics covered - may I also say you are a precocious 13 year old. (who am I kidding, Snaremop is probably a 45 year old stock broker).

Snaremop, I'm going to tell you the very same thing I just told my own 13 year old son: sometimes you just have to drop your chin to your chest and say "Yes, Sir."

When the principal calls you in his office you can offer no excuses or whining. Just take the consequences, tough it out and don't react. Man up, son, it's time.

Now, c'mere and give me a hug.

"most lucid - and may I say, poignant - thing I've ever read from you."
Damn. Choogie, battin' a thousand-

oh and hey, youngster, I would run from that hug, it's a trick-don't do it!

So who exactly is being accused of coming on to minors here now? I'll assume it's dag.

And Snaremop - putting my cranky old man persona to the side for a moment, allow me to say something nice about you- You embody two of my favourite sayings: "fortune favours the brave" and "90% of life is just showing up". So, you've got the basics covered - may I also say you are a precocious 13 year old. (who am I kidding, Snaremop is probably a 45 year old stock broker).


How did you know?! Thanks dag - good to see the hate dying down on this post...




But seriously, thanks.

Old farts, once letting out all their gas, can become quite friendly. Just avoid feeding them beans. <grin>

[btw, self-nomination for nastiest metaphor ever]

No. snaremop is so patently a 37 year old female FBI agent in the Child Obscenity division.

All of the lads gathered around the special "porn" computer at the Bureau will enjoy that exquisite metaphor, Krupo.

Aw, crap. It's back to prison again for me. At least there'll be more time for sifting.