Talk:List of most-viewed YouTube videos/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Update on the number 3

Chris Brown and his video "Loyal" has 1,094,183 views[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.58.113.155 (talk) 02:24, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

these are all updated at the same time, no needs to specify one. --MASEM (t) 02:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2015

Enrique Iglesias Bailando is going to overtake LMFAO Party Rock Anthem today. Could you please update the chart ASAP so he is credited with #5? Armx92 (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

No. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 17:58, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2015

75.100.42.8 (talk) 22:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done as you have not requested a change. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 00:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2015

Blank Space have got 886,948,655 views.

And Party Rock Anthem got 877,459,867 views.

So Blank Space should move higher in ranking. Views are of 28 may 2015 Aayushoj (talk) 14:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

•  Not done We are not going to update this table just because on a given day the position of two videos swapped. It's being done on a regular basis so it will take no more than 5-ish days for the list to update. This is why the "as of (date)" sits predominately on the table so that we don't have to stay instantly up to date on the changes at YT. --MASEM (t) 15:02, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2015

Blank space views:- 893,425,695 Bailando views:- 893,086,558 (on saturday 30th May 2015) which makes Blank Space in top 5(i guess). Aayushoj (talk) 15:51, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

They don't change the rankings every day. They wait four or five days between. Even if someone correctly updates the list too soon they revert it back for some odd unknown reason. Give it a few days Blank Space will be moved eventually. Finaltwo (talk) 15:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Dark Horse

I'm not entirely sure how to update this chart correctly, but Katy Perry's Dark Horse has become the third overall video (and first female video) to reach 1 billion views. See this for more. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi SNUGGUMS, the video passed the views on Vevo I believe. This list follows the YouTube views (which lag by around 20,000 views always from Vevo) and they are updated every 5 days. I believe they will be updated shortly. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

That said, I have left in invis comments on the table for the next update for note G that should be removed when it is updated, so that we capture the above source. --MASEM (t) 05:29, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2015

Please fix the Dark Horse in the description. It is incorrect. 174.27.117.153 (talk) 17:03, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 17:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Notes

The Notes states: "The "Danza Kuduro" upload is not viewable globally due to YouTube regional restrictions in certain countries." Well, that goes for most of the music videos when it comes to Germany. Neither "Gangnam Style", nor "Dark Horse" or most of the other videos are not available in Germany. The official videos won't show in the search results either. 2A02:8109:A93F:F624:F538:6234:6110:B191 (talk) 19:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Good point, I will adjust text to make it clear. --MASEM (t) 19:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Updating

If the update is every 5 days, then why the last update is in June 20 then update in June 23, not June 25? Roif456 (talk) 04:50, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

See edit request below. 99.170.117.163 (talk) 07:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Missing Video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYniUCGPGLs

This should have been on the list at #29 at least. Could someone please explain why it's not.

146.115.161.10 (talk) 03:36, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, "at #29 at least" (emphasis mine) or more accurately at #28 and ahead of "Wake Me Up" based on the current view counts. I informed the editor on his talk page (as mentioned when adding to the "edit request" above while this last comment was being added), perhaps he or another editor will notice (or "wake up" eventually to make a correction - hahah). 99.170.117.163 (talk) 03:51, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

By Year

Why isn't Most Viewed By Year relevant? I think it's interesting. Editor49 (talk) 16:19, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2015

During the next update, there appears to be a new addition to the list which would be or is ranked #29 (ahead of "Somebody That I Used to Know") based on statistics at the time of this request – the video is "Маша и Медведь - Маша плюс каша (Серия 17) | Masha and The Bear (Episode 17)" at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYniUCGPGLs (with 657,637,878 views), if someone will add this video when doing the next update. Thanks! 99.170.117.163 (talk) 07:14, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

It seems an update is "overdue" (has been over five days), the aforementioned video was added on 25 June when the list was updated and then the edits (the update and a subsequent correction) were reverted mistakenly here presumably due to erroneously thinking the "scheduled" update had already been done the prior day on June 24th when the edit that day by Masem was only to clarify "that video links overall may not be available due to regional aspects". The last actual update of the list had been done on 19 June [2] and the list update on 25 June by Roif456 was ~5 days later (and should not have been reverted, imo, as more than five days had passed). Helpfully... 99.170.117.163 (talk) 07:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Correction: list was also updated on 23 June which was not previously noticed, likely due to confusion on my part when "scrolling" through edit comparisons ("last edit", "next edit") and/or not seeing entirety of edit to the list. Somewhat inconsequential insofar as edit request which has yet to be fulfilled. 99.170.117.163 (talk) 04:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Now this is June 28, 2015, and the video Маша и Медведь - Маша плюс каша (Серия 17) | Masha and The Bear (Episode 17 is not even included here. Why? Roif456 (talk) 21:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Looks like the updater (Danielfuinogl) may not have seen the edit request and was unaware of the video. I added a comment on his talk page to ask him to please see this talk page. 99.170.117.163 (talk) 03:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Already done Apologies for the delay. Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests is currently backlogged, with the oldest request going back to June 5, 2015. It appears Roif456 (talk · contribs) has already carried out the request with this edit at 22:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC). Thank you, Roif456. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 07:09, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2015

The number of videos exceeding 1 billion views is now four. Additionally, "Blank Space" must be placed in quotations as it is a song title. The final sentence of the introductory copy should be updated to reflect these changes (my edits in brackets): "As of June 22, 2015, three [replace with "four"] videos have received over 1 billion views, all of which are music videos: "Gangnam Style" by Psy, "Baby" by Justin Bieber featuring Ludacris, "Dark Horse" by Katy Perry featuring Juicy J [Add a comma? Not sure about house style for serial commas.] and Blank Space [add quotation marks] by Taylor Swift.

EDIT FOR CLARITY:

Please change

• As of July 8th, 2015, four videos have received over 1 billion views, all of which are music videos: "Gangnam Style" by Psy, "Baby" by Justin Bieber featuring Ludacris, "Dark Horse" by Katy Perry featuring Juicy J and Blank Space by Taylor Swift.

to

• As of July 8th, 2015, four videos have received over 1 billion views, all of which are music videos: "Gangnam Style" by Psy, "Baby" by Justin Bieber featuring Ludacris, "Dark Horse" by Katy Perry featuring Juicy J, and "Blank Space" by Taylor Swift.

Link formatting is omitted here for ease of reading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.90.48.69 (talk) 17:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC) 70.90.48.69 (talk) 18:11, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  19:45, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Can someone update the list? See You Again just beat Somebody I Used to Know.104.238.169.78 (talk) 05:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

The list is updated every 3-5 days. There is no rush just because one video passed another. --MASEM (t) 05:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

|answered=yes

Let It Go (from "Frozen") - One song, three different videos

On YouTube there are three different videos which are all from the same song. In my opinion we should count the views of each video together. UPS Salla (talk) 23:15, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

No, it is best to simply treat each video as a separate entity, otherwise I can see this being used to play favorites. --MASEM (t) 01:14, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I would also say no, because this is not about songs. This isn't the Billboard YouTube chart. This is solely about the individual videos. It also would exclude videos like Charlie Bit My Finger if we based it on the song. Also, it would be nearly impossible to get totals if we had to track down every video with a song's audio to reach its view total. ThomasM123 (talk) 05:19, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 August 2015

Link to the Wiki page of Little Baby Bum Little Baby Bum, which is found in the 20th position. Thanks! Maria-546565 (talk) 17:36, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Done by Maria-546565. Stickee (talk) 04:20, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2015

It says "Rolling yoin the the deep" rather than "Rolling in the deep" 176.10.249.124 (talk) 10:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 11:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The "1 billion view" list

We already have 6, and at least 3 more videos are posed to hit 1B within the next few months. That is going to make that list excessively long in the lede. I suggest that either we eliminate the list, reword it to something like "As of (date) X videos have recieved more than 1 billion view." (no list), or change the metric to 2 billion (which I know only leaves Gangnam Style , but still), or a combination of the last two. But no way that we should have a 1/3rd of the main list restated in the lead. --MASEM (t) 14:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

This is meant to be a Top YouTube list, not top billion views on YoutTube list... Look at things like List of Highest Grossing Films, they have multiple $1B dollar movies, (22) but keep the list going until 50. Editor49 (talk) 02:40, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Masem to just mention the number of videos which has passed billion views, instead of listing them. Readers can just read below and see for themselves the names. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:26, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Years of Youtube

I put this in the article a few times, but it kept getting removed, here is the most viewed YouTube videos by year it was published...

Year	Video Title	Publisher/Artist	Views
2005	Example	Example	Example
2006	Example	Example	Example
2007	"Charlie bit my finger – again!"	HDCYT	826,942,255
2008	Example	Example	Example
2009	Example	Example	Example
2010	"Baby"	Justin Bieber featuring Ludacris	1,203,315,177
2011	"Party Rock Anthem"	LMFAO featuring Lauren Bennett and GoonRock	925,402,329
2012	"Gangnam Style"	Psy	2,399,754,753
2013	"Roar"	Katy Perry	1,036,975,992
2014	"Blank Space"	Taylor Swift	1,106,809,640
2015	"See You Again"	Wiz Khalifa featuring Charlie Puth	855,006,241

For everything else, ill wait for an approval... Editor49 (talk) 23:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Do you have a source for any of this? Otherwise it feels like WP:OR.--JOJ ^Hutton 23:52, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Exactly; also, by year, I would expect this to be based on the views during that year, not the cumulative views. (a 2013 video may have had its viewcount maxed in 2014 or later, for example). And that's not data readily available. --MASEM (t) 23:55, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

This is pretty much into unnecessary trivia territory since no third party sources are present atm. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:35, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Update Chart

The song 'Sugar' by Maroon 5 had been overtake 'Rolling in the deep' in the List of most viewed YouTube videos. It had reached almost 700 hundred thousand in recent. Can you please take action to update the chart ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.142.183.43 (talk) 09:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The chart is updated once every 5 days or so. The new ordering will be reflected then. --MASEM (t) 13:30, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2015

175.101.16.161 (talk) 07:07, 8 September 2015 (UTC) Blank space-Taylor Swift surpassed Baby-Justin Bieber youtube video views recently

 Not done as you just made that up
As of 2 minutes ago the figures were:- Taylor Swift 1,137,565,901 - Justin Bieber 1,208,974,965 - Arjayay (talk) 07:44, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Expand

Can we expand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.93.78 (talk) 17:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Revert back to Updated List

Current reversion is out of date. Please update to correct revision. 09:48, 13 September 2015‎ Danielfuinogl (talk | contribs)‎ . . (21,307 bytes) (+29)‎ . . (→‎Top videos)

173.166.46.97 (talk) 22:16, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 22:19, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

My bad I assumed you were vandalizing the article... Meh it's better to be safe & sorry I guess, Anyway my apologies there. –Davey2010^Talk 23:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2015

I would like to edited the list of most viewed videos on youtube page because taylor swift's video blank space now has 1,170,326,770 views and I would simply like to make this tiny alteration to prevent rage messages from Taylor swift's fans. Thank you. XAngelHunterX (talk) 16:17, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

 Not done We update this every 5 days. We're not always going to be up to date, and this page cannot be treated as a competition between fans of various artists. --MASEM (t) 16:21, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2015

Anyone try add a Peak collumn like most other tabulated lists or charts on Wikipedia? 2.96.129.1 (talk) 14:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Billboard-like charts do track the peak of an album or song, but there is no source that does the same for YouTube videos, and it would be original research to do so. It is probably not tracked because unlike albums which have generally limited windows when they will be popular, YT videos can keep going and going indefinitely, there's no "window" for most purposes, so that's probably why the data is not tracked. --MASEM (t) 14:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2015

Someone recently added the word "currently" to the image caption for Psy's Gangnam Style at the top of the article, but since the sentence already included "as of ..." there is no need for the extra word which may be seen as somewhat redundant. Please remove the word currently from the caption. Another thing is the phrasing could be misinterpreted as meaning the video became the most viewed on the "as of" date, so I request that "as of October 2015" be changed to "since November 2012" instead. Thanks! 99.170.117.163 (talk) 10:11, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done Seems reasonable to me. Gap9551 (talk) 15:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Gap9551, most appreciated! In this case, using currently may have been alright, as the article is updated regularly (thus could be an exception to WP:PRECISELANG), except for also having "as of" (sounded a bit redundant, imo, as I wrote in edit request). And, I like that you retained "as of" on number of views which can be updated whenever the full list is done every five or so days. Excellent! :-) - 99.170.117.163 (talk) 11:25, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Something else to consider (perhaps for the notes section), but not part of the edit request, is the same video was the quickest to reach most viewed status, doing so in 19 weeks (supported by the Forbes reference), a record which has not been surpassed. – 99.170.117.163 (talk) 10:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I can't find in the reference where it says that it was the quickest to reach most viewed status. Either way this can't be true; the first viewed YouTube video (right after YouTube's launch) necessarily must have reached 'most viewed status' after only 1 view, and many other videos will have reached this status quicker too in the early days. Gap9551 (talk) 15:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 November 2015

I want to edit this page. 71.120.219.225 (talk) 00:47, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

This page is protected due to excessive vandalism. If there is an edit you think needs to be made, please use this edit semi-protected form to indicate what change you want made. --MASEM (t) 00:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

"Let Her Go" taken down from Youtube

As og November 4, video #26 "Let Her Go" was removed from Youtube, due to coyright claims from Alannah Myles / Atlantic Records (WMG). I don't what should be done about it on this list. Since it was a Youtube video with that number of views, one could argue it should remain on the list, but with a note, until it is surpassed. Or one could argue that it should be removed, because it is no longer viewable. Also, perhaps it might come up again soon, since it was on Passengers official channel. Simnik(NSK) (talk) 01:55, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Simnik(NSK): As of November 6, the video is accessible at the link included on the list and viewable on YouTube at the same URL. 2602:306:3AA7:5A30:214:FF:FE00:6CCE (talk) 21:55, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2015

The #30 video should now be "Lean on" -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqeW9_5kURI Shenoyroopesh (talk) 05:22, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

 Not done It will be updated in time. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 12:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2015

Wildest Dreams by Taylor Swift exceeded 191,416,000 views today. Love Me Like You Do by Ellie Goulding has over 788,000,000 views.

99.242.217.195 (talk) 00:05, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Updates will be made at the regular frequency. --MASEM (t) 00:42, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2015

Back to December by Taylor Swift has over 113,816,000 views.

99.242.217.195 (talk) 00:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Updates will be made at the regular frequency. --MASEM (t) 00:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Add Major Lazer & DJ Snake - Lean On (feat. MØ) to the list

As of 11/10/2015, this video has a notable 759,901,192 views.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqeW9_5kURI&index=2&list=RDwkNspOpff4U

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.139.101.230 (talk) 23:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

It will be added on the next overall list update. --MASEM (t) 00:15, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello - Adele

Should be added to the list. Currently at 349,184,963 174.112.38.8 (talk) 20:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Which doesn't put it in the top 30 at all. I am confident based on its performance it will cross into that as some point, but we'll add it when that happens, not before. --MASEM (t) 20:37, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Me & U is under 10 mil. --Allygggggg (talk) 20:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Uploader of Charlie Bit My Finger

There are three videos that aren't music videos.

Masha and the Bear Wheels on the Bus Charlie Bit My Finger

For the first two, the uploader was the name of the channel, but for Charlie Bit My Finger, it's the name of the kids being filmed. I propose that we change the uploader to HDCYT.

ThomasM123 (talk) 02:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I think wheels on the bus is most definitely a music video, though for a much younger target audience! 114.112.239.243 (talk) 13:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2015

Change the views on Hello by Adele in to 851,398,734 since their are more views now.

Jasonzhang130 (talk) 19:38, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Viewcounts for all videos are updated semi-regularly (3-5 days), we don't do it just when the ordering switches. --MASEM (t) 19:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 December 2015

"Lean On" has surpassed "Sugar" as of either yesterday or today. Additionally, "Hello" has 799,755,000 views. It is now less than a million views behind number-30 "The Lazy Song", and I expect "Hello" to enter the top 30 by the end of today. Andrew11374265 (talk) 19:16, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

At least one update has been made since this request, so all suggested changes have been made. Gap9551 (talk) 23:28, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

#14

That has obviously some bot-driven numbers. There are nowhere near 1 bil people that can understand Russian and it is not something like a music video where lyrics might not matter. Nergaal (talk) 20:45, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

• Bloomberg seems to believe the numbers are real. --MASEM (t) 21:14, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2016

Please change the ranking of Hello-Adele. kindly revise the data.

103.248.122.2 (talk) 09:28, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as we do not update individual entries, since these would then be incompatible with all the other entries - the entire list is usually updated about twice a week - so, as it was last done on 5 January, it will be done in the next day or so. - Arjayay (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Top 30 or top 50

Should this list be Top 30 or Top 50? Why has 30 been decided on? Top 50 is more common. Does anyone have a view on this? AusLondonder (talk) 16:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

30 is the number historically used by RS for reporting this. It should follow that, otherwise we get creep fast.--MASEM (t) 17:07, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Could you please tell me what sources, User:Masem? AusLondonder (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

@User:AusLondonder, YouTube used to keep a list of the top videos, but for whatever reason they stopped. It only went up to 30. https://web.archive.org/web/20130921063650/http://www.youtube.com/charts/videos_views?t=a — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.74.100 (talk) 18:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2016

Gangnam Style view count is 2,498,304,334

50.67.14.93 (talk) 04:30, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

 Not done The viewcounts will constantly be changing, there is no need to point out a small change like this (if it was a serious errr, like only reading 2,500,000 views and not 2,500,000,000, that would be appropriate to note.) --MASEM (t) 05:05, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Proposition: Merge this list and the list of most-viewed Vevo videos into one article

Would it be a good idea to merge the two lists into one article? As a result, the other list would likely be better-maintained (e.g. I updated it today, despite an update yesterday, because the viewcount on one of the videos was off by 48 million - such mistakes haven't happened in this list due to its semi-protection). Andrew11374265 (talk) 03:47, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

When the Vevo list was created, as a clone of this one, it was nominated for deletion but determined to be kept because people felt the two lists were sufficiently different. I personally do not, as Vevo is much lesser known than YouTube, but that's the consensus to keep them apart. --MASEM (t) 04:39, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Alright, did not know that. Thanks for the response. Andrew11374265 (talk) 15:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Problem with Article

Personally, I am bothered by the fact that the notes are in alphabetical instead of numerical order

Can the notes be placed in numerical order (AKA in order to present the videos that reached a billion in order)

Rolling in the deep by Adele now has more views than Miley Cyrus' Wrecking Ball Juvnlopez (talk) 22:16, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Rolling in the deep by Adele now has more views than Miley Cyrus' Wrecking Ball Juvnlopez (talk) 22:16, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Note on Adele's "Hello"

Vevo's confirmed 1 B views as of a few hours ago. I expect a source to affirm it the fastest to 1B on YouTube will be in the newscycle tomorrow, which we should update the lead to add it to the existing 3. I'm still looking for a good # of day estimate. --MASEM (t) 03:02, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Update frequency

When reading this talk page and some edit summaries, I get the impression that the list is updated every 5 days. That's good. But is it true that correct, full updates are reverted if they are done after less than 5 days? If so, why? I can't think of a reason why intermediate updates are a bad thing, even if they happen inconsistently, as long as the 5-day upper limit is maintained. Gap9551 (talk) 15:29, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

If someone updates it less than 5 days but updates everything, that's good, though overeager. What happens 90% of the time is that people update one video or a few videos (because there was an order switch or a video crossed 1B views, or further, and that's not good. the entire list needs to be updated as one. --MASEM (t) 20:25, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Whether people are overeager or how they should spend their time is not for us to judge, I think. If they want to update the full list every hour, fine with me. I explicitly excluded partial updates from my question because I noticed that even full updates have been reverted. Gap9551 (talk) 21:34, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@Masem: Why did you revert an apparently correct update with this edit? Especially since above you say 'If someone updates it less than 5 days but updates everything, that's good'? Gap9551 (talk) 02:05, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Twice a day is overkill. What it feeds is people that are rooting for their favorite vids as they climb the ranks (currently what I'm seeing with Adele's Hello). We need to stick closer to a 3-5 day frequency, and definitely not tolerate twice a day. --MASEM (t) 02:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

It's still not clear to me why more frequent updates are a problem to you. The motivations of the updater are irrelevant. A more recently updated list is always preferable over a list less recently updated. Gap9551 (talk) 03:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

There may be a case for example where there are two videos simultaneously rising up in the charts. If they are backed by fans of the different artists, and we don't discourage frequent editing, we can easily get into edit wars between these two sets of editors. By doing one edit every 3 or 5 days, this type of situation would not happen since we're just snapshotting as needed. We should not be trying to be at-the-moment accurate, but reasonable current. --MASEM (t) 03:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Updating back and forth is not edit warring, as new, more accurate, content is being added with each update. In fact those sets of editors would all be cooperating in keeping the article up to date. To my knowledge there are no guidelines saying that articles shouldn't be updated more often than a certain frequency (following updates in reliable sources). Such guidelines would even conflict with WP:V as content should reflect reliable sources. Why should we not be trying to be 'at-the-moment accurate'? I'm not saying that I encourage editors to update after 9 hours, but if someone does it anyway, that's great news for the reader. The bottom line is that you reverted an edit that unquestionably improved the article, as the new version presented the reader with more accurate information than the old version. Gap9551 (talk) 16:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Who made you the Police of this article? Why do you decide what we need and not need, and what the update frequency is? One would think you're the owner of the article or something. As long as all 30 are updated, regardless of whether it's by fans "rooting for their favourite arists", then that's all that matters. Edit-warring is when reverts keeps happening or edits are undone – that would not happen in more frequent updates. Feudonym (talk) 03:28, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Because first, all the data needs to synchonized to the same day, which many new editors do not do. Second, this list is clearly one that fans of specific artists want to play favorites on; the case with Adele's Hello is a prime example. It will be updated in time, usually every 3 to 5 days, there is no need to immediately list when the video breaks 1 billion views in the long term scope of this article. --MASEM (t) 03:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

You keep conveniently skirting around the question posed to you (just like you did earlier to Gap9551); what does it matter if ALL 30 are updated, regardless of whether it's by "overeager" editors doing it every day, or every 5 days? (Who decided this "5 day rule" anyway?) I am not talking about people who update a single video here and there, that is not part of my question so please do not keep answering that when no one is asking it. Secondly, this Adele's "Hello" is a perfect case in point. As it has passed 1 billion views so quickly, there will be a lot of visitors to this page (especially as YouTube does not maintain these lists any more) to see where she is placed. A more accurate, recently updated list is far more preferable than a non-updated, in some cases 5 day old list. I am sorry that people other than you are updating it, I know it must cause a lot of heartache and anguish but you need to get over it. Feudonym (talk) 04:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

We don't care how many people come here, we want to make sure the information is accurate and importantly, neutral. Behavior on this article in the past has shown a lot of favoritism edits, some which can be helpful but most being of the type "my favorite artist's video just surpassed this artist's video that I dislike, so we must update this immediately." There is no need to be updating these any more frequently than a couple times a week because for the reason we are not playing favorites. We are not required to be up-to-the-minute to date, but we can be updated. --MASEM (t) 04:45, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Wow, it's like talking to a brick wall. I'll explain it as clearly as I can: No one is saying "we are required to be up-to-the-minute to date", neither is anyone saying "there is a need to be updating these more frequently". I, and I suspect a few others' whose edits you have undone, am asking why these complete edits, which may be done more frequently than every 5 days (!), is a problem to you or anyone?

we want to make sure the information is accurate and importantly, neutral

Well that's good, because updating more frequently does not make it inaccurate nor does it make it biased. As long as all 30 are updated, then it doesn't matter if there is favoritism in an artist (and as I mentioned earlier, I am not talking about single edits). If anything it would make it more accurate. I cited the Adele song as an example when the information gets rapidly out of date and it would clearly be an inaccurate article, by quite some positions on the list. In which case, updating all 30 every hour if an editor so wishes would actually be helpful, as it would make it more accurate. Feudonym (talk) 05:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Having an article a few days out of date is not an issue for Wikipedia, much less hours. There is no rush to be current. The problem is that when people do rush to reflect a standings change, they have easily made mistakes or gotten things wrong if only to push a specific artist or video they've been following. And while we haven't gotten to a point where this can occur, if there are two or more simultaneous videos pushing on changing the order or breaking 1B, we could easily encounter a situation where two or more editors are conflicting in their edits. By pushing for a more regular one update every three to five days takes out any favoritism and prevents edit warring even when a video breaks a certain mark. It keeps things neutral, and within accuracy in the context that we are not required to be up to the second accurate. --MASEM (t) 15:28, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Some editors potentially making a mistake when updating does not mean that we should also revert correct full updates that make the list more accurate. It means we should revert (or fix) the updates that contain mistakes, if any. Reverting an edit on the mere assumption that it may be inaccurate, without actually spotting a mistake, is not allowed. If two editors have an edit conflict, that's unfortunate for one of them who sees their effort go to waste, but no reason for us to impose a lower limit in updating frequency. The probability of an edit conflict is very low even with daily updates. And if those hypothetical edit conflicts were to happen regularly, the editors involved would become frustrated and reduce their update frequency by themselves. There is no need for intervention from other editors. Gap9551 (talk) 18:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

As said before, the motivation of the updates is completely irrelevant, so 'favoritism' is no problem here at all. It's even a good thing if fans keep the list more accurate by making full correct updates. In fact, most of Wikipedia depends on aficionados writing and maintaining its content. You are saying that a lower update frequency keeps the list more neutral – that is simply wrong. High update frequencies (of full, correct updates) can never compromise neutrality. On the contrary, frequent updates make the article more accurate and therefore more neutral. That been stated many times now in this discussion, and has not yet been refuted. An outdated list, however, is not neutral because it may have videos in the wrong position. If anything, keeping the list outdated on purpose could hypothetically be seen as favoritism towards videos that receive relatively few views currently, as a way for an editor to keep their favorite video in a higher position (I can't see anyone doing that, but I mention the possibility to underline my point). Gap9551 (talk) 18:30, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Not that additional arguments for leaving correct edits alone should be needed, but Wikipedia:Reverting#When to revert and the essay Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary clearly suggest to avoid reverting edits most of the time, unless really necessary. For example, your reverting may drive away perfectly good editors. Gap9551 (talk) 18:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

At the same time, there is no deadline or rush to have the right info in place and we remain a work in progress. It is basically not productive to update this list on a daily basis because the numbers are always going to change, so the time spent to make the edits is wasted. (I've argued before that we should be even less frequent than 3-5 days due to this nature, and perhaps should only be done when there's an ordering change or now when a video enters the 1 B club). Couple that with the numerous editors that come by to do partial updates because their favorite video changes position or the like, and you have a situation where we need more adherence to a schedule so that we aren't biased in any way. As long as we stick to that schedule save for important points (eg "Hello" surpassing 1B) we are not creating any bias whatsoever. Yes, those that want to update more frequently can, but we should be discouraging that as there are better places to use ones time than to make a change that becomes irrelevant in such a short time. No, I won't revert again if someone does a second update on the same day, but this is really poor editing practice that we caution against. --MASEM (t) 18:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

"It is basically not productive", "the time spent to make the edits is wasted", "we should be discouraging that as there are better places to use ones time". Wow, I cannot believe you are suggesting how others should spend their time. And yet again you keep bringing up partial edits. Arguing against you is hopeless. I'm out. Feudonym (talk) 02:11, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Creating a separate page for the Most Viewed non-music Videos

The vast majority of the "Most Viewed" youtube videos are Music Videos. The only non-music videos that are on the list are "Wheels On The Bus", "Masha and The Bear (Episode 17)", and "Charlie Bit My Finger". Eventually, all of the most viewed videos on Youtube will be Music videos. There was an interesting Reddit post a while back that listed the most viewed non Music videos. Since it was made seven months ago, this list is no longer accurate. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I support. Gotta be much more interesting. It would be perfect if animated films were also excluded. --Dixtosa (talk) 09:49, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

It would be original research as there is no one that has provided such a previous list, and thus inappropriate. --MASEM (t) 13:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Masem. I wouldn't mind having such a list, but only if we have reliable sources. The topic may not be sufficiently notable. Gap9551 (talk) 18:33, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Masem too. However, I just wanted to bring this to attention because this article will be no different than List of most viewed Vevo videos since most of the videos on this list are from Vevo. Most of the "Non-VEVO" videos are music videos not affiliated by VEVO including Gangnam Style, See You Again, Lean On, and Gentleman. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Fastest videos to 1 billion

Any thoughts on the short list at the top of the page, which currently has four videos in? It started a few months ago, used to be three videos, and then Hello became the fastest and we kept Blank Space in the list. Having four is of course arbitrary, and to me, three or five seem like more natural numbers to have, though perhaps for no reason other than my Western background, eg. 'I'm going to count to THREE' and five being half of ten, the base we usually work in.

I note that Lean On made it in about 290 days and would be a good fifth addition, with Uptown Funk not far behind. Another option is that we only include videos which have reached it in a year (currently six), but the downside is this list could grow (eg when 'Sorry'/'What do You Mean' hit a billion).

We also have to be careful about sources, without a source for the list, what do we do when a video should enter the list, but has no source? It's not so much an issue for the main list on this page, because a good source for that is the YouTube page itself.

I suggest we keep the list short, at three videos. Of course, another option would be to delete the list.

Tcamfield (talk) 09:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

As long as they are only listed in the lead, I also prefer a shorter list, 3 sounds good. But maybe we can move the current list of 4 videos to a table in a new section, below the main table. (Also since the 1-billion club seems to be a thing mentioned in sources.) If there are sources for more than 4 videos, that table can be expanded. If we make such a table, it would be sufficient to list only the fastest (Hello) in the lead, as a summary. Gap9551 (talk) 23:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

We only have four videos in sources that are listed as the fastest-to-1B. While it is arguably possible to make that calculation ourselves, that is also heading onto original research, so we need the citations to make this claim for us, and that's only coming from a few sources. I don't expect anything in the near future to beat Hello's rate, and if it does, it definitely will be sourcable then. So as it is is fine for the present. --MASEM (t) 23:58, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I think it's fine as is. I don't think we should do a table as it will lead to a load of revert OR type editing all the time and, although it's likely that a new fastest video will get sources, a new third or fourth fastest might not and then the table is incomplete without OR. By about August, by my reckoning, Hello will have become the fastest to 2Bn, followed shortly by See You Again, so we're going to need to keep the mentions of getting to 1Bn brief. Btljs (talk) 04:04, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Someone Like You

The problem with some performers' videos is that they have more than one official video for a song. A typical example is Adele's 'Someone Like You'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qemWRToNYJY has 158 million, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCya1yiFFP4 has 118 million, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AW9C3-qWug has 185 million, and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLQl3WQQoQ0 has 647 million. That's a total of 1.108 billion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:797B:EA00:F91D:BF4A:ABA9:3A3A (talk) 03:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

We are only going by official uploads of videos, not by song. So for example, the 3rd video we'd immediately exclude as it is a copyright vio, and the first two are simply different performances of the song. We could say the same with many of the songs too, and that would artificially increase all the views. It[s best to stick to the one single official video. --MASEM (t) 03:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

That's an interesting point, Masem, does that mean that we wouldn't list an unofficial video of a song if it has more views than the official one? Maybe that should be stated explicitly in the lede. And if a video is a copyvio, wouldn't Youtube delete it? Gap9551 (talk) 17:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

First, we'd immediately omit copyright vios (and I would suspect that copyright vios would be eliminated for us if they got as many views as the top 30 have now). But on the other hand, if a live performance of a song, uploaded by a entity with copyright license to it so that the upload is legit, exceeds the original song, we'd include the live performance. We just should not group the different versions as one "video" for this list. --MASEM (t) 18:16, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

So we would also list multiple legit videos of the same song if both would qualify for top 30? That's what I assumed we (and our sources) would do: simply list the top 30 videos, regardless of content. Gap9551 (talk) 18:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, each video stands on its own ,regardless of the song it uses, as I see it. I don't see any cases like this on the horizon to worry about though. --MASEM (t) 18:39, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I think the questions asked are wrongly assuming that this is anything to do with music. It happens that at this point in time most of the big view counts on Youtube are music videos, but it wasn't always the case and may not be the case in the future. A video is anything which Youtube keep a count of views for and is publicly available. The entire chart could be videos of one thing: an event on the scale of the Kennedy assassination could be filmed by lots of people and they could all receive a huge number of views. Btljs (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

If it was an event of that scale where there were dozens + videos of amateur footage of the event that sum total might reach billions of views, it would be OR to lump them all in as the same video, including the possibility of failing to find other videos of the same event. This is not meant to preclude videos that were taking without regard for production quality, just that we should be focused on the single video itself. --MASEM (t) 20:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

A video is a video regardless of content. There is no lumping together. It is recorded once and uploaded once. What I am saying is that there is no such thing as an official video of some events. Performances are an exception where there is copyright. If Kennedy was shot today with crowds watching there would be dozens of videos and it is entirely conceivable that many of them individually could reach a billion views. Btljs (talk) 22:27, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Dating

300