Jump to content

Talk:Onewheel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2021 and 24 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sphung11. Peer reviewers: Kelseycluett, Sarahdanes.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph?

[edit]

Can someone add a photograph of this device to this article (and ideally also to the gallery section of Personal transporter)? Thanks. PeterEastern (talk) 12:52, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anime?

[edit]

This device seems to feature in Carole and Tuesday, used for personal mobility by the caribbean girl. 94.21.241.137 (talk) 20:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Chang's video reference

[edit]

Jimmy Chang knows onewheel really well, and he made a video to basically give a definition on "nosediving". If you delete it from the article, you go against the ideology of Wikipedia - to share knowledge. You can't just pretend that the "nosediving" problem does not exist, can you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aqExgtYOIg WP:CITEVIDEO BE REALISTIC!!! Yilangderen (talk) 02:23, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CITEVIDEO is an essay, not a policy or a guideline. They are written by individual editors and do not speak for the entire Wikipedia community as a whole.
If no other reputable sources talk about this topic other than some guy on YouTube, posting their own content, then it isn't a notable enough topic to include. Anyone can post anything on YouTube; that in itself does not make them subject-matter experts or reliable sources. Unless YouTube videos are produced by a source already known to be reliable, then it should not be used. As is mentioned in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, which is an explanatory supplement to the reliable sources content guideline:

Most videos on YouTube are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable, and should not be used at all. Content uploaded from a verified official account, such as that of a news organization, may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability. However, many YouTube videos from unofficial accounts are copyright violations and should not be linked from Wikipedia, according to WP:COPYLINK. See also WP:YOUTUBE and WP:VIDEOLINK.

If you dispute this assessment, you can take it to the reliable sources noticeboard or ask for a third opinion. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:07, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not good at using fancy words, but two things are clear to me: 1. Subject-matter expert is the most relevant point. Jimmy has in-depth experience and expertise with the Onewheel; 2. Bassem Youssef has 8 YouTube citations, so Wikipedia's policy is not as strict as you think. Yilangderen (talk) 08:19, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yilangderen (talk) 08:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC) https://11thhouronline.com/2019/04/25/the-cost-of-future-motion/ [reply]

Thanks to the handy Onewheel iPhone app, I can tell you it was at precisely 17.7 miles per hour that I failed to notice the pushback indicating I needed to slow down and as the board performed an immediate and exquisite nosedive, I took flight.

I landed shoulder first, only mildly scraping an elbow and an ankle. Jumping back up, I assured my friend that I was ok. At least I thought I was ok. After a brief pat-down of my persons, I discovered an alarming protuberance where my left clavicle was supposed to be. I was certain this deformed object trying to escape from inside my fragile ginger skin was some type of heinous fracture, and before long the emergency room confirmed my suspicions.

See the danger of pushback & nosedive? It is physics, bro Yilangderen (talk) 08:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What makes Mr. Chang an expert? Has his expertise been cited in reliable sources that he himself did not publish?
Chang's channel has 5.46K subscribers, whereas Onewheel's channel has 31.3K subscribers. https://www.youtube.com/user/secondepinion https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCZMFqngWIbTcX_zPWPIJkg If you watch Chang's latest video, there is 533 likes and 30 dislikes. The point is, the internet agrees with Chang's knowledge. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PAlwx6hUvs Yilangderen (talk) 04:05, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And just because other stuff exists where YouTube is cited doesn't mean it's correct. With nearly 6 million articles, it's there are plenty of articles that are poorly writted, poorly cited or shouldn't exist at all. Each article has to stand on its own merit.
Seeing as we seem to be unable to resolve this disagreement about sources, I've posted a discussion here: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Sources cited by a contributor in Onewheel. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:02, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
65.131.249.132 Thanks very much! You have solved it, now it is time to share the knowledge, God bless Yilangderen (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The IP's additions are unsourced. Unsourced content isn't permitted, nor is WP:HOWTO content. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:26, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just because you remove the IP's additions does not mean you should remove my additions. Please continue debating my added content with me. Yilangderen (talk) 07:41, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Response to third opinion request:
Personally I have looked over the comments and I feel like I am on the side of Drm310 here as the YouTube references defintely goes under WP:SPS and you can't really say that Jimmy is the only one that has in-depth experience with the Onewheel. Their is also the fact that he only has around 5k subscribers which is like a drop in the sea on YouTube which wouldn't be good for referecing this article. HawkAussie (talk) 04:20, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it doesn't matter if he has 5000 or 5 million subscribers; popularity does not equal reliability. I am reverting the additions. If the content is restored again, I will take this to WP:DRN. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:47, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Before you bring it to dispute resolution, would you please assess the following 3 citations:
- https://e-surfer.com/en/onewheel-nosedive-onewheel-crash/
- https://www.synergywiz.com/glider
- http://thesidewaysmovement.com/onewheel-nosedive-wheels/
Yilangderen (talk) 07:39, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notable events

[edit]

Can someone please explain to me why it is relevant / important / noteworthy to mention the "Adventure Program" and "brand ambassadors"? It feels like an "attempted marketing" to me. Yilangderen (talk) 07:48, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Group Section

[edit]

Is this section really necessary? It’s unreferenced and adds little information, in addition to being written from a non-subjective point of view. DietDrPhil (talk) 06:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a controversy section

[edit]

Adding a controversy section as there are design issues, QC issues, dangerous board behaviours caused by a malfunctioning sensor that hasn't been recalled.

There is also anger coming from the community about alleged anti-electronics-right to repair practices by future motion on their Onewheel products. Which the company tried to answer in a video featuring the CEO but seemingly missed/avoided the actual issue. 209.15.92.141 (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@209.15.92.141 came here to check on the controversy and could not find anything. could be a good idea to add it. 51.155.195.31 (talk) 21:15, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Onewheel&oldid=1209522134"