Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Podcasting/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5→Archive 10

New Member

I'm new to the project, and just thought I would introduce myself. Sean (talk || contribs) 04:54, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Notability Requirements

There is a difficulty in establishing podcasting notability in that there are few acceptably notable secondary sources. The notability guidelines are seriously skewed toward commercial and heavily monitized podcasts while ignoring some significant efforts on the part of independant podcasters. What kinds of things can we to do to help reverse this? Specifically - looking at things like "Awards," the Parsec Award is the moral equivalent of the Hugo for Spec Fic Podcasts, is listed as its own wikipedia entry but recipients are not notable because the Parsec itself is not a sufficiently noted source? How do we fix that? What other awards, publication venues, etc, are suitable to satisfy the WP:WEB which actually address these forms of expression? Nlowell 2010 (talk) 20:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I was just looking at creating an article for Point of Inquiry, one of the most noted reason/science/skepticism podcasts, but I can't find many sources. Perhaps things like popularity (downloads) and notability of guests on the show could be considered? Perhaps a podcasting notability guide (i.e. "Notability (podcasts)") would be appropriate? Richard001 (talk) 11:24, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Podcasting articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Podcasting articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Podcasting Project Revival!

Hey all, this project was tagged as being semi-active and it looks like it's in need of some goals and active members. I've messaged those who indicated they were previously interested and hopefully we can get things cooking again. I adjusted the goals and structure of the project page. Feel free to discuss below or start contributing by making edits.

Let's get some work going and clean up some of these pages!

Udeezy (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Notability Requirements

Notability for specific podcasts is an ongoing issue that has never been resolved. Unfortunately, it still seems difficult to come up with hard numbers of downloads and popularity. I think it may just be a matter of submitting those that are questionable for group review. Here is a proposal, largely based on this prior discussion for a baseline guide to notability. Please let me know if you agree, disagree, or agree in part. Please explain your choice and propose changes in order to come to an agreement.

For a podcast to be considered notable, it must meet 3 of the following requirements:
  • At least one full year of regular broadcast
  • At least one mention in regular media (print, television, etc.)
  • Winner of a major podcast award (iTunes Podcast of the Year, etc.)
  • Consistently rank in top 100 of a podcast directory (iTunes top 25, etc.)
  • Consistently have more than 100,000 downloads per episode
  • Association with a major media outlet (BBC, New York Times, etc.)
  • Hosted by notable person

Thanks! Udeezy (talk) 00:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Assessment Standards

I think for now, most assessment can done based on the standard Wikipedia guidelines. I would propose the following minimum standards though for any podcast articles:

  • If an article should be included in the project, notability must be discussed on the article's talk page and a consensus must be reached
  • Podcast Infobox must be included
  • Podcast Footer must be included

Let me know what else you think should be included on this. Thanks! Udeezy (talk) 02:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest to accept notability for podcasts nominated for Podcast Awards. --Macko74 (talk) 10:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

podcasting-related article up for deletion

Just an FYI, since this project doesn't have a delsort category. tedder (talk) 17:45, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The Nerdist Podcast

There seems to be a problem getting the complete episode list onto WP. It has apparently been put up and taken down several times. Can anyone from the project clarify the process to getting this type of table into an article? does it require a separate page or should it be embedded into the original article? If there is a Podcast project, isn't expanding the articles for the more important podcasts be one of the tasks? EraserGirl (talk) 18:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The Space Show AfD

It was restored from CSD - I don't know if it was ever listed in WikiProject Podcasting. Now nominated for AfD, FYI. Thanks. --Lexein (talk) 01:01, 27 October 2012 (UTC) Modified 22:29, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Update: survived AfD due to N sourcing. --Lexein (talk) 18:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Film Sack

Is this topic notable or not? If so, is the episode list necessary? These issues are addressed at the talk page. --George Ho (talk) 23:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Userfied, expanded, sourced, approved, moved back to mainspace. See Talk:Film Sack --Lexein (talk) 18:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Assessment requested

For Film Sack. Thanks. --Lexein (talk) 18:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

AfD Jeff Riggenbach

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Riggenbach (2nd nomination). Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Leaflet For Podcasting At Wikimania 2014

Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 10:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Podcasting At Wikimania 2014(updated version)

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 10:06, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Jordan, Jesse, Go!

A new article has been created at Jordan, Jesse, Go! that is relevant to this wikiproject. I'm not sure about the notability criteria that podcasts usually use - I see some coverage in The AV Club and BoingBoing, and I think it's fairly well-listened to, but I'm worried about finding reliable secondary sources to avoid the accumulation of cruft in the article. Comments from editors more experienced in this field would be welcome. 0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 15:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Podcast page

I've taken the liberty of adding My Dad Wrote a Porno page to your project. If anyone is interested and has the time I would be grateful if you could class and rate the article, many thanks. Mramoeba (talk) 20:07, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Scope of podcasters

Does this WikiProject cover anyone who's ever hosted a podcast or just ones where that is a significant career? I'm asking mainly about folks like Mike Rowe, Pat Monahan, and Draymond Green who have podcasts. Also if a radio station offers podcast options for their programs, should they be added? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:53, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

List of daily news podcasts

Hey, just made this list. Welcoming contributors! AdA&D ★ 02:09, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I am new and could use some help with a draft page

Hi! I am new. My sandbox, has a draft for a podcast network (I volunteer for them). It was marked for deletion, which I contested. I would love a review/poke/prod etc to let me know how I can improve it? JessicaZahurak (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I'd suggest that you wait for someone else to create that article because you have a comflict of interest since you volunteer for them. Starsandwhales (talk) 18:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Apple Podcasts is not a reliable source. If you do move forward with drafting an article, plan to use Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. The use of these sources will help to establish notability (though do not necessarily indicate this). Mukedits (talk) 01:11, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Splitting Night Vale Presents from Welcome to Night Vale

Maximum Fun
TypePodcast and radio show
Country
United States
AvailabilityGlobal
Key people
Jesse Thorn
Affiliation(s)National Public Radio, Public Radio International (formerly)
Official website
www.maximumfun.org

I was thinking of splitting the article since the section on Night Vale Presents takes up a lot of space in the article, and isn't within the scope. Also it's a bit weird to have the entire network as a subsection of one article, considering that other podcasts in the network have their own articles. Since we don't have standardized formatting for podcast networks, I want to copy off of Maximum Fun, but we should really figure out our own formatting and templates. For example, some podcast networks have infoboxes (as shown) whereas others have templates (also as shown). I think podcast networks should have both as to link networks together without needing to make a taskforce for each network. starsandwhales (talk) 20:47, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Starsandwhales, I think that sounds like a good idea - I say go for it. I don't have much experience editing templates and such, but I am willing to help however I can Mukedits (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

@Mukilteoedits: I don't know too much either, but I guess making boxes (like the one for Night Vale Presents) for other podcast networks could be a start. Maybe we could mimic the formatting for television networks or broadcasting companies? starsandwhales (talk) 15:23, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
@Starsandwhales: That sounds good. I know Crooked Media also has a box. Mukedits (talk) 15:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Cool I nominated it for GA, but I think someone from this project should review it. starsandwhales (talk) 19:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Just read over Night Vale Presents and it looks good to me. Mukedits (talk) 16:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Evaluation criteria

I know there was a previous discussion about rating the importance and quality of podcast articles, but it doesn't look like there was a consensus or recent decision. Anyone interested in trying to figure this out? I've been tagging a lot of articles with our project, but don't want to rate them unless it's extremely obvious. Would love to have solid criteria so I can begin evaluating these articles. Mukedits (talk) 16:42, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

I've been going with what the Rater script says, which is based on article views for importance and article length/sources for quality. But yeah, we should standardize it for the project. There's an article in this project that's ranked as GA and is in desperate need of reassessment, since it's not that good in quality. starsandwhales (talk) 19:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
@Starsandwhales: can you point me to the Rater script? This is the first WikiProject I've joined, so I'm still figuring everything out. I read the old discussion that attempted to standardize the importance and quality for podcasts and most of the ideas they had are now outdated, so I think we need to come up with a new scale. Mukedits (talk) 16:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
For sure. @Mukilteoedits: you can find it at WP:RATER and there are instructions that explain how to add it. Instead of using a script we should definitely come up with standards for quality at least. For now I've been going off of television series articles as a model for what a podcast article should cover, but there are a lot of things that don't translate. For example the rule of thumb that start class is at least 10 sentences with 2-3 reliable sources. The problem is podcasts are still pretty niche, so it's hard to find "reliable" sources (like big name newspapers). starsandwhales (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
I agree that it can be difficult to come up with reliable podcast sources. For quality, I think t hat 10 sentences is a good start, but we have to figure out what to do about the sources. I also think it may be worth thinking about what sections we want podcast articles to include. This can give us a better idea of if the article includes most of the information readers need or if it needs expansion, etc. Then, if an article has all of the sections, but needs expansion, we could do C-class, if it only has one section and few sources then it would be start, etc.Mukedits (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
There will have to be different sections depending on what kind of podcast it is though (ex. news, commentary, actual-play, fiction, etc.), which is a lot to do. In general there should be a lead paragraph, a premise, a list of hosts/actors, reception, any accolades won. Is there a need for a "list of episodes" section or page? Some podcasts have one and others don't. starsandwhales (talk) 21:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe our criteria for importance can be a mixture of coverage by "reliable" sources, awards received, viewership, and chart ratings? But then we have to figure out how to determine viewership and ratings, which I know can be difficult. Mukedits (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Should it be based on pageviews or subscribers? Should there be a part of the article that mention its ranking on podcast charts like articles about albums do? Is that important enough to include? starsandwhales (talk) 21:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

We should also figure out how to talk about awards that podcasts are given. The Webby Awards are the main ones people know, but they're basically restricted to the podcasts that can financially afford to be nominated (and I don't even think they have a fiction section, let alone awards for different genres). I was told that the Audioverse awards weren't notable, but at least they're about podcasts. starsandwhales (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

There are also the Podcast Awards, although I've heard there is some criticism around those. iHeartRadio also started a podcast awards show a couple years ago. For right now, I think the Webby Awards should definitely play a role in notability, since they are the most notable for now, despite the drawbacks. Mukedits (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Finally, other wikiprojects have "formats" of all the things an article should include. For example in WP:TOL articles there should be a section on taxonomy, description, habitat, behavior, etc. We don't really have one of those for podcasting. At the very least for podcast articles there should be a premise section. Then there could be a section for actors/characters and awards if applicable. starsandwhales (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree we should come up with a format, finalize it, and then go through and standardize it across the podcasts. Mukedits (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I've also noticed that the "Collaboration of the Month" article hasn't been updated in years (February 2011). It was Podcasting, which used to be a GA, but lost that status. Maybe we can agree on an article and revamp the collaboration of the month? It would be a good way to improve the quality of some articles and potentially submit some for GA. Thoughts? Mukedits (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

That's a good idea, but I don't know if there enough active people in this project right now for it to be helpful. starsandwhales (talk) 21:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Artificial Intelligence with Lex Fridman

I'm a fan of Lex Fridman and his podcast 'Artificial Intelligence', and I'm thinking about starting an article for him and/or his podcast. He's had on loads of notable people, and there are many articles with external links to the podcast. But I don't know if he meets the GNG or if his podcast qualifies for a Wikipedia entry. What do you think? BillyGoatsGruff2020 (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

If there are articles that link to it and there have been notable guests, I'd suggest creating a draft and submitting it through the review process. Another indicator of notability is how many secondary sources discuss the podcast. starsandwhales (talk) 00:00, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
@BillyGoatsGruff2020: Agreed. There is currently a draft page Draft:Lex Fridman that had its submission declined in February 2020, but it is a very poorly sourced article and seems there is room to work on and improve the draft article. Mukedits (talk)

Collaboration of the Month

Is it really the collaboration of the month if it's been the collaboration of the month since 2011? Should the wording at least be changed? What needs to be done on the collaboration before moving on to another collaboration of the month? TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, I found no previous discussions in the talk archives about this, but there are a few attempts to discuss assessment and notability standards, you might want to take a look. Collaboration of the month seems to have been designed to designate one article each month for improvements. If it's not been updated for years, it could simply mean no one is interested in taking care of it. You can personally take that responsibility, changing the selected article every month, improving what you can before its time is up, and hope someone else joins you. To make it more communal, you can propose which article should be selected for next month, right here on this talk page. Try to have a good set of criteria on which articles you choose. If no one responds, you could assume consensus per WP:SILENCE. There is Wikipedia:Articles for improvement. You could observe how they do things for guidance. If and when someone comes to object to anything you've done, you can discuss with them what's best, otherwise you can proceed on common sense. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Usedtobecool! I'll take a look at the discussions on assessment and notability and look into how they do things at Wikipedia:Articles for improvement and then start maintaining the article of the month. TipsyElephant (talk) 20:48, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
It would be best if you also said which article you propose (ie. intend to change to on 1 August) for August and briefly why, in your post below. That will give any experienced editor coming across your post to comment on your choice, even if they don't care to suggest one themself.And, please try and remember to sign your posts. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:36, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, @TipsyElephant: Please sign your posts to the Talk pages with four tildes like this: ~~~~ so that we know who posted comments (like Usedtobecool mentions above). Below is a good example of why. I did not understand who was requesting for a collaboration in your post below or who was going to update the page. It looks like just an anonymous post. -2pou (talk) 15:41, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
I had suggested a while back that we change the article of the month, but it seems that there are not enough active users. I would be willing to collaborate if we do decide to change the article (which I think we should). Mukedits (talk) 20:55, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Just a list of genre-related links I thought might be useful for anyone working in articles:

I'll add to these as I find them.- TimDWilliamson speak 20:23, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Here's another useful one starsandwhales (talk) 13:20, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Podcasting/Archive_3&oldid=1137368793"