Forum:Video wiki extension

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Video wiki extension

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5826 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Hi everyone, I'm Ido and wanted to discuss the new video-wiki (collaborative video) functionality that has been added to the community.

This video-wiki (collaborative video) functionality, works similarly to text-wiki. Once you add a new video, anyone can add to it, remove from it, edit it, or remove it entirely. This functionality adds much value to any wiki community that wants to enrich its content with rich-media and video in particular. Rather than just being able to add or remove videos, using this tool, anyone can actually alter the videos: trim pieces, add text, add effects, dynamic layers, and sounds (and I can think of some funny sounds) - all directly from the article page. There is full history and versioning for each of the videos, and you can always revert back to previous versions of videos. For example, check out the sandbox with detailed instructions created on Halopedia for this functionality [1]. I would like to create a similar Help Page and Sandbox on Uncyclopedia. This way everyone can experiment with the new functionality, and get familiar with it. I would also want to add a couple of funny videos I started to my user-page, which I suggest to add to various articles. I'd be happy to get community feedback, and if you like them – we can add them to the articles and everyone can contribute to them. Similar to the text articles, each of these videos is an ongoing project that can be continuously edited. IdoSet 11:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Important notice

Due to some issues with the Kultura code management, we will not be allowing any usage of this format until those technical issues will be resolved with Wikia and Kultura. So for now, this is a conceptual discussion rather than a practical one. Hope all those issues will be settled ASAP. ~ 13:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Further to Mordillo's comments, a live Wiki is not the place to test something like this, given that it clearly still has issues with integration. As for whether is SHOULD be implimented I'll leave that up to the community to decide. I personally don't think its something we need on Uncyclopedia, though I can understand it on Halopedia. Uncyclopedia is primarily a satire website, and with a focus, for the greater part, on writing. Other media when utilised is to augment that focus. The other big issue is one of administrating content. What measures are in place to stop people from adding shock/gore/porn via this new mechanism? I personally feel this is just too easy a target for abuse and an unnecessary addition to Uncyclopedia. If there's a vote coming, mine is for AGAINST. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

I think that leaving the decision to the community is great and hope that many members will take part in this discussion. There are two points I want to stress. I believe that videos can be as satirical as any other form. Why be confined to just one form of satire when we can create it using texts, pictures and videos? Furthermore, we have the option to use it as we wish - to create a video that augments the focus on the text in the article or go in another direction we see fit. Identical to what is being done right now with pictures in the articles. About the administrating issue - I understand that it's a big problem. But it's not restricted to videos. people can add disgusting stuff in any shape or form - including text and pictures. As long as we have the option to take off the content that does not meet uncyclopedia standarts, I don't think it's really an issue. See something offending added to the video? take it off. Or take the whole video off. IdoSet 14:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that videos can be used for satire, and it may well be the case that a select few would do something wonderful with the format. With regards to the administration issue, we are, for the most part, quite good at catching images and text changes that are unsuitable. What worries me is that people will need to sit through every single video entry to make sure there is no unsuitable material used in it. Added to that other things such as working out the video equivalent of our Vanity Policy, Cyber Bullying, and so on. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

I see what you mean about the administrating problem. But in my experience, the stupid people who come to spam lack any form of sophistication - they will just put their gory content right at the beginning, making it easier for us to spot and remove it. Regarding the various policies, I'm sure we can work it out and integrate the video wiki feature smoothly. After all, we wish people to use it and hope it can be an integral part of this community, and therefore it must suit its rules and conducts. So... are you still against? or did I succeed in moving you to 'Undecided'? (I'm just kidding... =) IdoSet 15:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with what looks to be a great application. Just don't feel its suited to Uncyclopedia or large wikis in general. Others may disagree... :) -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Vote now!

• Strong Against - I'm sure when we ask for videos (sometime in 2010), you'll be able to give them to us. Until then, please take your cicus elsewhere, please. -- The Zombiebaron 15:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Is cicus a kind of a big prey bird? ~ 15:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

No....that's a Roc. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

• Strong against too as per Mhaille, Mordillo, Zombiebaron and all others. The extension is ugly and I don't get why it needs another two extensions to work...only the MediaWiki namespace should be restricted. Such as thing has never before been needed; I don't see why it'd be needed now. YouTube videos are more than enough for me, and probably for many other users. -- Jack Phoenix, professional killer admin (Whine?) • (Wikia ♥ ads) 15:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Correction: I didn't vote against, I just said that until we settle the technical issues, we shouldn't use it. ~ 15:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• Against I see hazardous potential in the concept itself, and don't particularly care for the idea. However if it's going to happen, then it'd better be 100% functional before it goes live here. --THINKER 15:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
• Per the above. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 20:37, Feb 26
  • Changing vote to for a trial, to see whether or not it causes Uncyc to jump the shark (again). Of course, this trial should only occur once all the bugs, such as the one mentioned here, are resolved. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 01:37, Feb 28
• Against per above the above. Plus it's a little annoying when you QVFD something undeleteable. –—Hv (talk) 26/02 20:41
• Abstain. I'm not against because there are probably a few people here who could make something cool with this, but I'm not for because I have enough trouble with just text and pictures and audio. The text, man! Oh, the text! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)<

  Changing vote to for. I'm experimenting with it, and see that it has potential. Comedy potential. Like a battery, but with humour instead of electrons. Well, maybe some electrons. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 10:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

• Against. Far too easy for random users to abuse. Sure, shock material can be reverted or removed, but after this gets going well there are going to be far too many edits a day to these videos for us to go through them all. It would be uncontrollable. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
• Against per the above votes. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 01:35, Feb. 27, 2008
• For! un-per the above votes 70.57.209.59 02:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
• Against. Although I see a lot of potential for the idea in UnNews and UnScripts, I cannot say that the idea would be a good idea at all. Although most people on this site are excellent writers that have brought joy to the userbase, I do not think that anyone would make a video which is high enough quality for the feature to be worth it. ~

  Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.

  27/02/2008 @ 02:20
• Kill - The extension and that for-voting IP. --AAA! (AAAA) 08:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
• For, by which I mean Strong Against - UnIdiot | Talk? | Theme - 16:10, Feb 27
•  Just No - Let's put it this way. Is anyone apart from IPs and vandals going to use this? No? Well we'll just sling it then (Bonner) (Talk) Feb 27, 17:26
• Against Not sure if I'm allowed to vote as I've had a couple, but you know. mAttlobster. (hello) 20:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
• Ummmm, no. There's just no need for this. One of the reasons I joined here was because of some examples of flat out brilliant WRITING which I can only hope to someday come close to (yes, I'm going to bring the average quality down, so sue me). If I wanted to watch stupid videos, I'd hang out on youtube instead. --Optimuschris 00:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
• For. If you don't like it, I don't see what the trouble is in, uh, y'know, not using it. I mean, who uses the hieroglyphics extension? Or the calendar, timeline, tabview, poem, or google spreadsheets extensions? It should at least be an option for people who could use it. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 00:41, 28 Feb 2008
• For voting on this topic, but Against counting this vote in the final results -- Spillin DylanTALKEDITS06:16, February 28 2008
•  Neat idea, but I'm concerned about the abuse by anonymous slashies. - Admiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate 17:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
• Against for the admins' sakes. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 02:26 Feb 29
•  Strong Against We already have the YouTube embed capability so we don't really need this to be coded here and create new bugs. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 ^{( yell | FAQ | I did this )} 11:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Importance Notice II

I am being told that the technical issue you are referring to has been resolved. all video pages can be deleted by sysop, staff, helper, janitor, bureaucrat. (For some reason this problem did not arise in other Wikia communities) I am of course a total fan of this functionality. Humor lives well with rich-media formats as well. No reason to oppose new functionality, that totally mimics the text-wiki. Am I correct that some of you have voted against this without even experimenting with the functionality? Note that you can edit the video in the same way you would edit text, you can also revert to versions of the video-wiki you prefer. As for porn - indeed remove it if if it appears. and Yes - you can remove it without watching it, if that might be a concern. --Michts 21:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I have tried this feature out and I assure you, it might be useful for some wikis, but not - that is, IMHO - for Uncyclopedia. There are far more useful extensions to be added to Uncyclopedia, such as Gadgets extension or Calendar extension...and the list goes on. -- Jack Phoenix, professional killer admin (Whine?) • (Wikia ♥ ads) 21:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see it totally rocking on Halopedia and wikis of that ilk. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

That you used "totally rocking" in a sentence about a Halo wiki indicates that you have no idea what "rocking", whether "totally" or in a less complete manner, really is. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 01:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

But I DID get to use the word "ilk"....so thats OK then.... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

My thoughts on the subject

I'm not into voting unless it's for feature or deletion. With something this big, a simple vote cannot encapsulate the opinions of the masses. I personally see promise in this extension. It seems pretty interesting and is indeed quite a nice way of extending the wiki ideals to other media. However, that said, it is just too buggy and altogether in a beta stage to be released upon us.

Incontrovertible.

This is a large wiki. Most Wikia wikis are not nearly as large, and indeed are more suited to this extension than ours. As this is the first time this has ever been sprung upon any MediaWiki, perhaps it would be best if only the wikis with a need or substantial want for it to get it until A) all the bugs are worked out, and B) its functionality has been seen. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljlego (talk • contribs)

Good idea. Are you suggesting a trial period? Because that would be a good idea.-Awesome Sauce 02:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Two things. One: Yes, a trial period, but not here. The "sandbox" needs to be a less-used wiki so we can see how it works, how it can be abused, how we can perhaps improve security on it, etc. Two: There's no evidence that I added the above comment, Modus. See?

Yet Another Important Notice

The technical issues have been resolved. IdoSet, please set a few examples under your user space so people here can take a look at it. ~ 06:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

People can view it working and test it at Halopedia. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

And there was much rejoicing...~ 08:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

With dancing in the streets... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Butt naked...~ 12:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope....I'm not taking my hat off for anyone... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Is Kaltura trying to take over the world?

Yes. IdoSet 15:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, you might want to suggest to the developers that they make the link to their website appear in a seperate window rather than the parent one as clicking it takes you away from the website. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Um, are the multiple against votes regarding this issue not clear enough? WE DO NOT WANT THIS SHIT YET. Perhaps in the future at some point (not likely), but for now, why the fuck are you people trying to force this on us?! GO AWAY with this fucking video nonsense! --THINKER 15:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thinker! Deep breaths, buddy. Have you considered yoga? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 16:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Have you considered yogurt? ~ 16:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I have, and I'm still pissed. --THINKER 16:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I second Thinker here. I don't like where this is going. (Bonner) (Talk) Feb 27, 17:35

That Chinese restaurant on the corner? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It's really more of a Pan-Asian Fusion, actually.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 00:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

HEY! NEWSFLASH

YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE IT,


BUT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT WANT TO!

That's right, if you can't find a use for it, don't assume there isn't one. Let others' superior imaginations find a way. You shouldn't get rid of such a powerful tool without even trying it. -- Kaizer the Bjorn takkun (nya nya) (1961 model!) Check out T61! 23:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. As long as the technical issues are all ironed out, there shouldn't be a problem in having it and allowing people to use it. I can see great potential in this for UnNews reports, for example. Even taking someone's audio of an article and putting it together with clips from news sources would make for a good project which multiple users could contribute to. And I'm sure there's people who can think of more good uses for it. Obviously (like the youtube extension) it's not suitable for every page - most extensions aren't - but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be an option for places where it would fit. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 00:21, 28 Feb 2008

But what about the enormous potential for vandalism? My against vote is based on the probability that we'll end up with shock porn uploaded to videos without us even noticing. If this gets big enough, we won't be able to patrol all of the edits made to this, as there will be too many. Are there any measures in place to prevent this? I'm sure we don't want anybody (including ourselves) stumbling on a random article to find a video of 2 girls 1 cup waiting for us. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the potential for vandalism is looming, as is the potential for unresolved bugs and other issues. The thing that bothers me just a bit is that it's almost like we're trying to copy other websites with videos, instead of sticking to our guns and parodying aspects of wikipedia. However, I'm still for a trial period, if only to see, if this fails, just how spectacularly it does so. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:00, Feb 28

I think the potential for vandalism is being largely misoverestimated. When you think about it, how many people would actually go to the bother of doing that? It'd be an awful lot of effort just for vandalism. Why not just post a shock picture or link and be done with it? Even that's hardly ever done. I mean, if you register an account you only have to wait 3 days before you can edit/vandalise the main page, but it just doesn't happen. I would like creating or adding to videos to be an autoconfirmed thing, which would reduce the chance of someone adding shock porn or whatever to practically none, as there's few people with enough dedication to vandalism to actually go through with that. I don't think this feature is ever going to be "big" in the way that articles and pictures are, in the same way that support for uploading audio is never going to be used by most people, it's just useful for a few people who might want to use it.

However, to make checking for vandalism easier, it would be nice if when the video is saved, a thumbnail preview is also saved along with it (such as the example on the right). This would make vandalism-checking a lot easier. Not sure how difficult this would be to implement though. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 05:01, 28 Feb 2008

Wait!

I just got here, the cab was late and my cat exploded. So this is a thing which allows us to upload Youtube like videos onto here? --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 05:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you even look at the very first two paragraphs of the page? While possibly new to you, I suspect this "reading" might help you :P • Spang • ☃ • talk • 05:46, 28 Feb 2008

Meh... all I learned at school was about the teacher's various extra marital affairs Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 07:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop!

Hammer time! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 06:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Guess What!

- Admiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate 17:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

UnExamples

As agreed, I uploaded a couple of examples to my user page. You are welcome to stop by and have a look. It's WORK IN PROGRESS, so everyone who wishes is also welcome to contribute his/her/its witty/funny/retarded clip, image or sound. Let's give it a try and see how it goes. IdoSet 09:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

So... uh...

• I feel I may have missed the "hate-bus", but I think it's worth pointing out that this idea is stupid. YouTube already exists for inane videos. Want to do an UnNews video report? Post the YouTube link. So, a strong Fuck You Against on this one.     EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank)   14:16, Thursday 28 February 2008  

Eugene please, your logical statement is already negated, as this is Bizarro Uncyc, and no one cares how the users feel. Jaysus. --THINKER 14:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Seriously Eugene, I try to avoid flamewars as much as I can, but you are starting to damage my calm. Not all videos are inane. Not even videos on YouTube. We are a satire wiki, and film is an extremely powerful tool for satire. I have taken video production and film classes, I know that it's possible to make good quality, funny, and intelligent video. I would argue that if you can't see the purpose of collaborative video, you either can't see the purpose of video, or you can't see the purpose of collaboration, in which case, you shouldn't be writing for a wiki. -- Kaizer the Bjorn takkun (nya nya) (1961 model!) Check out T61! 22:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are being quite the bigglewump. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Gone

So I've hardly been reading this, because of the Wikia meetings all week (whoever was shouting about us not listening... gimme a break will ya honey! I ain't a superwoman!). But Mhaille has kindly poked me into reading enough to see what way consensus lies, and off it goes. Sorry for the delay all -- sannse (talk) 00:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

There's absolutely not a problem with a delay. As long as it happened. I was planning on fighting Wikia tooth-and-nail on the issue 'cause I thought it was becoming a Wikia spotlight that I actually cared about. But you have once again saved us, sannse. Excellent.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 00:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, the superwoman we order in the mail wasn't a superwoman either. She just turned out to be Leddy in a dress. -- The Zombiebaron 01:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Admit it, you're just jealous because I'm prettier than you! - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 01:45, Mar 11

Baby Gone??

I thought the discussion was over, and we agreed that the video extension was worth a shot. Actually, if you read the whole thread you can see some interesting news flashes.... 3 admins said they were in favour, two of them have already created a video. THE DISCUSSION WAS ARCHIVED, FOR GOD'S SAKE!. So some of you don't like it - ok. But, as written above in much larger letters, some may want to use it (and actually began doing that). So what's going on here??? IdoSet 08:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

From what I can tell from reading this page "Uncyclopedia is an English language wiki that features satirically themed articles as a parody of Wikipedia. as per [2]. What you find behind that link is what you get when Uncyclopedia writers actually try to be serious for a second (it was mostly written by Uncyc regulars)... If and when Wikipedia starts using this feature I would be happy for Uncyc to parody it. Until then, Uncyc is not a place for "anything which could possibly be funny no matter what it is". Also, Uncyc is not a place for testing new questionable features... That's what Wikipedia is for. ;-) MrN 08:26, Mar 11

And how much of our stuff is actually a parody of the equivalent page at Wikipedia? We moved beyond that schtick a while ago. Personally, I'm totally in to parodying Google now. Take that, 'I'm feeling lucky' button!Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 13:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

And what about untunes and games and howto? There's no wikipedia equivalent to those. Even wikipedia has split nearly all their other equivalent projects into different sites - wikinews, wikiquote, wikisource, wiktionary, all of these aren't part of wikipedia any more. Should we stop our equivalents because they don't parody wikipedia any more? Should we limit ourselves only to things wikipedia does? The correct answer is no. Just because it wouldn't have worked in every article doesn't mean it wouldn't have been useful in others. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 13:46, 11 Mar 2008

If people want to add video content there's already a YouTube extension. The main issue with the collaborative video extension is in policing its use or misuse. I don't personally have any issue with using new technology and having things that aren't specific to Wikipedia, but this extension would open up a can or worms such as what currently makes YouTube so difficult to administrate. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

People can use the youtube extension - but it's totally not in the wiki spirit. The Kaltura extension allows you to edit together the clips, add other clips if you like - just like the text form. Also, it's based on open source (while youtube isn't), so anyone from this community who is a programmer can affect its abilities and is welcome to do so. As for the spam issue: The extension was live for two weeks. During those two weeks there was no spam in the videos. On the contrary: Modusparendi and Mordillo created a video for the UnNews (the Pope buys a new hat) and the other videos were watched by hundreds of users and got some good responses. None were taken off or vandalised. We're sensitive to the spam issue and keep track on the videos to make sure there is none. People have already started using the extension and enjoying it; nothing was vandalised, the Canadians video got got responses; We established that not all the things that are going on here are Wikipedia satire. So I still can't understand why it was taken off. IdoSet 15:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It was taken off because the majority of people who voted wanted it taking off. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

and what about the people who started using it and thought it improved the articles? Nobody has to use it. But obiviously, there are some people who want to. 217.132.79.89 16:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

If the extension starts being used not only for widespread copyvios but for this sort of content, the fallout once the mainstream media picks up on this would make this incident look like small potatoes by comparison. So much for "improving" the articles... --66.102.80.212 17:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

your choice

Just decide, and tell me what you want. I have my finger on the switch (at least, I think it's that switch... maybe that's the 'blow up Spang' switch... I should flick it a few times to be sure... ) -- sannse (talk) 17:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It was decided until it was taken off... I mean - read the whole thing. Some people thought it was bad, some people thought it was good. It came back to life and people - even admins, who are not regular people - started creating videos. Consensus is when everyone says the same thing. Didn't happen here. IdoSet 18:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

If consensus equalled unanimity, then nothing would be decided. I looked at the discussion, and made my best judgement that the admin asking me to flip the switch was right in his understanding of the general opinion of the group. But of course, if that changes then I'll flip the switch again -- sannse (talk) 20:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I wondered why my lights flicked off. *Clap clap*...That's better. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

/me passes Modus a torch MrN 21:28, Mar 11

If people really REALLY feel a need for collaborative video to come back, then they'll form some kind of stupid petition or something. Until that day, I say good riddance. Hopefully we'll all just stop talking about it and it will have never happened. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 22:42 Mar 11