Talk:Line Goes Up – The Problem With NFTs
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Line Goes Up – The Problem With NFTs article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Merging the already-existing draft edit
Hi @Nice Stories, I was wondering if you saw my draft on Line Goes Up before creating the mainspaced article. Now that there are two versions of the article, and only one may exist, we need to figure out how to best merge the two. SWinxy (talk) 23:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
not t be confused edit
Not to be confused with Dan Olsen who works on computers and society — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.31.26 (talk) 06:17, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Is This a Film edit
What makes this a documentary film and not a YouTube video? I scanned through and it seems to be mostly a guy talking to the camera, which is the same format as numerous other videos. Offensivename (talk) 13:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- While I am personally a big proponent of videos like these being referred to documentaries, reliable sources only refer to it as a video or video essay. I think changing the label to video essay would be the best option. Sock (
tocktalk) 15:38, 2 December 2022 (UTC)- Very late to this conversation, but that's not true. Vice calls it a documentary in both the subtitle and in the body. So does Business Insider. And Yahoo Finance/Coindesk, though less credible than the former two. The only articles that call it a video essay are Time and The Verge. Being a video published on YouTube doesn't mean it's not a also documentary. Dialmayo, what do you think? SWinxy (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Isn't the format of the video itself more important than what a source says? I mean, I realize Wikipedia is all about sourcing any information that is put on the site and I'm obviously not against that, but if Vice said Sgt. Pepper's was a ska-punk album, would that necessitate a change to the wiki page? I just don't see how this video differs at all from any other YouTube video where a guy sits at a desk and talks to the camera while playing relevant clips. Offensivename (talk) 16:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Obviously a single source using a term isn't enough, but be honest, if the usage of the term "ska-punk" somehow shifted over time so far that the majority of sources discussing Sgt. Pepper called it ska-punk, wouldn't it be appropriate to label it as such? Kenbellows (talk) 14:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Isn't the format of the video itself more important than what a source says? I mean, I realize Wikipedia is all about sourcing any information that is put on the site and I'm obviously not against that, but if Vice said Sgt. Pepper's was a ska-punk album, would that necessitate a change to the wiki page? I just don't see how this video differs at all from any other YouTube video where a guy sits at a desk and talks to the camera while playing relevant clips. Offensivename (talk) 16:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Very late to this conversation, but that's not true. Vice calls it a documentary in both the subtitle and in the body. So does Business Insider. And Yahoo Finance/Coindesk, though less credible than the former two. The only articles that call it a video essay are Time and The Verge. Being a video published on YouTube doesn't mean it's not a also documentary. Dialmayo, what do you think? SWinxy (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Those categories aren't mutually exclusive, but this categorization probably stems from the article on Vice.com, which refers to "Line Goes Up" as a documentary in its subtitle. An article on Yahoo Finance and Business Insider does so too, though they're not currently used as sources. ReneeWrites (talk) 23:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
"YQ xWvX1n9g" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect YQ xWvX1n9g and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 15 § YQ xWvX1n9g until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Rusalkii (talk) 07:19, 15 January 2023 (UTC)