Talk:YouTube Premium

Definitely need to add something about the complaints and Zoë Keating conflict.

There are many complaints that Google is strong-arming people into highly unfavourable contract terms. Zoë Keating appears to be one of the most notable complainers.

• "YouTube continues to issue content blocking threats to WIN’s independent label members who refuse to sign what many labels are calling highly unfavourable, and non-negotiable terms, which undervalue existing rates in the marketplace from partners such as Spotify and Deezer."
• Zoë Keating vs YouTube: The End of an Artist’s Right to Choose Where Their Music Appears on The Internet.
• What should I do about YouTube? Zoë Keating's blog
• Clarity Zoë Keating's blog
• 'YOUTUBE is EVIL': Somebody had a tape running, Google...

71.41.210.146 (talk) 19:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

• • YTR isn't even available in Canada. 216.58.122.145 (talk) 16:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hatnote

I added hatnote based on sources I found which discuss confusion between YouTube Red and RedTube:

• http://uk.businessinsider.com/youtube-red-sounds-like-redtube-2015-10?r=US&IR=T
• http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/10/21/youtube_red_a_new_subscription_service_sounds_a_lot_like_the_porn_site_redtube.html
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2015/10/21/youtube-red-tube_n_8352196.html (auto-playing video)

--Mika1h (talk) 00:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I've removed the hatnote. It doesn't seem to be necessary, according to WP:NAMB. "Distinguish" hatnotes should not be used when the name is not ambiguous, which it is not in this case. Despite the similarity in names, once a user is here (on the page "YouTube Red") they are unlikely to think this is a page about "RedTube". I acknowledge that the third-party sources recognize the potential for confusion, but hatnotes are about navigational confusion, which is the opposite. The sources point out that YouTube Red might evoke "RedTube", not that users who want to find RedTube might accidentally find "YouTube Red" instead. This type of confusion is actually reinforced by the hatnote, instead of prevented by it, so I've removed it. -- Renesis (talk) 20:39, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I should add that according to WP:COI I have declared, at the top of this page, that I have a (non-paid) interest in this article, since my employer (undisclosed for privacy reasons) has an interest in this article. If there is any dispute regarding my edit above, I will not re-edit the page. -- Renesis (talk) 21:17, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I've removed this before and see Mika1h continues to put it back. Just re-removed it. This is a major misuse of the distinguish template: it is not for "a clickbait article somewhere got to talk about a porn site OMG!" It is specifically for the following case: a user wants to get to article A, but uses term B, so there needs to be a hatnote saying "wait did you mean A." This makes sense for something like Grenada vs. Granada. It makes 0 sense here. You need to be *interested* in the porn site, but not remember its name quite right, and think "huh, YouTube Red, that was the name of the porn site I'm interested in, right?" No way. If anything, I could see the argument in reverse - that someone thinking of YT's subscription service might shorten it to "Redtube" - but nobody would arbitarirly *lengthen* the name. (Maybe they might think "Red YouTube? But I doubt it.") This is just trivia. SnowFire (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Game Lab?

Shouldn't this mention MatPat's Game Lab at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.141.57.22 (talk) 19:52, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Pas

Should we make a page for Paranormal Action Squad? Crazybob2014 (talk) 15:12, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Wording misleading at some points

In a few places in the article it reads like promotional material stating that ads are removed for subscribers. This is rather misleading, as all ads that creators integrate into their videos and associated product placement are still visible. The wording in these places definitely needs to clarify this, because it kind of feels like a bit of a bait-and-switch when you sign up and then realize that there are still ads.

184.66.83.37 (talk) 20:35, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

The distinction between the two as "advertisements" is unnecessary. Sponsorships (in-video "ads") are on an individual channel level. Advertisements are present across all monetized videos. There's a distinction between the two present in the difference in words. Sponsorships are individual; a channel gets a sponsorship from x brand, they give a plug for said company. Youtube content creators do not put the YouTube definition of "advertisements" into their comments. No need to clear up language. Watching content creators with brand sponsorships is a choice. Thatdave (talk) 09:56, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Damn I made my own then it turned into a professinal wikipedia page

Thanks guys to whoever did this, I thank you.

I got a message with "Flooded with them hundreds" what does this mean?

GDanthonyYT (talk)GDanthonyYT

@GDanthonyYT: That's an username. Tgeorgescu (talk) 17:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

ESPN

The paragraph underneath Licensing Terms referring to ESPN's YouTube channel is currently incorrect and needs to be updated. Videos on the primary channel are being uploaded daily, and are available in the U.S. (A YouTube premium region). Thatdave (talk) 06:58, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

New Location

the page is not updated with latest available location of YouTube Premium Doriyaphirbhikam (talk) 06:46, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Which is ...? (Also, please provide a source.) InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)