Talk:YouTube moderation

Left out that it is attacking its user base and abusing its own TOS

There is a growing consensus that YouTube is going way beyond shadow-banning and I suspect they need to be internally audited. Basically, your article is out of date. Revise please. 50.117.139.153 (talk) 10:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Source? WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

"Offensive content in YouTube" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Offensive content in YouTube has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 18 § Offensive content in YouTube until a consensus is reached. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 06:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 18 December 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

---

YouTube moderation → Criticism of YouTube – This article highlights criticism against the platform rather than discussing moderation - the section "Moderators" just talks about the moderators being treated poorly, which is again criticism. Criticism of YouTube is a redirect to Criticism of Google currently but I believe there is enough information for this to be a separate article. jolielover♥talk 14:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. cyberdog958^Talk 16:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose The topic of how YouTube moderates gets sustained in-depth coverage from reliable sources (ex: Wired in 2018, Washington Post in 2021, The Guardian today). The fact that the moderators section - which was BOLDLY changed away from that and which I have now restored - is incomplete is true and reflects the current start class status of this article. It is invitation to improve and expand it. Beyond that while much of the coverage present is critical in tone turning the whole article into a coatrack for criticism would be a WP:NPOV issue of its own; where the sourcing speaks less critically or YouTube's decisions our coverge should reflect that (and that is ignoring the fact that not everyone may agree that YouTube did anything wrong in particular moderation decisions). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:17, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  Comment: The title YouTube moderation suggests a page about how the moderation works, which the page doesn't cover; it only covers criticism of YouTube. I agree the page is a bit of a mess right now and needs some more paraphrasing (which I attempted to do, but was reverted), but the current state of it reflects the criticism more than the moderation. I'm not opposed to YouTube moderation being redirected to it, or a more in depth page being created specifically on it IF there is enough information to do so. Again, the moderators section is more criticism of the platform's treatment of the employees. I don't see how the moderators section was boldly changed, the only thing I changed was the title to "treatment of employees" which reflects what is said in the section, more so than the vague "Moderators". I don't see an issue with the rename of the article given other articles such as Criticism of Twitter and Criticism of Google. Yes, not everyone might agree but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be put in the article. YouTube has been criticised for several things and there are several references in the page supporting that. I could disagree with, say, the belief of OJ Simpson being a murderer, but at the end of the day information on it is obviously going to be on his page whether I believe he was innocent or guilty because Wikipedia is not censored. jolielover♥talk 15:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject YouTube has been notified of this discussion. cyberdog958^Talk 16:45, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose the current article title helps keep the article more focused and certainly needs some work. Perhaps some content should be moved out to a separate article of the suggest title. I would argue that an article about the moderation is more significant and useful than one about criticism, plus those articles tend to have far more issues with non-reliable sources, and so we should keep those two issues discrete. TiggerJay (talk) 05:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.