Ah, the good old Wikipedia Vlogging article. It actually got nominated for deletion years ago due to a lack of reliable sources. I decided to clean it up and begin contributing sources to it and I managed to change the outcome of the vote. Let's just say it was a..uh..thankless job. :)
I haven't contributed to it in years though and I agree that it has gone to shit. Pardon my merde. Let us know what you find. oh and watch out for Godwin's Law around this here town. pd On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:26 PM, gintaras.miskinis < gintaras.miski...@yahoo.com> wrote: > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, > Jay dedman <jay.ded...@...> wrote: > > > Unfortunately, "reliability" has been a point of contention. Some in > > this group may remember the dramedy trying to write the wikipedia page > > for videoblogging. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videoblogging > > Newspapers/magazines must write about it for it to be "reliable". > > Makes a certain kind of sense. You got to capture the mainstream to be > > recognized. It's like a vetting process. > > > > Ive also learned that the "history of videoblogging" is wide and > > varied depending on what community you look at. This group has its own > > specific timeline that differs from people who began through Youtube > > exclusively. > > > > I can scan the chapter I wrote in my book if you'd like and email it to > you. > > > > Jay > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://ryanishungry.com > > http://jaydedman.com > > http://twitter.com/jaydedman > > 917 371 6790 > > > > Thank you for your reply too. It's an honor for me to be contacted from the > book author :) > > I made some thinking after I had read your shared thoughts and just have to > agree: it is sad, that sources, which are not mainstream, cannot be > trusted..well, officially. > > But on the other hand, a year ago, when I was writing a term paper about > "video blogging evolution" I used your mentioned wikipedia link, and this > year, I thought that I could use my a year ago written info in the final > paper, and when rechecked wikipedia - saw, that most of the facts where > different then I had found a year ago...it was experience from practical > side on my own.. > > What connects to YouTube community, I think that those who started blogging > didn't feel the real "joy" of the video blogging start, like felt you people > (I guess), who had began from technical issues, and ending with > philosophical. In a sense, Youtubers' generation had everything "put on the > plate".. > > However, I would be very grateful if you could scan your mentioned chapter > and send it to me (to this yahoo mail if possible). You would help me a lot. > > Thanks again and sorry for my English. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
