Forum:Rules Reconsideration - Videos

Hey everyone, I feel that the rules for removing videos for objectives which could be explained by text are unnecessary. There are many people who learn better visually than through reading. In addition, there's a relatively high demand for videos instead of plain text. I posted a video on a page and it got removed due to the rules - however, within the 5 or so hours which it was up it got 20+ hits from this site alone. The removal of videos not only wastes moderators time, but frustrates those who put the time into trying to make the site better but end up getting their content removed. Videos are an essential part of explaining objectives, no matter how easy to find or complete, and should be allowed for any page.


 * I don't have a whole lot to say here. I like our current video policy and don't think it needs any changes. If video developers want hits, they can get them on youtube.--Gothemasticator 21:55, February 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * There's also the matter of quality control. Some video walkthroughs can be pretty long, sometimes upwards of ten minutes. Naturally, if an Admin wants to make sure that a video is up to certain standards, and isn't flagrant vandalism, they have to watch the entire thing. If we were to allow more videos onto the site, we would be spending far too much time insuring their quality with relatively little overall benefit. Hal10k(Leonard Bernstein!) 22:32, February 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * I am going to express the same thing here as I did on your talk page, this is a Wiki and not a game guide, the Wiki is here to document the games and not to walk people through the game (although there are some rare exceptions). My other concern is the hits you expressed, users will use this site as a hit counter and working off the back of the site for there own gain instead of the benefit of the Wiki. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 23:19, February 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * I feel that you all are looking solely at the negative effects, while ignoring the contradictions and positive effects that exist. The fact that you talk about how this isn't a game walk-through is laughable. On every single quest page there is a "Detailed Walkthrough" which acts as a game guide. Removing the text would be very detrimental to the site, but it seems by your reasoning it should be removed as it's a wiki, not a walk-through. As for the other concerns, yes there would be a competition for video creators to get spots on this site. While I realize I am fighting a losing battle, perhaps a video moderator could be considered. Of course, I would be more than happy to help you guys out, however, I understand the admin application rules and will do my best to be able to apply in 3 months. XDerivative 03:40, February 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * The other concern is that as a Wiki, it is all about community effect and contribution. One contributor cant correct a small aspect of a video without remaking all of it, secondly not everyone can make videos as easy as they can to correct simple text. The reason people are focusing on the negatives is because there are so many for the addition of videos, as opposed to the positives. I have yet to see a real valid reasoning for adding videos for things that can be explained in simple context. Ohhh as for you argument about the quests, that unfortunately is part of the game to be documented and is unavoidable, unless you can think of a better way to document it. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 04:12, February 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * What I suggest in response to that is that a regulated format for videos specifically for the wiki could be made, avoiding the conflict with Youtube view grabbers who just want to post random videos. A video submission system could be managed by a video admin and there could always be competition for making a better video.  Although you are correct that videos cannot be edited by the community, the video admin could also manage suggestions from the community and relay that to video makers - speaking for at least myself, the viewership reward is great enough to encourage people to make high quality videos specifically for the wiki. I'll continue to hold my belief that visual aid is as good if not better than text, which would be the valid reasoning for adding video - people learn in different ways, and I do not see the point of limiting the wiki to a single format. I understand nothing will be done about videos as of now, but hopefully you all will at least think about the positives and solutions to the negative aspects. XDerivative 02:49, February 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * I understand you position on visual aids, but saying that, they are already provided as such in the form of images. However if this was to go forward, I personally would prefer the videos to be hosted on this site (which I believe can be done in .ogg format). The benefit of this is firstly there is no issue of view count being the reasoning for the video addition, secondly .ogg is open source. Finally there would be more control of the videos by Wiki admins and less chance of them being removed from the external site, leaving a unlinked video. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 03:00, February 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * That sounds like a reasonable suggestion, although, I would be concerned that there would be a disincentive to work as the video creators get nothing back for their time. Perhaps if the creators got at least some recognition and perhaps a link to their page embedded in the video then the system you suggest would have proper incentives. XDerivative 03:07, February 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thats kinda the point, without incentive then it can be assured that contributions are made for the benefit of the Wiki and not for personal gain. As for credit, videos files are treated the same way by the Wiki as image files, so it will list the contributor on the file page. Anything other than that is just pure vanity. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 03:20, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

I guess I do have more to say: On the subject of walkthrough text vs. video, it is not a matter of learning styles at all. The Fallout games are prized for the multiple ways to complete quests. Videos just cannot show that very well. Text can show branches and optional sections much more clearly. Porter has been occassionally playing with a kind of flow-chart chart setup, which I think would be a great (and more visual) method. When that gets implemented properly, we will have even less need for quest videos.

Videos for the location of difficult-to-describe locations are allowed, but they must be short and to the point, not 10 minutes of entertainment tacked on to 30 seconds of useful info.

Finally, no video submission system will be practicable. Do you realize that we have hundreds of videos just awaiting deletion on this wiki already? Look at how many New Vegas videos are on youtube. Now look at how many editors visit The Vault. Pick some reasonably low number of people who would start porting videos over to The Vault if there were some submission option. You'd get hundreds if not thousands a day. And almost all of them would be unacceptable or duplicates. You'd need more dedicated staff than we already have just to keep up with the refusals. Ain't gonna happen.--Gothemasticator 16:54, February 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thousands of videos or even hundreds a day seems a bit exaggerated to me, but yes, it would become a problem to check them. Too bad, I was kind of tempted by the extra hits XDerivative pointed out. The more visitors, the merrier.
 * About those flow-charts, that's one more big undertaking. I've seen GhostAvatar do it on Climb Ev'ry Mountain, and it was quite a bit of work doing just this one.
 * My idea is, 'normal' users won't use it, it will have to be up to the more devoted ones like Avatar and Porter (and maybe myself). Jspoelstra 17:21, February 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * And I Don't Hurt Anymore, but yeah, there isnt that many people likly to take on the challenge of a flow chart. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 20:16, February 24, 2011 (UTC)