youtube/Archive 22

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on YouTube. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/11/08/html5-youtube-viewer-close-but-not-quite-there/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/felix-baumgartner-s-jump-from-space-s-edge-watched-by-millions-1.4115479
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130420134320/http://www.tono.no/YouTube+lansert+i+Norge.12888.cms to http://www.tono.no/YouTube+lansert+i+Norge.12888.cms

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Does autoplay affect the view count? Mobile mundo (talk) 18:45, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

There is a good and detailed answer here. People often asked why YouTube view counts once got stuck at 301+ views, and it was done to prevent inflated view counts from bots reloading the video. In August 2015, YouTube changed the system so that 301+ should no longer appear.[3] This isn't really within article scope here, but it shows that YouTube tries hard to prevent people from faking view counts by reloading the video.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:56, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on YouTube. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081228063433/http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/20youtube.html to https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/20youtube.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

This was the most useful info as wiki is supposed to be a neutral reference. I'm guessing the HD bitrate has been reduced, as suspected. 89.243.133.105 (talk) 13:38, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

It was removed in this edit on 16 September 2017.

I'm quite tempted to put it back again, what do others think?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:01, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Very out dated almost ten years old.....historical rates at this point.--Moxy (talk) 14:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
I removed it per a three-month-old consensus on GAR. It is still unsourced. Ꞷumbolo 15:05, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Editors with an interest in YouTube in general will find the following article has useful and timely content (link).

Citation provided as a courtesy:

{{cite web |last1=Popper |first1=Ben |title=2017 Was YouTube's Best Year Ever. It Was Also Its Worst |url=https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/22/16805410/youtube-business-scandals-best-worst-year |publisher=TheVerge.com |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20171223110306/https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/22/16805410/youtube-business-scandals-best-worst-year |archivedate=December 23, 2017 |date=December 22, 2017 |deadurl=no }}

RCraig09 (talk) 03:20, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

I saw this article in The Verge but it is largely a commentary on things that are already mentioned in the Wikipedia article. In 2017, YouTube became worried about allowing adverts to appear next to any video that might be controversial and cause advertisers to pull their advertising, and changed the rules to prevent this. There was also the Elsagate affair. Whether 2017 was YouTube's best or worst year is debatable, but there has been a good deal of coverage of YouTube in the media this year.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:11, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

This edit request to YouTube has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Parent company for Youtube is Alphabet not google Shyamkri (talk) 19:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

  Not done: YouTube is still a subsidiary of Google, which is in turn a subsidiary of Alphabet. [4] Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

This edit request to YouTube has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under Content Accessibility it should be edited to reflect that the current President of the United States is President Donald Trump instead of President Barrack Obama. 68.231.204.166 (talk) 16:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Emir of Wiki (talk) 16:07, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I beg your pardon? There is ample supporting evidence that a new US president was elected in 2016. I've made the change myself. BusterD (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
This is not a listing of who is the current president but which videos can be downloaded as MP4 files. The source says Obama. Emir of Wiki (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Would it be useful to change the sentence in some way to make it clear that Obama is no longer the president? The statement as written is no longer operative, and the request from the ip editor is perfectly reasonable. BusterD (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I will just remove the example, unless you have a better idea. Emir of Wiki (talk) 16:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
This was added at the time because it was considered to be unusual. Most YouTube videos cannot be downloaded (at least officially) but the weekly speeches of President Obama did have a download link.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Since the example no longer applies as written, and as the current office holder has discontinued weekly addresses altogether (which I didn't know until I looked it up), removing the example makes sense. Thanks for the work you do here. It must be quite difficult to keep such a highly viewed page at GA level. BusterD (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

YouTube's January 2018 changes to the YPP have been seen as a response to the Logan Paul controversy, although with 15.9 million subscribers he would not be affected by them. YouTube said in its blog that the changes would not affect a large number of users, saying "99% of those affected were making less than $100 per year in the last year, with 90% earning less than $2.50 in the last month." Nevertheless, the YouTube community was not pleased, with some users saying that the smaller channels were being penalized for the Logan Paul video.[5] Some commentators agreed with the changes [6][7] but the main story is that YouTube is now worried about any monetized video causing a controversy. The rules for Google Preferred have also been changed in January 2018, so that all eligible videos will be manually checked before advertising is allowed in them.[8]--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

It appears that YouTube supports less ways of viewing 3D videos now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheKing44 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Localization: Belarus (Countries with YouTube localization) - Belarusian language and Russian. --TheSnowflakeWarwaLAND (talk) 00:28, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

This is in the drop down localization table in the article. Belarus was added in October 2015.[9]--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:15, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Besides the obvious answer (because I haven't added it yet), why isn't there a subsection called 'YouTube Gaming'?Captain camEO (talk) 11:40, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

It's mentioned in the Company history section but probably isn't worth a subsection of its own.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:02, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Games played and showcased on YouTube comprise, on average, the largest portion of revenue for AdSense participants, as well as being the least challenged videos since the Adpocalypse of 2017. That's pretty substantial, and deserves more than just a difficult-to-find sentence. Also, even though it's a direct competitor to Twitch, the two are vastly different. They follow different upload/streaming models, are built using different technologies, and have separate policies. As written, the sentence in the article is like saying Twitch competes with The Price Is Right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain camEO (talk • contribs) 18:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
And if we want to look into even more numbers, statistics from Bärtl’s research show that YouTube Gamers have 14-time multiple of making money on the site than do traditional vloggers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain camEO (talk • contribs) 01:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Whoever User:Wumbolo is, they removed a very useful item in the article. I fixed their removal of the table from the article. Ergzay (talk) 23:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

See Talk:YouTube/Archive_22#What_happened_to_the_bitrate_section? Initially I wasn't keen on this either, but a lot of it was out of date and most of it was WP:OR.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:11, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ergzay: Your ping didn't work. The table has no place on this article. It lacks references, and we put even a lot of referenced content on other YouTube articles. This article is already too long. It may well be useful so consider placing it on another article and trying to source it there; this article is not a playground, it is supposed to resemble a good article so please use a sandbox. You may also put this on a sister Wiki project. wumbolo ^^^ 13:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Strongly disagree. The table is correct in practice. If it lacks references then fix them don't simply remove info that people reference. If you think its wrong then use youtube-dl and dump the format list from a youtube video (anyone can). The youtube-dl source code can be a reference if you care. Please don't hold this page hostage based on your own opinions. Reverted. Ergzay (talk) 19:55, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Adding on, please don't treat the page on Youtube as a non-technical page. Technical information is important and should not just be deleted. Stackoverflow even links to this page as a source for the list of formats that youtube uses. Ergzay (talk) 20:00, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Re this edit: I don't dispute that a lot of it is correct "in practice" but it was created by people downloading the videos and analyzing them with MediaInfo and similar tools. This means that they are original research. It's also unclear if all of these formats are still in use, and some of them may be obsolete. The consensus was to remove this, because the article would never get back to Good Article status with such a chunk of unsourced material.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Why don't you discuss this? Since Google took the company over, it has rapidly gone downhill. So called "fake news" scares have led to wide demonetisation and even removal of videos by the company itself, which is also pushing content by more "approved" outlets such as the BBC and CNN. It seems to me that it is ending up the polar opposite of what most people want from it.--SpringsteenSessions (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

@SpringsteenSessions: feel free to summarize from Censorship by Google#YouTube. wumbolo ^^^ 15:31, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

This edit request to YouTube has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

the shooting section needs to be updated with that 4 or 5 people were taken to a hospital via ambulance and the shooter was a female https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/us/youtube-hq-shooting/index.html 71.169.158.86 (talk) 21:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

This request belongs on the article about the shooting. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:38, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

There seems to be an active shooter situation going on at the YouTube HQ in San Bruno, CA Should this be covered in YouTube or in a separate article? lovkal (talk) 20:35, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Seems to be too soon to know anything for certain as of yet. I'd say wait until more information is available. -- Dane ^talk 20:37, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Lovkal: Please read WP:NOTNEWS. Wikipedia is not the place to make changes because of late-breaking stuff. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:38, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I just created 2018 San Bruno, California shooting. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:48, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@Another Believer: Perhaps you need to read WP:NOTNEWS, too. I don't think your editing in this manner is either sustainable or practical. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:52, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm familiar, and I'm fine with creating a space for folks to draft content. Can always be merged later, not a big deal. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:55, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Update: The article has been moved to YouTube headquarters shooting. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

What happened to audio music track muted on YouTube? It's vanished or what?2604:2000:A016:3F00:1188:16D8:8998:2C54 (talk) 02:39, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

This is beyond article scope, but YouTube has muted audio tracks in the past if copyright claims were made.[10] This system was introduced in January 2009, possibly to deal with complaints from Warner Music Group, which was making a huge fuss about YouTube at the time.[11] It's unclear if they are still doing this, but sourcing would be needed.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:42, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Since we have run into discussions about the size of this article, I propose splitting out the Features section of the article, as it contains around a third of the article's prose. It can definitely survive on its own, and be properly summarized. Note that we already have other sections split out and summarized. wumbolo ^^^ 14:39, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

• Strongly support split - @Umbolo:, due to the article size, I strongly support the creation of a Features of YouTube article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose The features of YouTube aren't notable. Almost this entire article relies upon primary sources and a fair amount of that specific section relies on links from YouTube, itself. Cut the junk content and pare down to what independent reliable sources say and suddenly the article will be smaller. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

• Reply - @Chris troutman:, be bold! --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:36, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Re this edit: it is the latest piece of Think of the children from The Sun (United Kingdom) which isn't a reliable source. YouTube is well aware that some people try to get around the rules by uploading sexually explicit content, see this thread in the archive. YouTube is not filled with porn unless you are a bored journalist on a wet afternoon.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

YouTube holds the copyright for the website, but the screenshot that we include in this article contains thumbnails of several copyrighted videos whose copyright owner isn't YouTube. I believe that this is currently a copyright violation, since the non-free rationale on the image page only covers for the website in general, and obviously not for the thumbnails of individual videos on the site. wumbolo ^^^ 11:35, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

This is technically true, but if the thumbnails were blurred out or removed, there would be little point in having the screenshot. The thumbnails are so small that they are of illustrative value only.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:29, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
@Ianmacm: I think the non-free use rationale should indicate that in some way, as the image consists of multiple copyrighted entities, so to say. wumbolo ^^^ 12:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

I propose that Google Preferred is merged into this article. It is very short. wumbolo ^^^ 21:18, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Someone who knows, please mention in the article the nature of the address youtu.be. Does this address lead to youtube or what? Because it looks like one of those addresses that are similar to a popular address, designed to mislead the user to a sham site. Why does this site exist? Thanks.CountMacula (talk) 20:43, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Youtu.be is a shorter version of Youtube.com and redirects to that website, There's no need to mention it as they only use this address for sharing purposes. –Davey2010^Talk 20:54, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
It is their native URL shortener. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 18:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
The youtu.be URL shortener was introduced in December 2009.[12] YouTube wanted an official shortening service for the links rather than relying on possibly rogue third party tools.[13]--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

The article refers to YouTube channels as though everyone knows what a YouTube channel is.

They don't. It is obviously related to the idea of a broadcast or cable television channel — which pretty much any reader understands. But a YouTube channel is not the same thing as a TV channel. So they need to be explained before they ought to be referred to.

The same comment applies to many different things. Some readers may not even have access to YouTube, so everything they know about YouTube may come from this article.2600:1700:E1C0:F340:9DFF:8453:754E:B40D (talk) 19:46, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

TBD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.102.229.79 (talk) 16:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

  Done Thanks for pointing this out.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:28, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

This edit request to YouTube has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

i want to make people subscribe to a certain channel Dat boi 356276536562 (talk) 19:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

  Not done: that's against the purpose of Wiki, and besides you did not explain what you wanted to change. L293D (☎ • ✎) 19:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

This edit request to YouTube has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The address states that the youtube headquarters is cherry avenue but it is cherry ave. It is not a short form of avenue. 82.2.114.129 (talk) 15:47, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

•   Not done YouTube's website gives the address as 901 Cherry Ave., but Ave. is short for Avenue in the same way that Blvd is short for Boulevard or St for Street. This doesn't seem to be obviously wrong.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

This edit request to YouTube has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "YouTube began as a venture capital-funded technology startup, primarily from an $11.5 million investment by Sequoia Capital between November 2005 and April 2006." to "YouTube began as a venture capital-funded technology startup, primarily from an $11.5 million investment by Sequoia Capital and Artis Capital Management between November 2005 and April 2006."

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/12/technology/12hedges.html 38.101.216.227 (talk) 20:50, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

  Done Claim and reference added.  spintendo  19:25, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Already slightly covered, and this has no reason to be a standalone article (too specific topic). wumbolo ^^^ 21:13, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Alright Wumbolo. For me, it must be included on "Community policy" section. Tajotep (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

• Merge: Too specific and not enough detail for a separate article, so merge it under Copyrighted material. OfficerAPC (talk) 12:18, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

This can definitely be merged - this is nowhere near complex enough to have it's own article. --ThatOneGuy000 (talk) 19:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Oppose and undo Moving the content here makes this article 102kb readable prose. Per Wiki: Article_size#Size_guideline articles over 100kb readable propose need to be split. 60kb is the soft limit when editors need to start planning a split. Moving more content into this article is going against a norm. If anyone wants to move this content in this first split off other parts and move other parts out.
Also it would be easy to expand the copyright strike article. I will add some more sources to make it stand alone more solidly. I am reverting for now. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:38, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Oppose The problem with merging other articles into this one is WP:SIZERULE as the article is now becoming too long for an average reader. YouTube copyright strikes do not need a long mention here, and there is now no room to add anything of significant length here because of the WP:SIZERULE problem.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:14, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
On the other hand, the Features section is certainly long enough to have its own article, as discussed earlier this year. OfficerAPC (talk) 14:21, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

I propose that this section is moved to Social impact of YouTube, because its content is not even mentioned at the other article, which is a complete violation of WP:Summary style. Also, this article is too long to contain every POV related to this topic. If this topic fits in the social impact article well, we may consider writing a summary in this article, consisting of some authoritative consensus instead of an indiscriminate collection of POVs. wumbolo ^^^ 14:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Nope, what other articles do is irrelevant. The content is highly notable and subject to extensive RS coverage, unlike much of the trivial minutia and poorly sourced garbage that it's in the article right now. The content should not be forked and put out of sight, as you're proposing. The text is already concisely worded and would not benefit from a trimming. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:43, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
You're just wrong. Maybe your proposal would work a few years ago, but right now you're completely wrong. If this is "subject to extensive RS coverage" and "highly notable" as you claim it is, then it's even more ridiculous to keep it in the article when summary style can be used. And what's the "trivial minutia and poorly sourced garbage" you referred to? wumbolo ^^^ 15:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
• And to elaborate on this revert, it introduces a blatant false statement that YouTube's algorithms "promoted" conspiracy theories, and is POV anyway. wumbolo ^^^ 16:33, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
• This is extensively sourced. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:42, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
• The current content of this section is not suitable for Social impact of YouTube because that article concerns the social impact of YouTube, that is, impact outside the website. In contrast, the current content of this section describes videos inside the website, and does not provide specific indications of how such videos have in fact impacted larger society. Disclosure: I have been the main contributor to Social impact of YouTube (81.8% of current text) since late 2013. —RCraig09 (talk) 17:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Afterthought: At most, a sentence could be added to Social impact of YouTube in one of the sections, "Broadened expression of political ideas" or "Expression of racial minorities and minority viewpoints". —RCraig09 (talk) 17:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
• Sure, it would be fine to put the content in its own section. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:53, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
? Its own section in which article? —RCraig09 (talk) 17:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
In this article, YouTube. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:53, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Follow-up: I've just added the following text to Social impact of YouTube (click here for diff). Any more internal detail should be kept in this YouTube article, because the Social impact of YouTube is limited to YouTube's impact outside the website itself. —RCraig09 (talk) 22:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
We can talk about the results by sociologists all we want at that article, but their incorrect or unsubstantiated beliefs about YouTube's internal workings are not appropriate for this article. wumbolo ^^^ 22:26, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Should this study cited by CJR be cited in the article? To me it looks very conspiratorial, useless, and amateurish. wumbolo ^^^ 15:41, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

In a word: yes. It's neither conspiratorial nor useless nor amateurish (60 pages, 110 endnotes, and is in turn cited by other reliable sources such as CJR and Vox among others I ran across). —RCraig09 (talk) 22:48, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Link: Google news results 2010-10-07 when searching the author and article title. —RCraig09 (talk) 23:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

This edit request to YouTube has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change the launch date from February 14, 2005 to April 23, 2005.

Source: https://mashable.com/2015/02/14/youtube-history/ 79.41.113.199 (talk) 21:52, 7 October 2018 (UTC) 79.41.113.199 (talk) 21:52, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

  Not done: From History of YouTube, The domain name "YouTube.com" was activated on February 14, 2005 with video upload options being integrated on April 23, 2005. wumbolo ^^^ 22:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
This was discussed previously here. February 14, 2005 has been given as the date of YouTube's launch/founding in numerous news stories, but this is the date when the domain youtube.com was registered and the first videos were not uploaded until April 23, 2005.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:30, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

There was just an outage on YouTube at about 01:10, 17 October (UTC) that affected millions of users across the world. Should we add this incident to YouTube#Company history? —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 02:28, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Indeed we should! --79.241.198.227 (talk) 02:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Think you mean an outage.   Yes if it gets a fair amount of reliable coverage like this it can probably be mentioned eventually. Home Lander (talk) 02:32, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
@Home Lander: Thanks. Just changed the title. —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 02:36, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Considering WP:NOTNEWS, maybe this event should not even be mentioned in an encyclopedia article. —RCraig09 (talk) 16:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)