Talk:CGP Grey/Archive 1

Section on his desire for anonymity
should this section be in or not? Please explain why you think yes or no.

Anonymity
He is very secretive about his appearance, often having his face blurred out or hidden when he appears in other people's videos. He also chooses to represent himself as a stickman with square glasses in his "thoughts from the screen" vlog-series. He has said that he "very highly" values his anonymity. He explains this by saying that he likes "being able to walk through the streets of London at night without being recognised and "not having my face in the videos forces me to me to concentrate much more on the visual side of an explanation for particular topic so I can't just shoot myself talking about it."


 * No. Article is about the channel.  Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MinutePhysics and related channels to see how they are written.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.224.169 (talk) 09:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

20:18, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it should stay as YouTuber before podcaster. Grey may produce more podcast episodes than YouTube videos or spend more of his time on podcasting, but he is far more notable for his YouTube videos. -- Iago Qnsi (User talk:IagoQnsi) 22:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * +1 to above. Vermont (talk) 00:07, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Dear Internet, here is a straw poll to decide the first line: http://www.strawpoll.me/15622852/r (If this is against wiki rules or there is a proper way to do this on wikipedia - please message me) Mindi Crayon (talk) 21:07, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * There's no reason to use some external polling site. See WP:Consensus for how decisions are made on Wikipedia. (By the way, I agree with IagoQnsi and Vermont—the subject is notable for being a YouTuber, not for being a podcaster, so it makes sense to put YouTube first in the lead.) —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:41, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2018
Added vlogger according to a newly posted video. 07h3rw153 (talk) 17:41, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:36, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Non-Free Image in Infobox
Hey! I was wondering if you would be willing to upload an image like the one in the info box and license it is a way compatible with wikipedia. Obviously isn't a big deal, but figured I would ask rather than just continuing to use that image without an appropriate license. 20:50, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * To elaborate on the above, currently the stick figure image is used under fair use, which a small few of the Wikipedia communities (mainly en.wikipedia.org) have opted into allowing. However, in order for the image to be allowed on other pages and Wikipedia language editions (e.g. Dutch and German Wikipedia) it must be released by the copyright holder under a free license. If you wish to do so, the easiest way would be for you to upload this image, or another image of your choosing, through Commons Upload Wizard. Alternatively, you could e-mail your permission and we will handle the rest. --Krinkle (talk) 16:16, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Standard.tv
i would like to raise awareness to the wikipedia community of a new business that cgp grey is involved in.

he is a founding member of Standard.tv.

I don't know how to include this in the article, but i thought that someone with more experience would be able to add it into the page.

thanks

] ([[User talk:Rachael M 94|talk) 14:35, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , if you know of some quality reliable sources that has covered it, we can work on adding it. But if no one has been covering it, especially CGPGrey's involvement, it is WP:TOOSOON   14:42, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

zchrykng the page that i linked to - standard.tv/pages/about is a source from the company which mentions cgp grey as a founding member. Is this enough? The website also sells Hello Internet merch, as well as merch from a bunch of other podcasts/ youtubers that it represents, so I don't think it can be fake.

but I understand, since there's no external websites that talk about it, it is very easy to doubt.

] ([[User talk:Rachael M 94|talk) 14:55, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , it isn't about doubt. I'm sure that he is part of the company. But wikipedia policy requires reliable sources that are preferably independant. Unfortunately, company websites don't qualify for most things.   15:10, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

"Taking a step back"
I've added a sentence to report that CGP Grey appears to be taking a break from internet production. Pity. I do hope he returns. Tony (talk)  10:19, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, User:Tony1. I am a bit unsure here as you are a far more experienced editor than I am, but are you sure he is taking a break from production as well as consumption of internet content? From his podcasts I had understood that he was explicitly only ending consumption, although those are also just primary sources. If it is true he is taking a break, I too am much saddened. Thank you, GreyGreenWhy (talk) 11:38, 20 October 2018 (UTC).
 * From listening to him, it sounded like he was only taking a break from consumption not production. The lack of videos would probably just be his normal slow production cycle.   19:03, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2019
I wish to update the statistics, in particular: CGP Grey: 405 Million View - 407 Million Views CGP Play : 389,000 views to 390,000 views Muffington (talk) 20:13, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bradv 🍁  05:52, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2019
Change "The podcast has an "official" flag ..." to "The podcast has an official flag...", as it is referred to as 'official flag' (without quotes) in several other articles, and in another spot in this same article. FiliusBonacci (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ per WP:SCAREQUOTES. – Iago Qnsi (User talk:IagoQnsi) 02:40, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2019
I wish to update the statistics, in particular: CGP Grey : 405 Million View - 407 Million Views

CGP Play : 389,000 views to 390,000 views Muffington (talk) 14:36, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Saucy[talk – contribs] 23:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Potential reference
Given the BLP primary sources tag at the top of the article, perhaps this Independent article could be added as a reference? --58.8.168.152 (talk) 20:47, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Warning! That article contains a CGPGrey name spoiler! --IngenieroLoco (talk) 15:21, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Image
Could you please license File:CGP Grey stick figure.png under CC-BY-4.0? It's starting to become a problem since the file is not technically free to use. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 15:55, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

, I also want to discuss if the current usage is truly unacceptable. Genuine question, where is the policy that does not allow non-free images to be used as an identifying picture, and what are the exceptions you mention? The WP:NFCC seem to be entirely fulfilled, hence why I reverted it in the first place. I apologize if I am entirely in the wrong, but I want to be sure before we get rid of an an image that has served the article well for quite a long time now (and has not been contested by the copyright holder who is semi-active on Wikipedia). Also pinging the uploader of the image, and  who seems interested in this topic. Cerebral726 (talk) 14:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC) I think this pretty clearly qualifies as WP:NFCCP. There's longstanding consensus against including the image face of Grey per WP:BLP concerns, so let's not get into that debate again. If this is simply a question of whether or not the image should stay, then I say yes since that is the image fans and the public know him by. To give a rather crude example, the stick figure adequately depicts Grey as much as the self-portrait of Vincent van Gogh. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 17:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Nonfree images of living persons are the paradigm of replaceable images barred by NFCC#1, and are explicitly cited as such in the governing WMF policy resolution, as well as applicable en-Wiki policy pages.. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.  Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 14:40, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * However, this is not an image of a living person, it is a representation of this person. And to quote the rational from the photo: CGP Grey is known almost exclusively known by his stick figure representation, which is copyrighted by him, so a freely licensed version couldn't exist. A freely-licensed photograph of Grey could be used, but it would not be illustrative in the same way that this image is (because he very rarely shows his face publicly), and it would also violate Grey's request for privacy on the talk page. Cerebral726 (talk) 14:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Which has nothing to do with with our nonfree content policy. If this isn't an image of the subject, it doesn't identify him and doesn't belong in the infobox. And this isn't really a privacy issue, but one involving the desire of a public figure to exercise control over the public image, which is not a concern recognized by Wikipedia policy. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.  Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 16:10, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Grey is not all that active on Wikipedia anymore. The simplest solution would be for him to just license this one awfully specific photo for free use. CGP Grey, the subject of the article, is almost exclusively depicted as this exact sick figure (therefore, identifying the subject). Without the logo, I am pretty confident that this image would be considered a . I also think that the logo, by itself, could qualify as that as well.. but both together seem to be enough creative content there to copyright. Regardless...


 * I think the image should stay. The reason non-free images aren't usually allowed for living people is that a free photograph could be created which would be able to replace a non-free photograph. But here we're not talking about a non-free photograph—we're talking about a non-free stick figure drawing. The possibility of creating a free photograph is irrelevant (in fact, free photographs are already on Commons)—the issue is that a photograph is not an appropriate or adequate representation in this particular article, for reasons that have been mentioned in previous discussions on this talk page. —Granger (talk · contribs) 08:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Please stop edit-warring. You are the only one here arguing that the image violates NFCC. As I just explained, the image meets NFCC#1 because a photograph would not be an adequate representation of this subject. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Consensus here is to include the image, and the one dissenting user is not responding here on the talk page, so I'll restore the image to the article. If anyone disagrees, please address the points that have been made and gain consensus before removing it again. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * A local consensus established here on this talk page cannot really override a policy like WP:NFCC. While I think both sides have made some valid points, I also think that the best place to try and resolve this is likely going to be at WP:FFD since that's a community-wide noticeboard and whatever consensus is established there is going to carry more weight. The file should, at least in my opinion, stay in the article until an admin removes it either per WP:F7 or WP:FFD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

After being speedy deleted, the image has now been restored and WP:FFDed: Files for discussion/2020 January 22 Ionmars10 (talk) 03:10, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2020
Never mind, he doesn't want his full name on Wikipedia.24jiang14 (talk) 19:12, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , if you change your mind you can just exit out of the window to cancel the edit. Ionmars10 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2020
Update CGP Grey channel views from 470 million to 533 million per https://www.youtube.com/user/CGPGrey/about. Giraffer (talk) 08:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done! GoingBatty (talk) 14:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion: YouTuber or content creator
Grey uploads his content on YouTube and also distributes it via rss. Won’t it be more appropriate to call him a content creator than a YouTuber then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesidhantgoyal (talk • contribs) 04:40, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Content creator is a very unspecific term – video creator would be better but Wikipedia does not have an article on that. If I had a YouTube channel, I would not call myself a YouTuber (because the type of content produced is more important than the platform) but the media does. I don’t think the article should be changed. —Dexxor (talk) 11:33, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Speaking of content creators, in the Youtube Information box called associated acts, I feel like it is the wrong word. Associated creators, or associated content creators would be better. - Chavoryn, Nov 16 2020
 * That name comes from the template . You should propose your change there. Keep in mind that the template is used in many articles and needs to have generic names. —Dexxor (talk) 11:53, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

I see. If it's a generic template used for many personalities, then I don't think it's a problem. - Chavoryn Nov 19 2020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.223.194 (talk) 03:03, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Photo
CGP Grey has revealed his face, and I think it would be appropriate to put a photo of his face in the article, but I wanted to hear input from others. Ethan Parmet (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Consensus in previous discussions has been not to include the photo, as the stick figure is a better illustration and the subject has expressed a wish not to have his photo in the Wikipedia article. Please see Talk:CGP Grey/Archive 1 and the deletion discussion for the stick figure image, and respond to the points made there if you want to add the photo. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately it goes against the interest of the encyclopedia as a whole if decisions like these are done by fans of his work. If the picture is in the public domain, it shouldn't be restricted by it. Rodrigo Duderte, por example, has a picture of him on his article and from his personality I am inclined to think he doesn't like it is there, giving some negative aspects of his administration that are depicted in the article. Yet it is there. His picture and his name isn't copyright and the decision to hide it is biased. --177.149.82.183 (talk) 09:07, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * If you're interested, the concensus (or lack of concensus to remove) has been established in a number of discussions. This includes in the linked archive discussion here and a WP:FfD that can be found here. You might want to do some digging before saying the decision is purely fan based. --Cerebral726 (talk) 12:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * There are policies around this kind of thing. See WP:BLPNAME and WP:BLPPRIVACY. I also personally feel that it doesn't actually add anything useful to the article to include it. Next to no one knows it, and it really serves no purpose to include. Especially since they have specifically asked for it to not be included. SamStrongTalks (talk) 12:39, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Defaultsort
"CGP Grey" is not a pseudonym. See Companies House: "Grey" is the legally registered last name and "CGP" are the initials of the first and middle names. Sorting CGP Grey under "Grey" is correct. feminist (+) 14:08, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * As much as Grey is his name, his chosen name is CGP Grey as an entire title, so I don't agree default sort needs flipping. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 14:14, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure I understand that logic at all. If someone uses their first and last name in conjunction often enough they shouldn't be sorted by their last name? There doesn't seem to be an argument that his last name isn't Grey, so it should be sorted like everyone else. --Cerebral726 (talk) 17:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I actually thought of the article title as not being his name but his YouTube channel name. Other brands are also sometimes named after personal names, but we don't actually treat brand names as personal names. &horbar;Jochem van Hees (talk) 19:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * This article devotes roughly equal coverage to Grey's YouTube channel (under the Videos section) and to his involvement in podcasts (under the Podcasts section). It is structured more like a biography than an article primarily about his main YouTube channel. feminist (+) 04:15, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with Feminist again. This article is absolutely a biography on CGP Grey the person, not the channel. If this was just about the channel a significant portion of the article would need to be removed. --Cerebral726 (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Stick figure


I think the non-copyrighted geometric logo (Pictured) is better than a copyrighted fair-use screenshot. Quick Quokka [⁠talk • contribs] 13:38, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I agree, assuming that the logo really is too simple to be eligible for copyright. It's not clear to me whether the stick figure or the logo is better for identification, and given that uncertainty, I'd prefer to err on the side of using free content instead of non-free content. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 18:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * (This is not my home computer, this is a public computer, and I don't want to sign in, due to security reasons. Will confirm this is me when I get home)
 * Hello, me, QuickQuokka, I have found a high-res version of the CGP Grey, and @Pbrks helped vectorize it. I think they'll fit in better than what I previously suggested. --93.123.119.139 (talk) 07:52, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Can confirm Quick Quokka  [⁠talk • contribs] 12:03, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Crazy idea, but what if we ask to draw a CC-licensed stick figure for use specifically in this article? 〜  Festucalex  •  talk  12:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Age
The biography of a person should include their age 2A02:C7E:3EDE:BB00:B987:AD8B:24B9:D7E0 (talk) 19:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * This article is mostly about the YouTube channel. It isn't supposed to be a biography. Zbelios (talk) 13:05, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This article is supposed to be a biography. But we also have privacy concerns. His age and full name is not widely reported in sources, so we do not include it. Also see this link from the header of the talk page. Cerebral726 (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2023 (UTC)