Talk:Patreon

Old
It's not okay to link to the site which the article is about?
 * done. --&#32; (talk) 07:25, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Just hearing about this - looking at the text "On average, patrons donate $7 per creation" I find my self wondering whether that's EACH patron or ALL patrons. ALL patrons, that sounds a teeny bit low, but EACH patron is unimaginably high - seems like it could be worded better...(?) Brettpeirce (talk) 13:09, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * from the reference: "Avg Pledge per creation: $7" It's not clear what the average donation is for the recurrent funding model, and it probably should be updated to a more recent analysis.--Lemnaminor (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Though a primary source Patreon recently released this summary How Patreon Creators Are Making Money. Did a quick and admittedly half-hearted news search and didn't any third party sources referencing those numbers yet. PaleAqua (talk) 05:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Business model?
The article doesn't mention what kind of organization Patreon is: Is it a charity or a company? If it is a company, how does the business model work? Als all of the funding going to the artist, and if not: How much does Patreon charge for its services?
 * The article says "Patreon takes a 5% commission on pledges." WaxTadpole (talk) 14:35, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

top 10
keep in mind that the list doesn't include any of the 18+ content creators, who are very successful. Gendalv (talk) 01:39, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Carl Benjamin is NOT alt-right
Just because Vox says he is. For clarity, read Wikipedia's own article on him, which presents a more balanced view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.160.134.114 (talk) 20:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Benjamin is an English liberal. He was banned by Patreon for insulting members of the alt-right. These kinds of basic factual errors undermine Wikipedia as a credible and politically neutral source for information. 2607:FEA8:8420:D7:9A6:BABB:E761:D0A7 (talk) 00:13, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Completely false. Carl was banned for making racist comments against black people; just because members of the alt-right reported him for those racist comments does not change the fact that he made them. Theintrepid (talk) 13:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It's your own analysis that sending interracial porn to alt-right users constitutes "making racist comments against black people". w umbolo   ^^^  22:02, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * He was banned for repeatedly yelling the n-word. Please spend at least 15 seconds googling before you type. Theintrepid (talk) 22:33, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Bullshit. The source cited doesn't mention that anywhere. Please read WP:BLP and don't ever cite a self-published source for such controversial information about a living person. w umbolo   ^^^  13:45, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Again. 15 seconds. https://patreonhq.com/hate-speech-on-patreon-a9026e52c2cf Theintrepid (talk) 20:23, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That's a WP:PRIMARY source by someone apparently working at Patreon and that scenario is likely not the case (because reliable sources report otherwise). w umbolo   ^^^  20:49, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The Financial Times did report it, so there might be truth to this. w umbolo   ^^^  20:57, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you please provide the reliable source that says he was banned from Patreon on December 6, 2018 for sending interracial porn to alt-right users? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theintrepid (talk • contribs) 21:05, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I thought you said that. I have never claimed that; in fact, I have been saying that he was banned because of a campaign to remove alt-right and far-right users from the website. You were the one bringing up the racial aspect, so I assumed that you were saying that his ban had something to do with him sending interracial pornography to an alt-right person, which he did according to one of the sources in his Wikipedia article (or the talk page of his article) which I'm not going to look for now. w umbolo   ^^^  21:33, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * All good! The recent changes are excellent. Theintrepid (talk) 03:33, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

here is a clip of the actual event after being harassed by the alt-right for months he went of a stream with several alt-right members where he said "you are acting like a bunch of N*****s, just so you know. you act like white N*****s, exactly how you describe black people acting is the impression I get dealing with the alt-right." this was not an attack against black people but against self confessed white supremacists. the gay interracial porn he sent to the alt-right member is what got Carl banned from twitter several month before. I've edited that segment to show the remarks while they maybe offensive to black people were in fact made at white racists. this was done to add clarity to the events as the alt-right have used this to deplatform Carl from Patreon--194.53.185.51 (talk) 01:44, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Why did not Patreon get partnership with Kickstarter?
Reason why Patrons need to be along with Backers to help out together. Isn't there Patreon-Powered Kickstater-Funded events in PatreCon? Was D.Rrip a child of Patreon and Kickstarter? Then explain please. 124.106.130.227 (talk) 20:23, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

The Post Millenial
Hi. Your addition of this as a source has been removed a few times. I thought I'd explain in further detail why this is not a reliable source. Articles like this, 'Patreon betrays the trust of its users', are opinion pieces, and are clearly marked as such a the top of the article (where it says 'December 12, 2018 in Culture, Opinion, Politics'). We can use opinion pieces for the opinion of the author, if that opinion is notable, but we cannot use it to factually say that 'This policy sparked unified outrage and an atmosphere of mistrust amongst Patreon users.' when this is really just some guy in Canada getting upset. There may be cases where the Post Millennial can be used for factual content; however, care should be taken. It was only established last year, and I would not say that this gives it time yet to be well-established or have a reputation for factual reporting, which are things we look for when we determine the reliability of a source.. It does publish a list of editors there, which is encouraging, but unless you'd like to take this to WP:BLPN I don't think even non-opinion pieces from the PM could we used here. PeterTheFourth (talk) 01:23, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Last line needs some massaging
The last sentence, as of this writing, is a nonsequiter:

"In December 2018, Patreon banned users Milo Yiannopoulos, Carl Benjamin and James Allsup as part of a wider campaign to remove alt-right and far-right users.[43] Harris finally deleted his account in protest.[44] "

I am assuming that "Harris" is Sam Harris. There is a sam harris wiki page - may I suggest that you: 1) add his full name (e.g. Sam Harris) 2) add square brackets around his name to make it a link 3) add a short description of who he is - something like: "Popular author and content creator Sam Harris has closed his Patreon account is protest...

I hate telling people what to do (when I am capable of making the changes myself), but I certainly understand the page being locked given the current controversies surround this topic

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.136.15.23 (talk) 13:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

WP:BLP
I rephrased a line in the "Controversy" section as per WP:BLP. Remember, associating people with controversial(/hate) groups like the Alt-Right movement is potentially libelious, it requires good sources. Certainly better than one article by an internet tabloid.

The policy is: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion" (WP:SOURCE) --Psychotic17 (talk) 01:08, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, so you didn't remove it, and you did it with discussion, and it's well sourced. Explain to me again about how much you understand our BLP policies, master. PeterTheFourth (talk) 02:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Enough to know you can't associate someone with a hate group based on one article on a tabloid web. What solution do you propose, then? --Psychotic17 (talk) 03:10, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Tell that to Patreon. We're only reporting what Patreon did and why. See Twitter suspensions for a ton of these – that's not a BLP violation. w umbolo   ^^^  09:43, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If the source cited was Patreon and not Vice, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But fine, I'm dropping it.--Psychotic17 (talk) 17:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Crucial
it is crucial to mention the whole context because Benjamin said it, and it has to be covered per WP:PUBLICFIGURE. It's like saying Trump used a racial slur ("Pocahontas") against Elizabeth Warren, without saying that she is not in fact Native American. w umbolo  ^^^  21:57, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * There are multiple problems here.
 * Your revert added information which was not supported by the attached source. Nowhere does it mention them being "stalkers", which is... true? False? Irrelvant? Why would that matter?
 * This isn't a platform for Benjamin's deflections. If the target of his racist and homophobic slurs is a justification for his actions, I haven't seen a single reliable source which explains why. He seems to think this is significant, but even his ideological allies have had a hard time supporting this. I've looked for sources explaining why this would hypothetically matter, but I haven't found any.
 * If you absolutely insist this perspective needs to be here, add it with attribution to Benjamin's own video, and according to due weight. Do not misrepresent the source by implying that it treated it seriously.
 * Comparing this to Trump seems absurdly inflammatory and unhelpful. Coverage of Benjamin ain't comparable to coverage of Trump, and everybody knows it. Grayfell (talk) 22:06, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It was added with attribution to his video before you removed it. w umbolo   ^^^  08:41, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


 * This edit, I assume. Why does the fact that he was addressing an alt-right group make any difference? Isn't this trivia? He further argued he could not share the homophobia nor the racism since he used the politically incorrect words to subversively mock their hateful ideology, implying they should behave in a civil manner. Even if we accept this summary, which is dubious, it is badly written and explains nothing. This argument makes no sense, and every reliable source I have seen ignores it or flatly rejects it as a nit-pick.
 * This edit added details which are not supported by the attached source. Citations are not the same as attribution, and misplaced citations are especially not attribution. If you still think this belongs, for some reason, you'll need to do a lot better than that. Benjamin still has many platforms for self-aggrandizement, so Wikipedia doesn't need to be one of them. Grayfell (talk) 22:59, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

D.Rip closing down?
D.Rip, a Kickstarter clone of Patreon is closing down in Q4 2019. Can Patreon work together with Kickstarter? 112.201.8.170 (talk) 12:27, 8 September 2019 (UTC)


 * What does this have to do with the Patreon article? Anastrophe (talk) 18:17, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

benefit for the creator to be on patreon vs. being directly funded via donate-button?
what is the benefit for a creator to be on patreon vs. being directly funded via donate-button? why pay shares to patreon? I heard on youtube that most of the patreons do not find their candidate across patreon but otherwise, like via youtube... so why not present yourself there via a link to a self-presentation for funding (patreon-style) and payment-solutions? thanx! HilmarHansWerner (talk) 03:13, 21 January 2020 (UTC)


 * What does this have to do with this article? Are you proposing changes to the article, or just speculating about the matter? If the latter, please see WP:NOTAFORUM. Thanks. Anastrophe (talk) 17:55, 21 January 2020 (UTC)


 * well, dear Anastrophe, the question "what's the use of it?" seems to be somehow not alien to the topic... so some answer to the question "why should I do this and not something else?" should be provided in the article, imho... so: what are the advantages of patreon over other (crowd-)funding-solutions? HilmarHansWerner (talk) 04:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it isn't a how-to guide, nor do we provide guidance to readers on whether product X is better or worse than product Y (or path X vs path Y or concept X vs concept Y, etc).
 * Now, that said, if you can find reliable published sources that have made claims that X is better/worse than Y, you're welcome and encouraged to add them to the article, within our golden confines of notability, reliability, etc etc. Cheers. Anastrophe (talk) 05:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * thanx, Anastrophe, for your willingness to help, but I know my way around in wikipedia since quite a while... my question was directed to people who know patreon (the logic behind it, the sources) better than me and are willing to provide enlightening content! HilmarHansWerner (talk) 02:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

different languages?
I can not find here or on the patreon-page an answer to the question what a creator does if s/he works with several languages? does s/he have to open different accounts or is there an option to present yourself in different languages within one account resp. one ID? thanx! HilmarHansWerner (talk) 05:01, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Patreon Lawsuits August 2020
Should we start writing a piece in this article regarding patreon - source links here: Court case writeup: https://www.cernovich.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/29.07.2020-Denial-of-Preliminary-Injunction.pdf Commentary: https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1288868346859905024 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.56.13.211 (talk) 03:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Explanation for revert?
Heya. Mind explaining what you mean by 'POV issue' in your edit summary of this revert? I'm just not certain what aspect you're objecting to. Is it that the Allsides blog is a poor source? Or that the description of Allsup doesn't follow NPOV guidelines? Or something else? I don't feel strongly about this revert, given the weak sourcing, but I was curious to hear your reasoning. Thanks in advance. Jlevi (talk) 17:16, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding. I should have left a comment here to explain further.
 * Regarding the revert, the reference isn't reliable.
 * As for the section itself:
 * "Controversy" sections are problematic in general.
 * Much of the section is simply pushback to Patreon's policies and enforcement of those policies.
 * I didn't look closely, but the section looks rather poorly sourced. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 18:02, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph seems UNDUE as written, and the POV might be reconsidered.
 * The second sentence of the second paragraph seems UNDUE.
 * Further paragraphs appear to have similar problems. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 18:45, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I just had a look myself - and while I shouldn't _have_ to say this, I'll state up front that I am not a fan of Patreon's rather slippery methods of dealing with issues by changing their terms of service ex post facto - but that said, the controversy section is far out of proportion to WP:DUE in terms of the company's totality of history. There's an awful lot of monologue going on in it, in detail that is not necessary to get the facts across, which amplifies the WP:UNDUE. I may take a stab at trimming proportionally. Anastrophe (talk) 19:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This all sounds fair. I suspect that some of the material cut from the Patron page could get moved to the pages of individuals involved, where the granular detail will be more relevant to them in particular. Jlevi (talk) 12:40, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Removed material on underage pornography
Hi, , , and. I notice that you all have recently contributed to some content that talks about underage pornography on Patreon, and that for three of you these are your first contributions on your Wikipedia accounts. I'm hoping to discuss a few reasons why I removed this content.

1) Reference to reliable sources is extremely important, especially for contentious material. The two non-primary sources references to support this material are Sausage Roll and Lulz. Both of these are low-tier sites at best a far as I can tell. Some better-quality sources for internet- and technology-related content might be Ars Technica, The Daily Dot, or maybe Business Insider (less preferred) or TechCrunch (less preferred). Even better would be citing more mainstream news outlets like the NYT, Washington Post, BBC, or Fox. Unless a very good argument is given, the current secondary sources are simply not sufficient to add this contentious content. See WP:Reliable Sources for more background.

2) There is a distinction between primary and secondary sources. You reference the Patreon guidelines directly to source two paragraphs. This is not the best form, because it is unclear why these sections have the WP:weight to be discussed rather than any other part of the guidelines. The best path to include these details is to show that they've been mentioned by reliable secondary sources.

3) Finally, it is important not to do WP:Original research. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which means that it does not synthesize information between sources. It only reports on what other reliable sources say. A Justice Department resource is placed in opposition to an interpretation of primary documents on Patreon guidelines. You would need a reliable source that directly makes claims, not just juxtapose commentary in Patreon guidelines with Justice Department remarks.

I hope this is all clear and that this explains why there is a fairly high hurdle to adding this content to the Patreon Wikipedia article. My biggest suggestion to you is to find reliable sources reflecting on these claims.

Jlevi (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Response:
 * Hello Jlevi,


 * I appreciate your feedback.
 * There are a few issues with your claim regarding the sources:


 * The first two come from Patreon's website as well as the Department of Justice website. Both are primary sources because they are being cited directly from the websites which are:
 * 1) selling child pornography
 * 2) prosecuting entities for selling child pornography


 * They speak for themselves regarding their allowance and prohibition of child sexual abuse material respectively. As for SausageRoll and Lulz, these websites have been cited on other Wikipedia pages so I would also recommend you hold the other contributers to the same standard if you're going to claim these are not reliable sources. I would recommend you take a look at Wikipedia's Reliable Sources policy if you have any questions and direct them to any administrators before you decide to delete important information like the one mentioned prior. My biggest suggestion to you is to review the editing guidelines as well as remove any personal bias you might have in favor or against a particular entity with its respective wikipedia page and mentions. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VCVgall (talk • contribs) 19:25, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Even if material comes from a primary source, it is often not worth putting in an article if not discussed in secondary sources. This issue is described in wp:weight. And it is important not to add one's own interpretations to primary material or go beyond what is stated in the source. For instance, "...they do not necessarily require but rather suggest..." appears to be interpretation of primary text not found in the original reference. For evaluating reliability of a source, the fact that it appears on wikipedia in a handful of articles is not a good argument--lots of chaff gets in, and we are having a conversation about the current article, not any other one. Jlevi (talk) 20:23, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

VS subscribestar
seems that lots of people are migrating from patreon to subscribestar (.adult) some infos --79.31.242.159 (talk) 02:29, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Russia and Ukraine Crisis 2022
Not sure if it's notable - but Patreon suspended a 7 year old account the week of the Russian invasion of Ukraine - Save-Life, NGO raising funds for the military - Patreon saying they do not allow offensive military funding on their platform. https://blog.patreon.com/en-GB/on-the-removal-of-come-back-alive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Envelopery (talk • contribs) 05:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Logo update
Patreon updated their logo again at some point (sometime after 2021 although I'm having trouble narrowing down when exactly it changed), and now their brand guidelines request that the central "p" be rendered in only a single color. Fluffycritter (talk) 00:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Recent removal of content
I reverted an IP who included various content that I removed with edit summaries explaining. Much of this seems to be undue and arbitrary commentary on the fact the platform has included content that might seem problematic to some due to recent events, but the inclusion here seems really POV. -- Zim Zala Bim talk 04:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Just because you do not like it does not mean it breaks POV!
 * Your edits are nothing short of disruptive and were made before consulting the talk page! 144.130.166.10 (talk) 04:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Please stop. Just trying to ensure we don't have undue focus on a particular concern some might have. Look at the language used, and you might understand that some of it is very point-of-view ridden -- Zim Zala Bim talk 04:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * You stop! You are the one making changes/mass deleting large amounts of the article without consulting the talk page! 144.130.166.10 (talk) 04:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Please note my recent edits that removed some of this content per WP:POV, WP:OR, and lacking sufficient WP:RS, as noted in the edit summaries. -- Zim Zala Bim talk 00:30, 22 September 2023 (UTC) An additional note - we really cannot engage in original research by suggesting there is a problem with Patreon hosting accounts that seem pro-Russia or whatever. We need independent reliable sources that suggest this is an issue. -- Zim Zala Bim talk 11:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting comment.png 3O Response: This discussion was listed at Third opinion and I am commenting in response to that request. I have never edited this article before nor have I (to the best of my knowledge) interacted with either editor. The dispute seems to be initially over this content, expanding into this content. As far as this content is concerned, its inclusion in the article does not appear to be warranted per WP:DUE; other than the Patreon link itself verifying the account, the other sources don't discuss Patreon so there's no basis for singling out this one account over all of the others (I'm sure there are many other Patreon accounts that would raise eyebrows, there's no reason this one would be worthy of note if reliable sources aren't mentioning it as being worthy of note).
 * As to the broader content, blogs like this and this aren't reliable sources (see WP:SPS) and this may or may not be reliable per WP:BUSINESSINSIDER, but the merits of that source should be discussed in detail if it's going to be relied on. In short, most of the disputed content doesn't appear to be WP:DUE given the lack of reliable sources discussing the content. For 144.130.166.10 my recommendation would be to try to find reliable sources that discuss the material added and to present them on the talk page and explain how/why they show that the content added is relevant in the scope of this Wikipedia article. - Aoidh (talk) 09:29, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Mass deletion of cited info by user ZimZalaBim
. The user ZimZalaBim has mass deleted well cited information on multiple controversies of Patreon without giving good reasons. 144.130.166.10 (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * See my note above - just becuase you have citations doesn't mean it is appropriate to include. -- Zim Zala Bim talk 04:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Your opinion is not the law!
 * Consult the talk page before doing mass deletions! 144.130.166.10 (talk) 04:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Please do not make a new talk page heading about a topic that already has one. Discussion should continue there, not here. Thanks, StartOkayStop (talk) 22:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Layoffs and percentages
A bit of quick math (and rounding) gives us So they have hired 77 new people after firing the 30, and 229 new people after firing the 36 - on top of ordinary employee circulation. Layoffs are not fun, and layoffs are events while steady recruitment is not, but a section on staff size might give a more balanced view than what we have now. Palnatoke (talk) 08:06, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * April 2020: "30 employees or 13% of its workforce"
 * April 2021: "36 employees or 13% of its workforce"
 * September 2022: "80 people, representing about 17% of its staff"
 * April 2020: Firing 30 out of 230.
 * April 2021: Firing 36 out of 277.
 * September 2022: Firing 80 out of 470.