Talk:Webvideo

Under Construction
Webvideo is going to be expanded soon. I have previously written the dutch article, so if you are capable of speaking Dutch you might help in translating it.


 * This page has a lot of potential (and potentially a lot of work). Let me know if I can help. I don't speak much Dutch, though. I put an UnderConstruction tag to let editors know you're working on it. Realkyhick 06:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Correct Title / Merging
The article was proposed for deletion, because webvideo is a neologism. That might be true, a simple search via Google will show that it is in widespread use though. There are even deli.ici.ous and Technorati categories named after webvideo, so I propose to keep the article and expand it with an explanation about the use of the word webvideo. In the further process of expansion also differences between the current use of the word webvideo, which refers mostly to video clips on YouTube that are in the FLV-format and use as a category for video. Titusn 07:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Google and blog sites aren't considered reliable sources. Why shouldn't this article simply be merged into internet video?  Is there something (referenced) to say about the word "Webvideo" that is different from internet video?  &mdash;dgies tc 07:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Webvideo symbolises the revolution of video on the web and is therefore essentially different from subcategories like the ones mentioned in the article. Also the article will contain unique information about a whole category of articles, therefore I propose to even include a new category called webvideo. I did so in the Dutch Wikipedia and it worked out fine. I guess it will work here, too. However merging the article into a special article on internet video might be acceptable too, as the word seems in much broader use in the dutch language that in English. Sources that do mention Webvideo in the English language usually do so as a reference to a certain software called WebVideo. The problem I have with the article you refer to is t hat it's title does not accurately reflect the use of the clips. It just says video clip and might refer to any sort of video. So I also suggest changing that title.Titusn 08:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * By the way on what sources do you base using the term internet video? My impression from the Google search (which admittedly is not very reliable, but still useful for getting an indication) is that both terms are in common use especially in Holland, which can be explained if you know that this country has one of the highest broadband penetrations in the world. The latter would mean that Holland would be one of the countries using Webvideo the most and thus using that word more often. So from the indication given by that Google search I would like to research what word currently describes best and is commonly used for video on the web in the English language, before coming to a conclusion about what title to give the article. Titusn 08:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * PS: This might all just be a grammatical misunderstanding, because in several European languages (including Dutch) words are more often concatenated than in English. It seems there already existed an article named Web video on wikipedia and it was merged with video clip as well. Titusn 08:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

The word webvideo might be in wide use. But as a concept, how is it different from internet video? Unless there is something really different, shouldn't the articles just be merged? We don't have separate articles for Website and Internet site.  &mdash;dgies tc 08:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for pointing that out. I believe that we even agree in principle. Because we do indeed not have different articles for website and internet site, we only have the article with the title Website. The name internet site would even be wrong, though it might be used very often in this incorrect sense. I can explain this: the web, like FTP or mail is an application based on the infrastructure provided by the internet. So a website would be a site in a virtual space, written in HTML and viewable by a web browser. An internet site would then be a virtual site like the low-level interface of a router. As internet and web are terms used in data communication for different layers of the ISO reference model (Halsall 1997), we should try and use the more specific term also in the case of video, which would then be webvideo in analogy to website. Titusn 08:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Going from memory here but I think the WP:MOS says articles should be named according to the term in most common English usage. So if you wanted the name to be "webvideo" in stead of "internet video", you would need to procide some evidence your term is more commonly used.  From my personal experience, "internet video" is way more popular.
 * Here is my suggestion: merge any content you have now into Internet video, then post on Talk:Internet video proposing the page be renamed to Webvideo and explaining your reasoning. If people agree with you, you can then take it to Proposed moves.  Does that sound OK?  &mdash;dgies tc 09:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, I already placed a link to this discussion on the Internet video and Video Clip talk pages. In the meantime I am trying to find out what would be the most commonly used term. I am not a language scientist, so maybe someone could help us out here, but I believe that using several search engines as a corpus and counting the results that are exclusively in English should give a fair enough indication, judging that we are talking about a theme that is internet centered here:

Instances of the phrases:

This shows that the phrase "web video" consistently occurs more frequently than "internet video" in all three databases, while webvideo is less common. The latter term is of course more specific, so a more thorough investigation shoud correct that statistically, but judging by the orders of magnitude difference between the occurrence of "web video" and "webvideo" it is safe to say that the first is most used in the English language. Now, While I would not recommend this as a method of determining who is going to be your next president (although some might argue that would be a more democratic way of doing it than the current system) it does lead me to believe that "Web video" would be the correct title for the article. Reactions please. Titusn 10:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

PS: Note that in the Dutch language a similar test would lead to reversed results and an even starker contrast, so that would probably be the source of the confusion. Titusn 10:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)