Template talk:YouTube/Archive 1

Image
I have removed the image, as Fair use images can't be used in Templates. I am not sure if this template is really useful, knowing that some videos in YouTube have copyright, it may encourage copyright violations (in example, people may add a YouTube template pointing to the latest X-Men 3 movie uploaded in YouTube). I am requesting comments from the External links section. -- ReyBrujo 03:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * If nothing else, a template will make it easier to find and delete links to copyright-violating YouTube links. :) &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 21:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Functional limitation...
This template only points to a single video at YouTube. There are other funcations such as searching based on keywords and show user profiles that neither it or similarly-named templates do not yet accomodate. -- 67.116.253.187 15:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I personally believe that pointing to a single video is good: if people want to link to many videos, they will have to use this template many times, which may allow us in the future to differentiate articles that are using this template once from those that are using it several times. Besides, we should never point to a user profile, as people would begin using it to point to their own profiles in order to get more "traffic" for their videos. Also, searching based on keywords is not really necessary: When you are adding an external link to an article, you don't give a link to a search on Google based on some terms, but instead to a specific page. -- ReyBrujo 16:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


 * One note about user profiles: There are some YouTube users who are either becoming internet memes in their own right or are bands that are actually presenting their music vids on YouTube. They are a small percentage of the YouTube community, but they are there. -- 67.116.253.187 16:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * In that case, the user or band will have to have a page in Wikipedia after his notability has been probed (either music or internet notability). In example, if the band does Alternative rock, we should not go to the article and add a link to the band's profile because they happen to play alternative rock. However, if the band becomes notable, in their Wikipedia page it would be fine to either manually add a link to the profile at YouTube without using the template, or add one YouTube template per every video they have in the section Videos of their article. -- ReyBrujo 17:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

No more renames!
Somebody felt that it was necessary to rename Template:youtube to Template:YouTube. Sigh. Fine. I can fix up the hundreds if refs (since the person who did the renames did not do so). NO MORE RENAMES, NOW. Ya hear? -- PinkCake 02:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

This could get popular...
There is a lot of content at YouTube, especially relevant for media/entertainment. We might want to set some guidelines. On what is and is not appropriate. -- 75.24.211.225 23:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The correct place for such discussion would be WP:EL. So far, what we can do is to replace any YouTube video link we find in articles with this template, so that if it is ruled YouTube videos should be deleted from Wikipedia, we can know where each is. Or to review the videos to see if there is some copyright problem with the link. -- ReyBrujo 23:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


 * A couple of fairly obvious guidelines: I am trying to not let the already-available content of YouTube effect the content of the encyclopedia. By that I mean, I am adding links if the page exists. I am mostly just doing songs.  I prefer live performances to music videos. A good example is Elton John, where the pages really just cover his period of greatest success (the 1970's) but Sir John has done tons of less successful music, duets etc. An exception I made was for Hotel California, where I thought the progression of the song through the decades was worth taking a look at.  Another such example might be Eric Clapton's Layla (the rare exception that a song is re-released and is successful). -- 67.119.195.218 23:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Please stop linking to songs... often these are copy-vios and we shouldn't be promoting that. ---J.S (t|c) 21:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Youtube: main site versus hot links

 * originally posted at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources, but no response there.

An editor at Quixtar would like to use an old promotional video as a source. Youtube hosts the video, and at least two Quixtar-related websites hotlink to it - one site belongs to a supporter and the other to an opponent. There is no licensing information at any site. My view is that linking directly to Youtube is the most NPOV (if we need to use the video at all) though that doesn't address the copyright issue. The other editor is concerned that if we link directly to Youtube the link will be removed. Talk:Quixtar. Any thoghts? -Will Beback · † · 01:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

YouTube links on wikipedia
YouTube is almost never a good source. There are currently 11,000 links from wikipedia and from my research a good part of them (10% or so) are actually being used as a source. Stop it. It's also not ok to link to copyrighted material. (see WP:EL) That seems to be more then 60% of the links I reviewed. This is a big problem. There is currently a discussion about this on the WP:AN. ---J.S (t|c) 21:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * However since it is currently July 7 that discussion is no longer available. Are you asserting that anything on youtube is copywritten and thus we cannot link to it? That might ought to be discussed in the template.Litch 17:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * An issue with using this template for source material is that there isn't an obvious way to use it with a reference template. Here's an example from Alberto Gonzales...
 * Using Template:cite video alone, entering the entire URL
 * Using just Template:YouTube
 * Using them in conjunction, replacing the title in Template:cite video with an instance of Template:YouTube and omitting the URL so that the templates expand together correctly
 * The third item works, and I think it is better since it clearly notes the host (YouTube) and the copyright holder and publisher (CNN). But, is it a good idea to combine the templates like this? Edurant 03:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Using them in conjunction, replacing the title in Template:cite video with an instance of Template:YouTube and omitting the URL so that the templates expand together correctly
 * The third item works, and I think it is better since it clearly notes the host (YouTube) and the copyright holder and publisher (CNN). But, is it a good idea to combine the templates like this? Edurant 03:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The third item works, and I think it is better since it clearly notes the host (YouTube) and the copyright holder and publisher (CNN). But, is it a good idea to combine the templates like this? Edurant 03:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Template for deletion needs
recently the template Tfd; it needs to be surrounded by … to prevent it from showing up on every linked page. Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Not done: The template as you see it on Template:YouTube is not what shows up on transcluded pages. Instead, a single line letting people know that the template used is up for deletion. It is supposed to do this. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * That may be well intended, but there should be a mechanism to prevent unnecessary disruption in case of whimsical deletion proposals like the current one. In fact, WP:TFD says: "If placed directly into the nominated template, use ... around the TFD notice if it is likely to be disruptive to articles that transclude that template." In light of this sentence and given the apparent WP:SNOW of the current Tfd's success, I repeat my request above. Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * You can call it "whimsical" or whatever if you want but it's within policy and being discussed. It's going to be treated exactly like any other template listed there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Under what circumstances would WP:TFD ("If placed directly into the nominated template, use ... …") be applied then? Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * For larger template, you can just add it inside. Besides, even if it's silly, I think most people would rather have more eyes seeing that it's up for deletion, not less.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Add "type" parameter
Because there are cases where it is useful to link to other areas of YouTube besides just videos I was thinking a 'type' parameter could be added to link to users and shows like this one for the Sherlock Hound article. Here is the code for what I had in mind. Anything missing? Objections? RP9 (talk) 05:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I have created a new version in the sandbox, which could be used to merge YouTube show and YouTube user with this template. To show exactly how this would work, I have created a table of testcases, which probe both the documented and undocumented features of the three templates.  Note that the current behavior of  is not the same as  in the live template, but it is the same in my sandbox version.  Does anyone have any comments or suggestions? Is this a good idea? If there are no objections, I will change the template. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  22:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This will not works for shows that do not use names, I posted this before the shows with names existed. For instance, this: http://www.youtube.com/show/K162qI1LPF8 will not work, it only works like this: http://www.youtube.com/show?p=K162qI1LPF8. It is not forward or backward compatible, hence YouTube show and YouTube showid. So, I think it will have to be added as a separate parameter. Also, any particular reason for the redundancy in the URL? RP9 (talk) 23:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It turns out you can produce the link you are asking for with . YouTube will strip off the extra slash.  However, since it's not that hard to add another variable, I added the 'p = ' option for the showid.  I have updated the test cases to show how this would work.  I moved the redundant www.youtube.com outside of the switch statement. I wasn't sure which was easier to read. Let me know what you think. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  08:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice. While that does work, it is not exactly intuitive. Adding the p variable, I think, is also going to cause confusion. For instance the other variables must be named if it is used, unless you do something like this: . Do you think this would be better? Have not tested it, so it may not work. RP9 (talk) 17:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought about it a bit, and I believe the usage could be simplified a bit by eliminating "type" and "" completely. The idea would be to use "show" if the "show" variable is specified, "showid" if "showid" is specified, "user" if "user" is specified, and the default if none of the previous three are specified.  I have made this change, and updated the testcases.  The other (minor) change is that I removed the italics from the title unless  is used for the title. The reasoning for this is that one might not want the italics. However, I could see including them for all cases as well. Let me know what you think. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  19:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree, this makes more sense. The code is kinda confusing at first but it is more obvious as to what the parameters are doing when using the template. RP9 (talk) 03:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Re: italics — I think you're right, the titles shouldn't be italicised by the template; that should be left to the editor. This provides more flexibility in cases like
 * Even better would be a new optional free-form parameter which allowed this rendering:
 * "O luce di quest'anima" from Donizetti's opera Linda di Chamounix, sung by Beverly Sills at YouTube (Adobe Flash video).
 * Am I dreaming? Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Since there are no objections, I will go ahead and update the template. We can always add the free-form text parameter, perhaps as , later. It would be fairly trivial to add since it would just insert some text in between the link and the "at YouTube" phrase. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  18:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Since there are no objections, I will go ahead and update the template. We can always add the free-form text parameter, perhaps as , later. It would be fairly trivial to add since it would just insert some text in between the link and the "at YouTube" phrase. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  18:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

"Adobe Flash video"
This template needs the "Adobe Flash video" note in parethesis removed, for one it's incorrectly interfering with the "YouTube user" template and second it's confusing to whoever reads it, in which would most likely lead the user to think that it's a Flash cartoon. •  GunMetal Angel   02:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * WP:EL requires that the technology needed to view content at a link be specified. Would it be better like this?
 * Sherlock Hound show at YouTube (via Adobe Flash video)
 * or
 * Sherlock Hound (via Adobe Flash video) show at YouTube
 * It is not incorrectly interfering with YouTube user. Often times, user account pages contain videos, however, it can be removed specifically from user links if it is a problem. RP9 (talk) 05:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If it's an uncommon problem, one could just create the link without using the template. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 05:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * … which will likely incur the wrath of XLinkBot. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that one of the purposes of this template is to obfuscate links to fool a bot? That doesn't sound good.  I imagine the bot could be modified to include  templates as well.  I have never had a problem with the bot reverting my edits, but perhaps I'm on a "whitelist".  Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  15:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought XLink reverted IP edits using this template as well as without. I don't think XLink ever reverts auto-confirmed editors when adding a link to YouTube. RP9 (talk) 20:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, if I can I would fix the "YouTube user" template, but I'm not good with codes, and I have haulted from using it (instead I just put for ex. Century Media Records at YouTube instead of using the template when it is needed in external links) but overall, I prefer the second note in the choices you gave; the one that reads "Sherlock Hound show at YouTube (via Adobe Flash video)" over them all, YouTube videos are ran with Flash (such as the border around it is made with the Adobe Flash program) but usually never the videos themselves. --  GunMetal Angel   19:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it should just be "Sherlock Hound show at YouTube (via Adobe Flash)" then because Adobe Flash has built in support for Flash Video, and the browser would need support for Flash not Flash Video in the case of YouTube. Also, could you explain what the problem is with YouTube user. I'm a little fuzzy on what the problem is. RP9 (talk) 20:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * is just a frontend for this template, so any changes made here will appear there. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 01:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

YouTube video links banned in general
Please check out the discussion "Wikipedia talk:External links." __meco (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Does not require Adobe Flash, GNU gnash works too
There's an error in the tag. Adobe software is not requiredd, YouTube videos can be viewed with Gnash.

This error is important because we should always steer as far as possible from encouraging the use of proprietary software and we should promote free software. Can an authorised editor fix it? Gronky (talk) 12:59, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Is "Requires Adobe Flash" really necessary?
I really don't think it is necessary to state "requires Adobe Flash" in the template. The website will still work if the user does not have Flash installed, instead they will simply get an error message on the page and the video will not play. It's not like the file will simply not work (like with PDFs), and links to those files don't have a disclaimer stating that a PDF plugin is necessary. Yes, this does appear to be a disclaimer in this template, which makes it seem more unnecessary. – Dream out loud (talk) 05:50, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Agreed, this text is redundant. __meco (talk) 15:26, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Same at Google video. We don't disclaim links which require javascript to function properly, and needn't for these. At the very least, it should be reduced to the size of MP3link. And, should link to Flash Video instead of Adobe Flash, given that Adobe isn't the only company that provides flv functionality. -- Quiddity (talk) 21:31, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * See above. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  22:27, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The comments above are not supported by the text at WP:EL. It says "Direct links to documents that require external applications or plugins (such as Flash or Java) to view the content" (emphasis added), and this template doesn't link directly to a Flash document. Furthermore, that section directs the reader to the "Rich Media" section of that page, where it says "Check that the content type of the linked page is "text/html", "text/plain", or "application/xhtml+xml" (or another XHTML content type) as some pages may instead be rendered solely by platform-dependent plugins." Pages on YouTube use "Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8". Let's lose that "requires" message! — John Cardinal (talk) 03:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Format declaration
WP:EL requires that an explicit mention of the technology required to view rich media be declared next to external links that require them. Please modify this and similar templates in compliance:

at YouTube (Adobe Flash video)

ViperSnake151  Talk  23:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Seems reasonable enough. Killiondude (talk) 16:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

This edit should be reversed by removing the text " " WP:EL does not require an explicit mention when linking to an HTML page, and that's what this template does. WP:EL is pretty specific, and even mentions the content type of the document being linked. With YouTube, such pages are text/html, or similar. Please see my furhter comments below in the Is "Requires Adobe Flash" really necessary? section. Thank you. 02:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Minutes and seconds
I think it would be a good idea to add optional parameters to inform readers of the length of the video.--Ccson 16:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This can of course be included in the parameter title :
 * which renders as
 * -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Excellent idea, I was just coming here to see if there was anything on a more specific parameter. You can also add #t=2m10s at the end of the URL link so the video will start immediately at that time (in this case 2 minutes and 10 seconds). YouTube automatically adds 3–4 seconds before the time listed (so 2 minutes and 7 seconds or so). –  Ker αun oςc op ia◁ <sub style="color:#5E1FFF;">galaxies  18:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * … as explained some time ago below at . -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Should it say "official channel"?
Please change "channel" to "official channel". That would make it more clear that Wikipedia generally does not point to fan channels on YouTube.--Lashuto (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Would you please discuss this change first? There may be cases where the word "official" would not be appropriate. Perhaps other editors can comment on whether this change would work. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:46, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess that it is easier to decide if something is an "Official website". See Official website.--Lashuto (talk) 19:04, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Why does it say "at" not "on"?
I think it sounds much more natural in English to say that a video is "on a webite" not "at a website". In my opinion, "All This and Rabbit Stew on YouTube" reads more like authentic English than "All This and rabbit Stew at YouTube". (That's the name of a cartoon in the public domain, by the way, so linking to it should not be a problem.)Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 13:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * All Err, most of the external link templates use this convention (e.g. Template:BBC Online, Template:IMDB name, Template:Britannica, etc).
 * Exceptions: Template:Databank and Template:StrongHebrew use "in", and Template:Handbook of Texas uses "from".
 * The majority seem to use "at"... However, there are hundreds of them and I only checked a few dozen: Category:External link templates


 * If you'd like to start a wide-scale discussion to standardize, then either Category talk:External link templates or Wikipedia talk:Template messages would probably be the place to do it. (?)
 * You'd have to ask a grammarian about the proper usage. My guess is that you're correct, based on the wording within the featured article Scene7 which uses "on the website" and similar constructions, throughout. HTH. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I know that most of them use "at". I also left a message on the discussion page for Template:Findagrave asking why the word "at" is missing. When you add that template you just get "Person's name Find a Grave". So far, nobody else has commented there.


 * I don't really see any need to standardize all of them, "in Strong's" and "from the Handbook of Texas" seem fine to me. I think that standardization across all templates, present and future, would just create more awkward English. As a modern languages graduate and a professional English teacher, I know my grammar. I'd welcome a second opinion, though.Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 14:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ahh, well if you are an expert, then I wholeheartedly endorse. If a third editor agrees, we can add an editprotected template.
 * (I did just mean: "standardization of 'at' to 'on', wherever might be appropriate".) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the current wording (Night of the Living Dead at YouTube), which has been in place since the template's creation 2006, sounds just fine. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Re-start edit request

Please see Template talk:Myspace. Several other templates now at "on". I think that this one should also. Because "on" sounds more personal, I wonder if the guidelines could be: So a single video might be "at" YouTube while a channel would be "on" YouTube. For something like a YouTube show, it might be "on" YouTube the way that a show is "on TV", but "at" would be natural also, especially if the "show" were only snippets of content.--Lashuto (talk) 19:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * "on" for sites that the person/group/artist/cultural_artifact/social_netork_thing actually controls
 * "at" for sites (IMDb, etc.) that simply list info about the person/work_of_art/cultural_artifact
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Linking to YouTube outside of the US
I found an article with a link to a video on uk.youtube.com. Is there a way of specifying that with this template? Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:49, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Option to stop linking to YouTube
Also, I think there should be a parameter to optionally disable the "on YouTube" being a wikilink, because it may result in over linking to the YouTube article on some articles where a few channels are mentioned, eg bands, collabs, etc. I recommend adding something like  - using "wikify=no" to inhibit the wikilink should be easy enough to add. Cheers,  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh  &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 23:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You're right that would be easy to implement and uncontroversial, so I will do it now. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


 * As you can see from the above, this is now working. (I thought link=no more appropriate than wikify=no. To me, wikifying implies a process of going through a whole article adding links. What do you think?) &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I thought  was distinct, because some people might think they need to put , e.g.  , but as long as it's made clear in the template doc what   needs, it shouldn't confuse people. Thanks.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh  &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 08:48, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply, but thanks Martin for fixint it! Regards, Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply, but thanks Martin for fixint it! Regards, Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Include "channel" in link text
Currently, if we use, on, let's say, Ghost The Musical, it produces However, I believe it should be displayed as:


 * on [[YouTube]

with the 's channel, as it is the channel of a particular organization, person, etc. I have changed it in the /sandbox. Thanks.

Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 16:42, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No objections, so ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:31, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * This edit has cocked-up the formatting. The "s channel" needs to be placed so that it gets included within wiki-markup when someone tries to style the channel name, in italic and bold, because it is on longer being processed (although it was before the last update). Please amend.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh  &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 23:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Current behaviour


I'm not sure you are correct. I have listed the previous behaviour above so we can compare. You'll notice that the word "channel" never matched the style of the title, and I don't think that would be appropriate anyway. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, maybe not - but the 's' after the apostrophe still needs to match any formatting applied, or it looks odd.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh  &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 08:40, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean but I can't think of any technical way the style of could be detected and also added to the 's. We would have to use a separate parameter like style=italic, and that is probably more complicated than it's worth. I'll ask User:Avenue X at Cicero to comment here. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't really feel it'll be necessary as we only italicize for non-English words or film titles. And as 's is not a part of either the non-English word or title, I don;t think its necessary. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Protocol relative URL
YouTube also supports HTTPS, which is why the link should be protocol relative. I've added the new code to the sandbox. Thanks, --The Evil IP address (talk) 15:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Or, even better, link to HTTPS always. YouTube has quite good support for it, and all supported features that this template permits (user, show, watch) work good with HTTPS. While most people might not care which protocol they use, some may do so. The updated code is in the sandbox. --The Evil IP address (talk) 15:41, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Before taking that path, I'd recommend researching whether HTTPS might be blocked in some environments. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:46, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't know a reason why someone would block HTTPS without blocking HTTP as well. In fact, I've noted some environments that blocked certain sites, including YouTube, but apparently used a regex like, leaving the HTTPS connection open for some time until they noticed it. Maybe you can clarify what you're trying to say. --The Evil IP address (talk) 10:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Declining for now as there seems to be active discussion over exactly what we want here. Personally I don't see a problem with simply going by HTTPS by default: the most likely case of incompatibility is with clients which don't support HTTPS, but those aren't clients which are going to have much luck with Flash video either. Please re-enable (or just ping me) once there's consensus either way. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems that some filtering software does not allow SSL browsing: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/googles_new_secure_search_might_force_schools_to_b.php
 * On the other hand, many filtering tools can be fooled by using HTTPS. I have no experience with restricted environments, but I was aware of some chatter about Google's introduction of SSL and its unintended consequences; that's why I suggested that some more research into the matter might be needed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Without meaning to be too flippant here, what exactly is the use case for an organisation which a) has a content filter strict enough to disallow HTTPS entirely, and b) doesn't block YouTube? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 14:54, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: the story linked above doesn't appear to refer to a complete block of HTTPS. Rather, it seems that the Google search was blocked by some schools, and now that Google has enabled the search on HTTPS as well, schools have problems because they can't block Google on HTTPS (that's where Google Docs and Google Mail is). --The Evil IP address (talk) 15:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems that my concerns were a red herring then. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Right: so, are there any objections to simply flipping to HTTPS by default, with no option? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 08:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've now flipped to using HTTPS by default, which matches the recent changes to the likes of twitter. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Review param
I'd appreciate a  "human="  param to indicate links have been checked Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure ... but what would be the proposed effect of adding yes ? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It would allow the automated tools to skip over the links already checked. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * So it wouldn't affect the display of the template? In which case there is no need to change the code of the template. You can start using the parameter (but perhaps yes would be a better name?) and describe it on the /doc page &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 04:46, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I was wanting yes to say it wasn't a bot check, but in essence OK Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:00, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, the following 3 params might be better yes access_date review_notes which means a note aboute "fair-use" can be included. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We definitely need a access_date. I will start a new section for this to draw attention to it. So many times I have gone followed a link to YouTube only to discover that the video has been removed. This access_date will show when it was possible to view it. It might also be nice to add a deadlink or removed parameters. And while we are on the subject of parameter wish-list, why not add a nsfw parameter? ;-) --Thorwald (talk) 05:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Karl_Slover&diff=prev&oldid=500767382 was what I had in mind. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

SSL connection
Is there some reason why this template generates a secure (https:) link to the video? This just seems to cause more processing overhead in one's computer; there's no good reason to encrypt a video one watches on YouTube. Hgrosser (talk) 03:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * There was some discussion about using HTTPS in October 2011, but local performance issues were not raised then. In my opinion, the local CPU is only minimally affected, but network traffic, especially at the handshaking stage, is severely slowed down; this may be particularly pronounced on mobile devices. On the other hand, the benefits of a secure connection to YouTube are not clear to me and that wasn't discussed then, either. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Parameter wish-list
I propose we use this section to suggest new parameters to add to this template. --Thorwald (talk) 05:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * access_date &mdash; the date the editor last saw the video on YouTube.
 * deadlink or removed &mdash; YouTube is in the habit of removing videos (e.g., removed) and it would be nice to add a parameter that shows this.
 * nsfw or mature &mdash; a parameter to let the user know that the video they are about to see may not be safe to watch whilst at work and/or when children are around.


 * I think they are all unnecessary. Accessdate (for which the parameter name is never "access_date") can be added after the template, e. g.
 * , accessed 31 April 2012.
 * as can Dead link, but following WP:EL, dead links really ought to be removed. As for NSFW: such a warning would be a first on Wikipedia, wouldn't it? And which articles have links to videos where such a warning would be required? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with Michael. In addition to NSFW content being irrelevant due to WP:NOTCENSORED, youtube has its own method of flagging material as being adult-rated (such that you have to sign-in and click "allow" (or set your preferences to always allow) in order to view it). —Quiddity (talk) 05:56, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * To note the sign-in issue, see registration required. —Mrwojo (talk) 21:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

How about: Other information such as: would also be useful. Unless the idea of nesting templates is preferred much of the material from Cite Episode would be useful for many WP:RS uses, for example: etc.MrBill3 (talk) 00:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * uploadedby &mdash; the channel or user who uploaded the video. This would help in addressing copy vio and WP:RS.
 * uploaddate
 * productiondate
 * producer
 * people or performers
 * director
 * series
 * network

Movies
Take for example http://www.youtube.com/movie/the-empire-in-africa. I didn't see anything in the doc about movie links. --Jerome Potts (talk) 19:05, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Image (2)
Is really an improvement? I suggest to revert to the previous version. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:36, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Please remove the purely decorative image.  The image also gives undue weight to YouTube links when they appear among other external links. —Psychonaut (talk) 13:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Done, although I'm sure that Dcoetzee would have reverted and then discussed it if you had actually asked them about it. Woody (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The image is not solely for decoration. It helps readers who are familiar with the YouTube logo to visually recognise YouTube links, while taking up very little space. I continue to support its inclusion for this reason. I agree that it gives excessive visual weight to YouTube links, but this could be partially addressed by including similar icons for other common sites. I recognise though that this represents a broader proposal more suited for VPP or something. Dcoetzee 03:33, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There's a general tendency on Wikipedia to avoid unnecessary graphics, or eye candy – take e.g. the discouragement of flags. Given the disputed nature of the template itself, I don't think it's wise to embellish its appearance. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:27, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

SSL Version of Youtube is not working
When i visit this video link from Template:Youtube it does show me an error("Dieses Video ist derzeit nicht verfügbar." lit. "This video is currently not avaible") but when switching to http the video is shown... Youtube HTML5 video playback is broken in this case, they should fix it asap. 78.35.213.45 (talk) 23:57, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Works for me. —Psychonaut (talk) 05:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Works here (Firefox, Australia), too. Maybe a region block for Germany? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Works fine from German networks for me. In any case, region-specific blocks on YouTube are always labelled as such. —Psychonaut (talk) 07:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

's
Could the template please be revised so that it detects user names that end in S (with Template:Str endswith), so that the grammatically incorrect "Smosh Games's channel on YouTube" can be avoided. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 00:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * "Smosh Games's channel" is perfectly grammatically correct. "Smosh Games" is a singular entity, and they operate a channel, so the genitive is "Smosh Games's". —Psychonaut (talk) 00:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Glad I asked first. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 05:20, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 16 February 2014
How about adding support for YouTube's  links? That way, "bundles" like this could be supported by this template. Thoughts?

&mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 01:28, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Since you seem to still be in a consensus building state rather than a please change "X" to "Y" position knowing what you want added, I'm going to close this request for now. Please feel free to reactivate once your consensus has formed and you have working code in the sandbox per WP:TESTCASES.  Thank you. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 02:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Add start parameter

 * To be done later: Add a "start" and a "end" parameters when the W3C Media Fragments Working Group will have standardized video fragment identifier (Youtube currently only alow non standardized start parameter). 89.2.241.2 (talk) 17:08, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I suspect YouTube might take little notice of those standards. Until they do, the start of a clip on YouTube can be specified by modifying its link, using the syntax  :
 * ("Largo al factotum") which renders as
 * ("Largo al factotum"). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please add support for this, since youtube has been blacklisted, even youtube links with this template are being removed.. -- &#123;&#123;U&#124;Elvey&#125;&#125; (t•c) 04:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Embed YouTube players on Wikipedia
Hi, but I don't know how to embed YouTube players on Wikipedia... can you clarify this request that I need to embed them on Wikipedia including their user pages but not supposed to be on talk pages. -- Allen  talk  00:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think that's possible. Wikipedia is not a social network, YouTube is not a reliable source, and the option to embed videos would very likely be widely used to embed copyright violations. Thus we're better off without the ability to embed YouTube videos. Huon (talk) 02:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

'id=' required
I believe (unless I'm doing something wrong) that the id and title parameters are required for linking properly to some videos. For example:
 * renders as
 * renders as
 * renders as
 * renders as
 * renders as
 * renders properly as

I think the usage section should be updated to reflect this. -- Veggies ( talk ) 11:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * This is normal behaviour for unnamed parameters; they cannot contain an ordinary equals sign. You can either use named parameters, or use the template =:
 * renders as
 * For details, see Help:Template. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I see now. These templates are complex. -- Veggies ( talk ) 22:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Please change to providing a protocol relative URL
A discussion was held on VPP as to offering HTTP, HTTPS, or protocol relative URLs (discussion held from November 18, 2013 through closure on January 17, 2014). The consensus was unanimous that for sites that offer both HTTP and HTTPS protocols, that a protocol relative URL should be provided. As is indicated in one of the thread above requiring the use of HTTPS when both protocols are available breaks the links for some readers. A protocol relative URL looks like  instead of   or. A protocol relative link allows the reader to continue using whichever protocol they are using to view the current page.

Specifically, the consensus on VPP was that we should provide: A)HTTP links to sites that only support HTTP, B) HTTPS links to sites that only support HTTPS, and C) protocol relative links to sites which support both HTTP and HTTPS.

Please change this template to providing a protocol relative URL. Makyen (talk) 16:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Done, I think? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This change has the unfortunate side-effect of breaking links when reading an offline (or otherwise non-http[s]-hosted) version of Wikipedia. It would have been better to wait for the outcome of the RFC on the implementation of the proposal, as specifically noted by the closer of WP:Village pump (policy)/Archive 111. —Psychonaut (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * for now &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I have started a discussion at Village pump (technical). —Psychonaut (talk) 20:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for starting the discussion on VPP. I do not know what program you are using to save and view pages for offline viewing. I just tested Firefox, IE, and the Wikipedia App. All three correctly handled PR links when storing the pages to files for offline viewing by translating such links on the page to the protocol which was in use at the time the files were saved (actually, I only tested under HTTPS).


 * I would appreciate (an) example(s) for which programs/OS using PR links is broken when saving and viewing offline content. Makyen (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

It should be noted this discussion now seems concluded: Village pump (technical)/Archive 123. Perhaps I am confused but I believe the consensus was applications that store webpages for offline viewing effectively are rewriting the content so links work offline and thus they are responsible for handling this correctly. I would still like to see protocol relative links used for this template. 50.126.125.240 (talk) 13:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Support in the Template for YouTube Playlists
YouTube allows collections of videos using the http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=Play_List_ID syntax. Unfortunately, trial and error yields not method to display these links in the template. How should this support be handled? Cjfsyntropy (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia shouldn't ever need to link to whole collections of YouTube videos anyway. We're not supposed to be an education portal. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:22, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I would content that that depends on the video list. It is fairly common to have a list for a video that is broken up into multiple pieces for nothing other than technical reasons. I would rather see the list linked as //www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL than as //www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p= . For example, [//www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE41F2DC2E9A8A042 //www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE41F2DC2E9A8A042] over [//www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=E41F2DC2E9A8A042 //www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=E41F2DC2E9A8A042] 50.126.125.240 (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, let's reboot: Adding support for YouTube's "bundles"?
How about adding support for YouTube's  links? That way, "bundles" like this could be supported by this template. Thoughts? &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 02:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * While it might be easier if the template supported a list parameter, you can currently accomplish what you desire by using = for the "=". Example:  Makyen (talk) 06:18, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Great, thank you for the tip! &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 10:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Am I missing something? As long as you use the id parameter, it works without the =, . 117Avenue (talk) 23:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Good point, thank you! I've already seen something like that while dealing with the   template –  here's a quote from its documentation:
 * Remember that "=" cannot appear in an unnamed template parameter and "|" cannot appear in any template parameter.
 * Having that in mind, using  is required only in unnamed template parameters. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 23:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope, you are not missing anything. Using = for = and | for | are just habit for me at this point. After a couple/few times encountering problems, I just generally use them within template parameters. I also both forgot that = was not needed for named parameters and assumed that using  had been tried. Thus, I went straight to = without passing =.  Makyen (talk) 01:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, for some reason I haven't tried out using "=" or attaching the "list" value before posting here – despite the fact I almost always keep putting square pegs into round holes. :) &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 02:16, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ... and I know why. The whole purpose of this template is to streamline external links to YouTube videos, so doing some "hacking" while using the template didn't sound right to me.  In other words, how about adding support for the "list" parameter, so it's "officially" supported? &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 02:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose – There's no reason not to extend the capabilities of this template by using its parameters in a more creative way; see above and . (And don't insert blank lines into a threaded discussion (or any other lists); see WP:LISTS). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:32, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Please don't get me wrong&mdash;I'm not married to this proposal&mdash;but those two presented arguments don't make much sense. If we take the route of having no need for introducing "fancy" features into this template, that could be easily extended into having no need for this template at all.  A good example for having benefits from "fancy" features is the whole family of citation templates –  they all exist and serve well, while every single of them can be "emulated" using the basic citation template, or even by using no citation templates at all. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 06:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes please I'm a fan of this. In fact I came here to this template to see if there was a quickie way how to do this. This would be useful for articles about prominent web series where everything is available via an ordered playlist. I'm sure there are other examples as well where it would be useful. Wikimandia (talk) 07:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: I do not know if this sort of linking is that useful or necessary. First, I believe it can already be accomplished just by adding to id (as mentioned above). Second, I believe direct support of playlists in general would be more valuable (and has been asked for before): . 50.126.125.240 (talk) 14:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Brackets nee to be converted to &amp;#91; and &amp;#93;
Fail: Markup: —User 000 name 11:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * five years later! – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Request/question
I was attempting to use this template or to link to www.youtube.com/channel/UCdAAGP1HFRSFoly78fku8xw, although I don't think either template works with "youtube.com/channel...", only with "youtube.com/user...". And so far as I can tell, the above linked channel doesn't have a publicly accessable userpage. Could someone find it, or better yet, could the "Youtube" or "Youtube user" templates be updated to allow linking to channels? Thank you.-- ɱ    (talk)  14:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I would like to echo this need. Since the template already has a parameter for channel, this parameter would have to be removed, before we could add one for channels. 117Avenue (talk) 05:43, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Time skip
Sometimes YouTube videos are very long, and we want to use them as a reference for a specific thing said within the video, so instead of linking to the beginning, we want to link to a portion further into it.

It is possible to do that currently by simply tacking on the ?t= followed by the number of seconds you want to skip into it (it is also possible to use "m" and "s" (you need both) for minutes, like ?t=1m10s or something instead of ?t=70. I wonder if perhaps we should build this in as a feature of the template though, as many users may not be aware of the ability to do that feature. Ranze (talk) 21:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This template is for linking to an external webpage as a whole, I think what you are looking for is Template:Cite episode or Template:Cite AV media. 117Avenue (talk) 03:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

AV media

 * Use to provide bibliographic citations in footnotes

This redirects to Template:cite AV media, but I can't correct this to avoid the redirect due to the page being locked. Can an admin fix? Ranze (talk) 22:06, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What is it that you want corrected? 117Avenue (talk) 04:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed changes November 2015
I would like to make a number of changes to the template. "showid" and "sid" are not being used, I would like to remove it. YouTube differentiates user page ids and channel page ids. I would like to remove the use of the "channel" parameter on all pages, before editing the template to change what the "channel" parameter does. I would like to add a "playlist" parameter. Also included in my rewrite of the template is better logic to detect blank parameters and bad usage, and allows titles to begin with a #. The proposed template can be found in the sandbox, and the changes can be seen in the testcases. 117Avenue (talk) 06:12, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I recommend that you generate a tracking category for all errors, not just deprecated parameters, e.g. Category:Articles using YouTube with parameter errors. After years of fixing template errors, I have learned that you can't count on a big red error message to motivate editors to fix the errors every time. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:27, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You could also check for redundant parameters, e.g. the use of user and u in the same template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:31, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't think errors occur often enough to warrant a category, but you're right that there would be no way to track them without one. 117Avenue (talk) 03:03, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I've added error detection, which is as long as the template itself. Any more comments before I implement the new template, from anyone? 117Avenue (talk) 06:28, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Changes have been made, any pages not using the template correctly will be placed in Category:Articles using YouTube with invalid parameters. 117Avenue (talk) 02:27, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You're wrong about no way to track them without a category... any page transcluding error in mainspace gets my attention... I patrol for that.
 * Pages transcluding errors in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=Template%3AError&namespace=0 main namespace] Wbm1058 (talk) 21:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought there was a way to track the error template. But as it turns out, there are more articles than that, using this template incorrectly. 117Avenue (talk) 04:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Suppress "on Youtube" completely
So I'm aware you can suppress the wikilink for the "Youtube" link with |link=no however you cannot remove the "on Youtube" text which is part of the template for a reason, but for use within a sentence can sometimes make it hard to follow.

Quite possibly should be using Cite AV - however there is a template for YouTube, why not use it? :) Thelen Shar (talk) 03:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This template is for the external links section at the bottom of the article only. External links should not be placed in the body of the article. If you are citing something on YouTube use a cite template, that will allow you to give full bibliographic acknowledgement, author, date, etc. 117Avenue (talk) 00:08, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * While I was searching through transclusions, I noticed that YouTube is frequently used for linking references, sometimes in the prose when they want to connect to media (eg: Rhythm and blues, a former Good Article now at B-class), and then other cases with whole lists of videos (eg: Juggling world records). For references, I'd agree you're better off with cite AV media or possibly cite web so there's a little more information.  Policy-wise I feel 117 Avenue makes a good point about keeping external links to their own section at the bottom of the article -- though I believe the citation templates typically offer a hover-over external link.  Reidgreg (talk) 00:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

misspellings introduced by user channels with pluralized names
I suspect I may have come across a rare, very minor potential spelling error which the template might create. It seems to me that the links to youtube user channels always add an apostrophe-s, even when substituting another title for the displayed link. I suppose that normally isn't a problem since user names for most user channels should be singular, but I was searching for typos and came across this one at Brown Eyed Girls where "Brown Eyed Girls's channel" should be "Brown Eyed Girls' channel". Apologies if there's a way around it that I missed. I imagine this is a pretty rare occurrence but I thought I'd report it. Please let me know if there's a work-around for it. Reidgreg (talk) 15:34, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I thought so too, but according to Psychonaut, it's correct. 117Avenue (talk) 02:12, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out, 117Avenue. It is a tricky one.  But please take a look at the article on apostrophe.  Under the basic rule for compound nouns, it gives as an example: the Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports' with no s after the apostrophe.  Although the Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports is a singular entity, that doesn't allow for an extra s after Ports'.  The Manual of Style doesn't go into as much detail, but does say that names of companies ending in s (although singular) should not get an additional s.  Perhaps Psychonaut could revisit this? Reidgreg (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * My bad, the MOS was talking about something else. It doesn't seem to have anything that applies. Reidgreg (talk) 19:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Huh? The second bullet of Singular nouns [in the MOS] applies. Which I think gives favour to the 's. 117Avenue (talk) 20:55, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * (I was looking for compound nouns which we'd earlier brought up.) It seems like there's significant division, and the MOS doesn't make a judgement on it but does say that whichever method is chosen should be applied consistently throughout an article (as with, for example, Commonwealth or U.S. spellings of english words).  So I feel that might be an option to be made available to the editors of pages where the template is used - with the default being 's which should be correct ~99% of the time.
 * (I want to learn more about editing templates and the procedures involved so I'll try to look into a solution for a simpler and less-used template with the same issue. This will, no doubt, take me a while to figure out how to do proper sandbox testing, etc.) Reidgreg (talk) 15:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh I see, your issue is with compound nouns ending in s, not singular nouns ending in s. I think the #2 is still a good guideline, is it pronounced Charles Dickens's novels or Charles Dickens' novels? 117Avenue (talk) 02:13, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

I asked at the Language Reference Desk and received these answers. (Now found in the archives here 15:05, 30 May 2016 (UTC).) If you have a follow-up question, please ask it there. For the examples we'd earlier brought up, Trailer Park Boys and Smosh Games, there seems to be a consensus that the bare apostrophe is at least preferred if not proper. They bring up enough examples to illustrate that the choice between  and s is fairly complex, and I don't honestly see writing an algorithm to make the determination particularly when considering the matter of preference in the article. That's why I was thinking it might be best if the article editors could choose when calling the template. I had three thoughts on addressing this: That's as far as I've gotten. I really need to defer to greater experience on the potential issues and how they might be best addressed. Thanks. Reidgreg (talk) 13:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Have a third (optional) parameter passed to which if it holds a specific value (eg: bare=yes) adds the bare apostrophe and otherwise, by default, apostrophe s.
 * Copy youtube into a new template and modify it so simply adds ' to user accounts, and use that when desired. (While it should work 100% it could be awkward when this template gets updated.)
 * Rather than modifying the template, call it from another template which reduces the s to  afterwards. I tried testing  in a template sandbox but I must have been missing some syntax. (sorry, still learning.)  Also, this might have unintended consequences in rare instances (eg: O'Shaughnessy's Boys).
 * I think it should be an optional parameter, but where the user inserts the prefered ending, rather than making a positive/negative switch. Take a look at the testcases to see it in action. 117Avenue (talk) 19:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That is brilliant! It fixes this issue and also allows for a lot of personalization.  You could use "suffix='s personal" to get a result like username's personal channel on YouTube.  (BTW, I'll volunteer to search through articles and add the suffix=' fix as needed when this is implemented.) Reidgreg (talk) 15:05, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Now you have me worried that it's going to be misused. I thought that it was only going to be used on rare occasions, to fix grammar, now users can do what ever they want with the text. 117Avenue (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I never thought about designing against that kind of misuse. It might be tempting to put in superlatives like "username's awesome channel" which isn't very NPOV and takes away from consistency.  Darn.  Do you think it'd be enough to stress in the documentation that the suffix= parameter is intended for grammatical purposes? Reidgreg (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I think I've written a good explanation in the documentation, what do you think? 117Avenue (talk) 03:35, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry, I meant to write something for the documentation. The Brown Eyed Girls' example is excellent, but should it be under "Example (3 parameters):"? For the suffix parameter description, could we recommend its use and stress article consistency, since the determination has more to do with practices than rules?  So, something along the lines of:
 * Its only recommended use is  for cases when a bare apostrophe is preferred to show possession (most commonly for plural names ending with s and sometimes also for singular names ending with s) in keeping with the style practiced in the article.  Please see MOS:POSS for more information.
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reidgreg (talk • contribs) 14:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Since the goal is to write better articles, I think it is better to stress the proper way to deal with the scenario (in my opinion pronunciation) than to have users fit in whatever works. 117Avenue (talk) 02:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * There's a lot to say about what's proper, though, and sometimes the proper answer is "maybe" (depending on which style guide is used, and MOS:POSS doesn't endorse one over the other). Pronunciation is a good rule of thumb though one of the RD editors noted:  "in those possessives where the final s is optional, sometimes people write it but don't pronounce it, and sometimes people pronounce it but don't write it."  That's why I keep going back to consistency in the article - and with how the topic is treated outside of Wikipedia, which editors familiar on that topic should be able to determine.  (For example, if someone is adding a YouTube link and that name is already in the article with the bare apostrophe, they should use suffix=' to be consistent, or if they feel it's wrong take it to the talk page of the article to discuss with other editors.) Reidgreg (talk) 12:06, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Progress Report: I just finished my search and implementation of the   fix.  Of approximately 24,500 pages I applied the fix 112 times.  So a pretty minor problem but nice to get it right.  Much thanks, Avenue! - Reidgreg (talk) 14:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Request/question proposed June 2016 (Official channel on YouTube).
I would suggest to explain how to use the syntax to get a simple Official channel on YouTube for someone:. I think it is sufficient to use the suffix parameter leaving it empty, e.g. or. Otherwise, the apostrophe remains and you are unable to remove it. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Where's the line between an official channel and a non-official channel? Why does official have to be specified? 117Avenue (talk) 04:02, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually I don't know, but I know to recognize when I find a grammatical error not included among the cases provided by the template, which therefore is not of any help for the proper management of its syntax. You're offtopic. Have a nice day. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 07:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not very familiar with YouTube but I am also curious why "official" needs to be specified on Wikipedia. The channel "belongs" to the user, which seems enough to distinguish it from alternate channels that might have earlier registered their name on YouTube.  If it was a fan channel, though, we should say so rather than suggesting it belongs to the subject of the article.
 * For your specific example (which is the first channel I've noticed for a film) I would suggest that, after verifying the link is what it reports to be, to change the template to  Note the italic markup because it is the name of a film.  I believe the other external links on that page should follow this format. Hope this helps. Reidgreg (talk) 11:53, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * If it is the first channel you've noticed for a movie, then it would seem an isolated case and it is useless to talk about it. Anyway thanks a lot for your time. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 13:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! With something unique I try to bring it to the attention on the article's talk page, like Headhunterz where I couldn't determine the correct possessive.  Oh, also see WP:ELOFFICIAL for policy on official external links. Reidgreg (talk) 13:08, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks to your suggestion I read WP: ELOFFICIAL, really interesting, and even WP: ELMINOFFICIAL: one never stops learning the MoS. I also had a look at your Headhunterz: good, just that I do not understand why these data cannot be inserted into the template page. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 14:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

In the above discussion we expressly did not want the suffix parameter to be misused, and the template's use to become something different. I think that the documentation explains how the template should be used. 117Avenue (talk) 01:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Recent edit extends use of template outside of
External links== section ==

Please note that the recent edit is meant to extend the use of this template outside of  ==External links== sections. For reference see diffs. --Bob K31416 (talk) 19:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It's clearly marked as External video in a little box beside the prose, so it doesn't seem too objectionable. It's called from within External media (~5000 transclusions) which has fairly strict terms on its doc page.  It sounds alright though I don't know about endorsing it in the documentation here. - Reidgreg (talk) 12:34, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Would a time= parameter be useful? It can be faked...
I just added the footnote
 * Video available at.

The video contains four talks back to back, and I wanted to add a  parameter to the youtube URL to take the reader to the start of the cited talk. Since the template just puts the video ID at the end of the generated URL, I can append whatever I like to it and ended up using, but that seems fragile.

Would it be worth adding a t/time parameter? I was thinking of something machine-formatted rather than the human-readable parameter which Template:Cite AV media uses, but it's the same basic idea. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 20:26, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think adding a time paramter for any reason is a bad idea, as it would encourage users to use this template outside its inteded usage. Which is solely for external linking, and not referencing. 117Avenue (talk) 05:13, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Suppressing "'s channel"
I have a similar problem akin to above, but instead of trying to suppress "on Youtube" I'm trying to suppress "channel" I'm trying to improve Draft:Allison Raskin (and subsequently Gaby Dunn will need the same form) to be ready to publish it, but the show they run is called "Just Between Us"

(this would be ideal, but because the template is trying to add that as the code to a video, it won't parse)

I could of, of course, just do "Allison Raskin's channel on Youtube" but that is much less accurate, and in Dunn's case it would lead to two separate links with the same lead in (because she also has a personal account). So how do I do this? menaechmi (talk) 17:43, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Top-level Youtube channel name
The Grand Tour (2016 TV series) Youtube channel has a top-level URL: When using, the output (with incorrect URL) is: Ideally the it would be possible to generate the link (with the correct link): So the question, what would be the proper way to achieve this using the template? —Sladen (talk) 21:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * http://www.youtube.com/thegrandtour
 * (404)
 * The Grand Tour's channel on YouTube
 * To find the "real" URL, click on the page name, in this example "The Grand Tour", the channel id will then appear, in this case "UCZ1Sc5xjWpUnp_o_lUTkvgQ". The template you want to add is: . 117Avenue (talk) 04:30, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * , that's great, yes, thank you. …But not the question here.  —Sladen (talk) 05:43, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The reason it doesn't work normally is because "channels" are linked by youtube.com/channel/CHANNELID. The page isn't "/channel/thegrandtour" it's just "/thegrandtour". The only way to rectify this issue so that it's compatible with the template is to either add another "if" function (? I think it's called) to the source, or alternatively, to use the channel id and not "thegrandtour". The source would require the following code to be added - or some variant of -;
 * and also;
 * I believe that would render the page in the format that you're asking. That said, I don't see it being implemented for a single case. Is this common for Amazon prime video content on YouTube? if so, then maybe that may justify amending the source code or if not and this is an isolated case, then, you'll just have to live with adding the full channel id, like so Mr rnddude (talk) 19:01, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * This is called a custom URL on YouTube and is quite common. I think the template should support it with a new parameter Alex Muller  10:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe that would render the page in the format that you're asking. That said, I don't see it being implemented for a single case. Is this common for Amazon prime video content on YouTube? if so, then maybe that may justify amending the source code or if not and this is an isolated case, then, you'll just have to live with adding the full channel id, like so Mr rnddude (talk) 19:01, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * This is called a custom URL on YouTube and is quite common. I think the template should support it with a new parameter Alex Muller  10:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This is called a custom URL on YouTube and is quite common. I think the template should support it with a new parameter Alex Muller  10:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

time_continue
Suggest support for the "time_continue" URL parameter, which allows start at a specific point in the video, in seconds. In this edit I was forced to drop the parameter in order to use this template. As for the template parameter name, start would work for me. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  19:22, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * This has been discussed above and in the archive. The desired effect can be achieved with the template by appending  to the 1st parameter:


 * gives
 * -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. A parameter would be more user-friendly, both for the editor who needs to use it and for all editors who come along after it's used. And it would be easy to implement given a bit of template coding knowledge (which I lack). Even without that, editors don't read template talk pages for template usage information, so this should be covered in the doc. Most editors would look for the support in the doc and reasonably assume it isn't possible. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  06:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. A parameter would be more user-friendly, both for the editor who needs to use it and for all editors who come along after it's used. And it would be easy to implement given a bit of template coding knowledge (which I lack). Even without that, editors don't read template talk pages for template usage information, so this should be covered in the doc. Most editors would look for the support in the doc and reasonably assume it isn't possible. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  06:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Can we please get this time parameter added.
 * It's also a bug (if a useful one) that time can be added to the id parameter. The template ought to forbid that - either URL encoding the embedded ampersand (it's no part of an id) (DON'T DO THIS!) or, more properly, removing it and anything after it (make the template do that too, once we've migrated the use of time to a proper parameter).
 * It's basic good coding practice to not allow an ampersand through like this. Maybe today it's safe, but what if tomorrow YouTube introduces a redirect_to_spam_afterwards parameter? Andy Dingley (talk) 11:10, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Add direct URL parameter
On youtube, you can use "youtube.com/user" to directly link to a channel, and this url is different from both the and  parameters already used in this template.  Nixinova   T   C  20:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Second, but the longer user=x URL has the same effect: example. –84.46.53.83 (talk) 10:43, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Feature request
In this diff the id=x|user=y was rendered as user=y. There might be a maintenance category for impossible combinations (I'm not looking into the code). But actually it's a missing feature, it could be rendered as "video title on y's YouTube channel" with a link to video x.

Rationale, YouTube references are anyway suspicious, is it spam / copyvio / "was on a concert armed with a smartphone" / etc., or is it an "official" video released by the artist or copyright holder, where "official" could mean "channel of the verified artist" (verified on YouTube). –84.46.53.83 (talk) 10:36, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Another example, I found the maintenance category. –84.46.53.126 (talk) 07:40, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Timestamp parameter
Please adopt the changes in Template:YouTube/sandbox. I have already documented this new parameter at. Daask (talk) 12:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ — xaosflux  Talk 13:36, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you both. Worth the 15-month wait. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  15:08, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

With timestamp "feature"?
The "With timestamp feature" doesn't seem to be working as documented and gives: regardless of the parameter value.
 * Warning: Page using Template:YouTube with unknown parameter "t" (or "time") (this message is shown only in preview).

Is there any workaround or plans to implement the feature? DadaNeem (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It does work in starting the video at the requested time so maybe it's only a quirk of the preview perhaps due to using ProveIt and wikEd gadgets? DadaNeem (talk) 01:49, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, it forms a correct URL, but the error message is very confusing, especially since it has a link to the template documentation, which does describes this parameter and gives examples. Besides that, the template output must contain something like "(starting at ...)" if the starting time is specified. An example how do this can be seen in the Russian version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikhail Ryazanov (talk • contribs) 02:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * This was from implementing the section above without updating the unknown parameter check. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 03:09, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Shows and channels?
Why doesn't this:

work as expected?

i.e. something like: hosted by [https://www.youtube.com/channel/Forgotten%20Weapons Forgotten Weapons on

It's a video. A single video. It's hosted by that channel, which is surely worth linking in the presentation of it, or even just listing as plain text. As there's an id, it has to be an article and so shouldn't be replaced by a link to the channel page only.

Also, what's with the embedded space breaking the channel name param? Surely we shouldn't need to encode that? Mediawiki template params can handle spaces OK, why doesn't the template?

Even if none of this is easily achievable, because the channel titles and channel IDs are separate, we should at least be able to annotate the YT link (without the channel link) as a working link to the video ID, not dropping into a broken link to the overall channel. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:50, 19 November 2019 (UTC)