Talk:SSSniperWolf

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Image from shorts channel[edit]

@Miklogfeather, I have my doubts about the legitimacy of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nJ8TRclMEk for c:File:People Who Got Caught In 4k shorts 0-5 screenshot.png. There are several things about https://www.youtube.com/@SssniperwolfShortss/channels that seem off.

  • First of all, it's spelled "@SssniperwolfShortss". Looking at the other channels, she knows how her handle is capitalized.
  • In the banner image it's spelled "SSSniperwolf Shorts", different from the channel name and still wrong: lowercase W.
  • The photoshop on the banner image is REALLY poor. Sharp edges, blunt cutouts.
  • None of her official channels link to it on their channel tabs: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
  • Account is not verified. (though Little Lia and Sausage aren't verified either, but all the others are)
  • Google search for "SssniperwolfShortss" didn't return anything useful either.

Has she ever linked to that shorts channel herself somewhere? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 20:03, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those are good points. I assumed it was legit because of the subscriber/view count, and that I wouldn't put it past Sniperwolf to have a channel like that, but you may well be right. It's still weird that it's the only video on that channel marked as creative commons.
I will note though that she has her handle written all lowercase in her main channel's description and the Little Lia channel branding reeks of bad Photoshop too, so it's not impossible that it belongs to her, Miklogfeather (talk) 00:25, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Miklogfeather, I agree it's not impossible, but I'd really like to see her referring to that shorts channel somewhere.
Being the only CC video is a bit odd. If it had been at someone's request to extract a picture, wouldn't they have asked her to relicense a video on her main channel? My best guess is that it's relicensed to test if Creative Commons helps to please the YouTube algorithm. It probably doesn't. YouTubers are known to experiment with video titles and thumbnails, so why not experiment with the license as well?
As for the main channel description, it says "Hi I'm SSSniperWolf! You can call me Lia, sniper wolf or sssniperwolf!" To me this only says "it's okay if you write my handle in all lowercase". @GRuban, as a license reviewer, what do you think? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 10:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the consultation, folks, my official rates are ... . Honestly, the most straightforward answer is to write her and ask. Her official channel page giver her email address, click "more links", "view email address". It's also on her Facebook page, without the extra clicking, right on https://www.facebook.com/SSSniperWolf as (title of this article) at komboventures. If I were doing it I'd write:
Hi, I'm a volunteer editor for Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia (give user name and user page); we have an article about you, SSSniperWolf, where we're using an image from the Creative Commons Attribution licensed video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nJ8TRclMEk, and we're debating whether it's actually your video or a copyright violation. Can you please clear up the debate? If you could, please respond, both to me, and to [email protected], and say whether you licensed this image for reuse. Thank you, (give name).
I can send the email myself if you insist, but if one of you can do it that would be better, as this isn't really my area of interest, and I'm no one special, just another editor. Perhaps I have a bit more experience in evaluating free images like this, but that's the thing about experience, the only way to get it is by doing.
Until we get a response that proves it, though, I would tend to believe it is legitimate. I knew nothing about the subject before this ping here, but clearly she has no shortage of different YouTube channels, and they do reuse the content from the other channels, what with other languages, "Top Videos", etc. They also don't all link to all of each other, some are only linked to by one other, so it doesn't seem out of the question that this one isn't linked to by any. From our article about her (and even the content of this video!) she seems to be very active on YouTube, not just posting her own, but also watching and interacting with other people's videos. If this were a low visibility channel we could hypothesize she merely hasn't noticed it, but since this channel has 324K subscribers and 444 videos it is hard to believe she wouldn't have noticed it, and would not have taken action if it was a channel devoted to nothing except violations of her copyright. --GRuban (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. I see the image is actually up for deletion at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:People Who Got Caught In 4k shorts 0-5 screenshot.png, so this is a bit more urgent. I guess I will weigh in there as well. --GRuban (talk) 14:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GRuban, thanks for your input. Please be aware of spam harvesters, I've altered your comment. I was hoping someone else would, but as nobody seems to have taken the bait I contacted the komboventures mail address.
Alalch E., as I wrote above: "My best guess is that it's relicensed to test if Creative Commons helps to please the YouTube algorithm. It probably doesn't. YouTubers are known to experiment with video titles and thumbnails, so why not experiment with the license as well?" Whether we should accept that as a license (did they even realize what they were doing?) is another question, so I asked about that in the mail as well. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 13:19, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good point about experimenting, missed that. —Alalch E. 13:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GRuban, I forgot to mention: there may be a reason for her not to take action even if it is unofficial. It's possible to monetize videos from others on YT. This is common for videos that feature music, but I also uploaded a clip of a show from the NPO and the NPO claimed it, IIRC they monetized it too. I'm unsure what kinds of organizations can monetize videos from others or whether anyone could do it, but Channel Red possibly could.
If the shorts channel is otherwise productive, that's what I would do as doling out copyright strikes tends to hurt one's reputation. The shorts channel owner probably still gets the revenue up to the point where a video is claimed, so they could still be making a profit as well.
No reply yet (wouldn't expect anything that fast) and the mail hasn't bounced either. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:28, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GRuban, funnily enough, I found two stock images of Shelesh on Getty Images. I tracked down the photographers and sent them an email with a similar template via Proton Mail. They haven't answered yet. — Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 00:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Davest3r08, only two? I see several more. But professional photographers are typically not jumping for the opportunity to give their work away for free. Why would they even care whether this article has a picture or not?
You'd have better odds searching social media for a fan who took a picture of her at a comic con. Or contacting her directly. Unless you're willing to pay muchos pesos to buy the actual rights (not just a license, ffs don't spend money on Getty!) from a professional photographer. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 01:07, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, fair point. Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 01:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Davest3r08, if the Commons file is kept we should use File:Alia Shelesh YouTube shorts screenshot.jpg instead. (see User talk:Miklogfeather#PNG vs JPEG) @GRuban, perhaps you can look at it to confirm it is a screenshot from the video as Shelesh has been on a deletion spree lately. I know you can't do a license review right now. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 02:25, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
c:Commons:License reviewed them both, joined the new one to the other deletion request, let's see how it plays out. Honestly, the best solution is if SSS responds to her emails!--GRuban (talk) 18:13, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't heard back yet. The shorts channel also has no mail address, but granted, neither does the top videos channel. The Little Lia channel however does. A mail address could have confirmed ownership, but alas, it's not there. In defense of the channel being hers: in the titles of the videos on https://www.youtube.com/@sssniperwolftopvideos/shorts she sometimes forgets to capitalize the "w" in her handle as well. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 09:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Image kept on Commons, thank you User:Holly Cheng! --GRuban (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the update. Still haven't heard back btw. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 23:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by BlueMoonset talk 16:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Alexis Jazz (talk). Nominated by Davest3r08 (talk) at 14:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/SSSniperWolf; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]


Withdrawal Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 13:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Splitting a section into an article[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was: speedily closed due to nominator withdrawal, per WP:WHENCLOSE (first bullet, note 1). The nominator is thanked for using a relevant process to test an idea with the community, but is advised to then also include a relevant and substantive rationale in the opening statement when making formal proposals such as this one in the future (how doing something will make the encyclopedia better in light of our established practices).—Alalch E. 17:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Jacksfilms-SSSniperwolf conflict or SSSniperwolf doxxing incident? Idk. [[User:Trainrobber66|trainrobber]] (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose No good reason given for splitting the article. I don't think it meets WP:NEVENT, nor does the content about the incident in this article make it excessively long. Schazjmd (talk) 21:59, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agreeing with Schazjmd. This topic does not need a separate article, and I agree that it would not make the article too long. Jackthewriterguy12 (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok [[User:Trainrobber66|trainrobber]] (talk) 10:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SSSniperWolf&oldid=1217263145"