Talk:Punkcast

Possible move?

During the AFD it was pointed out that many of the cited sources are really more about the site's founder, Joly MacFie, rather than his website. Much of the article here also is about what MacFie did. Can this article be moved Joly Macfie and slightly edited to become a biography? Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:10, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not totally averse but my feeling is that someone wanting to learn about Punkcast will not be interested in MacFie's life story, but just the history of the site. The reason the opening para does mention biographical details is merely to place it in the tradition of punk underground media. Could be some rewording. Wwwhatsup (talk) 12:03, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't think that the information in the article would need to change at all. Much of the "History" section is already about MacFie, for instance many of the awards listed there were presented to him and not the website. I don't see that that section would need any editing in the event of a rename. To reflect the title, the lead paragraph would be slightly altered into something like

"Joly MacFie is the founder of the online video site Punkcast.com that covers the NYC underground music scene. Since its founding in 1997, PunkCast has broadcast more than 1000 shows online and formerly on cable TV. The content is mainly complete songs from live performances in the city's clubs and other locations. The site occasionally covers other local community events."

The reason is as mentioned in the AFD that the sources were primarily about MacFie. The article survived AFD barely (largely due to a last-minute intervention by Sandstein), and do-overs on AFD are not all that uncommon, especially for "no consensus" results. If the subject is clearly the primary focus instead of something just mentioned in the cited sources, it is much easier for you to make a case for keeping the article. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Sigh. If it has to be done, it has to be done. Do you think Better Badges should go the same way? Wwwhatsup (talk) 21:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Wired "must see" & New York Noise

I see the ref has been tagged 'not in citation given', however the citation is in fact to the print edition (p. 131) where the quote does occur. There's a chance I can dig up a scan. Wwwhatsup (talk) 17:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Good idea. Can you talk about the New York Noise claim too? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 03:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

From the source:

punkcast.com, is the well from which NYC TV's New York Noise, a new weekly program on basic cable available in all five boroughs, draws its riches. The show focuses predominantly on New York bands, and on November 1 the program will air exclusive video footage of the Yeah Yeah Yeahs ("Yeah! New York" and "Kiss Kiss"), Ari-Up and the New Crew ("Don't Say Nothing"), and Oneida ("Privilege"), among others.' Wwwhatsup (talk) 04:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I see. Originally your text states that it was the "majority of programming" for the series. I changed to "some". However the article only talks about 3 videos. Aksi, it looks like punkcast was not featured after the 10th episode (2004) out of 89 episodes (2009) according to these official links[1][2][3]. Do you have any evidence that says something else? The article linked is pretty old. I am guess you would know since you are the one who put that claim in, what is it based on? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 10:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Article says "the much of" - typo? - should be changed to just "much of". and then "the programming from 2003-2004". The VV story is 2003 as it was getting going. Hence the word "nascent". Shirley Braha mentions 5 videos she went for right away. In 2004 she graduated from Smith and started working fulltime on video selection /production and the reliance on punkcast was over. Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I see you are right I was not reading it correctly. I will fix the text a little and put in the other source. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 08:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Richard Hell incident

While this is notable enough to bear a mention, I beleive the inclusion of the quotes is uneccesary cruft. Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I wanted to make the quotes shorter but could not see how to do it and keep both sides of the position there. I think it's an imporant issue and it is worth listing, also a wikipedia article must present both sides. It was a very one-sided article before. You did not put lots of praise in but you put nothing negative. Even if Richard Hell is wrong it is important to put it there, I believe so. If you can see how to shorten it that could help, I am following advice and trying to build up this article. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 08:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure the quotes are needed at all. I prefer my original edit with just the basic facts. Anyone interested in detail can go to the source. The underlying truth of the story is that Hell's top down and MacFie's bottom up approaches were at odds, but I don't think that's necessary to flesh out. The main point is that the media pressure reflected Punkcast's role as a public resource at the time, hopefully an indicator of the challenged notability. I further would say that quoting Hell in Wikipedia, when he is actually protesting being quoted at all - which is what the whole issue was about - is compounding the injury. Wwwhatsup (talk) 08:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Your original edit made it look like Hell was the only one to blame, which is a one sided way to say it. The sources are not here to show notability of the company but to give information about the company. The information can show it's notable but if you just put the good things then it reads like an ad which is why it almost got deleted the first time. This is the only recent source that is not a list and gives more than a small mention of Punkcast. I don't think Hell would mind copying a public post he made I think he would appreciate it. He did not want his private communications made public. Do you know of other sources that talk about that part of punkcast, I think it would help the article. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 09:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Podcasting and YouTube

I've removed the podcasting project tag on this page, as the punkcast podcast hasn't been updated in some time. What's not said in the article is that, after the advent of YouTube, the site has been pretty much neglected. The associated YouTube channel meanwhile has 1500 videos, 2k subscribers, and 7.5m views. Wwwhatsup (talk) 09:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Did you make this change yet? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 09:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Also is it best to describe as a "site" still in the first sentence? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 10:00, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

As a declared conflicted user I will henceforth restrict myself to making suggestions, unless there is a lack of willing editors and the article gets vandalized or such. I do suggest that the significance and notability of punkcast is mostly as a website that pioneered presenting user-generated music video content on the Internet in the period 97-2005, when there was no YouTube etc. Although in the early days it did to some people, represent the DIY ethic as applied to music video. I think the notability to some extent ends there, the Hell incident notwithstanding, as after that there were many others. As to your question of business model, punkcast was never commercial. It was the equivalent of an online fanzine. There was some effort to get bands to sell VCDs at shows, but not with any great success. It was financed, as referenced in the VV source, mainly by an inheritance, and subsidized by Wwwhatsup, a blog started in 94 which operated the pinstand, which was actually quite successful in the latter 90s, as there was not much competition for punk merch. on the net. Around 2005 MacFie became more active in Internet advocacy, shooting more tech-related events, and also some book readings - but still on pretty much the same basis. If you look at the site you can see the transition occurring, including pioneering webcasts of NYC City Council Internet-related hearings. Hence the second VV Best of. There was a period when that stuff had to go on the punkcast YouTube channel because it was grandfathered to have no time limit, but recently as YouTube have lifted that limitation, most of the tech work appears on other channels. He also now runs webcasting for the global Internet Society. Wwwhatsup (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you have sources for any of that? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 05:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

If punkcast was really pioneering that would be nice to have, in what ways was it pioneering? Do you have sources that show punkcast was unique and influential on what is more common now? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 05:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Show me someone else that was doing it in 97!  :) Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Funny but I do not think that holds up to wikipedia standards. :) Streaming Media says the first band broadcast was in 1993. What is special about punkcast in this way? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 06:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

If you investigate further that claim you'll find that band was bunch of techies working across the MBONE and had virtually no viewers. There was no consumer level streaming video on the World Wide Web until the introduction of RealVideo in 1997. Even that was too late for the first punkcast which downloadable MPEG-1. What was special about Punkcast was that it was DIY audience video and thus UGC, and documented the burgeoning NYC music scene of the time. All this is in the VV source I think. You are right though to be skeptical of such a claim without a strong source per WP:PEA. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Downloadable and streaming are different things, yes? There was much downloadable video in the 1990s, on official band sites. I am confused are you making a different claim now? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 06:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Business model

There is no discussion of how this company supports itself or what it charges. I tried to add some from sources but needs more. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 09:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Artists Filmed

Not sure if listing artists filmed gives any notability and I was looking at WP:LC. How do you decide who to list? Can keep picture of Joe Strummer though we can move the information to under that picture. MarioNovi (talk) 05:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Generally it's acceptable to list a few notable examples in running prose. Long and comprehensive lists are generally banned to pages of their own. I wouldn't say that such is merited here. GBH, Peter and the Test Tube Babies, Goldblade, Alien Sex Fiend, Soul Brains are good examples of early punkcast subjects. Yeah Yeah Yeahs, The Moldy Peaches, Liars and TV on the Radio are all examples of successful acts where Punkcast provided early exposure. A later success was The Gossip where the punkcast video carried their hit, "Standing in the Way of Control", especially in Europe, but good luck finding sources on that. It was also the first Punkcast video on YouTube [4] where it gained over half-a-million views.

When I saw the article the first time it sounded like bragging. Any person with a camera can film those bands if they are in the audience so do you think it adds to the article? The other things you say, if they get lots of views or mentioned like Gangnam Style that is different. I will not remove it just a suggestion, want to hear what you think, thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 06:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you know about WP:VNT? MarioNovi (talk) 06:27, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd say all that was fairly verifiable. The site is still up. You can go to the Internet Archive to check that it was then as now. And, I beleive, you are beginning to get the point. Sure anyone can shoot and post video now, but in those days it was a different matter. This, I think, does not need verification. But to put it again bluntly, in a time when there was no other such existed on the Internet punkcast, with a DIY approach rooted in the punk tradition of P2P culture like fanzines, was posting up video of the NYC underground music scene. And of such quality that the City of New York later built a new municipal music tv show on top of it's catalog. That's all in the VV source with perhaps a little background in Internet History required to comprehend context. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

What I am saying is that it does need verification. If you think or know it is true and even if I do it is not enough for wikipedia. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 09:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I did say that The Gossip would be difficult to source but then again if you look at the date of the video, and the timeline of the band's career, it's fairly self evident. 500k was a lot of views for an unsigned indie band in 2006! Similarly with the other bands I mention above. As for your permission statement in the opening para, it's not strictly true. Punkcast's rep on the NYC scene was such that many bands were very welcoming, and permission was asked of many others. Any band could make their preferences known, and responded to, as exemplified by the Yeah Yeah Yeahs in the VV story. The point of the Hell incident was that, after permission had been given to shoot, Hell later had a change of heart, and instead of asking for the clip, which was linked on his website, to be taken down, served a DMCA notice, taking down the whole channel. Talk about the Blank Generation. But it was nevertheless a minor incident. Similarly the disks sales were so minimal as to be non-notable. Wwwhatsup (talk) 12:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Can we get any of this at all without doing original research or from primary source? MarioNovi (talk) 08:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd suggest a closer reading of both the VV and Brooklyn Vegan sources. Wwwhatsup (talk) 16:18, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

The article only says that punkcast was there at that time and maybe you could see that it says that people watched it but that is mostly a MacFie quote talking about how he see something as confirmation. I do not see any comparison to other sites, I do not see anything mention if there were other sites or not. I do not see anything that says it was first or that it influenced anything else. Can you quote where it says these things? Trying to follow no original research. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 06:04, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The Wired 'Guide to the Online Video Explosion "was a round up of notable video websites at the time (2006), Punkcast was one of only four music sites that had live video. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean this [5]? I do not see something like that there. What are the other four sites? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 08:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Try http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.05/watch.html and although it doesn't say it there, the others were all recent new podcast sites, while Punkcast had been going 7 years by that time, and so had a much wider catalog. Incidentally if you haven't checked the print edition of Wired that is referenced, maybe you should take down that tag until you do. Wwwhatsup (talk) 12:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

But that is what I am saying, it does not say it there. So I feel we cannot put this original research in the article, correct? And do any of the other music sites listed have wikipedia articles? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 05:56, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I am not going to revert you, but you are wrong. The source is a printed edition of Wired. Just because you don't have a copy is no reason to remove the info. If you had a copy and it didn';t say that then you could. I am waiting for you to finish with your improvements and then I am going to put up an RFC, so let me know when you are ready. Wwwhatsup (talk) 11:03, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The reference is to an online page not a print one. It should be a different kind of reference if it is to a print source. I am just trying to help clean up the page because a lot of the article made claims that are not support by the references. I have done enough for now so please make the RFC to ask others for help. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 05:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I saw a physical copy of that issue of Wired. I could not find what you were talking about until I noticed a photo next to the Punkcast text that has a red caption "MUST SEE!". I do not know if they mean Punkcast is a must see or if that video the picture is from is a must see or if the video is from Punkcast or something else. The original text you have says it was "called a must-see" which is not the same thing. I do not know what to do. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 00:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

It is pretty clear that the it refers to the site. Wwwhatsup (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Also I was looking at the list of bands you put up there, do you know about WP:ADV it says "It is obvious that a link from Wikipedia to an external site may drive Web traffic to that site. But in line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if Wikipedia guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked"? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 07:04, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

The article is about the site in question. The point of references is so that readers may verify the the referenced imformation. Wwwhatsup (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I am talking about changes like this [6] that I found because you linked there. Sorry I did not explain it well. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 21:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh those. Punkcast was the official Moldy Peaches video website in that period. Wwwhatsup (talk) 10:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

What you say does not seem to cancel out this phrase "you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if Wikipedia guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked". Do you not agree? Also what about [7] Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 07:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Those are guidelines, mainly aimed at SPA's who just post on WP for promotion. In contrast to an experienced editor who works to document article subjects. If I could post videos to commons I would, however it's not always possible to get open licences on the music. When I can, such as spoken word, I have, like I do photos. Wwwhatsup (talk) 00:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you would like another user more experienced than you to agree because it does not seem true to me? You do not want to get in trouble. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 07:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, take these videos they are filmed, and the links posted, by me. Problem? Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• They do not seem to be in an article so I do not think so, yes? Maybe you should get another experience user to help. One you do not know already? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 08:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Creative Commons

Hello, I looked at some old Punkcasts like here [8] for photos and they are listed with "No Derivative Works" protection. Am I seeing right that these can not be used for photos on wikipedia because it requires "derivative works"? Or am I confused because having this protection looks stronger than what MacFie asks from the bands? Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 07:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Correct, further permission is required to use images on Wikipedia. In the case of the videos, the No-Deriv is essentially to stop people republishing the audio, but it does affect framegrabs too. Generally if permission is requested, it is given. Some of the tech stuff, notably Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen is under the GFDL. Wwwhatsup (talk) 08:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

How much content from Richard Hell

User who declared COI [9] made changes to article here [10]. Question is, how much material to keep in regarding this dispute? With the material removed, it seems like Richard Hell was the unreasonable one, but if his quote is included, he seems very reasonable. Thoughts are appreciated, thank you. MarioNovi (talk) 06:13, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

About your Third Opinion request: I'm a regular volunteer at the Third Opinion project. Your request for an opinion has been removed because that project requires thorough recent talk page discussion which has reached a stalemate. Please discuss the issue with the other editor here on the article talk page. If that discussion comes to a stalemate, then you may apply for dispute resolution. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:24, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Punkcast. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://paperthinwalls.com/featuredarticle/index?id=141

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:00, 2 April 2016 (UTC)