User blog comment:NOBODY/Video module on the Nitrome Wiki/@comment-3060206-20121008232906

I honestly couldn't care less if the Related Videos module was there or not, but there are a lot of things in your statements I do disagree with.

"Anyone who does not like the Nitrome Wiki can now crush us with this video module. "Add a video" - this button allows you to add any video to the Nitrome Wiki, for it to be displayed globally. "

Crush us? How? The same users could easily "crush us" because the "Latest Photos" module has an "Add a Photo" option. Users could have easily uploaded a photo to the Wiki, just like they can a video now. Even as I type this comment, there is a button below that allows me to easily add a video to the Wiki, appropriate to Nitrome or not. And yet I don't, and neither does anyone else on this Wiki so far.

It also irritates me that you continue to use this same "obscenities" comment as an excuse to remove the Videos module. Users can create obscene content anywhere on the Wiki. They can upload obscene pictures, add obscene text to mainspace pages and even make obscene blog posts, which, at first impression, could even pass as an innocent blog post. Users can do all this, but they don't. What makes you think having a "Related Videos" module will change any of that?

The way the Related Videos module works is that it displays the most recently added videos via the "Add Video" button (of course, unless that video is deleted). It also displays a list of all the videos currently embedded on the specific page. Final Ninja Zero, for example, reveals all the videos embedded on the page as well as the two I just recently uploaded via the "Add a Video" button. It's more likely advised that we try to avoid using that button to add videos to the Wiki, as they will show up there for every article viewed, but the rest of the videos added via the editor will only be visible on the module for that single page.

Of course, if we decide to keep the module, we will have to set down rules that keep videos fitting for the Wiki. Most users weren't aware that the video embedder tool put their videos on the upload log or in Category:Videos, and it is a fairly new feature. Videos would be treated like pictures - no personal videos allowed using the video embedder tool (youtube tags will still be allowed though, as they don't show up in the Related Videos module).

Lastly, I don't know if a user should be seeking community approval for "every single feature" they want to enable on the community. With a little common sense, they will know that a change that affects the way users see the Wiki and the actions they do should receive community approval. I don't think that comes down to many approvals, except disabling a few features or drastically changing the background's style or wordmark. But features like the category exhibition are optional, and can be turned off per user if they don't like it. That, I'm okay with admins enabling without permission. Community consensus is usually done when a currently active feature is to be disabled (ex. User badges), but I don't usually see it for features to be enabled. Sort of like creating project pages; Santi implied that you have to seek admin approval to create a project page, when admins can create whatever project pages they want. I just think it depends.