Talk:Reddit

The Button

I think somebody should add a section about the new button on reddit, I think it might be noteworthy. --JumpingCactus (talk) 22:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@Jumpingcactus: wasn't that just an April Fools' Day event? Danotto94 (talk) 03:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

As a note, an article was created at The Button (Reddit) ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:57, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

@SuperHamster: @JumpingCactus: unsure if you noticed but there's now a section based on it. Anarchyte (talk) 09:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

TIL

I really dont think the section on "Today I Learned" needs to be there. It has no sources (other than about what "TIL" stands for) and doesn't warrant its own section. StewdioMACK ^{Talk page} 05:56, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

To be fair, it is the 4th largest subreddit (according to http://redditlist.com/). It does look like it was just written by a moderator or frequent user of that sub, however, and reads more like an advert than a factual description. Supernova190 (talk) 17:00, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, why the 4th largest subreddit and not the largest subreddit? And this section on /r/ShowerThoughts is so devoid of information, clearly it has no reason to be. I guess what I'm saying is, I'm definitely in favor of deleting these sections. The AMA section is fine, AMAs are a thing that gets regular coverage in reliable sources. --SubSeven (talk) 21:37, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I have the same concerned with the /r/ShowerThoughts section as well. Only 2 sources, both of them coming from the subreddit itself. Zappa24Mati 03:56, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm leading towards deleting both sections and leaving only the AMAs. Both are low quality, don't provide useful information, and aren't particularly unique to reddit (whereas AMAs are). If anyone would like to rework them and add them back, or has ideas for other important subreddits, please feel free to contribute. Supernova190 (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I'd suggest creating a table for all subreddits with some info on the most relevant subs. Alternatively there could be a new article for it -> e.g. List of subreddits ("List of subreddits on Reddit" is kind of tautological). --Fixuture (talk) 20:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Would there necessarily be anything wrong with doing both? A table with short descriptions in the main reddit article, and then moving the full length sections to a separate list page could work. Supernova190 (talk) 15:36, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I second that. However we probably should decide on which subreddits the main article should feature (each as short subsections of the "Subreddits"-section). I'd suggest /r/IAMA, /r/AskScience, /r/ExplainLikeImFive (and maybe: /r/AskReddit, /r/TodayILearned, /r/Worldnews)

The list could then be linked on top of the "Subreddits" section.

--Fixuture (talk) 17:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Google info pane. (image change)

Google has a standard sidebar for a small gist of an article which links to wikipedia, including links and more info. And when searching for reddit, it looks like this.

It seems unprofessional and I think it should be changed, as transparent images become black. I suggest something like this instead: http://www.redditstatic.com/about/assets/reddit-alien.svg. -AychAych AychAych (talk) 22:37, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Well that's not a matter of Wikipedia / this article but Google. Maybe try that feedback button there. I guess Google gets the icon from an app in its play store (of which it got the license for the logo) or something like that. --Fixuture (talk) 22:55, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2015

Under the heading "Philanthropic Efforts", please add this:

In December 2014, the subreddit MillionaireMakers was born. The idea behind this experiment is that if one million people were to donate $1 to a person, we could make that person a millionaire. Once a month, a Redditor is selected at random and deemed that month's "winner". Once the winner is selected, everyone else donates $1 to the winner. As of May 2015, over $30,000 in individual donations have been given to the winners.

Djbr22 (talk) 20:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 05:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Also I'm sekeptical to what extend that would classify as "philanthopic". From the article Philanthropy:

Instances of philanthropy commonly overlap with instances of charity, though not all charity is philanthropy, or vice versa. The difference commonly cited is that charity relieves the pains of social problems, whereas philanthropy attempts to solve those problems at their root causes (the difference between giving a hungry man a fish, and teaching him how to fish for himself). A person who practices philanthropy is called a philanthropist.

A lottery or at least random selection of the price's winner isn't really philanthopic - actually it isn't even necessarily "relieving pains of social problems"...it's just making some random stranger happy. --Fixuture (talk) 16:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

The banning of /r/fatpeoplehate

Considering how much vandalism is going on reddit currently, and how controversial the /r/announcements post was...well, everything's gone crazy. But I think this should be mentioned on the page, if not now, but in the future when all this settles down. Robotortoise (talk) 05:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

It has been added, the sources is a breitbart article, there are numerous more neutral articles that also mention it, it looks to me like it should be expanded. CombatWombat42 (talk) 15:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Link the word "subsidiary" in the intro to the corresponding Wikipedia article.

In the introduction it says that "Reddit became a direct subsidiary of Condé Nast's parent company, Advance Publications, in September 2011."

I would do it myself, but I can't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.203.149.84 (talk) 22:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Conflation of Taylor's firing with Jackson's AMA

I'm not able to edit due to semiprotection, and this request for removal is likely to be contested; however, to me this looks like a novel synthesis. The section #IAmA and AMA currently states that Taylor's firing "coincides with an AMA on the site with Jesse Jackson that has been reported as having apalling [sic] performance". Spelling aside, there's no evidence of a connection, only speculation, and even the Breitbart article used as a source only claims that it was "after", not "because of" the derailed interview. It is, perhaps, fine to note that the Jackson AMA went badly, but it's impermissible to imply in Wikipedia's voice that there is a connection, without a source that gives an explicit connection. The best solution is just to delete the mention of the Jackson AMA for now; it was bad, but there have been worse ones that are not singled out in the article. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 05:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done: It's speculation. I doubt that she was fired because of that. If someone wants to readd it, it should state that this is speculation. Some introductory info on that issue: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/3bx23y/whats_the_deal_with_the_jesse_jackson_ama/ --Fixuture (talk) 19:16, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

New Reddit Search Page

I Want to Be Able to Access Legacy Search Without Logging in, How Can Visitors Do It? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.49.73.83 (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2015

In the section History, please change the mention of "Redditmade" from "On October 29, 2014, Reddit comes to the crowdfunding field with Redditmade, a service that allows moderators to create merchandise for their subreddits. Redditmade was later closed in February 2015." to "In October 2014, Reddit announced Redditmade, a service which allowed moderators to create merchandise for their subreddits. Redditmade closed in February 2015." (citation omitted for clarity, but should be retained). Reason: removal of promotional language and general concision. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 06:09, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Done Bazj (talk) 07:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Voting Rings / Brigading

No mention of how prevalent voting rings and brigading is? It's practically part of Reddit culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.27.230 (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Technology

Nothing about the 503 page? At certain times of the day all Reddit serves is 503's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.27.230 (talk) 21:34, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done. Sometimes reddit sends 503 pages, but if you want this information included in the article, you need to find a source talking about the 503. --Frmorrison (talk) 20:45, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 September 2015

Please change Alexa rank from 31 to 32. Source: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/reddit.com Bgmota (talk) 11:10, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

 Done - Arjayay (talk) 12:21, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2015

Reddit is a lowercase word. Change the name of the page as well as all the "Reddit"s you find. Dan6233 (talk) 00:37, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: - please see Talk:Reddit/Archive 1#"reddit" or "Reddit"? and Talk:Reddit/Archive 2#reddit is lowercase. Existing consensus is that the proper use is to capitalize the name. If you think that consensus has changed and that we should render the title in lowercase, you will need to have a discussion first. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:18, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

I checked out MOS:TMRULES and indeed, reddit should have a capital R. Well, thanks. Dan6233 (talk) 01:37, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Ellen Pao ousting

The controversy section should have something about the unfounded hatred towards Ellen Pao and how it led to her resignation. The subsequent comments by co-founder Yishan made it clear that Pao in fact stood for free speech rather than corporate interests.

From nymag.com "She became an easy scapegoat for the predominantly young and male Redditors, who, very maturely, had taken to calling her Chairman Pao."