Talk:Reddit

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Austin.Lira (article contribs). This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tortalyni (article contribs).

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2020

In section "Controversies", "2020":

• Original text, for context:

On August 3, 2020, moderators of the subreddit r/Animemes banned usage of the word 'trap' to refer to any person or fictional character. The ban was predicated on the real-world usage of the word "trap" as a slur against transgender people, with moderators citing the trans panic defence. In response, many users of the subreddit contended that 'trap' was not being used in a non-transphobic manner, but instead to endearingly refer to crossdressers, otokonoko, and characters with related identities in animanga.

• Please change the last sentence to:

In response, many users of the subreddit contended that 'trap' was not being used in a transphobic manner, but instead to endearingly refer to crossdressers, otokonoko, and characters with related identities in animanga. 189.10.216.68 (talk) 00:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done — IVORK _Talk 00:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Aaron Swartz as co-founder

This recent edit removed Aaron Swartz from the co-founders section of the infobox based on a first-party source, even though the third paragraph in the lead and the Aaron Swartz article both list him as co-founder. I think both perspectives are discussed reasonably well in the Company history section. Since the WP:RS in the lead all list him as co-founder, and for the sake of consistency within the article and across articles, I've re-added Swartz to the infobox. However, based on some comments here and on Talk:Aaron Swartz (archives), it might be worth an RfC. Certainly not worth edit warring over. ~SpK 03:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

SpK please ping people in the future (don't mean to be rude here). You can do so in the edit summary btw. Anyhow, I considered the first-party source had precedence in this case, no? Different sources could misleadingly call Aaron Swartz founder of Reddit, but he is in fact co-founder of Reddit. This could be better phrased throughout the article. If you think an RfC is necessary, could you start it? I never did an RfC and don't know how to.User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 13:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

@Tetizeraz: Sorry for the missing ping, not sure why I omitted it. Might have pasted over it when I linked the diff.

I think that WP:PRIMARY is pretty clear when it says A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge.. It's obvious to me that Swartz's status is is not straightforward, particularly given that every secondary independent source (on both Reddit and Aaron Swartz) lists Swartz as a co-founder. The only reference to the "well, actually" is in #Company history where Ohanian requests that the NY Times not call Swartz a co-founder.

If the consensus of reliable secondary independent sources is that Swartz is a co-founder, but Ohanian says he isn't, does the latter really merit removing Swartz's mention in the infobox/lead? That feels WP:UNDUE to me. I think Ohanian's tweet/request is addressed appropriately in the history section. Regardless, removing Swartz only from the infobox but leaving him in the third lead paragraph (Reddit was founded by University of Virginia roommates Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian, and Aaron Swartz in 2005.) creates an obvious mismatch. Do you think adding something like ...though Ohanian disputes Swartz's title. to the lead (with an appropriate citation) would resolve your issue? Curious to hear your thoughts. ~SpK 20:03, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2021

old: As of 2018, there are approximately 330 million Reddit users new: 2019: "430 million monthly active users" --> more than 430 mio users src: https://redditblog.com/2019/12/04/reddits-2019-year-in-review/?utm_content=buffer8df1d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=buffer Progros (talk) 21:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

"Yourweek" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Yourweek. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 14#Yourweek until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Reddit 2010 and 2014April Fools prank missing

For some reason I can't edit the article myself, but anyone who can should add the 2010 April Fools prank.

"Reddit’s first massive April fool’s social experiment was to make everyone on site an admin. For 24 hours users could ban one another, modify upvotes and delete comments and votes. This was all, of course, fake. Any modifications to reddit only occurred through the user’s perspective. While many caught on, others began threatening fellow users with their admin privileges and went on mini power trips demonstrating that not everyone can be trusted with great power."

In 2014, Reddit did "headdit" a joke way to navigate and use the website using the webcam.

Bigfreakingkelleher (talk) 18:40, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

I can edit the article for you, but ok Chris Ducker (talk) 21:32, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2021

At this article's first mention of "Steve Huffman" the article should link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Huffman 208.65.167.243 (talk) 16:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Not Done - The first mention of Steve Huffman is in the lede, and it's already linked. The relevant sentence is Reddit was founded by University of Virginia roommates Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian, with Aaron Swartz, in 2005. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, going to accept your request Chris Ducker (talk) 14:01, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Clarity about Aimee Challenor

As a reader, I am confused by this section under the 2021 controversies. As it reads now it seems like the backlash was against her solely for the actions of her father and boyfriend. Reading the linked articles it appears that she kept her father on as campaign manager after charges were filed. Not entirely sure how to word that. perhaps "In March, Reddit users discovered that Aimee Challenor, an English politician who had been suspended from two UK political parties for retaining her father as her campaign manager after his child sexual abuse charge and partner's comments related to pedophilia, was hired as an administrator for the site." That doesn't really sound right though. What are your thoughts?--76.123.193.174 (talk) 05:37, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I'd support a rewording and your version, while not ideal, is already clearer than the present state of the section. My suggestion would be "In March, Reddit users discovered that Aimee Challenor, an English politician who had been suspended from two UK political parties, was hired as an administrator for the site. Her first suspension from the Green Party came for retaining her father as her campaign manager after his arrest on child sexual abuse charges. She was later suspended from the Liberal Democrats after tweets describing pedophilic fantasies were discovered on her partner's Twitter account." That way we have a more in-depth description of why she was suspended and which incidents are tied to which suspension. ASpacemanFalls (talk) 11:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

nsfw content

there's isn't enough talk of the nsfw content on the site and the regulations for it Cyclone26 (talk) 11:11, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Since that appears to be something you're familiar with, maybe you could add it? — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 00:05, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

"similar sites"

4chan and Tumblr are not similar sites to Reddit. Lemmy is.

Saying that 4chan/Tumblr are like Reddit is like saying 4chan is like an airplane because it travels very quickly or Tumblr is is like a roll of toilet paper because you can keep scrolling down on both. They are not good comparisons, and they're not justified in the same way comparisons to voat, digg, and hackernews are.

User:Mir Novov what's your justification? Would you say that The New York Times is a similar website to Reddit, since they both show the news? Or Pornhub is similar to Reddit because they both allow their users to upload pornography? I can't understand why you lump Tumblr and 4chan in with Reddit besides "these are popular international websites for English speakers" . I am not trying to be malicious by reverting your edit, I am simply trying to keep the page on point.

153 [x] 00:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

I removed Lemmy since it goes against criterion #13 of WP:ELNO, but forgot to put that in the edit summary; sorry about that. There are (probably literally) hundreds of Reddit alternatives out there; all of them have just as much of a right to be included, and if they all were, then the section would be unnavigable. If you wish for it to be included in the list, create an article about it with reliable sources that prove its notability.

Both Tumblr and 4chan are general-purpose content sharing sites with a discussion component. Them and Reddit are based around an anonymous user base with a unique culture, and especially in the earlier part of last decade, shared numerous cultural ties. - Novov T C 02:09, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Possible improvements

Hello! So I have 2 things that I think could be improved on in the same sentence. The sentence is, "Posts are organized by subject into user-created boards called "communities" or "subreddits", which cover a variety of topics such as news, politics, religion, science, movies, video games, music, books, sports, fitness, cooking, pets, and image-sharing." First, where are the user-created boards called communities on the website? From my limited knowledge and being on the website I've only ever seen them referred to as "subreddits". Second, "which cover a variety of topics such as news, politics, religion,..." this should probably be shortened to something like "which cover a variety of topics such as news, politics, religion, and more" or possibly "such as new, politics, religion, etc." I don't really see the need to basically list all of the topics the subreddits cover as there are a whole lot of them. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Animemes

"On August 3, moderators of the subreddit r/Animemes banned usage of the word "trap" to refer to any person or fictional character. The ban was predicated on the real-world usage of the word "trap" as a slur against transgender people, with moderators citing the trans panic defense. In response, many users of the subreddit contended that "trap" was not being used in a transphobic manner, but instead to endearingly refer to cross-dressers, otokonoko, and characters with related identities in animanga. Many users flooded the subreddit with memes making fun of the rule change and the moderation team. Many left in protest, which resulted in a loss of over 100,000 subscribers."

the sources: https://nicchiban.nichegamer.com/2020/08/subreddit-r-animemes-bans-trap-loses-almost-100k-subscribers-in-two-weeks/, https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/08/12/trap-banned-reddit-anime/

Drama specific to a subreddit, in this case r/animemes, is not relevant to the larger topic (being Reddit itself). In addition, I would not consider hitc or nicchiban reliable sources, even on anime topics. For these reasons I'm removing this paragraph from the article altogether unless it can be shown to affect the website as a whole.

SpartaN (talk) 23:08, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

R/GenderCritical Ban directs to a TERF site

I'm not sure that it's necessarily a good idea to link to a TERF site while citing the ban of r/gendercritical, as it risks compromising the neutral point of view for the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by FloofMother (talk • contribs) 19:46, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@FloofMother: Can you explain what link you're referring to? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:48, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Link number 327 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FloofMother (talk • contribs) 19:56, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@FloofMother: I think it should be fine as long as the content the reference is supporting is neutral. However I don't know what would be acceptable in this situation as I tend to stay away from political related things (TERF sites being one of the many things). You might be able to ask at WP:RSN about the source however I've heard that places is only for discussing the reliability of a source and not whether it would be appropriate in certain situations. So I would say wait for a more knowledgeable editor to answer. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:02, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Updated citation for academic studies on the "Science" section

Hello, I am the owner of the blog someone has cited discussing academic research on Reddit. I believe a better source would be this academic journal article: Studying Reddit: A Systematic Overview of Disciplines, Approaches, Methods, and Ethics of which I am one of the authors. It gives a much better up to date and in-depth coverage of the quantity of Reddit research, what disciplines are doing it, what topics have been covered, and methods used.

I an new to contributing to Wikipedia, but I have not edited anything myself as I believe it would be a conflict of interest/go against Wikipedia's values.

Throwaway Nay (talk) 11:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

@Throwaway Nay: Hello Throwaway! Thank you for not editing the article directly as you are correct that you would have a conflict of interest. SOme advice for you would be WP:COI and WP:SELFCITE. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:17, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Some subreddits have sites!

Well, I've found one: https://okbrofficial.neocities.org/ , https://okbrofficial.neocities.org/home.html https://okbrofficial.neocities.org/articles.html - important links to understand what this community about. There were also sites with other communities from Reddit. Should they be added?