Talk:SoundCloud

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SoundCloud article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Websites Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Websites.

Websites: Computing Start‑class

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Companies Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Reads like an Advert

Advertorial? 194.72.120.131 (talk) 11:57, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It reads like an advertorial I think because advertorials read off key features and information. Wikipedia articles list practically the same thing. I don't think there is anything that can be done to change the article's tone without it sounding somewhat like an advertorial. SoundCloud is pretty notable in the world of social media but it hasn't generated enough news worthy criticism to balance the article. Element₉. _TALK 21:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does a bit, but not egregiously so. My main issue would be it needs a go over by a native English speaker. At the moment it reads like it's been written by someone with a good but not native command of the English language. 81.108.180.242 (talk) 17:36, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I second that, imo the introduction reads a lot like a commercial, especially the sentence "Many new artists use SoundCloud as their primary music distribution platform for its wide range of features and large user base". the reference provided for this sentence poorly supports this assertion. More precisely I have a problem with the word "many" (no source) and the "for its wide range of features and large user base", which is not factual at all (unless someone adds a ref to a poll among the artists on SoundCloud which shows indeed that it's the reason why they adopted it!). I added a citation needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.226.56.1 (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2013 (UTC) Removing the sentence now 134.226.56.1 (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added some citations, plus added a "Criticism" section; hopefully, this balances the article out better. Accordingly, I removed the "Citations needed" template, since there are no more "citation needed" tags left. Ochado (talk) 22:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement

Soundcloud is supposed to be a platform for genuine user-created content, and possibly most of its content is, but it only takes a few searches to find material by The Beatles, Led Zeppelin and others which is clearly not 'user-created' but plain copying. Just wondered if Soundcloud has any systems to detect this, like ContentID on YouTube?86.183.203.169 (talk) 21:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, SoundCloud has a Content ID just like YouTube, but it's more strict than YouTube's Content ID. You can upload most copyrighted music without permission on YouTube, but you can't on SoundCloud. If you upload a copyrighted song to SoundCloud, you will get a notification saying it was blocked. However, you can upload some copyrighted songs that aren't in SoundCloud's Content ID. For example, I uploaded the song "The Holy River" by Prince and I didn't get any notifications saying it was blocked so it's fully playable on SoundCloud. If you remix a song, the Content ID will think it's original, however the copyright owners can still report the song as copyright infringement. DBZFan30 (talk) 12:59, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the distinguish tag for Soundhound needed, or is it actually just advertising on the page of this much more popular service?

Subject says it all. Human fella (talk) 17:59, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is for SoundCloud, not SoundHound. DBZFan30 (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jargon

"some original users have complained that it is losing its fidelity to artists" - what on earth does this mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.125.98 (talk) 12:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on SoundCloud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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:Offline} 03:31, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete statistics

Sources published in 2014 are used to support several statistical claims, including "more than 175 million unique monthly listeners", "content creators upload approximately twelve hours worth of audio every minute", "over half the songs that are uploaded are played within the first 30 minutes", and "90% of all uploaded tracks receive a listen from at least one user". In 2016, SoundCloud eliminated the popular Groups feature that likely made these statistics possible and consequently, I expect that these statements are no longer accurate. I've added an Update tag to bring attention to this issue. Lambtron (talk) 16:13, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tag doesn't apply: no "factual accuracy may be compromised". States "in December 2014,..." zzz (talk) 20:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok now I vaguely get what you mean, but it is WP:OR. Also I don't see why you deleted the "groups" info in this edit when you could just say when it was phased out. zzz (talk) 22:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Groups no longer exist so it seems obvious to me they don't belong in Features, which is a compendium of current features. If Groups are to remain in the article, perhaps they should be discussed in a new Discontinued_features section. You've made a valid point about WP:OR, yet there is abundant evidence that Groups were a primary enabling factor for the company's 2014 statistics claims (e.g., numerous forum threads lament the loss of Groups because Groups were considered the only means available for many artists to make their works known to listeners). Consequently those statistics are obsolete -- and misleading because they are featured in the article lede. So on the one hand the statistics are obviously no longer valid, but on the other hand the only relevant RS is the company's dated claims -- a seemingly intractable problem. Lambtron (talk) 17:06, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]