Talk:Hydraulic Press Channel

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Internet culture C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

C

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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the YouTube Task Force.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

A fact from Hydraulic Press Channel appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 June 2016, and was viewed approximately 4,928 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that when the Hydraulic Press Channel, a YouTube channel, broadcast the folding of a piece of paper seven times using a hydraulic press, the paper exploded?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hydraulic Press Channel.

Wikipedia

Repetitive introduction

While the lead section of an article is meant to summarise the article's contents, per WP:LEAD, this article's lead contains essentially all the information presented in the "History" section, and is therefore less of a summary and is more of a redundancy. Please note that MOS:INTRO states that, for an article's introduction, "editors should avoid lengthy paragraphs and over-specific descriptions, since greater detail is saved for the body of the article." –Matthew - (talk) 12:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MatthewHoobin – thanks for starting this discussion. You're right, of course, that we should avoid lengthy paragraphs and over-specificity, but I feel that a summary is what I accomplished (or at least tried to accomplish) with my edit. I may have been too wordy (as I tend to be), but I don't think the lead here would provide the reader with an adequate summary of the article. Per WP:LEAD: the lead should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies. Identifying the topic and explaining the context is easy enough: the Hydraulic Press Channel is a YouTube channel that crushes objects in a hydraulic press. But to "explain why the topic is notable" and to "summarize the most important points", I think at the bare minimum we have to mention the paper folding video and how that video makes the channel notable. If the lead only states that it is a YouTube channel that crushes objects, it is not entirely clear why the subject is notable (it is notable because of the attention it received following the paper video). Although the current does repeat information (as a summary does), I don't believe it is redundant because there are certain additional details (like what kinds of objects, the paper exploding and why it exploded, the specific analysis) that the reader could find out about in the body of the article if he or she wants more than just a summary. I tried to cut the length down a little bit with this edit. Let me know what you think. Kind regards, Mz7 (talk) 14:25, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that re-edit's pretty agreeable, since the lead isn't as specific as the "History" section anymore. Thank you for discussing! –Matthew - (talk) 15:54, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Their Other Channels

Should their other channels Beyond the Press and Anni Vuohensilta be included in the article? Anni's channel predates HPC, but it is very small with 8.5k subs as of today (though it has grown quickly this year from ~5k to 8.5k in just a few months, which is a quick jump for a channel that's been around 7 years without growing much). I think at the very least, the BTP channel with 450k subs should get a mention or something. — Tha†emoover†here (talk) 06:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vat da faak?!

I notice that "vat da faak?!" was added as a catchphrase but subsequently reverted as potentially racist because it's a transcription of an English phrase in a Finnish accent. Since they sell t-shirts with this written on it, and have worn those t-shirts on camera e.g. here, I'm inclined to reinstate it. Does anyone object? › Mortee _talk 23:39, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"operated by Finnish factory owner Lauri Vuohensilta"

How is he a factory owner? The workshop is owned by his father, he just used to work there as a machinist. See for example [1] and [2]. EnemyOfTheState_|talk 04:52, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]