Talk:Justin.tv

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Websites: Computing Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing. Internet Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Who is Kappa and other guys? Justin.tv crew? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.104.228.3 (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am tired of having to delete this article. Please show that the subject is notable so that the article does not qualify for a speedy deletion. Please see WP:WEB for information on how to do this. Additionally, you will need to work on the article either on this page or in userspace before I will again remove protection. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 13:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://cbs5.com/video/?id=21933@kpix.dayport.com

This site is gaining a lot of attention, and brings up significant privacy and ethical issues. I was really surprised to see wikipedia has no article for this.

I don't understand why this article continues to be deleted IMO it was a legitimate article about a legitimate website, this article shouldnt be treated any differently from other articles like Fatwallet, DSLReports, Slashdot, DemocraticUnderground. Digg, Freerepublic, Shoutcast, Suprnova and many other sites featured on wikipedia.

This site has been featured in all sorts of mainstream media - AP wire, new york times (I believe). It has been the buzz of the podcasting and tech community for a while now. It has been discussed in length on TwiT, etc etc etc. How much more legitimacy is needed here? Why is there no page?

Here is an AP/Washington Post article http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/27/AR2007032701220.html

I see no reason why you continue to block this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WikiGlory (talk • contribs) 23:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You know what's funny? I think Chris Griswold has something against the guys at Justin.tv. He's marked their other company, Kiko, for deletion too.

The completely bullshit thing about all of this, is that the damned Rules of Aquisition from Star Trek are on wikipedia and not considered TRIVIAL, yet Justin.tv, the first Web cam to go mobile is considered too trivial despite getting major press since before the site launched. This is another reason why wikipedia shouldn't allow nazi admins like Chris Griswold to run completely unchecked on the site.

When was the last time the Associated Press covered Rules of Aquisition?

How are the rules of Aquisition more trivial than this? They're both equally important.

Write an article that explains that the subject is notable or stop whining. Three times the article was deleted because it could have been anything. I provided a link to information on how to do this. If anyone wants to work on this article and wants my help, I will be happy to provide it. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 02:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This guy was on numerous national (USA) broadcasts within the past week. G4TV's Attack of the Show and NBC's (Major network.. hello?) The Today Show.

Justin.tv is a website created by the ex-founders of the calendaring website Kiko.com. Using a mobile webcam attached to the head of Justin Kan, one of the founders, the website streams continuous live video and audio of what he is seeing and hearing. The site went live at midnight on March 19th 2007 and it is stated on the site that Justin will wear the camera "24 hours a day, 7 days a week."^[1] There have been previous experiments with 24/7 live streaming via the internet, DotComGuy and JenniCam for example, but Justin.tv is notable because Justin is completely mobile. Using 4 wireless EV-DO networking cards and a laptop in a backpack^[2] the video is streamed from wherever Justin is currently located. The site has been compared to "Edtv" or "The Truman Show."^[3]

I have a comment. It bothers me that wikipedia notes "Justintv" as being the originator of "live streaming 24/7. Although he was the first, to my knowledge to gain media attention by wearing the portable cam on his hat or backpack, he was hardly the first to stream live 24/7.

Alki David did that back with a program called "Cuseeme" in the early 1990's. You did not have to have a camera to participate. You could log on, watch him on cam or if he left, you could watch his house, pool, etc. You could watch people come and go. If they were not directly "in front of the camera", you could watch them at a table holding meetings, hear what was doing on, see them.

Many people in the community of "Cuseeme" would log on and chat an hour or two.. or more. Alki's cam would run non stop and as people entered they'd ask "What is this?" and they'd be told.

I just wanted to make sure that JUSTINTV was NOT credited for being the first to broadcast live streaming 24/7. You can research cuseeme and the communities and see that others ran their camera's 24/7 also. The longest running camera would probably be Ostfeld College in Norway. Checkit out.

Now that this article has established itself and should no longer be in danger of deletion, perhaps it's time to clean up all the "deletion" "deletion" "deletion" talk entries? Anyone, anyone? --67.188.0.96 10:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article now includes reference to the article itself? I'm not suggesting the entries aren't worthy; rather, I'm just pointing out how strange it is to have a wikipedia article that is in part about itself. That said, I've watched justin.tv and seen Justin request that users edit the article in certain ways--which invariably happens within minutes. Sometimes his suggestions are helpful, but isn't it getting much too close for comfort to have the subject of the article dictate the article's content? And after that, entries to the article are made regarding entries to the article? My head is spinning. --67.188.0.96 10:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• At last, a decent start that won't be deleted within 5 seconds. As soon as the media does something on this, there'll be an article for sure. Thanks, Zadernet 06:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I think the media already has. The references below show a Washington Post article as well as a Techcrunch posting, and here is a San Francisco Chronicle article And65 12:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Perfect, And65. I'll put it up now. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 13:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Mentioned on This Week in Tech... twit.tv or Diggnation; I'm not totally sure, but definitely one of the above. I believe TWiT. --Auto^{(talk / contribs)} 03:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, this is Emmett from the staff of Justin.TV. I don't mind the criticisms about it not being 24/7 (although it seems very POV and should probably from a source, rather than editorializing by whoever wrote it). However, I'm annoyed about the Anne Curry "bitch" comment inclusion. It's very POV, not cited, and it was in no way a significant event in the history of Justin.TV. It's true, but it was muttered under his breath after a hostile interview, and hasn't been featured in any significant press I know of. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eshear (talk • contribs) 07:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You're right; I've removed the section. This article may in the future have many edits based purely on Justin's video feed, but edits based only on that feed should be considered original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia, since they require the editor's interpretation. Also, I suggest that you and the rest of the staff, if you haven't already, become familiar with the conflict of interest and autobiography guidelines. --Brandon Dilbeck 13:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that there are numerous external links for this article, most of which seem to be various news articles. Others are interviews. Should we keep them all, or only keep the ones that seem more note-worthy? Yavoh 15:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There should not be so many links. Wikipedia is not a link repository. If you'd like to check through them, please go ahead and remove all but the most important and relevant links. --Brandon Dilbeck 17:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through and left only the more noteworthy links. I left the cleanup tag in, however, as there may be some disagreement. Yavoh 18:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A few points to consider:

• Citation #2 links to Justin.tv; where exactly is this information? Is there a secondary source available instead?
• "Justin.tv has been compared to Edtv, Being John Malkovich and The Truman Show." - needs a citation
• The list of similar projects is original research. Some of these could be appended under a "See also" heading.
• The list of channels replete with in-line links needs to go, there's no reason to advertise them by upping their googlerank and offering free traffic.
• The list of Television appearances may help substantiate the article in case of an AfD, but it adds no useful information.
• (It may seem from the above that I really don't like lists, it's rather that I think there should be a pragmatic basis for including them.) ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 21:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is Justin.tv down? it doesn't work 4 me.

~~Ryan~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.127.210 (talk) 01:58, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not down... Just bogged down by the overwelming numbers of advertisements!!!

Unless you have a extremely high screen resolution, ads cover most everything including other ads. It's ads on ads on ads... Try looking at the site with a netbook, rediculous. Worst yet, if you click the hide ad button... it takes you to a full page ad!

Justin.tv hasn't been a viable option for companies for quite a while. Now it's become useless for the casual user too. I'm sure this comment will be deleted for it's truthfulness since Justin.tv controls this wiki. To bad, but they lost thier relevance already and nobody cares about them anyway. Sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.229.215.166 (talk) 20:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I heard a kid committed suicide on webcam using Justin.TV. Anybody have more information on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.192.194 (talk) 23:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go here: http://newteevee.com/2008/11/20/19-year-old-commits-suicide-on-justintv/

Also: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-150666 Pepso2 (talk) 23:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certain people have criticized the alleged use of the website by pedophiles, especially as it relates to underaged models being used for peep shows. This should probably be mentioned in the criticism section somehow.[1][2][3][4] ADM (talk) 13:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just did. 174.252.138.51 (talk) 22:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Can we put this to rest now?[reply]

With Thai internet, when going to justin.tv, Thai internet redirect to 203.113.26.78, that IP site is labelled "This website has been blocked by ICT" --118.172.210.122 (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I must remove "decline in viewership" again. Someone left an unsigned comment on my talk page, which I will now address. I do not have any personal invested interest in Justin.tv and was coming to Wikipedia as a first source of information about it. My objections to this section are twofold:

Your removal has been re-added back to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.169.190 (talk) 15:00, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The point was made that certain claims cannot be cited because of the nature of the site. This may well be true, but in that case, it does not belong in an encyclopedia. Saying that readers may verify it themselves is not an argument.

This most cetrainly belongs to provide relevant, factual information on the subject matter that people unfamiliar with Justin.tv should be aware of so their children do not get involved with this site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.169.190 (talk) 14:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not intended as a platform for you to spread your own ethical views. Sign your comments with four tildes. Vanhedrarn (talk) 16:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of whether the factual claims are objectively true, the manner in which it is written is unsuitable. The most egregious, perhaps, being

"Many of the blog creators, such as Mr. MacGregor and Anthony TT, are just as perverted as the registered users of the service they are trying to out. Anthony TT is a prime example of someone who needs to be outed himself."

"perverted" is a wildly subjective term to use, and saying that "Anthony TT [...] needs to be outed himself" belongs in your blog and not in an encyclopedia.Vanhedrarn (talk) 09:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The only valid reasons someone would have issues with this information are twofold: 1) You are one of those people mentioned, 2) You are an active member of the blog cited.

If you believe that people only contribute to Wikipedia for personal benefit, then you shouldn't be making any edits. Neither of these are the case. The section in question is an embarrassment to its author and should be at the very least cleaned up. Once again, I'll say: don't write what you can't cite and SIGN YOUR COMMENTS. Vanhedrarn (talk) 16:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added an Unreferenced section label as a very generous compromise. Please don't remove it or I'll report it.Vanhedrarn (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For someone who claims to know a lot about Wiki, you should also know that backseat modding will not be tolerated. Putting up the tag is good enough. Making threats to people that you will report them for merely wishing to remain anonymous will not be tolerated. Keep such comments to yourself and allow the true moderators to deal with the site accordingly. Your own admissions state you were informed of the reasons why the article was uncited. Why can't you just accept that and stop inserting your own influences over a site you are not a moderator of, nor an owner. It also seems very strange that your user name was only created after the edits went up. This informs me that you are nothing more than a Wiki troublemaker yourself. 174.252.169.190 (talk) 17:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)HappyNow?[reply]

I had to remove a line in the article which stated that Justin.tv's shutdown was caused by a lawsuit filed by The Hub, a cable TV network that no longer exists (channel was rebranded and renamed). Given the fact that there is practically nothing new to add, I suggest that this article should be locked to prevent others from adding their own theories as to why the website was shut down. Skraptix (talk) 06:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As announced by Justin Kan today, Justin.tvv will relaunch as a Snapchat channel. The article needs to be updated to reflect this. --Super3588 (talk) 23:44, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Justin.tv. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080317192547/http://blog.justin.tv/2008/03/categories-and-chat-fixes.html to http://blog.justin.tv/2008/03/categories-and-chat-fixes.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Justin.tv. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20081022071152/http://www.justin.tv/ to http://justin.tv/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]