Talk:Home video

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Article

I was going to try rewriting this desperately-in-need-of-rewriting item, but could think of nothing to say beyond the definition. This this isn't a dictionary ... I'd say kill this baby. - DavidWBrooks 01:24, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

...

just a comment:

The concept of home video could be approached from an ontological perspective as well: "It is unrelenting footage that rolls on and on. It has an aimless determination, a persistence that lives outside the subject matter. You are looking into the mind of home video, It is innocent, it is aimless, it is determined, it is real." [Don Delillo, Underworld, p. 156]

the 'home video business' focus seems to represent only the commercial aspects...

[Sune Blicher, 21/10/05]

Other uses of the term

What about "home video" meaning a video made by a person videotaping an event, like the ones on AFV? -EdGl 22:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, that's considered home movie. There should probably be something on this page linking to it. --Max 00:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation: Home Video (the band) www.homevideooffice.com 216.232.53.130 14:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List

I've moved the long list to

list of notable home video companies PirateArgh!!1! 20:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]


Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move
. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Perhaps you all should hash out an appropriate title, then request a move. Close until a title is agreed upon, otherwise this will continue to sit in an otherwise already swamped backlog Jojhutton (talk) 21:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Home video → ? —

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • Support. I suggest changing it to Video distribution. This article is not really about the items, it's about economic and societal aspects of making videos available to the public.--Mike Selinker (talk) 04:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Another suggestion made today on CfD was "Commercial video."--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (formal). This will probably become a support for some specific title if we come up with a better one, but I don't think video distribution is quite right, as the phrase is still ambiguous and covers far more than this retail industry. My Google search got [1] and [2] on the first page of hits, for example (your results may differ depending on your location etc). Andrewa (talk) 14:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is the best title for this article; a hatnote to
    home movies is sufficient for disambiguation. Powers T 14:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Question: Do we have an article on the other sense of home video? It doesn't seem to appear in Category:Home video if so. If not then there doesn't seem any pressing need to move this article. Perhaps instead it could be expanded to cover the whole topic.

The other question is, where to move it? Video distribution doesn't seem right to me, that term would cover a lot more than home videos.

All told, I don't think a case has yet been made for a move. Andrewa (talk) 07:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have the article
home movies (curious that, it's plural), which is the other sense of "home video" (also the sense used by the popular TV show mentioned in the rationale). The category may require renaming after this article's naming is determined. 76.66.193.119 (talk) 10:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks, exactly what I was looking for. Perhaps home video should become a two-way DAB pointing to this article (wherever it ends up) and to
home movies#Home video-making (perhaps also with some renaming of the article and/or section). Andrewa (talk) 13:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
For now, I've added home movies to the home video category. Andrewa (talk) 13:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the
home movies should definitely move to Home movie; the rationale doesn't hold water for me. I agree with the two-way DAB idea.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Curiouser and curiouser... so there are already two DABs, one at home movie and one at home movies (disambiguation), which links to articles on four works which should remain pluralized. However IMO the two DABS should still be merged, and the pluralization removed from articles about home movies in general as opposed to works entitled Home Movies with the s as part of the work title. The example fireworks given in justification for the pluralization is actually evidence against in my opinion, the two cases are significantly different. Andrewa (talk) 01:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree; the plural is fine on
home movies. Powers T 12:01, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
But we can't forget Wikipedia policy: Per
Home movies should be moved to Home movie. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 23:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
This is one of those cases where
WP:IAR applies. Powers T 12:23, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
We can't just use
WP:IAR as an excuse to back up our own opinions, which in your case goes against a well established convention on article naming. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 04:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Likewise, we needn't slavishly follow a guideline that cannot possibly anticipate every exception. The term is more widely used and more recognizable in the plural, and the fact that a guideline recommends singular is no reason to ignore that. Powers T 18:49, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Study
WP:PLURAL) says that "home movies" is not an exception, then it is not an exception. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 03:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
"If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." In my opinion, the encyclopedia is improved by using the plural in this case. Powers T 11:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
And just where did you hear that the plural is better? Show me some good sources and I might possibly be convinced. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 02:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't know how to even begin to find sources for such a thing. Powers T 12:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
 If I may chip in from the land of

The Queen's English, I do not use to term "movie(s)" (the word is "film(s)"), so I would never say "home movie(s)". Here, they are "home video(s)", and, I suppose, the broad term for commercial VHS, DVD, BD etc. is "video(s)". Hope my insight helps DBD 11:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

If it is decided that

WP:PRECISION. I don't agree that the plural is better as a title the article about home movies. I think consistency should be favored, and on wikipedia article titles are usually singular.TheFreeloader (talk) 17:37, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move
. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

First sentence

IP

MOS:FIRST
.

I have explained in my edit comments, I have explained on the IP's talk page. In each case the IP again reverted to their preferred version for the first sentence, with no edit summaries, no replies, no explanations or justification.

I attempted a compromise, adding a sentence "It is a type of home media." (Home entertainment is already mentioned at the end of the lede sentence, just without bolding.) Again, the IP reverted the lede sentence to their version, even though it is now redundant, with no edit summary or other interaction.

The IP has made no other contributions.

Comments? Jeh (talk) 04:30, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Home media and home entertainment are wider concepts than are covered in the article. They shouldn't be in bold as if they are the subject of the article when they are not. (I am not
ping me if you want my attention.) — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:49, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:56, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blu-Ray and LaserDisc

It's wild to me that this article doesn't mention Blu-Ray or LaserDisc. I won't get to it immediately (clearly citations are a much more direly-needed improvement) but I'm putting this out there now in case anyone wants to get on that before I can. JupiterBruzer 08:03, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lol nevermind on the Blu-Ray bit. I must've skipped that section somehow! Still though, I'd like to put in a bit about LaserDisc. It didn't catch on very well historically, but it's significant enough to warrant more than just a See Also link. JupiterBruzer 08:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sexy pornography girlsfjdkdvkskxmwlzkfjxkwkdnfmekxiwkxkroxcj jdkejxnrjdnek jejgkdjfjj jeif jejgkdjfjj jeifhexju jeidifhu iddi ueivjb ufitu ugjd sick jdjf right now just need to pretend to sthandwa sam

Fjf 41.114.255.45 (talk) 21:32, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How's it's done pornography

Example of pornography 2A03:2880:21FF:3:0:0:FACE:B00C (talk) 01:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Step sister 92.96.44.25 (talk) 21:44, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Step sister 92.96.44.25 (talk) 21:43, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Home_video&oldid=1206481710"