Talk:List of most-subscribed YouTube channels/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Country of Origin Versus Country of Current Location

Would it be better to have the country of origin of a channel, or the country of where the channel is based? I personally would choose the latter, but major changes must be discussed here on the talk page before being made. Also, if we were to change it to the current location of a channel, then where would we get the information from? Socialblade provides that information for every single channel. For example, PewDiePie was born in Sweden, but he currently lives in the United Kingdom and runs his channel there. DrossRotzank, who lives in Argentina, was born in Venezuela. Should a youtuber's place of birth dictate their country on this chart, or should their place of residence? Or should we delete the country column altogether? Clbsfn (talk) 04:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

And even more useful information would be the language of content. The origin of person could be just one flag somewhere near the name of Creator--Giorgi Eufshi (talk) 07:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Language flags

Let's not have flags in the "Language" column.

The flags might imply a channel/nation connection.

The channels aren't always connected to the nation that the flags represent.

Just have the name of the language; no flag, in the column.

We already have flags in the other column.

We don't need the language flags for clarification purposes.

The linked language names are clear enough.

If there's a question, they can click the link, so no harm done by removing them.

I'm going to remove them, OK? Chrisrus (talk) 03:55, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

New section - tops per category

What do you think about a new section where would be tops of most subscribed cannels per category (top 50 at Music, top 50 at Gaming top Sports etc). Is this idea possible to realise? Dawid2009 (talk) 10:34, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

For example in List of best-selling books there are diffrent tops with diffrent categories of computer game. What do you think about varied this list? Dawid2009 (talk) 11:36, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I like this suggestion. I'll work on adding, maybe a top 10 for each of the 7 categories? 50 seems too much, especially if there's 7. Perhaps we could do a top 20. I'll do top 10s for now, and we'll see if people like it. If they do, then i'll make the lists top 20s. (The 7 categories are Comedy, Entertainment, Music, News, Games, Howto, and Sports.) Clbsfn (talk) 21:27, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Turns out there's an 8th category: People. Clbsfn (talk) 21:27, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Rowspans cause the table to be unsortable by columns

This is why do get surprised when I remove them. --Giorgi Eufshi (talk) 06:08, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

@Giorgi Eufshi: Fixed; this was caused by the rowspan for the 11 million subscribers table cell being incorrect. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 07:41, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Red links to be returned

Someone keeps removing the red links. Please read WP:RED and be convinced by its evidence and reason. Understand why red links are not only not a problem but an important part of creating progress on Wikipedia. Then, after we restore the red links, please help keep them that way by restoring them when they are removed in the future.

I plan to wait an appropriate amount of time and then restore the red links.

Thanks! Chrisrus (talk) 05:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Socialblade

@Clbsfn: Regarding your reverts of me, Socialblade seems to be inaccurate for some of the networks. Many of Sheeran's and Mars's video thumbnails contain the Warner Music logo, and both channels feature Warner and Atlantic Records in their sidebars for "related channels". The language in the video descriptions also refers to the artists in third person. "DavidGuettaVevo" is probably a Vevo channel. In addition, I don't think it's necessary to include all the Socialblade categories and lists for each category, since they're often somewhat arbitrary (e.g. why is ERB "entertainment" and not "music"; why is Ellen "entertainment" and not "shows"?) and channels can extend across multiple categories. The multiple lists feel like cruft and there was already a discussion which limited the number of entries to 50. I believe similar categories were removed sometime earlier this year. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 05:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jc86035: All right then, i won't stop you from adding/removing the music labels and category charts. Clbsfn (talk) 03:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Most subscribed YouTuber

The most subscribed youtuber should be this: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-9-kyTW8ZkZNDHQJ6Fgp

PewDiePie is actually no. 4 Spinosaurus75 (Dinosaur Fan) (talk) 14:09, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

The article clearly states that we do not count auto-generated channels. I assume that you intended to link to the channel "#Music," since the link you gave was a bad link. All channels starting with a hashtag in at least the top 100 or so youtube channels are auto-generated by youtube and should not be counted (and at least one that doesn't start with a hashtag, "Movies"). Clbsfn (talk) 15:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

• Here's what the article says: "Channels marked as "Auto-generated by YouTube" (such as Music, Gaming, Sports and Movies) are not included." Clbsfn (talk) 16:00, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

My ideas for a better list

First of all, I think one of the element on this list that might be very helpful and give information about the channels should be the type of content but is missing , for example (PewDiepie = gaming, Smosh = Comedy). Also a list for the most subscribed by this category will be a good extra for this article. - Company or Network channels like Spinnin' Records, WWE, WatchMojo.com or TheEllenShow have to be given a different colour as a reference just like VEVO channels, I would say the best color for me is green or blue but is up to you.

  Artist like David Guetta or Bruno Mars, have music channels but they're not VEVO owned so in my opinion should have other to distinguish from other channels too.
 If it's possible we must separate type of channels in the list of most subscribed by country like this : (musicians/network) and (user-generated). For example in the USA we have Youtube Spotlight , but if we apply this changes we would have Smosh in it too as an user channel

- We should add a chart of the channels views and their most viewed video with a link to it. A description of them would be good too in my opinion - Last but not least important, this list seems too short, why not give it an expansion to 100/150 most subscribed.

---

These are my ideas. Hope someone will listen to them , and apply this. I would really appreciate it if someone does it. Thanks for reading this MatsLP (talk) 06:06, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Australian channel with 5+ million subs

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAL3JXZSzSm8AlZyD3nQdBA/featured

Primitive Technology has 5.3+ million subs, and originates in Northern Queensland, Australia.

Just letting everybody know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A445:CBF5:1:D4C6:15E1:E783:581 (talk) 13:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Content column

Who the hell removed it? People worked to add content type for fifty channels and someone just decides to remove it? Dixtosa (talk) 17:27, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I have traced it. It was @Jc86035:. Now @Jc86035: restore content type and discuss its removal then. Dixtosa (talk) 17:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

@Dixtosa: It was probably copied from Socialblade. They define this themselves and categories often overlap (e.g. PewDiePie does vlogs now, but used to scream while playing video games) so it's not totally objective. Jc86035 (talk) 03:11, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

@Jc86035: Oh, it was copied from socialblade? Then it must be very easy to readd the column. Restore it, it is your responsibility.

As for PewDiePie and objectiveness we can decide each creator's content type on a case-by-case basis if anyone challenges our initial categorization. We had received no complaints about it before. Dixtosa (talk) 19:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I think this article should be semi-protected, because vandalism occurs daily. MaxPlays (talk) 04:25, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

YouTube Movies

@Embryo Yall: Does YouTube Movies count as a real channel and should it be included in the table? They do appear to have uploaded at least one video. Jc86035 (talk) 12:48, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

@Jc86035: In the past, we decided that the channels that aren't "real," and therefore shouldn't go on the list, are Auto-Generated Channels. The guideline used to be to include only channels that have uploaded videos, but as you have discovered, YouTube Movies would meet that guideline. In fact, I see three videos currently posted to the channel that are free to view. But since the channel is auto-generated by YouTube, it does not count as a "real" channel and therefore should not be placed on the list. If you search "Youtube movies" on YouTube, (link to search query), the result for that channel will have a small gray arrow next to the channel name (only in desktop mode). If you hover over the arrow with your cursor (or press on it if on a tablet), a little dialog box will pop out of the arrow saying "Auto-generated by YouTube." It's interesting that on the channel page itself, that gray arrow indicating that it's an auto-generated channel is not there, but it is there for most auto-generated channels. YouTube Spotlight is different, because it is actually run by employees of YouTube that upload videos to it. This can be seen by using the same search method as before, searching "Youtube spotlight," on YouTube, and the gray arrow for it will show "Verified" rather than "Auto-generated by YouTube." Most channels with a large amount of subscribers have this arrow, and in this case it helps us decide whether a channel run by YouTube should be counted as a "real" channel or not. In the case of YouTube Movies, it should not, because it is auto-generated. In the case of YouTube Spotlight, it should be counted as a legitimate channel. Embryo Yall (talk) 15:09, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

@Embryo Yall: Okay, thanks for clarifying. Jc86035 (talk) 15:11, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Content column

I'm adding back the content column, using information from Socialblade. If someone has a good argument that it shouldn't be added to the list, I will remove it again. We don't have to keep it exact to what Socialblade says, and we can change it on a case-by-case basis if need be. Embryo Yall (talk) 15:22, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Luis Fonsi Listed As Puerto Rico

Why is Luis Fonsi's channel listed as Puerto Rican instead of American? If we're getting that specific, shouldn't nigahiga be listed as Hawaiian, Taylor Swift's as Pennsylvanian, etc.? Or is it the standard convention on Wikipedia to consider Puerto Rican a different nationality than American? ^–User_Dude 11:17, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Brazilians channels

Canal Canalha and Felipe Neto aren't from USA and they don't speak english on their videos. They are brazilians and speak portuguese! fix that pleaseee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fantasmaaaaa (talk • contribs) 07:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2017

Youtube Spotlight should be listed as 26 million subscribers 108.65.77.252 (talk) 18:32, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:10, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

hi

hi guys — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.148.196 (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

"As of January 2018"

It isn't anymore December 2017, and there are few "as of December 2017" expressions. Happy New Year 2018! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everyk (talk • contribs) 21:02, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

"Most-subscribed by country" list

This list is problematic. The references within only verify that each channel has the claimed number of subscribers, not that it is the most-subscribed channel to originate from its listed country or that it even originates from that country. We could use the lists provided by Socialblade, but the nationalities it designates channels as sometimes vary from what is given in the main table — PewDiePie, David Guetta, and many Vevo channels of non-American artists are listed as American. I would be willing to use Socialblade's lists, but my primary hang-up is with PewDiePie, a Swedish expatriate residing in the UK who is certainly not American; a table listing him as the most-subscribed American channel would be greatly misleading and poorly received. I would like to hear other people's thoughts and suggestions. LifeofTau 11:06, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

I propose we base the table on the lists provided by VidStatsX, another reputable social media statistics site (examples: [1][2][3][4]). Like Socialblade, however, it also lists most Vevo channels as American, though this is not completely baseless when one takes into account that Vevo is based in New York City. It may be controversial to list JustinBieberVEVO as the most subscribed American channel, but I think this is the best solution if the table is to be preserved. I would still like to hear others' thoughts and suggestions. LifeofTau 00:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

After half a month with no responses, I have decided to be WP:BOLD and go ahead with reconfiguring the table to be based on VidStatsx's data. Since the website's list of countries and territories is limited to a select 38, it no longer makes sense to have the channels ranked; as such, I am removing the "Rank" and "Change" columns and listing the countries/territories in simple alphabetical order. LifeofTau 04:54, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Other countries on the Vidstatsx also have, I added some of them. RedJavelin (talk) 19:58, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Lists are not consistent

Justin Berber is listed as from Canada in the worldwide list, however he isn't the top channel from Canada in the country list. He should be Canada's top channel and Taylor Swift should be the USA's top channel. PlasticCoffee (talk) 14:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Most subscribed Argentinian YouTuber

DrossRotzank isn't Argentine, he is Venezuelan. Could you fix it?

--168.227.96.124 (talk) 12:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

http://www.elperiodicodelara.com/2017/12/drossrotzank-de-venezuela-esta-entre.html

--168.227.97.52 (talk) 12:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Sorry, but no. For tables like these to be consistent, all entries must cite the same reliable source. Right now that happens to be VidStatsX, and its page for Argentine YouTubers, when last accessible (see the section above), showed DrossRotzank to be the most-subscribed from that country. If you know of another reliable source providing the most-subscribed YouTube channel from each country and would like to propose the list be based on that instead, you may do so on this talk page. According to Dross Rotzank's article, he was born and raised in Venezuela but now resides in Buenos Aires. If he also registered his account there, that would explain his listing on the VidStatsx's Argentina page, since the website most likely assigns nationalities based on where the channel was first set up. I think it can be argued that this is not inappropriate, since Dross Rotzank's apparent indefinite residence in Buenos Aires would make him a Venezuelan-Argentine. His association with Argentina does not appear to be insignificant or misleading (DBase, the website whose statistics I am considering having the table be based on instead, also lists his channel as Argentine, as does Social Blade). Thank you for understanding. LifeofTau 09:38, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Bruno Mars now has 20 Million subs

The list is outdated as from today XXIVK (talk) 20:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done as part of my regular update. LifeofTau 22:23, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Most subscribed Puerto Rican YouTuber

Luis Fonsi is from Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is not a state from the United States but a Commonwealth. Nicky Jam appears with 11 million subscribers and Luis FOnsi with 18 million, so is Luis Fonsi the Most subscribed Puerto Rican YouTuber. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.189.12.151 (talk) 03:06, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: We must adhere to what is stated by the cited reliable sources, and what the cited VidStatsX page for Puerto Rican YouTubers stated when last accessible (see my comment three sections above) was that NickyJamTV was the most-subscribed from that territory. If you know of another reliable source providing the most-subscribed YouTube channel from each country and would like to propose the list be based on that instead, you may do so on this talk page. Luis Fonsi is indeed Puerto Rican (although he currently resides in Miami), but LuisFonsiVEVO is not his personal channel; it is run by the New York City-based platform Vevo and uploads music produced by his label, the Los Angeles-based Universal Music Latin. Social media analytics providers most likely assign nationalities based on where each channel was registered, and it can be assumed from the aforementioned factors that LuisFonsiVEVO was set up in one of the fifty U.S. states or Washington, D.C., not Puerto Rico; this would explain why it is listed as American by both Social Blade and VidStatsX. Regardless of the reason why these websites regard the channel as American, we cannot allow personal views to supersede what is stated by reliable sources. Thank you for your understanding. LifeofTau 05:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

VidStatsX is no longer accessible and proposed solution

Back in December, the Social Blade page being used as the primary source for the main article was months out of date. At the same time, I found that the most-subscribed channels list on VidStatsX was only hours behind the actual figures, and so arranged for and executed a changeover that made the it the cited source in the article. However, about two weeks ago, it became apparent that the VidStatsX page was no longer updating, and it was soon off by hundreds of thousands of subscribers for certain channels. Less than a week later, all of the cited VidStatsX pages in the article were dead in what seems to be a server issue on their end. Days passed, and the VidStatsX pages remained unaccessible—this is still the case as of this writing. This is a problem for a list attracting frequent updating; simply using the subscriber count of each channel's YouTube page to determine rankings runs against WP:SYNTH.

However, the same Social Blade page mentioned above is now displaying figures virtually in real-time, only hundreds off from the actual subscriber counts (for example, at the time of this writing, the list shows that PewDiePie has a subscriber count of 61,019,045, while the channel's YouTube page shows 61,019,399).

As such, I am proposing to have the main table be based once again on the Social Blade page, changing references where appropriate. I would like to hear others' thoughts and suggestions. Given that this is a more pressing issue, I am going to allow seven days to receive replies and will go ahead with the change if there are no objections made or alternative solutions proposed within that timespan. LifeofTau 17:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Seven days have passed with no responses, so I have gone ahead with this change. LifeofTau 22:10, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

VidStatsX is no longer accessible (with regard to the "most-subscribed by country" list)

As I have explained above, none of the cited VidStatsX pages in the table are accessible. Although I proposed to switch to Social Blade for the main table in my above comment, doing so for this one would be problematic, as I have elaborated on in the "'Most-subscribed by country' list" section on this talk page. Namely, it would mean listing PewDiePie as the most-subscribed American channel, which would inevitably be received poorly. I have no intention of continually reverting people changing the U.S. row's channel to something like TaylorSwiftVEVO when both parties know fully well that PewDiePie is certainly not American.

VidStatsX and Social Blade are not the only options, however—there is a host of other websites offering such lists. Of these, I feel that the lists provided by DBase are the most promising: the channels are for the most part what I would expect, unlike some of the other sites, and it avoids the issue I noted with Social Blade, unlike YouTubers.me. Of course, the question of reliability comes into play, and I will be inquiring about the site regarding the matter at WP:RSN. Should everything go as hoped, I expect to propose a switchover to having the table be based on DBase’s lists. I hope to hear others’ thoughts and suggestions. LifeofTau 05:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Update and proposal: I have received an encouraging response on the reliable sources noticeboard regarding DBase from an editor who feels that "it should be fine." As such, I am proposing to reconfigure the table to be based on the lists provided by the website. Because this is also a more pressing issue, I will allow seven days for objections to be made or alternative solutions to be put forth and will go ahead with the change if neither occurs within that timespan. LifeofTau 05:01, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Seven days have passed with no responses, so I have gone ahead with this change. LifeofTau 05:44, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2018

TSeries subscriber count update from 38 to 39 million Anujya.aashwat (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 19:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

@Anon126: Thank you for updating the table. When doing so in the future, please make sure to update every subscriber count and rank that needs updating at the same time (based on the cited Social Blade page) along with the "As of" date at the very bottom of the table (based on UTC). Thank you. LifeofTau 22:20, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Japan's most subscribed youtube channel

Japan's most subscribed youtube channel is はじめましょー(hajime) not any other channel. I think it should be corrected soon. AllTimeChampion17 (talk) 03:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — IVORK _Discuss 04:18, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

@AllTimeChampion17: To address your point about hajime, we are required to adhere to only what is stated by the cited reliable sources, and what the cited DBase page for Japanese YouTubers states is that Fischer's is the most-subscribed channel from the country.

Given that you believe the entry is in error, here is what can be done: in your edits, you cited a webpage from Vidooly, which I explained in my reverting edit summary should avoided as it keeps the table from being consistent. However, if you believe that the entire table should be based on Vidooly or another source that lists the most-subscribed YouTube channel from each country (provided it is reliable), you are more than welcome to propose it on this page. It appears that I am the only editor left who is regularly active here, but you can be assured that I will take such a proposal into serious consideration; if you can demonstrate that the alternative source is reliable and provides more accurate or more complete data than DBase, you will likely have my support, and therefore consensus. Best of luck with your editing. LifeofTau 04:47, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I really understand what do you want to say. I clearly understand that point, but hajime is really a youtuber of Japan. He has more than 6 million subscribers on his channel. I am not saying that vidooly is completely right but vidooly has wrong informations too and not only that but all the websites that gives information about youtube is wrong. So, I think it would be a good work if you take this by your common sense. AllTimeChampion17 (talk) 09:40, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

@AllTimeChampion17: Likewise, I do understand your concern. You correctly point out that no website can provide entirely noncontroversial results; as you can see in some of the sections above (and from these edits), users were contesting various entries when the table was based on VidStatsX's lists as well. If every person who took issue with an entry successfully changed it to what they believed was correct, the result would be a table dictated by subjective points of view, even if in each case a source was cited. By keeping the table adherent to a single, reliable source, we are able to remain objective with respect to what channels are listed. To me, which source is used (assuming it is reliable) is far less important than ensuring the table adheres to it. As noted above, you are welcome to propose an alternative source to switch the entire table over to, but arbitrary changes to single entries based on personal viewpoints are simply not going to happen. Thank you for your understanding. LifeofTau 04:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Entry of Justin Bieber

On March 25, Justin Bieber's original self-titled channel (predating JustinBieberVEVO by two years), suddenly gained 32 million subscribers, giving it a total subscriber count of 37 million. Now Justin Bieber and JustinBieberVEVO (which retains its 34 million subscribers), are being listed by the Social Blade page that the main table cites as the third and fouth most-subscribed YouTube channels respectively (not counting auto-generated channels). Given this, are we to add the former to the table in the next update?

I can see arguments being made that the Justin Bieber channel should not be listed, those being:

• Over 85 percent of the subscribers were automatically added in a single day; the resulting number does not represent real people who have consciously decided to subscribe
• Listing both JustinBieberVEVO and Justin Bieber is unfair or dishonest in that it twice represents the single achievement of the former in attaining over 30 million subscribers

At the same time, I am inclined to agree with the following potential arguments in favor of inclusion, those being:

• It is important that we adhere to the source
• Justin Bieber is an actual channel on YouTube that is officially listed by the website as having 37 million subscribers and has uploaded its own content, meaning it is not auto-generated like channels such as Music; ignoring the channel is ignoring the fact of the matter
• Listings that do not appear to make sense can be appropriate; if the statistics are attributed to the cited source, in this case Social Blade, then it is made clear that we are merely reproducing what a third party has reported

I will also note that in 2013–14 there was a peculiarity with YouTube Spotlight's rise to the upper echelons of the list; in February 2013, the channel suddenly began gaining subscribers at an seemingly unnatural/unexpected rate, rising from 1 to 21 million in the span of 12 months before its growth abruptly flattened. Despite the possible fraudulence in YouTube Spotlight's subscriber count, we faithfully list the 27 million figure given on YouTube and Social Blade. If Justin Bieber were to be added, the presence of two Bieber channels—and the red decrease arrows that would accompany most table rows as a result of their respective channels being shifted down one spot—would likely cause controversy and be contested, which is one of the reasons I am inquiring about the issue here. At the moment, I lean toward adding Justin Bieber to the table, but I very much would like to hear anything that anyone else has to say on the matter. I encourage anyone who has thoughts or opinions regarding this issue to reply. Thank you. LifeofTau 04:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Update: It appears that a similar situation has occurred with Rihanna's self-titled channel, which is now listed by Social Blade as having 28 million subscribers, more than RihannaVEVO's 26 million. It should now be in consideration whether the former should also be added. I believe the potential arguments for and against inclusion of Justin Bieber equally apply to Rihanna. LifeofTau 04:27, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

I have shifted my position. My new line of thinking is that if we already deviate from the Social Blade list by excluding autogenerated channels in order to make the list more fair and representative, it would not be unprecedented to do the same with these two channels (Justin Bieber and Rihanna), for which the bulk of their subscribers are demonstrably artificial. I think we should just change the sentence

Channels marked as "Auto-generated by YouTube" (such as Music, Gaming, Sports and Movies) are not included.

to

Channels marked as "Auto-generated by YouTube" (such as Music, Gaming, Sports and Movies) and channels known to have gained subscribers inorganically (such as Justin Bieber and Rihanna) are excluded.

and keep the table as-is. I hope to hear others’ thoughts and suggestions; I plan to go ahead with this change if there are no objections made. LifeofTau 20:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

I would like to add something that I think is very important to this discussion. Since the VEVO videos are now attributed to the personal music channels, the affected VEVO channels are losing subscribers and/or going completely stagnant. If we continue to only list the VEVO channels, we will expect to see them go stagnant and fall in the list, even though they are still gaining subscribers through the personal channels. Personally, even though the personal channels have been boosted, I think taking out the VEVO channels and adding the personal ones might be choice for the long-term. Somebody500 (talk) 17:21, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

@Somebody500: Thank you for sharing this. JustinBieberVEVO's growth does appear to have slowed down in the last several days (although RihannaVEVO's growth appears to be mostly unaffected). Upon researching further, what really strikes me is the fact that the music videos that were uploaded by the Vevo channels are now marked as being from the personal channels, yet they continue to appear only on the Vevo channels' upload lists. Because the subscriber growth of Bieber and Rihanna's Vevo channels has been primarily driven by the success of their music videos, most of the new growth is inevitably going to go to the channels whose names and subscribe buttons accompany said videos, in this case the personal channels. Given that, if I had to choose at this moment, I would agree with your suggestion. What do you think about changing the sentence about exclusion to "Channels marked as "Auto-generated by YouTube (such as Music, Gaming, Sports and Movies) and channels whose content has been transferred (such as JustinBieberVEVO and RihannaVEVO) are excluded."? LifeofTau 18:41, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Somebody500 (talk) 02:25, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

It seems we are in agreement then. I will enact the change in my next update to the main table. LifeofTau 03:21, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

@Somebody500: Update: After some searching, I have uncovered a Variety article and YouTube blog post explaining the phenomena observed above. In essence, the website is consolidating all separate official channels (including Vevo channels) under a given music artist's name into a single "Official Artist Channel" whose name is simply that of the artist and which combines all of the individual channels' content and subscriber counts. Given this, I feel confident that we are correct in listing these "Official Artist Channels" instead of the Vevo channels they are de facto replacing. The wording in the article and blog post seems to indicate that this is an ongoing process, and as a result we may see more of the Vevo channels in the main table having their subscriber counts merged into OACs, in which case I believe we should take the same approach that we have with the Justin Bieber and Rihanna channels. LifeofTau 01:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2018

1m 103.92.152.76 (talk) 01:26, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. LifeofTau 02:32, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Number of entries in the "By country and territory" table

As I announced in an above section, I reconfigured the "By country and territory" table last week to be based on the pages provided by DBase rather than the dead VidStatsX. In doing so, the list was expanded from 70 to 86 rows as the former recognizes more channels from unique regions which meet the stated threshold of one million subscribers. That amount is becoming unwieldy and difficult to maintain (each update requires checking each of the 86 cited webpages for changes), and the length is taking up a considerable portion of the page (it uses about 50 percent more vertical space than the main list and has become the most prominent item in an article where it should be more of an supplementary feature). The switchover has also introduced an increasing number of channels, typically with 1–2 million subscribers, that it seems would in no way be notable on their own.

I think the best solution to these issues would be to raise the threshold for inclusion in the table. I think five million subscribers makes sense – this would reduce the table to a respectable 35 rows, which would be much more manageable, take up far less space, and eliminate most un-noteworthy channels. I hope to hear others’ thoughts and suggestions. LifeofTau 04:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Update: A few days ago, I found that VidStatsX.com is again up and functioning; I had until then presumed it to be permanently offline. I waited until today to ensure that this was not temporary, and I am now withdrawing my prior suggestion. As a result of this revelation, I instead would like to propose that the VidStatsX be once again the source upon which the table is based, with the rationale being that its inaccessibility was the only reason it was replaced with DBase to begin with. As always, I hope to hear others’ thoughts and suggestions. LifeofTau 03:44, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I must withdraw the above proposal; although VidStatsX.com is once again online, its subscriber counts have evidently not been updated since early February, when the website first became inaccessible. If, like Social Blade, VidStatsX's pages are found in the future to again be regularly updating, the proposal can be revisited. As it is, I would like to reinstate the proposal I made in the earliest comment in this section. Given that eight days already passed from my making the proposal and my withdrawing it, I intend to allow six additional days to receive objections or any other feedback before implementing the change. As always, I hope to hear others’ thoughts and suggestions. LifeofTau 04:19, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

As a total of 14 days have elapsed with no objections made, I have gone ahead and implemented the proposed changes. LifeofTau 08:26, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Taylor Swift is the most subscribed female user and should be ranked at 7th place.

Check yourself:https://www.youtube.com/user/taylorswift https://www.youtube.com/user/rihanna https://www.youtube.com/user/corycotton Taylokswift (talk) 12:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2018

Taylor Swift's channel got 29,763,744 million subscribers so change it from 28M to 29M subscribers https://www.youtube.com/user/taylorswift Taylokswift (talk) 11:24, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 11:54, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@NiciVampireHeart: Thank you for updating the table. When doing so in the future, please make sure to update every subscriber count and rank that needs updating at the same time (based on the cited Social Blade page) along with the "As of" date at the very bottom of the table (based on UTC). Thank you. LifeofTau 20:11, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2018

change TaylorSwiftVEVO to Taylor Swift and Taylor Swift is the most subscribed female singer.Taylokswift (talk) 12:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done per the cited Social Blade page. LifeofTau 21:22, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Vevo designation

All of the Vevo channels in the table, aside from Vevo itself, have at this point have been consolidated into "Official Artist Channels" by YouTube. Given this, I intend to remove the corresponding legend at the top as well as the background coloring for Vevo in 48 hours if nobody objects. Whether the yellow background should now be used for channels in the music category is a separate discussion that users are welcome to bring up if they wish; for the time being I am not persuaded of it. LifeofTau 07:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

48 hours have passed with no objections, so I have implemented this change. LifeofTau 08:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2018

Change Canal KondZilla's subscriber amount to 33 million subscribers. Coopw (talk) 19:51, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done as part of the most recent update. LifeofTau 01:39, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2018

Change whinderssonnunes's subscriber amount to 29 million subscribers Coopw (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done as part of the most recent update. LifeofTau 01:41, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2018

Change One Direction's subscriber amount to 27 million subscribers Coopw (talk) 19:59, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

 Unnecessary, as 27 million was already (and as of this writing remains) the listed subscriber count for One Direction. LifeofTau 01:42, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Jesus is not no. 2

I'm sure this happens all the time in this article? It appears that on the table T-Series' entry has been vandalised and now it reads Jesus. "Content Category" also makes no sense for the third and fourth chanells. IDK if there's anything else.

I haven't made an edit in Wikipedia in my life so I'm afraid to change it in case I do smth wrong :P

2A02:587:2917:FE00:98C:F637:2FDF:E910 (talk) 08:32, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I fixed the issue around 8 minutes after you wrote this comment. Thanks, SportGuy002 (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2018

Pewdiepie is not the most subscribed Youtuber. "Music" is. Heres proof! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-9-kyTW8ZkZNDHQJ6FgpwQ 2601:84:4600:8EA5:5C21:ACA5:3F77:5E17 (talk) 20:32, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Auto-generated channels are outside the scope of the list. —C.Fred (talk) 20:35, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Addition of references and notes in the network column of the primary table

This comment is copied from User talk:Life of Tau, where it was originally posted by Dannyyankee12 on 17 August 2018.

I saw the recent change regarding the network section of the list. While I'm all for it, there are some things that need to be improved on:

1. The sources are outdated.

2. The channel-network association are outdated as well

Tying these two together, just because SocialBlade once had the network name on every YouTube account page, doesn't mean that the page referenced is up to date. (Examples: Marshmello switched from Monstercat to Spinnin' Records, Maker Studios has since rebranded as Disney Digital Network, etc.) Not only are the sources outdated, it makes the whole list outdated as well.

3. Unnecessary footnotes

This is just a personal nitpick, but I don't think a footnote is needed for every non-network channel just to tell people when they no longer where affiliated by network. Also, the sources on the network sections could be better suited positioned next to the channel name. This could be aesthetically pleasing to the viewer while also provide a better editing experience for you, me, and all the other editors who edit this list.

Other than that, the change is fine. I hope you take my points into consideration. I would do most of this myself, but I'm heading back to school soon, so I won't be editing as at all. Plus, I wanted to talk to you about it anyways because you are much more experienced than me and you were the one who made the change anyways. Thank you for understanding. Have a great day. Dannyyankee12let's talk 04:34, 17 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding comment originally added by Dannyyankee12 (talk • contribs) on 04:34, 17 August 2018

Hello, Dannyyankee12, and thank you for your diligent work updating this article. I have opted to copy over and respond to your comment on this page, which I find to be a more appropriate place for this discussion.

Social Blade ceased listing the network on channels' user summary pages late last year, leaving me no apparent option but to use year-old archived pages. Another method of determining network affiliation, which involved using the source code of the page of a channel's video, no longer appears to work. In fact, my moderate research into this has found that YouTube has apparently ended its practice of allowing channels' network affiliations to be publicly known, as it considers this to be private information. This is one of the primary reasons why, in all honesty, I am actually in favor of having the network column removed altogether in the long run. (If you or any other user is aware of another reliable source providing updated network information, I would reverse this view and be more than happy to add new references citing that source instead.) However, if the column is to remain for the time being, it is preferable to list data which can be verified to be correct as of last year than data that is merely presumed to be correct and up-to-date, which is why I undertook the task of adding the references and notes.

I am aware that Maker Studios is now the Disney Digital Network (in fact, I was the user who initially updated the cells listing Maker to reflect this) and have no reason to doubt your statement regarding Marshmello's network. I think it would be inappropriate to change the cells currently listing Maker to DDN, as it is not verifiable that their affiliation with Maker continued past the point when the rebranding occurred. My new update to the column does update Maker to DDN for the two channels that can be verified to have been with the network past May 2017. If you are able to find a reliable source supporting the other two channels' affiliation with Maker/DDN past that month, for Marshmello's network being Spinnin' Records, or for any other listed network that requires updating (the sources do not need to be Social Blade), I will gladly update the appropriate cells and replace references where appropriate.

Because I am aware that the network data is not necessarily current, I decided to add notes indicating this for the sake of the readers. For many channels, the most recently archived user summary Social Blade page is from February 2017, which is why I used this as the default month, specifically seeking pages archived then. This was possible for 36* of the 50 channels, and the note in the column header ("All entries are as of February 2017 except where noted.") allows for the majority of the cells to not require notes specific to individual channels. As you may have noticed, the notes in the cells are not indicating which channels are unaffiliated or since when (the fact that they appear most commonly in cells for unaffiliated channels is a semi-coincidence), but rather the channels for which a February 2017 page could not be found, indicating which other month the data is verified to be accurate.

Although I agree that having references and notes contained to the channel name cells would make for a more aesthetically pleasing table, in my view it would be markedly less helpful to the readers, as doing this would make it considerably less apparent where the references for the networks are located. I also feel that ease of editing must come second to providing a more helpful article to the readers. If anything, all of the references in the table pertinent to a specific channel could be contained in a single reference column added to the far right, something that is not uncommon for Wikipedia tables with many citations. I would certainly be open to considering such an addition if you are interested.

I believe this overly-long response has addressed all of your points. My primary intent with the edit was simply to provide references for the data in a column that until that point had been entirely unsourced. Thank you again for your work on this article.

*In the case of PewDiePie, the news articles reporting the end of his affiliation with Maker in the wake of the WSJ/Disney/YouTube controversy were coincidentally published in February 2017 as well.

LifeofTau 07:41, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2018

Edit: Korea (most subscribed channel is SMTOWN not ibighit) SMTOWN - 15,396,559 ibighit - 15,396,209 DarknessAnonymousWatchers (talk) 14:32, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

T series incorrect language EDIT REQUEST PLEASE READ STOP IGNORING THIS!!!

I listen to music by T-Series and I am punjabi and am certain that the language is punjabi not Hindi.

I tried to add a photo but it said they couldn’t determine if it was acceptable as it was a screenshot and not an actual photo. Rip :(

I, pretty sure it’s quite self explanatory of the location of the error though

EDIT: hello I am the original poster again. This issue has not been fixed, I believe the channel is both Hindi and punjabi, mostly punjabi (has the most views) so can this be corrected please? @lifeoftau — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:8515:BA00:7C49:3104:1B0E:16FB (talk) 13:19, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

TT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itssohardtofindavalidusername (talk • contribs) 20:29, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Not done for now: Hello, Itssohardtofindavalidusername. I apologize for any delay in responding, and wish to assure you that there has been no intentional effort to ignore your comments. Although your request is not unreasonable, edit requests should be made only for unconstroversial changes, and yours is not, as demonstrated by the fact that this topic—which language(s) should be listed for T-Series—has been the subject of several editing disagreements so far this year. Instead, you must first gain consensus for this change (see WP:CONACHIEVE for ways this can be accomplished). Alternatively, if you make nine additional edits with your account, you will most likely become autoconfirmed and will therefore have the ability to edit this semi-protected article, allowing you to implement the change yourself. If you do so, I can assure you that I will not revert an addition of Punjabi to the language cell for T-Series, but I cannot guarantee the same for other editors; as I alluded to above, users have attmpted to alter that cell several times this year, only to each be reverted by others within five days. LifeofTau 08:18, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2018

Change Canada to 40 million subs because Justin Bieber is Canadian Boierboil (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The Canada entry in the "By country and territory" table correctly reflects what is listed in the cited DBase page. If you believe that DBase is in error, you are welcome to propose an alternative reliable source on which to base the entire table (not just the Canada entry). LifeofTau 22:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

HowToBasic

SocialBlade lists HowToBasic as the most subscribed Australian YouTube channel with over 11 million subscribers, could this be changed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:A8D8:2800:DD17:6EF3:7509:833B (talk) 08:33, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

The "By country and territory" table is currently based on the lists provided by the YouTube analytics website DBase (you can read the sections above to see how this came about). While there is nothing necessarily wrong with the Social Blade page (the reason the two sources disagree is that DBase lists Wengie as Australian, while Social Blade considers it to be American), all entries in the table should cite the same reliable source in order for it to be consistent. Because of this, changing the Australia entry in the way you describe would require reconfiguring the entire table to cite Social Blade rather than DBase—you are welcome to propose such a change on this page if you wish. Please note that I have given my thoughts on doing so in some of the above sections. LifeofTau 23:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2018

Pewdipie now has the secong most subs, with T Series now as the reigning champion. 2602:306:C4AF:4570:95F9:3047:DA9F:10A3 (talk) 01:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done – This is not true according to YouTube (PewDiePie) (T-Series) and the cited Social Blade page. LifeofTau 12:44, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2018

The Netherlands is represented by Trap City in this chart while it should be Spinnin Records with 23 million subscribers. https://www.youtube.com/user/SpinninRec

Spinnin records is dutch: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinnin'_Records 213.127.27.231 (talk) 16:24, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The Netherlands entry in the "By country and territory" table correctly reflects what is listed in the cited DBase page. If you believe that DBase is in error, you are welcome to propose an alternative reliable source upon which to base the entire table (not just the Netherlands entry). LifeofTau 18:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2018

Change "is the most-subscribed user on YouTube, with over 66 million subscribers as of October 2018." to: "is the most-subscribed user on YouTube, with over 67 million subscribers as of October 2018." Nickgeorgiou (talk) 02:21, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done per the cited Social Blade page. LifeofTau 02:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed changes

The following are proposals for changes that I have been considering for a while. All of these are changes that I believe will improve the article. If any of these are unopposed, I am capable and willing to implement them myself.

1. Reordering columns in the main table. It has always perplexed me why, after the rank and name of the channel itself, the network is seemingly the most pertinent information to provide, followed by the primary language, and only then the subscriber count. It seems obvious that the figure for which the article itself is named should be placed further to the left than less essential data. I would instead have the subscriber column be immediately left of the channel column, followed by the primary language, and then the network, and finally the category. In effect, this would mean simply switching the network and subscriber count columns.

2. Rename the "channel name" columns to simply "channel". It is already obvious that these columns contain the names of their respective channels; including the word "channel" "name" in the header is simply unnecessary.

3. Alter the "chg" column header. This is relatively minor, but the current hover text "Change in rank (within 14 days)" would be more precise if reworded to something such as "Net change in rank within the last 14 days". There should aslo be a period at the end of the "Chg" to designate that it is an abbreviation.

4. Trim down the historical progression table. The network and country columns are cruft-like and unsouced. The table should be kept to only what is relevant and useful, and this would be accomplished by their removal.

5. Reverse the chronological order of the historical progression table. The table was not originally in reverse chronological order, but this edit—made without discussion and simply asserting that the table should be reversed without offering any explanation why—is the reason for its current state. I am opposed to this because I see no compelling reason for it; I would desire an explanation of exactly why it is an improvement over chronological order, which would seem to be the default, natural way to list the channels, before reconsidering my stance.

As always, I hope to hear others’ thoughts and suggestions. LifeofTau 23:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

As more than thirty days have elapsed with no objections made, I have gone ahead and implemented the proposed changes. LifeofTau 02:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Is T-Series, SET India and two Zee channels primary language Hindi or Hindi-Urdu (Hindustani language)

I am a Urdu speaker from Pakistan never been to India and I understand language spoken in Indian movies and TV. Yet the language spoken by PM Modi in his speeches is foreign to me. He speaks Hindi. I speak Urdu. I understand Indian movies and TV so Indian movies and TV can't be in Hindi. Then Indian movies and TV language must be in Hindi-Urdu or Hindustani which is different from Hindi.

Here is some of the sources that supports my view point that these channel language of choice is Hindi-Urdu or Hindustani. If you say these are not direct source then I would say the channel content is also from TV and Bollywood movies and not just created for only YouTube channels.

First Bollywood is an international film industry and second Indian television is popular in Pakistan so Pakistanis must speak Hindi but no Pakistanis speak Urdu. Besides Bollywood being popular among the South Asian diaspora, in far off locations, from Nigeria and Senegal to Egypt and Russia, generations of non-Indian fans have grown up with Bollywood over the decades, bearing witness to the cross-cultural appeal of Indian films. Indian cinema's early contacts with other regions became visible with its films making early inroads into the Soviet Union, Middle East, Southeast Asia and China. Why would Arabs and Persians be interested in the Bollywood movies because half the movie is in Urdu which borrows words from Arabic, Persian and many other languages. If the Bollywood movies were in Hindi, I as a Urdu speaker would understand nothing.

Some of these channel say they are Hindi entertainment channels but what they mean is they are Hindi industry which is not always synonymous with Hindi language. For example, Hindi Belt doesn't mean only Hindi is spoken their as you know tons of languages are spoken their including Urdu that is why it is also called Hindi-Urdu Region. Ahmedmahdi1 (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2018

T-series is now the most subscribed youtube channel 2001:8003:AC1B:2A00:B442:7457:113B:1BE7 (talk) 08:07, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --DannyS712 (talk) 11:51, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Issue with T Series

If I recall, it has been confirmed that certain scandals/controversies surrounding T Series are legitimate, such as the accusation that when an YouTube account is made in India, it is automatically subscribed to T Series, shouldn't these concerns be brought up in a separate controversies section, or something of the sort.--MilkFghy (talk) 00:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)Fghy

That was a joke. Do you really believe in PewDiePie's memes/take them seriously? I mean, that is seriously dumb. No offense to you, dude. Just that the idea is silly. 2.51.19.70 (talk) 20:37, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

I just made a new account, set the region to India, and I was subscribed--MilkFghy (talk) 17:25, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

WOW. Dude, I have lived the majority of my life in India, and this has never occurred with me. Either way, you need reliable sources for such an accusation. 2.51.19.70 (talk) 16:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

User:Ahmedmahdi1

May I know where the consensus discussion has taken place, because I can't see any on this talk page. If you are referring to your comment above, I must say that's not how consensus works. The sources mentioned above are not related to the youtube channels, they don't even mention the youtube channels (also one of the sources is a blog article which is not considered a reliable source). The fourth one doesn't even mention the media altogether. On the other hand, the "About" pages of the youtube channels clearly say their language to be Hindi ( User:Life of Tau has also provided some sources which directly mention the language of the channel here). If your argument is about Bollywood in general, I have already suggested you the place to start a discussion [5]. I hope I was able to express myself clearly. In case of any confusion, feel free to ask. I am reverting the edit to display the original text. Please don't revert untill a consensus has been gained. Pratyush (talk) 17:29, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Please see the previous edit summary of Life of Tau for consenses. I already started a disscusion above longtime ago. For some reason you don't want to reply their and keep threatening me here. Here it is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_most-subscribed_YouTube_channels&oldid=867637730. Read carefully what Life of Tau says in this edit summary. Thank you Ahmedmahdi1 (talk) 18:45, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ahmedmahdi1: The edit summary does not show any consensus. That is not how consensus works. The discussion should be on the talk page. If your edits are getting reverted by three different users, you most probably don't have a consensus. Pratyush (talk) 01:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

So I guess mob doesn't want to discuss this above as I started the talk above very long time ago. You and your mob is just good at giving threats which sadly doesn't work on me. Ahmedmahdi1 (talk) 15:48, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

The above mentioned sources are not even related to the channels. And still the point stands there is no consensus for Hindustani. Pratyush (talk) 03:40, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Need to fix rankings. They are in the wrong order

Most notably 5-10 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zvikorn (talk • contribs) 15:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@Zvikorn: Could you please elaborate? I have cross-checked with the cited Social Blade list, and have not been able to find any error in our rankings for the ten most-subscribed channels. LifeofTau 16:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Hindi or Hindustani?

Ok, we need to find a consensus about this topic. There's got to be some sort of reliable source out there that can settle this debate. I brought something to the table that can shed some light into this debate. I don't know if this will help any, but here you go: Diwali. If you have anything better and reliable to the table, I'd love to hear it. As long as there are no threatening of any kind. This should be the place where problems like this should be resolved, not carried on like nobody's business.

I hope this is understood. Thank you, and have a good Thanksgiving. Dannyyankee12_{let's talk} 02:04, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Dannyyankee12: The "about" section of the channels clearly state the language to be Hindi. I highly doubt any company would lie about the language of their content. T-Series is an exception to above but here are some sources ( Economic Times, Quartz ) which mention their language as Hindi.

Thanks for some light shedding. Hope you have a great Thanksgiving. Pratyush (talk) 03:52, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Provide a single source where it says Hindi language. Word Hindi can be used in many different ways. See this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindi_(disambiguation) Ahmedmahdi1 (talk) 15:58, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

It is quite clear, Hindi is used in the above pages for Hindi language. Pratyush (talk) 18:01, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

No, it is not. Please stop this nonsense. Ahmedmahdi1 (talk) 14:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2018

Update T-series's subscriber count because it has increased by a lot. AkTheHacker (talk) 03:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: As of this writing, the listed 74 million subscriber figure is accurate to what is being shown by YouTube, Social Blade, and DBase. If you are requesting that the figure include a third decimal to indicate the hundred-thousands place (i.e. 47.2), this is not something that has consensus, and almost certainly will not for the foreseeable future, as implementing it for every channel would necessitate ten times as many updates to the table. LifeofTau 04:31, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Netherlands

This page contradicts itself. In the first table, Spinnin' Records is listed with 23 million subscribers, in the second table, Trap City is listed as most subscribed channel from the Netherlands with only 11 million subscribers. PPP (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

This is only because that Spinnin' Records doesn't qualify for the list on DBase. If you find a better list that includes Spinnin' Records on the Netherland's list, we love to see it (here on the talk page first, just to verify). Thanks for your concern. Dannyyankee12_{let's talk} 16:39, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

How about this one? https://socialblade.com/youtube/top/country/nl/mostsubscribed 1999Julian1999 (talk) 17:52, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

@1999Julian1999: The page you have linked to is from Social Blade; while there is nothing inherently wrong using the website, all entries in the table should cite the same reliable source in order for it to be consistent. Because of this, changing the Netherlands entry in the way you suggest would require reconfiguring the entire table to cite Social Blade rather than DBase—you are welcome to propose such a change on this page if you wish. Please note that I have given my thoughts on doing so in earlier discussions; I am of the opinion that overall, DBase's country lists provide more accurate results than Social Blade. LifeofTau 07:37, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Clarification on what "On YouTube" means in the timeline

The timeline under "Historical progression of most-subscribed channels" indicates that geriatric1927 is currently "On YouTube", which is difficult for someone that is dead. Though the only person that has a marked "ending" deleted their account. So, should inactive/dead YouTubers have marked endings in the graph? If not, then perhaps the wording could be improved.

Cr1cks (talk) 16:57, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Cr1cks: There is an appreciable distinction between channels and the people who run them; while Peter Oakley is indeed dead, his channel geriatric1927 remains "on YouTube", in that it still exists and its videos can be viewed even now, twelve years after being uploaded. As I understand it, "on Youtube" simply means that the channel in question has not been shut down, terminated, or deleted, as was the case for Brookers. Whether this is the most relevant status to depict can certainly be put to discussion—I have had no role in creating or formatting the timeline, and I am mostly neutral on this matter. If we are to instead color each channel's line according to when it is (or was) "active" on YouTube, we need to determine how exactly "activity" is to be defined. Take for example Judson Laipply: he registered his channel in March 2006 and released "Evolution of Dance" the following month, which remained his only video until 2008 (the second video has since been removed); since then, his incredibly sporadic upload history has seen four videos in three years, a four-year gap between uploads from 2011 to 2015, and no new videos since 2016. Based on this, where would the channel's period of "activity" on YouTube be said to begin and end? If I had to decide, I would define it using the dates of a given channel's first and last public uploads, but you might disagree. In any case, I would be happy to discuss this issue with you further if you wish. LifeofTau 05:50, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2018

Add https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PewDiePie to Pewdiepie reference in All-Time Most Subscribed list Bekas21 (talk) 12:49, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

 Already done PewDiePie is linked five different times in the article. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:09, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Problematic edits

RomanReignsHEEL keeps changing the Historical progression of most-subscribed channels section to say that PDP surpassed YT spotlight on December 22, 2013 when the citations clearly show that he surpassed YT spotlight on December 23, 2013. I keep trying to tell him to stop changing it when I revert his edits, but he doesn't listen. I would suggest blocking him at this point, since he refuses to listen. 344917661X (talk) 16:32, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

fair Warning

beyond here is an edit warBMO4744 (talk) 04:50, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-9-kyTW8ZkZNDHQJ6FgpwQ this should be the number 1 most subscribed channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOpNcN46UbXVtpKMrmU4Abg this should be the number 2 https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEgdi0XIXXZ-qJOFPf4JSKw this should be the number 4

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ^{Babymissfortune} 04:33, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

To directly respond to your point, category channels such as Movies & Shows, Music, Gaming, and Sports are intentionally excluded from the list—as is noted above the table—because they are not YouTube channels in any normal sense; these are largely distinct entities that are operated and function in ways alien to any conventional channel. None of their pages contain videos of their own, instead serving as aggregators of existing content deemed to fall within their respective categories; Gaming, for instance, displays various popular video games (each of which has its own page dedicated to content related to the game) along with gaming-related videos and streams from an assortment of channels. A very large portion of the subscriber growth of these topic channels is demonstrably artificial. Music, for example, grew from 220 thousand subscribers to 24 million within a single day in November 2013, and gained an additional 42 million the next day. Sports' subscriber count increased from 1 thousand to 153 million in two days before falling to 76 million several hours later. LifeofTau 22:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

"Most-subscribed female user on YouTube"

The page states (in an image caption) that Katy Perry is the most-subscribed female user on YouTube. Is 5-Minute Crafts not a female user with a lot more subscribers than Katy Perry? --Vurp0 (talk) 13:09, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the claim that 5-Minute Crafts is a female user? Kime1R (talk) 20:09, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

5-Minute Crafts isn't one person, but is a channel under the publishing company TheSoul Publishing. Zoom (talk page) 23:53, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

The Katy Perry, Justin Bieber, Taylor Swift and Eminem channels are also not run by one person. They are products of the respective record labels. If "female user" means corporately owned channel with at least one female host, the answer should be 5-Minute Crafts. If "female user" means a channel owned by one woman, the answer should be Yuya. Connor Behan (talk) 23:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Reliable source problem found

119.92.14.102 (talk) Reliable Sources 2 proclaims about the 100 Most Subscribed YouTubers. Then why is there 50 of 'em? —Preceding undated comment added 12:32, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

We are not obligated to make our list as long as Social Blade's. When this article was younger, the number of entries changed more than a few times, but eventually fifty became the number generally agreed upon. While expanding the list to include more entries would certainly make it more informative, it would come at the cost of needing to continually maintain and update all of them. At the moment, fifty is enough to make the list relatively comprehensive, but not too much of a burden to maintain. If you still believe that the list should be expanded, feel free to propose such a change on this page. LifeofTau 23:02, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Problems of 2nd reliable source

119.92.6.102 (talk) How are there 50 users in the list while the source has 100 of them. Can you please include Music, Gaming, Sports, and the other channel that needs to be included? —Preceding undated comment added 01:34, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

• Those "topic" channels are basically just subscribable playlists and not channels.  Nixinova  T  C  21:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

• For a response regarding the number of entries, please see my comment one section above. For a response regarding the exclusion of topic channels, please see my comment three sections above. LifeofTau 03:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Other YouTube accounts?

Wait, why haven't you added the other accounts such as Music, Gaming, Sports, YouTube Movies, and VEVO accounts? Reply to me, please. Look, I know about the notes but I just wanted those accounts to come in the list. Please do it. -119.92.6.102 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:24, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

For a response regarding the exclusion of topic channels, please see my comment six sections above. LifeofTau 05:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

VEVO

Why VEVO channels are omitted from the list? I've tried searching past discussions to see how consensus was achieved but I didn't find anything concise about it. Would it make sense to add them again? I understand why Music, Sports and other channels are not added since they act more like a repository and not like a unique content creator channel. AlvarezGomez (talk) 19:51, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@AlvarezGomez: The relevant discussion took place in March of this year. That month, YouTube began consolidating separate official channels (including Vevo channels) under a given music artist's name into a single "Official Artist Channel", usually the artist's personal channel. As a result, videos from the old channels now display their channels as the OACs; for example, "Shake It Off", originally a TaylorSwiftVEVO upload, is now listed as a video on the channel Taylor Swift. In addition, the subscriber counts of the old channels were merged into that of their OACs, and because Vevo channels typically had subscriber counts that dwarfed that of their corresponding personal channels, those channels—now OACs—saw dramatic single-day jumps in their subscriber figures. For instance, 27 million subscribers were added to Rihanna's personal channel all at once on March 24, an increase of nearly 2,000 percent. After some time, YouTube even removed the subscriber counts from the pages of the old channels. While the Vevo channels still exist, they have effectively been rendered obsolete by YouTube's consolidation efforts, and listing them separately from the OACs would be redundant and misleading; Katy Perry and KatyPerryVEVO did not each accumulate 26 million subscribers over time. LifeofTau 01:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the clarification. Happy new year! AlvarezGomez (talk) 08:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

What's the reference of PewDiePie?

About Reference 5, what is the code for it? I needed my own reference of The Petlings - Official channel. If you won't give it to me in this talk, here is the draft of my article.

Just let me know!! 119.92.14.102 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Because this request and my response are about a draft that is unrelated to this article, I have responded to this comment on the relevant talk page. LifeofTau 00:05, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2019

The sub count for T-series needs to be changed, they as of now have hit 79 million subscribers along with Pewdiepie. Noahdaboi (talk) 19:46, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done as part of the most recent list update. LifeofTau 22:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Eminem has passed HolaSoyGerman

As of around 15 minutes ago, Eminem gained a lead over HolaSoyGerman in subcount. The list needs updating but I don't have edit persimmons -_- Maskyy. (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Most followed channel of the United States

It should be 5-Minute Crafts. According to socialblade this channel is located in the US. I know you use dbase.tube but maybe it is not as updated as it should be. AlvarezGomez (talk) 10:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

@AlvarezGomez: If we were to follow Social Blade's lists, we would actually have to report PewDiePie as the most-subscribed American channel, which is an outcome I doubt you would prefer. LifeofTau 22:16, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

THIS IS NOT TRUE

The most subscribed channel on Youtube is YouTube Music! It has over 100million subscribers Zsolnaib (talk) 13:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Zsolnaib: For a response regarding the exclusion of topic channels, please see this comment that I made last month. LifeofTau 18:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2019

the most subbed youtube channel in UK is PewDiePie not Ed Sheeran 173.209.106.207 (talk) 02:06, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DannyS712 (talk) 02:21, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

To directly respond to your point, the United Kingdom entry in the "By country and territory" table correctly reflects what was listed in the cited DBase page as of January 23 (the website regards PewDiePie as a Swedish channel). If you believe that DBase is in error, you are welcome to propose an alternative reliable source on which to base the entire table (not just the UK entry). LifeofTau 05:02, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2019

Hello, just have to say, but I have a new idea for the Reactions part of this article. It could go like this:

For 5 years, PewDiePIe became the most subscribed channel after beating Smosh in 2013. He was then into a big battle against Indian music company, T-Series in subscriber count. SocialBlade predicts that PewDiePIe could be beaten at anytime in 2019.

You can actually delete the prediction of SocialBlade when T-Series already beated PewDiePie. Still add the references that you might wanna go add here in the Reactions part. 119.92.10.57 (talk) 08:00, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Okay, it is there already, I see. Okay! 119.92.10.57 (talk) 12:48, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

 Already done – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:38, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2019

Hello, after having that PewDiePie VS T-Series as a big situation in YouTube, how about adding the big sub changes of HolaSoyGerman on the Reactions content. Maybe there, people get to know about something about HolaSoyGErman increasing so much.

I have also found a reference here and it would be written at the end of the entire saying of HolaSoyGerman earning a big sub count. Here it is.

Most Subscribed YouTube Channel Daily Subscriber Change (January 2019)

Or rather, you can add this one.

HolaSoyGerman Vs Badabun

This video is actually the reason HolaSoyGerman has grown so much that he beaten Ed Sheeran already.

Thank you for reading, whoever did. 119.92.10.57 (talk) 07:08, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: A significant change like this would require an update of all the other listed channels as well. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 03:45, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Cocomelon has beated Badabun

Switch Badabun and Cocomelon's places. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.92.10.57 (talk) 12:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2019

make tseries ahead for 5 seconds 2600:1702:4F0:2420:74F8:A47E:1F61:1C4E (talk) 21:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DannyS712 (talk) 21:44, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Source?: Here is a link to pewdiepie talking about the issue with a screen shot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F882_Ih61Sc&feature=youtu.be&t=616 doylej0011 (talk) 23:32, 24 February 2019 (GMT)

The meaning of 'Current record' at Section: Historical progression of most-subscribed channels

The Section of 'Historical progression of most-subscribed channels' outlines the timeframe of which channels hold the number 1 spot of 'most subscribed YouTube channel'. Therefore, it would not make sense for the former records of 'days held' to be 26 -> 45 -> 221 -> 517 -> 677 -> 1888, and the 'current record' be 1 day.

If the 'current record' simply means the timeframe of the current most subscribed channel, then by that logic every past addition should be a 'former record', which should not be what is displayed in this section.

Therefore, I propose adding a separate row in the legend to indicate the 'current most subscribed channel', and clarify the meaning of 'former record' and 'current record' in terms of the duration of the title held.

Feel free to discuss further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.179.169.238 (talk) 03:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

This should be the idea of how records are perceived in this section. It is basically the same logic as in the the page List of most-viewed YouTube channels — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dokidokis (talk • contribs) 03:59, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

We can not use this system because of the fluidity of the record. A compromise proposal I came up with is that T-Series can still be on the history as 0 days, but PewDiePie's streak of 1888+ can still be kept as 'ongoing'. BMO4744 (talk) 04:23, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Can someone update the table/graph

Right now PewDiePie is the most subscribed by around 7K but for a few minutes around 1:15 PST on 2/22/2019 T-Series was ahead by around 3-4K? Best picture I have is here https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0CgBkzWsAEtCn0.jpg:large I don't know how to do it but if someone could edit the historic progression table/chart that'd be great Battle Salmon talk

NO, this has caused a fire in the talk page. BMO4744 (talk) 04:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Extremely brief change in rank due to a technical error

About an hour ago, a technical error caused the subscriber count for PewDiePie, as reported by Social Blade, to dip by around 20,000 such that it was briefly exceeded by that of T-Series before almost immediately regaining those subscribers. This is evident when comparing the subscriber count at 16:00 for each channel on their respective Social Blade pages, which means that we do have a reliable source to cite. Should the historical progression table and other relevant parts of this article be amended to make note of this glitch? I would appreciate it if users engaged in level-headed discussion here rather than rushing to make any changes; this is not an emergency, and we should feel free to take the time we need to come to a rational decision. Thank you. LifeofTau 22:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC); edited 02:01, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Too small to be noted on this page BMO4744 (talk) 22:44, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree, it's too small. Ninux2000 (talk) 22:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

I lean toward agreeing with both of you. I must report that I was mistaken about the change in rank being evident on Social Blade and have stricken that part of my comment. As long as there is no reliable source verifying that this occurred (a livestream is wholly insufficient), we cannot even consider making any changes that acknowledge it. LifeofTau 22:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

After further investigation, I feel the need to correct some inaccuracies in my first comment. Rather than being a technical error as I had presumed, the sudden drop in subscribers seems to have been one of the regular audits YouTube performs to remove illegitimate or inactive subscriptions. This was not reversed "almost immediately"; what instead seems to have occured is that PewDiePie's subscriber count rose very sharply—but nevertheless organically—in response to having been overtaken, increasing at such an extreme rate that at a brief glance it appeared to be another automatic jump. PewDiePie's subscriber count thus surpassed that of T-Series not at once, but apparently after several minutes. I would consider this a legitimate change in subscriber rank, but most likely one too minor to make note of. I will repeat that the lack of any reliable sources documenting this occurrence precludes us from doing so as well. LifeofTau 00:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, T-Series legitimately passed PewDiePie for a few minutes. I've added a note to acknowledge this, and I agree that it's too short to make an appearance on the list. I'm not sure what you mean by lack of reliable sources, though.. all of the "sub gap" streams use YouTube's API to track subscriber count. Surely YouTube is a reliable source of their own metrics? Ioaxxere (talk) 01:33, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

One way of looking at this situation is that at the end of the day, in that 8-minute stretch of time, T-Series almost certainly had more 'real' subscribers than PewDiePie. Since an audit is essentially a synchronization of the subscriber count with the 'legitimate' number, it can also be implied that T-Series had had more 'real' subs for quite a while before those eight minutes. Somebody500 (talk) 03:39, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I have to disagree with many of you here. The chart says, and I quote, “The following table lists the sixteen YouTube channels that have most recently been the most-subscribed on the website, since May 2006.” This clearly shows the intent of the chart is to list any channel that has been the most subscribed since May 2006, NOT any channel that has been the most subscribed for over a day. We either need to add T-Series with 0 days, and restart PewDiePie’s streak, with a not saying the exact amount of time, or change the description of the chart, which I highly suggest not doing, considering it changes the original intent of the chart and the section as a whole. 173.54.199.86 (talk) 13:31, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

This talk section has become irrelevant to the subject and we should move our attention else where. BMO4744 (talk) 14:10, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposition

I have zero clue what has transpired over the past several hours, but what I have gathered is that we can't decide if 8 minutes counts as a whole day. *sigh* If this is happening after the first back and forth switch, I can't even fathom what can transpire over the next year. We need a solution, but first, let's get something straight: 8 minutes is NOT a day. Nowhere even close. With that said, I do recognize the legitimacy of the take-over. My solution is that we add on to the current note on the "historical progression" table, saying something like: "Albeit the takeover was legitimate, it wasn't long enough to break PewDiePie's current record streak as most subscribed." That way, we recognize the legitimacy of the takeover and how PewDiePie's sub streak continues. This proposition isn't perfect, nor will it immediately end the edit war, but at least it's something that can potentially solve this mess.

Anyways, I hope this is resolved soon. Have a good day. Dannyyankee12_{let's talk} 17:26, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

• Just a quick note, the note has been challenged on the basis that it was only supported by a single unreliable source (self-published, original research, no editorial oversight, no guarantee of accuracy), and, per WP:V, a reliable source will be needed to reinstate the information. It does not look like mainstream sources are even reporting this incident. ~Swarm~ {talk} 00:46, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Answered edit requests (read before submitting new ones!)

 Administrator note This article is seeing a high degree of protected edit requests, including excessive numbers of redundant requests that are not going to be approved. For reference, readability, and organizational purposes, and to avoid drowning out legitimate requests, I have condensed the requests that have already been answered into this single section. Reminder: edit requests are for uncontentious edits unrelated to the content dispute. If and how to include the T-Series overtake is under discussion, and will not be unilaterally added via edit request. Regards, ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

The table within the section 'Historical progression of most-subscribed channels' specifies the timeframe of each channel being #1. The 'current record' should be the one that currently holds the longest duration.

As stated in the talk page: "The Section of 'Historical progression of most-subscribed channels' outlines the timeframe of which channels hold the number 1 spot of 'most subscribed YouTube channel'. Therefore, it would not make sense for the former records of 'days held' to be 26 -> 45 -> 221 -> 517 -> 677 -> 1888, and the 'current record' be 1 day.

If the 'current record' simply means the timeframe of the current most subscribed channel, then by that logic every past addition should be a 'former record', which should not be what is displayed in this section.

Therefore, I propose adding a separate row in the legend to indicate the 'current most subscribed channel', and clarify the meaning of 'former record' and 'current record' in terms of the duration of the title held." Dokidokis (talk) 04:10, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I belive that this will be very clunky and unessasary because this record will change hands many times over the coming months. 8 minutes is nothing now.BMO4744 (talk) 04:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

•  Not done, see #Page protected/advice for going forward. ~Swarm~ {talk} 04:26, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

If that would be 'clunky', then at least a clarification of the meaning of 'former record' and 'current record should align with the intention of the section. This is the same logic as the similar section in the page List of most-viewed YouTube channels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dokidokis (talk • contribs) 04:46, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Under Note O (where it details that T-Series overtook PewDiePie for 8 minutes), I believe that the time listed is wrong, based on multiple screenshots of when the audit occurred. The time should be changed from 6:04 EST to 4:04 EST. TB9877 (talk) 04:10, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Does 8 minutes really matter for a full protection?BMO4744 (talk) 04:13, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Heh, it looks like the T-Series-PewDiePie war has spilled into Wikipedia. But you're right, the time is incorrect, maybe an admin will fix it. Ioaxxere (talk) 04:18, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

We need an admin who has lived under a rock for more than 7 months to not have any WP:BIAS in this pageBMO4744 (talk) 04:22, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

• Stand by, let me look into this. ~Swarm~ {talk} 04:28, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
•  Done, according to the source, the overtake occurred at 21:04 GMT, which is indeed 4:04 PM EST. Good catch, Ioaxxere @TB9877:. ~Swarm~ {talk} 04:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Note O (describing T-Series brief overtaking) does not specify the date, only the time. It should be updated to "On 22 February 2019 at 6:04 PM EST, T-Series became ..." from "On 6:04 EST, T-Series became ...". AppMaster1000 (talk) 04:26, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

•  Done. ~Swarm~ {talk} 04:27, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

I would like to change historical progressions of the most subbed channels because on February 22 6:04 EST T Series passed PewDiePie then PewDiePie passed t series so I don’t understand why T Series is not on there RomanReignsHEEL (talk) 05:08, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

•  Not done, see #Page protected/advice for going forward. ~Swarm~ {talk} 05:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

T Series passed PewDiePie RomanReignsHEEL (talk) 05:11, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

That was earlier, it took 2 minutes for it to go along so that means it won't be concluded as the most-subscribed yet. Also, it won't be added on the day held part. Thank you for this suggestion, but it won't be accepted. 119.92.14.79 (talk) 05:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

•  Not done, see #Page protected/advice for going forward. ~Swarm~ {talk} 06:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Under “Most-subscribed channels” under “By country and territory” under “PewDiePie” change nation from “United States” to Sweden 75.27.56.223 (talk) 05:49, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

•  Not done The section is about "channel[s] in each country", not "channels from each country", and the current information is supported by the source. ~Swarm~ {talk} 06:12, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

I would like to request a change in the most subscribed Youtuber. T-series, on February 22nd, surpassed Pewdiepie, for a very short amount of time, ending his 6 years streak, however, Pewdiepie quickly passed T-Series. My Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOZ25E9vUc0 JadenStar10 (talk) 05:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

•  Not done, see #Page protected/advice for going forward. ~Swarm~ {talk} 06:14, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

I believe that the 8 minute tseries lead should be recorded Kehlery (talk) 06:07, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

•  Not done, see #Page protected/advice for going forward. ~Swarm~ {talk} 06:14, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Add a row for when T-Series passed Pewdiepie for a split second, and another row for Pewdiepie reclaiming the top spot. 2600:1:C690:A6AC:C17A:8D61:916D:70E2 (talk) 06:39, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

No, we have not have any consensus on this!!!! Stop trying to ask for edits when no consensus has been reached!!BMO4744 (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: see #Page protected/advice for going forward — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:46, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Recently, T-Series did pass PewDiePie for 8 minutes making PewDiePie's streak over after a YT purge happened. He did catch up again though. 69pop69 (talk) 09:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

We already know and have that in the article. BMO4744 (talk) 12:46, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See above ~Swarm~ {talk} 10:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

I believe that T-Series overtook PewDiePie for about 10 minutes last night, so should we change it so that T-Series is in there and then change it back to PewDiePie

Basically what i am talking about is i want to add T-Series in to the list and i have an example of what it would look like with T-Series included:

PewDiePie: Dec 22 2013 - Feb 22 2019: 1888 days T-Series: Feb 22 2019 - Feb 22 2019: 1 day PewDiePie: Feb 22 2019 - now: 1 day That is how i would like it to go here comes dat boi (talk) 09:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I want the record to be continuous for the time because over the next month this record will change hands many times!!! I think the 1 day proposal would be better than cutting 5,000 times. BMO4744 (talk) 12:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See above ~Swarm~ {talk} 10:06, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

T series surpassed PewDiePie YouTube channel on 23 Feb for 8 min . So I think this should be updated on your page. The streak of PewDiePie is broke.though it is regained again but still ....

Link :: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PewDiePie_vs_T-Series In 3rd paragraph it is mentioned if u need the proof as this site is trusted. 106.207.216.62 (talk) 12:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Stop asking for requests for subjects with controversy still under them dammit!!!!BMO4744 (talk) 12:54, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See the numerous similar requests above ~Swarm~ {talk} 16:44, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Change the United State's most subscribed from Pewdiepie to Dude Perfect, as Pewdiepie is Swedish, not American. 69.140.86.75 (talk) 16:21, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See similar request above ~Swarm~ {talk} 16:36, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Yesterday, on the 21st of February 2019, T-Series passed Pewdiepie in subscribers for about 5 minutes before the spot was taken back by Pewdiepie. I think the list of historical most popular youtubers should be updated to represent this 2A02:C7F:5E58:CF00:4CDE:AF33:A1C1:2EFF (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See above. This topic is under debate. ~Swarm~ {talk} 22:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

PewDiePie lost his 1889 days streak. At 22Feb 2019 16:00 ET, during an audit, Pewdiepie lost subscribers and T series gained subscribers resulting in T series briefly surpassing Pewdiepie by 2.1k for 8 minutes. But after that PewDiePie regained the #1 spot. Debabrat Rath​carrymi 49.206.216.118 (talk) 17:59, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See above. This topic is under debate. ~Swarm~ {talk} 22:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

For about 9 minutes, T-Series did indeed surpass PewDiePie. I suggest continuing the streak, but adding T-Series to the list with 1 day as their streak. Both PewDiePie and T-Series led for part of the day, therefore PewDiePie's streak should continue and T-Series should get credit for 1 day. Almy (talk) 20:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

No, their is no consensus on this issue yet and nobody has ever said that they should be accredited with 1 day streak. 8 minutes ≠ 24 hours of passing pewdiepie BMO4744 (talk) 20:18, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I never said there was a consenus. I said I suggest that should be done. It's merely a suggestion. The administrators can say no if they want. I put this here because I felt it was a good solution. I agree that this might not have been best to post as an edit request, but I would like to see what an administrator thinks of this proposal. Almy (talk) 20:32, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

If it is a suggestion please say so in the title. Sorry if I sounded gritty in my response but their was a lot of spam and flame about this issue. BMO4744 (talk) 20:44, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. See above. This topic is under discussion. ~Swarm~ {talk} 22:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

In #Historical progression of most-subscribed channels, please disambiguate T-Series by replacing [[T-Series]] with [[T-Series (company)|T-Series]]. Certes (talk) 22:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done (possibly in response to this request) Certes (talk) 22:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

This request is not related to my first one. I have noticed that the historical progression chart states that it is "as of December 22, 2013." This should be updated to read February 23, 2019. Almy (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

No, their is no consensus on this issue. BMO4744 (talk) 20:20, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

there*

This is not a matter of consensus, nor does it involve what the article was protected for. In no way, shape, or form is this a controversial edit. The chart was clearly updated recently, so I requested that the date be updated to reflect that. This has nothing to do with PewDiePie vs T-Series. This is not something that needs consensus, it is a very clearly incorrect date. In addition, you are not an administrator. This edit request is very clearly meant for an administrator who can edit the page. Your opinion of my edit request is not necessary in this situation. Almy (talk) 20:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Almy, the last updated date is set to the date that Pewdiepie took first from YT Spotlight, it should be today with the count of how many days he has been first (excluding the "8-Minute Series" incident yesterday, per consensus). I think BMO4744 missed the issue here. AppMaster1000 (talk) 23:01, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Why is PewDiePie listed next to "United States" in the "By country and territory" section of the article? Doesn't he live in England?

RayDeeUx (talk) 21:53, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit: Never mind! I can't delete this section now, but I've found the answer...

RayDeeUx (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

May I delete this for you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BMO4744 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

In the top countries part... Pewdiepie is in the USA category, when he is Swedish and lives in England so it makes no sense... I think it should say Sweden. 2001:8A0:6599:F601:2588:F719:D1DB:B29B (talk) 23:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

IDKY they have not done this yetBMO4744 (talk) 23:26, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The section is about "channel[s] in each country", not "channels from each country", and the current information is directly supported by the source. ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

In the countries must subscribed youtubers part, pewdiepie is in the USA category when he is Swedish and lives in England so he has nothing to do with America... I think it should say Sweden. Miana555 (talk) 23:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC) Miana555 (talk) 23:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The section is about "channel[s] in each country", not "channels from each country", and the current information is supported by the source. ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

In the list, there is a grave accent mark after Ariana Grande. Please remove it. CoolSkittle (talk) 23:40, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:49, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Remove the note in the leftmost cell of the final row of the "Historical progression of most-subscribed channels" table. This is not a matter of preference; it is a matter of adhering to policy, specifically WP:NOR. Unless a reliable source verifies that PewDiePie was briefly surpassed (the YouTube video on an insignificant channel being cited is decidedly not reliable), we cannot make note of it in the article. WP:NOR states that original research is defined as material "for which no reliable, published sources exist", which is the case for what occurred yesterday. LifeofTau 17:48, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done I've reexamined the relevant policy considerations, particularly WP:SOURCE and WP:NOTRS, and I do not think that youtube video constitutes a "reliable source". While Social Blade statistics are reliable, and while that stream is probably accurate, a random person's youtube video is objectively not a reliable source for that information, according to policy requirements for what constitutes a reliable source. I searched for a reliable source for this content, and I could find absolutely nothing. So, I think this is a legitimate challenge, and per WP:V, such challenged material requires a reliable source in order to be reinstated. ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:46, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. LifeofTau 01:02, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Under the historical progressions I would like to edit is that t Series became the most subbed channel for 8 minutes then PewDiePie regained and I think you should count t series as one of the most subbed channel RomanReignsHEEL (talk) 20:21 , 23 February 2019 (EST)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. ~Swarm~ {talk} 01:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

---

The most subscribed countries has pewdiepie listed as the United States instead of Sweden. 90.254.9.15 (talk) 01:40, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

He lives in the UK and should be listed thereBMO4744 (talk) 01:44, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The section is about "channel[s] in each country", not "channels from each country", and the current information is directly supported by the source. ~Swarm~ {talk} 01:51, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

---

Yesterday, T-Series surpassed PewDiePie in subscribers for 8 minutes. I'd like for the table labeled "Historical progression of most-subscribed channels" to add two more rows. One row indicating that T-Series passed PewDiePie for 8 minutes and another row indicating that PewDiePie is in his 4th reign as the most subscribed YouTube channel. Also. the length of PewDiePie's third reign should be left at 1,888 days (as 365 * 5 + 1 + 31 + 31 = 1,888). Also, note that T-Series passed PewDiePie because of a YouTube audit. AggieMav21 (talk) 01:48, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. The topic is disputed and is currently under discussion. ~Swarm~ {talk} 01:51, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit Wars Episode I

We need to come to a quick consensus or a compromise because their is edit warring happening in the edit history. We have the one day side and the add now side. Both of these sides have reasons for choices. Please talk about it before I have to call Uncle Billy The Admin BMO4744 (talk) 03:38, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

A compromise proposal I came up with is that T-Series can still be on the history as 0 days, but PewDiePie's streak of 1888+ can still be kept as 'ongoing'. Somebody500 (talk) 03:41, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I think that could be good. Too bad the edit warring is has killed the pageBMO4744 (talk) 04:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Page protected/advice for going forward

• I have protected the page in response to the edit warring. While it's a legitimate dispute and no party is objectively "right", edit warring over a contentious topic is unacceptable. The current consensus of talk page comments appears to rather clearly be in favor of omitting the 8 minute overtake from the list, and based on that, it's not even clear that a compromise solution is urgently necessary, much less an aggressive change of stance within the article itself. Now, of course, consensus can change, but changes should not be pushed through via edit warring or other aggressive conduct. I recommend starting a new section, that can serve as the dedicated, single discussion on this topic, and seeing where the local editors views are at. If there's clearly a lack of consensus one way or the other, then we need to start discussing compromises. If no satisfactory compromise can be agreed upon, then we need to employ dispute resolution, most likely in the form of an RfC. Thanks, ~Swarm~ {talk} 04:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
• Protection has been reduced to extended confirmed. I am not yet comfortable fully reducing to semi due to the continued presence of SPAs, but if things continue calming down, I will reduce the protection further. Continued edit warring will, of course, result in a return to full protection. Regards, ~Swarm~ {talk} 03:57, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Consensus Check

Points have been made by editors and held up by administratiors clearly be in favor of omitting the 8 minute overtake from the list. These reasons include: illegitimate citations & lack of true sources, and the time frame which T-Series held the spot. Seeing the facts stated here I beleive that we have came to a consensus on the issue and that we should move twards that and file for a protection downgrade. BMO4744 (talk) 01:25, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

• This is premature. Discussion has not even been going for 24 hours, and SPAs are still flooding in. We cannot begin to consider the issue resolved yet. I am 100% willing to unprotect once things calm down and the chance of continued conflict/disruption is low, but we're not there yet. ~Swarm~ {talk} 01:56, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
• While this matter isn't resolved, things appear to be calming down somewhat. As noted above, I have reduced the protection to extended confirmed. If you have a legitimate reason to edit the article, other than continuing the edit war, come talk to me on my talk page and I will grant you extended confirmed status. ~Swarm~ {talk} 03:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2019

Tseries name needs to be included in Most subscribed Youtubers list as on 22nd feb 2019 16:00 ET T series briefly surpassed pewdiepie for 8 minutes. Pewdiepie Streak was broken as for 8 mins of 22nd Feb 2018 pewdiepie was not no. 1 .After that Pewdiepie regained spot of no. 1 Pramodbhar (talk) 10:22, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ~Swarm~ {talk} 10:23, 24 February 2019 (UTC)