Talk:LBRY
Add topicLatest comment: 1 year ago by Wiktorpyk in topic Odysee independent article
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LBRY article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 6 months  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The following are reference ideas for LBRY. Click [show] for details. The following reference(s) may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Odysee independent article
[edit]in my opinion, Odysee deserves its own independent article. it is one of the main competitors to youtube especially after the removal of the dislike counter from youtube.ArmorredKnight (talk) 16:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
- I agree! Ilovehugging (talk) 02:07, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Whether Odysee is notable for its own article is determined by the existence of reliable sources, not us. Dexxor (talk) 08:46, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Now that Odysee is it's own company, it should have one! Ilovehugging (talk) 16:36, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've written a draft but it was deleted because Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G11 Wiktorpyk (talk) 22:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
i agree also. it deserves an one article. its a very huge website and more famous then lbry! also its important against the youtube monopol. we can not allowed to have you tube here and one of the top 10 opponents in the world not. many say its eaven the nr 2 in the western world. OF COURSE it needs an own article. 2A02:1210:1671:2E00:94A3:F66F:7F75:C276 (talk) 22:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- I agree I am surprised it doesn't. it is clearly is two companies now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:5000:E9D2:4CAB:F4F1:D616:303F (talk) 07:57, 8 April 2023 (UTC)