This article was nominated for deletion on 3 July 2020. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 24 September 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to Philosophy on YouTube. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
I feel a bit bad for saying this, as most of the content I am going to propose removing/reducing relates to YouTubers who I have a lot of time for, but I do feel that the bulleted list is somewhat arbitrary and not in keeping with the way we usually handle lists. A lot of the people/channels listed are small and have no article either for the channel or the creator. For example Mia Mulder is on just under 30K subscribers (which is objectively a travesty of justice but is undeniably still a small channel). As an example of arbitrariness, why is Shaun included while (the very similar and equally good) Three Arrows is not?
So what should we do? Here is what I propose:
Does that sound reasonable? -- DanielRigal ( talk) 10:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
I think we have a disagreement about what merits inclusion on the list. I'm going to have to insist that we don't fall into WP:OR here. The list needs to be verifiable. Here is what I propose as the eligibility criteria:
and (not or)
and (not or)
I understand the desire to build the list up with our favourite channels but we can't let personal preference come into this. I have removed several channels from the list, even though I think those channels are great, because they were not sufficiently notable or not demonstrably part of the BreadTube phenomenon. I'd like to see similar restraint from all editors. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 22:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
There is text: "calling it gatekeepy", which links to a site on "gatekeeper" that does not once have the string of characters "gatekeepy"in it. I'm fairly sure that "gatekeepy" is not a word, and in any event if one wants to use non-words due to their use in some cited media then an associated wiki link should fairly represent the content on the page that is linked. Suggest remove the sentence and citation, or clean it up so that the word in the link matches the content of the linked page a closely as possible. I'm not trying to be pedantic here. I well know what a gatekeeper is. But When I say the word "gatekeepy" and a link I assumed that the link would explain to me some unique meaning behind this non-word, and yet it did not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8C1:C100:647:551A:E920:D692:9290 ( talk) 03:23, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Saw that Vaush wasn't included b/c there's no "articles" about him
- https://thepostmillennial.com/vaush-kim-klacik-racist - https://globalnews.ca/news/6729355/britney-spears-comrade-britney-trend/ - https://junkee.com/elon-musk-grimes-baby-memes/252754 - https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/01/the-end-of-marianne-williamsons-campaign-is-a-real-shot-in-the-arm-for-vaccine-tweets.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:9680:C750:613A:F162:F27F:D62A ( talk) 19:07, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
He has spoken before about not seeing himself as a part of breadtube. He should be given his own article once he becomes more prominent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.150.197 ( talk) 23:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Caso queira traduzir fique a vontade. 2804:14C:5BB1:9AC7:56D4:910F:806A:1ABA ( talk) 00:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@
Luizpuodzius and
Raimundo57br: Se for possível traduzir como
pt:comunista de youtube eu agradeço. att
2804:14C:5BB1:9AC7:FB50:8FAA:1930:AEFA (
talk)
15:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
@ Luizpuodzius and Raimundo57br: achei fontes acadêmicas pra "filosofia de internet". 2804:14C:5BB1:9AC7:23D8:1445:595F:4597 ( talk) 01:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
@ TheFinalMigration: I believe that the use of "educational lectures" in the lead to describe their videos is justified, since that most closely describes their style/content. Their videos being political doesn't diminish their educational value (it's hard to be non-political in the fields they're discussing), as opposed to PragerU, who don't even bother to do the most basic amount of fact-checking and whose videos (among other things) lack depth, rigor, and understanding of the topics they're discussing — making them more propaganda than anything else, and any comparison of BreadTube (as discussed in this article) and PragerU one of apples and oranges. TucanHolmes ( talk) 10:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
@
TucanHolmes:
"who don't even bother to do the most basic amount of fact-checking and whose videos (among other things) lack depth, rigor, and understanding of the topics they're discussing — making them more propaganda than anything else" The exact same could be said of Breadtube. At the end of the day it's a bunch of random people explaining and promoting economic and social left wing viewpoints {It is very easy to be non-political in their fields, by not siding with one side or another which they clearly do as their videos are designed to challenge and counter viewpoints they disagree with not for example to explain concepts.} Arguing why something is bad and something is better is not educational it is an opinion, and as they aim to convince others of their arguments they are by definition propaganda. Until you can prove that these homemade youtube videos are reliable sources it would be disenguous to refer to them as educational.
TheFinalMigration (
talk)
19:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
It is very easy to be non-political in their fields, by not siding with one side or another which they clearly do as their videos are designed to challenge and counter viewpoints they disagree with not for example to explain concepts.— In many cases, doing exactly that (not siding with one side or another) would not be educational if it is simply false; my favourite example for this is the topic of climate change / climate denial, or the issue of institutional racism (and even if they counter the viewpoints/concepts they disagree with, they still have to explain them first, which is something you claim they don't do). See Golden mean fallacy.
[...] The exact same could be said of Breadtube. At the end of the day it's a bunch of random people explaining and promoting economic and social left wing viewpoints [...] Arguing why something is bad and something is better is not educational it is an opinion, and as they aim to convince others of their arguments they are by definition propaganda.— That's nothing short of a false equivalence. There exists a huge gap in quality/accuracy between PragerU-style videos and LeftTube videos. In fact, many LeftTube videos are dedicated to exposing the lies and inaccuracies of e.g., PragerU videos.
Until you can prove that these homemade youtube videos are reliable sources it would be disenguous to refer to them as educational.— What matters is how reliable sources describe their videos. Demanding that I prove their reliability is not only a Sisyphean thing to ask, it would also be original research, and therefore unusable on Wikipedia. See Moving the goalposts.
BreadTube is the current best attempt at harnessing this momentum. BreadTube, named after 19th century anarcho-communist writer Peter Kropotkin and his book The Conquest of Bread, is an online ecosystem of leftwing content creators, primarily on YouTube, who produce video lectures that are both entertaining and educational.
It looks like the sources are primarily US-based and these sources can give a more international perspective: https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/long-reads/breadtube-gamergate-twitch-online-politics-streamers-b1765156.html https://blog.zeit.de/teilchen/2020/01/13/youtube-influencer-linke-social-media/ . However, AFAIK this is an English-language only movement, and the members are mostly in the US, so there is a limit to the possible globalization. Sjö ( talk) 07:59, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 14:54, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
BreadTube → Philosophy on YouTube or Revolution on YouTube or List of YouTube channels about philosophy or List of left-wing YouTubers – Globalize article @ Luizpuodzius and Raimundo57br: 2804:14C:5BB1:8FDA:7064:1555:FEB0:90B9 ( talk) 03:24, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
These "leaks" are obviously complete nonsense and we will not be wasting our time on them. Any attempt to add them to this (or any other) article should be reverted as vandalism and appropriate warnings issued. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 22:34, 30 December 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
So is someone going to add the recent leaks proving that BredTubers are government funded propaganda? Or does the SuperPAC that pays the wikipedia mod, who watches this thread, not want that? 2001:871:237:55A6:1C8C:87AE:47CB:3C85 ( talk) 20:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC) The only source I can find discussing this is a single TheGrayZone article. It is considered a deprecated source by this site and is generally considered unreliable. I see no reason for the "leaks" to be added to the article if the only source is from an unreliable origin. -- TwiliAlchemist ( talk) 21:41, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
|
Have requested protection for the article as article is now clearly being targeted by vandals and trolls in the wake of the smear piece referenced here. BobFromBrockley ( talk) 12:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, this guy is a self described capitalist, definitely not on the left left, if you get what I mean, he should be considered a moderate leftist or even a centrist leaning to the left — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:448A:1082:2F69:9563:268A:1FF4:6D05 ( talk) 08:22, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
This article seems like an endorsement to them, Which is clearly against WP:NPOV, So the article should be rewritten to portray both sides fairly. 209.97.89.182 ( talk) 22:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Well the reason I'm saying this, is because "whereas right wing creators are often antagonistic to their opponents, Breadtubers seek to understand their political opponents" Has "OFTEN" only on the right wing part,If we were trying to be anti biased here then the part about breadtubers should have often in it as well, So that it doesn't paint a biased picture like it did before.≈≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.97.89.182 ( talk) 22:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
I noticed that the article only says that breadtubers are left wing and composed of social democrats, anarchists, communists etc.. It even later mentions some being maoist. Isnt communism and maoism considered far left? If It mentions far right youtubers,then this article should say that Breadtubers are left to far left youtubers since as said above, some consist of Communists,maoists,anarcho-socialist etc... otherwise it might look a bit bias. 173.172.16.197 ( talk) 19:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
This article should be updated to include the term cornbreadtube as the growing moniker for Black breadtube creators 2600:4040:7AA1:7800:819D:8844:B2E6:52AE ( talk) 18:59, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
It's like the article doesn't mention the actual bread part of the breadtube. Where are the anarcho-communist youtubers? UlyssesYYZ ( talk) 09:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
If you want "BreadTube" to redirect here, fine, but "List of left-wing YouTubers by political stance" is a more objective title than a buzzword that the mainstream media uses to describe it. Channels like BadMouse and Balkan Oddysey are small out of context, but as communists with hundreds of thousands of subscribers they are significant as part of the broader group. Shushimnotrealstooge ( talk) 22:06, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
In the second two of the first three paragraphs designed to quickly define the term for readers, the article focuses on a loaded selection and presentation of information: accused of hijacking, infighting, and invading spaces to get at young viewers. This is bad phrasing and isn't a vital part of the definition 'BreadTube' (based on what I have now read from the sources). This section could more accurately be quoted/paraphrased from:
"The name 'BreadTube' emerged organically online as a more comedic alternative to the name 'LeftTube'. [13] BreadTube has no strict definition, but can be categorized as a core group of academically minded YouTubers that produce high-concept material with high production values. [24] The movement was spawned by a few groundbreaking stars—two of the most prominent being pop-culture critic Lindsay Ellis and philosopher-entertainer Natalie Wynn in the mid-2010s in response to uncontested alt-right racist and sexist propaganda and conspiracy theories online. [11] Since then an identity has coalesced around a shared interest in spreading leftist ideology and opposing the propagation of far-right ideology online. [13] Breadtubers often focus on the same topics discussed by content creators with right-wing politics, putting their videos into the same spaces as those targeted by right-wing or far-right videos. [8]"
Source: 24. Sylvia, JJ; and Moody, Kyle. "BreadTube Rising: How Modern Creators Use Cultural Formats to Spread Countercultural Ideology." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 24.1 (2022): < https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.4291>
This would better define the term, origin, meaning, and evolution. If you feel the need then to include something about infighting due to diverse, contradictory views of those who identify themselves as 'BreadTube' that would be better included under 'Reception' since it isn't really part of the definition. 108.183.107.24 ( talk) 19:00, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Near the end it mentions hbomberguy's Plagiarism and You(tube) but in that video I couldn't find a single reference to Breadtube (or even "Bread"), Lefttube, or discomfort with channel labels at all. Should this be removed? Does someone have a citation with a timestamp? 2603:7000:6440:BC4E:6771:173A:36F7:11B1 ( talk) 16:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
The article makes polarising and demonstrably false claims, most notably that the left are opposed to liberty and that some left leaning popular youtubers can be classified as maoists is no different to claiming that someone like Sargon of Akhad is a Hitlerite or Nazi. 193.61.243.93 ( talk) 20:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
In the notable figures category Harry Brewis should be within the people who reject the "breadtube" label since he's listed as an "important" figure, he rejected it in his video "plagarism and (you)tube". 5.13.22.255 ( talk) 15:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 3 July 2020. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 24 September 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to Philosophy on YouTube. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
I feel a bit bad for saying this, as most of the content I am going to propose removing/reducing relates to YouTubers who I have a lot of time for, but I do feel that the bulleted list is somewhat arbitrary and not in keeping with the way we usually handle lists. A lot of the people/channels listed are small and have no article either for the channel or the creator. For example Mia Mulder is on just under 30K subscribers (which is objectively a travesty of justice but is undeniably still a small channel). As an example of arbitrariness, why is Shaun included while (the very similar and equally good) Three Arrows is not?
So what should we do? Here is what I propose:
Does that sound reasonable? -- DanielRigal ( talk) 10:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
I think we have a disagreement about what merits inclusion on the list. I'm going to have to insist that we don't fall into WP:OR here. The list needs to be verifiable. Here is what I propose as the eligibility criteria:
and (not or)
and (not or)
I understand the desire to build the list up with our favourite channels but we can't let personal preference come into this. I have removed several channels from the list, even though I think those channels are great, because they were not sufficiently notable or not demonstrably part of the BreadTube phenomenon. I'd like to see similar restraint from all editors. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 22:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
There is text: "calling it gatekeepy", which links to a site on "gatekeeper" that does not once have the string of characters "gatekeepy"in it. I'm fairly sure that "gatekeepy" is not a word, and in any event if one wants to use non-words due to their use in some cited media then an associated wiki link should fairly represent the content on the page that is linked. Suggest remove the sentence and citation, or clean it up so that the word in the link matches the content of the linked page a closely as possible. I'm not trying to be pedantic here. I well know what a gatekeeper is. But When I say the word "gatekeepy" and a link I assumed that the link would explain to me some unique meaning behind this non-word, and yet it did not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8C1:C100:647:551A:E920:D692:9290 ( talk) 03:23, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Saw that Vaush wasn't included b/c there's no "articles" about him
- https://thepostmillennial.com/vaush-kim-klacik-racist - https://globalnews.ca/news/6729355/britney-spears-comrade-britney-trend/ - https://junkee.com/elon-musk-grimes-baby-memes/252754 - https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/01/the-end-of-marianne-williamsons-campaign-is-a-real-shot-in-the-arm-for-vaccine-tweets.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:9680:C750:613A:F162:F27F:D62A ( talk) 19:07, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
He has spoken before about not seeing himself as a part of breadtube. He should be given his own article once he becomes more prominent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.150.197 ( talk) 23:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Caso queira traduzir fique a vontade. 2804:14C:5BB1:9AC7:56D4:910F:806A:1ABA ( talk) 00:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@
Luizpuodzius and
Raimundo57br: Se for possível traduzir como
pt:comunista de youtube eu agradeço. att
2804:14C:5BB1:9AC7:FB50:8FAA:1930:AEFA (
talk)
15:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
@ Luizpuodzius and Raimundo57br: achei fontes acadêmicas pra "filosofia de internet". 2804:14C:5BB1:9AC7:23D8:1445:595F:4597 ( talk) 01:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
@ TheFinalMigration: I believe that the use of "educational lectures" in the lead to describe their videos is justified, since that most closely describes their style/content. Their videos being political doesn't diminish their educational value (it's hard to be non-political in the fields they're discussing), as opposed to PragerU, who don't even bother to do the most basic amount of fact-checking and whose videos (among other things) lack depth, rigor, and understanding of the topics they're discussing — making them more propaganda than anything else, and any comparison of BreadTube (as discussed in this article) and PragerU one of apples and oranges. TucanHolmes ( talk) 10:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
@
TucanHolmes:
"who don't even bother to do the most basic amount of fact-checking and whose videos (among other things) lack depth, rigor, and understanding of the topics they're discussing — making them more propaganda than anything else" The exact same could be said of Breadtube. At the end of the day it's a bunch of random people explaining and promoting economic and social left wing viewpoints {It is very easy to be non-political in their fields, by not siding with one side or another which they clearly do as their videos are designed to challenge and counter viewpoints they disagree with not for example to explain concepts.} Arguing why something is bad and something is better is not educational it is an opinion, and as they aim to convince others of their arguments they are by definition propaganda. Until you can prove that these homemade youtube videos are reliable sources it would be disenguous to refer to them as educational.
TheFinalMigration (
talk)
19:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
It is very easy to be non-political in their fields, by not siding with one side or another which they clearly do as their videos are designed to challenge and counter viewpoints they disagree with not for example to explain concepts.— In many cases, doing exactly that (not siding with one side or another) would not be educational if it is simply false; my favourite example for this is the topic of climate change / climate denial, or the issue of institutional racism (and even if they counter the viewpoints/concepts they disagree with, they still have to explain them first, which is something you claim they don't do). See Golden mean fallacy.
[...] The exact same could be said of Breadtube. At the end of the day it's a bunch of random people explaining and promoting economic and social left wing viewpoints [...] Arguing why something is bad and something is better is not educational it is an opinion, and as they aim to convince others of their arguments they are by definition propaganda.— That's nothing short of a false equivalence. There exists a huge gap in quality/accuracy between PragerU-style videos and LeftTube videos. In fact, many LeftTube videos are dedicated to exposing the lies and inaccuracies of e.g., PragerU videos.
Until you can prove that these homemade youtube videos are reliable sources it would be disenguous to refer to them as educational.— What matters is how reliable sources describe their videos. Demanding that I prove their reliability is not only a Sisyphean thing to ask, it would also be original research, and therefore unusable on Wikipedia. See Moving the goalposts.
BreadTube is the current best attempt at harnessing this momentum. BreadTube, named after 19th century anarcho-communist writer Peter Kropotkin and his book The Conquest of Bread, is an online ecosystem of leftwing content creators, primarily on YouTube, who produce video lectures that are both entertaining and educational.
It looks like the sources are primarily US-based and these sources can give a more international perspective: https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/long-reads/breadtube-gamergate-twitch-online-politics-streamers-b1765156.html https://blog.zeit.de/teilchen/2020/01/13/youtube-influencer-linke-social-media/ . However, AFAIK this is an English-language only movement, and the members are mostly in the US, so there is a limit to the possible globalization. Sjö ( talk) 07:59, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 14:54, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
BreadTube → Philosophy on YouTube or Revolution on YouTube or List of YouTube channels about philosophy or List of left-wing YouTubers – Globalize article @ Luizpuodzius and Raimundo57br: 2804:14C:5BB1:8FDA:7064:1555:FEB0:90B9 ( talk) 03:24, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
These "leaks" are obviously complete nonsense and we will not be wasting our time on them. Any attempt to add them to this (or any other) article should be reverted as vandalism and appropriate warnings issued. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 22:34, 30 December 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
So is someone going to add the recent leaks proving that BredTubers are government funded propaganda? Or does the SuperPAC that pays the wikipedia mod, who watches this thread, not want that? 2001:871:237:55A6:1C8C:87AE:47CB:3C85 ( talk) 20:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC) The only source I can find discussing this is a single TheGrayZone article. It is considered a deprecated source by this site and is generally considered unreliable. I see no reason for the "leaks" to be added to the article if the only source is from an unreliable origin. -- TwiliAlchemist ( talk) 21:41, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
|
Have requested protection for the article as article is now clearly being targeted by vandals and trolls in the wake of the smear piece referenced here. BobFromBrockley ( talk) 12:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, this guy is a self described capitalist, definitely not on the left left, if you get what I mean, he should be considered a moderate leftist or even a centrist leaning to the left — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:448A:1082:2F69:9563:268A:1FF4:6D05 ( talk) 08:22, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
This article seems like an endorsement to them, Which is clearly against WP:NPOV, So the article should be rewritten to portray both sides fairly. 209.97.89.182 ( talk) 22:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Well the reason I'm saying this, is because "whereas right wing creators are often antagonistic to their opponents, Breadtubers seek to understand their political opponents" Has "OFTEN" only on the right wing part,If we were trying to be anti biased here then the part about breadtubers should have often in it as well, So that it doesn't paint a biased picture like it did before.≈≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.97.89.182 ( talk) 22:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
I noticed that the article only says that breadtubers are left wing and composed of social democrats, anarchists, communists etc.. It even later mentions some being maoist. Isnt communism and maoism considered far left? If It mentions far right youtubers,then this article should say that Breadtubers are left to far left youtubers since as said above, some consist of Communists,maoists,anarcho-socialist etc... otherwise it might look a bit bias. 173.172.16.197 ( talk) 19:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
This article should be updated to include the term cornbreadtube as the growing moniker for Black breadtube creators 2600:4040:7AA1:7800:819D:8844:B2E6:52AE ( talk) 18:59, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
It's like the article doesn't mention the actual bread part of the breadtube. Where are the anarcho-communist youtubers? UlyssesYYZ ( talk) 09:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
If you want "BreadTube" to redirect here, fine, but "List of left-wing YouTubers by political stance" is a more objective title than a buzzword that the mainstream media uses to describe it. Channels like BadMouse and Balkan Oddysey are small out of context, but as communists with hundreds of thousands of subscribers they are significant as part of the broader group. Shushimnotrealstooge ( talk) 22:06, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
In the second two of the first three paragraphs designed to quickly define the term for readers, the article focuses on a loaded selection and presentation of information: accused of hijacking, infighting, and invading spaces to get at young viewers. This is bad phrasing and isn't a vital part of the definition 'BreadTube' (based on what I have now read from the sources). This section could more accurately be quoted/paraphrased from:
"The name 'BreadTube' emerged organically online as a more comedic alternative to the name 'LeftTube'. [13] BreadTube has no strict definition, but can be categorized as a core group of academically minded YouTubers that produce high-concept material with high production values. [24] The movement was spawned by a few groundbreaking stars—two of the most prominent being pop-culture critic Lindsay Ellis and philosopher-entertainer Natalie Wynn in the mid-2010s in response to uncontested alt-right racist and sexist propaganda and conspiracy theories online. [11] Since then an identity has coalesced around a shared interest in spreading leftist ideology and opposing the propagation of far-right ideology online. [13] Breadtubers often focus on the same topics discussed by content creators with right-wing politics, putting their videos into the same spaces as those targeted by right-wing or far-right videos. [8]"
Source: 24. Sylvia, JJ; and Moody, Kyle. "BreadTube Rising: How Modern Creators Use Cultural Formats to Spread Countercultural Ideology." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 24.1 (2022): < https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.4291>
This would better define the term, origin, meaning, and evolution. If you feel the need then to include something about infighting due to diverse, contradictory views of those who identify themselves as 'BreadTube' that would be better included under 'Reception' since it isn't really part of the definition. 108.183.107.24 ( talk) 19:00, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Near the end it mentions hbomberguy's Plagiarism and You(tube) but in that video I couldn't find a single reference to Breadtube (or even "Bread"), Lefttube, or discomfort with channel labels at all. Should this be removed? Does someone have a citation with a timestamp? 2603:7000:6440:BC4E:6771:173A:36F7:11B1 ( talk) 16:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
The article makes polarising and demonstrably false claims, most notably that the left are opposed to liberty and that some left leaning popular youtubers can be classified as maoists is no different to claiming that someone like Sargon of Akhad is a Hitlerite or Nazi. 193.61.243.93 ( talk) 20:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
In the notable figures category Harry Brewis should be within the people who reject the "breadtube" label since he's listed as an "important" figure, he rejected it in his video "plagarism and (you)tube". 5.13.22.255 ( talk) 15:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)