I just uploaded one animation which had four sources and because single one of them was youtube, someone added youtube tag.

I was about to cite the wiki page for the tag, but there's actually no wiki for this.

I'm pretty sure that stuff that's source is from youtube should be excluded from the tag and thus tens of animations need to also be manually cleaned up from this, but what does count under the tag? Visible youtube website, youtube player or youtube play button (or clear knockoffs of them) should be obvious:
post #688273 post #1128803 post #1037823 post #997627

But how about other copyrights which origin from youtube like super_planet_dolan? People from youtube? Artwork created specifically for youtube thumbnail? Images/animations telling to go to youtube?
post #597754 post #955691 post #698829 post #1135867 post #729977

I do not really think artwork created for YouTube or originating on Youtube (but not otherwise relating to it) should fall under this tag, because that violates Tag What You See.

On the other hand it would be useful to tag more broad subjects such as YouTube personalities. I think a separate tag for that would be best. I would count these things as relating to YouTube, because while sharing art on YouTube just uses it as a platform whereas being a YouTube personality means you're known for being on that medium. I'd imagine a tag like youtube_channel might be useful for something like that? If that's the case, I'd imagine super_planet_dolan and other channels would imply said tag.

There's a problem with this, though, and that is that I don't think it's a tag anyone would search for. I find it hard to imagine a situation where one would come here and search youtube in the hopes of finding art of a particular channel. I know tags like nintendo would suffer from the same problem, but I do feel like this would be different somehow because YouTube is a platform. I don't really know, to be honest. I just think I should mention this line of thought as well.

If I'm allowed to vent, i abhorrently hate sourcing to YouTube. I believe guidelines should be in place for when sources are from YouTube, like the time stamp it stems from or the other artists if involved, because the prior makes it easier to to find the X, and the latter because sourcing from YouTube images is god-awful. These would both be included in the description, not the tags.

Siral_Exan said:
If I'm allowed to vent, i abhorrently hate sourcing to YouTube. I believe guidelines should be in place for when sources are from YouTube, like the time stamp it stems from or the other artists if involved, because the prior makes it easier to to find the X, and the latter because sourcing from YouTube images is god-awful. These would both be included in the description, not the tags.

If talking about images alone, then yes it's bad, but youtube is primarily for videos and artists are able to post content themselves there. There are content which are only available from youtube or highest quality is available on youtube. Also youtube offers their videos natively in WebM format so they can be directly uploaded here.
post #1211795 post #1135994 post #1049049 post #836754 post #818714

And this is about youtube the copyright tag, not about sourcing from youtube.

i support using the YouTube tag only for YouTube features, because otherwise it would lead to everything under the sun, like what YouTube hosts.

Kemono-Kay said:
On the other hand it would be useful to tag more broad subjects such as YouTube personalities.

A term exists for that...we call them "Youtubers". For example...Pewdiepie and JonTron are Youtubers. So if there was any tag to denote them it would be youtuber. That said I think such a tag should only apply to the people...not their creations.

Kemono-Kay said:
I'd imagine super_planet_dolan and other channels would imply said tag.(youtube)

I'd imagine it shouldn't. That would imply that Youtube played some part in creating Super Planet Dolan, when in reality it's only a platform for the show. That would be like adding a "television" tag to every single ducktales image just because the show appeared on TV.

I think the only time we should be tagging YouTube is when the ACTUAL WEBSITE appears in an image. I wouldn't even bother tagging a player like in post #1128803 (unless the player literally says "YouTube" on it)...because the player style is going to change over the years. In 5 years it will look different anyways. We shouldn't be tagging YouTube on things that just come from YouTube...that's just dumb and sets a bad precedent. Are we going to start tagging things like deviantart and pixiv too? Bleh.

I didn't mean to say that a tag like super_planet_dolan would imply youtube, but rather something like youtuber or youtube_channel if such a tag is deemed necessary.

I completely agree that tagging youtube on things that originate there in a bad idea.