YouTube Historians/HistoryTube/PopHistory -

Also, to not be too much of a parasitical faggot, has anybody here watched Fascinating Horror? They're focused on the history of usually smaller-scale accidents, events, and disasters like the Cocoanut Grove Fire or the time a literal child crashed a plane. I like the narrator, and while I can't vouch for accuracy too well but what times I have delved further the content seems to have been more or less accurate.
I'm subscribed to that guy, he seems decent. He reminds me of Horror Stories, because he cuts the crap and gets straight to the point unlike sp00py channels like Nexpo, and he doesn't do cringy clickbait like MrBallen or those true crime channels with annoying girls in the thumbnails.
 

Just A College Boy

kiwifarms.net
I'm surprised Biographics wasn't brought up in the OP. He falls under Quality Control, but as far as I know, it's just a small team that works on the videos (him included), though I'm not as sure on the possibility of studio backing. However, Simon Whistler (the host) appears to be a human content farm as he's admitted to having so many channels that he often forgets which one is for what. There's only one issue I've had thus far, and well, they say "show don't tell," so:
He should have just stated "I don't want Youtube to drop the ban-hammer on this channel, so..." Still, he just get points for saying "biologically male" instead of "assigned male at birth."

Moving on, Forgotten Lives covers obscure historical figures, but they do occasionally cover more well-known ones such as Calamity Jane. Legends of the Old West Podcast covers Old West history (Apache Wars, Billy The Kid, Red Cloud's War, etc.). It's run by Black Barrel Media and it's a godsend for anyone with even just a passing interest in Wild West history because it doesn't skimp over the mud and grit, never leaning one way or the other. Legacy of the Old West falls within the former's category. Infamous America Podcast (also run by BBM) covers true crime in America. Most Notorious, according to its channel description covers "Serial killers. Gangsters. Gunslingers. Victorian-era murderers. And that's just the tip of the iceberg." The host is author Erik Rivenes, and among the guests are: Paul Andrew Hutton (American culture historian), Charles Leerhsen (author of "Butch Cassidy: The True Story of an American Outlaw"), Vernon Keel (journalist and author), and many more. Based on a True Story Podcast covers the historical fact vs the historical fiction in movies, but also makes videos on how much of a movie could have happened (ex. How much of The Last Samurai could've actually happened?). Among its guests are: Dr. Brian Dirck (a Professor of History at Anderson University), Stephen L. Hardin (professor, historian and author), Joe Pistone (the real Donnie Brasco), and more.

Native American History is just starting out but what's quite noteworthy is that in their video on Comanches, they don't whitewash them. They paint them as the brutal mfers they were.
 

Übertroon

Gotta go fast
kiwifarms.net
The algorithm pushed a channel my way named Jabzy, I found it interesting because it has some topics and first hand accounts I wouldn't consider general knowledge. For example I'm not particularly knowledgeable about gypsy history, and did not know that the leader of the gypsyies in Romania aligned himself with the Iron Guard

 

Seventh Star

hungry burger fan
kiwifarms.net
are there any of his videos you feel are egregiously wrong? Whenever he's covering a topic I'm actually familiar with he's very accurate and delivers it really well

Especially the second one. The sources are reddit and TE, which is outdated as hell. He doesn't cite sources at all, if he does theyre very vague or theyre reddit and wikipedia.
There's a channel called History Matters that I watch from time to time. It's pretty large (~900k subscribers). I don't mind the blocky animation & I like the dry humor, but the videos are 3-4 minutes long so it's possible that important context is often left out.
As far as I know HM is fine, but again, they dont cite sources. There are some vids where they do if I remember correctly, maybe the older 10 minute ones.
 
The algorithm pushed a channel my way named Jabzy, I found it interesting because it has some topics and first hand accounts I wouldn't consider general knowledge. For example I'm not particularly knowledgeable about gypsy history, and did not know that the leader of the gypsyies in Romania aligned himself with the Iron Guard

Jabzy is kinda of an interesting channel. I remember first seeing his channel when he did a trip from japan across Eurasia back to his home in Britain. I remember at least in his older videos he tried to strive to be unbias. He had one of the most impartial takes on the Yugoslav wars. His stuff can sometimes fall under Generic content farm but I would say he is at his best when he is talking about obscure less documented historical topics. I have seen people point out factual errors of his in the past so take him with a grain of salt but over all I do recommend Jabzy.
 

Corpun

Save the Tomboys! #TLM
kiwifarms.net
Potential History is insanely lazy. He's notorious in the history community for his reddit-tier takes and complete lack of editing talent. It's not that he can't make a good video, it's that he refuses to. I couldn't even get two minutes into his latest video because the audio mixing is ear-destroyingly AWFUL. The guy can't even take the time to do a basic Noise Removal in Audacity. For those who don't know, a Noise Removal is an entirely automatic process for eliminating background noise like hissing, static, etc, and requires pressing two buttons and highlighting one section of the audio track as a reference point. Some of his videos (like his Girls Und Panzer Das Finale video) are so badly edited they have blatant errors right in the middle, which he never bothers fixing.

Beyond that, he is so unprofessional it cost at least one other content creator quite a bit of money and exposure when he agreed to do a collaboration, but fucked around for so long that the partner (I believe it was the Armchair Historian,) had to go ahead and release their half with a ton of last-minute edits to cover the stuff he should've been doing.
If he had spergy takes on Twitter or Reddit he might deserve his own thread (though maybe he has old reddit accounts saying dumbshit like 'we should disinter all Confederate soldiers and try every Axis war vet for warcrimes')

He does have a habit of occasionally pimping his girlfriend out to do the sponsorship ads. I remember one video he randomly films her hula-hooping.
for example how in the Russian Revolution pt.1 video he portrays Emperor Nicholas II as partying all the time, actually he cut the court budget and his own personal budget more than his father or grandfather and donated large parts of it, especially during the massive Famine of 1891. Lots of people could come away thinking that he increased spending on court life or something similar
The jokes issue could be resolved if he pit footnotes in the video like Armchair does. From what I have seen he isn't new to editing so it can't be that bad.
I don't get how you can take jokes he makes and form them into a new reality. He jokes about killing the French, sure he may not like them but he also doesn't want to kill them. He is a British nationalist to be sure, but not someone who makes that a major point in his videos. And regarding the WW2 machine gun video he made, if that's your best evidence for him being biased then he's not biased. maybe it was just an honest mistake, which happens.

in the Falkland war video he made it a point to say "we" instead of "the British" because he was alive during that time. He looks down on people who think they have a connection to the past.
I didn't say I took his jokes seriously. I just said I found them charming since they come from a very obvious British nationalist.
However, Simon Whistler (the host) appears to be a human content farm as he's admitted to having so many channels that he often forgets which one is for what. There's only one issue I've had thus far, and well, they say "show don't tell," so:
I could've sworn I mentioned Simon Whistler in the OP, maybe I missed him. There is no way however he is able to operate dozens of channels without some errors. Most of them that I have caught have been fuck ups with dates or years where presumably someone in the editing or reviewing doesn't notice it. His channels are very much contentfarms however with the amount of videos they pump out.
Native American History is just starting out but what's quite noteworthy is that in their video on Comanches, they don't whitewash them. They paint them as the brutal mfers they were.
I am surprised that not painting the natives are nature loving hippies is allowed in current year.
 

Jarolleon

kiwifarms.net

Especially the second one. The sources are reddit and TE, which is outdated as hell. He doesn't cite sources at all, if he does theyre very vague or theyre reddit and wikipedia.

As far as I know HM is fine, but again, they dont cite sources. There are some vids where they do if I remember correctly, maybe the older 10 minute ones.
So Felton is the Potholer54 of history channels? A stereotypical Anglo educated type who benefits from that fact that most people born between 1980 and 2000 have been conditioned from childhood to view anything said by such a person as factual? It's the pre-Clown World BBC style of presentation.
 
Last edited:

Seventh Star

hungry burger fan
kiwifarms.net
So Felton is Potholer54 of history channels? A stereotypical Anglo educated type who benefits from that fact that most people born after the 1980s have been conditioned from childhood to view anything said by such a person as factual? It's the pre-Clown World BBC style of presentation.
Yes. He's mostly benign since he isn't insufferable, but he is hated in tank circles for being a smoothbrain who misinforms people. He's an old style "historian" who thinks WWII was this fantasy land where an M6 can penetrate the Tiger II (even from behind its almost impossible). On the other hand, Lindybeige is seen as similarly worthless teeaboo; all he knows is that British stuff is the best. If you want a brit who is actually funny, entertaining, and informative, watch Chieftain's videos. Speaking of, here's this horrible collab they had.


My first exposure to Johnny/PotentialHistory was through his Ha-Go video, and then I watched his Nation Tank Meme videos. Besides the fact that he barely talks about tanks and talks about tactics instead which beats the purpose of the video, his opinions are as far as I know really mixed. The worst ones being placing way too much importance in manufacturing AFVs in numbers that Germany didnt have the capacity for, and blowing out of proportions the problems with one-man turrets. He's basically spouting anything he hears in r/tanks.
 

Übertroon

Gotta go fast
kiwifarms.net
My first exposure to Johnny/PotentialHistory was through his Ha-Go video, and then I watched his Nation Tank Meme videos. Besides the fact that he barely talks about tanks and talks about tactics instead which beats the purpose of the video, his opinions are as far as I know really mixed. The worst ones being placing way too much importance in manufacturing AFVs in numbers that Germany didnt have the capacity for, and blowing out of proportions the problems with one-man turrets. He's basically spouting anything he hears in r/tanks.
It's the anti wehraboo pendulum swing I've mentioned earlier in this thread. The wehraboos spent years praising the tigers and panthers to be the greatest tanks of the war, curb stomping all opposition with ease, so to "own the nazis" their opposition decided to focus entirely on the strategic shortcomings of the germans panzers. Every tank video that mentions german tanks will inevitably have a mouthbreather making a joke about the drive train breaking.

Now, they're completely right about german tank production being a strategic nightmare. Germany did not have the resources to build enough tanks to compete with the combined industrial capacity of the US, UK, and USSR. They did not have the time, raw material, manpower, or industrial capacity to compete in the armored arms race of the war. Especially when the allies were bombing german infrastructure back to the stone age.

But here's the thing, usually when autistic history nerds argue about WWII tanks they're not having a deep discussion about which tank was the most strategically logical, or which one had the least crew losses or highest kill ratio. Their argument is the age old "who would win between superman and batman?"
If a Tiger tank faces a IS-2, who wins?

As for the joke about german tanks breaking down all the time. Yes they did have problems related to tanks breaking down, but the truth is every tank of the war had such issues. In truth the German tanks were expected to have double the service life of a russian tank. There was also the fact that tanks breaking down only really hurts if you're losing. if you're winning a broken down tank can just be repaired and put back into service. It's actually a miracle that the German tanks weren't of shittier quality considering they were already suffering from steel and aluminum shortages already in 1938.

At the end of the day, if there was a battle between a sherman and a panther, I know which tank I would prefer to sit in. And you're being a tard if you think you're going to convince people that the sherman was a better war machine by pointing out that the Shermans had a logistical advantage.
 

Jarolleon

kiwifarms.net
Yes. He's mostly benign since he isn't insufferable, but he is hated in tank circles for being a smoothbrain who misinforms people. He's an old style "historian" who thinks WWII was this fantasy land where an M6 can penetrate the Tiger II (even from behind its almost impossible). On the other hand, Lindybeige is seen as similarly worthless teeaboo; all he knows is that British stuff is the best. If you want a brit who is actually funny, entertaining, and informative, watch Chieftain's videos. Speaking of, here's this horrible collab they had.


My first exposure to Johnny/PotentialHistory was through his Ha-Go video, and then I watched his Nation Tank Meme videos. Besides the fact that he barely talks about tanks and talks about tactics instead which beats the purpose of the video, his opinions are as far as I know really mixed. The worst ones being placing way too much importance in manufacturing AFVs in numbers that Germany didnt have the capacity for, and blowing out of proportions the problems with one-man turrets. He's basically spouting anything he hears in r/tanks.
So why do old style historians have such fanciful views of tanks? Were they reliant on a handful of memoirs published immediately after the war, while newer historians focus more on field tests or declassified war archives or something?
 

Seventh Star

hungry burger fan
kiwifarms.net
So why do old style historians have such fanciful views of tanks? Were they reliant on a handful of memoirs published immediately after the war, while newer historians focus more on field tests or declassified war archives or something?
Basically, yes. You hit the nail on the head; archives and field test materials have only become more widespread and available recently, while before people based most info off of memoirs, diaries or journals. There was also a poorer understanding of tank doctrines and exactly what was going on behind the scenes. That's not to mention that only nowadays there's a sizeable collection of tanks all over the world, including the minor miracle that is the reconstruction of the 7TP tank. As time progresses, more information is extracted from whatever people can uncover. Aforementioned is the entire polish tank programme which has been studied more recently, and they had some extremely promising designs.

It's the anti wehraboo pendulum swing I've mentioned earlier in this thread. The wehraboos spent years praising the tigers and panthers to be the greatest tanks of the war, curb stomping all opposition with ease, so to "own the nazis" their opposition decided to focus entirely on the strategic shortcomings of the germans panzers. Every tank video that mentions german tanks will inevitably have a mouthbreather making a joke about the drive train breaking.

Now, they're completely right about german tank production being a strategic nightmare. Germany did not have the resources to build enough tanks to compete with the combined industrial capacity of the US, UK, and USSR. They did not have the time, raw material, manpower, or industrial capacity to compete in the armored arms race of the war. Especially when the allies were bombing german infrastructure back to the stone age.

But here's the thing, usually when autistic history nerds argue about WWII tanks they're not having a deep discussion about which tank was the most strategically logical, or which one had the least crew losses or highest kill ratio. Their argument is the age old "who would win between superman and batman?"
If a Tiger tank faces a IS-2, who wins?

As for the joke about german tanks breaking down all the time. Yes they did have problems related to tanks breaking down, but the truth is every tank of the war had such issues. In truth the German tanks were expected to have double the service life of a russian tank. There was also the fact that tanks breaking down only really hurts if you're losing. if you're winning a broken down tank can just be repaired and put back into service. It's actually a miracle that the German tanks weren't of shittier quality considering they were already suffering from steel and aluminum shortages already in 1938.

At the end of the day, if there was a battle between a sherman and a panther, I know which tank I would prefer to sit in. And you're being a tard if you think you're going to convince people that the sherman was a better war machine by pointing out that the Shermans had a logistical advantage.
I agree completely, and I know just how troubled Germany's industry was and how they leaned into Sweden for steel. Some of the bombings caused... tragic events for tank history, including the destruction of the Hungarian Tas tank.

I've had arguments like that many times over. Despite how much you point out to people that in a duel, the Panther easily outmatches a Sherman, they will keep bringing up the transmission meme (which isn't even true, as later Panther tanks were quite reliable). Anti-wehrabooism is also basically freeabooism. Like that furry fuck Spookston who only sometimes avoids parroting the same talking points.
 

Serbian Peacekeepers

Nostiagla Critic Main
kiwifarms.net
I've had arguments like that many times over. Despite how much you point out to people that in a duel, the Panther easily outmatches a Sherman, they will keep bringing up the transmission meme (which isn't even true, as later Panther tanks were quite reliable). Anti-wehrabooism is also basically freeabooism. Like that furry fuck Spookston who only sometimes avoids parroting the same talking points.
im biased towards the panther since its my favorite german tank ever , but anyone with a brain should see that the panthers drivetrain wasnt that big a issue and is overblown by the fact that like , most of the testing of it happened post war by crews that didnt train on it or could even read the manual.
 

Seventh Star

hungry burger fan
kiwifarms.net
im biased towards the panther since its my favorite german tank ever , but anyone with a brain should see that the panthers drivetrain wasnt that big a issue and is overblown by the fact that like , most of the testing of it happened post war by crews that didnt train on it or could even read the manual.
The only tank that it would apply to in a valid way is the Tiger II, and to a bigger extent the Jagdtiger. The rest are decent vehicles. Johnny boy here thinks the Germans would've won through the use of the StuGs and Panzer IVs. :story:
 

Just Some Other Guy

kiwifarms.net
Sherman vs Panther is easy. Am I in the tank? Panther. Am I trying to win a war? Sherman.

Anyways a neat channel for WW2 airplanes, especially an incredibly in depth series on the P-47 Thunderbolt is "Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles". Also a fan of Drachinifel videos, although his comment section is pure reddit with the amount of "laughs in" and "yes" uh....'jokes'.
 

Serbian Peacekeepers

Nostiagla Critic Main
kiwifarms.net
The only tank that it would apply to in a valid way is the Tiger II, and to a bigger extent the Jagdtiger. The rest are decent vehicles. Johnny boy here thinks the Germans would've won through the use of the StuGs and Panzer IVs. :story:
Um achsually he says the wouldnt help them , so uh , nazi btfo
 

likeacrackado

kiwifarms.net
I had to pretty much cut out watching pop history channels. Everytime some fat soy filled faggot like PT or Cynical historian would repeat the same generic anti wehraboo or anti conferederate views, alongside reddit "humor", I would become more hardline in my own stances opposing them. Reading accounts of historical events has done a lot more to broaden my horizons than being scolded for not hating my background enough.

I also hope I'm not the only person who remembers when Invicta was a total war tuber under the name 'THFE Productions'. Haven't watched many of his videos post name change(think I've watched enough Roman history videos to last a lifetime).

Dovahhatty wore on me sometime after he grew out of being a guy who shilled his own videos on /his/. Him being a furfag doesn't surprise me as much as it would if the entire appeal of his channel wasn't tired 4chan memes.

As for most of the rest I don't have much of an opinion. The only channels I watch consistently now are Drachinfel, a variety of firearms/weapons channels, and Unknown5 for when I need background noise of a dubiously sourced Wikipedia article.
 

Corpun

Save the Tomboys! #TLM
kiwifarms.net
As for most of the rest I don't have much of an opinion. The only channels I watch consistently now are Drachinfel, a variety of firearms/weapons channels, and Unknown5 for when I need background noise of a dubiously sourced Wikipedia article.
What does Unknown5 do? Never heard of him.
I had to pretty much cut out watching pop history channels. Everytime some fat soy filled faggot like PT or Cynical historian would repeat the same generic anti wehraboo or anti conferederate views, alongside reddit "humor"
I recently checked if I was still subscribed to a few pop history channels that kept getting recommended to me, Potential History included, just to make sure I quit getting their content fed to me.
Reading accounts of historical events has done a lot more to broaden my horizons than being scolded for not hating my background enough.
Have you heard of Voices of the Past? They do exactly that.
 

likeacrackado

kiwifarms.net
What does Unknown5 do?
Basically what I said he does. Its just pan and zooms of art/photos combined with generic youtube storyteller narration. He has an odd habit of presenting the information twice for each topic, one more like a summary of a movie where the author leaves out the ending and one a bit longer with more details and a transition to the next topic. Once you watch a couple videos you'll pick up that he's rewording wikipedia style articles and padding out what information he has by repeating himself. He gets called out in the comments for this, but like I said the videos make for good background noise and have sparked my interest in a few events/people I wasn't aware of before.
Have you heard of Voices of the Past? They do exactly that.
No I haven't checked them out yet. Thanks for the recommendation.
 

Corpun

Save the Tomboys! #TLM
kiwifarms.net
Basically what I said he does. Its just pan and zooms of art/photos combined with generic youtube storyteller narration. He has an odd habit of presenting the information twice for each topic, one more like a summary of a movie where the author leaves out the ending and one a bit longer with more details and a transition to the next topic. Once you watch a couple videos you'll pick up that he's rewording wikipedia style articles and padding out what information he has by repeating himself. He gets called out in the comments for this, but like I said the videos make for good background noise and have sparked my interest in a few events/people I wasn't aware of before.
That's either got to be the blandest content imaginable or the most intelligent YouTube business model.
 
Everytime some fat soy filled faggot like PT or Cynical historian would repeat the same generic anti wehraboo or anti conferederate views, alongside reddit "humor", I would become more hardline in my own stances opposing them.
Oh God, the cynical historian. He might be the biggest lolcow out of all of historytube.
To quote myself from another thread.
The Cynical Historian - I was a fan of his from the beginning but whether it was his annoying "muh academia" quips, his hypocritical view of conspiracy theories, his trump derangement syndrome, his lack of nuance when it come to his subject manner, his attitudes towards criticism of his content, or his pro censorship views. I began to really despise him. I think it was either his really bad take on the film The Death of Stalin or was his strawmaning the Irish indenture servants were slaves argument and turning the comments off when people began forming counter arguments in his slavery video that completely turn me off from his videos.
I use to really like him at one point in the beginning but man did he become an insufferable twat.

He's also a buffoon on twitter from what I've gather from other threads.
View attachment 2268125-4db95ed5a56b798ae8b0c67cc9f1488f.webp
.png


He's apparently related to General George Patton whom I'm completely am assured would have been ashamed to find out that any of his relatives ended up as a commie.
 
Top