Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea/Archive 17

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Status of WikiProject Korea working groups

I've updated the working group list to show Seoul, South Korea and South Korean Economy as "defunct", since none of these had any activity, discussion or listed members. I'm just wondering how people feel about the rest of them. The North Korea working group seems reasonably active, while Baseball, Cinema and Military History are all co-maintained by other WikiProjects. These are all fine.

But there doesn't seem to be much (if any) activity at the others, and they mostly seem like relics from back in the day when this project was more active and had greater participation. Whenever I add the {{WikiProject Korea}} banner to a page I diligently include any relevant working groups, but it often seems a bit pointless. I suspect anyone who is interested in those subject areas or who is looking for help will get more of a response on this page anyway.

Any thoughts on mothballing some or all of the remaining work groups? PC78 (talk) 12:54, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

No-one? In that case, let me suggest that the Architecture, Arts, Biography, Cuisine, History, South Korean geography & South Korean politics working groups be marked as "Inactive" for now, with a view to removing them from the project banner at a later time. I'll give it a few weeks though in case anyone rallies to the defence of one or more of these groups. PC78 (talk) 17:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Dear User:PC78. There is nothing like a living Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea. But feel free to discuss with the stone haetae, they will not contradict you in any manner. Pldx1 (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Ah-ha, is that approval or disapproval? I can't tell! :) PC78 (talk) 18:16, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

It's been over a month with no sign of life at any of the above working groups. I've marked them all as "inactive" for now but will continue to monitor the situation. PC78 (talk) 10:28, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@PC78: That's kind of sad. ;-; Ericgyuminchoi (talk) 13:55, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Six Korean name articles created today

Hi! The discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Six Korean name articles created today may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Please feel free to provide input at the link provided. SITH (talk) 18:20, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

StraussInTheHouse Thank you for the notification.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 00:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

If/When both N/S Korea merge, how will the naming of articles be?

Ok this is more theoretical, but how would naming of stuff occur? like many they moved to Korea?

72.76.233.248 (talk) 22:38, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if I should write the word as it is or translate the meaning.

http://ko.wiki.x.io/wiki/%EC%B2%99%ED%99%94%EB%B9%84 This article is waht I'm trying to translate. The name of article, should I write in Korean name or translate name? I couldn't find it's English name — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkdrmstj (talk • contribs) 04:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wkdrmstj You can't write it in Korean on English Wikipedia, so you will need to use a translation or the Romanization of Korean, as there is no English word that means the same thing. Examples in WP are Chuseok, Joseon, Yangban, etc., which are used for words that do not exist in English.

I have done a search to try and find any romantizied versions of 척화비 which may have been used in English language newspapers (I usually do this and use the version most often used). But, I didn't find any. I did find one article that refers to the exact quotes which are written on the stone monuments [1] in JSTOR, but it calls them steles in English, or "stone slabs". The best I can find is this book [2] that calls them ch'ok hwabi", and chokhwapi. Another dictionary site [3] says cheog hwa bi. Translators for Google and Bing are saying cheoghwabi and chuckhwabi.

So, I think Chokhwabi (or Chokhwabi), or maybe Cheokhwabi (or Cheok hwabi), or Cheoghwabi (or Cheog hwabi), are all pretty close.

Hopefully, someone with more experience can also offer some advice here. Or maybe you can translate it more closely with your own knowledge. Good luck to you, interesting topic!--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2019 (UTC) And yes, you can translate the meaning in the article, with a citation, use the Google book one I listed above. I think it translates too long to use as a title of the article? What...."Korean stone monuments to guard against attacks by western barbarians", or "Daewongun (spelled Taewongun in Google book) stone monuments against foreign invasion".....yes the tranlated Korean version will be better, right?--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 10:45, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Actually, I gave it more thought and looked at Wikipedia:Article titles, a title with a short translation might be better than an unknown Korean romantized word. Although a Google search for 척화비 gives a lot of results in Korean language, the romantized name search "Chokhwabi" or its other versions are not showing up in an English search. So maybe a title with a translation would be best, something like I wrote above, you can use your own translation. Again, hopefully someone else can comment with advise here.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 11:52, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Wkdrmstj, I finally looked at your Draft article and you have the name translated to "Anti-appeasement stele". (and WP has page links for both appeasement and stele which you can use). That is what you should use for the page name. Sorry I wandered a bit above. I also found this Cultural Heritage Wiki that provides details about them in Korean and English, which may help with your translation, although it does not reference any citations that I can see, which you could have used, [4] And, for general history, I found another wiki, Korea 100, [5] which also might provide source information for researching and translating articles for Wikipedia. I understand that these subject matters are hard to translate and appreciate your hard work in attempting a difficult task.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Korean speaker (well, reader) needed

I'd quite like to add this image to the article Seokjeon. It looks as though it's a relatively old painting (that said, while I've got a reasonable grounding in the history of Chinese and Japanese visual arts, I know next-to-nothing about Korean art history, so maybe it's not that old) which would probably make it usable under public domain rules. However, I can't be sure... the caption might tell me more, but it's in Korean, which I can't read. Would someone with a better understanding of Hangul mind taking a quick glance to see whether the text at the bottom of the image goes any way towards indicating the original artist or source? Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:48, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Unauthorized use of the image is not allowed. Such a restriction can't be enforced on 2D replications if the painting's copyright has expired, but without the artist's name or date of publication, it's impossible to determine the copyright status. Ə XPLICIT 23:52, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I am perfectly aware of that. That's why I am asking for help in determining whether the caption provides information about the painter's identity or the date of the painting. Thank you for educating me in the sucking of eggs, nevertheless... Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:30, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

"이미지 무단 사용시 저작권법에 따라 법적책임이 따를 수 있습니다" (Unauthorized use may result in legal liability under copyright law)―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:07, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Cho Min

Could someone perhaps look at merging any relevant content from Cho Min into the relevant section at Cho Kuk? It seems that the daughter is not notable enough for a separate article. PC78 (talk) 13:23, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

There seems to be lots of sources. And the article says her work became "a focal point" in the scandal. The large section in the article about it seems to reflect that. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:58, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

She does not appear to have any notability beyond the scandal, so WP:ONEEVENT and WP:PSEUDO both apply. It's not a question of sourcing. PC78 (talk) 18:07, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree. She is not notable for a wikipedia article. It should be removed or merged. --Christian140 (talk) 15:40, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Article title

I was going to create a list on 대한민국의 명승, which I think would be translated into "cultural scenic treasures of South Korea" but I am not sure. Taewangkorea (talk) 19:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Here, it is translated as Scenic Sites of Korea. --Christian140 (talk) 07:51, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Taewangkorea (talk) 00:33, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Category deletion discussion

Please come participate in the discussion here. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:33, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

PUBG Korea League

Could anyone assist with assessing the notability of Draft:PUBG_Korea_League? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

@Curb Safe Charmer: On quick glance it appears to be notable but I will take a detailed look at the sources later today (Source No. 8 by Kukmin Ilbo appears to demonstrate SIGCOV, but need to check for the other). But it contains large amounts of promotional and unsourced material that would need to be trimmed down. Taewangkorea (talk) 18:03, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

@Curb Safe Charmer: After another quick look through the sources, it appears to be notable, but the largest problem is that the article is very promotional, so I have declined it as such. If I had time I would trim it down, but right now I do not have the time to do so. It appears that Korean media have referenced it as "PKL" a lot, maybe an abbreviation. Taewangkorea (talk) 02:18, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

National Parks of South Korea

Should we merge the articles on some mountains of South Korea to their respective national parks (Bukhansan to Bukhansan National Park, Chiaksan to Chiaksan National Park, Deogyusan to Deogyusan National Park, etc) or vice vursa? I think that since many of these articles are very stubby and can benefit from mergers. Thoughts requested. Taewangkorea (talk) 01:02, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

@Taewangkorea: Consider WP:NGEO. If a stubby mountain is nonetheless notable, it should remain a stub. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Including how work has been received by experts and the public in articles about Korean musicians

FYI, there's a Request for Comment about including how work has been received by experts and the public in articles about Korean musicians at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea/Popular_culture#RfC:_Including_how_work_has_been_received_by_experts_and_the_public_in_articles_about_Korean_musicians.

Please feel free to participate. Hyuny Bunny (talk) 05:18, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Kim Young Soo

Interesting topic (whisteblower, soldier) that has been declined from AfC due to notability. Korean sources only, maybe someone can improve and rescue it? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Seo kang joon

Hi. Seo kang joon has received an award for “watcher “ .please add this to his biography ShamimBr95 (talk) 08:09, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:BEBOLD. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:27, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

:Hi @ShamimBr95:, as you were told at the article talk page, information needs to be reliably sourced and you are welcome to make this change yourself. Alex (talk) 15:51, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Romanization of Korean

Hi, I have stumbled on some pages created by WikiProject Korea and the Romanization was highly incorrect. There are official Romanization systems and if your content does not follow them, you are forcing other people to come and edit word by word by word. You cannot just trust that existing content on other pages has been Romanized correctly. The standard now, especially online is the Korean government's system. Please use that, and if you don't know how to do it, please review how to do it before creating content with spellings that will confuse the readers and will not connect to the information that exists in other books, journals, and on others webpages. Umyang (talk) 16:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)umyang

Hello! WikiProject Korea's Manual of Style provides guidelines for romanization, which you can find here. In short, it says to generally use Revised Romanization for articles related to South Korea, and to use McCune–Reischauer for articles related to North Korea and Korea before the division. There are always exceptions, notably when the these romanization systems differ from the common name in English, you should use the common spelling used in English sources. I hope that's helpful! Also keep in mind that, even if a page is part of WikiProject Korea, it may have been created or edited by users who aren't members of the project and who aren't familiar with the romanization guidelines, so mistakes happen and any effort to fix them is greatly appreciated. Lenoresm (talk) 19:10, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Korean-speakers needed to evaluate an edit request

An Edit Request at X1 (band) could use some evaluation from editors fluent in Korean. The anonymous editor has requested substantial changes based on non-English sources, so none of the usual semi-protected patrollers (including myself) has taken it on yet. It has lingered for over a week now. Thanks in advance. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:40, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Done Taken care of by Explicit. Thanks to anyone else who looked. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:57, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Naver - reliable source?

I encountered the following two URLs being used in citations: https://search.naver.com/search.naver?where=nexearch&sm=tab_etc&mra=bjky&pkid=1&os=2186592&query=%EC%97%90%EC%9D%B4%ED%8B%B0%EC%98%A4 and https://search.naver.com/search.naver?where=nexearch&sm=tab_etc&mra=bjky&pkid=1&os=2186935&query=%EC%8B%9C%ED%9B%84

Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources says that apart from blogs, Naver is a reliable source. These don't look terribly reliable to me, not least because they link to this page https://myprofile.naver.com/Index.naver which suggests the information is provided by the person or their agent which would make them "somewhat reliable" per WP:SELFSOURCE. I don't speak Korean so may have misunderstood.

Could anyone please advise me? (please ping if you reply) --kingboyk (talk) 09:35, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Naver People Search is reliable per Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources. Maybe use those links instead of the above: https://people.search.naver.com/search.naver?where=nexearch&sm=tab_ppn&query=%EC%97%90%EC%9D%B4%ED%8B%B0%EC%98%A4&os=2186592&ie=utf8&key=PeopleService and https://people.search.naver.com/search.naver?where=nexearch&sm=tab_ppn&query=%EC%8B%9C%ED%9B%84&os=2186935&ie=utf8&key=PeopleService ~~ CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 10:48, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I won't touch the citations since I have to rely on Google Translate. If you'd like to attend to it the article is Sihoo Lee. --kingboyk (talk) 10:56, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Quite aside from the reliability of Naver, the article was problematic. I've draftified it; it's now Draft:Sihoo Lee. -- Hoary (talk) 04:42, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

BTS (band) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for BTS (band) to be moved to BTS (group). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 08:02, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

RfC: Including concerts/tours in articles about Korean musicians

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Result: An article about notable Korean musicians can include a section listing concerts/tours that meet the guidelines for notability.
There appears to be some other issue in this discussion, but I can't figure out exactly what it was. In any case, this discussion has come to a natural end so this RfC should be closed. -- llywrch (talk) 19:21, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Should a section listing concerts/tours be included in articles about notable Korean musicians?

(NOTE: This only refers to major performances where the musician is the headline act, not where they just perform a few songs along with many other musicians.)

Hyuny Bunny (talk) 00:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Following Wikipedia's recommendation to “ask for help at the relevant WikiProject”,[6] I would be interested to read the views of this group to see if there's a consensus here, as not all users appear to have the same understanding of this issue. To keep the discussion professional, please cite sources to support statements, as I've tried to do below. This helps focus on the goal of group collaboration based on factual evidence, rather than just individual opinion.

To put this issue into context, a section for concerts/tours is included in articles about American musicians (such as Mariah Carey[7] and Michael Jackson,[8] which are both classified as Featured Articles), as well as some articles about Korean musicians (such as Girls' Generation,[9] which is classified as a Good Article).

Wikipedia seems to confirm that these comparison articles avoid fluff and set precedents:

“A good article...addresses the main aspects of the topic...without going into unnecessary detail.” [10]

“Featured articles...are used by editors as examples for writing other articles.” [11]

Including this information also seems to follow Wikipedia's fundamental principle to “use common sense”.[12] Concert tours and ticket sales are financially important to musicians' careers, often more than music releases and album sales [13].

Finally, there are WikiProject Guidelines that specifically recommend including this information in articles: “Page layout ... Concerts, convention/festival and tours” [14]

Thank you in advance for the opportunity to have a civil discussion here about this issue.[15] [16]

Hyuny Bunny (talk) 00:07, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Why exactly do we need an RFC for a standard staple in articles about musicians? Ə XPLICIT 03:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you that we shouldn't need one. Unfortunately, another user removed that information from an article, and discussion with that user didn't resolve the situation. Thank you for sharing your view that including concerts/tours is standard in articles about musicians. Hyuny Bunny (talk) 06:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, as long as there is a reliable source to support the information then I don’t see why this would be removed. They’re a musician, it’s definitely relevant to the subject. Alex (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your viewpoint. (Please note that featured articles, like those for Mariah Carey and Michael Jackson, don't include sources in the concerts/tours section, and the WikiProject Guidelines don't specify that they're required there either.) Hyuny Bunny (talk) 18:50, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Hyuny Bunny, I have no problem for including this info, as long as the information is reliably sourced. Taewangkorea (talk) 19:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Taewangkorea, thanks for your feedback. I'm not the editor(s) who added concerts/tours to the article originally, so it's not my own work that I'm defending here. The user who deleted them noted in their Edit Summary, "that these are worth mentioning is questionable", so their decision wasn't based on lack of sourcing. If their edit can be reverted on the grounds that WikiProject Guidelines and this RfC's communal consensus prove that concerts/tours are worth mentioning, then I can try to source them. But it does seem strange to apply higher standards to this article than those used in featured articles. Hyuny Bunny (talk) 19:57, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

@Hyuny Bunny: I don’t necessarily mean they should be sourced in the tour section. Jackson’s tours are all sourced where they’re mentioned throughout the article in prose. As long as it’s sourced somewhere in the article. Alex (talk) 20:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

@Alexanderlee: Thanks for clarifying, and sorry if it wasn't clear that I was only referring to the listing in the concerts/tours section. What you propose makes sense, as it looks odd to add sources to a list format. If that user's edit can be reverted now, then nothing else needs to be done to that section. Hyuny Bunny (talk) 20:18, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

@Hyuny Bunny: Ah sorry for the confusion. I only mentioned it being sourced as I’ve seen edits been made where a tour has been added to a list, but not mentioned and sourced anywhere else in the article. I agree it’s a pretty standard thing for an article regarding a musical act. Alex (talk) 20:39, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

@Alexanderlee: No problem, and thanks for the information. Hyuny Bunny (talk) 20:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Another point to add to the general discussion: Wikipedia's essay on Overzealous Deletion states, “Wikipedia is not about what you like and do not like. An article or section that fully conforms with Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion must remain, even if one or a few people do not like it.”[17] The outcome of this discussion could also affect other articles, if that user has made or will make the same deletion elsewhere. Hyuny Bunny (talk) 20:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Explicit, thanks again for participating in this RfC. According to Wikipedia's established practice, “guidelines document communal consensus”[18], so would the guidelines that I referenced above help document the communal consensus of WikiProject Korea?[19] And would it be appropriate to close this uncontroversial discussion now?[20] Hyuny Bunny (talk) 00:09, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

"as long as there is a reliable source to support the information" is pretty relevant, of course--and the K-portals that mostly rehash company PR don't count. In many cases, the "list of tours" or whatever is unverified and questionable, it frequently includes these "showcases", and it seems to be just another way to fill up articles that are written according to templates. Drmies (talk) 16:30, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

- @Drmies: Please note that there were some reliable sources to support the information, and it didn't include any "showcases". According to your rationale above, the entire section should not have been deleted by you, and then deleted again by User:Dr.K.. Are you now willing to allow that section to be restored, if reliable sources exist? Hyuny Bunny (talk) 07:20, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Drmies's points entirely. I also add that to list the concerts/tours, these have to satisfy GNG. In other words, I fail to see why a concert or a tour has to be listed if an article about the event does not exist. At a minimum, an article should already exist for an event to be notable enough to be listed. Dr. K. 04:16, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

- @Dr.K.: Please note that according to Wikipedia, "The notability guidelines do not apply to contents of articles or lists" [21] Some sources do exist for concerts/tours, so according to your rationale above, they are notable enough to be listed. According to your rationale, the entire section should not have been deleted by User:Drmies, and then deleted again by you. Are you now willing to allow that section to be restored, if sources exist? Hyuny Bunny (talk) 07:10, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
  - I'm kind of wondering what the point is of having a list even if the content is verified. If some band goes on tour and plays a dozen shows or whatever in this or that country, that should first and foremost be part of the verified text, the biography if you will. One of the problems here is that we have yet another opportunity for listing and table porn in K-pop articles which, before you know it, is going to be split off into yet another article, creating the supposed need for yet more templates and links in templates, in a domain of articles where the blowing up of factoids supported by PR and fan portals is already rampant. Just look at the article for Kard (band), and their enormously inflated "tours" section, and that for a band that managed to make no albums and sell only 37,000 copies of three EPs. And look at the source for their North American "tour" (four shows in venues of 2,000 sets)--this piece of promotional fluff. So this "verified" really means very little, practically speaking, in that article. Sure, I suppose that PR piece "verifies" something, but it gives no indication that it actually mattered. And this is symptomatic for this domain. Drmies (talk) 18:53, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
    - @Drmies: Your general wondering would be more appropriate to bring up later in another forum, and you would have to respect the many experienced editors who have documented their communal consensus in guidelines and set precedents by making lists a standard practice in featured/good articles.
    - The point of having a list has already been addressed in this RfC – concerts/tours are important to a musician's career, often more than their discography (which also merits a list). Precedents/guidelines/communal consensus all indicate that a list is considered useful for reference purposes, so that the entire text won't have to be searched for that information,
    - The article for Kard isn't a good comparison because the article in question here does not have an enormously inflated tours section, and the band in question did manage to release multiple albums. Nobody is asking for that section to be split off into another article, only that it be returned to the article from which it originally came, to give equal treatment to every musician, regardless of nationality.
    - For everyone's sake, it'd be best to resolve all our old business before the end of the year (UTC), so we can start the new year with a clean slate. That would avoid the need for further escalation of these matters. Any unnecessary delaying tactics will only prove lack of good faith. For the last time, I'm requesting that you respect the communal consensus of the other experienced editors who have contributed to this RfC, drawn up guidelines, and set precedents in other articles. To prove your good faith, please have Dr.K. undo their revert and restore concerts/tours to the article, so I can start seeing to sources. Hyuny Bunny (talk) 02:25, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

So for this clean slate, and "everyone's sake", you, with 104 article edits and all this talk, want us to just roll over, without actually addressing a single one of the points I raised, besides saying "this article is different"--which you then want to use to format other articles. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 02:54, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

WP:NODEADLINE. If you wanted your RfC to end earlier, you should not have started it so late. Now, you must wait for an uninvolved editor to close it after the full 30 days have elapsed. As far as Drmies telling me to revert myself, it won't happen. We both agree on everything. Also, please, no pinging. It is annoying and useless. I know how to find this talkpage. Dr. K. 03:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Drmies and Dr.K.: I'm not sure where you two are getting this idea that lists of concert tours is an "issue" strictly affecting K-pop. There is a literal WikiProject that offers suggestions to users on how to present the information. There are featured articles and good articles about particular tours, and lists and featured lists that cover all tours by a particular artist. There is no established convention to present the content, so there isn't really "right" or "wrong" way to go about it as long as there are references to back it up. Aside from vilifying K-pop and its audience, are there any actual concerns that justifies removal of said content that doesn't inherently fly in the face of established norms and practices? Ə XPLICIT 07:01, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Explicit, it sounds as if I am beating my wife continuously. Let's start 2020 with fewer loaded questions. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

What Drmies said. Also asking the rhetorical question: Aside from vilifying K-pop and its audience... is insulting. If you think my contributions in this discussion, (or Drmies's for that matter), amount to this denunciation, there is no point in discussing anything further with you unless you retract the loaded statement. And, again, no pinging. If you had read my comments just above you would have seen the previous no pinging request. Dr. K. 18:36, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

The answer to the RFC question is obviously yes, but I would add a big but here. Namely, announcements of these concerts should not count as reliable sources that these concerts have actually taken place. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Kibi Clan Rebellion

QuickTrial (talk · contribs) removed the content of the Kibi Clan Rebellion article, describing it as "pseudohistory presented as fact". I've restored the content, but marked the article with a {{disputed}} header until someone knowledgeable can take a look at this. If it is pseudohistory or myth (perhaps like the Arthurian legends?) its content should probably be marked as such, rather than the whole article deleted. -- The Anome (talk) 13:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

BTS (band) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for BTS (band) to be moved to BTS. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 07:35, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

IZM reliable?

Is IZM a reliable source? Specifically, there is disagreement on Map of the Soul: 7 as to whether its album review can be included. WP:A/S says to come here for reliable sources concerning k-pop. Bait30 ^Talk? 16:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bait30: Where is this disagreement regarding its reliability taking place? Based on the page's history, the disagreement stems from its inclusion in the {{Album ratings}} template at the eleventh review, which is generally limited to ten. Ə XPLICIT 09:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Explicit: Oh I didn't even notice that there were 11. I guess in this case it doesn't matter. For future reference though, what do you think about IZM's reliability? Bait30 ^Talk? 16:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bait30: From what I can tell, it's a fine source. The founder appears to be a highly regarded music critic, and IZM has in-house writers as well as contributions from other noted music critics/columnists from time to time. Ə XPLICIT 00:26, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

BTS (band) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for BTS (band) to be moved to BTS. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 10:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Has it been discussed before here?

I was wondering, if/when the two Koreas unify ( a big IFF), what would be the names? Was there a prior discussion? Starzoner (talk) 14:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't really the place to speculate on such things. We need reliable sources to write about the subject - the point of Wikiproject Korea is to improve articles related to Korea. Your best bet for anything on this issue would be Korean reunification. Evaders99 (talk) 20:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for assistance

There is discussion at Talk:United States Military and prostitution in South Korea about the number of prostitutes in South Korea during the 1950s and 60s. As I don't speak Korean and the format precludes machine translating, could somebody kindly verify (or not) the the ROK Government figures for prostitutes serving the UN/US military were 10,000-30,000 in 1954, 20,000 in 1966 and 13,000-14,000 in 1969 from these sources [22], [23] and [24].

Thanks. --John B123 (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

May is Asian Pacific American Heritage Month

I don't know if anybody has told you about this, but May is Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, and DYK has set aside a special holding area for that. Please see WT:DYK. Also, so far, we just have contributions about Hawaiian Asian culture, and Fililpino Americans. It seems to me that Koreans in America are a sizeable population. Please feel free to participate. If anyone needs help getting started over there, just post a request for help at WT:DYK. Good luck. — Maile (talk) 23:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Korean Air Lines Flight 007

Korean Air Lines Flight 007, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Exceptions To Members Sections

I actually came here because of the Dempagumi.inc members section and how furious I am at the removal of detailed information about the members of the group. I know that they're J-pop and this is about K-pop but the idea of members and the things they represent remains consistent through both cultures. The difference is that as K-pop is vastly more popular in the English speaking world than J-pop is, it's far more well-documented in English. The problem I have arises from something like the Dempagumi.inc member section having its detailed member informatuion removed. As of right now, Wikipedia is one of if not the only place on the English-speaking internet where that detailed information from the member section can even be found. Things like what each member represents in their otaku genre, their color, information about their circumstances, join and graduation dates, etc. That information only exists right here in that former revision of that Wiki.

By removing that information, you are - metaphorically speaking - burning the only known translation of a book. You are erasing recorded history, and that is absolutely unacceptable. I will continue to revert that version until a rational consensus can be reached. There needs to be a place for information like that, especially when Wikipedia is the only reputable home on the internet to translated information such as that. I do not care if you can't settle on an agreement upon how to organize something like that. If you are removing detailed information like that for the sake of "consistency", you are an enemy to the preservation and recording of history, and that is downright putrid and you should be ashamed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KPopPapi (talk • contribs) 01:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

@KPopPapi: It is trivial, and you do not own the article. Any continued disruptive behavior will only lead you to being blocked. On the contrary to your claim, you have to find consensus to include the content, not the other way around. It wasn't there in the first place. Wikipedia is not a fansite nor is it a place to dump any and all information simply because it is exists. Ə XPLICIT 11:13, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments on the removal of dating info from Korean artists

There are currently 2 discussion about the removal of dating info from Korean artists Talk:Kim_Hee-chul#Personal_life_section and Talk:Kang_Daniel#Personal_relationship. Please help us reach a consensus. ~~ CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Finding a source

I can't seem to find a good source for Kang Myung-A, a south korean shooter. Can anybody help me? Thanks! Neverbuffed (talk) 20:41, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Neverbuffed, I am sorry nobody helped you. Maybe try asking at a bigger forum. --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 09:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Add photo for Ri Chun-hee?

(Question also posed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Korea, but raising here as well for greater coverage.)

I would like to propose adding a non-free photo of Ri Chun-hee (the North Korean TV news presenter), per a fair use exemption. Normally, the "pictures of people still alive" condition would bar fair use of a non-free picture of a living person, on the assumption that a free image may eventually become available. But it would appear vanishingly unlikely for anyone to ever be able to obtain a free photo of Ms. Ri under any circumstances — much less a picture of her in the pink attire that is an essential part of her persona and her notability. So, I'm strongly inclined to argue that a non-free photo of her, taken from a screen grab of a South Korean or other foreign news broadcast, would be appropriate. Comments? — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Also asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Korea. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

BP Guinness World Record discussion

I posed a question on the talk page of the Blackpink awards article regarding the GWR section and got some responses from only 3 editors related to the page, one of whom did not seem to understand at all what I was asking. In light of that I am hoping for additional thoughts on the matter if anyone is willing to take a look. Please note I am not contesting the information's inclusion but rather the way it is being presented on the page, as it seems to hinge upon a technicality in the supporting reference rather than clear-cut official confirmation from the record awarding body. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 02:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Seoul station listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Seoul station to be moved to Seoul Station. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 19:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.