Talk:Squid Game/Archive 1

Archive 1

Detective

Can someone add the detective? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.7.156.225 (talk) 14:43, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Already there "Wi Ha-joon as Hwang Jun-ho" - A police officer who sneaks into the Game to find his missing brother. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 15:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2021

There should be a disclaimer to not be confused with the Nintendo game franchise Splatoon 2601:602:680:4650:A481:4644:8BD8:C92B (talk) 19:57, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Marketing (globalize)

Any editors could help expand on this section especially on promotion efforts in South Korea itself and marketing efforts of the main Netflix office. In my opinion it is UNDUE to give focus on marketing promotion in the Philippines. It is weird that there is no mention of advertising in Korea or by Netflix central. I added a promotion on a train station in Seoul to mitigate this (a set in contrast to just the doll being exhibited in Manila). I suspect there could be Korean-language resources for this but I'm not fluent in Korean myself.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:40, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2021

KasparIsntDead (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

There are 2 seasons

There are now 2 seasons KasparIsntDead (talk) 11:09, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:11, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2021

In the first paragraph of "Production/Development" there's a misspelling in the following quote: "too difficult to understand and bizzare". It should be spelled "bizarre". Ndesprez (talk) 18:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done Eevee01^(talk) 19:05, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2021

In the "Public response" section beneath "Reception," there is a typo. Please change "locatization" to "localization". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.151.33 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 03:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2021 (2)

In the "Reception" section:

The Wall Street Journal reported that for a decade, Korean studios rejected the show for being too "grotesque" and "unrealistic", but has now become Netflix's biggest hit ever. 217.35.76.147 (talk) 15:53, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

This source is already used, and this aspect itself is already in the development section. --Masem (t) 16:10, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

References

Premise

Current premise is STILL incorrect, it isn't about people from 'all walks of life' participating in a survival game, it's about people in financially-difficult situations participating. Please revert to former state.

Former 'premise' section read: "456 people, who have all struggled financially in life, are invited to play a mysterious survival competition. Competing in a series of traditional children's games but with deadly twists, they risk their lives to compete for a ₩45.6 billion (US$38.5 million) prize." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:F84E:D300:9861:7A0C:EB9B:868E (talk) 22:26, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

I've updated the premise to go into just a bit more detail (with the fact that Gi-hun is the clear central character of the show) --Masem (t) 22:40, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the extra detail, but I think it now reads more like an 'overview' than a 'premise'. A premise should be short and succinct... Perhaps there can be two separate sections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:F84E:D300:9861:7A0C:EB9B:868E (talk) 01:48, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

What was the "premise" before (with the fixes) would be appropriate in the lede as a one line overview. --Masem (t) 01:54, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Realistically, the "premise" is used on articles where there isn't a succinct plot, so this should really be expanded to cover the plot of the series. An overview section would be about the series as a whole, such as creators and how the series came about. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:05, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

I believe it's fine for an overview. However, the first sentence of the article's second paragraph isn't so well-written.

This is clearer: 'The series centers on a contest which presents itself as a mystery survival competition, where 456 players, drawn from different walks of life but each struggling financially (or deeply in debt), are invited to compete in a series of traditional children's games but with deadly twists; they risk their lives to compete for a ₩45.6 billion (US$38.5 million) prize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:F84E:D300:9929:B9AA:8D15:42FC (talk) 00:52, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

The problem with that is that nothing in the show gives the games the concept of "survival competition", particularly not from the player's perspective; it is not like Hunger Games that they know apriori they are going to die if they lose. --Masem (t) 01:24, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

there is a typo

in Development section it says Hawng instead of Hwang — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.97.158.101 (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 23:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Epic games website???

Hey there. It seems that the website fields redirects to the epic games website. Can someone change it to the Netflix one? When I try it unnecessary spaces are added for a reason and my edits are getting reversed... Lidistat67 (talk) 21:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Website is already correct. According to this diff, you removed it entirely instead ... — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 00:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Is the website field being generated from wikidata? Is it really suitable to use it's streaming service as the official website? I wouldn't think we should be doing that. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

For all purposes, Netflix's site is the official site for it, but it is a bit weird that there's no non-logged in landing page for it as best as I can tell to see it. It doesn't have a simple promo page site. --Masem (t) 13:24, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Critical acclaim?

I had previously made edits reverting claims pertaining to a so-called universal acclaim this show received. These edits have been reverted back to "critical acclaim". As is the standard across Wikipedia, wouldn't a score of 69 (among other things) be indicative of "generally positive" response, as I had previously written? VF01 (talk) 03:01, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Generally, we don't have sources that discuss a film's broad critical reviews, and in absence of these, we do want to revert to using "generally positive" type language. But we can readily source "critical acclaim" to many sources broadly covering Squid Game's success, so there's no reason to not use that here. --Masem (t) 04:30, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

+The source literally states "critical acclaim", and there are multiple sources that describe the reception as "critical acclaim". Review aggregators' "consensus" are used when there is nothing else to use, basically. ภץאคгöร 16:41, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Page per episode

Is it too early to carve out a page per episode?2601:405:8401:4B80:DCBD:8894:E227:F1DE (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Are the individual episodes described about in detail by multiple RS? I think that's a bit overkill. We don't even have enough together for a standalone article for the episodes as a list, it doesn't need splitting out. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:03, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

I can tell right now that there is definitely not enough info per episode for this type of split. Development info is described at a "series" level, and while I have seen some per-episode reviews, it is the series overall that is talked about. The only episode maybe even close (and its still very far away IMO) from a standalone article is Ep 6. --Masem (t) 20:07, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Squid Game doll.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2021

Please move the sentence "Their bodies are strung up for all players to see and the players receive an apology, as Player 111 had an unfair advantage and the games are prided on treating everyone equally, regardless of their status in the outside world." to episode 6 as it happens at the beginning of episode 6 and not in episode 5. I read episode 5 after watching it and was spoiled :( 2603:8080:7200:145E:20DA:43AC:1B16:6217 (talk) 04:47, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2021

Change

Anupam Tripathi as Abdul Ali (199),[12] a foreign worker from Pakistan

to

Anupam Tripathi as Abdul Ali (199),[12] a foreign worker from India

He's clearly speaking Hindi to his wife, the actor is Indian - it's unclear why the character is listed as being from "Pakistan"

Thanks for your consideration 207.96.89.95 (talk) 14:08, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Spoken Hindi and spoken Urdu are essentially the same language, particularly in the frenzied, lower-register lexicon he was using when we heard him speak to his wife. I trust that you saw other elements (accent?) that made him seem Indian to you. However, the character -- as opposed to the actor -- explicitly says he's from Pakistan. Thus the character is from Pakistan, full stop. It would be an extreme violation of WP:NOR to grant your request. Moncrief (talk) 06:36, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done He clearly states he is an immigrant from Pakistan. Doesn't matter if the actor is Indian, we go by how the fiction presents it to us. --Masem (t) 14:20, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

14 October

Add on reception section: Gayming Magazine felt that Kang Sae-Byeok and Ji-yeong's scenes were emotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.224.32.108 (talk) 08:18, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

References

 Not done for now: I don't think this adds anything of value to the article. ––FormalDude talk 03:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2021

"Squid Game received critical acclaim and attracted international attention. Within a week of its release, it became one of Netflix's most-watched programs in several regional markets; within its first 28 days of release, it attracted more than 111 million viewers, surpassing Bridgerton as the network's most-watched series to date."

The part I put in bold is incorrect information and needs to be corrected. Squid Game was released on September 17, 2021, and the date Netflix released the record for Squid Game is October 13, 2021. It was not yet 28 days. On the other hand, the record of Squid game released by Netflix Korea achieved 111 million in 17 days, so it is correct to modify it to 17 days, not 28 days. In addition, The Verge and Netflix EEK-ed also said that Squid game reached 111 million in 17 days. BAozzz (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 21:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2021

Viewership paragraph, "Netflix estimated that after 28 days of availability, Squid Game had drawn over 111 million viewers worldwide,[d]"

It's the same problem as the part that I made the edit request yesterday and got accepted. The part I put in bold is incorrect information and needs to be corrected. Squid Game was released on September 17, 2021, and the date Netflix released the record for Squid Game is October 13, 2021. It was not yet 28 days. On the other hand, the record of Squid game released by Netflix Korea achieved 111 million in 17 days, so it is correct to modify it to 17 days, not 28 days. In addition, The Verge and Netflix EEK-ed also said that Squid game reached 111 million in 17 days. BAozzz (talk) 07:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done It is technically not wrong: as 28 days would be up through October 14, and even if they got 111M in 17 days, whatever number there was since is "over 111M". Most other sources are staying with the "28 days" mention since that's the standard that Netflix has used in the past. --Masem (t) 12:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

References

Show worth

Not sure where you want to put this but, they said this show is worth $891-900m. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 14:49, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/netflix-s-squid-game-is-reportedly-worth-almost-900-million/ar-AAPEYk6
• https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/squid-game-will-generate-891-million-in-value-according-to-leaked-netflix-data/ar-AAPDw25

It is already presented under Viewership. --Masem (t) 15:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Currency

The prize money (45.6 billion South Korean won) is approximately 38.5 million USD (exactly $38,452,781.40 as of the time I write this). I feel like we should put this in the article, since not everyone on the English Wikipedia know how much a South Korean won is worth (0.00084 USD per 1 KRW)

Iamtheduckie (talk) 22:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

It is in the article as a footnote along with its Euro conversion as many articles that cover SQ include that currency conversion. It is just awkward to state it in prose each time so it is easier to put it as a footnote. --Masem (t) 23:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

As mentioned, it's already there. See the footnote (a) directly after the first mention of the prize amount in the first paragraph. Moncrief (talk) 23:12, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

@Ctrlwiki the models are not the same, the wiki image has the model sitting, whereas in the show the model is standing. Triosdeity (talk) 10:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

"Hwang himself had been a former police officer"

This sentence under the Writing section cites the Times article, but the article never actually claims Hwang is a former police officer, only that he is interested in exploring the role of the police in a potential future season. --157.131.124.228 (talk) 04:38, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Took that out, don't recall where else I thought that might have come in but its not in the times article. --Masem (t) 05:06, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

No sources for intro paragraph

The final paragraph from the intro has no citations:

"Squid Game was released worldwide on September 17, 2021, to critical acclaim and international attention. Attracting more than 142 million member households during its first four weeks from launch, it is Netflix's most-watched series to date."

There is no source for the Netflix numbers and I would even question the critical acclaim part but I think that was covered already by someone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amalamagama69 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

These things are cited in the body, so shouldn't be cited again in the lede. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:00, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Specifically, see WP:LEDECITE. Unless we had direct quotes, as long as the material is sourced in the body (which I know the lede is all following), no citations are required, and generally discourages since it can complicate reading. --Masem (t) 20:25, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Awards

Squid Game got nominated for Rose d'Or awards in the Drama cathegory , is it possible to add this to the article? 85.174.204.189 (talk) 16:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Masem (t) 17:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

References

Are the staff's jumpsuits pink or red?

This article says pink in the summary of Episode 1, but they are more often called red online. I can't find an authoritative source, but want to note that calling them pink could be considered original research. It's an interesting debate, but not sure one we should take sides on if it comes down to WP:OR. It's entirely possible that the ambiguity is intentional. Moncrief (talk) 21:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

It's not original research. During an interview with Netflix Korea the Director said, "The main colors of the managers are black and pink." Here's a link to that interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjuB2eC7Mmc&t=639s (It will take you directly to the timestamp of which he says it). Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 22:10, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

There's also the Variety printed interview [1] that, while I am sure is translated from Korean, uses "pink" in the production designer's words. (and I'm sure "red" and "pink" are two different words in Korean). "The participants are wearing a green tracksuit, which is the most common color for a school tracksuit in Korea, while the masked staff are wearing a pink jumpsuit. " --Masem (t) 22:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

It's translated properly. When talking about the colors he even made a reference to the South Korean girl group whose name is Blackpink. Even the soundtrack that plays when they enter is titled "Pink Soldiers". Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 22:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

OK, I'm convinced! Thanks to all for the quick, definitive responses. Moncrief (talk) 23:09, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Game shows and reality TV shows

The series seems to draw on the popularity of Reality TV shows and Asian game shows (Category:South_Korean_game_shows), appealing to that part of the cultural zeitgeist. Is that worth mentioning or able to be mentioned with any references? UserTwoSix (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

We would need references. Reviews have compared it to Battle Royale and Hunger Games-type survival games, but I've not seen game shows yet compared. --Masem (t) 01:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Association with PlayStation controller

As a type of game, is there any association with the symbols on the PlayStation controller, or is this purely coincidence? I believe the controller buttons are X, O, triangle, square. UserTwoSix (talk) 01:03, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

No, I've seen nothing that compares it to the PS controller. They are shapes taken from the squid game court shapes. --Masem (t) 01:13, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I've seen bits an pieces such as [2], and a lot of Non-RS talking about it, but it's very much in passing an kinda irrelevant. PlayStation don't own regular polygons. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Please clarify

I've watched episode 9 and I'm not sure if Gihun was talking to the Frontman at the end of the episode? Can anyone clarify it? Ctrlwiki (talk) 13:03, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Ctrlwiki No evidence the person behind the phone call was the Front Man, just a speculation floating around in Reddit and also maybe some forums. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I would have to go back to rewatch but I think captioning gives "Front Man" as the speaker. --Masem (t) 13:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

So we should temporarily remove the information in the episode 9 in the episode section mentioning that the person behind the phone was the Front man, because there is no clear evidence for that statement and considered as a false information, Should we? Ctrlwiki (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I actually agree with this. I saw no evidence it was the Front Man in the show (my version of captioning didn't have identifies of the speakers), and was surprised to see the Front Man's name in the Episode 9 summary here. I think saying it's the Front Man is original research, frankly. Moncrief (talk) 13:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I have just checked. The English CC captions (not the English sub) specifically have "Front Man" in front of said lines. No speaker is identified in front of the English dub (and I suspect for the other dub options). Given we know the English CC has some issues from RSes, I agree we should simply remove that speaker's identify for this purpose. --Masem (t) 14:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Ctrlwiki (talk) 14:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Can someone check the Korean Audio Description whether the narrator says the Front Man is on the phone? I agree that it doesn't really matter for the purposes of the summary. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Episode 9 summary trimming

I removed the episode 9 summary line about "and to prove his theory that humanity has no innate goodness left in it. Il-nam " [3] The episode doesn't go into how Il-nam has been conducting the games to build up a theory that humanity has no innate goodness. He does ask Gi-hun whether the game has affected the latter's view on humanity and goodness, but this seems to be more just episodic detail and not summary.

Anyway we're at around 240 words now. Is that good enough, since finales could potentially need more verbiage, or should we keep on trimming? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that. Yes, we should definitely not impute motives of characters that aren't explicitly spoken in the show. On another note, remind me how we know the guy on the street in episode 9 is drunk? If the characters high above assume that, I guess it's OK. I would prefer it to be "apparently drunk" though. Moncrief (talk) 18:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Moncrief, also having questions on whether to say Jun-ho was "apparently dead" in episode 8. In-ho does look over the edge for the body. That can be trimmed out or retained. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Moncrief, Il-Nam does think the man on the street was a drunk, so not sure if apparently is needed there. Collider summary Marie Claire summary AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Regarding some recent additions

@BAozzz: There are two major problems with your additions. First on what you are trying to add to the lede is already in the body of the article, and we want to avoid being too overly promotion or peacocky in Netflix's own language in the lede. We do state that cultural zeigeist already in the body as part of the new viewership numbers, where it is appropriate. If third-party works make the claim, then maybe it will be appropriate for the lede. On the second part, related to their market cap, be aware that after the recent quarterly report, their stock market numbers dropped, so the predicted increase in market cap vanished, so really that was a transient point. Further, be aware that Forbes Contributor pieces are not reliable sources for WP (per WP:RS/P). Also, BNN Bloomberg is just a republishing of Bloomberg news and not a news source. We want to avoid using Netflix's own reports directly and report through what third-party gives, again to avoid promotional or peacocky coverage of the topic. --Masem (t) 23:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Masem: Your logic is possible when the stock price has fallen as much as before the release of <Squid game>. Even experts' analysis shows that Netflix's stock price has risen due to <Squid game>. Meanwhile, I agree that "Don't put it on the top". But I'm against deleting it altogether.--BAozzz (talk) 00:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The stuff you were trying to add at the lede is already present in the article (under Viewership), and just adding extra sources that say the same thing doesn't help, that's part of the problem). We don't need to add it twice in the body. --Masem (t) 00:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I didn't see that. However, the debate on stocks is still valid. As already said, unless the stock price falls to the level before the release of <Squid game>, it is right to post experts' opinions.--BAozzz (talk) 00:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The actual stock dropped [4] despite the success of Squid Game. Hence why stocks are a fickle thing to really talk about. (also the release was right at the end of the quarter for Netflix, so its effects will not be more apparent until next quarter). --Masem (t) 00:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I read the article you suggested, but there were many opinions from experts who acknowledged the rise in Netflix's stock price due to <Squid game>. That is no reason to deny the opinion of experts that the stock price has risen due to <Squid game>. 'Uncertainty' is due to what Netflix can suggest after <Squid game>.[5]--BAozzz (talk) 00:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The second paragraph in "Other themes" is not a theme

I moved one of the first paragraph, but not sure what to do with this second paragraph. I don't think it's a theme at all. Moncrief (talk) 19:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Let me rename that "Other themes" to "Other commentary" as under "Themes and analysis". There is more sourcing from higher quality RSes about the translation issues that also have set off discussions on better translation in the future, so with the section rename, that other paragraph fits there as well as the current second para. Basically, trying to section off actual "public responses" that are not necessary commentary or critical in nature from those that are analyzing the work. --Masem (t) 19:38, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Moncrief (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Criticism of capitalism

I have tried to add a see also link to the page "Criticism of capitalism" to the section "Capitalism and economic disparity" but have been reverted by Masem with the reason "This is about the theme of capitalism we're not going into the political discourse about capitalism itself". Criticism of capitalism is a main component of the series and the pages are definitely related. The page Criticism of capitalism highlights economic inequality and exploitation that are elements of the series. Its not to say these pages are exactly the same, I just think they are related enough to justify linking this page as a see also page. Helper201 (talk) 22:52, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

In the specific section, we're talking about the themes of capitalism and the like, its not meant to go into criticism of capitalism itself from that political or ethics angle. While this section needs to flesh out more from the sources given, its meant to explore how capitalism is expressed in the work , and not so much about criticism of capitalism. Now, if after expanding it is clear that the sources are clear they think Squid Game is meant to be a "criticism of capitalism", then maybe that would be a fair link, but right now it's not. --Masem (t) 22:56, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Who is 23?

23 is being credited or some of the show's songs (including the Pink Soldiers one which is very prominent in the show), yet very little info can be found on who is that artist, anyone can assist finding out? Dollarsign8 (talk) 12:41, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Could be related? 23 enigma Dollarsign8 (talk) 12:44, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

The most detailed source is the BBC Music Magazine and they best they can say is (paragraph) some artist known as "23". --Masem (t) 12:52, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I was able to find a personal social media account of 23 but other than that they seem quite unknown. I think this person is pretty new to this field of work. Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 02:03, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Not necessarily new. Spotify credits list this: "Performed by 23 Written by 23 Source: Genie Music Corporation, Stone Music Entertainment", "23" is probably someone from one of these music corps Dollarsign8 (talk) 07:44, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Somewhere else in the article it said who 23 was, let me try to find it... Here it is: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squid_Game#Music) --Semitones (talk) 15:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for solving that mystery! Dollarsign8 (talk) 17:56, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 November 2021

change the single reference "904" to "94" 45.95.236.212 (talk) 13:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:41, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Femitomi's lede edits

@Femitomi: Your edits to the lede are creating several problems. We have reliable sources in the body (namely this THR article) that explains he was financially down in 2008, came up with the idea, and wrote it by 2009. Second, there's nothing tying the financial issues he faced or wrote about to the global financial crisis, he strictly wrote about his experience with what had happened in South Korea related to capitalism and economic disparity, which may have been a result of that crisis but had been long building before that point, so linking to the global crisis is original research. This is all explained in the body, and we want to try to avoid having any citations in the lede. --Masem (t) 12:35, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, while you are providing a source, that is a Netflix source, which is a first-party and dependent source, which we want to avoid using per WP:V and WP:PSTS. We prefer third-party sources like The Hollywood Reporter. --Masem (t) 12:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Masem(user) loves 2008

@Masem: I think Masem desperately deleted the 2008 global financial crisis. but masem wrote a lot about the 2008 korea economy in this article. where a u from? (t)

https://www.fnnews.com/news/202110131352380650

All of our reliable sources that have Hwang's interviews on the scripts originas have him only speaking about the situation in South Korea around 2008 which led to his own situation as well as the influence on the first script of Squid Game. He never mentions anything about the global financial crisis - which may have influenced the South Korea crisis but that was already building up before that global crisis, so it is original research to make the connection to the global crisis from the sources we have. Even with this article above, as he is talking about Trump, that aligns with the changes that happed after 2008 and 2009 and up to 2019 when Netflix agreed to produce the work, but nothing around 2008-2009. We do have statements from Hwang that state, in his opinion that by 2019 the global situation had changed to make Squid Game more relevant, which is already documented in the article. You may not be a native English reader but this how we have to take the reliable sources in English. --Masem (t) 01:02, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Also to add, using the Indie Wire source [6] that that article mentions, Hwang specifically talks of the Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008, but that is NOT the same thing as the overall Financial crisis of 2007–2008 (though it is part of the events of it). So again, its original research to make the leap of logic you are trying. --Masem (t) 01:09, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

As a midsolution, I've included a footnote to explain how the events are connected from a scholarly paper, placed as a footnote, since the article about the debt crisis in SK doesn't really cover the 2008-2009 period very well. --Masem (t) 01:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

South Korean protestors

Members of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions wore "Squid Game" costumes during a rally against their government's labor policies. If goes into more detail about it in this article: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-korea-squid-game-labor-union-protest/ So I was wondering if this should be included in the article? Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 05:55, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

@Btspurplegalaxy: I think that this could be a potentially good source for the Public response or even the Themes and analysis sections as it shows how Squid Game has managed to influence events in real life. Jeuno (talk) 23:47, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

This is already in the article, it is used under the Themes related to Capitalism. --Masem (t) 03:01, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Episode 6

I know this may be Original Research, but from reviews I saw on YouTube, most if not all single out Episode 6 as "the best" episode either for set design, emotional impact, etc. I wonder what we can say about this because I found it surprising and worthy of inclusion in the article. UserTwoSix (talk) 20:50, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Reception summary in lead

The lead currently covers the series' reception only by noting that it was released to critical acclaim. The reception has certainly been positive—Rotten Tomatoes gives it 93%, and Metacritic gives it 69, right in the middle of the "Generally favorable" range. (I'm inclined to prefer Metacritic, which uses a more tightly curated set of critics and includes more nuance by giving each review a score rather than just a binary fresh/rotten.) However, the critique that the show is excessively violent has also gotten a lot of coverage. Should we add something along the lines of although some critics objected to its violence? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:20, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The extreme amount of violence and killing, something along the lines of Kill Bill or Utopia, should be mentioned in the lede. I would be more in favor of "However, the amount of violence was an issue for some viewers." after the critical acclaim sentence. UserTwoSix (talk) 21:30, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The problem is that it wasn't consider a gratuitous use of violence, at least at a significant level of criticism. That there was violence was noted but most reviews accepted this as part of the story, and thus wasn't criticism. I don't see enough sourcing to support this facet in the lede, at all. --Masem (t) 21:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

If not outright rejected by critics, then based on the Critics Consensus on RT which reads "Squid Game's unflinching brutality is not for the faint of heart, but sharp social commentary and a surprisingly tender core will keep viewers glued to the screen - even if it's while watching between their fingers." This "unflinching brutality" is a notable characteristic of the show and should be in the lede, but maybe not in the critic's paragraph. UserTwoSix (talk) 22:23, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The NYT review actually pans the show and uses the "gratuitousness" of the violence as evidence after some other criticisms. UserTwoSix (talk) 23:01, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The thing though is that few reviews take the violence separately as an issue with the show. They discuss that it is a violent show, and thus may not be for the faint-of-heart, but in terms of "objecting" to the violence, that's simply not something readily seen, compared to, say, the discussion about how the show may be deeming to women (which we do have). There's perhaps enough to say that some critics did object to the violence in the lede, but this would also have to be align with a statement of what aspects the critics rated highly about the show (which is absent from the lede as well) - eg "Reviews praised Squid Game for X, Y, and Z, but some expressed concern about the amount of violence shown.". --Masem (t) 23:50, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

External links sections

After cleaning up the article, I noticed that there are two “External links” sections, are they different? — ctrlwiki (talk) 00:55, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

I removed the earlier one; EL's should be the very last section of the article (before nav templates and categories) and the one at the bottom is more properly formatted for ELs. --Masem (t) 01:48, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Splatoon?

Hello all, new here. I have had many anecdotal experiences of others confusing this with the Nintendo franchise Splatoon. This confusion can also be viewed on Twitter (when you both search “splatoon” and “squid game”) Would it be necessary to add a disclaimer for the confusion at the top of the page? Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:680:4650:48DA:6AAB:68FD:5345 (talk) 05:39, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

If an RS made a good argument that they could be confused, we might mention it in the article, but there's no reason why these would be confused by the titles on Wikipedia. If you are searching for the wrong title, you will find the wrong article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:34, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

As one in the video game area, I have a hard time finding a reason to justify linking an informal "squid game" to Splatoon. Yes, that's the game with the squid-like kids, but its even frequently called "squid game" informally to warrant the hatnote here. --Masem (t) 15:05, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

The Marketing Lessons from Squid Game

Squid Game has not only become the most viewed series for the sake of fun and entertainment but, it also has become one of the best learning topics in context to Marketing / Product Marketing. There are 4 very important takeaways for Product Marketing professionals from this series-  1. There are no cultural differences that need to be adapted for markets if basic human emotions are the foundation- The series shows the South Korean culture and not everybody is aware of that culture around the world but the events of desperately poor people being invited to compete in children’s themed games with deadly consequences if they lose. That's how the series catches the viewers on a basic human emotional level so that everyone can relate to the characters' dilemmas’ and build a connection with them.   2. Word-of-mouth is one of the most powerful & influential tools and can be more successful than the largest paid ad campaigns- Squid Game proves that WOM can be the major leading factor in advertising. Unfortunately, marketing firms can’t really buy or secure word of mouth, so it’s usually done organically, but with social media being so accessible to brands, businesses can now attempt to trigger a wave of trends or buzz to get word-of-mouth going. The major social media platforms are- Tiktok, Facebook, Instagram. 3. Play TikTok right and your brand is bound for success- TikTok videos of this series are great examples of its promotion. Further, a survey by IRI this year showed that to the question “which way is most likely to get you to buy a product”, TikTok is the number 1 platform to inspire purchases, coming right after word-of-mouth.

4. We don’t know what consumers really want until they show us, or brands show them- The script for Squid Game has been written since about 2009, with years of attempts by the writer to get it picked up, but no one wanted to produce such an unrealistic and violent story. But in fact, now it was the perfect time to release such a show because due to the COVID situation people are spending more time at home and in front of the screen and they are bored of the copy-paste-styled shows now available on all streaming services. There is a gap in the market, new and brave formats like Squid Game has quite a good chance to succeed, but no one really can predict what consumers want next until they show us or they get exposed to something that might be interesting for them. Sometimes brands need to break out of their conventional norms to come up with something completely new, rather than doing market research, then consumer surveys, then based on these results briefing of their R&D departments, then putting the product on the market and boosting it via media   Saritasony (talk) 23:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:02, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Multiple sources showing Squid game reached no.1 in 94 countries.

There are many many more than just 3 sources but three should be enough. If anyone wants more sources that shows many famous articles claiming Squid game reached no.1 in 94 countries I will post more.

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2021/10/13/business/tech/Netflix-Squid-Game-success/20211013182953859.html

https://impakter.com/why-is-the-squid-game-such-a-roaring-success/

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/oct/19/netflix-quarterly-results-subscribers-squid-game

Vamlos (talk) 00:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

We don't need source spam for a single fact like this - that's only if we're talking opinion or contentious information. The Guardian source is sufficient. We also want to avoid using citations in the lede; the information should be first added to the body, and if deemed appropriate for the lede, added there. (which I've done). --Masem (t) 01:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Cast spoilers

Could we maybe not include that the front man is the cops brother? I just wanted to see the actors name and this article ruined the twist 160.19.3.161 (talk) 22:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

See WP:SPOILERS , we do not hide relevant information that may be seen as spoilers to some. --Masem (t) 23:07, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Awards update

Squid game won Score - TV Show/Limited Series (Jung Ja-eil) at 12th Annual Hollywood Music In Media Awards Source --85.174.200.151 (talk) 13:01, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Episode 3 Summary - proposed edit

Seen as the article is semi-protected, could someone please remove "commit" from the sentence about suicide (e.g. die by suicide, or just "suicided"). Might seem trivial when it's about a fictional character but I think it's important/good practice. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7C:180E:CB00:2858:32B4:BAA7:CAE2 (talk) 21:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

WP does not presently have any issue with wording like "commit suicide" (an RFC last year determined this), but we can change here the wording to "shoots himself" and avoid any issue. --Masem (t) 21:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Removals from Category:Squid Game

All of the actors were removed from this category. I would like to know why, since its what a lot of them are notable for (e.g. HoYeon Jung). I can understand the removal of all the games, but why the actors? --InPursuitOfAMorePerfectUnion (talk) 18:42, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I think the standard approach for categories related to fictional topics is not to include actors or other real people, only characters, as to avoid any confusion between fictional and real people. --Masem (t) 19:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Budget/Cost

It says in the viewership section that the series cost $21.4 million "to produce" (and the same figure is listed in the infobox as the budget), however, I don't think the cited source warrants such a statement. The relevant paragraph from the cited Bloomberg article says:

"The comedian’s popularity comes at a cost. Netflix spent $24.1 million on the “The Closer,” slightly more than the $23.6 million it paid for Chappelle’s 2019 special, “Sticks & Stones.” By comparison, the streaming service spent $3.9 million for “Inside,” Bo Burnham’s recent hour-and-a-half special. The nine-episode “Squid Game,” which delivered the best debut in Netflix history, cost $21.4 million."

I think in this context (contrasting it to the Chapelle figures, whose specials certainly didn't cost that much to produce, but to acquire), it sounds like the series cost $21.4 million to acquire, not to produce. Thus, I find presenting this $21.4 million figure as the budget a bit misleading. I recognize that the statement regarding Squid Game in the paragraph has some ambiguity, but in the given context it still sounds more like "cost to acquire" rather than "cost to produce" to me. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 11:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Netflix didn't just buy the series (compared to, say, Money Heist) but funded its production. But how much was acquisition costs vs filming costs, we don't know, so saying it as production costs (inclusive of acquisition) is about as fair as we can get, and this is still an estimate. --Masem (t) 19:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

That explanation makes sense, thank you. I guess I was/am kind of confused by the terms "paid for" and "spent for" (as well as the large figures for Chapelle's specials), which to me don't sound like "costs of production", but I guess I am wrong there and Chapelle's large cut is considered part of the budget/production costs as well (especially since Netflix didn't just buy the mentioned specials either). Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 20:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Squid Game

Category:Squid Game has a lot of entries. Do we really need to include all the games, actors, etc? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:56, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

There is zero need for the individual episodes articles; redirects where there is no additional disambiguation is fine. This article, Hwang's, and the actors make sense, but really nothing else in there is logical at this point. --Masem (t) 15:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I think quite a few are duplicates in the subcategories Category:Squid Game episode redirects to lists and Category:Squid Game character redirects to lists. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:54, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the category from the pages in the subcategories. I hope this helps to sort out the issue of it being so large. --InPursuitOfAMorePerfectUnion (talk) 20:54, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, looks much better! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:31, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Death penalty in North Korea for owning squid games

One person was sentenced to Death by North Korea for owning an distributing Squid Game copies. His parents later bribed officials to lower the sentence to life in prison. Other accomplices got 5 years of jail each. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmharding (talk • contribs) 02:18, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done for now—It'sCtrlwiki • talk • 02:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC)  Not done—It'sCtrlwiki • talk • 09:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

References

Stop writing clickbait stuff using questionable references. Here's NK News calling out the BS.

Try reading this about covering information blackholes. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:05, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@TrangaBellam I mostly do agree with you, I had a deeper look at the situation and found that multiple sources misreported the fact that 6 (or 7) North Koreans were sentenced to labour camps for 5 years. We definitely shouldn't be putting unconfirmed facts from sources that don't state where they got the statement from at least for now. However, if more reliable information is found in the future that confirms this happening then we can re-add the statement, and vice versa. (once there is more information that debunks this event, then we just leave the article as it is) Jeuno (talk) (contribs) 09:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Squid Game Hollywood Music In Media Awards

• Requiest: Add Squid game won Score - TV Show/Limited Series (Jung Ja-eil) at 12th Annual Hollywood Music In Media Awards to Accolades.
• Because it's an important award precoursor and also adding this award will make the Accolades part more compelete.
• Refernces: https://www.hmmawards.com/hmma-winners/

Randomness-space (talk) 04:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Done in my next edit, found a 3rd party source to confirm. --Masem (t) 04:58, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Slight error in wording

I would edit it myself, but I can’t because it is locked. In the “Potential Sequel” section, it is written “Hwang confirmed that he had begun conceptualization work on a second season had started”. Either “he had begun” or “had started” should be taken out. As it stands, this is grammatically incorrect 2603:6010:C0F:AF39:6006:E0D1:EC77:1117 (talk) 20:16, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Fixed --Masem (t) 20:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

On the images

@Lee Vilenski: I've been watching the images, they are coming from a video that 1) is Creative Commons licensed on YouTube and 2) is the work and under the control of the channel uploader, so there's no copyright-washing going on.

That said, to others involved, lets not edit war over the images. There's no requirement for them to all come from the same "set" and for photos, JPG is generally better than PNG in terms of size compression. --Masem (t) 13:52, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

@Masem: @Ctrlwiki: @Btspurplegalaxy: jpg is a format that sacrifices more detail than PNG.[7] And Lee Byung-hun's photo may be in violation of copyright.[8] Also, I think it's better to place images from the same set if possible.--JoJoqoq (talk) 14:49, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2021

ADD Section under 6.4 Themes and analysis:

Game Theory

Following the debut of the show on Netflix, numerous articles were published discussing the optimal way to participate in and win the games the contestants played. Ultimately, many of these strategies can be boiled down to basic principles of game theory. This was touched upon in a CNN Philippines article by Anton Holmes, and further elaborated on in a course blog post for Cornell University.

Due to the large amount of debt held by each player, and the potential for a large cash payout, a majority of players find that participating in the game to be the Dominant Strategy. The concept of Zero-Sum is observed across each round of the game with the outcome being either surviving and advancing to the next round or dying. At the conclusion of the game, one participant wins the entire prize, which is the sum of the winnings added to the pot following the death of each other participant. The concepts of Mixed-Strategy Equilibrium and Prisoners’ Dilemma are demonstrated in cases where certain participants are viewed to have an advantage, such as in the Tug of War game. Cclaes13 (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I do not see anything of encyclopedic value - these aspects are yet to obtain significant coverage in MSM. And Cornell undergrads (?), if not acting under duress, ought to be more productive with time. TrangaBellam (talk) 08:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Red Light, Green Light (Squid Game) at AfD

FYI, Red Light, Green Light (Squid Game) has been nominated for deletion. Happy editing, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:23, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2021

Overview and plot. Track suits are blue not green. 2600:8800:478F:1E00:213B:654E:DD07:ABFD (talk) 19:33, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done All RSes call them green. --Masem (t) 20:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Character information

Should we decrease the character information here to cleanup the article, cause it has its own article now. Ctrlwiki • 09:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Personally, I think any non-plot element from the character article should be brought here. That list article is far too plot-summary heavy and violates WP:NOT#PLOT, but anything beyond that (which is not much) can be brought in here. --Masem (t) 13:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

viewership

@Wizzito: If it is a grammatical error, not an informational error, pls help me to correct it. Don't just rollback.BAozzz (talk) 06:19, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@BAozzz: Ctrlwiki has also reverted similar edits to yours for being unnecessary information. wizzito | say hello! 06:20, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ctrlwiki:, Could you please tell me why that is unnecessary information?BAozzz (talk) 06:23, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wizzito:, Could you please tell me the grammatical error? BAozzz (talk) 06:35, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@BAozzz: The information already said that the Squid Game was the second most watched series in the US, means all 9 episodes are already included there, use your commonsense. The same thing in the sentence after it. The paragraph is there a long time ago, no ones added that unnecessary words. –Ctrlwiki (talk) 07:48, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ctrlwiki: Is it commonsense that Lucifer had 93 episodes? It is not unnecessary as it is a fact stated even within the source to avoid misunderstandings. BAozzz (talk) 08:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

 Comment: Agreed with Ctrlwiki, how does including and/or mentioning x number of episodes has anything to do with "second most watched series in the US" when it already stated that it's "most watched series" not "most watched episodes". — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:16, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

VIP MIA

geoffrey giuliano -- author of several rock tell-alls -- is probably the only one of the VIPs who's at all famous. both his wiki and IMDB list him as VIP #4.

and yet, the actual show -- copy i have, anyways -- leaves him out! end credits say "VIP #1, VIP #2, VIP #3, VIP #5, VIP #6"!! what's the story? some legal issue that they had to DELIST him? 2601:19C:5280:5BA7:A58D:A9B9:8013:6F85 (talk) 05:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@2601:19C:5280:5BA7:A58D:A9B9:8013:6F85 What do you mean? I can see Geoffrey Giuliano listed as VIP #4 in Squid Game#Guest cast. If your concern is regarding the credits of the show itself that isn't English Wikipedia problem but Netflix problem. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:50, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

well, that's what i'm asking. is it just a TYPO in netflix's end credits or is there some bigger issue here?

it is a wikipedia issue in the sense that we are using the Guardian as a source over netflix itself! where do they (or IMDB) get off *adding* someone to the cast list?! 2601:19C:5280:5BA7:A58D:A9B9:8013:6F85 (talk) 10:36, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

@2601:19C:5280:5BA7:A58D:A9B9:8013:6F85 Still not getting what you're exactly referring to, according to Squid Game's Episode 7 at 53 minutes 53 seconds, I can see him listed in the credits as "vip4 Geoffrey Giuliano" which isn't huge different when compare to this article. And as mentioned above, if you have problem with Netflix and/or IMDB listing and/or crediting him as "vip4 Geoffrey Giuliano" instead of "VIP #4 Geoffrey Giuliano", this is NOT English Wikipedia problem but Netflix problem and IMDB problem instead, there is no way, we can help with you for matters for those platforms. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 10:54, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

no, no problem with the description. altho, 53:53 for me still showing them in a boat!

i guess this is an issue with english (dubbed) copy. couple mins longer, but with faulty credits.

thank u for clarifying how it is in the original!

and yes, it is no longer a wiki matter. UNLESS...(again)...US *deleted* his name on purpose. i know he has a spotty history with arrests, warrants, etc. if he's living in asia as a fugitive, would netflix censor his name from the US copy? 2601:19C:5280:5BA7:A58D:A9B9:8013:6F85 (talk) 03:19, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

We aren't a forum to discuss things outside of wikipedia. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:18, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2022

In the public response section, this new academic research can be edited in:

The study found that within the first 24 hours on Twitter alone, there were over 13 thousand users tweeting about the show which helped it cascade across social media. The most impactful users on Twitter driving electronic word of mouth were ordinary citizens and not paid marketing by Netflix. WikiEditor123abcd (talk) 11:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:09, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Splitting problems

A show's reception and viewership are essential elements to keep on the show's page per WP:SS. Yes, the section may be long, but the tag does say the whole section should be split off. A normal split would be to separate the table of allocates and awards to its own article since that is sufficiently large. The other thing that could be split now that we have a confirmation of season two is the episode list. Once both of those are done, the this would be at reasonable size. --Masem (t) 15:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Is the Cultural impact section enough to warrant its own article?

Per articles such as Cultural impact of the Beatles, Cultural impact of Star Wars etc, could the "Public response and impact" section have its own article? This would help prevent the article from being too long. --92.22.212.168 (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Not at this point, but if season 2 is as big a hit then possibly. Those other works have years on this one. --Masem (t) 15:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Good point! --92.22.212.168 (talk) 20:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Change Gi-Hun to Gi-hun

The episode synopsis for "One Lucky Day" lists Gi-hun's name as "Gi-Hun" in the ending sentence. Could this be corrected? 89.243.125.209 (talk) 13:09, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done --Masem (t) 13:39, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! --89.243.125.209 (talk) 21:44, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2022

I want to add it to the back part.

-Part- [Squid Game has been accused of plagiarizing the 2014 Japanese movie As the Gods Will, as both involve children's games where the penalty for losing is death. However, writer-director Hwang Dong-hyuk claimed he wrote Squid Game's script in 2009 (5 years before As the Gods Will was released), saying "the similarities that were pointed out are purely coincidental and there is no copying from either party".[162]]

-Add- concept was actually created in 2009, which was revealed by the investment report at the time. At the time, the script concept and the Netflix Squid Game were almost identical. The difference is that, as mentioned in the interview with director Hwang Dong-hyuk, the reward has changed from 10 billion to 46.5 billion, the difference in the number of people, and the game of marbles have been added. Wldnwlak (talk) 00:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A document posted by a non verified Twitter account is not a reliable source. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:37, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, we already basically have some ideas of how the original story was expanded for Netflix, I don't think these details really add much more , even if verified. Masem (t) 00:42, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

The news article has already come out several times, but this is the first real data. The Twitter user was actually one of the project reviewers at the time. He also posted in English. And It was also made with NFT. Wldnwlak (talk) 10:51, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Wow, if it's got NFTs involved it must be ultra reliable. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2022

To link Squid Game (soundtrack) in the music section 223.178.87.23 (talk) 14:03, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done Lemonaka (talk) 16:05, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2023

In "other commentary" a sentence should read "while his death in the game comes from the seventh episode..." i.e., include the word "the". Bondonk (talk) 10:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Done. --Mvqr (talk) 12:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Round 6 is title of serie in brazil!

The Round 6 is name of serie in brazil not to appears the name as "Squid Game". Kiel Yan da Silva Alves (talk) 13:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

1 2601:681:5100:9E80:6DF6:EDC7:C4CB:FCFC (talk) 00:53, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Season update in infobox

Season 2 of the series already confirmed, will we update it or not yet? ThisIsSeanJ (talk) 07:07, 8 July 2023 (UTC)