Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

→

Archive 25

Help Chungcheong Province Article

This Article Needs Resources and Improvements as you see on the article's page (This article needs additional citations for verification) Thank you —Sakura emad (talk) 18:28, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Multiple Article Related Projects needs Resources and Improvements

Hello ^_^ i created this page for collecting articles which needs to be sourced and improved Certain Page<< here

Note: i will update the page as much as possible feel free to remove any links in the page after improvement or add any other links that needs to be updated thank you ^_^
— Sakura emad (talk) 00:11, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft: Pdogg

I was hoping someone could give me feedback on the sources I've cited on my draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pdogg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 52-whalien (talk • contribs) 04:52, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

It's nice—nothing wrong with it in my opinion. ~Wizdzy [ 💬 | 📝 ] 17:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Dear User:52-whalien. In my opinion, providing a trans-title, i.e. a translation of the title for any reference in Korean would be great. You know, there are people who are to lazzy to call papago for each of them. Pldx1 (talk) 22:13, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

About important DPRK documents

The English Wikipedia has the 2010 version of the WPK Rulebook, but it's in Korean and I don't understand... Could somebody translate that Rulebook and publish it here in Wikipedia? Link to the document: https://web.archive.org/web/20170622234608/https://www.voanews.com/MediaAssets2/english/2011_01/WPKCharter28SEP10.pdf Signed: 190.219.182.200 (talk) 00:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Korea Newspaper Translations

Hi, can anyone help me with some translations from old Korean newspapers? I'm in the process of writing an article on Ice hockey in South Korea and have gathered some relevant newspaper pages on the early activities from the Naver News Library (see User:Hockeyben/Korea for the pages). I don't need the full text to be translated, only the names of the competitions and the teams in the game results. Even writing out the competition/team names in Korean would be fine, as I could then run them through Google Translate myself. I can't do that now as the newspaper archive does not make the full text available to be copied, and OCR translators are horrible. I hope somebody can assist. --Hockeyben ^{(talk - contribs)} 05:20, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Korean drama page

There is 1 user making edits on viewrship/ratings number on Korean drama page although ther's written on Nielsen website is three numbers behhind decimal but this user make edit like that just make the ratings numbers become one number behind decimal so there's some dramas have same ratings when in fact it is not. Michaelelijahtanuwijaya (talk) 05:02, 07 April 2021 (UTC)

There shouldn't be any problem in rounding numbers. Nielsen numbers shouldn't be accurate anyways. --Christian140 (talk) 14:27, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Jo Yongho

I accepted this draft but I am not sure if the name 조 is best rendered as Jo? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:26, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• Indeed, according to LTIK, this is the preferred romanization. Pldx1 (talk) 20:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Should Yongho not be hyphenated to Yong-ho? As was done for Park Ji-hoon and Lim Young-woong etc. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 21:57, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• Writing 박지훈 as Park Ji-hoon is mainly based on the "English reliable sources" mantra. Here, we only have the LTIK version. By the way, it would be great if the "title" of Korean sources was given as published (i.e. in hangul), and the tentative English version given as a "trans-title". Romanizations like "Kisneun kis hansumeun hansum" are quite useless. What are the odds to reconstruct 키스는 키스 한숨은 한숨: 중남미 아프리카 문학기행 ? Pldx1 (talk) 11:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Pldx1 ah ok I understand. I didn't check to see what sort of sources were used for the article. Just thought the naming was odd compared to others I've seen. Also, are you asking me to translate that title? Or just additionally stating in general that it should be (as in to no one in particular)? -- Carlobunnie (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The spelling without the hyphen is generally always the prefered one by the guidelines of the Revised Romanization. The hyphen is only "tolerated" but it is not the recommended romanization. When Korea set-up the Revized Romanization, they made the mistake to allow too many exceptions. And Wikipedia decided to make use of this and keep the hyphen for historic reasons. It's old-fashioned. But there a re so many problems with all the romanizations, the only way to solve them is when North and South Korea sit together and create a new romanizations without exceptions. --Christian140 (talk) 14:35, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposed MoS addition on optional stress marking in Korean, Japanese, Russian, Ukrainian, etc.

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC?, for a proposal relating to optional characters/marks for indicating vocal stress, used in some foreign languages, include "ruby" characters for Japanese and Korean, and znaki udareniya marks in Ukrainian and Russian. The short version is that, based on a rule already long found in MOS:JAPAN and consonant with WP:NOTDICT policy, MoS would instruct (in MOS:FOREIGN) not to use these marks (primarily intended for pedagogical purposes) except in unusual circumstances, like direct quotation, or discussion of the marks themselves. Target date for implementation is April 21. PS: This does not relate to Vietnamese tone marks.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:32, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

TXT (band) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for TXT (band) to be moved to Tomorrow X Together. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Re: the Gaon/Riak table in the Lists of fastest-selling albums article

The Gaon/Riak table was orig added to the above article by Mauri96 in this edit on Nov 12, 2018. I'm wondering if perhaps, since the article hinges specifically on first week sales, the monthly sales table is not needed at all? While I could have asked this on the article's talk page, I'm asking here because this page receives far more traffic from WP:KO editors—especially ones knowledge about kor album sales-related topics—than that one does and hopefully someone can help me better understand it. I had asked another editor about it last year or the year before but I never got an answer from them. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 12:42, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Since the article's scope is first week sales, I would remove the Gaon/RIAK chart since those sources don't show weekly sales data. I don't use Hanteo data so I don't know how easy it is to search, but I would note any limitations of the data in the article, and check to make sure that older albums that fit the criteria are included too. (For example, maybe a Jo Sung-mo album really did have record first week sales, but because we have easier access to recent news, we've overlooked that.) Lenoresm (talk) 14:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lenoresm: I removed it, left a link to this discussion in the summary, and I'll go thru the article's history to check whether older revisions included older albums like the one you mentioned at any point (iirc I believe this was only the case for the Gaon table when it had 30 entries or so). -- Carlobunnie (talk) 14:46, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

I am of the opinion that removing monthly sales and keeping only Hanteo would be quite recentist. As recently as October 2011, The Boys shipped around 228k copies for its first (incomplete) month of sales but barely registered 67.1k first week sales on Hanteo. The sales of the biggest female idol acts in South Korea have practically doubled since then, but the percentage of Gaon sales reflected on Hanteo is also much higher, which leads to even greater inflation overall. --Mαuri ’96 (talk · cont) 00:41, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mauri96: I don't exactly understand the last bit of what you said, but the article's scope is first week sales (always has been, exclu the addition of the mthly table). It doesn't make sense to also include monthly sales for SK just because of the diff in how the weekly body (Hanteo) measures sales compared to the one that only does mthly (gaon). We don't want to be inconsistent. If a fast-selling album is so-dubbed based upon opening week performance by nearly all the rel news+ent media outlets that we use to source articles like this in the first place, then selling poorly in your first 7 days but doing better after 8, 9, or 10 days etc. (regardless of country) is irrelevant, no? Like Lenoresm suggested, I do think a proper note indicating the limitations of Hanteo's data (inclu a mention that since Gaon doesn't publish weekly data it can't be used) would serve to somewhat cover the recentism issue you're concerned about. If I've gotten it wrong I do apologize but I have only limited knowledge of this stuff. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 01:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

This is the footnote I added to the section for now: "The Hanteo chart provides real-time daily, weekly and monthly sales updates but only accounts for data received from affiliated stores and therefore does not reflect the total sales of a given release. The Gaon Album Chart, established in 2010, counts all albums shipped to stores regardless of affiliation, but only provides monthly and yearly data. Given this article's scope, and the limitations of existing sources, Hanteo's numbers are used." - I know Gaon introduced its Retail Albums chart in Feb 2019 but since we don't use that for anything here on WP I didn't mention it (if I should pls lmk). I'm sure the wording probably needs further tweaking so any additional input on it is welcomed. I'm presently looking through all articles that mention "Hanteo" on Naver search to see what I can use to support the footnote. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

I would add a comment along the lines of "Before the collapse of album sales in South Korea in the mid-to-late 2000's, the biggest music acts would often have million-selling albums, with some releases shipping over 1 million copies in less than a month, as tracked on RIAK." I have no news sources directly stating that, but I can probably cobble something together. -- Mαuri ’96 (talk · cont) 23:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mauri96: again, given the article's scope I don't see why that should be mentioned. The focus isn't on if an album sold a million copies/how quickly (or not) it did so. Anything related to big sales in an album's first week = relevant, anything related to sales outside of that period = irrelevant. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Is this source reliable?

Recently, Xdarkdawnx replaced couple of considered reliable source mainly from QQ Music to http://y.saoju.net/ for the album/EP/singles album's sales column. However, the source doesn't seem reliable to me and looks sketchy as well. Adding on, Xdarkdawnx also supported his statement by saying the a lot of article are using this website as reference, however I would like to point out that he is the one that added/replaced it recently, see his contributions logs. Hence, would like consensus from this community on the inclusion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 17:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Huge language barrier, but the homepage makes it seem like a community-run website. There's a note on your link "*今日销量按最近一次获取到的数据减去今日0点左右获取到的数据计算，非准确数据。从0点30分起，大约半小时更新一次。" (Google Translate: Today's sales volume is calculated based on the most recently acquired data minus the data acquired at around 0:00 today, which is not accurate. From 0:30 onwards, it will be updated every half an hour.) User compiled? This isn't looking reliable in the slightest. ✗plicit 11:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Same feelings and opinions here. I agreed with your comment. Would take note in the future if I come across the source when patrolling. Thanks you for your comment. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: although you've already got your answer about the source, just thought I'd link this WP:CHARTS discussion from October last year. You might recognize some of the editors from the Music/Albums/Songs wikiprojects. They also thought it an unreliable blog and not appropriate for use. There are currently exactly 30 WP articles that reference this site (some of which I think you possibly edit from time to time since you work across a lot of kpop related articles) in case you want to remove the refs and replace them w the direct sales links instead. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Carlobunnie: Noted, thanks a lot for linking the related discussion and the list of articles currently using them. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 00:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Naver redirect references

I realised that some users do use Naver to search for news and tend to just add them as references. But I know that Naver only generates the news on their website, but there will still be another link on the news that will link to the original publisher.

Just an example in case I'm not very clear in expressing my question: Naver link usually is something like this: https://entertain.naver.com/read?oid=609&aid=0000432777 And there will be an original publisher link: https://www.newsen.com/news_view.php?uid=202104241043432410

So I am just wondering to use as a reference, which type of link is better? The Naver generated or the original news link. Or both is actually alright. Sophiajoanne (talk) 13:08, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

There was a discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources#Naver sources. The original source is preferred, but I don't see an issue in using a Naver link. ✗plicit 13:32, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Sophiajoanne (talk) 02:08, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Both are okay, there isn't any issues with using/mixing both imo. My personal choice is use Naver ones as some original source have some coding that prevents Wayback Machine to archive it correctly, Wayback will archive the website as jquery script instead, the archived link will be something like this https://web.archive.org/web/20210329041525/http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.8.3/jquery.min.js and the content won't the news content but jquery code instead. Btw, I often use IABot to automatically archive the source and would only manually do so if the service is down. Manually archiving, the original source will also return the same result hence it is a website problem. In addition, some original source would have this inappropriate advertisement (not referring to 18+ advertisement) at the sidebar, I can't remember which source it is, but it is reliable source as far as I can remember. Also, take Herald Pop or Herald Corp (can't remember which), if you use the original source, it will keep loading for like 2 minutes before you actually see the content while the Naver ones loads instantly. So overall my preferences, is using Naver due to speed, no nonsense advertisement, and ease of archiving. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 04:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Need help on finding one more reliable source

Hi, previously, I've asked for help here and some of you gave me important advices. Since then, I've been working very hard trying to improve Draft:Shuhua. The draft already contain 2 reliable source which indicates her notability. But for the past few days, it became harder for me to find at least one more reliable source for her. So I came here to seek professional help. Anyone willing to help can leave a message at my talk page here. Thank you in advance. YehWolf [🐺 • 🍒] 06:53, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@YehWolf: Draft doesn't meet WP:NMUSIC. Early life section is unsourced. Career section, the Weibo source needs to be replaced with more reliable source. Weibo is essentially in the same category as Twitter. Personal life probably need to be removed entirely, the current content is simply trivia information and isn't important. Overall, in the current state, it fails WP:NMUSIC, unless Shuhua has solo debut or released singles else it is unlikely to pass the draft submission. Similar to how Draft:Sowon has been rejected too many times with the same reason. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Paper9oll, got it, thanks for the explanation. YehWolf [🐺 • 🍒] 07:15, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Reliable sales source

Is this a reliable sales source for pre-Gaon singles? I'm trying to find sources that contain sales for Gee, Haru Haru and I Don't Care. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 21:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

@Nkon21: I'd say no. For one, look at the name of who wrote the article. Two, SBS Pop Asia isn't known for being an authority on sales, so how can the validity of those numbers be verified? It cites no sources for its numbers, so where did it get them from? Three, while I can't speak for all of the numbers cited in the article, I know that the ones for Big Bang are questionable at best. They've been queried on Wikipedia before since they aren't reliably sourced (numbers were taken from Onehallyu and some other kpop site iirc) and to the best of my knowledge it's still that way. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 22:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

The issue with Chinese sales figures from QQ Music etc.

So there is the guideline Wikipedia:Record charts#Single-vendor/single-network charts which basically says that we should not use charts issued by single vendors. We barely do this anymore, but why do we still use sales figures given by a single vendor? The China Music Corporation owns QQ Music, KuGou and KuWo, so all the platforms mainly used for sales. There isn't a proper guideline for this yet, but shouldn't we exclude the sales figures all together?--Lirim | Talk 04:51, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Namuwiki being used as a source

There are roughly 70-ish NamuWiki refs on SK-related articles on Eng WP at present. Idk anything about any of those article's topics to say that I could find replacement sources. Would the better thing be to remove each ref+tag for cite needed, or leave the the NW refs+instead tag as unrel source/better source needed? -- Carlobunnie (talk) 03:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Given NamuWiki's reputation for its lack of accuracy and reliability, I would advise that you remove the references and tag them for cite needed. NamuWiki doesn't have any guidelines that really require for there to be sources. The fact-checking of any of the content on NamuWiki also isn't even required. Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 19:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Namuwiki has a much larger number of Korean participants, so compared to Wikipedia, it is more reliable and accurate on many things related to Korea. But like Wikipedia, Namuwiki is not WP:Scholarship, so it cannot be cited. SkylightXO (talk) 14:38, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol

New Page Patrol needs experienced volunteers

• New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles, including Korea related articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; Wikipedia needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
• If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions and review our instructions page. You can apply for the user-right HERE. --John B123 (talk) 12:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your proposal. Pldx1 (talk) 13:53, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Notability of Korean Queen

Someone did shame on Korean royal queens. For notability opinion, pls give your opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility/Archive 9#Korean queen. Thanks Korean. VocalIndia (talk) 03:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

She gave birth to a son... and became exiled when the son of another mother took the throne. We will have to wait for the next K-drama for more details, since written sources are barely saying more than that. Pldx1 (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:Joseon Dynasty people has been nominated for discussion

Dear all. I have nominated the Category:Joseon Dynasty people for a possible renaming into Category:Joseon people. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pldx1 (talk) 10:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

TXT "Magic" single

Is this an official single or a B-side? I was under the impression all this time that it's the former (and therefore should be in the main singles table in the discog article), but it was added to the "Other charted songs" section. So I'd like additional opinions please. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 02:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

@Carlobunnie: I've seen a lot of articles calling it a B-side (most just call it an english track tho), including some that BH tweeted (like 1 & 2). I also assumed it was a single considering that it had a promotion schedule, mv and a lot of performances. Idk if there's something official confirming it, like a Weverse notice. Looking at the discog article it seems like only lead singles are in the main table, otherwise songs like Eternally and Angel or Devil would be there too. - Ïvana (talk) 04:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ïvana: yes, I saw those on Naver as well. English sources just refer to it as their "first english single" (can't recall any mentions of "B-side" in the ones I read). I was looking at both sections and couldn't understand why some songs in the latter section weren't in the main. I think it should be changed but idk if that's right or wrong, and I don't want to incorrectly edit it. Thank you for your comments. Hopefully other editors more familiar with TXT than me will weigh in and provide additional insight. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 05:27, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

The 10 most-viewed, worst-quality articles according to this Wikiproject

• 236 Yoo Yeon-seok 58,367 1,882 Unknown Unknown
• 3 Doom at Your Service 451,882 14,576 Stub Low
• 144 Kyeon Mi-ri 83,611 2,697 Stub Unknown
• 166 Kim Yeo-jin 75,942 2,449 Stub Unknown
• 225 The Call (2020 South Korean film) 59,667 1,924 Stub Low
• 246 Moon Ga-young 56,785 1,831 Stub Low
• 256 Dark Hole 55,279 1,783 Stub Low
• 361 Han Ye-ri 43,900 1,416 Stub Low
• 383 TVN (South Korean TV channel) 41,970 1,353 Stub Low
• 447 Forbes Korea Power Celebrity 40 37,666 1,215 Stub Unknown

Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Popular pages--Coin945 (talk) 06:48, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Coin945 Thanks, it may be better if you could wikilink them? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Korea#Article_alerts

Just a friendly reminder we have this nice feature, which lists many discussions such as requested moves or deletions that can use more input. You can also watchlist it! _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Can I include other section of Gaon Chart other than Download Chart if the Digital Chart wasn't available?

Hi! So I was a bit confused about Gaon Chart. When a single didn't chart on the Digital Chart, we included the Download Chart on the notes, right? And what if a single didn't chart on Download Chart, but it charted on other charts like BGM Chart, Streaming Chart, or Mobile Chart? Do we write them in the notes just like the Download Chart or we don't? Sorry if my words are confusing, English isn't my native language. Thank you for answering! Byy2 (talk) 10:39, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Byy2 Maybe you should ask at some music-related WikiProject? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:07, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Fan Meeting

Moved from Talk:Kwak Dong-yeon § Fan Meeting

 – — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi dear editors,

I would like to add the Fan Meeting information to Kwak Dong-yeon's page. Is it ok to add? There are many Korean actors and singers that have these information on their pages.

For example

in Career section -Cha eunwoo -Lee joon gi -Bambam(singer) -Park jinyoung -Kim hyunjoong -Lee Jongsuk

in Fan Meeting section -Kim soohyun -Park bo gum -Jang ki yong

in both Career & Fan Meeting section -Song joong ki

in Public Relations section -Jung hae in

Drmies stated that fanmeetings fall under WP:NOTNEWS. I have read WP:NOTNEWS, but I don't completely agree that Fan Meeting falls under this topic. It's like an artist can't have concerts or tours written on their pages... Fan meeting is also that kind of events for Korean entertainers. The fans have to buy very expensive tickets in order to attend. Not just anyone or infamous artists can do this. If the artists are popular enough, then they can hold fan Meetings internationally and in large scales. It's also a part of their careers. If you wont allow me to add this information to his career section, then can I add it to the Fan Meeting section (in table format) or in Public Relations section instead then? (just like the pages above)

However, if its not allow to be added. I understand and wont add it to his page, but please delete these Fan Meetings information from the above artists pages too, not only just Kwak Dong-yeon. It should be the same standard for Korean entertainers.

Thank you so much. Waiting for the response Samekizofu (talk) 09:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

In my opinion, I agree for the fan meeting information to be added to korean entertainers pages (if provide proper references) because it's actually big part of artists career. They can earn a lot money from this fan meeting internationally, just like tour concerts for singers. Aoowassana (talk) 10:12, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

As someone who has been to fan meetings, I would argue that including such information is not useful. What encyclopedic value does a list of fan meetings provide? Anyone celebrity can hold a fan meeting, big or small. The last one I went to before COVID was for a group who can't crack 2,000 album sales, and they've had multiple fan meetings. A typical fan meeting can consist of the celebrity talking to the audience at large, talking to several small groups of attendees, games, performances, and so on. These events only occur for fan interaction and not much else, which makes it perfect WP:FANCRUFT material. ✗plicit 14:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Explicit, I'd say that it depends on RS. If reliable outlets cover those events, they are probably notable. For the group you mentioned, I doubt there'd be reliable sources anyway... in other words, I guess it's case by case type of an issue. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:55, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

@Piotrus: I'd be interested to see what information someone can gather that goes beyond routine coverage (see my response to Samekizofu below for an example). ✗plicit 10:38, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I personally don't think fan meetings should be mentioned unless there is something particularly notable about a particular fan meeting and I definitely don’t see why they would need to be listed in a table. I don’t think the fact you have to buy "very expensive tickets" has any relevance to its Wikipedia inclusion, either. Explicit makes a good point with WP:FANCRUFT, too. Alex (talk) 16:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

If that the case, the fan meeting information in the above artists' pages should be deleted as well right? I'm totally ok if you disagree, but this should apply to all entertainers. Samekizofu (talk) 03:12, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Samekizofu: that's what this discussion is about, so we can come to a consensus. Alex (talk) 06:07, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Alexanderlee: OK..I understand. BTW @Explicit Which was the idol group that u attend their fan meeting u mentioned? And Was that fan meeting held internationally(not in Korea)? I'm a fan of BTS, EXO, GOT7 and Ateez. From what I've known is that normally those idol groups won't hold fan meeting, but they will hold "fan signing" events instead, which is completely different from "fan meeting".

Fan signing the attendants will be held in small groups(limited attendants), because they want to sell their albums. The fans have to buy a lot of albums in order to win the right to attend the fan sign event(the top spenders). And rarely held internationally, unless that country is their target market.

Fan Meeting mostly from Korean actors or actress, or individual solo activity..just like Bambam GOT7, and Cha Eunwoo from Astro(which is also an actor). The fans have to buy tickets to attend, and mostly hold in large scale and internationally.

That's from my experience. I've never followed not popular idol groups before, so I really have no idea about what u said. Samekizofu (talk) 08:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I think Samekizofu points for this discussion is why there is no consistency from article to article as certain articles are "okay" (kind of) with having fan meeting section which are mostly styled exactly like table from concerts and tours section/list article (for example List of Blackpink live performances#Tour dates vs Kim Soo-hyun#Fan meeting). Imo, it is better to have clear consensus so future newly joined editors can have better understanding else they would just assume that it is okay to have the section because they see it on another article and after adding their edit, another editor removed. This is exactly the situation that Samekizofu faced. For me personal, I'm don't oppose to having the section, personally I haven't worked with fan meeting section before (referring to adding entry to the list) however I have with concerts and tours section/articles. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

yes Paper9oll that's exactly what I thought. I just want a clear consensus. Samekizofu (talk) 09:07, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I still don't think anyone can have Fan Meeting in large scale and internationally though, but even if anyone can, in just a small scale like @Explicit said. Shouldn't it still be ok to add to Wikipedia anyway? Because anyone can hold a concert too. (whether the groups are popular or not popular, Big or small attendants). Editors can't add the concert/tours on the group's article too then? In my opinion, the concert/tour is just like Fan Meeting event. People have to buy the tickets for both concerts and fan meeting events in order to attend. (the fan Meeting tickets sometimes are even more expensive than the concerts too.) BTW, this does not count Fan signing events for Korean idol group because thats the opposite of Fan Meeting, as I mentioned above. If the concert can be added then, I still dont see why the fan meeting can't. Samekizofu (talk) 08:26, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

@Samekizofu: The group was D-Crunch. Interestingly, that particular fan meeting was a dinner with the group and nothing else, aside from the concert directly after. The one I went to was in Seoul, but they also had a fan meeting in Malaysia two years ago. Fan signings are even more fancrufty than fan meetings, and even those occur overseas. I recall JBJ95 holding these events a few times in Japan for the release of their Korean albums. They take place outside of Korea a lot more than you'd think.

Concerts and fan meetings are incredibly different from each others. Let's take The Monster Ball Tour, for example. There's background, development, synopsis, critical reception, commercial performance, and so on. Reliable sources cover these events in great detail. What information do we get from fan meetings? "X Group will hold a fan meeting at Y, tickets go on sale on Z" or "X Group sells out fan meeting tickets in Y amount of time". That's what I've seen over time. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I don't oppose mentioning fan meetings in prose if it's related to promotion. I've just remembered that I mention them in passing at D-Hours AM 7:03#Release and promotion, and I only listed those because they were held as promotional events for the album. I don't think they're worth mentioning at Kim Dong-han in prose or anywhere in list form. ✗plicit 10:38, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: IC..I don't have that much knowledge about those not that popular idol groups. Anyway in my opinion, what I mean is that the concerts (for idol groups) are the same as the fan meetings (for an actors/actresses).. The singers have "concerts" to meet and showcase their performances with their fans who bought the tickets, meanwhile the actors/actress can also have the "fan meeting" events in order to publicize/showcase/connect with their fans who bought the tickets too (mostly they will have fan meetings soon after their drama or any work successfully finished), and the media did not just report a few things like u said.. they also wrote many details about the events too. In conclusion, I think that the idol groups should have only the concert/tours information, but not the Fan meeting and fansign events on their articles (except for individual solo artist like u mentioned above, and if the fan meetings are relevant/notable, and in big scale.. the fansign events are too irrelevant, can't be added for sure). Whereas the actor, and actress can have Fan Meeting information, because it's also considered as a promotional/public relation events for them, and mostly it's in big scale and held internationally too. Actually, I just want the conclusion about adding the Fan Meeting information/table to the actor/actress's article tho. I dont know much about Idol groups/singers. My English is not that good. Hope u'll understand what I'm trying to say. Samekizofu (talk) 10:20, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

So what's the final conclusion? Can I add Fan Meeting or not? Samekizofu (talk) 06:37, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Revised Romanization mistake

There are two pages on the Romanization of Hangeul (why? But that's not the problem right now). In one of them, the romanization of dyphthongs is correct but in the other it is different than in the first, and plain wrong. I'm saying "wrong" based on the official rules to be found on the website of the National Institute of Korean Language. ㅘ is marked as oa (when it should be wa), ㅝ is marked as oae (when it should be wo) ㅚ is marked as oi (when it should be oe) and so on and so forth. I thought, before going in and changing it myself, to alert you here, because it's important stuff. Shantimar (talk) 05:07, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

That's odd. I'm not seeing much of a point in having two separate pages which provide the same information, especially when one provides a portion of the other. Perhaps there is nuance between the articles that we're missing as non-native speakers—Revised Romanization of Hangeul was created by the native South Korean user Garam—but it should probably be redirected to Revised Romanization of Korean regardless, as a content fork wouldn't be justified even if there is a difference between the two. ✗plicit 07:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree. The second page is wrong and could simply be a redirect. --Christian140 (talk) 13:14, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and redirected Revised Romanization of Hangeul to Revised Romanization of Korean. Garam seemingly quit editing all Wikimedia projects last June, so an answer from them would not be forthcoming. ✗plicit 07:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

About now "draftify-d" article Draft:Lee Hyung-geun

Hi WikiProject Korea people.

Please see Ko:이형근, Ja:李亨根 and so on.

In terms of an addition to the English language Wikipedia, I guess there is a quite manifest notability assertion here: a four star general who later went on to be a diplomat.

I guess a first issue to address here may the standard romanization of 이형근.

Your thoughts about this?

Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 13:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry I can't seem to understand what you are talking about since I'm not so experienced in the English language. But if you're asking about the romanization of 이형근, the Revised Romanization would be I Hyeong-geun and the McCune–Reischauer would be Yi Hyeongkŭn

BaaBaaTheSheep^{(talk • ctb)} 05:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Sourcing ratings

Is there a specific website where ratings for television shows/web series can be found? Or are they usually always mentioned in news articles on Naver? I saw on Kor Wiki that ratings were provided for the television broadcast of BTS In the Soop, but that article contains no sources. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 19:35, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Those ratings come from Nielsen, https://www.nielsenkorea.co.kr/tv_terrestrial_day.asp?menu=Tit_1&sub_menu=1_1&area=01, Gallup and the like. --Christian140 (talk) 14:01, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Carlobunnie The ratings are likely taken from Naver Search [1] or Daum Search [2]. If the ratings are high enough, they will appear in Nielsen Korea website, https://www.nielsenkorea.co.kr/tv_terrestrial_day.asp?menu=Tit_1&sub_menu=2_1&area=01&begin_date=20211003 (this for paid television network such JTBC, MBN, Channel A, TV Chosun, etc), https://www.nielsenkorea.co.kr/tv_terrestrial_day.asp?menu=Tit_1&sub_menu=1_1&area=01&begin_date=20211003 (this is for free-to-air television network such as SBS, KBS, MBC, etc), and lastly https://www.nielsenkorea.co.kr/tv_terrestrial_day.asp?menu=Tit_1&sub_menu=3_1&area=01&begin_date=20211003 (this is cable network such as tvN, Mnet, etc). Since In the Soop is broadcasted on JTBC, the first one is the one you would need. To get the exact date from Nielsen Korea, change the date 20211003 (YYYYMMDD) to whichever date you want, there after you can ensure each episode has its own source for the ratings. Do note that, the date searching/changing function on Nielsen Korea website doesn't change the date on URL, you have to manually change the date.

However, In the Soop's ratings is quite low hence it wasn't listed on Nielsen Korea website, you would have to use either Naver Search or Daum Search as citation, I have linked them for your convenience above. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:17, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both very much! -- Carlobunnie (talk) 20:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Paper9oll would you mind taking a look at the ratings table I added? I've never had to create one before so Idk whether I did it correctly or not. I used the summary graph from the Naver link you provided for the ratings, but also saw articles citing additional numbers/details from TMNS for the first episode, like this and this. Now idk if the table should be modified to include any of that, or if it should just be mentioned in a note at the bottom of the table. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 02:53, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

@Carlobunnie The ratings table looks good, I made a slight adjustment to made it align with other K-shows articles. TNmS is another type of ratings available for use in South Korea TV series/shows, you can create another column if you want to include it. However, the ratings doesn't appear on Naver nor Daum results, you can only get the figures from news articles. Here is an example of the ratings table with TNmS column. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 03:03, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the adjustment. I was asking whether I should include the TMnS ratings (found in the articles I linked above) for ep1 in the table or not, since none were reported for the other episodes. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 03:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I wouldn't include it because only 2 out of 8 episodes has the data. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:10, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Literal trans

Should the lit. for "인더숲 BTS편" be written "In the forest BTS" or "BTS in the forest"? I put the latter in the first sentence, but I want to know for sure. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 07:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Wow. That show has a terrible title on the first look. I hope the producers have a good explanation. I would use "In the Forest: BTS edition". --Christian140 (talk) 07:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Since no one else commented, I went with your suggestion. Thanks for the reply. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 23:18, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Fish sauce, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 11 October 2021 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Pansori

• Pansori (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

In case someone would like to improve this article (that may contain auto-translated parts?) Particularly funny are the sentences with "intestine" (like: "Since clowns are folk intestines, it would be right to say that they ate various folk intestines based on the rhythm of these mugas and completed them"). Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 00:22, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

People born in Korea under Japanese rule should not be said to have been born in "Chōsen", as is currently the case

A recent widespread change that occurred on the Wikipedia pages for many Korean people is the changing of birthplaces and deathplaces to be in the nation of "Chōsen", a name imposed by the Japanese during the annexation of Korea from 1910-1945. For instance, the Wikipedia article for Kim Dae-jung currently shows his birthplace as "Ka’i-tō, Chōsen" link when a few months ago it was shown as "Hauido, Japanese Korea" link, a more accurate name.

I will post here what i posted on the talk page for Kim Dae-jung. I find it extremely objectionable that the territory and its people, which made constant assertions of its own independence and deeply reviled the occupation, would be referred to by the name imposed upon it by its occupiers, especially in what's supposed to be an objective context. During occupation the territory was referred to in English as "Korea" by the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea (KPG/Korean Provisional Government), which was lead by the deeply important independence leader Kim Gu and first president of South Korea Syngman Rhee. The US referred to the territory as "Korea" in the 1940s as seen by these (1 2 3) NYTimes articles. The US-based Korean National Association, in which first president Syngman Rhee worked as a leader, called the nation "Korea" since 1909. The South Korean government's official website always refers to the territory as "Korea" when referring to the nation under Japanese rule. Hell, North Korea still calls itself "Joseon" (similar to Chōsen) but no one refers to it in English as "North Joseon" or especially "North Chōsen". It's like calling Kim Dae-jung "Toyota Taichū".

This change occured on articles about Korean people. If neither modern Korean people nor modern scholars do not call the nation by the Japanese Hepburn transliteration "Chōsen" but instead call the nation in that period "Korea" in the English language, then it should be called Korea. This is a matter of basic respect of peoples. Holidayruin (talk) 21:12, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Gwangju Inhwa School#Requested move 2 November 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Gwangju Inhwa School#Requested move 2 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 14:37, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Chough Pyung-ok

The article for Chough Pyung-ok is pitifully incomplete. Only four short sentences. And I think he's a fairly interesting figure whose life was consequential to South Korean history.

The Korean Wikipedia article (조병옥) is pretty detailed. So I think it would be a good idea to expand it using that. The tag for expansion using the Korean Wikipedia article was from six years ago and I just reupdated it. Thanks to all!

Holidayruin (talk) 05:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I've added a bit from English-language sources so it has more content now, although still sadly lacking in details particularly on his personal life. Zawed (talk) 08:40, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks so much! This is great work. Holidayruin (talk) 04:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh My News

I would like to know if this news site could be considered a reliable one. The "모든 시민은 기자다" section on their About us page has me on the fence. Granted I've only ever been exposed to a handful of their articles at most and therefore have zero idea about their general reliability, so I'm hoping other editors can weigh in. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 00:32, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

If you wanted to write a wikipedia article about it, it already has OhmyNews. If you want to cite it, I generally think newspapers are garbage. The contributors of the articles featured on the main page usually have their own website or work for small newspapers. Apparently, some of the writers are part of the staff, while it seems the majority are netizens. They certainly have some notability. There is the term 한경오 and 한경오프 for the three to four big liberal media (Hankyoreh, Kyunghyang, Ohmynews, Pressian). Still, I can't think of anything they would be needed to be cited that cannot be found on other news pages. Though, they have original interview and vote polls. --Christian140 (talk) 19:40, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

No, I only wanted to know about their reliability. Didn't know they had an article. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 22:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Note, I am not an authority on sourcing, but maybe I can contribute something to this matter. Ohmynews has not been determined to be reliable or unreliable on Wikipedia's compendium, gathered through individual consensus discussions. But Ohmynews' style and content strike me as similar to Huffington Post, which is on the list. If you take a look at the list of reliable sources and scroll down to HuffPost, the consensus was that HuffPost articles were separated into three categories of reliability: 1. If the article was non-political and written by a hired staff writer, then it is generally reliable; 2. If the article was political and written by a hired staff writer, there is no consensus, so use discretion and caution when sourcing; 3. If the article was written by a freelance contributor (like citizen contributor on Ohmynews), then the article generally considered unreliable. These seem like good rules of thumb to use on Ohmynews articles as well to me. Holidayruin (talk) 22:20, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Full House#Requested move 25 November 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Full House#Requested move 25 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Hddty (talk) 12:26, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Fictional Koreans

There is a dispute at this article, specifically about whether articles about fictional Koreans should be covered under this WikiProject. Anyone interested in saying their piece is encouraged to participate. - Whadup, it's ya girl, Dusa (talk) 21:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd also love to know about Fictional Koreans, and if it can or should be added to this page(link)...😬😬 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamster Lover99 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd love to discuss more about this article, thank you 🤗 Hamster Lover99 (talk) 17:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Tang Joon-sang#Requested move 17 December 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Tang Joon-sang#Requested move 17 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 16:06, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Conversion of full-width Latin letters and Arabic numbers

Greetings! I'm starting a cleanup of characters in the Halfwidth and Fullwidth Forms (Unicode block); some of them have leaked into English-language text. Since English Wikipedia uses variable-width fonts and horizontal writing, based on some quick research it looks like it's actually safe to transform full-width Latin letters and Arabic numerals to their ASCII equivalents (Ａ-Ｚ to A-Z, ａ-ｚ to a-z, and ０-９ to 0-9) even when they appear on English Wikipedia in Chinese, Japanese, or Korean text. This of course does not include instances where the characters themselves are under discussion. My plan is to start doing that when the next database dump is available in a week or two. If you have any questions, objections, concerns, or suggestions, please let me know! -- Beland (talk) 20:48, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Melon charts for pre-Gaon songs?

Although Melon charts should not be used on articles alongside Gaon Chart, the case may be different prior to 2010 where there was no "Gaon"-esque chart in South Korea. Melon would typically fall under WP:SINGLEVENDOR, but it also outlines that some charts representing the home country of the artist or composer ... can be included if no other suitable charts can be located. As Melon is perhaps the most representative music chart of the country prior to Gaon, is it suitable for it to be mentioned in prose of pre-2010 song articles? ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 04:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Nkon21, according to Wikipedia:Record_charts, pre-2010 data can be extracted from the Music Industry Association of Korea. – robertsky (talk) 06:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

The MIAK/RIAK charts track only physical releases. The majority of singles by South Korean artists do not have physical releases (even back then), and weren't able to chart on them. Melon tracks digital singles. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 07:06, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Romanisation of North Korean

There is a question/proposal about the romanisation of North Korean at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal to Change The Romanization of North Korean language in Wikipedia that members of this project are likely to be interested in. Thryduulf (talk) 08:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Help with moving Hangul character articles

I plan to move all Hangul characters' Wikipedia articles to their romanisations per WP:UE, but I have no experience with Korean or Hangul. dudhhr_Contribs 23:48, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Articles on South Korean Provinces - Maps

Latley the maps on many of the articles regarding the South Korean, such as the South Jeolla Province for example, have been removed (see here), by a user on the rational that the maps are inaccurate. I was wondering if there was any consensus on this, and if there was if there were any other maps on commons we could replace them with. I think it is important to have a sense of a geographical area when talking about it in an article, and images such as maps help tremendously. Tagging @Kookminbank:, the user who made the edits. Inter&anthro (talk) 22:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I just saw Ansan’s map in Eng wiki and Ko wiki. They look pretty much the same to me. BaaBaaTheSheep^{(talk • ctb)} 02:18, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

there’s a similar/same problem in kowiki to. the maps have error in North border with Paju City(Gyeonggi-do). BaaBaaTheSheep^{(talk • ctb)} 02:36, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Does there exist any substitute map for S. Korea? I looked briefly on commons but I couldn't find one. Perhaps the former maps needs to be digitally fixed, or a new one created entirely. The other option perhaps would be to include the old map, but with a disclaimer. Inter&anthro (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Jo In-sung#Requested move 30 January 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Jo In-sung#Requested move 30 January 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 19:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Heo Joon-ho#Requested move 30 January 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Heo Joon-ho#Requested move 30 January 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 19:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Gyeongju Featured article review

I have nominated Gyeongju for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:47, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

article renaming request

Regarding the article Chandongja Park,finding the location on google maps says it is the Pohang stadium located in Chongjin. Thus it should be renamed to either chongjin stadium or pohang stadium. Waltzingmogumogupeach (talk) 21:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)