Shinyang-i

Hey

I know it is frustrating dealing with "these" articles, but I hope you don't take it too emotionally. Other editors might not understand what we are saying now, but down the line, sooner or later, it will hit them hard of what they are doing to their favorite idols and how badly these articles are. I also got into a couple of discussions before, now I'm immune to it. Take the attack comments lightly and know that what you are doing is meant to be a good thing. Not every edit we make can be perfect, but at least we try. Just want to leave you a note. Thanks buddy.--TerryAlex (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for keeping the project clean and true to its purpose. Drmies (talk) 01:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Yello ~

Hello ~ Sorry to bother you but I'd just like to ask you something regarding the BAP page because I just got the notification about us engaging in an 'edit war'. I'm just wondering though, why should I not recreate the member tables? Personally, I think having it in prose makes it much more difficult and inconvenient to refer to and even then, I'm not really sure how to fit such info in prose 'nicely' so that it flows. I went though the page's edit history/logs, and I saw a previous edit about how the member tables is unnecessary due to them all having their pages (and linked as well). But I also find this largely inconvenient since there's no 'quick' reference at all. Sure, there are the member's names and links by the sidebar, but it's somewhat obscure and sometimes, people just wish to have a quick reference to such info (i.e. members, their real names, names in hangul, birthdates, etc.) rather than having to click through links and read full pages of info that they do not desire. Haha! Sorry if this is too wordy. >< I'm not sure how to approach you regarding this 'edit war' since I'm new here... so, hey. Hope to work things out with you. :3 --Kimzt (talk) 10:38, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, I'm not really any more involved with the BAP page than I am any other, and I haven't left any messages about edit warring. So I might not really be the one to contact. Who knows how helpful I can be. :) I think the deal with the member tables is that they are usually used in lieu of prose and contain little information for an encyclopedia. Surely there's more to say about these guys than their names, birthdays, and names in hangul and/or hanja? (Many tables used to contain blood type, favorite color, weight, zodiac signs, etc - they were really trivial and embarrassing.) Where's the guy from? How'd he grow up? Include stuff (in prose!) that is normally included in biographical WP pages, as long as it's referenced and not ridiculously trivial. "Quick reference" isn't really what Wikipedia strives to be; in my professional life, which is unrelated to kpop or biographies or music, I never ever turn to Wikipedia for quick reference, because I won't find it. It's just not what WP is. Also, the intended purpose of tables on WP is to organize information that otherwise turns into a huge crapheap - things that legitimately belong in lists, like detailed filmographies. For members who do have their own page, there most definitely isn't a need for tables on the group page, because it just repeats information already present on their own page. (There's a big problem with redundancy on kpop pages, in general. To change one piece of information, an editor must often visit tons of different pages because there are tons of tables located all over the place.) Anyway, overall Wikipedia is about reading prose, so kpop pages - like all other artists' pages - should work toward maximizing prose and using tables only where the information legitimately warrants a table. A list of members doesn't really fall into that category, and so should be in prose. "Quick ref" resources for member minutiae aren't really what Wikipedia is for; that's what fan sites are for. So, I recommend building up the exising kpop wiki on Wikia or even starting a Wikia for your favorite group for quick reference and for info that is of interest to hardcore fans but is not encyclopedic (such as tiny details revealed by a day-by-day recounting of the lead-up to a song's release; such info often makes up the bulk of many kpop articles). Right now, when I read articles on WP on kpop groups, at the end of the article I feel like I have no better ideas who they are than before I read the article. Someone's birthday and a list of variety show appearances and all the other stuff that tends to make up 99% of a kpop article tell me nothing about what they're really all about.

I might not have been very helpful, but I appreciate your question, and I super appreciate the mature, sensible way you approached me. If editors are sometimes rude to you, it's because we're often dealing with lots of people who don't read up on Wikipedia policy at all, who are rude to begin with, who behave like spoiled children and refuse to read any Wikipedia guidelines, and who basically just act like entitled brats - "this is how I want it to be so WP should change its whole structure to meet my desires - that kind of attitude). We also deal with a lot of personal attacks and "Wiki-stalking". In those circumstances, it gets easy to accidentally be gruff or even rude to editors/readers who are being totally reasonable. Anyway, have a great day and definitely consider my suggestions about Wikia or another platform for hardcore fanning needs. That's really what they're there for and I use them all the time when I want detailed info on "fannish" subjects. :) Shinyang-i (talk) 22:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Tasks

If you ever take a break from AFDing, check out Portal:K-pop and help with the Category:Unassessed Korea-related articles. There was a time that I managed to shrink the unassessed a bit but it grew due to the creating of articles. Oh yeah, if you haven't, add yourself to Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Participants. Thanks. ☴ Jaewon [Talk] 02:48, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

@Jay2kx:. I think I'm guilty of contributing to the buildup of unassessed articles, as I recently tagged probably hundreds of them with the Wikiproject's banner. I think I'm done with AFDing for now...I never set out to do it, it's all just stuff I stumbled across while tagging articles. When almost every single song by a group has its own article, that kinda jumps out at a person, heh heh. I also monitor the newly-created articles reported by one of the bots. But it's a really ugly process and too many editors are just...well, you know. In terms of assessing articles, I'll read through the guidelines but I don't know if I feel comfortable assessing them for actual quality beyond "stub". I don't feel seasoned enough yet. But I can add tags for "needs photo", etc. I notice there is an "unstable" field for articles that tend to have edit warring and such. Is that actively used? I can think of many that could make use of it.

I also was wondering how to tell if usage of a photo on a page is legit. Like, there is a certain page where I suspect the main editor is ganking pictures from other fans from around the internet for the article. He/she fills out the required copyright release stuff when it gets uploaded, claiming the photo as his/her own, but that doesn't meant it's true. Are there people within our project who specialize in assessing that kind of situation? I have no desire to dive into that particular pool. :) Shinyang-i (talk) 07:27, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Haha. Adding them to the scope of the project is different. I wish more people did that when they created articles. I don't think people don't know the edit war field exist and should be used more often. And if the photo is linked from Commons, there is usually a bot or person who will handle check for rights to use it. So what article is it? ☴ Jaewon [Talk] 15:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

I've started tagging the articles I have to revert daily with the "unstable" label. The photo issue is with Zhou Mi (singer). It has many photos and the infobox photo has even changed since the last time I looked a couple days ago. Now I see that all the current photos are in the process of being deleted and/or have been tagged as non-free. But a couple of days ago, the primary article editor had uploaded a new infobox photo and claimed it as his/her own, though it came from a fan twitter with a different username. Given his/her history with photos on the article, I doubted it was really his/her twitter. In its present condition, the photo issue may be moot, though. But in general, how can someone tell if a photo an editor claims as his/her own really is? Shinyang-i (talk) 23:48, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

G-Dragon

Hi, There is currently an editing war going on between another user and myself on G-Dragon's page in regards to his blackface on Instagram. Would you mind being the third/neutral party to see that the editing war doesn't continue? That would be lovely. Thank you. AhnSoonKyung (talk) 12:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)