Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:KO)

List of South Korean girl groups has an RfC

[edit]

List of South Korean girl groups, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.

Help finding sources?

[edit]

(I was wondering if anyone could help find sources for the film The Man with Two Faces (1975 film) 공포의 이중인간 ). The article is up for deletion and it would be great if someone could check for sources in Korean. I am using Google Translate so I'm limited to just what can get translated easily - since the film is older, I have a feeling that if sourcing does exist, it's potentially going to in places I can't use Google Translate. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some coverage in sources considered reliable by WP:KO/RS
"공포의 이중인간" translates literally as "The Double Man of Terror" so if you're reading it with machine translation that's probably what the title will show.
Easily enough coverage there, and its inclusion in the Korean Film Archive means it meets criteria #4 in WP:NFO at the very least, and likely #2 as well for being selected as a film that portrays the greatest Korean villains. RachelTensions (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics on Korean clans

[edit]

I'm trying to complete the incomplete list on Korean clans with population data. However, the source for it (source n.2, [1]) is now a permanent deadlink with no archive. I can't find whether there is (or has been) another survey online with an intact url. There's a naver blog post which still has the data([2]), but I assume it still wouldn't be considered a reliable source. -- 00101984hjw (talk) 22:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this it? [3] Idk why documents would be in .exe format but links work and download (I have no idea what they do, I have a Mac)
Link retrieved from Statistics Korea here: [4] RachelTensions (talk) 22:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The link you found only elaborates on the outlines on the methodology of the census, and not actual census data. Although, it does say here that family clans were surveyed during the census, so I'm hopeful the actual census results would have something useful. Thanks anyways. -- 00101984hjw (talk) 22:54, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a direct download link for the bon-gwan report from the 2015 census: 2015년 인구주택총조사보고서 전수조사결과(성씨본관편).pdf. Not sure if anything similar is available for the 2020 census. -- Visviva (talk) 23:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you -- 00101984hjw (talk) 23:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing - does anyone here know whether Korean family clan seals are in public domain? It appears that many of them were created during the Japanese colonial era, and I believe some may be designs copyrighted by clan associations. Samhanin created a bunch of those a few years ago and released them as public domain.([5], [6], etc.) - 00101984hjw (talk) 04:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Think it'll be case-by-case basis. If a seal is provably old enough it's probably in public domain.
Side note, I'm not sure what the copyright situation is for both of those seals. The license given for both of those pictures is that This image of simple geometry is ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain, because it consists entirely of information that is common property and contains no original authorship. but especially if the shape involves things like dragons I think they may be pretty distinct designs.
In other words, if the Gimhae Kim clan seal was originally created in a time that still has copyright protection (e.g. if the seal was created in 1970), the Wikimedia Commons license could be wrong and it could actually be a copyright violation.
On the other hand, some other seals could genuinely be pretty simple geometric shapes and be ineligible for copyright. The Gyeongju Kim one may lean closer to that, but I'm not sure. seefooddiet (talk) 04:47, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While I'd hate to lose them from Commons, I'm afraid most of them may not be old enough to be in the public domain area ([7]). While I can't find any information on the specific dates of creation, many seals were allegedly created post-2016. Almost all of them seem too contemporary for a design created prior to the 1920s. 00101984hjw (talk) 05:04, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Asked someone on discord and they said the Gimhae Kim clan logo is not simple enough. If it was created post-2016 it's a copyvio. But shh, if you don't tell anyone else they're copyvios I won't tell anyone.
On the other hand, the Gwangsan Kim clan logo is pretty clearly simple enough to be copyright free I think. Same with the Danyang U clan logo. Anything that's just basic shapes or letters in a reasonably standard font is copyright free. seefooddiet (talk) 05:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation pages with Hangul titles

[edit]

Has there been past discussion about why we have a bunch of disambiguation pages in Hangul? Category:Disambiguation pages with Hangul titles Surely they should all be redirected to a romanized version (WP:UE).

Looks like a lot of them are just disambiguating two pages so could probably go anyway if one is a primary topic (WP:ONEOTHER).

Just wanted to see if anyone knows backstory before I start cleaning it up. RachelTensions (talk) 04:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any backstory and would approve of the cleanup. seefooddiet (talk) 05:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do these always have a primary topic? Both entries for 둔전역 get a combined 17 views total for the past 30 days, so it's hard to argue that. On the other hand, there is only one valid blue link at 이영애 (disambiguation), so we can probably get rid of that one. I don't know if there's a backstory, but Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles has existed for 17 years and some of those pages have survived AFD and RFD. ✗plicit 06:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if there isn't a primary topic to allow getting rid of the disambiguation page (as is the case for 둔전역) I'd assume the disambiguation page title should be romanized wherever possible instead of left in hangul... WP:UE "Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese, or Russian names, must be romanized."
RachelTensions (talk) 07:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I don't think UE strictly applies to these pages, because a disambiguation page is not an article, but rather a navigational aid more closely akin to a soft redirect (this is discussed somewhat in the lede to MOS:DAB, although our nomenclature on this subject is not entirely consistent). But even if it doesn't strictly apply, it's probably still the best way to go (absent strong countervailing considerations, which I don't think exist for most of these).
There have been some fitful past discussions on this point, which seem to have come to more or less random outcomes depending on who showed up. You can find some relevant (but not particularly edifying) background at Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/CJKV task force (of which I apparently was/am a member, although that was long enough ago that I have no actual memory of it), and at various discussions linked from there and the associated talk page. IMO the particular reasons for maintaining dabs at (some) Han-character titles, which do not generally have a language-neutral transcription, are considerably less compelling for Hangul, and I think moving these Hangul dabs to romanized titles is probably a good idea. (But the messiness of Korean romanization could still create some difficulties.) -- Visviva (talk) 23:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with all these opinions. seefooddiet (talk) 00:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’d agree that the ”must” part of UE probably doesn’t apply but we should romanize whenever possible, though I’m sure there’s one or two that won’t be possible. RachelTensions (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah some of the ones in that cat require some thought. But I think most will be easy to resolve. seefooddiet (talk) 01:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Korean calendar automatic conversion module

[edit]

Just putting this out there—we should make a Korean calendar converter module. It's clearly possible, per [8]. {{JULIANDAY}} is similar, see also Category:Date-computing templates and Category:Chinese traditional date and time templates. I probably won't get around to programming it in near future but having this module would be a huge help to our community. seefooddiet (talk) 04:25, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea&oldid=1261172125"