Talk:DNA (BTS song)

Soompi links used as citations
Hello, can someone please replace the soompi references with more reliable accepted sources? I noticed a few links when scrolling the page just now however I'm on mobile and cannot make the changes myself. Carlobunnie (talk) 03:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC) Carlobunnie (talk) 03:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Np and sorry
Ashleyyoursmile sorry. I didn't check to see that it was still ongoing. I just decided to do the usual CE. I'll stop, but I do have a few questions for my own clarity so I can proceed better in general moving forward: why is it work instead of publisher? From what I've seen, when it's their articles being ref'd BB is usually marked as work and when it's their charts they're marked as publisher, so I'm confused as to why it's wrong. And 2) the reason I added 'to number fourteen' was because the sentence read as incomplete when it was just 'before falling for the week of October 15, 2017' - that wording begets the question where did it fall? Did it fall off the chart completely, did it fall out of the top 10, top 20? That was my reasoning behind the insertion. I apologize if the number shouldn't be there but the sentence phrasing hangs at the end. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 18:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Carlobunnie, no issues. For the first doubt, I'm not aware of what you are mentioning. The only thing I know and have seen across GAs is that we follow the format that is followed by single chart template. Since it cites Billboard as work or website (you'll find them italicised), so we are doing the same here instead of citing as publisher. As for your second query, falling out of the top ten works well I guess. Because I do agree that we are leaving it incomplete. However per WP:CHARTS the number shouldn't be mentioned. Anyways, I appreciate the work you do with the articles and is always grateful for that. -- Ashley  yoursmile!  18:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Carlobunnie Billboard is not a publisher; they are part of the publisher Lynne Segall. Publisher isn't used for charts, because it's often too much. The Gaon Chart publisher is the KMCA but adding that to every single ref is useless. The publisher parameter generally doesn't get used much. |work= for magazine and |websites= for websites is often more than enough; |publisher= for charts and music videos uploaders and |via= mostly for stuff like YouTube, Spotify etc.-- Lirim  |  Talk  19:44, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you both for the clarifications. About my first question, I probably didn't explain it well but early on when I first began actively editing a longtime music article/chart editor had said, in multiple edit summaries iirc, that the 'work' parameter should be used when citing BB articles and the 'publisher' parameter for chart references so that's what I've followed over the years. I didn't personally think BB must be a publisher but that was the understanding I came to re: charts based on what I was told. That's also why when I saw 'work' (the one Ashely corrected) I thought it was a mistake or something. The single chart template (I went and read it) confused me because I only saw the output being rendered in italics with no mention of 'work' or 'website' anywhere on the page making me think it was just a stylization thing not that it meant those parameters should be used. Sorry again for the trouble, also Lirim please don't think I was attempting to disrupt your review; I realize my edits could be construed that way. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 20:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)