Talk:List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2021

"Reporter Woo-bin"
Ss112, sometimes Korean news articles only state the reporting journalist's first or last name with 'Reporter' attached to it. I thought it would be weird to cite the writer as just "Woo-bin" so I wrote it as 'Reporter Woo-bin', which (if you opened the article) is how TenAsia usually refers to this particular journalist. Additionally, it is a placeholder ref, so I didn't think there was any issue with temporarily using it. Sorry if that was wrong I guess. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That's not something unique to Korea. I've seen it in the press before. It's still not part of somebody's actual name, regardless of what is common in the press or not. I don't think this was worth starting a whole section over. By the way, I have pings turned off. This article is on my watchlist.  Ss  112   01:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
 * While I can't presume to know what you're thinking, your edit summaries tend to come across like I (or other editors) have done something so utterly ridiculous you can't believe it, so I wanted to explain. Also, I was under the impression that you don't want/like msgs on your talk page (or atleast you said something to that effect a long while back) so I made a post here instead. Most sources I've used/been exposed to during my time on WP always cite full names or an abbr form of that, so I didn't know only one is commonplace, or acceptable to use. You might have seen it before, but not everyone else has. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 02:08, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, except you are specifically addressing me, not "everyone else". I was in disbelief somebody would put the word "Reporter" in author= like it's part of somebody's name and you wouldn't think to just leave it out. I don't particularly think trying to pull me up on my edit summaries is the best when you're prone to using silly hyperboles ("don't crucify me") and informing editors about things they wouldn't care about, like that you're falling asleep (then go off the computer to sleep and let somebody else update the page?). These remind me of the editor Malmsimp's former diary entry edit summaries. I don't see what you're trying to achieve here. Looks like an excuse to have an argument to me. Are we done?  Ss  112   02:39, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
 * When I said "everyone else", I was referring to other editors like me who might not know all the things that you do. I'm not looking for an argument. I was only trying to explain that I felt the need to explain my mistake to you because of what you said in your summary. I addressed you specifically because you were the editor that corrected my mistake. I would still have explained myself had it been any other editor who said the same thing you did. I apologize if I've somehow given you the wrong impression, I meant no disrespect at any point. The 'crucify' thing was me joking once, and I only mention when I'm falling asleep so that anyone who visits a page after I've edited it will understand why there's a mistake(s) if I happened to make any and missed them. I feel anxious if I don't try to clear up my mistakes, or if there's any misunderstanding caused by my edits. That's all it was. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 03:17, 30 September 2021 (UTC)