Talk:Pink Luv

Proposed merge with Luv (A Pink song)
There isn't enough information for two articles. Random86 (talk) 06:37, 28 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Wait what was it merged already why Danny2579 (talk) 15:40, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * They were merged because there isn't enough information to justify two separate articles. Other K-pop songs/albums have been merged recently and more will be done. Here is a quote from WP:NSONG: "Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." Random86 (talk) 19:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Mmhm okay then... Then shouldn't details like how the song ranked and stuff like that be shifted here? Since the song's article is gone, then would it be appropriate that the details of how the song charted be moved here instead? Also, if there were to be a Japanese single version of LUV released (which apparently might happen but I don't have reliable sources on this so now it's just hypothetical), would it justify creating LUV as a separate article again? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danny2579 (talk • contribs) 07:13, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The song's rank on Gaon is mentioned in prose. Singles charts are not normally includes on album articles, and you can always go to A Pink discography to see how everything charted. Even if a Japanese single is released it probably won't justify re-creating the song article, since the other A Pink song articles (with Japanese singles) didn't have enough information. If all the article has is charts, tracklisting, release history, when teasers were released, etc., that isn't enough. A lot of K-pop article are like that, and that's what I (and some other editors) are trying to change. It's better to have less articles and have all the information together rather than spread out over 2-3 articles. Random86 (talk) 08:42, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Article for Mr._Chu and No_No_No_(A_Pink_song)
, I have undid your merger for Mr.Chu and NoNoNo song because I believe this need to be discussed first. I believe those two in addition of "Luv" are qualified for a standalone article especially with the first two with their Japanese release. Questions about the WP:NSONG policy and how can we improve the articles:
 * 1) "Notability": Mr Chu and Nonono has been ranked in both in Korean and Japanese charts and won many awards while Luv only in Korea as of now and the article can be greatly improved with the future Japanese release.
 * 2) "Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article." I believe both article have enough material and can be improved, it's already have details such as album cover, tracklisting, charts, etc. How do you justify "not enough information" or "reasonably detailed article"? What kind of information needed to be there, since you said "charts, tracklisting, release history,etc" are not enough. Can you give any link to kpop song article that can be a good example?
 * 3) "Articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." Both article can obviously go beyond stubs, since Nonono has been assessed as "Start" article by both WikiProject Songs and WikiProject Korea while Mr. Chu only by WikiProject Korea and maybe need reassessment by WikiProject Song because it was assessed before the Japanese release. Sonflower0210 (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)


 * First of all, charting and winning awards do not make songs notable enough for their own articles. They must also pass the WP:GNG. For the Korean versions of the songs there is very little information. Here's what is currently in the "No No No" article: teasers, release history, who directed the music video (unsourced), what shows the song was performed on (mostly unsourced), music show wins, and chart performance. There is no information about the song from third-party reliable sources, and no reason why all the existing information can't be included in the album article instead. Look at Secret Garden (EP) and Pink Blossom; if the merged info was taken out, there would not be enough information to justify having the articles and they would probably be merged to A Pink. It makes sense to merge two articles when they are both short, even if they aren't technically stubs. The Japanese version of "No No No" has been out for a while and there is still no significant coverage from third-party reliable sources in the article. So, a Japanese single existing doesn't justify the song having a separate article. The only K-pop song that is a Good Article is Gangnam Style, but you can see more examples here: Good articles/Music. I would say most K-pop songs do not warrant an article because they lack significant coverage in third-party reliable sources. This applies to albums too, but I am mostly focusing on songs right now. --Random86 (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)


 * For Korean song release, I agree that they don't need a separate article since they are part of the album. However I don't think it's appropriate to include Japanese release to their Korean album since they release 2 song from two album. For example NONONO Japanese release also contain another song, MyMy that wasn't included in Pink Blossom mini album but from Snow Pink album. It's the same with Mr.Chu Japanese release that contain song Hush from Une Anee album.


 * Moreover, I actually found a lot of article coverage and interview about the songs and albums that hasn't been put on their article. How about for now, i will try to add more information on those articles and we'll see if it'll have reasonable length for a standalone article. If it still too short, how about combine all Apink Japanese release/activity in one article? So far they have released two singles and planned one future release for May. I think it will be better than merge them to Korean album. Sonflower0210 (talk) 01:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the Japanese releases probably shouldn't be in the Korean album articles. I think the Japanese singles should be merged to A Pink because an article just for their Japanese releases isn't appropriate. If they ever come out with a Japanese studio album with all those songs the singles could be perhaps be merged there. Random86 (talk) 01:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Since you agreed that the Korean songs don't need separate articles, I'm going to redirect them back. Feel free to improve the album articles with the material you found. :) Random86 (talk) 06:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * That's not what I said though. I meant it for songs that was released only as a Korean version so they might not have many coverage. I don't agree to moved the Japanese version to A Pink article and you don't agree to create page for Japanese release so since we can't find solution, I think the song page are better to stay with additional information. They are notable as per WP:NSONG and as per the policy you mention WP:GNG they have reliable source coverage about the song. Do you want me to give you the links? I'm still currently working on the article on my sandbox. I thought I want to add into the page song after I finished. There are a lot more to add and I have all the sources but I'm not fast. Do you know where can I ask for help to improve article? Since you are busy, I don't think you can help?  Sonflower0210 (talk) 11:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I must have misunderstood you then. When you are done, I can always propose another merge. My concern is the album article won't have enough information without the song info. By the way, it's not just my personal opinion to not want a Japanese releases article. I don't see anything like that on Wikipedia. Random86 (talk) 21:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * There are actually information available, it's just there are not many active editor for Apink. I wish there are more senior editor who willing to help improve/expanding kpop article, most of them seems focusing more on deleting stuff. Anyway, a question, for music video synopsis can we do original research? I saw in some of SNSD song page like Gee or Mr.Mr, they don't use sources. Is it ok for synopsis or do they still need source? Btw, I've already added more content into NoNoNo article, I think the length should be more reasonable now? Sonflower0210 (talk) 01:56, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

There are editors (including myself) who improve/expand articles, as well as merge/delete. Both things are necessary considering the state of K-pop articles on Wikipedia. A lot of song/album articles were created by mostly copying and pasting from Allkpop, and that's why I merged some of them (there wasn't much real info there). Now that you've added to "NoNoNo", we actually have a real article, but Secret Garden (EP) is a possible candidate for a merge right now because there's almost nothing there. I don't think sources are required for a basic synopsis, but it would be good to add some if they exist. Random86 (talk) 02:56, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I'll look into the secret garden album too and I would like to request your help, I've noticed that there are some IP users who sometimes add information without adding any sources that you eventually deleted. Since Apink page lack active editors, for things that can be easily find through google search like comeback date, can you help add the sources or just put tag for "citation needed" so there will be some other editors like me who can help look for the info? Sonflower0210 (talk) 00:55, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * A lot of the time, I revert unsourced information from my phone where I can't easily add sources. If something is reverted because it was unsourced, another editor can re-add it with a source. It's really not a big deal. I only add "citation needed" tags to info that has been there for a while to give others a chance to add sources. I don't think that is necessary for new unsourced info. Random86 (talk) 01:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)