Talk:South Korean animation

North Korea
This article has nothing about North Korean animation, like, which appears to be primarily propaganda targeted at North Korean youth. Should animations such as these get a mention? 60.231.26.221 10:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Manhwa yeonghwa
I've seen Korean animation being called Manhwa Yeonghwa... and it was by a Korean speaker from a magazine which printed anime stuff, but the editor was Korean. The person asked the readers to call Korean animation properly. Can someone counter?--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 23:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Slavery controversy section
Not everyone has seen these Banksy opening credits, why aren't they described? Why aren't there any references? The section is quite unclear, and reads like it was written by someone with an agenda, certainly not fitting for an encyclopedia. The only reference doesn't support all the claims made. Shouldn't this be more than enough to warrant deletion? 88.73.76.144 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:52, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that History of Korean animation be merged into Korean animation. I think that the content in the History of Korean animation article can easily be explained in the context of Korean animation, and the Korean animation article is of a reasonable size that the merging of History of Korean animation will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. The History of Korean animation article will also add much-needed referencing to the Korean animation page. Yoninah (talk) 17:35, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if the merge is needed. I think the topic of history of Korean animation has stand-alone notability, so there is no need to redirect the article here. We can copy more content and expand this one while leaving it in the old article. Finally, I'll note that the history section here is an unreferenced mess, while the old article is fully referenced. If we try to preserve the current content and merge the history of... here, and then redirect it, we will decrease the quality of the history content, as we will replace the fully referenced history of... article with one which is not. PS. I found some nice English refs at and, if anyone would like to see if the content here could be referenced properly. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  14:29, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Merging doesn't mean keeping the old material intact. If the merged content is better/better referenced, that should take precedence over the low-quality text. I propose saving whatever is salvageable from the History section here and primarily using the content of History of Korean animation for the History section. Yoninah (talk) 19:36, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see why this article should disappear. You can copy the content, improve history section there, and leave this one intact for further development. I repeat: I believe the subtopic of history of Korean animation is important enough to deserve its own separate article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:43, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Korean animation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426054727/http://www.korazy.com.au/main/page_articles_article_2.html to http://www.korazy.com.au/main/page_articles_article_2.html
 * Added tag to http://www.chuncheon.go.kr/eng/contents.asp?MCode=30302
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061212042920/http://nandakorea.sakura.ne.jp/koreanime.html to http://nandakorea.sakura.ne.jp/koreanime.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080920023427/http://www.korazy.com.au/ to http://www.korazy.com.au/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426054727/http://www.korazy.com.au/main/page_articles_article_2.html to http://www.korazy.com.au/main/page_articles_article_2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:19, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Native names for Korean animation studios
I can't find native names for some of the Korean animation studios, for example what is native name of South Korean animation studio Anima Sam Won? Isn't is (주)아니마삼웜? And what is native namne for North Korean animation studio Studio Paek-ho? Isn't is ㅅ투디오퍀호? 94.180.100.46 (talk) 08:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Split the page
If we have Chinese and Taiwanese animation pages, then we should divide this page into North and South Korean animation pages respectively. And North Korea don't have just 3 animation studios: In reality North Korea may have as much animation studios as mainland China or Vietnam. 94.180.52.22 (talk) 12:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * S.E.K. Studio (조선4·26만화영화촬영소)
 * Studio Paek-ho (조선백호만화영화창작단)
 * Samchŏlli General Corp. (삼천리총회사)

Requested move 26 February 2020

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move, after extended time for discussion. BD2412 T 13:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Animation in South Korea → Aeni – Animation in South Korea is usually referred to as "aeni" in Korean the same way that animation in Japanese is "anime". This can be seen by reading various online discussions, videos, and articles about animation that are in Korean. Recently, there have been an increase in the number of Korean animated TV and web shows that have started to come out based on manhwa and original ideas from various companies including Naver with LICO TV, SYOK Studio, and Crunchyroll. Since there has been an increase in the number of Korean animated shows that are now being created and there is no other use for the term "aeni" in English, I feel we should rename the page to distinguish and reflect Korean animation the same way we do for Korean comics with manhwa and Japanese animation with anime. While the term is not widely known yet, there are still a few who are aware of it and make the effort to make a distinction. This move is also being done to curve the use of "Korean anime" to refer to Korean animation as now fewer people say "Chinese anime" to refer to donghua. AquilaXIII (talk) 05:33, 26 February 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 11:48, 4 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose - proposal would greatly limit the topic. Currently, this article is about the broad animation industry, where "aeni" is limited to particular styles/properties. Also, I don't think "aeni" is COMMMONNAME... it seems to be used far less than even the phrase "Korean anime". OP's bolded example of "donghua" is misleading and contradictory evidence because actually its a redirect to Chinese animation. -- Netoholic @ 20:33, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Aeni does not refer to specific styles or properties in Korean animation, aeni is the whole Korean animation industry since it's the term they use to refer to it. Renaming it wouldn't be limiting the article, it would be giving it its proper name the same way we do for manga, manhwa, and other country specific media. As mentioned before, the word aeni is still not well known outside of Korea since there hasn't been a good amount of animated shows that have been made or released outside of Korea that aren't cartoons (animation for kids) the same way anime and donghua have. It's just now that it's starting to happen and some are starting to take notice. You can see this on reddit with the few posts made about aeni and even a whole subreddit dedicated to it. As for Chinese animation, donghua isn't used for the name on Wikipedia because it is taken up by a disambiguation page since depending on the tones, it can mean different things. But if you look online through searches on Google, Bing, YouTube, and Reddit, you'll predominantly see the term donghua used for Chinese animation. You can see the same for aeni by doing an online search of 애니 and looking at the results. AquilaXIII (talk) 04:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:USEENGLISH is the policy I think most applies here. It doesn't matter that aeni is "the term they use to refer to it" - we use the WP:COMMMONNAME as it stands now in English. You also admit that "the word aeni is still not well known outside of Korea". Also your original move request mentions move is also being done to curve the use of "Korean anime" (think you meant "curb the use") - that rationale is prescriptionist and sounds more like WP:Advocacy. -- Netoholic @ 05:31, 27 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - I agree that it makes sense to change the name since it's now starting to become more popular. No one really says Japanese animation or Japanese comics when referring to anime or manga and I agree that donghua is used way more than Chinese animation. Alexaclova112330 (talk) 20:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * SOCK/MEATPUPPET? I'm concerned at the edit/style overlap between User:AquilaXIII and User:Alexaclova112330. Are they two friends editing in the same topic area and with same style or is something else going on? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py?users=AquilaXIII&users=Alexaclova112330&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki significant overlap on a small number of edits. For example User:Alexaclova112330 collected a Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Mexican pornographic film studios 14 June 2019 while AquilaXIII collected a Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Mexican pornography 22 June 2019 (UTC). And other similarities between home pages and edit history. This requires an explanation. Are these two editors in tandem, or a case of sock puppetry? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose we need evidence that Korean animation is better known as Aeni in English language sources before we move the article and no evidence had been provided.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 20:49, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - I think it makes sense to move the page and rename it so we have consistency. I feel like all the arguments against it were already addressed too. I just wish the page would get better improvements like more additions and better sources. KumaPanda (talk) 03:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I have often seen anime and manga used in English, sometimes manhwa and donghua, but I cannot recall ever having seen aeni used in English. Dekimasu よ! 03:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Though it does not alter the way we should select titles on the English Wikipedia, the Korean article is also at ko:대한민국의 애니메이션 ("Animation in South Korea", with "animation" spelled out completely). "Animation" occurs over 100 times in that article, "aeni" only once. Dekimasu よ! 05:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - Doing a search online with 애니 brings up searches for animated shows on YouTube and Google. I think that if Korean animation is about to blow up like the user mentioned, then it would make sense to use the same term that is used in Korea. Either way, I don't really see a good reason not to support the move. 10.144.197.165 (talk) 22:10, 2 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.223.242.21 (talk)
 * Using Korean characters as a search term in this discussion is the opposite of what WP:USEENGLISH advises. This IP's contribution to the discussion should be dismissed out-of-hand just for that reason alone. -- Netoholic @ 07:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree, the average English speaker is not going to use 애니 to look this up so it's completely irrelevant in determining whether or not Korean animation is better known as Aeni by English language speakers and sources.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 16:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Very Strong Oppose completely fails WP:CRITERIA. Please read the guideline and explain how this proposal meets all the criteria for WP:TITLE. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose. The common name in English for Korean animation is by no means "aeni".  O.N.R.  (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Animation character Lava.jpg

Requested move 20 June 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist (+) 02:16, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Animation in South Korea → South Korean animation – Changing the name of the page would just align it with similar pages like "Chinese animation", "Taiwanese animation", & "North Korean animation". The current name of the page doesn't make sense when it doesn't match the other ones. AquilaXIII (talk) 08:42, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support for consistency and per WP:COMMONNAME: "Animation in South Korea" is a descriptive name, and it should not be used if there is a common name in use. This ngram shows that "animation in South Korea" is so rarely used (compared to "South Korean animation") that it doesn't even show up on the graph.  Mysterymanblue  07:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak support. This article is about SK and standardization of names is good. Please note that Korean animation is a redirect to History of Korean animation which discusses both SK and NK. I midly wonder if the redirect target is correct or whether it should be come a disambig? (Which I am leaning to). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC)