Talk:The King's Affection

Requested move 6 September 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: page moved. Seokgjin (talk) 15:22, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeonmo → The King's Affection – The English name used by the international distributor (Netflix) is The King's Affection. - Seokgjin (talk) 08:56, 6 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose as per WP:COMMONNAME and partly relevant WP:NCKO with all of Korean sources including the teaser poster using revised romanized Yeonmo. Listing five sources already included in article for to ensure common usage claim is verifiability. English sources (majority unreliable source) listed show title as Affection which is the literal translation of 연모 (Yeonmo), listing two unreliable English sources such as AsianWiki and MyDramaList (both of which I cannot link it because the URL are blacklisted globally on Wikimedia) which uses Affection. While IMDb and HanCinema uses Affection with IMDb denoting Yeonmo as original title. I don't oppose renaming article to Affection (TV series) based on literal translation but not The King's Affection which isn't even commonly used/referred to.  —  Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  09:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC) Just my comment belows.  —  Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  14:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Move: Netflix is available in 190 countries, so the series will be available for worldwide streaming. The present title is a Korean title and it is difficult for international audience to relate with Korean language title. This is English Wikipedia so any English understanding person who wants any information on the series will come to this article. It is desirable that the title should correspond to the title on Netflix. The present title is common for Korean language speaking people but for wider audience it will not be common title. It is usual practice with other TV series also to have different English title than the Korean title. Soon KBS at its website KBS World will announce English title for this series also. For example 신사와 아가씨 (Gentleman and Lady) has been titled as Young Lady and Gentleman. As far as translations are concerned different sources translate the same title differently. Even this title has been translated as 'Attachment' by some sources. That's why I think a redirect as Attachment (TV series) has been created. I suggest we should wait for KBS to announce English title and then decide the move. Thanks Rickyurs (talk) 13:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Rickyurs I beg to differ to using Netflix to name the article title as stated in my comment above that it is not commonly used/referred to neither it is Netflix original programming, they are just distributor for the drama in selected countries. However, I'm confused by your example for Gentleman and Lady though, as the KBS website shows it is named the same English Wikipedia article or are you referring to "Gentleman and Lady" means literal translation? I support waiting for the KBS official website to be published then after which Seokgjin or Rickyurs or me or some other editor (whoever is faster) can move it to the title matching KBS ones? @Seokgjin what do you think, if you okay with waiting then kindly self-withdrawn the requested move for now.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  13:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Paper9oll & @Rickyurs I agree with withdrawing the request, but I've noticed that KBS also uses The King's Affection . Is that enough? - Seokgjin (talk) 14:01, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Seokgjin Great finding, I have zero objection then. However, if there are changes to what KBS World published (basically if it is different from expected title The King's Affection) then it will maybe have to be move again but for now, I don't have any objection to moving to The King's Affection since the KBS Instagram seem to be legit given the blue verified tick. I think you can just self-withdrawn or self-move as early closure.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  14:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Seokgjin I have self-revert to your previous move, please help to self-withdrawn this request.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  14:57, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Family tree
Hi there, @Paper9oll! You boldly removed the family tree I'd added to the plot summary. I think it's useful to keep the family tree because it concisely summarises the dynastic relationships between characters that drive much of the plot of the series. This information is included in the cast list, so other users clearly think it's worth giving, but the format of the cast list makes it very hard to make sense of the information. Moreover, the summary of the series is underdeveloped at the moment: it states the premise of the story, but doesn't summarise what happens. The family tree concisely expresses the births and marriages that are key plot developments. And users can always choose to hide it, so I don't think it does any harm having it.

Alarichall (talk) 12:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @Alarichall Hi, I don't see how this is even useful nor significant, nor are we a guidebook which this does seem like one in some form to me, and something that belongs to Fandom and/or AsianWiki and/or DramaWiki, as supposed to English Wikipedia, which was why I removed it. While such table/graph does exists in history articles about Kings, Queens, etc ... I don't see how is this helpful for readers pertaining to television series given that majority of the South Korean television series (regardless of history or modern storyline) has some form of family tree as well.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  12:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * As I say, I think it's useful as part of the plot summary and you haven't explained why you don't think it's useful. I agree that most summaries of fiction on Wikipedia don't include family trees, but that isn't in itself an argument that they shouldn't. The Manual of Style is clear that we should include plot summaries and that '"Teaser"-style or incomplete plot descriptions ... should not be used'. At the moment, this article does have a teaser-style plot summary, and the family tree helps ameliorate that. It would also make it easier to understand any plot summary that is written in the future. Alarichall (talk) 12:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Alarichall Huh ... I already explained above in the reply above on why I don't find it's useful and/or helpful. Unless you're planning to write the plot summary now else I don't see why and/or how this would useful and/or helpful and/or making it easier to understand to the readers and/or make the article better.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  13:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I feel you've explained that you think that this family tree looks like it belongs in AsianWiki or the like, and that other similar Wikipedia articles don't have family trees, rather than giving reasons why it isn't a useful component of this article, whereas I think I have given clear reasons why it is a useful component of this article. But I had been thinking about improving the plot summary, so maybe I'll do that and bring in the family tree if I still think it's useful to explaining the plot. Alarichall (talk) 14:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Alarichall The reason being, in addition to earlier mentioned, this graph doesn't adds any values to the existing synopsis nor does it helps the readers to understand what is what. If you're able to improve the plot summary then feel free to go ahead even though majoritive (at least 95%) of South Korean TV series don't practice such (having extensive plot summary), maybe that would make this graph useful. If you don't have time, and want to add this back asap then, imo this should be collapsed instead of expanded as per my reasoning above, and also add legend for those lines (I don't even understand what the lines means even I though I understand the relationship but that's because I watched the entire series so of course I would understand the relationship).  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  14:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of edits by Miss roberts008
Hi there, @Paper9oll. I see you've reverted a series of edits by @Miss roberts008 with the comment "Non-npov" -- i.e. you don't think the edits offer a neutral point of view. But as far as I can see they are mostly or all accurate plot summary. Miss roberts008's contributions would definitely benefit from being copy-edited and could be expressed in a more encyclopaedic tone, but I don't think your reason for deleting them is appropriate. I also note that Miss roberts008 is a new contributor to Wikipedia, and it would be good for us to be more welcoming to new editors than just reverting their edits with a cryptic, abbreviated reason (whether or not that reason is accurate). I suggest that we reinstate and copy-edit Miss roberts008's edits. Alarichall (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Alarichall ✅ restore with some rewrite. "I also note that Miss roberts008 is a new contributor to Wikipedia, and it would be good for us to be more welcoming to new editors than just reverting their edits with a cryptic, abbreviated reason (whether or not that reason is accurate)", you're free to do so. Thanks and regards,  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  04:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Fab! Thankyou. Alarichall (talk) 14:33, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I am sorry if I caused you trouble. I edited/ added information about the drama because I am fond of reading Kdrama plots here in wikipedia, but after seeing less information about The King's Affection, I could help but feel frustrated because it has become a habit of mine to read plots while watching. Thank you for understanding though. Thanks and regards... Miss roberts008 (talk) 06:31, 6 March 2022 (UTC)