User talk:Ainvip95

April 2019
Ainvip95, I have removed your 3 recent edits to Burning Sun scandal. Much of it appears to be taken from an interview between Sisa Journal and Seungri's defense attorney. Most of what you added does not make any sense, but that aside, the Wikipedia page is not the place to detail Seungri's entire account or defense of what happened, if that is what you added. The page, in general, is detailing the major events. You also, used Soompi twice as a citation, which is considered an unreliable source here: WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources. If you wish to discuss this, please leave a message here or at my Talk page.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 08:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Bonnielou2013, first of all, sorry as I intruded into your page as I didn't know it's yours. Sorry also as I'm just a beginner that still learning here and don't master up all the basic editing and formatting skills yet. But, sorry to say also, your page is CLEARLY BIASED. Your page is named as Burning Sun Scandal, but a few days before Hwang Hana stories was revealed, you were focusing more about issues of KKT chats and less updating about BS issues itself. Actually there are Korean articles out there that talked about BS issues at that time, instead what you have included in your page. And do you know that, there are TONNES of FAKE + BLANTANT NEWS outside there when regarding all those huge complicated issues, regardless towards who they are wrote about. That might makes some of your sources are also NON-RELIABLE. My intention is just not to talk about Seungri only, but also for other person who involved also as it's in my plan already. I just wanna ask you, is it totally wrong for me to help you and your page with adding missing/correcting misleading information about those complicated issues? And also, since when you started to follow about the issues? For your information, I have followed about the issues since the Day 1, from Jan 28 already of the news of Kim Sang-kyo was being abused at the BS club, until now. That's why I decided to help you.


 * Btw, about those sources from Soompi, I'm so sorry about that. I'll try to find another more reliable sources for that. But, I had found out that you included a source that being linked to a Koreaboo new site page that are also can be categorized as unreliable. And you also had added Jung Joon-young's confession into your page, but why I can't put Seungri's statements that some are his answers during the police questionings as well? As he become the main face about this complicated issues, why it's so wrong to put his statements also? Is it supposedly to be parts of developments of this issues as well? Or just developments are just about allegations and more allegations only? Please think either your page is fair enough with just your contents that keep talking more about allegations/bookings/arrests only. and the last one, I just wanna tell you even the Korean news sites in the list that you have tagged above also have posted FAKE NEWS before (If you don't believe it and you wish to see about it, I can show you some of it). Anyway, so sorry again for this rant, I'm already 24 and I'm not just ordinary immature teens anymore. What I'm doing here is just helping you in the name of justice. So, again, I'm so sorry for everything and I wouldn't stop from correcting and help people to know more stuffs about this case. Please help me by teach me more about the editing/formatting/other skills and also please allow me to help you and your page. Thank you so much.

Ainvip95 I agree with you that the page is probably biased. The investigative reporter Kang said "the sex video investigation was seen by some people as a means to avert attention away from the larger corruption scandal with its multiple allegations." I think this is a common sentiment in the South Korean public. That is why I added her quote and also from another journalist and Lawyer Bang, who talked about the issues being "mafia" like, they were so wide-spread. I know that the KakaoTalk aspect is only a minor portion. But, that is what is getting the headlines.

Please remember that this is a current issue. Information changes on a day-to-day basis and the page will go through many updates. This is a version of the "stub" or beginning page I started on March 20, which included the Current Event tag saying that "initial news reports may be unreliable" and asking for contributions and discussion. I additionally added Empty Section tags on March 21 inviting editors for input, By March 30, the Development Section still had a Needs Expansion tag (which I added), inviting editors to help by adding information. But, on March 30, another editor took off the Current Event tag, at the top of the page, inviting input and saying the article would be going through frequent changes, due to Wikipedia's rules about the number of editors needed for it be called Current.

Although I started the page very late in the events, on March 20, by then, no one else had created a page for it and very few editors contributed to adding information or improving the page with any amount of information. But, many improved small details, fixing spelling and punctuation and watching out for typos. I was a little disappointed. It was my first time working on a Current Events page and I had anticipated a lot of activity and working with others and perhaps discussing the events. Oddly, people were viewing it, but did not have a lot to say by making edits (as like the busy group pages, like Big Bang's, for instance), which has multiple editors.

One editor took out the sentence I had added about Zico, and I agreed with their changes to leave his name out. Someone else added Hwang Ha-na's name in the Infobox section and I added the information on her arrest. Editors work together all the time to make changes, without argument. It is not "my page", nor are any other pages I have created or assisted in editing. Wikipedia is a community effort. Anyone may make changes, within the scope of Wikipedia's rules, or within reason. Editors, including myself, discuss changes on Talk pages or make the changes and add a small note on the edit summary section. I made changes to your edits by making a Summary note and adding an explanation here for you. I have added several of Seungri's apologies and his response to SBS "that the lawyer whistleblower and journalist were responsible for all the criminal allegations against him, had not checked facts properly and had "ruined his career for their own personal gain"." I have added a lengthy section about his career with Big Bang and his business ventures, which I hoped would subtly add a human element.

But, in the information you added, a number of sentences like this: He shared, “Seungri claimed that CEO Kim told him he is going to meet the Indonesian king for the nickel business and asked to be introduced a beautiful woman to show off to the king. In fact, CEO Kim went to Indonesia with just him and Seungri, without a woman”...and this one: "In December 2015, Seungri was scammed by singer Shin Eun-Sung (real name: Jeong Na-Ra, 36).[121] Shin Eun-Sung asked Seungri for a favour and presented to him the idea of CEO Kim and his sister’s real estate investment which is actually just a scam."......don't make any sense.

Although I reviewed your contribution, I could not find a portion of it to work with and make it clearer or more understandable for readers, many who know nothing about Seungri, perhaps having seen his name first, as a part of this scandal.

Please tell me what information you would like to add, and I will help you work on it. However, I still will say that Seungri's entire explanation and defense is not suitable for the page, which is just a summary of the entire events of the scandal. Hopefully, more of the events in the scandal will be publicized soon.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 23:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Belated welcome


Hello, Ainvip95, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
 * Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
 * Check out some of these pages:
 * Introduction to Wikipedia | Tutorial
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode


 * If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out Questions, stop by and/or ask a question at the Teahouse, [ ask me on my talk page], or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Bonnielou2013 (talk) 02:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

{{Hidden|style=width: 50%;|contentstyle=text-align: left;|1=How do I create citations?|2=#Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for. 
 * 1) Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
 * 2) In a new tab/window, go to the [//tools.wmflabs.org/makeref/ citation generator], click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
 * 3) Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
 * 4) Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like, copy the whole thing).
 * 5) In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
 * 6) If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories: