User talk:Nkon21/Archive 6

About EVERGLOW on Jeddah K-Pop Festival
I am having trouble to identify what Wikipedia consider as reliable or not. If i introduce this source ( https://www.koreaboo.com/news/everglow-first-kpop-girl-group-perform-jeddah-kpop-festival-saudi-arabia/ ) on the subject, would it validate the inclusion of their Arabian-soil performance on the Notable events and achievements section? Please tag me explaining why yes, or why not! I wanna learn better how to use sources, so it would help, as when i try understanding an entire WP:XXX usually makes me more confused than helped. Thank you for your contributions!! Skydream1721 (talk) 05:24, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Koreaboo is a unreliable source according to WP:KO/RS, so that source does not validate the inclusion. Have you checked if there are any sources that say they are the first on Naver? ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  05:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Didn't checked it before, but after searching i found this: ( https://entertain.naver.com/read?oid=117&aid=0003617219 )
 * Is this one valid? Skydream1721 (talk) 06:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, the source checks out as it says "it is said that Everglow is the first Korean girl group to perform in Saudi Arabia". ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  08:08, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Starting an article for Ready for Love (BP)
Hi! I know Ready for Love is going to be released as a promotional song for PUBG on Friday, but since it’ll be their first group release in almost 2 years and apparently has a music video, would it be okay to start an article for the song?

Thanks! Beulagpinkeu (talk) 11:09, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, Nkon21. I'm just posting to let you know that Melon Music Award for Album of the Year – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for August 19. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:21, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello again. Please be aware that I moved the Main Page date back to August 29 since we had a date-relevant request for a music list to appear around the same time and I wanted some space between the two lists. The new blurb is here. Cheers. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:46, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022
Hello ,

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators and, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.
 * Backlog status

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.


 * Coordination: and  have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out.  will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.


 * Open letter to the WMF: The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.


 * TIP - Reviewing by subject: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.


 * New reviewers: The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.


 * Reminders
 * Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
 * If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
 * To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

File:Born Pink Tour.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Born Pink Tour.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ✗ plicit  01:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message
Hi ,

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.
 * Invitation

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sea of Love cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Sea of Love cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:44, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, just a question passing
Hi I am a new editor cause my cousin introduced me to Wikipedia, can I know why you removed “Pop Diva Supreme” for ariana grande in the list of honorific names? I’m confused cause it had a reliable source. 186.7.206.11 (talk) 23:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

It’s firmed by my username Supremediva1 (talk) 23:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Elizabeth
It has been confirmed by multiple news source. DIVINE (talk) 17:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

interview request
Hi, I'm a reporter at the Wall Street Journal. I'm interested in talking with you about the London Bridge task force for a story I'm working on. Can you send me an email at alyssa.lukpat@wsj.com so we can arrange a time to talk? Many thanks. Reporter wsj (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

List of IU concert tours
I'm not being "hasty", I've searched multiple times for set lists while making Real Fantasy, Modern Times and Chat-Shire, and I've only found one for 24 Steps. If the content is unsourced it shouldn't be on Wikipedia, and most of songs performed are in prose so I do not understand why you keep adding it? Poirot09 (talk) 17:15, 18 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, thank you for your concern. However, I found some sources that mentions the set list for several of the tours already and was about to add them to the article, and delete the remaining ones. I see zero need to be so hasty here. Best, ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  17:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If you would have added them at the start, there would have been no issue. Seems like you do not care about BURDEN. Btw, the one on The Golden Hour article is not the set list, some songs she performed seem to be missing + the article just writes the songs in a random order. Poirot09 (talk) 18:17, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:BURDEN is about the editor's responsibility for providing citations to the content they themselves add and I don't see any violations of that here. A better step per WP:BURDEN would have been adding citation needed tags to them in order to give time for me (or other editors) to find possible sources, instead of hastily removing them. As for the Golden Hour concert setlist, it was based on the order a Naver article listed it as; if it's wrong, then its the source's problem. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  18:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Didn't you add content without citations? And the source is clearly tagged as a review and does not give a clear order of songs. Poirot09 (talk) 19:32, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Honestly, the majority of set lists on K-pop tour articles have never been sourced and I have not seen someone who brought that up before. But if an editor indicates that you are removing content too quickly, then it's probably best to step back and wait a bit (can't even spare 5 minutes?). As for the golden hour article, the source mentions "the tour started with x song, then she performed this song and so forth". If its wrong (I don't know because I didn't watch it), then that's on the source and you may remove it if you please. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  19:57, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, sorry if I came off as aggressive, I didn't mean it. I don't know much about how K-pop tour articles do it usually, but I'd like to keep this article up to standard. I'll remove the ref from the golden hour for now and monitor naver in the next days, a better ref will surely come out soon. Poirot09 (talk) 20:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries. As for the Chat-Shire controversy, I agree it should be kept as it says it impacted ticket sales (for some reason my eyes skipped over that sentence). As for the type of tour it is, I've seen articles that include the continent/country and others that don't, so I guess it doesn't matter that much. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  20:10, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive
(t &#183; c)  buidhe  21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Asia Song Festival 2009 and 2011
I don't agree that those awards are non-notable as they were ceremonially awarded a physical trophy which is more notable than when artists win awards that hand out nothing. See https://entertain.naver.com/read?oid=277&aid=0002233887 (2009), https://www.newscj.com/99931 (2011) and https://yoonsicroom.tistory.com/entry/111015-Asia-Song-Festival%EF%BC%88%E6%8C%87%E8%B7%AF%E4%B8%8E%E9%97%AE%E8%B7%AF%EF%BC%89 (2011). Also, Asia Song Festival does not award all artists every year (and it looks like they've discontinued the awards altogether: https://m.vlive.tv/video/41675). Solemn Penance (talk) 20:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Physical trophies are not a metric of notability here. The sources said that they gave that award to everyone who attended the event for those years, which makes it promotional in nature and non-notable. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  20:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Or the organizers (Korea Foundation for International Culture Exchange) deemed that all attending artists were deserving of the award for those years. I still believe they are notable from the videos showing the ceremony, but I don't have any other arguments. Since you have greater authority I'll leave you to decide, but I urge you to reconsider. Solemn Penance (talk) 21:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rum Pum Pum Pum, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages South Korean and Teaser.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Coldplay listicles
Make sure the references and place results are all centered like in the List of awards and nominations received by Coldplay. You just need to copy and paste the right regions really. I hope you don't take my comment as something annoying, I just worked really hard on that list hahah. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 22:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Coldplay listicles 2
I noticed some of the album/song lists were not completetly transferred. You left some publications out for no reason in articles where the listicles are already included while a lot of other album/song articles have the listicles completely missing. Please make sure to transfer all information correctly otherwise I'll have to restore the old big list so we don't lose information. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 14:05, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Generally, only works with more than 5 or so listicles should have tables, any number less than that is unneeded. Fyi, songs/albums are not the place to include every listicles that you happen to find, as really there should only be a max of 10 publications per a consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums. There are still some articles that have 14+ publications that should've been cut down more. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  17:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I understand we shouldn't put tables for albums/songs with less listicles, but you didn't include them in text on the reception section either, so you're essentially removing some stuff. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 02:07, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, I had some free time today and cleaned up the listicles and included them on the articles where they were missing. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 18:26, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

File rename
Hi! If you have the capabilities, could you please rename of Jennie? It already has a rationale.

Thanks! Beulagpinkeu (talk) 14:08, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tonight (Big Bang EP) album cover.webp
Thanks for uploading File:Tonight (Big Bang EP) album cover.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Watashi Kono Mama de li no Kana alt cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Watashi Kono Mama de li no Kana alt cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Re: Yoo Jaeha's album
Hi, it's actually on my list of to-do things. I'll gladly create it when I have time and after doing some more researches on the subject. Best, ChoHyeri (talk) 13:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

hey
can you add any pictures of Joji on his page? Silencedoc (talk) 05:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

hi, I saw your change. actually I wasn't referring to that picture, it's very strange... can't find another better =( Silencedoc (talk) 05:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)


 * That's the only image Wikipedia has of him atm. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  05:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi
Hello, I see a change with you. Please stop deleting, the source is clear and reliable. Wikipedia for other artists also lists their awards and nominations for world awards. Thank you so much. Bforbend (talk) 08:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Move Again, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Music Bank.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Question
Hey there! I'm a professional in the music industry and I see you edit a lot of music-based articles. I had a question regarding your editing process on Wikipedia in regards these articles. Would you mind emailing me? texashorse900[at]gmail.com

Thank you!

TexasHorse (talk) TexasHorse (talk) 20:31, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * You can ask me here. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  21:55, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

User:92.93.178.63
Hello! I made a block for the IP for edit warring/disruptive edits. However, AIV is not the place for those reports. In the future, please seek assistance for disruptive editing and edit warring from WP:ANEW. ZsinjTalk 23:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year!




 Nkon21 , Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours!  — 🎄🎆 Paper9oll  🎆🎄 (🔔 • 📝)  04:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


 * – Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Baby Monster article
(I accidentally put this on your Wikimedia talk page, I apologize!) Hi! An article was already created for the new girl group from YG here, but some of its content seems unnecessary i.e. views since we only have an introductory video, and some of the words are phrased oddly. Can you take a look? Thanks! Beulagpinkeu (talk) 11:55, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

BigBang (South Korean band)
Hi, I note your recent moves of this article. The RM determined that the consensus title is BigBang (South Korean band). If you feel that the RM close was improper, you can reach out to User:Sceptre, or you can begin a move review at WP:MR. What you can't do is bold move the article against community consensus. I've once again reverted the move. Thank you for your continued contributions to the encyclopedia. 162 etc. (talk) 17:50, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Chat Shire tour poster.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Chat Shire tour poster.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:
 * File:IU 2018 tour poster.jpg
 * File:Love Poem tour poster.jpg
 * File:Palette tour poster.jpg
 * File:Real Fantasy tour poster.jpg
 * File:24 Steps- One, Two, Three, Four poster.png

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Jennie Kim
Hi Nkon21, i see that you have removed the writing credits for Blackpink's Jennie solo remix with the belief that it wasn't officially released, the solo remix was officially released on Blackpink's live album of the show see more information at The Show (concert) which sold over 36k copies in South Korea, it was officially released as a work/project of the group and on the tracklist Solo remix is included, so there's no valid reason to revert it. Lightlylove (talk) 00:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Tracks on live albums barely count as anything substantial; the thing is the Solo remix was never officially released as there isn't even a studio version that exists. Neither the live album track or Jennie's credit are counted in the KOMCA database, so I don't see why it should be listed under Jennie's songwriting credits. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  02:43, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol needs your help!
Hello , The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by using  at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Honorific nicknames in popular music
Hello! I wonder why you have removed several of the artists on the Honorific Nicknames In Popular Music list? Your arguments are what "trimming list based on consensus on talk" but there is not even a consensus on the talk Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 10:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Based on Articles for deletion/Honorific nicknames in popular music this article needs a massive rework as its filled with WP:FANCRUFT and non-notable nicknames (that have small recognition outside an artist's fanbase). Since nobody has attempted to rework the article since the AfD's closure in May, I took a jab at it. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  15:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

In connection with the Nickname "Aces"
Actually, I totally agree with your initiative in the article "Honorific nicknames in popular music". I have no objection on that, but I reverted only your edits about "Aces" since it complies based on the thread "Recent changes" and I don't get the point also that many of the names in that article with only one source, this made the thread a conflict.

That is why I suggest to not limit only the names with the "Kings" and "Queens", because based on my understanding about the thread there is no specific names to be accepted nor be accepted as long as it complies with the set rules, which I followed when I added the "Aces of P-pop" on the page.

Lastly, I am sending you this as a regards, I will not argue anymore about this, and if in case in the future, if there will be an opportunity to cross our ways again, maybe in one of the Wikipedia articles, I hope we settle our differences on one thing next time.

Thank you and have a nice day. Troy26Castillo (talk) 05:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Request to add "(Ive song)" instead of just "(song)"
Hi, can i request something, can you add on the title of these pages "(Ive song)" instead of just "(song)", to avoid confusion, as different artists can literally have the same song name. Thanks.

Just like: Eleven (Ive song)

Add "Ive":

Love Dive (song) to Love Dive (Ive song)

After Like (song) to After Like (Ive song)

Kitsch (song) to Kitsch (Ive song)

I Want (song) to I Want (Ive song) 120.29.77.209 (talk) 00:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Hey @Nkon21 is there an update? 120.29.77.95 (talk) 13:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

BTS (boy band)
Should this fairly useless redirect now be deleted? Wehwalt (talk) 12:56, 15 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes please go ahead and delete. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  14:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Honorific Nicknames in Popular Music
You have repeatedly reverted my edition without giving me any solid reason to, i provided reliable sources, and have repeatedly told you that this nickname is an a honorific title the artist involved has for real, it's not fan made or fabricated, everyone who knows the artist involved can tell you that she is called like that since decades ago, she's been titled like that for over 33 years, it really for sure doesn't hurt much to add it on the article, since its already clean and most names have been removed by you, please engage in this conversation before reverting, i don't want to get involved in edit warring. Lightlylove (talk) 21:33, 18 August 2023 (UTC)


 * You don't seem to understand that the WP:ONUS is on you, not me, to start a conversation on the article's talk page because you are the one who wants to include disputed content. It is not my responsibility to get a consensus, it's yours. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  22:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Honorific Nicknames in D
Hey greetings. I saw that you reversed my edition in the honorary titles. I was reading this: WP:ONUS but honestly I don’t understand it well, both artists are known that way, so I consider that leaving one alone is not the right thing. If you mean there’s no evidence of widespread use of that nickname, I can provide respective sources. Sendtel + (talk) 04:42, 24 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, please provide at least three high quality sources that show that Don Omar is widely associated with the nickname. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  05:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course: here Sendtel + (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Impact Bangkok logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Impact Bangkok logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

About reviewing the draft documents
Hi, Good morning.

I would like to ask you if you can look at 3 Draft documents that have been transferred by the reviewer. I asked the request to him/her that it was wrong to move to the draft, but it has spread to an argument and I can't talk to him/her anymore. Of course, this is not a message to comment or criticise that reviewer, so I won't talk about it in this thing. By the way, I leave a message for you who are other reviewer who mainly deal with Korean music. Now I've modified these three draft documents to be satisfied with Notability (music), so they can be different from the previous criteria.

But if you're busy, you could refuse because it's not your job. But if you can help me, I would like to ask if you can return the document, or if there are any shortcomings while looking at the draft documents, I would like to ask if you at least could give me any advices.

The three documents are Draft:Dabda (band), Draft: Green Flame Boys, and Draft:Wapddi. If you take the time to see it, I'd really appreciate it. 올해의수상자 (talk) 06:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Well, just forget that I said good morning. I was confused because it's morning here. 올해의수상자 (talk) 06:58, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter
Hello ,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of GA or Featured Article
Hi @Nkon21, I know that you edit a lot of South Korean and K-pop related articles. For K-pop boy groups BTS Wikipedia page is a Featured article, for girl groups however, I believe articles like Blackpink, 2NE1, Girls' Generation, and Twice are close to that status. I'm just curious if you are interested in nominating some of them for Good article or Featured article? or perhaps someone you know might be interested. Cjse23 (talk) 20:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah I would be interested in helping to get any of those articles to GA or FA status, although I'm not sure if I could do it alone as those articles are rather lengthy. But if other editors decide they want to nominate any of those articles, then I'll most certainly be interested in helping out. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  22:10, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Adding note to GAN
Please add the note to the talk page of the article that is put up for GAN. You can do this by editing the |note= field of the GA nominee template. Do not edit the WP:GAN page; the bot that updates that page will overwrite any changes. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  20:24, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive
 Hello Nkon21:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!

The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

List of awards
Hi @Nkon21, just a quick heads up, I'm not sure if you have seen this (diff). This format is consistent with other articles, like BTS list of awards, Blackpink list of awards, etc. You returned it to Efn-ua on your most recent edit, so I'm not sure if you are aware, thanks. Cjse23 (talk) 08:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Promotional poster is scaled low resolution and under fair use
The poster is scaled down resolution and therefore complies with WP guidelines. It can be used in both an info box and article as it is not claiming to be fair use and it is helpful to the reader to visually see a promotional poster for the single that the article is about. Thatsoddd (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Non free-use posters are not allowed on Wikipedia. The article already has another piece of non free-use content (the single album cover) thus any more violates Wikipedia's guidelines. Please stop re-adding it. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  20:18, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * If a poster under free use is found and uploaded then will it still violate guidelines? From what it seems, the poster is free use. Thatsoddd (talk) 20:29, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The only reason the last one got deleted is it was found from a website which means it needed permission before being used from the original author but that specific website doesn’t license the poster, it simply showcases it. Thatsoddd (talk) 20:30, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The bottom left of the poster states "unauthorized commercial use or publication is prohibited", therefore it is definitely not free-use. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  20:50, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I’ll add the link to the poster instead and I’ll just archive that. Thanks. Thatsoddd (talk) 20:56, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Converting tables into prose
Is you converting tables for year-end list rankings for all these songs based in some sort of guideline or recommendation? Otherwise I'm not sure where you're getting the idea to do this from. At least, last that I knew, tabular data for rankings being converted into prose was a mere preference.  Ss  112   05:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Nkon21, I am still wondering where, and if it is, written in our Manual of Style that there is a preference for prose over "tables with few entries". I don't know why you're ignoring a simple question.  Ss  112   04:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Converting tables into prose was based on the feedback that I have received on a FAC and a couple GANs, as accolade tables with only several entries are better written in prose. If there are many of them, however, than tables would be more organized. MOS:TABLES also expresses preference for prose: Prose is preferred in articles as prose allows the presentation of detail and clarification of context, in a way that a table may not. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  20:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Some of the tables you have converted into prose have had more than just "several" entries. I think tables with more than five entries is a significant enough accolade list to leave as a table. It's fine if you want to "sacrifice" having a table presenting this information on an article you have created and/or have collaborated on with other editors in order to have promoted to a GA or FA (which, even then, is the reviewing editors' preference), but I'm not convinced it's something that needs to be done outside of what you're immediately working on, especially since these other recent K-pop releases you've made such changes on aren't all GAs or going to necessarily be nominated for GA or beyond (and perhaps those articles creators' prefer tabular data). One of the examples MOS:TABLES gives is a list of awards and that's what some of these that you're converting into prose are. MOS:TABLES is talking about a preference ("preferred" and "may") for prose that provides more context. I personally do not see that you are providing more context when these tables already clearly explain via the headings, captions and column headers that these are tables of accolades, wins on music programs, and appearances on publications' best-of lists and then listing the program/publication/organisation names, the name of the list, and the ranking. You have in most cases just converted the table listing these details in columns into prose that says "This song appeared on publication's year-end lists: x (y), x (y), x (y)", which isn't any additional context. I'm all for improvements to Wikipedia and I know you're only trying to improve these articles, but I'm just not convinced this is ultimately benefiting readers.  Ss  112   12:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not see the benefit of adding tables for year-end lists or music program awards if they don't have many entries in the first place, as they can easily be written as prose. This is not particularly important information (unlike say chart positions) that render it being listed out in tables necessary, especially when the publications that make these listicles are not the most reputable in the industry (such as Young Post, a student division of SCMP, or the likes of The Telegraph India, etc.) and if the article does not offer much significant critical assessment in the first place (one sentence per song doesn't offer much valuable content). I would only see it being possibly justified if it received attention from a sizable amount of highly notable publications that have offered valuable critique. Otherwise, there is no benefit of tabling these random listicles (many of which are not even written by music critics just to get more views) other than visual gratification. I would say that the inclusion of these listicles should be restricted to only the most notable ones overall, but that's another discussion. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  19:46, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * How did this change from "there's only several best-of rankings listed in the tables" to "the articles the songs were ranked on are not significant enough"? What does it matter how many words these publications wrote about the songs or albums? As for the quality of the sources themselves, if there are student-written sources being used, I would remove those on sight, as I do with student newspapers being used as music critics (they are not professionals and there's no reason we should care about college students' opinions on music). I believe there was a consensus to only include year-end lists from a maximum of 10 publications on album articles a year or two back, although I'm not sure where it took place, so in similar "best-of" tables, I don't think there could (or rather, should) ever really be that many properly listed.  Ss  112   03:37, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The existence of only several listicles and less notable publications are not mutually exclusive, as many articles that I've seen related to K-pop are like this. Just like student publications, why is there a need to table listicles from publications who people don't care about? Why should people care about articles that don't offer valuable critique? Just to insert as many lists as possible inside a table for visual gratification? The preference for presenting information in articles is first and foremost prose. Particularly important information or statistics can be presented in tables (for organization and emphasis), but I'm failing to see why listicles such as those I adjusted need tables. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  06:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You're again simplifying what you've done and focusing on one area. You converted other tables than just inclusion of songs or albums on year-end listicles into prose, including music program wins. If you have a problem with the quality of the sources being used, either remove them entirely (especially if they're student publications) or raise them at WP:RSN. Hypothetical: if an article had, for example, 10 high-quality sources who ranked it on their year-end lists, you mean to tell me you wouldn't convert that table into prose? From what I've seen, it seems as if you're opposed to having tables for accolades entirely and regardless of how many there are (3, 5, 10) will always try to convert these into prose on K-pop articles. I'm asking this and pointing this out because it seemed as if earlier you were saying if the accolades were numerous enough rather than just "several entries" you would leave them as tables.
 * Another hypothetical: if a user suggested in a GAN that they personally thought chart tables would work better as prose, would you then start converting chart tables (one or several entries) into prose? (E.g. just having a commercial performance section and no "Charts" tabular section after the track listing and personnel.) I know users like this (who many not work very often in the area of music) are out there as I've seen them say this years ago. Why could the same argument regarding accolade tables working better as prose not be used for charts? I'm not sure what the difference between the two is to you and these editors who suggested it (as in, why one is mostly always kept a table and accolades-as-tables are being resisted).  Ss  112   07:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * If an article had 10 high-quality sources who ranked it on their year-end lists, you mean to tell me you wouldn't convert that table into prose? On which article did I do this? All the articles that I adjusted had listicles that either 1) did not have many entries and 2) Had mostly less notable publications, and in the case of music program awards, simply only had a few entries. It seems as if you're opposed to having tables for accolades entirely is inaccurate based on reasons I already wrote. If the accolades were numerous enough rather than just "several entries" you would leave them as tables is exactly what I did. (3, 5, 10) will always try to convert these into prose on K-pop articles is again just an imaginary idea you came up with that isn't true. I have never seen anybody at FAC or GAN bring up any sort of idea that charts should be in prose, but multiple people who works in the FAC and GAN area have recommended tables with less accolades to be written out, and that is exactly what many FAs that have been promoted have. I don't see any good reason that you have given here that justifies the conversion the accolades I adjusted into prose as a violation of any guideline or recommendation. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  21:26, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I only have two things to reply. One, nowhere in this entire thread have I suggested (nor did I come here suggesting) that it was a violation of a guideline or recommendation to do what you have done. I asked you if it was in a guideline, you said yes, then I disagreed as to what that applied to. That's all. Two, it's not an "imaginary idea", I already said "it seems", which means your edits (which I didn't closely inspect on every article) seemed to give that impression rather than that necessarily being the reality. I'm still not sure what's to keep somebody from suggesting charts could work better as prose and then an editor such as yourself taking that as a new precedent to start making them all prose, but I wasn't expecting you to be clairvoyant in the matter. If you are doing what you say, leaving sizable tables be, then I don't have any major issues left to bring up. Thank you for your explanation.  Ss  112   23:28, 8 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Final thing I have to say on the matter: If you want to risk the consequences of getting into edit wars over content disputes, Nkon21, go right ahead, but I would recommend you not re-revert if somebody has disagreed with you converting a table into prose. This isn't a good look. You should follow WP:BRD. Recommendations in guidelines don't give anyone a pass to edit war (and yes, I consider re-reverting if your bold edit has been reverted an edit war).  Ss  112   13:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Sr-only again
Even though Johnuniq said you should not be hiding table captions until there was consensus (which nobody was clearly going to get at WT:ACCESS), there is technically no guideline against doing so (so I'm not going to revert you editing after me on these Big Bang articles you clearly feel are your domain) but for the record, you might want to stop hiding table captions on discography articles like Twice singles discography where the tables are far more complex than "chart – peak position" and the captions describe more than what is in the headings. Thank you.  Ss  112   07:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, Johnuniq only expressed concern with the explicit wording of MOS:ACCESS and there are plans for a revision. where the tables are far more complex than "chart – peak position" The captions at the page you linked are also clearly redundant; they add zero use to existing table headers and section headers. ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  07:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Johnuniq said, on 26 November 2023, at WT:ACCESS: "At any rate, Nkon21 should definitely not continue making changes until this is resolved". But as I just said, clearly it wasn't going to get resolution, so I haven't reverted you. I just thought you wouldn't keep doing this so soon. Funnily enough though, I only noticed this because Alive (BigBang EP) was on my watchlist from when I edited it in 2018.
 * I'm not talking about table headers or section headers on Twice singles discography. There are many more columns present there to summarise in the table captions that readers do not get from the section header. They are not merely repeating or rewording what the section headers are, like header: Weekly charts, table caption: Weekly chart performance for "song name". I don't want to get into another days-long debate about this, but Template:Screen reader-only makes a point to say its primary use is where "the heading is effectively identical to the table's caption". Those table captions are not mere summaries of the headings, they address the content of the many columns present in the table.
 * What isn't redundant about it? The "weekly" part? Weekly charts are the basis for most charts on Wikipedia; unless stated otherwise, that is assumed to be the default regularity with which listed charts are published as it's the world standard.  Ss  112   07:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I've only just noticed what you're saying is a bit contradictory. The fairly simple caption I said "at least be consistent" with hiding with sr-only is one you don't consider to be redundant, but table captions with much more wording in them that summarise more than just what the section headers state on Twice singles discography are redundant table captions...?  Ss  112   08:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Johnuniq's comment on November 26 pertained to whether or not visible captions are always required, and the outcome of the subsequent discussions showed that they are not. There is no consensus anywhere that discourages the use of sronly, so like you said, adding them is not going against any guideline. Of course I'm not going to go around mass-adding them for the second time until the guideline has been revised, but yes I added them to Big Bang's pages since I edit the group's pages frequently.
 * There are many more columns present there to summarise in the table captions that readers do not get from the section header. They are not merely repeating or rewording what the section headers are The table captions are literally an unnecessarily wordier version of the table column headers. They are essentially in every way still redundant. The only part where I would actually see a clarification would be "selected chart positions" as some readers may wonder why there are only 10 positions when a song may have a lot more chart entries, but changing "Peak chart positions" to "Selected peak chart positions" can be an easy fix.
 * Regarding your comment about the Last Dance article, nowhere in the table mentions "weekly" so the caption is in virtue, not redundant. I only left it be as many articles with solely weekly charts also don't have any subheaders saying they are "weekly". ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  08:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Final reply as I think we're just rehashing things I really do want to move on from, and I'm fine with you archiving after this. As I said, it's assumed charts are weekly unless stated otherwise as this is that is the default regularity with which they are published worldwide so I do think it's still redundant, but as you left it be, I guess you de facto concede on that point. The wordiness of discography table captions is a matter for more debate but we're not going to resolve anything here; it'd be a better fit for the article talk page, but honestly, I've about reached my limit on sr-only this, sr-only that. I only opened this thread as I saw you readding them again. As for your first point, I don't consider long tangential disagreements between two editors, one of whom was myself, to be much in the way of "subsequent discussions" that resolved much about the initial point of application of sr-only, but you clarified your intent with the next line anyway, and I'm fine with that. Thanks.  Ss  112   08:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)