Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GFriend


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:14, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

GFriend

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Most of the sources are charts on the groups sells or stuff just saying they are a group very little of it actually shows they are notable. I do not feel the group has enough activities and general visibility that their should be an article for them already. It seems like a lot of filler. Peachywink (talk) 06:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. Peachywink (talk) 06:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Peachywink (talk) 06:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Most the sources and information of any rookie group on Wikipedia only includes their charts, sales etc, GFriend being a 6 months old rookie and already being on the rise, i pretty much believe they are notable enough to have their own wiki page. GFriend has many activities but due to people removing it again and again on their page, we decided to only keep the major appearances like on Running man and King Of Mask Singer, compared to the other rookies that also do have a wikipedia page like for example Sonamoo, GFriend is the one at the upper hand when it comes to activities, recognition and notability. I believe this article should stay, GFriend had their second comeback 3 days ago and the activities you claim that they lack will also come along. If you request for GFriend's page deletion then it should apply to the other rookie pages that have the exact same amount of information on them. So like i said, the deletion of this page would be very out of place and one sided. (talk) 2:00, 26 July 2015
 * Comment I wanted to add in here that guest appearance are not usually considered notable but for large programs I would be willing to see an exception if they got into it during the debut year because that does show huge advancement. However aside from the groups 2 music videos none of the filmography section is sourced, that means the all the shows cameos ect..  Also the only sources for the music videos are there official YouTube Videos.Peachywink (talk) 14:17, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment It's my mistake that i did not source them properly, i took the part of editing G-Friend's wiki page for all these months, and i'm willing to fix my mistakes and properly source because i'm still learning how to edit on wikipedia i did not do it intentionally. The official link of their YouTube MV is enough of a reference that the MV was indeed released under their name and their company's name, useless articles saying "G-Friend has released their new M/V" Seemed useless to me thus i didn't cite them., i was actually already planning to go through all the sources and re-source and remove what's a filler in fact. I still stand by my point that this article should be kept, G-Friend is showing a huge, huge advancement, and just as we speak their company updated their schedule with MV featuring on other artists' songs, appearances etc, so again like i said, G-Friend out of all the rookies right now, is indeed the most notable one and it makes absolute no sense to me that their article should be removed. The sourcing will be fixed now.--Soyeony (talk) 17:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I can understand forgetting to source something and during the time the page is up for discussion you are free to fix those issues to try to establish the groups notability. As for Music video sourcing the reason just the YouTube videos don't work is because it just shows the video exists not the fact that it's notable. To do that you need to find an article, it doesn't have to be real long but it can't be 2 sentences, That talks about the music video.  To be honest most k-pop pages fail to adhere to this standard but it is in fact still a standard.  So if you can find an article talking about the video reaching a million views quickly or discussing the video itself for almost any reason that would be a better source than just the YouTube video.  Here is Lady Gaga's page Lady Gaga videography, while this page is NOT a perfect example, you can see that the music videos are sourced using articles about the video rather than the videos themselves.Peachywink (talk) 19:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Indeed, just like you said, KPOP tends to fail to that standard, but i still went back and sourced what i could find on Mwave and Naver which are considered notable since i checked many KPOP pages on wikipedia and they source from them and i will continue to do so until the article will be considered well sourced and up to the standard. For the music video appearances however, for the member Sowon to be specific, that i can't cite, because that happened when she was still a trainee in another company couple years ago, i added her appearances in GFriend's article because i believe that a new G-Friend fan or someone that didn't know would like to see the member of their favorite group appear in an MV, but sadly i can't source it since like i said it happened years ago and she was just a trainee so you can't find any articles about her in that time frame. The other parts of the article i sourced most of it and what's left un-sourced will be sourced soon, i'll go get the articles from Korean portals since the English articles i find are mostly from Allkpop and sites alike that are not reliable. Again, having their article deleted just for that is harsh and excuse me for what i'm going to say but it seems a very biased judgement to me, Lovelyz, Sonamoo and i can go on and on they all lack the exact same thing as G-Friend's page that's why it seems to me that it was a biased decision in the first place to nominate this page for deletion. My standpoint is very clear, the article should be kept, i don't think of it as a filler like you do, and as a follower of the group since the day they debuted it doesn't contain any wrong information either. --Soyeony (talk) 20:46, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * starting indents over- @Soyeony My reply had little to do with GFriends AFD so I put it on your user page.Peachywink (talk) 22:40, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think you replied to any of the points i just made about why i stand by that this page should be kept and i'm still confused as to why this page is even nominated because just like i stated in my previous comment the reasons you gave do not make sense to me and alert an alarm of biasing. The article could easily be fixed with some edits, which i've done and i'm still doing, deletion is not the way to do it.--Soyeony (talk) 23:12, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * you answered while I was still typing...I type slow. Sorry for the confusion.Peachywink (talk) 23:29, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * adding on here but I've pointed you in the direction of fixing the page in the off chance you find more information to make them notable because so far I do not see enough notable things for this group but that's why it a vote. people can all interpret standards differently.Peachywink (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep They've charted, have independent sources, that's enough per WP:Musicbio Asdklf&#59; (talk) 23:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per User:Asdklf;. Also, individual members have appeared on various notable programs, as well as the group receiving worldwide attention for various reasons. Tibbydibby (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: If this survives the AfD (which I hope it does), I'm going to make a move request as the title of the article should be G-Friend (band) per WP:BANDNAME. Hyphen included with the disambiguation of band. Tibbydibby (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep they have 2 album and a number of songs (Toomass (talk) 22:48, 30 July 2015 (UTC))
 * Keep article is well sourced, their songs charted on gaon. Donottroll (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep for a rookie group their songs sell really well and are charting really high, the article has been sourced correctly. User:4minute lover (talk) 12:20, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 August 8.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 17:42, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:MUSICBIO "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." => http://www.webcitation.org/6am9NjH5y Ctrl+F "GFRIEND". Gaon Chart. Duh. &mdash; regards, Revi 12:04, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.