Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K'Pop


 * 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 – PeaceNT 07:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

K'Pop

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

fails WP:MUSIC - Prod tag removed. — Swpb talk contribs 02:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete the only reference provided doesn't seems to be sufficient to establish notability by Snowolf (talk) on  02:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. If you search for its Korean name (케이팝) you get more results., , and seem to indicate the group does exist, albeit it seems they are actually named "K-POP". Notability is also not an issue, they have three releases by a Big 4 label (Sony BMG). hateless 08:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Notability is an issue until the article shows otherwise. Please add a reliable source to the article. — Swpb talk contribs 14:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Spoken like a true bureaucrat. You know, the effort you have used to admonish me could have instead been used to update the article. hateless 20:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Please do try keep the discussion to the article in question and not on other editors. Some editors may find your comments offensive. WP:NPA - no personal attacks.Luke! 20:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You made the assertion of notability, not me. And you in turn chose to attack me instead of making the necessary improvements to the article, which I find rather hypocritical.  In the end, "admonishing" you to back up your defense took me much less effort than backing it up for you would have taken - effort I was able to spend working on articles of much clearer usefulness than this one. — Swpb talk contribs 00:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't figure out how to weed ghits for the band from ghits for Korean pop music in general. If you have a source for your claim about them being signed to Sony BMG, now would be a good time to add it to the article. — Swpb talk contribs 17:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This site, which I added to the article, listed SONY-BMG as the publisher for their 2004 album, but it listed Doremi Media (도레미) as the publisher of the 2002 album, so I was inaccurate in my assertion. Doremi is credited as a major label in Korea. As for your comments before, I do not appreciate the implication that my opinions and the facts I bring up on this or any AFD can be discounted unless I expand the article. While I may regret the tone of the comment, I don't regret the content. hateless 21:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you provided a translated version of that page? I can't read Korean, and I doubt many contributors can.  If no one can read a source that is supposed to assert notability, this page will just be nominated for AfD again. — Swpb talk contribs 22:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record, I tried running the page through babel fish, and I see no mention of Sony-BMG there. — Swpb talk contribs 22:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You have to follow the links to find label info. The 2004 album is here, the 2002 album is here. For the 2002 album, it lists "도레미" as the label, which a google search reveals as Doremi Media. Sony BMG's profile on their 2004 album is here. For the record, I know nothing about written Korean. hateless 22:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I have added the Sony link to the article. The crition states, however, that the band "Has released two or more albums on a major label", which has still not been met.  And regardless, the central criterion ("It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable") remains to be met. — Swpb talk contribs 22:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As already stated "Doremi Media" is major label in Korea, it doesn't have to be one of the 4 major labels in the whole wide world. Monni 19:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and tag with expand. Monni 17:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you have reasons for keeping this article? Luke! 17:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the main reason is like it is pointed out above, the band is notable, but it isn't adequately documented on the article. My alternative vote would have been userfying the article until notability is proven adequately in the article. Monni 18:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - searching for "K-Pop" yields tons of irrelevant hits about Korean pop in general. To narrow the search, I added the name of the first listed member of the band.  The google search "Yoo Bin" K-Pop -wikipedia -kpopwiki -youtube -site:xanga.com -site:livejournal.com yields seven hits, none of which are relevant.  Ghits are not a formal indicator of notability, but this is not a good sign. — Swpb talk contribs 22:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Kungfu Adam  ( talk ) 17:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep multiple instances of coverage from various newspapers clearly visible in first page of the 18 thousand Google hits you get by searching on the Korean name such as   . "No hits in English" is a pretty poor indicator of anything when you're dealing with topics from non-Anglophone, non-Latin alphabet countries. cab 14:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 14:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep unless someone can point out that the non-english hits are not valid; otherwise, we should have WP:FAITH and tag it with expand. John Vandenberg 14:40, 27 January 2007 (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.