Talk:2016 Re-Album

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedy deleted as being recently created, having no relevant page history and duplicating an existing English Wikipedia topic, because the right way of writing said Album's name is "2016 Re-ALBUM" as seen on the korean version of the article here: https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Re-ALBUM The original article "Re-Album" should be deleted or made to work with the redirect i added

Edit: Thank you --Elronor (talk) 14:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fun facts/overview and more

If anybody happens to stumble here I'm wondering myself weather the part should be called Overview as translated from the original article from Korean or Fun Facts which i feel is more fitting for the information added to said area.

I'm also not exactly sure do my sources count as reliable or should i use something more precise straight from the company at hand? The sites are dedicated to Korean music news and apart from their sometimes apparent biased articles, the facts stated and information given is always reliable from my experience. I chose to use them originally as its the easiest way to keep track of the timeline of events etc. (Compared to scouring the company's/Band's twitter feeds or using their websites which are extremely slow thanks to the distance.Elronor (talk) 15:17, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd get rid of the first line since it doesn't matter how long it's been since their last album. Or, if it is significant, it needs a source and an explanation as to why. I wouldn't use "fun facts" as it's not very encyclopedic. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:25, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and get a source for the first line, extremely rare for a "kpop" group to come back after 16 years of in activeness (they had officially disbanded during 2000) and the "comeback" process was quite the news at the time (better explained in the band's main article but in my opinion still very much worth mentioning here if somebody is just looking for info on the album and doesn't want to read the whole history of "SechsKies"[hence my non encyclopedic "Fun Facts"]). Ill also switch back to overview and try come up with a better word for funfacts, if such word even excists. Elronor (talk) 02:56, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for article check

Not sure how i should go with requesting such assistance but i would like somebody to check out the article to point out anything i might be missing or should rework and also maybe re-evaulate the wikiproject on top of the talk page.--Elronor (talk) 16:54, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you use reliable news articles, not Soompi or allkpop. Also look at other documents and learn how to cite articles. Please cite the articles properly and indicate the title, date, language, etc. Yelkie (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I checked out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Korea/Reliable_sources and I'm going to try rework the sources thru that. It was pointed out to me earlier i can use sources that are not in English, should i try go the extra mile if i cant find it from the English ones from that list or is it okay to leave the Korean articles in?

Edit: And it seems its going to be a struggle to find much news regarding the group from these bigger reliable sites so i might have to fall back to Korean anyway.

Edit2: I was quite right. Should the citations be made similarly as in English or should they be translated/transliterated in any form?Elronor (talk) 02:34, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think it's fine and more reliable to use Korean sources. You can always add translated titles. Check out how other people do this with their references. I'd suggest you either remove soompi or allkpop articles or directly indicate their source as soompi and allkpop. Currently, you only show the name of the writers, but not the sources. Yelkie (talk) 08:54, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done, if you want you can check the bottom of the talk page to see if you have any suggestions for the translations but i think they're fine now. Do tell if there's anything else that should be changed. Elronor (talk) 12:52, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Latest big edit made on the 20th of June

@Scope creep: Was the information removed according to some Wikipedia rules or out of personal opinion? I think at least some of the information in "Personnel" was quite useful and can be next to impossible to find even for the bigger acts from South Korea. It could be hidden inside a block as seen here. Elronor (talk) 20:03, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]