Talk:K-pop

Addition of images on infobox

I would like to know why to place images of artists in the infobox about music genre? Who chose which artists would be notable here? There aren't Big Bang, BoA, and others. In addition, what is the point of this type of edition that doesn't bring improvements to the article? In pop music article, we haven't images of Michael Jackson and Madonna on infobox, in rock music article we haven't images of Elvis and Beatles. This is because the articles already mention the notable artists.

Please consider removing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.19.164.94 (talk) 191.19.164.94 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - RPM SP 2022 - MASY1-GC 1260 200 Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 February 2022 and 5 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yh3907 (article contribs).

Is K-Pop a music genre?

This discussion has been moved to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music per WP:APPNOTE and WP:INAPPNOTE.

Due to my recent contributions being reverted/deleted, I think there needs to be a consensus if K-Pop is a musical genre or not. I'll go first; I think K-Pop is a musical genre because of numerous reasons, 1. Most K-Pop music is recorded in South Korea and released in South Korea. 2. If you can tell the difference between K-Pop and other songs, then it's pretty easy to tell which song is Korean. 3. K-Pop has a unique style that can be easy to differentiate. 4. K-Pop isn't just a musical genre, it's an industry, distributed and promoted in a very different way than other territories, even if it's just a little bit of a difference.

I understand that Wikipedia is fact based, and I'm not here to make or promote vandalism, maybe even if it's a trait of mine, I have no intention to make Wikipedia a bad place. Maybe this topic can turn into an article. Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 21:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC).

oh wow, so I wasn't the first one to end up on this issue. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 18:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Splitting proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Clear consensus to split the page within this plan and move from there. Orangesclub (talk) 23:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

---

• Split K-Pop into K-Pop and Global Popularity and Impact of K-Pop. As has been discussed above, I'd love to push a split forwards. I have started to try culling this article down, but there's a lot of good content that I don't want to flat out delete, so I think a split of the K-pop#Popularity and impact section into Global Popularity and Impact of K-Pop article is a good place to start. Somehow, despite being massive, the section also needs some decent updating so a split should give us room. I'm happy to do the split if we go ahead. Orangesclub (talk) 11:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

  I support this since for me it is the biggest issue of the page, having half of it being purelly promotional repetitions over repetitions. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 19:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

  Titles should use sentence case WP:LOWERCASE -> Global popularity and impact of K-pop seefooddiet (talk) 17:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

  Oh, thank you - explains why it looked wrong! Orangesclub (talk) 22:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

  Support this plan. seefooddiet (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Plan

Alright, I'm going through what's been mentioned above and I'm coming up with more of a plan. I'm thinking of making it Popularity and Impact of K-pop. I'm thinking of moving the various regions over somewhat as is for now, but leading with more content about K-pop fandom in general. Let's say:

• K-pop#Appeal_and_fan_base (with some content left behind)
• K-pop#Social_media
• K-pop#Popularity_and_impact (maintaining the current breakdowns but adding content, especially to SEA)
  • East Asia
  • SEA
  • South Asia
  • Middle East
  • North America
  • South America
  • Europe
  • Africa
  • Oceania

I think by doing this, we will essentially come up with two articles: one for the K-pop industry K-pop and one for the fandoms, online and around the world (the new article) Orangesclub (talk) 06:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

It makes sense to me, then probably a lot of small adjustements can be made! Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 10:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

criticism/controversies : lead plus subsections

I went on to add a criticism section on lead, which was completelly missing. I urge other editors to not remove it, since WP:LEAD clearly states that "The lead should include mention of significant criticism or controversies."

This is of course a first draft, it can be improved in fluidity. I tried to mention all the issues in the most concise way, the etherogenity comes from the fact that the various issues need a rewrite on the subsection as well. First of all I think that the controversies should follow some kind of logical order, which can be something like "from first to last" "from lightest to harsher".

This is the current order:

Corruption Poor living and working conditions Tight control over public image Sexualization and pressure on appearance Mental health Criticism of hybrid identity

I want to change it to something like this. I think that it improves an understanding of how the issues develops.

Criticism of hybrid identity Poor living and working conditions Corruption Sexualization and pressure on appearance Tight control over public image Mental health

I am also wondering if it is not better to rephrase some of the titles, to make them broader or more specific when needed. Should a title of a criticism section already have the criticism on it? For exemple "poor" on living and working conditions. I don't know. Also I would change "Mental health" to "Suicides", it seems way more appropriate and specific to the Korean/K-pop world, well described by so many sources. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I would put "Corruption" second, followed by working conditions and public image, before going into sexualization and mental health. Support removing "criticism of", "poor", and "tight" from their respective titles. Vacosea (talk) 00:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Great, I'll try to do it now. A bigger expansion and rewrite will need more time. I also think that the sexualization part and a more general appearance/beauty section should be separated, two different issues that often get different sources, even more than mental health and suicides.

Also thank you for the rewrite of the paragraph I added on lead, it's good. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 15:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Done, it will be way easier and more sensical to proceede with some other quality edits now in my opinion. The whole section alredy flows better. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 16:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2024

Evening everyone The changes needed to be done is to add Amapinao into the category space as part of what genre kpop also associate with. This is because more and more kpop idols are now making more Afro-beat related songs. E.g. Le Sserafim released a song 'Smart' on the 5th of March, 2024. As well as more genres needed to be added Nontombie (talk) 00:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I would personally condense/remove references to other genres in the lead, I see no point in linking to more than 10 genres. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:29, 27 September 2024 (UTC)