This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Latest comment: 2 days ago15 comments6 people in discussion
@Blanes tree Hello, recently you added several cleanup tags to the article. I don't really agree that the article is vague or wordy; it's pretty short and direct. I'm also having a hard time spotting significant grammar errors, can you point out an example?
Furthermore, there was already a notability dispute that was resolved during the draft approval process. Many of the sources given are major South Korean newspapers; they are wikilinked. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 12:39, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
It's terribly written and the South Korean press can't be used to support notability because it's heavily censored. You aren't allowed to critisize businesses in South Korea because their entire economy only consists of five or six organizations and if one company collapsed the whole thing would topple like a house of cards. I could always take it for a second AfC if you'd like a bit over oversight? Shall I take it for a second AfC? Blanes tree (talk) 12:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Uh I'm not sure where to begin with this response lol. It's excessively rude and discriminatory. The press in SK can be pretty brutal to the big corps; you're missing tons of nuance.
Instead of AfC, I'm going to look into dispute resolution. Your comments go past the line of polite constructive feedback and into the territory of rudeness. Think other people should see what you're saying. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 12:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Before I make a request for third opinions, I'm going to ask if you're willing to walk your comments back and actually give constructive feedback instead of "it's terribly written". What does someone even do with that feedback?
And throwing out all sources from South Korea altogether, ignoring the consensus built at Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources, is highly unconvincing to me. Feels like you're relying on a stereotype rather than actually caring about a country's nuances.
I'm trying to get these tags resolved. That's accomplished by either you giving me actionable feedback that I can follow to edit the article to your satisfaction or potentially even you editing the article yourself to resolve your concerns. It's really not a long article; it'd take <4 mins.
For notability, I think you will be quickly overruled if you try to argue that South Korean sources should be unilaterally distrusted. Are you sure that's the argument you want to make if I start reaching out to third parties? 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think it would be sensible to allow a reasonable amount of time to pass so that other editors can view the changes and address them accordingly. In the meantime, I'll edit in a different part of the encyclopedia. There are a lot of articles here, I'm sure we can find plenty of ways of not interacting with each other going forward. I wish you all the best. Blanes tree (talk) 13:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'll reach out to dispute resolution. Frankly I'd like to get this resolved promptly; this page will have low page views and I've seen even more popular pages sit for 15 years with less activity.
I tried to give you multiple outs, and you haven't taken them. It really would only take you a few minutes to explain what you don't like about the prose.
To be clear, the reason I'm not accepting your apology is because of "if I offended you". It reads backhanded, as if this situation really could go either way and that some people would be happy to hear "Your writing is terrible" without any actionable feedback. You've already been warned about how you talk to others. I am a human and didn't deserve to be treated like this. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC) Note: user edited their message to be more reconciliatory just before I posted this comment, which is why my comment was unfriendlier. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Blanes tree: No, Kyunghyang Shinmun, Yonhap News Agency, Newsis, and The Dong-A Ilbo are all reliable and listed at WP:KO/RS. If you object to their reliability, you can always open a discussion at WP:RSN. If you object to the article's notability, feel free to nominate it for deletion. I have marked the article as reviewed. CFA💬22:57, 26 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=icon}
Response to third opinion request: