This has been discussed twice in the noticeboard and the consensus was that it's unreliable.
There has been previous discussions about the validity of this site as a source, at the reliable sources noticeboard, best represented by the discussions: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_121#allkpop.com and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_125#Allkpop_and_Soompi, mostly with a consensus that it's unreliable.
There are a lot of articles who use them and I propose that we make a group effort to replace them with reliable sources. If they (Allkpop and Soompi) are the only site that reported it, what should be done?
What is everybody's thoughts about BNT News? ☴ Jaewon [ Talk 16:32, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
There was a discussion about Allkpop, Soompi and other English K-pop news blogs on Talk:K-pop. My stance is still the same, there is no evidence that their news reporting, translated from Korean sources would be unreliable per se. If they provide the original Korean source, that should be used. Opinion articles and blunt yellow press articles on scandals (who dated who) should not be used as sources. They report on awards ceremonies, for example, I don't see why that wouldn't be reliable, since they watch the event on TV and report about it, that's it. There are also self-reported articles like which celebrity appeared on which TV show and when certain music videos were released etc. Those are also OK, in my opinion. All in all, the article itself should be examined and if there is no reason to think they misreported, why shouldn't we use them? They are the fastest English sources on K-pop, though Mnet's MWAVE and occassionally bigger papers like Korea Times and the Korea Herald also report on K-pop news, increasingly so, since it became so popular nowadays. But when no other source is available for the same statement, I would say Allkpop, Soompi and others should not be discarded. Teemeah 편지 (letter) 09:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
These are sites seem to me to be reliable but I wanted feedback before adding to the list.
However, these sites I am not sure at all even though I found them on Girls Generation.
Just let me know which ones seem unreliable and if you have sources not on the list that you would like to share. ☴ Jaewon [ Talk 18:27, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Soshified is a fan site of Girls Generation. I would not use that, and any other fansites, either. If they give the original source, it should be used instead. Sometimes I do mention them with small letters, like I did in case of a couple of Big Bang sources, that translation (of a direct quote for example) was taken from bigbangupdates.com. These were almost exclusively translations of interviews. But fortunately many bigger fansites properly credit their sources with links. Teemeah 편지 (letter) 09:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Teemeah 편지 (letter) 09:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
@ Piotrus:, done the listing, as requested Teemeah 편지 (letter) 22:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, I've been following these two sources on Facebook and sometimes I feel like they operate like fansites themselves. Plus, I've seen these sources used in articles, which I have had to change a few of them in the past. Tibbydibby ( talk) 00:32, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't see KpopStarz mentioned here as reliable or unreliable. It appears as reliable to me. It does name its writers and the staff list appears credible: Kpop Starz - About Us
Opinions? BashBrannigan ( talk) 03:21, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
I was wondering about these as I've seen them on numerous pages. Mikepellerin talk 07:08, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I think Korea.com needs to be removed from the reliable sources list because they have user-uploaded content. Anyone can upload a story to their site, and I was unable to distinguish fan-uploaded stories from ones written by the staff. There may not even be any of the latter. I think it should be added to the unreliable list for this reason. Also, there is a forum (called "Let's Talk") at Mwave ( http://mwave.interest.me/forum/theme), and it should also be specified as not a reliable source. I've seen editors try to pass off things from the forums as RS on articles. Also, a few more non-reliable sources I've been seeing lately:
Please let me know what you all think of these items. Thanks! Shinyang-i ( talk) 03:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This discussion kind of dried up, but based on what's been said, I think there is consensus(?) to do the following:
We'll take no action about Yahoo! News or kstyle.com (thanks, revi, for the additional info on the latter site; I looked further and concur; it's a Japanese version of Naver, basically). If the above list doesn't look right, speak up! :) Shinyang-i ( talk) 04:51, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Korea.com is pretty much like akp and soompi but worse, because they don't credit the original article they took the news from. -- Teemeah 편지 (letter) 16:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
I often end up on that page because translated articles for me have often lead back there but I have no clue it it's reliable. Anyone else know? Peachywink ( talk) 02:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Entertainment news ought to have gossip or trivial things reported from time to time, whether it comes from a reliable site or not. I say just use our judgment and determine whether we can make that news become notable and relevant somehow. Trivial matter, in relation to a series of related events, can still become notable right?-- TerryAlex ( talk) 22:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
So here hare the ones I think should be added to the reliable list: Osen, StarN news, Star News and for the unreliable list I want to add ygunited and oh!kpop both of which are blog style sites that repost from other sites like allkpop. Peachywink ( talk) 21:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
-Beging again. How about we just add a note that no fansite articles are allowed such as the girls generation site? I agree It should be obvious but fans will really stretch what qualifies as an acceptable source. Also that makes sense about the Korean sites, but a collapse down list would be helpful for future referencing needs. I would hope people use caution when choosing the articles to include from those sites. Majority of mine I actually had English translation for from a naver site that listed where the original articles came from. But I do also think Google translate can give you an idea of what an article is really about. Such as a lengthy article featuring a picture from Got7's web drama was actually more focused on the rise of web-dramas in general so it wasn't useful. But then again I am practically fluent in Google translate at this point so maybe I get more out of it then most. lol Peachywink ( talk) 05:31, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Tenasia is not a blog per se. Blog format doesn't mean it's a personal blog. CNN has blog format pages, so do other major news outlets. Tenasia conducts personal face to face interviews with Korean celebrities and famous personalities. Fansites should only be linked when the original IS available. I did that on a couple of cases to provide the translation to Tenasia interviews and in-depth articles. I usually put them between html small tags as (translation) or use the translation parameter of cite web. Teemeah 편지 (letter) 11:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunatly it seems that site might have been shut down which is unfortunate since it was an english language kpop site run by a newspaper. Currently trying to contact someone about it to see if it might just be down but it looks like they closed it. Peachywink ( talk) 14:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
This is few newspaper sources that I have usually used in my articles because I thought it is reliable. What do you think about it?
Kenny ( talk) 13:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Sites like these that report news from korean sources should be included into the reliable sources.The English wikipedia recommends the use of english language sites and since what those sites do alot of the time is translate stuff from korean sources they should be included.As to storys that are obviously translated but not sourced that may be excluded.Stuff like gossip and rumours should not be used and be specified on the page specified.Akp has gossip on a seperate category so its easy to distinguish. Junkoo ( talk) 19:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Question: Is an official website (of a movie, a drama or a television show) considered as a reliable source? Kenny htv ( talk) 17:48, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I'm trying to work on cleaning up articles such as 2017 in South Korean music and the other years (I've already removed artists without an article from the debuting and disbanding sections, as well as completely removing joining/departing sections) - can music.naver.com be used as a source for listings? Alexanderlee ( talk) 21:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Is MelOn accepted as a reliable source? I feel that MelOn will be a reliable source for Korean Music because it is an official South Korean online music store. CodingNewb ( talk) 16:55, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Is this a reliable source? I don't see it on either list but I see it fairy often in articles. Alexanderlee ( talk) 21:01, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
LINK: https://www.koreaexpose.com/
I think it's a unreliable source in my opinion, but what do you guys think?
Tibbydibby ( talk) 06:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
After reading a few articles, I found no errors. From the standpoint of Koreans, I got the impression that it was like a foreign news article that solved Korean issues well in English. The author seems to be Korean, but on the contrary, there were many articles from a fresh perspective that were difficult to see in Korea. In addition, there was a consistent signature of individual reporters in every article. I don't think it's the best, but it's not the worst. in this regards.-- Jeong Seo Yoon ( talk) 08:10, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
SBS PopAsia is a radio and occasional TV program run by Special Broadcasting Service (SBS), a public broadcaster in Australia. Just because "blog" is in the title of some PopAsia URLs, does not instantly make it unreliable. They also have reporters/presenters who were involved with the K-pop world and still are, like Kevin Kim, who was part of ZE:A. Their writers would be just as reliable as other writers for SBS, which is considered reliable by Wikipedia at large last time I checked. Who determined SBS PopAsia to be unreliable and when was this? Ss 112 12:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Ss112: After looking through the article history I see it was added to the list by @ Abdotorg: but no discussion took place and no explanation was given Alexanderlee ( talk) 13:25, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Ss112:: Looking at the articles, I can see why SBS PopAsia is placed as an unreliable source. Most of their articles' sources are taken from unreliable sources themselves. For example, for this article, it gets its source from a personal account Twitter page. Then, we can look at this article where it gets its source from Soompi, one of the unreliable sources in WP:KO/RS. Heolkpop ( talk) 15:48, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm reviving this discussion, as it hasn't reached consensus and I agree with Ss112. I'd very much support moving SBS PopAsia to the reliable sources section. Not only are its authors qualified as listed above, SBS has information on who is running the organization [35] and a rather extensive editorial policy [36] which is enough to convince me that, even if Soompi is listed as a source of information, the content is at least vetted and verified. WP:KO/RS labels it as a "K-Pop site" but it rather is SBS' Asian (not just K-Pop) pop culture media hub. (And while I do agree that often times reliable publications refer to Korean ones for information, Heolkpop, often times they also cite tweets are their sources of information.) Abdotorg, I'm curious to know why you chose to list it as unreliable and Alexanderlee, you commented on here already so I'd love to know your thoughts as well. Redalert2fan, ChromeGames923, ChoHyeri, Evaders99, Fiipchip, Snowflake91, CherryPie94 you've all helped maintain this page (thank you!) so I'd appreciate your thoughts as well. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 01:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Is DramaFever news reliable? https://www.dramafever.com/news/1
I have seen it being linked but was unsure about it. Also, is it allowed to source HanCinema drama/film page to actor pages to prove they acted in the work? Or should we include news articles instead of linking to databases? ~~ CherryPie94 🍒🥧 ( talk) 06:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello all, I am new to the Korea reliable sources topic. I would like to ask for opinion if the following websites are consider reliable or unreliable as I do not see them in the wiki page for reliable sources. Kindly assist in updating if possible as I'm in the progress of update/cleaning up a wikipage. Thank you.
http://www.sedaily.com/ (Seoul Economy) Language in Korean
http://www.travelnbike.com/ Language in Korean
http://news1.kr Language in Korean
http://star.mk.co.kr/ Language in Korean
http://www.kookje.co.kr/ Language in Korean
http://biztribune.co.kr/ Language in Korean
http://inkinews.com/ Language in English
Fiipchip (
talk)
07:42, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that Korea Portal ( http://en.koreaportal.com, and its corresponding Korean website, http://koreaportal.com) be listed as an unreliable source. The website frequently publishes rumors and other unconfirmed information. This can be discovered just by viewing the homepage but I'll list a few examples of the rumor-based articles (as well as the unsourced speculation that appears in the article content). Recent examples include an article reporting on hearsay posted to an online forum about BTS' RM, speculation that Black Pink's Rosé will be releasing a solo performance based solely on a vague Instagram caption, and an article claiming that Momoland's Nancy is "jealous of Black Pink" after speculating that she "glared" at them on a music show, among other incredulous topics. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 01:52, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
This one is a lot less obvious than previous websites so I'd really appreciate input from other editors here!
So Metro is a UK tabloid site that seems to publish rumors. I'm suspicious about their reliability, cause though they do cover actual stories that are accurate, and these are fairly frequent, they seem to also publish rumors and unconfirmed facts. Looking at their BTS tag as an example, you can see they published the news about BTS' view record before the numbers were confirmed by YouTube, and wrote about a "bromance" between John Cena and J-Hope. You can also notice that they publish numerous factually accurate stories as well. Much of what they report is published by reliable sources (notably Billboard). Thus, I'm wondering if we should treat it like Soompi -- though factually accurate articles are published, enough rumors are posted as well to make the source unreliable. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 03:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi all,
User Mlee965 recently included Sinhan Minbo as reliable source. Can someone help to verify as it was not discussed on the talk page? Fiipchip ( talk) 14:24, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Questions:
Korea Star Daily ( https://www.koreastardaily.com/) is a Chinese-language blog-styled K-pop site. It seems like it operates similarly to Allkpop and Koreaboo, and it is as opinionated as those unreliable sources. Therefore, I suggest placing Korea Star Daily as one of the unreliable sources. What do you think? Heolkpop ( talk) 13:05, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I have a few sources that we might want to consider being either reliable or unreliable:
Thanks, ChromeGames923 ( talk) 01:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
kprofiles (english) seems to be an unreliable site for use as reference on kpop related articles, their "profile/fact" content seems to be completely unsourced or copied from other pages (possibly from Wikipedia) and furthermore includes a lot of trivia. Also runs polls and quizzes. Redalert2fan ( talk) 08:58, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
I have added Kpopping.com to the unreliable section since Kpopping's Database is a wiki that anyone can edit and provides no references to any (or most) claims made. It is probable that it copies content from Wikipedia itself. Redalert2fan ( talk) 13:55, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
SBS is a major news organization in Australia, i dont think sbs popasia should be deemed unreliable automatically. Apples&Manzanas ( talk) 09:28, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Did you see the section "Who determined SBS PopAsia to be unreliable and why?" on this page above? There has been quite an extensive discussion before. Redalert2fan ( talk) 11:21, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Response:
My edit got reverted, so i guess i need a new discussion on the metro.co.uk listing in the unreliable sources section. This should be deleted from the unreliable sources section. For starters, it simply doesn't belong on the list whatsoever. This wikipedia project is meant to be devoted to Korean websites, the metro.co.uk is neither korean nor does it primarily deal with korea. It shouldn't be eligible to be on this list. Secondly, it's bizarre that it's listed as an unreliable source when it's simply an ordinary major newspaper. Like, obviously no newspaper needs to be treated as gospel, but there's really no reason whatsoever that it shouldn't be valid to cite any articles from it if no one can point out anything wrong with the citation. I'm not proposing to add it to the reliable sources section, im just saying it doesnt belong on this list at all. Apples&Manzanas ( talk) 12:03, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Seo kang joon has received an award for “watcher “ .please add this to his biography ShamimBr95 ( talk) 08:06, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Can soompi be used as source for soompi awards? Recent soompi awards were covered by other medias but for earlier awards, say, 2006 – 2010, there are no other alternative source. Lulusword (talk) 06:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
I apologise for my bad phrasing/intepretation.
Anyway, in summary, I would argue Soompi Awards by itself is notable because in the recent edition, the secondary sources described what exactly the award is and how long it has been awarded here [37], [38] and [39]. The award was also broadcast on Myx TV starting from 2011 for a few years. (There is news piece about this but it is kinda trivial and I can't find it again today) And if Soompi Award is deemed notable, it can be covered by primary source as it said here on Wikipedia:Notability (media)#Primary criterion, where it says Once notability is established, primary sources may be used to add content, which mean, it can be used to cite earlier winners without needing to be covered by other sources as long as it is verifiable. But since this wiki project deemed Soompi as unreliable source due to its gossipy tone of its news reporting, so I post this question here to seek others opinion about it because there is this rule exception here Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves.
On the other hand, if Soompi Award by itself is non-notable, I would argue that all soompi awards win & noms on list of awards and nominations articles to be removed as it is non-encyclopaedic. Saying only a few editions to be notable make it seems like all the reports about it are incidental (I am sorry if that is not the correct word) and for example, was only covered because bts won the aforementioned award, not because the award by itself is noteworthy.
Either way, I by myself cannot say/decide if the award itself is notable or not, and this is not the correct talk page to discuss it. I might bring it up to the proper notability talk page if I am not lazy (which I kinda am at the moment), and since there is no urgency need of it right now, I am not pressing for it, so I am stepping back from arguing about this issue. Lulusword (talk) 15:41, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
I would think some internet news sources, upon closer scrutiny, probably belong in a grayzone reliability category, that is, something like a "No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply", in the WP:RSPSOURCES table.
I think the WP:RSPSOURCES table is more discerning, and only makes certain exceptions of online media as "reliable".-- Kiyoweap ( talk) 20:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
I was recently informed that Naver sources are unreliable, and that they should not be used as a reference, especially on GA articles. But as far as I understand, we could use Naver sources as long as the news article contents are from the reliable news outlets (e.g. Yonhap News, 10Asia, etc. on Naver) So I would like to seek clarification if we could use Naver sources at all across all article classes. Thanks all. Heolkpop ( talk) 03:21, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi! Doosan Encyclopedia should be on the reliable sources list. Teemeah 편지 (letter)
Is Bandwagon.asia a reliable source? SnowKang ( talk) 19:07, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah,I see.Thanks for replying!! SnowKang ( talk) 11:41, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
asianjunkie.com I've had a look at the website and I'm sure it's a gossip site. So can someone please add it to the list of unreliable sources? Btspurplegalaxy ( talk) 00:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi! So, I just found a website owned by Yonhap News Agency ( https://en.yna.co.kr/aboutus/domesticnetwork). Are those websites listed considered reliable for Wikipedia? Thank you for answering! Byy2 ( talk) 08:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi! So, i want to ask. Is it okay to use Melon or Naver Vibe as the source for the album credits? Because for some artists, when i search them on Naver, it redirects me to Naver Vibe instead. And i think there's no other sources apart from their social media accounts, like Twitter. Byy2 ( talk) 11:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I would like to ask/discuss if Pinkvilla is considered as reliable source. They have section for Korean entertainment [40] and they are regularly posting news/articles. If yes or no, please add in the list. Thank you. Accireioj ( talk) 07:17, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
There are several sources not listed here that are considered unreliable for use on WP but continue to be used in both old and new articles, including the International Business Times, Metro UK, Republic TV/World, Newsweek, Pinkvilla/Meaww/Bollywood Life ( 1, 2, and 3), etc., the latter few of which, while not on the Perennial sources list, are also considered unreliable or very low-quality sources. I've linked some of the discussions on them for reference. As many editors are/may not be aware of the aforementioned list, could a link to it be placed somewhere on the KO/RS page with an accompanying note that editors should also check there for additional guidance on source reliability? I think it would be helpful. Kultscene is another unreliable source not on the WP:KO list, but currently used on 39 project-related articles. I have removed several instances of its usage in the past (and did 2 more a short while ago), and while it is not heavily used, it is still a fan-created/fan-run site. I would remove the remaining 39 instances myself, except I lack the familiarity with those articles subjects to be able to find suitable replacement sources, which is always the preferred route instead of just tagging. -- Carlobunnie ( talk) 22:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Asking again, since it's been a few months and only one other editor participated in the discussion: would anyone object to the removal of the remaining 38 uses (excluding the one mentioned above as ChoHyeri would know best how to handle that article) of KultScene from the respective articles? -- Carlobunnie ( talk) 22:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi everybody! I got some questions and I'd like someone to help me.
Thanks everyone! - Fisforfenia ( talk) 16:05, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Saw
this being used in one of the drafts,
Draft:Lionesses (band) I am looking at. Its about us page has this: We strive to be a reliable and unbiased Kpop news source curated by experienced journalist and Kpop fans.
Is this site reliable to be used for kpop related articles?
– robertsky (
talk)
23:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm looking for a consensus to add Hello Asia in the reliable source section. I'm not sure the basis of its original addition in unreliable source as there's no discussion of it here. Hello Asia is a fork of The AU Review, an independent music, arts, travel, lifestyle publication based in Australia which was already deemed reliable by WP:ALBUM/SOURCES through this 2019 discussion, but focuses more on Asian content, including K-pop. [41] Both sites are under Heath Media, probably named after the founder Larry Heath. [42]
The way the website is structured makes it hard to see all of their writers but some of their contributors are:
Lulusword (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Is Wikitree ( https://www.wikitree.co.kr/) reliable? It's a Korean sports, economy, entertainment, culture news site. HoneyKpop ( talk) 04:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Is Y Magazine a reliable source for music reviews? It has been mentioned by Hankyung and News 1 kinda as a way to select the album of 2022, but I'm not sure if it's just a press release. And does anyone know any Korean music magazines other than IZM? I haven't found much. Poirot09 ( talk) 17:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Thoughts on k-odyssey.com adding it as a reliable source? The site is operated by Yonhap News Agency. You can see the details at the bottom of k-odyssey homepage. 98Tigerius ( talk) 07:03, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
This has been discussed twice in the noticeboard and the consensus was that it's unreliable.
There has been previous discussions about the validity of this site as a source, at the reliable sources noticeboard, best represented by the discussions: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_121#allkpop.com and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_125#Allkpop_and_Soompi, mostly with a consensus that it's unreliable.
There are a lot of articles who use them and I propose that we make a group effort to replace them with reliable sources. If they (Allkpop and Soompi) are the only site that reported it, what should be done?
What is everybody's thoughts about BNT News? ☴ Jaewon [ Talk 16:32, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
There was a discussion about Allkpop, Soompi and other English K-pop news blogs on Talk:K-pop. My stance is still the same, there is no evidence that their news reporting, translated from Korean sources would be unreliable per se. If they provide the original Korean source, that should be used. Opinion articles and blunt yellow press articles on scandals (who dated who) should not be used as sources. They report on awards ceremonies, for example, I don't see why that wouldn't be reliable, since they watch the event on TV and report about it, that's it. There are also self-reported articles like which celebrity appeared on which TV show and when certain music videos were released etc. Those are also OK, in my opinion. All in all, the article itself should be examined and if there is no reason to think they misreported, why shouldn't we use them? They are the fastest English sources on K-pop, though Mnet's MWAVE and occassionally bigger papers like Korea Times and the Korea Herald also report on K-pop news, increasingly so, since it became so popular nowadays. But when no other source is available for the same statement, I would say Allkpop, Soompi and others should not be discarded. Teemeah 편지 (letter) 09:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
These are sites seem to me to be reliable but I wanted feedback before adding to the list.
However, these sites I am not sure at all even though I found them on Girls Generation.
Just let me know which ones seem unreliable and if you have sources not on the list that you would like to share. ☴ Jaewon [ Talk 18:27, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Soshified is a fan site of Girls Generation. I would not use that, and any other fansites, either. If they give the original source, it should be used instead. Sometimes I do mention them with small letters, like I did in case of a couple of Big Bang sources, that translation (of a direct quote for example) was taken from bigbangupdates.com. These were almost exclusively translations of interviews. But fortunately many bigger fansites properly credit their sources with links. Teemeah 편지 (letter) 09:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Teemeah 편지 (letter) 09:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
@ Piotrus:, done the listing, as requested Teemeah 편지 (letter) 22:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, I've been following these two sources on Facebook and sometimes I feel like they operate like fansites themselves. Plus, I've seen these sources used in articles, which I have had to change a few of them in the past. Tibbydibby ( talk) 00:32, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't see KpopStarz mentioned here as reliable or unreliable. It appears as reliable to me. It does name its writers and the staff list appears credible: Kpop Starz - About Us
Opinions? BashBrannigan ( talk) 03:21, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
I was wondering about these as I've seen them on numerous pages. Mikepellerin talk 07:08, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I think Korea.com needs to be removed from the reliable sources list because they have user-uploaded content. Anyone can upload a story to their site, and I was unable to distinguish fan-uploaded stories from ones written by the staff. There may not even be any of the latter. I think it should be added to the unreliable list for this reason. Also, there is a forum (called "Let's Talk") at Mwave ( http://mwave.interest.me/forum/theme), and it should also be specified as not a reliable source. I've seen editors try to pass off things from the forums as RS on articles. Also, a few more non-reliable sources I've been seeing lately:
Please let me know what you all think of these items. Thanks! Shinyang-i ( talk) 03:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This discussion kind of dried up, but based on what's been said, I think there is consensus(?) to do the following:
We'll take no action about Yahoo! News or kstyle.com (thanks, revi, for the additional info on the latter site; I looked further and concur; it's a Japanese version of Naver, basically). If the above list doesn't look right, speak up! :) Shinyang-i ( talk) 04:51, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Korea.com is pretty much like akp and soompi but worse, because they don't credit the original article they took the news from. -- Teemeah 편지 (letter) 16:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
I often end up on that page because translated articles for me have often lead back there but I have no clue it it's reliable. Anyone else know? Peachywink ( talk) 02:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Entertainment news ought to have gossip or trivial things reported from time to time, whether it comes from a reliable site or not. I say just use our judgment and determine whether we can make that news become notable and relevant somehow. Trivial matter, in relation to a series of related events, can still become notable right?-- TerryAlex ( talk) 22:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
So here hare the ones I think should be added to the reliable list: Osen, StarN news, Star News and for the unreliable list I want to add ygunited and oh!kpop both of which are blog style sites that repost from other sites like allkpop. Peachywink ( talk) 21:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
-Beging again. How about we just add a note that no fansite articles are allowed such as the girls generation site? I agree It should be obvious but fans will really stretch what qualifies as an acceptable source. Also that makes sense about the Korean sites, but a collapse down list would be helpful for future referencing needs. I would hope people use caution when choosing the articles to include from those sites. Majority of mine I actually had English translation for from a naver site that listed where the original articles came from. But I do also think Google translate can give you an idea of what an article is really about. Such as a lengthy article featuring a picture from Got7's web drama was actually more focused on the rise of web-dramas in general so it wasn't useful. But then again I am practically fluent in Google translate at this point so maybe I get more out of it then most. lol Peachywink ( talk) 05:31, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Tenasia is not a blog per se. Blog format doesn't mean it's a personal blog. CNN has blog format pages, so do other major news outlets. Tenasia conducts personal face to face interviews with Korean celebrities and famous personalities. Fansites should only be linked when the original IS available. I did that on a couple of cases to provide the translation to Tenasia interviews and in-depth articles. I usually put them between html small tags as (translation) or use the translation parameter of cite web. Teemeah 편지 (letter) 11:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunatly it seems that site might have been shut down which is unfortunate since it was an english language kpop site run by a newspaper. Currently trying to contact someone about it to see if it might just be down but it looks like they closed it. Peachywink ( talk) 14:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
This is few newspaper sources that I have usually used in my articles because I thought it is reliable. What do you think about it?
Kenny ( talk) 13:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Sites like these that report news from korean sources should be included into the reliable sources.The English wikipedia recommends the use of english language sites and since what those sites do alot of the time is translate stuff from korean sources they should be included.As to storys that are obviously translated but not sourced that may be excluded.Stuff like gossip and rumours should not be used and be specified on the page specified.Akp has gossip on a seperate category so its easy to distinguish. Junkoo ( talk) 19:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Question: Is an official website (of a movie, a drama or a television show) considered as a reliable source? Kenny htv ( talk) 17:48, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I'm trying to work on cleaning up articles such as 2017 in South Korean music and the other years (I've already removed artists without an article from the debuting and disbanding sections, as well as completely removing joining/departing sections) - can music.naver.com be used as a source for listings? Alexanderlee ( talk) 21:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Is MelOn accepted as a reliable source? I feel that MelOn will be a reliable source for Korean Music because it is an official South Korean online music store. CodingNewb ( talk) 16:55, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Is this a reliable source? I don't see it on either list but I see it fairy often in articles. Alexanderlee ( talk) 21:01, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
LINK: https://www.koreaexpose.com/
I think it's a unreliable source in my opinion, but what do you guys think?
Tibbydibby ( talk) 06:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
After reading a few articles, I found no errors. From the standpoint of Koreans, I got the impression that it was like a foreign news article that solved Korean issues well in English. The author seems to be Korean, but on the contrary, there were many articles from a fresh perspective that were difficult to see in Korea. In addition, there was a consistent signature of individual reporters in every article. I don't think it's the best, but it's not the worst. in this regards.-- Jeong Seo Yoon ( talk) 08:10, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
SBS PopAsia is a radio and occasional TV program run by Special Broadcasting Service (SBS), a public broadcaster in Australia. Just because "blog" is in the title of some PopAsia URLs, does not instantly make it unreliable. They also have reporters/presenters who were involved with the K-pop world and still are, like Kevin Kim, who was part of ZE:A. Their writers would be just as reliable as other writers for SBS, which is considered reliable by Wikipedia at large last time I checked. Who determined SBS PopAsia to be unreliable and when was this? Ss 112 12:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Ss112: After looking through the article history I see it was added to the list by @ Abdotorg: but no discussion took place and no explanation was given Alexanderlee ( talk) 13:25, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Ss112:: Looking at the articles, I can see why SBS PopAsia is placed as an unreliable source. Most of their articles' sources are taken from unreliable sources themselves. For example, for this article, it gets its source from a personal account Twitter page. Then, we can look at this article where it gets its source from Soompi, one of the unreliable sources in WP:KO/RS. Heolkpop ( talk) 15:48, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm reviving this discussion, as it hasn't reached consensus and I agree with Ss112. I'd very much support moving SBS PopAsia to the reliable sources section. Not only are its authors qualified as listed above, SBS has information on who is running the organization [35] and a rather extensive editorial policy [36] which is enough to convince me that, even if Soompi is listed as a source of information, the content is at least vetted and verified. WP:KO/RS labels it as a "K-Pop site" but it rather is SBS' Asian (not just K-Pop) pop culture media hub. (And while I do agree that often times reliable publications refer to Korean ones for information, Heolkpop, often times they also cite tweets are their sources of information.) Abdotorg, I'm curious to know why you chose to list it as unreliable and Alexanderlee, you commented on here already so I'd love to know your thoughts as well. Redalert2fan, ChromeGames923, ChoHyeri, Evaders99, Fiipchip, Snowflake91, CherryPie94 you've all helped maintain this page (thank you!) so I'd appreciate your thoughts as well. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 01:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Is DramaFever news reliable? https://www.dramafever.com/news/1
I have seen it being linked but was unsure about it. Also, is it allowed to source HanCinema drama/film page to actor pages to prove they acted in the work? Or should we include news articles instead of linking to databases? ~~ CherryPie94 🍒🥧 ( talk) 06:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello all, I am new to the Korea reliable sources topic. I would like to ask for opinion if the following websites are consider reliable or unreliable as I do not see them in the wiki page for reliable sources. Kindly assist in updating if possible as I'm in the progress of update/cleaning up a wikipage. Thank you.
http://www.sedaily.com/ (Seoul Economy) Language in Korean
http://www.travelnbike.com/ Language in Korean
http://news1.kr Language in Korean
http://star.mk.co.kr/ Language in Korean
http://www.kookje.co.kr/ Language in Korean
http://biztribune.co.kr/ Language in Korean
http://inkinews.com/ Language in English
Fiipchip (
talk)
07:42, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that Korea Portal ( http://en.koreaportal.com, and its corresponding Korean website, http://koreaportal.com) be listed as an unreliable source. The website frequently publishes rumors and other unconfirmed information. This can be discovered just by viewing the homepage but I'll list a few examples of the rumor-based articles (as well as the unsourced speculation that appears in the article content). Recent examples include an article reporting on hearsay posted to an online forum about BTS' RM, speculation that Black Pink's Rosé will be releasing a solo performance based solely on a vague Instagram caption, and an article claiming that Momoland's Nancy is "jealous of Black Pink" after speculating that she "glared" at them on a music show, among other incredulous topics. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 01:52, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
This one is a lot less obvious than previous websites so I'd really appreciate input from other editors here!
So Metro is a UK tabloid site that seems to publish rumors. I'm suspicious about their reliability, cause though they do cover actual stories that are accurate, and these are fairly frequent, they seem to also publish rumors and unconfirmed facts. Looking at their BTS tag as an example, you can see they published the news about BTS' view record before the numbers were confirmed by YouTube, and wrote about a "bromance" between John Cena and J-Hope. You can also notice that they publish numerous factually accurate stories as well. Much of what they report is published by reliable sources (notably Billboard). Thus, I'm wondering if we should treat it like Soompi -- though factually accurate articles are published, enough rumors are posted as well to make the source unreliable. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 03:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi all,
User Mlee965 recently included Sinhan Minbo as reliable source. Can someone help to verify as it was not discussed on the talk page? Fiipchip ( talk) 14:24, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Questions:
Korea Star Daily ( https://www.koreastardaily.com/) is a Chinese-language blog-styled K-pop site. It seems like it operates similarly to Allkpop and Koreaboo, and it is as opinionated as those unreliable sources. Therefore, I suggest placing Korea Star Daily as one of the unreliable sources. What do you think? Heolkpop ( talk) 13:05, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I have a few sources that we might want to consider being either reliable or unreliable:
Thanks, ChromeGames923 ( talk) 01:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
kprofiles (english) seems to be an unreliable site for use as reference on kpop related articles, their "profile/fact" content seems to be completely unsourced or copied from other pages (possibly from Wikipedia) and furthermore includes a lot of trivia. Also runs polls and quizzes. Redalert2fan ( talk) 08:58, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
I have added Kpopping.com to the unreliable section since Kpopping's Database is a wiki that anyone can edit and provides no references to any (or most) claims made. It is probable that it copies content from Wikipedia itself. Redalert2fan ( talk) 13:55, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
SBS is a major news organization in Australia, i dont think sbs popasia should be deemed unreliable automatically. Apples&Manzanas ( talk) 09:28, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Did you see the section "Who determined SBS PopAsia to be unreliable and why?" on this page above? There has been quite an extensive discussion before. Redalert2fan ( talk) 11:21, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Response:
My edit got reverted, so i guess i need a new discussion on the metro.co.uk listing in the unreliable sources section. This should be deleted from the unreliable sources section. For starters, it simply doesn't belong on the list whatsoever. This wikipedia project is meant to be devoted to Korean websites, the metro.co.uk is neither korean nor does it primarily deal with korea. It shouldn't be eligible to be on this list. Secondly, it's bizarre that it's listed as an unreliable source when it's simply an ordinary major newspaper. Like, obviously no newspaper needs to be treated as gospel, but there's really no reason whatsoever that it shouldn't be valid to cite any articles from it if no one can point out anything wrong with the citation. I'm not proposing to add it to the reliable sources section, im just saying it doesnt belong on this list at all. Apples&Manzanas ( talk) 12:03, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Seo kang joon has received an award for “watcher “ .please add this to his biography ShamimBr95 ( talk) 08:06, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Can soompi be used as source for soompi awards? Recent soompi awards were covered by other medias but for earlier awards, say, 2006 – 2010, there are no other alternative source. Lulusword (talk) 06:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
I apologise for my bad phrasing/intepretation.
Anyway, in summary, I would argue Soompi Awards by itself is notable because in the recent edition, the secondary sources described what exactly the award is and how long it has been awarded here [37], [38] and [39]. The award was also broadcast on Myx TV starting from 2011 for a few years. (There is news piece about this but it is kinda trivial and I can't find it again today) And if Soompi Award is deemed notable, it can be covered by primary source as it said here on Wikipedia:Notability (media)#Primary criterion, where it says Once notability is established, primary sources may be used to add content, which mean, it can be used to cite earlier winners without needing to be covered by other sources as long as it is verifiable. But since this wiki project deemed Soompi as unreliable source due to its gossipy tone of its news reporting, so I post this question here to seek others opinion about it because there is this rule exception here Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves.
On the other hand, if Soompi Award by itself is non-notable, I would argue that all soompi awards win & noms on list of awards and nominations articles to be removed as it is non-encyclopaedic. Saying only a few editions to be notable make it seems like all the reports about it are incidental (I am sorry if that is not the correct word) and for example, was only covered because bts won the aforementioned award, not because the award by itself is noteworthy.
Either way, I by myself cannot say/decide if the award itself is notable or not, and this is not the correct talk page to discuss it. I might bring it up to the proper notability talk page if I am not lazy (which I kinda am at the moment), and since there is no urgency need of it right now, I am not pressing for it, so I am stepping back from arguing about this issue. Lulusword (talk) 15:41, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
I would think some internet news sources, upon closer scrutiny, probably belong in a grayzone reliability category, that is, something like a "No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply", in the WP:RSPSOURCES table.
I think the WP:RSPSOURCES table is more discerning, and only makes certain exceptions of online media as "reliable".-- Kiyoweap ( talk) 20:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
I was recently informed that Naver sources are unreliable, and that they should not be used as a reference, especially on GA articles. But as far as I understand, we could use Naver sources as long as the news article contents are from the reliable news outlets (e.g. Yonhap News, 10Asia, etc. on Naver) So I would like to seek clarification if we could use Naver sources at all across all article classes. Thanks all. Heolkpop ( talk) 03:21, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi! Doosan Encyclopedia should be on the reliable sources list. Teemeah 편지 (letter)
Is Bandwagon.asia a reliable source? SnowKang ( talk) 19:07, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah,I see.Thanks for replying!! SnowKang ( talk) 11:41, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
asianjunkie.com I've had a look at the website and I'm sure it's a gossip site. So can someone please add it to the list of unreliable sources? Btspurplegalaxy ( talk) 00:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi! So, I just found a website owned by Yonhap News Agency ( https://en.yna.co.kr/aboutus/domesticnetwork). Are those websites listed considered reliable for Wikipedia? Thank you for answering! Byy2 ( talk) 08:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi! So, i want to ask. Is it okay to use Melon or Naver Vibe as the source for the album credits? Because for some artists, when i search them on Naver, it redirects me to Naver Vibe instead. And i think there's no other sources apart from their social media accounts, like Twitter. Byy2 ( talk) 11:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I would like to ask/discuss if Pinkvilla is considered as reliable source. They have section for Korean entertainment [40] and they are regularly posting news/articles. If yes or no, please add in the list. Thank you. Accireioj ( talk) 07:17, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
There are several sources not listed here that are considered unreliable for use on WP but continue to be used in both old and new articles, including the International Business Times, Metro UK, Republic TV/World, Newsweek, Pinkvilla/Meaww/Bollywood Life ( 1, 2, and 3), etc., the latter few of which, while not on the Perennial sources list, are also considered unreliable or very low-quality sources. I've linked some of the discussions on them for reference. As many editors are/may not be aware of the aforementioned list, could a link to it be placed somewhere on the KO/RS page with an accompanying note that editors should also check there for additional guidance on source reliability? I think it would be helpful. Kultscene is another unreliable source not on the WP:KO list, but currently used on 39 project-related articles. I have removed several instances of its usage in the past (and did 2 more a short while ago), and while it is not heavily used, it is still a fan-created/fan-run site. I would remove the remaining 39 instances myself, except I lack the familiarity with those articles subjects to be able to find suitable replacement sources, which is always the preferred route instead of just tagging. -- Carlobunnie ( talk) 22:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Asking again, since it's been a few months and only one other editor participated in the discussion: would anyone object to the removal of the remaining 38 uses (excluding the one mentioned above as ChoHyeri would know best how to handle that article) of KultScene from the respective articles? -- Carlobunnie ( talk) 22:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi everybody! I got some questions and I'd like someone to help me.
Thanks everyone! - Fisforfenia ( talk) 16:05, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Saw
this being used in one of the drafts,
Draft:Lionesses (band) I am looking at. Its about us page has this: We strive to be a reliable and unbiased Kpop news source curated by experienced journalist and Kpop fans.
Is this site reliable to be used for kpop related articles?
– robertsky (
talk)
23:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm looking for a consensus to add Hello Asia in the reliable source section. I'm not sure the basis of its original addition in unreliable source as there's no discussion of it here. Hello Asia is a fork of The AU Review, an independent music, arts, travel, lifestyle publication based in Australia which was already deemed reliable by WP:ALBUM/SOURCES through this 2019 discussion, but focuses more on Asian content, including K-pop. [41] Both sites are under Heath Media, probably named after the founder Larry Heath. [42]
The way the website is structured makes it hard to see all of their writers but some of their contributors are:
Lulusword (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Is Wikitree ( https://www.wikitree.co.kr/) reliable? It's a Korean sports, economy, entertainment, culture news site. HoneyKpop ( talk) 04:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Is Y Magazine a reliable source for music reviews? It has been mentioned by Hankyung and News 1 kinda as a way to select the album of 2022, but I'm not sure if it's just a press release. And does anyone know any Korean music magazines other than IZM? I haven't found much. Poirot09 ( talk) 17:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Thoughts on k-odyssey.com adding it as a reliable source? The site is operated by Yonhap News Agency. You can see the details at the bottom of k-odyssey homepage. 98Tigerius ( talk) 07:03, 7 February 2023 (UTC)