Talk:Pink Venom

Discuss please: Billboard Hits of the World Charts

The following discussion 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.

---

I understand why people want to include them in the charts table, especially when a band has reached number one on the Hits of the World charts but not national singles charts. I'll refer you to the principles listed at WP:RECORDCHARTS:

• No one disputes the reliability of charts published by Billboard, however when Rollingstone launched their Top 100 for the US, both the Hits of the World and Rollingstone Hot 100 were urged to be used with caution here
• There has been two other discussions were "Hits of the World" have been mentioned and the general view is that there isn't a valid reason for including the charts when there is already an established national record chart, see discussions here.
• Nobody has yet provided a valid reason or consensus that they should be included. They are valid charts in the sense they are published by a reputable source but they are not recongised within South Korea as an official measure of success in the Korean music market
• The current reasons for including them seem to be "well they're included elsewhere" but per WP:OTHERSTUFF, that isn't really a valid discussion point. If 100 people who couldn't swim jumped into the sea, does that mean the 101st person should jump into the sea too? No it doesn't.

I believe the only reason we are having this discussion is because "Pink Venom" is number one on the South Korean Songs chart published by Billboard but not on the Circle One so fans want to include it to say that the band have another number one in S Korea. I'm by no means diminishing the achievements (or not) of the band, however the official and most widely recognised single chart for South Korea is the Circle Chart. Billboard's version is a new chart and yet to establish its dominance or even longevity. Rollingstone Hot 100 barely lasted a year without being shelved. I urge editors who wish to add in the chart to engage in discussion first. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 21:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Well I guess you are right. 🤷‍♀️ But Im wondering if the information about pre-orders that were reported by the K-pop companies (JYP, SM, YG etc.), should be deleted from every article? And also the South Korean Billboard chart should be also deleted from the new song's pages since it hasnt "established its dominance or even longevity". Im just asking. MotherofSnakes (talk) 00:05, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

MotherofSnakes In theory yes, anywhere you see a record label promoting the sales of an artist it should be used with extreme caution if at all. As an editor we all have our favourite artists and people generally edit articles they are interested in. I happened to come across this one and noticed some inaccuracies so removed them as appropriate. There's millions of song articles - no single person can be expected to review, patrol and remove inaccuracies from every single article. Wikipedia works by community - if you notice someone has edited incorrectly you politely point out guidance, rules or procedure that demonstrates this. Then that person makes better edits next time and passes on the policies. This is how we collectively achieve a better, more factual and more accurate wikipedia. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 14:10, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Lil-unique1: South Korea had its own Billboard's K-pop Hot 100 which existed from August 2011 to July 2014 and from June 2017 to April 2022. While Hits of the World was introduced in February 2022, South Korea Songs was only added in May 2022 and during the same week K-pop Hot 100 was stopped being issued.

Both Circle Digital Chart and K-pop Hot 100 have been used in all South Korean song and discography articles. When K-pop Hot 100 was stopped this year and South Korea Songs was added to Hits of the World, editors have started using South Korea Songs as a replacement for K-pop Hot 100 (maybe because both are Billboard charts, see BTS singles discography for example). (Disclaimer: I am not one who started this neither I have revamped any artist's discography for this.)

Now, I asked you to reach a consensus not as you assumed but this situation is unique to South Korea and to ensure same thing can be done for all the South Korean song and discography articles. Thank you. -ink&fables «talk» 03:48, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

-ink&fables I didn't assume - Pointed out that the use of Hits of the World is contested. Per WP:BRD and per WP:CONSENSUS, if someone removes or reverts content then it means any assumed consensus is contested. The onus is then on the individual wishing to add back the original information to establish consensus. Consensus is not established by status quo or the number of times something occurs. Whether something appears in one article or 100, makes no difference as to whether it is correct or not.

And no the situation is not unique to South Korea at all - Billboard has introduced Hits of the Word for many countries. Veitnam had the same thing, The general consensus on talk pages I linked you to is that Hits of the World charts should not be included alongside other nationally recognised charts, there have been no compelling arguments that demonstrate why they should be. Introducing a new chart, even if its been considered a replacement for the old K-Pop 100 (which is WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS), requires discussion and consensus. Any arguments for including it here have been "Hits of the World" replaces the "K-Pop Hot 100", which doesn't demonstrate valid reasons for either chart being included.

As happened with Rollingstone Hot 100. I came across this article by happenstance and removed stuff that I understand to be incorrect per rules and consensus. It is procedurally incorrect for editors to claim that because its done elsewhere it must be correct, without checking the current consensus and guidelines or to simply revert because you don't like it. It also becomes indiscriminate to include multiple charts for multiple countries. What does 'Hits of the World' at to the current chart performance? Very little because its yet to be established as an effective or well-known measure of chart success in South Korea, its published by BILLBOARD US not the local BILLBOARD for SK, so is clearly aimed at Western Audiences and is viewed through a western lense. There's no evidence that anyone outside of the US cares or pays attention to the chart. The long established Circle Chart (formerly the GAON) chart is longer than the short 25-position hits of the world chart and has a rich history as the main/official/most widely recognised chart in South Korea. It was removed from "Pink Venom" because it was understood to be surplus to requirements, irrespective of how widely it is used elsewhere. Adoption of it alongside Circle Charts needs to have wide ranging support from music editors, not just fans of Korean music who wish to show their favourite act got number one irrespective of whichever chart otherwise it reads like "i didn't like the position on circle chart so I include Billboard too. I want as many number one positions as possible". Its for the same reason we stopped allowing the Rollingstone 200 albums chart before it died of its own circumstances like its Hot 100 sibling chart. If there's valid reasons for including the chart other than "its a different look at the market" then there's scope for discussion but at the moment Hits of the World is not recognised or established as a measure of chart success in South Korea. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 14:10, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Lil-unique1: Vietnam is not included on the Hits of the World, it is Vietnam Hot 100 not Vietnam Songs. When I say it is unique to South Korea, I don't mean that having a Hits of the World chart in addition of country's industry official chart but about previously having a country specific Billboard Hot 100 chart which was stopped after its addition to Hits of the World. "Pink Venom" isn't the first song to top South Korea Songs but failed to reach atop of Circle Digital Chart; "Yet to Come (The Most Beautiful Moment)" by BTS, "Girls" by Aespa, "Sneakers" by Itzy are others. Why? Because all these songs (or the albums having these singles) were released on Friday to target most charts which tracks from Friday to Thursday, like Billboard charts. Circle Digital Chart tracking period is from Sunday to Saturday. Also, because Circle Digital Chart doesn't include data from YouTube Music which is currently one of the biggest and fastest growing music platform in South Korea. Well that is a whole different discussion and don't want to get more into it. See, I am not currently arguing if South Korea Songs should be included on this page or not. But what should be done for discography of South Korean artists which has combined Billboard's K-pop Hot 100 and South Korea Songs in the same column? And should we remove South Korea Songs from other South Korean songs' articles?

And please stop repeating the same thing that I or other editors argued to add South Korea Songs just because it reached number one. It is something which you have "assumed". I would have argued its inclusion even if it hadn't reached number one. Thank you. -ink&fables «talk» 03:43, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ink&fables: I'm not even sure why the K-Pop Hot 100 was included to be honest but that's a tangential discussion. If the Billboard and Circle charts track different things then there needs to be a discussion about it. From what I understand, Billboard's Hits of the World only track streaming, and sales - there's no mention on Billboard's pages whether video music is included. My issue is that if we're including it based solely on a different tracking week then that isn't correct. If its because the chart formulae and methodology is different? That's more acceptable and I can see an argument as to why we might want to include it. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 14:42, 4 September 2022 (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.

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea which will affect this article

I've a started a discussion at WikiProject Korea over the usage of Billboard's Hits of the World – South Korea Songs. You are welcome to participate in the discussion. Thank you. -ink&fables «talk» 07:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pink Venom/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Nkon21 (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: IanTEB (talk · contribs) 09:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewing!

Comments

Background and release

• "On July 31, YG Entertainment officially released the album trailer video" the name of the album could be worked in here; currently it's not mentioned outside the lead
• "On August 10, two sets of individual member teaser posters were posted to Blackpink's official social media accounts" I think it would be good to specify that the posters are promoting “Pink Venom” rather than the album, since the latter’s promotion is also talked about in the previous paragraph
• url-status=live should be added to [1], [3], and [4]
• Spotchecks: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] (albeit with all Korean-language ones checked with translation)

Composition and lyrics

• Add url-access=subscription to [17]
• Spotchecks: [16], [18], [19], [20]

Critical reception

• No problems here!
• Spotchecks: [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37]

Accolades

• For Best Partnership or Collaboration, Features (Social), shouldn’t the PinkVenomChallenge specifically be listed as recipient?
• Spotchecks: [45], [51], [55], [57]

Commercial performance

• “most-streamed song by a female artist in a single day in 2022, with 10.79 million streams” not seeing the stream count in the Billboard source
• “first song by a female K-pop artist to top Spotify's Global Top Songs chart” not seeing this part in the source
• Link “Oricon chart” to Oricon Singles Chart
• “Billboard Japan Hot 100” should be “Billboard Japan Hot 100”
• Spotchecks: [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], [70], [71], [72]

Music video

• Add url-status=live to [104]
• “geomungo” is previously linked in the composition section
• “vampire” doesn’t need to be linked
• Spotchecks: [100], [101], [103], [104]

Promotion and live performances

• No comments
• Spotchecks: [115], [116], [117]

Credits and personnel

• A source should be added here since there’s names not referenced in the Composition or background sections

Charts, certifications, release history

• No comments

Lead and infobox

• The infobox image could use an alt text
• The cover doesn't have white edges so a border isn't needed

Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Looks good for the most part, but I had a few notes above. Nothing unfixable of course

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   Apart from the credits section, all looks good

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Critic commentary relies a bit much on quotations for my liking, but it's not going to hold it back from GA. These quotations is about everything detected by Earwig.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

   Last major edit was on February 29, the day of nomination. There have been revisions but seems generally stable

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   Images have fair use or are under creative commons.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   Alt needed for the infobox cover, otherwise all good.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Really great and high-quality article. I had some comments but all should be relatively easy to fix. Don't see any reason this shouldn't be able to pass. IanTEB (talk) 09:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Done with all, thanks for the review! ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 18:04, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Promoted! Great work! IanTEB (talk) 19:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 11:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Blackpink's "Pink Venom" references songs by the Notorious B.I.G, Rihanna, and Taylor Swift in its lyrics? Source: https://www.vulture.com/article/blackpink-new-venom-switched-on-pop.html
  • ALT1: ... that Blackpink's "Pink Venom" incorporates the sound of traditional Korean instruments such as the geomungo? Source: https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/k-pop/artists-celebrities/article/3218436/blackpink-and-bts-suga-show-power-using-traditional-korean-sounds-k-pop-trend-picks-steam
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Joy (dog)

Created by Nkon21 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 11 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 19:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC).

• Reached GA around time of nom, long enough, well-sourced, good prose, no copyvio (two fair use images, one for music video one for cover art), and facts supported by given sources. I prefer your main hook above ALT1. I feel like those names are more eyegrabbing to Western audiences. Nice work! toobigtokale (talk) 17:22, 31 March 2024 (UTC)