This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Charts, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Record charts. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Record ChartsWikipedia:WikiProject Record ChartsTemplate:WikiProject Record ChartsRecord Charts 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
@Ss112: My thing about the inclusion of the digital indexes is that 1) they're literally on the Korean pages for the article and 2) the fact that they have been included in earlier Gaon pages with nobody doing anything to them despite them also having "no explanation" behind them. Soz if I sound oddly confrontational, but I am not entirely sure how you can call the Gaon indexes "irrelevant" even though they're the literal backbone of the Korean song charts. But overall, I'm just trying to have consistency between the pages here; if they're "irrelevant" now and ergo should not be included on the pages, then we should erase the older index points that are used on the older weekly #1's by year pages. The ones from about 2010 and 2011. (Or maybe don't erase those, since Gaon has also permanently hid those numbers away from public sight. I may be wrong, though.) I'm not trying to be rude. I'm just seeking consistency in what we put on the pages for this stuff and what we don't put on the pages. Not purposefully attempting to be some annoying renegade. Ynnda (talk) 02:44, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ynnda: The previous year pages had sales when the singles chart included that, no other list on Wikipedia has had the "Heating Index" before you added it so I don't know what you're referring to. There is no indication as to what a "Heating Index" even is. We know what sales are—they're how many units (digital and/or physical) were sold. What do the millions next to each song indicate? You say they're the "literal backbone" of the charts instead of what appears to be an unknown figure that means something to Gaon but is lost on the rest of us. I think the charts are still ordered by how many streams/downloads/sales they had, not the Heating Index—it's just that Gaon doesn't specify the former anymore, for whatever reason. Also, I was talking about relevancy as it applies to readers—obviously Gaon thinks it's relevant—but if it can't be explained as to what a Heating Index even is, then it's irrelevant info to readers to include. The average reader does not care about a random number next to songs, but moreso the song that's actually number one. We could also include more information than we do on these pages, but the point is we cut some things out for brevity and include only the most important things. There is no need to ping me, I created this page so I'm obviously following it. Ss11203:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"The previous year pages had sales when the singles chart included that, no other list on Wikipedia has had the "Heating Index" before you added it so I don't know what you're referring to."… Except they did have a concept that was basically the same as the "Heating Index". Scroll down the 2011 page, and you will see a monthly #1's table that literally displays the "aggregate points" for the monthly #1's that Gaon published at that time. 2012 as well. It's literally the same concept as the digital indexes that Gaon uses today, it's just not called that anymore. You're skirting around the point; the point is that I'm trying to achieve consistency between the Korean page and the 2011 and 2012 pages back when Gaon had done the same exact thing. It "meant nothing" then (because Gaon never explicitly declared what it meant) and it still "means nothing" now. The same thing with the Heating Indexes. Ynnda (talk) 03:39, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Aggregate points" is not "literally the same concept" as the Heating Index for each week. Two articles having that in the monthly list at the bottom of the page, then adding it to the 2018 and 2019 lists is not what I call "consistency". It should probably be removed from those lists too, because again, you have no explanation as to what the figures mean and nor does anybody else. I don't see why we would be including data if we can't explain what it means. Also, I can't be "skirting around" a point that you only specified in your last message. Saying "but other lists do this too" is an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS type of argument—you will find not every number-one list belonging to a certain chart on Wikipedia has exactly the same thing on it, nor do they need to. Different editors make them so naturally things change. You can continue arguing with me, but it's not going to change anything. Until you have consensus (per WP:CONSENSUS) and you or somebody else can explain what a Heating Index is (and I don't see how you can if Gaon doesn't), then it should not be included. I'm done here. Ss11204:05, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"It should probably be removed from those lists too, because again, you have no explanation as to what the figures mean" Then remove it. If that's how it must go, then remove it. Bye. Ynnda (talk) 04:24, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
