User talk:Satou4

August 2017

You seem upset that the Gaon Digital Chart list was deleted and your page moved into draftspace. This indicates you think all other number-one lists will or should be deleted as well, which is not the case: ARIA's list has links to other websites on it (and ARIA's website does not contain an archive), and the Billboard 200 links to different articles on Billboard's website, which is not a mirror. Ss 112 22:33, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I sympathise with your list being deleted, and I disagree with its deletion, but as I said on RoySmith's talk page, other things exist is not really an accepted reason for deletion or in related discussions. Ss 112 22:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input, @Ss112. I am indeed upset, but I should have clicked the red link to the 2017 page and found the deletion debate before I finished the entire thing. Explicit already has a very good page completed in his user pages. My problem is, how are other users supposed to know that there is a debate that the 2017 page should even exist? When I see a red link alongside the other years, it makes me believe that there would be no problem with such a page, and it only has to be created to become a blue link. I see that the 2010 Gaon page has links to news articles to help reference the data, but the data in the intro, which is referenced by these news articles, is mostly simple data which could be found on the chart itself. How can the debate be re-opened, so we can get the 2017 page back online? Satou4 (talk) 03:08, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017

@Ss112 so what needs to be done to reinstate the 2017 Gaon page? Do I just complain more? Is there an official way to open up debates again so we can vote on whether or not to reinstate? I have no idea how to do this. Satou4 (talk) 03:04, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think, as RoySmith said, the concerns raised in the deletion review and original deletion discussion would have to be addressed. Mostly, I think it was that other editors felt the article did not have sufficient coverage in independent sources (as in, articles from news publications talking about the Gaon chart or what is/was number one on it), or any real coverage beyond links to every week's chart. You could open another deletion review, but it may be pointless as it will probably go the way of the last one. The deletion review said perhaps the AfD can be relisted—maybe ask Explicit (talk · contribs)—they appear to have saved several of the earlier Gaon lists from deletion; maybe it is time for the 2017 list to be restored. Ss 112 04:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]