Talk:Jimin

About Music Station

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.

---

My editions about Music Station are repeatedly removed mainly by User:Btspurplegalaxy, but I think the reason is not valid. first with no reason, second with the claim of no relevance, third with them suspecting my intention and the last claims in the past the content was declined. I don’t think User:Btspurplegalaxy read the content because it is relevant to the individual and the third claim is violation of No personal attacks and the last claim is not supported by proof. My text was with reliable sources. The Asahi Shimbun is mainstream paper in Japan and Agence France-Presse is, as you know, one of the most famous of that kind . And on the page of the group, there is no mention about the individual. The program is one of the most famous music programs in Japan and Japan is one of the biggest market of them. Therefore I think you can find notability of the event. In the first place, You can easily find the article of this event on the page of the group. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@小出-小坂井: in the BTS#2018–2020: Continued worldwide success section of the BTS article, the information is stated in the 5th pgraph, with the sentence beginning "In early November 2018...". The wording used was decided upon after a consensus was reached (several editors participated in the discussion, including ones not specifically affiliated w BTS on WP), following the occurrence of the incident at the time. The reasons stated by Btspurplegalaxy are correct, particularly that the information was/is more relevant to the group hence the reason it was added on that article and not here. Japan being a large market has nothing to do with where the info is stated. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

In the first place, I think Btspurplegalaxy’s reasoning can not be valid except what Carlobunnie pointed out, therefore we can not trust their claims. Carlobunnie claims there were consensus on the group page but they don’t give any proof. And of course it is relevant to the group but so why Wikipedia has the page on the individual and the page has a section about the group? This event is about the group and especially the individual is focused on in the event. We can write that here. And I already gave sources. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 22:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The incident/discussion took place in 2018 and has since been archived on the BTS talk page, which you can search for yourself. Any info related to BTS on Jimin's page has to do with his debut as part of the group or his music-related work. No other details pertaining to BTS are relevant to him as an individual/singer. If his career specifically was affected by the issue (i.e. he was banned from appearing in Japan, had to stop working for a while, was made to pull out of BTS appearances etc.) then that would be relevant to mention, but it was not, hence no inclusion. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 22:33, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I found the talk you were talking about, which you had to find by yourself to prove your remark is right. But in that there is no specific mention about whether this should be written in the page of the individual. And you claim the event have to affect their career or something if written, but it’s not Wikipedia rules, just your taste. This is the reason why I explained why this event has notability. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 23:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

A week has passed since I doubted the validity of the deletion and posted this talk, and now there is no consensus that this should not be written on the page. So I”ll write the content on the page. If a person or two can reject some contents with void reasoning, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia. This is not the case. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 14:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@小出-小坂井: No consensus means exactly that. I agree with Btspurplegalaxy and Carlobunnie; the event didn't affect him individually (he wasn't kicked out of BTS or prevented from performing or anything of the sort). It did affect BTS as a group, which is why the information is presented in their article, with context and appropiate sources, and not here. I'll ping some other editors so they can give their two cents if they want to, but you already have three telling you the information is not relevant enough to be mentioned, esp when it is already covered in the group's page. Pinging Paper9oll, Ukiss2ne14lyfe & ErnestKrause. - Ïvana (talk) 16:11, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Agreed with Btspurplegalaxy, Carlobunnie, and Ïvana viewpoints. The information is more suitable for inclusion on BTS (which is already included there since c. 2018) rather than here. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 16:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

To be clear, Ïvana is the editor who posted the last deletion. I understand some have opinions different from mine. But Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not vote but consensus and your way is not fair at all. I want to point out that on the page of group there in no mention of the individual and NO RULES tells you can’t put this info on this page and rather should put it because this event has notability I already prove with reliable sources. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 16:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

You've been told what to do. Establish a consensus, then we can all proceed from there. Your babbling isn't going to get you anywhere. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 16:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Besides Carlobunnie everyone who is involved in this talk are the editor who deleted my edits or who was called by them. At this point this is just “vote”. To be clear. And Btspurplegalaxy violated Wikipedia:No personal attacks again. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

You keep commenting on the topic, but you aren't making any effort to make a consensus. Nothing won't be done until you've establish a consensus like I mentioned before. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 17:57, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

小出-小坂井 you have four different editors telling you the same thing. That's actually a consensus already. There hasn't been any "vote" like you claim. I'm not presuming your proficiency with English, but you don't quite seem to quite understand the proper context for "vote" or "personal attack". Btspurplegalaxy hasn't committed the latter at any point, so I'd recommend not continuing to accuse them of such. Your persistent edits, despite repeated explanations from multiple editors of why they're wrong, did not/do not appear to be in good faith. It's not a personal attack to say so. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 19:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Do you really think suspecting my bad intentions with no proof is a normal thing? And calling my edits “babbling”? Except you everyone did things which I think are invalid or was called by them, so I need others’ opinion. That’s what I meant. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 19:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

If one makes an edit, or a series of edits, and is repeatedly reverted by other editors, with multiple explanations of why their edits are incorrect or inappropriate, yet that person continues to make the same edits while insisting they are right, and disregards what they have been told, that is editing in bad faith. Which is how your actions come across. It might not have been your intention, but that is how it looks to everyone else. Perhaps you have a different understanding of the word "babbling", but I understand why Btspurplegalaxy said it. They were referring to your comments, not your edits. Please be aware that unless more editors chime in and agree with you, the information will remain excluded from the page, as that is how consensus works. Even though you think the others editors actions were "invalid", despite being told why they were not, I hope you will be able to accept the consensus even if no one else shares your opinion. Until the discussion is over, it would be best to wait, instead of trying to add the info to the page again. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 20:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I understand they call my comments “babbling”. I asserted this is problematic. Only two people rejected the content, which I think is done with invalid reasoning. At this point you are a only person who is a “third party” about the edits. Only third party can discuss the validity. According the method you claim is right, a couple of people can delete contents if they do not like that. This is not Wikipedia or encyclopedia. 小出-小坂井 (talk) 20:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:ONUS you are indeed required to achieve consensus if you're trying to include material that has been disputed. Also, from what I can see, there are four editors who disagree with your proposed material not two. If you still think these four editors are wrong, you could seek further feedback via some form of WP:Dispute resolution but please take on board what they are saying first otherwise you risk falling into WP:IDHT territory. Note that the editors have given reasons why they feel the material should be excluded rather than just saying they don't like it. Nil Einne (talk) 21:34, 23 March 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.

Requested move 8 May 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:59, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

---

Jimin (singer, born 1995) → Jimin – All sources within his article, identify him as Jimin. Per WP:COMMONAME and WP:MONONYM it should be titled accordingly. Those that share his name are disambiguated; some with hyphens, others with their surnames, and one who has long changed their name from Jimin to Jamie, so there would be no confusion in regard to which Jimin is being referred to. It's evident that Jimin is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC especially given these search results: results [1]. Furthermore, Jimin is singularly listed on his official artist profile and uses it for official legal credits at the Korean Music Copyright Association. (here, search "10005241" for his music credits. 52-whalien (talk) 03:36, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

• Note: recent discussion started by same editor at Talk:Jimin (singer, born 1995)/Archive 1#Requested move 5 November 2021. Jimin does not redirect to this page. Dekimasuよ! 11:38, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

   Note: Related discussion started by same editor at Talk:Jimin (singer, born 1995)/Archive 1#Requested move 20 February 2022 also speedily closed. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:29, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. No other English Wikipedia main title header uses the exact form "Jimin", which currently redirects to Ji-min. A hatnote atop Jimin — For others with a similar name, see Ji-min. — would resolve any confusion. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

• Support As stated above, other articles use Ji-min or other forms, not the connected Jimin. Nythar (talk) 10:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose There's an argument here for creating a disambiguation page. The current title seems perhaps over-disambiguated. I find the Google search results argument to be unpersuasive for primary topic. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
• Support Per WP:PRIMARYUSAGE dailypage views. Readers should be taken to the highly desired destination. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 22:06, 14 May 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.

"Park Jimin (musician)/junk" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Park Jimin (musician)/junk and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 16#Park Jimin (musician)/junk until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:32, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2022

let’s change the photo to a more recent picture!! (also better quality photo…) 98.110.32.51 (talk) 04:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)