Talk:Babymetal

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 18:17, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

• BabyMetal → BABYMETAL – Undiscussed move. After it was contested and reverted by me, the editor moved the page again and edited the redirect to prevent me from moving it back. Moscow Connection (talk) 03:31, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Moved from speedy

• Comment after reversion, it should be opened as a regular move request, because it falls under MOS:CAPS and MOS:TM being "BabyMetal" or "Babymetal" as the proper form -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 04:03, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

• Anyway, any future discussion can't possibly result in "BabyMetal" where it is now cause MOS:TM says: "CamelCase may be used where it reflects general usage" and "BabyMetal" is never seen before. --Moscow Connection (talk) 04:15, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Survey

• Comment shouldn't this have been reverted per WP:BRD practice now being enforced by WP:RM? (see WT:RM for discussions implementing this) -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 09:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose "BabyMetal" (single word usage considering logo) or "Baby Metal" (logo) or "Babymetal" (one word usage removing caps) should be used, not "BABYMETAL" per MOS:CAPS , MOS:TM -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 09:04, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
• Move somewhere from here fast. "BabyMetal" is outrageous.
  I think it would be right first to revert it back to "BABYMETAL" and then to propose to move it to "Babymetal" as the simplest way to write it in lower case without adding extra spaces, etc.
  But I must say that currentsly I haven't seen any articles about the group in reliable Western sources. Reliable Japanese English-language sources like Kawaii Girl Japan (example) and BARKS (example) write the name as "BABYMETAL". Big Japanese online shops in English write "BABYMETAL" (HMV) or "BABY METAL" (CD Japan). But at least I've seen "Babymetal" (and occasionally, very rarely "Baby Metal") in unreliable sources like music sites and blogs.
  By the way, if you look at the article traffic statistics, it receives a considerable amount of views lately. I will try to find where the group was written about in the beginning of June. --Moscow Connection (talk) 19:32, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose, per WP:MOSTM: "avoid: REALTOR®, TIME, KISS". Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:37, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose a clear cut case here and the current time is not even remotely outrageous.--174.93.167.9 (talk) 03:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose, per MOS:ALLCAPS. Amazon gives "Babymetal". Kauffner (talk) 06:20, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Genre

Please don't revert cited material without reason. If you want to add any other genres, you need sources per WP:RS. Andrzejbanas (talk)

Requested move 14 November 2013

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 21:12, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

BabyMetal → Babymetal – The most common name is still "BABYMETAL", but it is followed at some distance by "Babymetal". Since Wikipedia guidelines prohibit all-caps, I propose to move the article to "Babymetal".

• The discography page on the official website uses "Babymetal × Kiba of Akiba" as the English title for the single. Here: [1].
• German Metal Hammer calls them "Babymetal". Here: [2].

Please move the article cause I don't think I saw the name written as "BabyMetal" anywhere. We should use a way of writing that has been used by reliable sources. The two listed above are the most reliable non-Japanese language sources that don't write it in all caps I've found. --Moscow Connection (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2013 (UTC) Moscow Connection (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support - seems fair enough. Amazon mostly uses the proposed form: [3]  — Amakuru (talk) 16:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Content dispute

User Moscow Connection has reverted me twice after I tried to add sourced material because he/she thinks its "irrelevant", "incorrect" and lacks sense. Since the explanation of their name is an obviously relevant information, I've added it back, this time with a direct link to the source instead of using Blabbermouth.net and with a minor rewording. I also grouped both new sentences in the same paragraph, since the previous layout was indeed a little confusing. The fact that they are working on a genre they haven't before is also relevant and taken from that same source. Both pieces of information are there, easily checkable. There is simply no valid reason for removing it. More of our opinions on the matter can be read here and here, but I will try to center the discussion here now. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 17:23, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

• Your edits really looked like someone had just discovered the band and was now adding nonsense to Wikipedia. (Sorry, no offense. :D)
  Is the expression "to have contact with metal" (you wrote "None of the members have ever had contact with heavy metal before") some sort of a word by word translation from Portuguese? Cause it sounded very strange. Now I have reworded it.
  To a person who have followed the band for awhile and have never heard the story before, it is quite obvious that the thing about "a newborn genre" is a newly invented explanation. This is precisely one of those controversial cases when a first-party source can't be used.
  By the way, do you realize that they weren't the ones who invented the band's name? Do you know what Sakura Gakuin is?
  You should listen to people who know about the subject a little bit more than you. Sorry. And thank you for adding the sentenсe about them not having known what heavy metal music was before the band was founded. I think it's a great contribution to the article. Moscow Connection (talk) 23:00, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Who cares if you know this better than me? Or when I discovered the band? And since when sourced information is nonsense? This is called a free encyclopedia for a reason, you know. But OK, since you refuse prefer to call my edits "nonsense" and to use discouraged arguments instead of actually providing a valid reason for removing the sourced origin of their name, I'll have to request external comments on this issue. Only after that we'll have it settled. This could have been so much easier, still don't understand why you prefer to make a war out of a small edit. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 00:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Requested a third opinion here, I will not edit the article again before someone makes a comment. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 00:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

By the way, I am sorry if you think that I am tryng to bully you. You see, I didn't intent to edit Wikipedia today, but I saw your addition and I thought it was so very wrong that I had to log in. You reverted, and I had to return again just because of that. I might have been too emotional, but I was just trying to restore the article to a normal state. To me, this story about the "baby" part is absolutely unbelievable, beyond any possibility. --Moscow Connection (talk) 02:54, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Read WP:SELFSOURCE (at least 1 and 4; probably also 2 since they obviously weren't the ones who invented the name and therefore couldn't actually know). I have provided a valid reason. You don't seem to listen. This is not a small matter. I see you trying to add a misleading statement (originally two misleading statements) to Wikipedia and I revert.
The only way for you to convince me would be to do a search for third-party sources dating a few years back and find an old third-party source.
(The other would be to use the Internet Waywack Machine to find an official definition for the Sakura Gakuin's heavy metal club and its band from back when it was founded. That would demonstrate what "baby" stood for originally.)
At present, all you have is a very recent interview. At, least, do some search and try to find some other source, anything. That would not convince me (see above), but at least that would give your claim some weight. I suspect you have already looked and found no sources except this interview. --Moscow Connection (talk) 01:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

3O Response: My interpretation of this source is that the musicians consider their own brand of metal to be a newborn, or 'baby' genre. It could be worthwhile to include this explanation, noting that this is what how the musicians interpret their group's name, or that this a new interpretation of the name Babymetal. If there was some previous or alternate definition of their name, it might be worthwhile to include that too, giving each one weight appropriate to its credibility. Note that this wouldn't have to take up a large chunk of the article, both descriptions could probably be described in a sentence or two. Breadblade (talk) 03:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

• KOBAMETAL (the band's producer) said in an interview to Nikkei Trendy Net: 「BABYMETALでは、メンバー3人のかわいらしさとメタルの激しさとのギャップ感を大切にしている。「ヘビーメタル」をもじった「BABYMETAL（ベビーメタル）」というネーミングは“お告げ”によって降りてきたものだが、“BABY”でかわいらしさ、“METAL”で激しさをわかりやすく示すことができ、また「新しいメタルが誕生する」という願いも込めて採用した。」
  In short, the name came to him by revelation (as a "divine message"). It is a play on the words "heavy metal". "Baby" may indicate cutess, "metal" — intensity. Also, he have came to liking to interpret it as "new metal is born". Something like this. Source: [4].
  Victor Lopes, could you please translate the section "Origin of the band's name" (that I've just added) for the Portuguese Wikipedia? Cause I decided to check what was going on there and you used the same interview, making it look like the name was originally meant to indicate a newborn genre. I am sorry for the reverts, but, as you may now see, I was right. (They are babies, that's why the group is called Babymetal. :D) --Moscow Connection (talk) 06:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Of course, you were so damn right that in the end you gave in to the third opinion kindly provided by Breadblade and did exactly what I was trying to do since the start. No, actually, you even created an entire section for that information, with one extra source, while I was happy enough with a minor sentence. And that extra source actually confirms what my source said. In other words, you made a mountain out of a molehill - for nothing. My job here is done, hope we can work peacefully next time I try to improve this article. Happy editing, Victão Lopes ^Fala! 13:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

The article now tells a completely different story. I added your version only as a newer interpretation. The current version about the "divine massage" makes perfect sense to me, which could not be said about what you wrote. :) Moreover, you added the info into the history section as if the band was intentionally named to mean it was of a "newborn genre". And I actually found a good source. I used Breadblade's exact words cause I liked the way he said it. --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

To be fair, there are at least three different stated reasons the band is named what it is (you may have to wait for me to grab the source that has the third one). All are technically valid in terms of reliability and understanding of the band. And IMO, the "naming" section should either be in the history section as a subsection or it should be completely merged into the section, perhaps near the beginning. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:23, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Moa and Yui articles

Due to WP:MUSBIO (#6), since both Moa and Yui are members of "two or more independently notable ensembles," Babymetal and Sakura Gakuin, it should be all good if they get their own articles (that is, if someone wants to make them). --Prosperosity (talk) 00:04, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

I want to make them! I will in a couple of days. Thank you for your suggestion! (Sadly, the Japanese Wikipedia didn't have the same rule the last time I checked.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 08:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Rewrite

The whole article needs a complete rewrite because it has badly written English. 178.167.254.148 (talk) 08:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)