Talk:Kahi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 201.16.244.186 (talk) at 21:57, 14 September 2010 (→‎Continued discussion: added Comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography Stub‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconKorea Stub‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Korean popular culture working group.

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: No consensus, Page not moved  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Kahi (entertainer) → Park Kahi —

  • Park Kahi is a better fit and does not cause disruption as a disambigious title. We already know they are entertainers but what kind of entertainers and also do we place (entertainers) beside actors as well. Relisted. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 19:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC) EunSoo (talk) 05:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "entertainer" is the descriptor used to disambiguate, or clarify, what Kahi article this is. Because there already is a Kahi article, entertainer needs to be used so that it becomes a separate page. (Whether or not Kahi the district is more notable than Kahi the entertainer is debatable, but not for here.) Again, Kahi makes more sense for the page name as she does not use Park Kahi professionally, although her surname is known. As such, Kahi makes more sense. SKS (talk) 17:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay u make it sound as if it absolutely must be (entertainer) no it doesn't have to be (entertainer) and again should be a last resort. Why use entertainer when she has a last name and is also primarily known as Park Kahi. You still don't understand what I am saying eh. It's not like Kahi isn't in the title Park Kahi but it is also secondly popular to Kahi. EunSoo (talk) 17:24, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Entertainer is still not an appropriate title as it is a general word. A grand example Prince (musician) so why is Kahi the entertainer?? Doesn't deserve to have her own title? EunSoo (talk) 03:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, before I go on -- please note that these aren't hard rules. There are exceptions to each rule. Prince, for some reason, is one of them. I believe it stems from the fact that his guitar skills are what he's most known for, and musician encompasses both "singer" and "guitarist". But he's one exception out of many. Entertainer refers to someone who "entertains" beyond just one field of the entertainment industry. Like I mentioned to you before, Madonna, Monica, and Usher are listed as "entertainers" because they do more than just singing. Again, you can find exceptions, but that's the reasoning. So to summarize:
  1. Per WP:COMMONNAME, a person who goes by a mononym/single name professionally or a stage name should have his/her article under that name. For example, Lady Gaga is under Lady Gaga, not under her real name. As Park Kahi uses just "Kahi", the article should be under Kahi.
  2. As there already is another article under Kahi, this article has to be distinguished, or disambiguated, from the other article. As she started off as a dancer and has since become a singer, "entertainer" as a term works best because it encompasses both terms. Kahi (singer) is also an acceptable way of naming the article, but I think that other editors have decided that "entertainer" works best.
Because Kahi (entertainer) is the most "correct" name using Wikipedia guidelines, it will be difficult to convince others to move it elsewhere unless you can demonstrate why it needs to be done. (Again, I don't know if the current "Kahi" article is more notable than this Korean singer, but that's another debate, not for here.) Because of that, you'll probably run into a lot of resistance from all over Wikipedia, as you can see over at the talk page for Rain. I hope this all makes sense. SKS (talk) 04:27, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No it doesn't make sense that's why I am challenging this topic. Because your rules say one thing but then editors say another. And the rules don't say that titles can't be changed. Kahi annd Park Kahi are what she is commonly known as. And since Kahi is taken it would only be best that Park Kahi be next in line. And Wikipedia goes by the what the person commonly does and Kahi is primarily and foremost a singer. So why is she title entertainer??? It doesn't make sense. To me it seems like editors are being slopy in their titles and that's why people say Wikipedia is inconsistent (I actually read that in a news article some time ago). It's either one or the other. Side Note: Google Kahi and Park Kahi and you will see what I mean. Allkpop, Dramabeans and Kpop News all title her as either Kahi or Park Kahi. EunSoo (talk) 04:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per WP:AT, use of Park Kahi as the page title would be the natural mode of disambiguation. "If there is a natural mode of disambiguation in standard English, as with Cato the Elder and Cato the Younger, use that instead." I am surprised the discusssion about this one seems so heated. To me, the move, as proposed, seems obvious. Rejectwater (talk) 11:50, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would like to express my concern that this proposal is being "lumped in" with other proposals made by EunSoo all at around the same time. I believe all these proposals were made in good faith, and I strongly urge all editors to take each proposal on a case-by-case basis. Rejectwater (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Rejectwater. The article needs to be disambiguated one way or the other, and parenthetical qualifiers should be avoided when there's a more natural option available. Jafeluv (talk) 12:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Jafeluv. Doesn't make sense to have bracketed title when there is already a more suitable one free of usage. Karry145 (talk) 15:08, 8 June 2010 (UTC) Stricken as known sock of the nominator - see here. Dpmuk (talk) 22:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]
  • Comment: For all the supporters re: "naturalness of name", established consensus seems to indicate (I'm assuming it's an interpretation of WP:COMMONNAME and WP:DAB, because to be honest, I can't find an actual policy) that names of BLP articles should be under the professional name, and disambiguated from that point onwards (see Madonna (entertainer), Monica (entertainer), Usher (entertainer), Prince (musician), Iman (model), etc.). Beyoncé Knowles is the one exception that I can find, although I believe the argument stems from the fact that she was credited under her full name for acting or something. Anyway, as stated earlier, Kahi does not use her surname, nor has she been credited under her full name in her professional career. As such, why should this article be under her full name? And if we go that route, should all the articles that I listed as examples be moved as well? SKS (talk) 16:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:COMMONNAME is for titling articles such as Bill Clinton and Gordie Howe, where "Common usage in reliable sources is preferred to technically correct but rarer forms", however it does not deal with disambiguation. Madonna, obviously, is known as Madonna, however the term "Madonna" on Wikipedia is ambiguous, as is "Kahi". For these situations we turn to WP:PRECISION, which is where I took my quote from above ("If there is a natural mode of disambiguation in standard English, as with Cato the Elder and Cato the Younger, use that instead."). So, yes, in my case I would certainly support the renaming of Usher (entertainer) to Usher Raymond, Madonna (entertainer) to Madonna Ciccone, etc, because that is the natural mode of disambiguation; disambiguation is necessary in those cases, and the use of the surname of the individual is, as I am reading it, the preferred way to achieve it. It is my understanding that the use of disambiguators in parantheses is a mode of last resort. Rejectwater (talk) 00:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:QUALIFIER seems to indicate otherwise, as it lists Prince (musician) as acceptable (and endorsed) as opposed to putting it under his birth name. SKS (talk) 03:29, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, though it also states "If disambiguation can be achieved more naturally by using different name forms (as described previously on this page), then this is done", and uses James Stephen Smith, better known as "Steve Smith" as an example of avoiding disambiguators. As another example, we have The Vanguard Group rather than Vanguard (firm). I would argue that Prince (musician) is a bad example for WP:QUALIFIER. Rejectwater (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, I accidently posted another post here so came across it. 박가희 in Google translator says "Bakgahui" which is the same as "Park Kahi". I also Googled "박가희" and found this kahipark it's not news proof but it's her own page right so I guess that counts. Urgenine (talk) 21:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC) Stricken as known sock of the nominator - see here. Dpmuk (talk) 22:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]
I found news proof in Korean 박가희, "가출 이후 7년동안 아버지와 연락 안했다" (Translate: Bakgahui, "seven years after he ran away and did not touch") Urgenine (talk) 21:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would like to visit the idea of Googling "Park Kahi", so I did- the search generated 689,000 hits, and the first few pages of results were nearly all for this entertainer. One example is found at this page. Rejectwater (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I think a major problem for how she is to be known in English is that very few reliable sources in English have picked up on her and her group. I'm going to chuck a spanner in the works: she's also known as "Park Gahee", which gets more Google hits than "Park Kahi". Korean Wikipedian knows her as 가희, i.e. "GaHee", and her real name is not "Park Kahi", but 박지영, i.e. Park Ji Young. Fences&Windows 21:27, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • p.s. And could Korean speakers please add reliable sources to verify this article and improve it? Surely the content is more important than the title? Fences&Windows 21:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Move? (2)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: page not moved Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kahi (entertainer) → Park Kahi —

  • First move request was right it page should go by most common name Park Kahi UltraMiracle (talk) 07:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not even remotely uncontroversial given that they were moved to these locations as the resulted of a requested move only about a month ago. Normally I'd start the discussion myself but I don't think starting a discussion is worthwhile as I think it qualifies for a speedy close (given how recent the last discussion was and the lack of presentation of new evidence). Also reluctant to start a discussion as I strongly suspect sockpuppetry (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/InkHeart). I've just removed this from the "uncontroversial" section twice without adding here and left a descriptive edit summary both times, but as I've been reverted twice I'll put it here for someone else to review. Dpmuk (talk) 10:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Move? (3)

Kahi (entertainer) → Park Kahi — Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From User talk:Anthony Appleyard#RE: Kahi (entertainer) move

  • This page move was heavily contested, and ended up not going through, with a user and his/her many sockpuppets being banned. Looks like another sock has returned, but you still allowed the page to get moved, even though you declined it about a month earlier due to the sock issues. Can I ask what happened? SKS (talk) 22:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That move was requested in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=382419419#Uncontroversial_requests . I have now moved the page back to Kahi (entertainer). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:40, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why was this reverted? When the poster said there was proof of correct naming? Reading the first move there were 4 Comments, 2 Supports and 1 Oppose that is not heavily contested? It just seems like there wasn't enough time for proper consensus. 201.88.202.10 (talk) 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • It was reverted because you're banned, User:InkHeart. "The poster" was you. As a banned user your edits are not welcome and can be reverted without further explanation. -- zzuuzz (talk) 08:07, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Continued discussion

  • Please try to clear up this confusion. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:08, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as there is evidence and she is generally called Park Kahi. 96.45.189.199 (talk) 05:14, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: My points from the previous discussion still stand. Moving it to Park Kahi would go against established conventions. And considering that most of the support came from a user and related socks.... SKS (talk) 16:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A majority of the first move was in agreeance to the Park Kahi move. The Comments made by Rejectwater and others had supported it with evidence that Park Kahi was more appropriate. 221.112.63.4 (talk) 18:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comments made by the same person under different accounts and/or IPs don't count. That's what most of the "support" votes were. SKS (talk) 21:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Are you blind?
1 | Support Per WP:AT, use of Park Kahi as the page title would be the natural mode of disambiguation. "If there is a natural mode of disambiguation in standard English, as with Cato the Elder and Cato the Younger, use that instead." I am surprised the discusssion about this one seems so heated. To me, the move, as proposed, seems obvious. Rejectwater (talk) 11:50, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2 | Support per Rejectwater. The article needs to be disambiguated one way or the other, and parenthetical qualifiers should be avoided when there's a more natural option available. Jafeluv (talk) 12:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The votes were 2-1. Everything else were Comments. You should know considering Rejectwater went against your Comment SKS. [Yes, though it also states "If disambiguation can be achieved more naturally by using different name forms (as described previously on this page), then this is done", and uses James Stephen Smith, better known as "Steve Smith" as an example of avoiding disambiguators. As another example, we have The Vanguard Group rather than Vanguard (firm). I would argue that Prince (musician) is a bad example for WP:QUALIFIER. Rejectwater (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)]201.16.244.186 (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kahi&oldid=384870785"