Jump to content

Talk:AKB48/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

"Unnecessary info", "Fantalk" and other friendly buzzwords

Shame to see someone trying to erase my addition to this article by resorting to flimsy excuses like this, but since I was "kindly" asked to debate the usefulness of my paragraph, let me paste it in here for scrutiny and approval.

AKB48 and its sister groups boost their record sales by a variety of marketing strategies. Like many other contemporary musical acts, the singles and albums are released in different editions and types with alternate album-cover pictures, B-side tracks, video DVDs, collectible member pictures and event tickets. In conjunction with the annual general election contest, voting coupons are also contained inside the single usually shipping during the summer period, although there're always multiple ways for fans to cast their votes without buying a specific edition of the single. This can be done by logging in one of the official fanclub mobile applications and the like, basically allowing up to 10 "alternate" ways of voting not bound by any CD purchase.[1][2][3] In spite of a widespread misconception that these votes must be inevitably tied in with a rise in CD purchases, third-party market researches actually revealed that over one third of the votes every year are cast through mobile applications and not using CD ballots.[4][5]

My question is. How is any of it "unnecessary" or "fantalk"? Since there's a paragraph analyzing how AKB operates with their sales promotions, shouldn't it be necessary to clarify how these elections actually work, instead of stupefying the reader with misconceptions ("one must purchase tons of CD to access these elections", FALSE) and articles bordering on urban legends ("fans reportedly bought thousands of CDs to yadda yadda", but in reality none of the sourced articles contain any firsthand confessions and are written by people whose knowledge can't possibly go further than simple Internet hearsays).

To add even more irony to this revert, while removing this part from the article Rka001 felt like reinserting a whole paragraph in the Controversy section about a fat comedian calling AKB "shame of Japan" (?) during one of his ungenuine tirades.

Now, I want you to tell me: which part is the informative one and which one "inflates the article with unnecessary info" that we could frankly do without? Answer me sincerely.

Addendum: To top it all, Akimoto never advanced the idea of an "all-star" group to perform at the Tokyo Olympics. In reality, this was just a wild Internet rumor which unfortunately happened to grow its own pair of feet, and which was debunked and officially denied many days before that crass Guardian article was even published, as proven by native Japanese reports such as this and this. So, in other words, not only the (dis)info is not "verified" at all, unlike what Rka001 boldly claims, but it all makes Matsuko Deluxe's reaction more uncalled-for and absolutely NOT worthy of being recorded inside an encyclopedic entry if not out of simple malice. Now, if you please, I'll delete that eyesore from the entry, since the only reason for it to be there has been proven wrong.

Bullpup11 (talk) 02:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the 10 alternate voting methods, can you provide the specific articles that illustrate this? Your references are just pointing to the main election page for each year. Also how do you distinguish between someone using their mobile app to register their vote having purchased their CD/digital download single and these other methods? Is there a subscription fanclub where members get to vote without having to buy the single, but having already purchased the app? If there are other methods like signing up for a service, or using AKB48 frequent buyer points, that can be briefly added but I don't see how it can replace the existing paragraphs. -AngusWOOF (talk) 02:24, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, what I actually linked are the pages of the official election website pertaining to the voting methods. In the case of the 27th single homepage, I admit I should've provided a straight link, but the section explaining how to vote is still there and can be freely reached by clicking the menu on top. By clicking on arrow/plus signs on the side of each voting method you are redirected to a page or a drop-down box with further details on how to use each -- to make a long story short most these fanclub apps are subscription-only with a cheap monthly fee, they are normally used for booking theater tickets and accessing premium content (such as interviews, videos, etc... in the case of the Live of Demand service it's entire recordings of theater performances) but during the period of the general election they provide one extra service, which is allowing the owner to cast one vote per app. As for a graphical illustration on how to perform the task with each app/subscription service, I think nothing is more official than the instruction videos they published on their own YouTube page for their fifth and sixth yearly election (it seems a guide for their fourth yearly election was also posted on their profile once, but it is now set to private, hope the other two are sufficient enough). As you can see in order to vote a fan has to access through a completely different site for each of these methods, which makes it easy to detect how the vote was cast.
Bullpup11 (talk) 03:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
It is correct, one can vote via several methods, but this doesnt add a bit pf usefulness to the article. The article is very inflated anyway, and where is the extra benefit of adding all voting methods? There is none. Please read WP:Fancruft and WP:Not. We have agreed long time ago that the article does not need information that only fans would benefit from. About Matsuko Deluxe, please be aware that Wikipedia is only reporting the issue, we are not taking sides. We also do not review the role of "fat comedians" (a very gross statement to begin with), we do review that a very reliable source (The Guardian) reported about an issue that made it to several japanese news outlets. Its a controversy that made it to western news - so you might reword it as you like, but do not remove sourced content from reliable sources, because you dont like it. Rka001 (talk) 08:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
User:AngusWOOF explained it quite well with his last edit. We are interested in Yui Yokoyama becoming the next GM, but we are simply not interested in Takahashi stating she would stay a year longer to let Yui adapt to her new role. This is a prime example of unnecessary fan talk. Rka001 (talk) 08:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I found an article that summarized the fan club voting rights. [1] so I put that line into the article. -AngusWOOF (talk) 15:17, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
1) The mention of multiple voting methods dispels much of the bunk reposted in this article regarding the necessity to buy CDs, if not hundreds (!) of them, in order of access the election. The fact that market researches revealed 1/3 of the votes every year come from such mobile apps and not by inputing coupon codes shows that it makes up quite a big chunk of the voting process, which should be hard for anyone to ignore, beyond all simplistic English-language reports written by less than brilliant journalists. Since CD sales for this group seems to still be a hot button topic for many outsiders, then it would be necessary to actually lay down the facts as they are. The fact that many of the aforementioned journalists failed to take the first step of checking the official website for informations and instead kept propagating the misconception that elections means buying tons of CDs is, if anything, proof that English reports about Japanese showbiz are not reliable enough to be trusted. Then again, why do we need to rely on English articles when the group is Japanese, works mainly in Japan and is aimed at a Japanese audience?
2) Gratuitous television dissing, especially if not spurred by any official statement from AKB or its managemente is NOT encyclopedic material, no matter how much you sugarcoat it. It adds nothing informative to the reader, not to mention that a "controversy" is something more than someone belching out unpleasant words on a blog or a TV program. Also, in case you don't know, for years Matsuko Deluxe's job on television (other than dressing in a drag, of course), has been pretending to be a contrarian about everyone and everything, which makes this time's utterance nothing special or newsworthy. I don't see anyone citing "his" statements regarding politicians and showpersons on their respective entries, so why this should be an exception for such a trifling remark? You are so concerned about the content of this article growing exponentially, yet you seem too care too much about adding such a meaningless fluff paragraph.
3) I repeat, the content and premise (Akimoto proposing an "all-star" group to perform at the Olympics) has been proven bunk many days before the Guardian source, and the rest of the article reads pretty much like a low-quality tabloid filler rather than a Pulitzer-winning newspiece (es.: "One user [on 2ch] said...", "A commenter on Japan Today wrote...", who are they kidding with this garbage?). This alone should tell you something about what sort of piece of trash you're defending here. It may have been made to the Western media, but beyond the irrelevant content, the way it is presented makes it even less worth of being remembered on an encyclopedic entry for the years to come. This Guardian article has a reliability that numbers in the negatives and it only exists for cheap click-baiting, make no mistake.
4) If you are so desperate for a "critics" opinion to be thrown into this entry (as I presume is the reason you are so adamant about keeping that tabloid-esque Guardian reference but not, say, an explanation of how the election process really works), then I can provide you with tons of better citations from real pop-culture experts like Uno Tsunehiro, Kobayashi Yoshinori or Sayawaka, you don't need to pick up the first thing that the cat dragged in.
5) It is sad that by hiding behind meaningless buzzwords like "fantalk" we are giving free reins to clueless outsiders to edit thie entry at will -- it's not a wonder that, compared to other Japanese music acts here on the English Wikipedia, much of this article ended up reading like a confused patchwork of insignificant trivia which they came across by mistake on some lazy English-language news site (or a glorified blog still persisting on the "crazy weird Japan" stereotype). Not only it does little justice to AKB48, but it is also insulting for the casual reader who comes to this page thinking he's going to learn anything more useful. Wikipedia should be a repository of vital cross-checked facts, not a place where to dispose of any trivia and "curio" you find on the Internet. To think I was planning on adding in the following days a small paragraph concerning how to access "handshake events" and the difference between 全国握手会 and 個別握手会, since this is another topic surrounded by deep-seated misconceptions that need to be clarified after tons of useless English-language articles poisoned the well. However, I guess that according to the standards set by Rka001 this is going to be "fantalk" not different from writing a whole paragraph about Haruka Shimazaki's favorite ice cream flavor, so if even the keepers of this page care nothing about its decorum, what use is proposing any real improvement?
Bullpup11 (talk) 17:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
The fanclub/mobile app is still a more recent voting method. It still does not dispel that prior to that the gimmick resulted in multiple CDs being bought for the purposes of garnering more ballots. If you have stats for 2014 that show that 1/3 of the votes cast were not from purchased singles, that can be added to the paragraph. But regardless, the ballots are still being acquired by purchasing AKB48 product. -AngusWOOF (talk) 17:48, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Regarding the Olympics controversy, that Akimoto is on the Olympic committee is encyclopedic and can be kept on his article, as well as its criticism/response, but give the responses due WP:WEIGHT. If one entertainer does not like the appointment, are there others with a similar opinion? However, if he hasn't actually proposed AKB48 to participate in the Olympic ceremonies, then leave it out per WP:BALL for now. He might pull rank on that some time, and by then it will have encyclopedic impact. -AngusWOOF (talk) 18:05, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
The fanclub/mobile app thing started ever since the first general election in 2009, as proven by the official guidelines published at the time, with more and more voting options being added as new group-specific apps were made available. The official sources I graciously provided prove that JapanTimes (...) article largely incorrect, in that it definitely isn't just a thing that started in 2013 as it purports. The "point-accumulation" part isn't even reflected by any official statement and is possibly a fabrication of the journalist (the lack of any sort of link on that article makes it impossible for me to check where they got it from). Not least, there is no such thing as a "point-accumulation" program in AKB (I remember there used to be one with Passpo, but never with AKB). The closest I can find to this fabled "loyalty program" is a page about a defunct service where points are awarded with monthly renewal, but the "prize" here is downloadable content such as wallpapers and Chaku-Uta tunes. The voting service is provided to anyone with an app installed on their device, as plainly stated in the instructions instead. Again, it is tragic we have to resort to vastly less reliable and vastly less authoritative sources just because they're written in English. - Bullpup11 (talk) 18:16, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Ok, got it. I reworded that sentence to include the fan club and apps and removed the parentheses as that has been there since the first election. -AngusWOOF (talk) 18:39, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
What happened is that apparently some newspaper brought up the topic of a possible JPN48 appearance at Tokyo2020, to which Matsuko Deluxe responded as he did. This made all news outlets in Japan, and then western media as well. If something about AKB48 appears on the Guardian, we want to look at its encyclopedic value anyway. In the end, Akimoto denied any of these plans on his 755. Its a story about how AKB is recepted in and outside of Japan. The reception of AKB48 is definitely controversial, and we might want to reflect on that in our article.
That said, dear Bullpup11, you dont have to defend AKB48 here, as we are not attacking them. We only collect information about the band that we might find useful and encyclopedic. This includes bad news as well. We dont take sides, we report whats on the media. I dont like the subject as well, i think Matsuko is crying for attention, i dont care if AKB48 is going to appear in 2020, as i wont be interested in that group anymore. So, i have included all your criticism in that two sentences. They now report what happened, and i think its of encyclopedic value.
You should definitely read some import wikipedia guidelines. This article has been a prime example of fancruft, and it is now in a more or less acceptable state. With that in mind, a guide to handshake events might be extremely useful for fans - go for wiki48 instead, they accept new editors just now. And btw, stage48 features a handshake event guide already. But a handshake event guide here at wikipedia? Are you serious? Content that is directly and only targetting the fandom? Again, WP:Fancruft. The same is true for the voting procedere. I might add: I know everything about voting, because i have personally organised more than 500 votes for my favourite member in the last two sousenkyos. I even typed in every single code myself. I am a big fan of 48G, and i have spent thousands of bucks on them. But that is not the message. The message is: What is important for the non-fan to know within the scope of this article? The fact that you can vote your favourite members (and songs) once per year, presumably by buying cds. Yes, there are up to 12 different ways to vote. But thats meaningless for the target audience of this article (most of the additional ways to vote are not availabe for foreign persons, anyway). If you want - and i am cool with it - you can add a "among others" to the paragraph somewhere. But listing all extra ways to vote plus a vote distribution chart? WP:NOT. Other things we definitely not need are reverse theory finding. We state - and its a known fact - that sales are increased due to clever marketing. You dont need to add that others do that as well. We know for sure that sousenkyo singles are by far the best selling singles each year because of the voting ticket. You dont need to post a counter-hypothesis, because we dont post a theory, we present facts.
As a last thing: Please try to stay calm on all these things. We had serious cases of vandalism from haters here , incl. severe wrongdoings by a certain anime fan, who has been recently banned, and guys demanding the deletion of every individual member article, because they were not notable. This article is a honeypot, and you wont survive here for long, if you are tilted easily whenever you feel AKB is "critized". Feel free to add anything, but please read the relevant wiki guidelines and be civil. Noone here likes to argue about this article. Actually, it was quite a silent area the last couple of months. Take home message: When you edit wikipedia, forget about your fandom. Free yourself of bias.

@Angus: I never have heard of "accumulating points" for the fan clubs. Afaik, you just need to be a member there and gets one vote per membership. Rka001 (talk) 18:48, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

No worries. That was from that Japan Times article where the writer mentioned points, but the ameblo.jp article is a much better RS (even if it's primary) for addressing the content of whether you can vote without buying a single. The specifics of which non-single methods were used every year can vary (whether it uses Docomo or Passpo or a newly created app is not particularly notable). As for the percentage of votes by non-single methods, that can be empirically calculated from the number of total votes cast vs. number of election singles purchased for that voting period. -AngusWOOF (talk) 19:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
That was a good edit. Thank you. Exactly as broad and short as we need them. Btw, we state that f.e. in 2014 2.4 millions votes were cast - this exceeds the sales of Labrador Retriever anyway, so the interested reader can already see what is going there. I am however strongly against showing vote distributions. Thats a textbook case of excessive statistics, as described in WP:NOT. This article still needs to be shorter. Bullpup11, you see: Most of your ideas are actually incorporated in the article. Maybe not in the way you wanted them to be, but anyway, the article has been improving since yesterday. I might add that Japan Times has never written an unbiased or good article on AKB48.Rka001 (talk) 19:12, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
As a sidenote, The Telegraph is now reporting on the Olympics issue as well. Its basically the same opinion piece as the Guardian, but we would be terrible editors if we would outright ignore the sheer fact that AKB48 is making western media mainstream with this story, in a very controversial way. With my wording as proposed, we also indirectly correct whats on western news (the "Akimoto has brought it up himself"-storyline). So, i would like to ask you to consider my version of the news as acceptable, before other guys come in and bring that up themselves in a more troublesome way. Thank you. Rka001 (talk) 19:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
The reliability of Japan Times and English news blogs like Tokyohive can be brought up as a separate topic. I'm hoping the article can be cited with more Japanese RS'es. But the fact that journalists from RS'es (Billboard, Washington Post, Guardian, CNN) are writing in English and might not have all their details straight doesn't mean they are suddenly unreliable. -AngusWOOF (talk) 19:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Heh, what's funny is that the Telegraph article is referencing Wikipedia for its info :), although what they quoted is connected to reliable sources (Washington post, AKB48 video). -AngusWOOF (talk) 19:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, mainstream media guy often uses wiki. Thats how this interplay between us looking for reliable sources and the reliable sources looking for us is getting complicated. But anyway, we should not expect all the western media guys getting their facts right all the time. AKB is just not that important for "real research" i guess. So, they mostly write off from each others. But then, things are getting notable, and then we need to react. That said, i do like tokyohive, but i dislike Japan Times for their clear bias. Tokyohive may not have the journalistic profile, but it doesnt have this obvious agenda as JT. But i am not against using them. Just with a grain of alertness. I cannot revert my own edit regarding this now very notable issue back in to the article, as we are now under 3RR, and i certainly dont want to bring a new editor to ANI on their first day. Tomorrow, ill start a new attempt. Maybe they are then listening to reason. I clearly dont see why this shouldnt be brought under controversies. If i have ever see a controversy, then in this case. Rka001 (talk) 19:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
The Telegraph manages to be even sloppier than the Guardian article (which, incidentally, it references in a sort of Internet version of the telephone game, or the human centipede if you wish), to the point they even mistakenly embedded a music video by Kyary Pamyu Pamyu thinking it was from AKB. Honestly, this is a great proof of why something written on an "authoritative" news site does not make the news itself "authoritative" by transition and needs to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. It's funny you now want to keep the detail about the gossip here in order to correct the misconceptions that the propagation of such a gossip might have created, but this sort of preemptive damage control also ends up supporting my opinion that the entry has to expanded on how elections, handshake events and other faux-"controversial" matter actually works since they're also the target of misconceptions. Let's not pretend those matters are anything different to the eyes of outsiders and other assorted rubberneckers, please. - Bullpup11 (talk) 20:41, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
You still seem to under some misconceptions about what Wikipedia is and what not. We dont need any expansion on any of the things you mentioned - because we dont want to explain them in unnecessary detail anyway. We need to report that there are handshakes and elections, and this is what we do. But we do not give detailed insights on their procedures because these are not the scope of this article. Especially not in hindsight of anything you might find "controversial". Again, have you read ALL the guidelines that i have recommended to you? Rka001 (talk) 21:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Which info are you referring to? We have already included most of his proposals (except for his prosaic member glorification :P). We are certainly not going to have detailed guides on handshakes, and you well know that. Rka001 (talk) 14:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't remember anymore... I was just passing by and decided to look at the talk page... (I removed it from my watchlist last March or so. Cause it was too annoying.) --Moscow Connection (talk)

References

  1. ^ "AKB48 27thシングル選抜総選挙".
  2. ^ "AKB48 32ndシングル 選抜総選挙 投票受付開始しました".
  3. ^ "AKB48 37thシングル 選抜総選挙 :投票方法".
  4. ^ "政治山調査特別編「AKB48 22nd シングル 選抜総選挙　投票分析結果」".
  5. ^ "政治山調査特別編「AKB48 27th シングル 選抜総選挙 投票分析結果」 (2/3)".

romaji

AKB48 (Hepburn: A.K.B. forty-eight) ...

Is the parenthesis at all necessary? Is it even honest to describe forty-eight as a Hepburn romanization of 48? If it's pronounced in Japanese as (quasi)English, maybe the Hepburn spelling ought to be something like ekebi fotieto. —Tamfang (talk) 07:51, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree it does not need to be Nihongo'ed as the term is in English and they don't publish a standard Hepburn romanization. Other options presented:

The second option is a nice gesture but the "River" song where they announce their group name right away sure sounds like regular English to me. So I would go with (read "A.K.B. forty-eight") AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 13:44, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

2015 election

Speaking of Japan Times, need a different citation for the total vote count for this year's election if you don't like that source. I also removed the synthesis regarding that the 2nd and 3rd place got more votes than Mayu Watanabe did for 2014. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:54, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Citations needed for chapter expansion

I feel the impact of AKB48 and its sister groups on the entertainment industry hasnt been really touched. We basically only have "In addition to dancing and singing, members are promoted by the Japanese mass media.[5] AKB48 regularly hosts "handshake events", where fans can meet the group.[5]" in the concept section, which is a bit small given that during their heyday it was entirely impossible to avoid AKB48. It would be interesting to have statistics about total tv appearances (total hours per year), commercials (a list of brands would be sufficient), standings in the Nikkei Power Rankings, big talent agencies signing AKB48 members, and such. If we find the sources, we can also state that this impact is already declining. Rka001 (talk) 14:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

The Japanese version of this article already has a "tie-in" sub-section listing all the commercial campaigns in which a certain AKB song (and AKB members, along with that) has been featured. This is not to say that it's all the commercial campaigns where AKB appeared, but it's already a comprehensive resource, seeing that the overwhelming majority of CMs featuring AKB had obviously also one of their songs used as background music. This site also keeps track of the commercials currently on air on Japanese TV (by clicking on the link, you'll be taken to the "Idol" category where AKB pretty much dominates the rankings). It's somewhat hard to browse through, but by clicking on the idol names, you'll also be taken to their personal profile, where is a short history of the CMs in which they appeared individually along with a tally of their total appearances.
Edit: Looks like the Japanese wiki also has an article with a complete list of all CMs AKB has appeared in. So feel free to ignore the previous paragraph and use this other reference instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullpup11 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I think lists of the members' individual talent agencies are already available on the Stage48 wiki and 48pedia, as part of the team members' overview. All we need to do is just to check the　individual agencies' homepage one by one and link to their "Female talent" section　if you need any official reference.
Regarding the statistics about total TV appearances, there's this other site calculating the number of TV shows and total air time. The calculations for 2015 are, obviously, still in progress, but you can browse the rankings for the past years just by clicking on the arrows. Again, this is the idol section but to claim the impact is somewhat "declining" (enough to crystallize the statement in an encyclopedic entry, where there's only room for fait-accomplis) is somewhat ridiculous. AKB is at the top for 3 consecutive years, with a number of TV programs still 2 or 3 times greater than the second best competitor.
Finally: "If we find the sources, we can also state that this impact is already declining". I'm sorry, but I have to say it irks me quite a lot when people make "contributions" to this article only to add negative details, or slant the perception of the reader toward a negative bias by citing dubious "sources" (a la JapanTimes). I don't see these sort of remarks happening on other entertainment entries, so I'd rather avoid doing it here as well. There's also many people out there who, so to speak, are trying to sell the bear's skin before the beast is killed, and it's quite silly to give any sort of empty self-validation to their equally empty claims. So, no, thank you. Bullpup11 (talk) 02:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Well we don't need a fully-detailed list of CM products and sponsors for AKB48. If there are major ones, that can be summarized in a paragraph with the appropriate references as with Michael Jordan. As for the TV time and supposed decline, that should be referenced so that we're not drawing the connections. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:54, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Of course, I don't say I want (nor do expect) the article to include a complete list of them. Just a summary with a stress on those brands and companies that AKB had endorsed for multiple years in a row would be more than enough.
Speaking of sections that need improvement and expansion, the "Musical style" is another. As of now it's laughable to say the least, and even somewhat insulting. Some parts are even plain wrong (I don't know who this Monica Hesse is, but I don't remember any member sporting pigtails -- even the closest thing to it, twintails, is far from prevalent, which makes me question her knowledge about the rest). The truth is that AKB has experimented in more genres than some snobbish journalists are willing to admit (to name a few major examples off my top of my head: Sakura no Shiori could as well be a church choral, Give Me Five and a few theater songs experimented with live instruments played by part of the members, Heart Ereki is an open throwback to 1960s Group Sounds, not to mention the countless rock instrumentals in stage songs), and I think it deserves an abundant acknowledgment.
I'm just throwing proposals out for now, but if no one is willing to pick up the task, I'll endeavor to do it myself whenever I have the time. Bullpup11 (talk) 04:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I certainly wasnt trying to add a negative connotation to the article. Thats kinda funny in the light of the conflicts i had with Ryulong who wanted to do just that. It irritated me that the article fails to show AKB48's massive impact on japanese contemporary culture, and i am happy someone is going to pick up this previously abandoned area. It will definitely improve the article by a lot. My proposal was to add a word or two about a possible decline, if we find a reliable source for it. If not, fine. People are telling me that a lot in recent months, but i have yet to find clear proof for that notion. No need to get overly defensive again. Rka001 (talk) 18:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Talking about declines is kind of like sports teams and their windows of opportunities to win championships, or predicting stock prices/corporate earnings even if they come from these "reliable source" analysts. Lots of WP:CRYSTAL going on. I'd wait until they lose their stranglehold of number-one singles or millions sold to stir up the news. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
I agree. They have what 10 TV shows and even then the group's stars constantly appear on the biggest normal TV shows. Like someone somewhere else put it, they've grown from a musical group into a TV show phenomenon. I also see little to no mentions of their TV shows in the article. Why is this? Maybe add a small subsection to Promotion and media where it details this a bit. --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 06:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
I noticed there are a few listed TV shows under the other article Filmography, but it doesn't really aptly describe the TV phenomenon as it just lists them (also, the list is outdated). I still think there could be a short description. Maybe add some description to Filmography (not the article but the section here). --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 07:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Number Updates

I have tried to update the many numbers given in the articles, which were partially very old or even contradictory (for example, in the concept section the number for the highest member count ever was given with 92, and later in the text, its clearly stated that there are actually many more members (sidenote: If anyone wants to look up a reference: The highest member count must have been present during the time when AKB48 featured around 50 "part time members", must have been around 170 then)). Generally, maybe someone has the time to read the entire article and streamline the possibly still existing contradictions and outdated numbers, especially for CD sales. I would still be very happy if someone can look up numbers and reliable sources for other activities: Featured articles, news mentions, fashion and gravure pictorials (we still dont report the close cooperation between Weekly Playboy and AKB48?), TV appearances (as a group (musical performances) and individually (variety and drama)), Nikkei Idol power rankings and so on. We also give also only very small hints for the virtually dozens of AKB48 related TV shows that have appeared and disappeared, or are still running, through the years. tl,dr: The article was partially outdated, and it is still not touching important topics. Rka001 (talk) 21:50, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Member Punishment

I would be happy if someone could obtain reliable sources to remove or alter the statement that members are punished for misbehaviour. A quick reality check shows that this is statement - while certainly true until Minegishi Minami's headshaving scandal - is not valid anymore. Very notable members (including Kashiwagi Yuki, Miyazawa Sae, Watanabe Miyuki) have been - with or without any substantial background - exposed in yellow press scandals with no obvious punishment by the management. Even less popular members like HKT48's Murashige Anna were not fired despite being photographed while dating men. In the case of Kashiwagi Yuki - of whom revealing pictures were released - the main producer even stated that the punishment was up to the fans, and no action was taken by the management. While some girls indeed (apparently deliberately) resigned from SKE48 and Nogizaka46, respectively, following exposure of their private life, it is clear that the statement as given in the concept section is outdated. It should be changed accordingly. Rka001 (talk) 22:07, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on AKB48. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:45, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Generations information

I removed the timeline for the Generations. Having records of the tenures of each generation of members involves way too much original research and fancruft. If you want to mention SEED or early names for the trainees, that can be integrated into the history along with the references. Also any sourcing of graduations of members can be done at the List of former members of AKB48 or the individual bios if the member is Wikipedia-notable. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:52, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Record Sales

Just in: The real reason why Oricon and Billboard/Soundscan numbers differ so much since last year, is that Oricon does not consider bulk cd sales anymore (and not as previously stated because they discount international sales). This decision was specifically targeted at idol groups, which rather sell tickets than records (or to be more precise: records with tickets) and most sold records are dumped without ever seeing a playing device. Thats why we have differences between Oricon and Soundscan numbers of several hundreds of thousands units for AKB singles. In my opinion, as much as i personally support Oricon decision, their numbers are definitely not correct.We should thus stick to Billboard/Soundscan. I have added missing sources for yearly single sales in 2015 and 2016. For 2016, i have used Billboard sources. I have also rewritten the "note" in the introduction to sound it less like "fan vengeance". I would rather move it to the end of the article, btw. And i am still looking for a japanese source.Rka001 (talk) 09:09, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Here's the text (I removed the ref brackets):

Note * Starting February 2016, Oricon stopped considering bulk CD sales. By contrast, Billboard JAPAN produces a comprehensive report for the national sales figures of CD singles and CD albums on its official weekly charts: Top Singles Sales ("Billboard JAPAN Top Singles Sales". Billboard JAPAN. February 8, 2016. Retrieved February 8, 2016.) and Top Albums Sales ("Billboard JAPAN Top Albums Sales". Billboard JAPAN. February 8, 2016. Retrieved February 8, 2016. )

This can be a footnote in the AKB48 discography section to explain perhaps why 2 different sales numbers are presented for the recent entries. It does not need to be up front on the AKB48 article. Billboard Japan rankings already have a column in the discography. You can list the figures like 400,000 (O), 1.2 million (B/S) and footnote it there. It also gets messy when counting digital downloads. Asking Prosperosity for advice. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:24, 27 January 2017 (UTC) updated 19:01, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I've changed the lead paragraphs to indicate that the 2.5 million was counted using Billboard / Soundscan, and that the final rankings of top 4 and 5 are strictly by Oricon, limiting the year ranges to 2010 to 2015 as data for 2016 was not available or may have indicated otherwise. If you want to discuss about Oricon stopping counting bulk CD sales, put that information in the Oricon article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:01, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Rka001, I've added a thread from talk:Oricon to come to here. Can you provide news articles about the counting changes? I've only seen ones for the music cards [3] and an editorial comparing Soundscan to Oricon [4] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I am very fine with not having this note in the introduction. It just doesnt belong there (but as usual, i dont like outright deleting the hard work of others). About the oricon changes, thats a tricky one. The base for that is an interview between the oricon boss and Asahi Shinbun, however only in the part which was subscribers-only. The missing part was nevertheless published in several entame blogs, e.g. entaboo. But oricon has - to my knowledge - never issued an official statement regarding this. Please note that this information was provided by Bullpup11 via personal communication on twitter, who unfortunately seems to have cancelled their wiki account.Rka001 (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
edit: i streamlined all the references to just use the official yearly oricon cd charts. Regardless on their counting scheme, AKB48 still occupied the top4 in 2016.Rka001 (talk) 21:34, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Rka001. That looks better. We can only go with what the news sources use, and bouncing around two different counting methods and preferring the new one because it counts more confuses the situation. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I actually only mentioned this because something misleading was stated in the now deleted note within the introduction. But regardless what metric we use, a discrepancy of 1 million copies between two publically trusted charts is pretty ridiculous. Rka001 (talk) 22:21, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on AKB48. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:00, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on AKB48. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:00, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Clarify “Akiba for short” detail

“(Akiba for short)” appears in the summary, but the meaning of this detail is not straightfoward. My guess is that this an attempt to indicate that “AKB” reflects the first letter of the syllables “a”, “ki”, and “ba”. The summary should be more direct. Patrick Dark 18:25, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on AKB48. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Call for better editing

Sorry for not properly logging in. Today i realized that recent actualizations covering contemporary history were in really bad shape. They followed the highly repetitive pattern: Single was announced. Single was released. XY was center. Repeat. One immediate cure is the principle that anyone who updates the release of a single should merge this with the previous sentence covering the release announcement. Also: It is unfortunate that only one out of three future IZ*ONE members were named. Also: jbiz.com is definitely not a citeable source. I am very sure there are better sources to cite single releases. take care, and thank you for keeping the article up to date. 134.102.85.184 (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2020 (UTC) (Rka001 from office).

Japanese spelling

Is there official native spelling in Japanese for AKB48? --Ans (talk) 09:45, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

エーケービー フォーティーエイト. Its actually with an "to" at the end AKB fo-ti-ey-to. The article is wrong/inaccurate in this respect. Noone in Japan spells them in english. Is always Katakana. There are some songs, in which the actual english version is used, however. But they self-introduce themselves in katakana. Rka001 (talk) 19:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2020 and 1 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Saigmcgi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:AKB48/Archive_4&oldid=1140664297"