Talk:BigBang (South Korean band)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Taeyang's & DaeSung's position vandalism

Can the people who keep vandalizing Taeyang's position by changing it from "Main Vocalist" to "Vocalist" while renaming DaeSung's one with "Main Vocalist" instead please STOP doing it! As much as you may love certain member more, please get your facts right before vandalizing actual facts! Taeyang has been a lead vocalist and he still is ever since the group was formed back in 2006. Please also check his official YGE page if you need to verify this simple fact. Visit his YGE page at http://www.ygbigbang.com/taeyang and visit his profile section of his page. It is clearly stated that his position is "Main Vocalist"! As such, PLEASE STOP changing/vandalizing the members' position in the group! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.14.246 (talk) 13:48, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Singer-songwriters

Big bang, Deux, and Seotaji are DEFINITELY not the only kpop artists to write their own music.. Epik High is one, and im sure there are more —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.224.9.232 (talk) 07:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Trivia

Should we just get rid of the trivia? It's going to get really messy... Bopomofo 05:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I moved your question beneath the header. I hope you don't mind. Anyway...there's relevant trivia, and there's irrelevant. Things such as debut, and ad contracts, are somewhat relevant to the article. Like, "Big Bang has won contracts for different labels, including _____ and ______." It can be a sentence for now, in the main body. But all the fan numbers...unless they're notable, I think they're deletable. Heck, I'm gonna delete them right now. SKS2K6 06:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Okay, I'm not sure who it is, but someone keeps messing with the Big Bang page here. I understand that a lot of people (girls) like them, but putting in information like "Spouse: [insert name]" and "I LOVE HIM" shouldn't be put on their Wiki page. Save it for fansites and forums please, because this is the 2nd time in the past two days I've been trying keep the page intact.

I'm not getting mad at the people who did add that stuff, but I noticed that when it (the random comments) were added, some information would be deleted in it's place. I'm sure others as well as myself would appreciate it if those people didn't add in such things.

Thank you! =D

EDIT FROM ANOTHER READER: Someone just put vulgar words on the page and swore at the band. I'm not sure how to remove it, so could someone please? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.237.218.8 (talk) 21:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bb2cover.jpg

Image:Bb2cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bb1cover.jpg

Image:Bb1cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bb vol1.jpg

Image:Bb vol1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bb 1stdvd.jpg

Image:Bb 1stdvd.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cover bblive.jpg

Image:Cover bblive.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Recent image

There needs to be a recent image of the FIVE members in the group. The original six member pic can be probably moved to somewhere else in the article.

Resources/References

Please find ACTUAL articles and not fan translated ones. Wordpress blogs do not cut it.

Until these other blogs learn to add sources, I think it'll be quite difficult to get them, considering the lack of Korean news in English.... SKS2K6 (talk) 08:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I guess as long as they're not from biased gossip blogs then it should be okay. Most blogs usually have unnecessary commentary from the writers. So far, http://krnloop.wordpress.com/ does a good job being a neutral resource for translated articles. It also includes the source of news, but no links to them (should be easy to search for them if necessary). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.226.12 (talk) 13:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

AGAIN, please do not cite sources that are biased blogs without sources. Allkpop does not count as a source. Neither does soompi. SKS2K6 (talk) 08:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

May I ask, how does Soompi not qualify for it? It is reliable and I don't think it's bias.AhnSoonKyung (talk) 13:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I think Soompi should be qualify for it as it is reliable and certainly not bias. Anyway, I edited the page and added numerous references. And honestly, some of them are mainly common sense: them winning the Daesang and such. Whoever had went and put all those citations tags on it must have honestly wanted to do so for fun or something.Cherrieslovable (talk) 04:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

It's only common sense to say something like "Mariah Carey is a singer", because it is clear and evident to anyone who has any knowledge about Mariah Carey. To say that someone writing all their songs is "common knowledge" is, well, untrue, because it is not. I know, for example, that Big Bang is a group with YG; that's basic knowledge. A member writing a majority of their songs is not common knowledge. Also, Soompi does not count as a reference because it is not a news source; it is a Korean pop fan site and it really has no journalistic credibility; besides, all their information is taken from other Korean news sources. Blogs should normally not be sources, because they also take their information from other sources. Please see TVXQ or Mariah Carey for a well-sourced page. This clearly is not. SKS2K6 (talk) 05:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)nanly rocks

Also, if something is "common knowledge", then there would be a source for it, no? For example, I found this. If you think something is fairly obvious, then point it out using sources. SKS2K6 (talk) 05:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I must say, I really want to add more references to this page (it is needed!!!). However, most news about the group is mainly in Korean and I'm not Korean, nor do I have the Korean language install into my computer. Is there actually an English site that is reliable for references?206.40.103.14 (talk) 01:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

It's difficult. The ones I got (to replace previous unreliable references or comments that were labelled as "references"), I found by typing in "Big Bang" in Korean along with other Korean terms (for example, "fashion" or "plagiarism"). The only English news sources for Korean pop would come from international media sites, for example, KBS World or the English website for the Chosun Ilbo newspaper. Sometimes, the Asian version of Time magazine might also have Korean pop articles, but they're usually only for the really noteworthy ones, such as Rain. SKS2K6 (talk) 03:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you misread the 2nd reply of this topic. Have you even checked out http://krnloop.wordpress.com (this is NOT the same as AllKpop)? Krloop provides LINKS TO THE SOURCES and is UNBIASED.
It's very different from the Popseoul/AllKpop/Shenyuepop crap.

Use that original source, then. There is no need to provide an intermediary link when the direct article is linked. Oh, and please sign your comments. SKS2K6 (talk) 17:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Soompi is definitely a reliable source. It has been used as a source for numerous other kpop articles as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.184.50.118 (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Soompi is essentially a fansite/blog and is therefore not a reliable source. Please read Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources. It can't be classified as a news organization, as it is essentially a K-pop fansite with a blog section for news. The thing is, though, is that Soompi usually uses the Korean news articles as their basis. As such, the original articles should be used. SKS2K6 (talk) 21:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup of Members section

The members section is rather messy, with both content on a member as well as a profile. The parts from the profile should probably be incorporated into the paragraph about each member or removed entirely to keep the section clean. Unfortunately, I don't think we would be able to create a page for each member, but it might be good to split it off into another article- 'Members of Big Bang,' though I don't know how feasible that would be, either! In any case, the section just needs a bit of tidying up. Yaminator (talk) 05:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Tae Yang

Tae Yang's real name is not mentioned under his content nor in the box at the top ahahah so I put it in, originally how it is spelt most popularly, but then I changed it to the romanized spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.128.163 (talk) 03:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Seriously

We seriously need to unite Day By Day and Day After Day as either name. People are getting confused by that(including me!). Mydoctor93 (talk) 23:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

빅뱅은 자기들이 작사작곡편곡을 할수있다. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.175.9.224 (talk) 08:32, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Daesung

Why do each of the indivdual members of Big Bang have their own pages except for Daesung? He has released singles, starred in musicals, and on Family Outing. None of the other members seem to have done any more outside of Big Bang (except maybe GD) than he has. I feel that either none of them should have separate pages or they all should, however I don't know enough about Daesung (or wikipedia really) to make a page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.19.107 (talk) 03:00, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

It was just an issue of meeting notability requirements. At this point, I would say that all of the Big Bang members could have their own page, as long as they follow Wikipedia guidelines. (By the way, the Seungri page is a mess.) SKS (talk) 03:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

pagiarism

I don't see any-thing about Sony's plagiarism allegations (See Korea Times, Sat/sun Sept. 26-27, p. 16, Cho Jae-hyon, "YG Hits Sony Over [sic] Plagiarism Allegations.")

I don't think Big Bang is accused of plagiarism, but for sure, G-Dragon is. Someone963852 (talk) 12:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

clean-up needed

The grammar is weak in places. The article needs improvement in that area.Kdammers (talk) 03:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

removing member bios.

I was wondering whether everyone would agree on just removing the bios on each member of big bang and just replace them with a set of links to their individual articles.
I am suggesting this because a lot of good articles such as The Fray and Aerosmith have just a very brief list o their members. Plus TVXQ, does not even have a triv like list of members. I'm sure that 'The Fray' and 'Aerosmith' have their own different consensus given the fact they are actual instrument playing bands and Big Bang is a boy group. However, this section is merely a lot of fan triv, most of which is already incorporated into their respective articles already. Deleting it without discussion would probs lead to a fangirl/boy uproar so comments would be appreciated. ^N_P^e_e^e_r^b_v^s_e^s_z (Push) 20:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

A Band?

Would you really consider Big Bang a "band"? They are more like a "group" because, even though they compose and write their own music, they don't actually play their songs (besides the piano, of course), like Aerosmith or Daughtry. AhnSoonKyung (talk) 04:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

See WP:NCM. Regardless of "type" of musical group, the main disambiguating term is "band". SKS (talk) 04:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer Review

I want this article up for peer review because I think that would greatly improve this article. Any objections? (BTW, I have NO IDEA how to do that. =] So if you do know, feel free to!) Cherrieslovable (talk) 01:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

거짓말 (Lie or Lies)

Which one is it? According to Time magazine, it's just "Lie" (even when I put it into the Google Translator). Just wondering.75.72.105.60 (talk) 03:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Korean's a bit weird in that a lot of meaning is contextual. Just by seeing "거짓말" (literally "fake word(s)"), it's hard to say if it's "Lie" or "Lies". But contextually, within the song lyrics, it's "Lies". SKS (talk) 05:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Music sample

I was wondering if it would be appropriate if we could add a music sample onto this page? Such as "Lies" or "Day By Day" because those were their hits? Any comments on it? SandylovesMicky (talk) 02:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

It's up to you. It would certainly help, but I've never done it. See WP:SAMPLE for more information and help. SKS (talk) 05:39, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I figured out how to upload the song, but I have no idea how to cut it down to about 22 second or something. Darn it! AhnSoonKyung (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done YAY! I know how to do it now! Weee!! So I uploaded "Lie" and "Day by Day" because those are obviously their biggest hits and I also uploaded "Oh My Friend" because it was a different genre that the group also experimented with. Whatya think? For some reason, I feel like I should've upload "La La La" or "We Belong Together" instead of "Oh My Friend".... AhnSoonKyung (talk) 04:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

YouTube as a source?

Would it be legit? I think it would, such as the award shows because it's actually filmed and recorded, so fangirls can't really tamper with it. What do you guys think? 75.72.105.60 (talk) 22:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Copy-vio. Unless it's uploaded by the original maker of the video (so, in other words, if SBS decides to upload an Inkigayo performance), it won't work as a source. SKS (talk) 05:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Aww, it won't work? Cause I've been trying to find a source for those awards that were tagged, and I found a youtube video on it, but I can't seem to find an article anywhere that deals with it! As for the "Korean People's Music Choice Award. Netizen Award"...is there such an award, cause I can't seem to find any articles on it at all! Not even blogged one! 75.72.105.60 (talk) 04:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Moving award section proposal

Just proposing whether we should move the awards section to a separate page. Your opinions are welcome.
I'm aware that the list isn't considerably long, however it would make the article much more easy to read through so that readers do not have to continuously scroll past the awards section to read the following info. + npervez ☂ 21:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we should. As their career continue, so will the awards that they receive. It's well cited anyway, and can back itself up with its own page. =] 75.72.105.60 (talk) 04:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done Moved the awards section. SandylovesMicky (talk) 19:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Finding sales for album

Since the Music Industry Association Korea is dead now (I think, right??) where are we suppose to find source for album sales? Just wondering cause the discography page really needs it. SandylovesMicky (talk) 11:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that, since the history section is littered with those refs. However, coming up with a replacement could prove difficult. I would just advise looking for article coverage for the albums and see whether they cite any figures. I for one don't really know what sources are available for album sales. :/ + ThermoNuclear ☢ 18:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)