Jump to content

Talk:Chloe Kim

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BriannaHerr.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Korean name

[edit]

I removed that, but my edit was reverted. The meaning of the template {{Korean name}} is that in traditional Korean names, such as Kim Il-sung, Kim is a family name, but it stands first and may cause confusion. (if it were a European name, we would thing Kim is a given name because it stands first). In case of Chloe Kim, she is of Korean origin, which is mentioned in the article. However, it is absolutely undisputable that in her case Chloe is a given name and Kim is a family name. This is not a Korean name, this is an American name with the family name of Korean origin. If she ever has kids, they will be called smth like "Alex Kim". The template is therefore misleading and must be removed.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter: Please see Template:Korean name#Usage. The template {{Korean name}} is template about Korean family name. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 09:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You have been reverted by multiple users, and if you continue restoring this template, I will have to bring your case to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: Please see Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I don't understand your this attitude now. I don't revert any your edits, and I hope to discuss this problem. So, I left my opinion in here, and I visited talk pages of other users. Is there something the matter? Thanks. --Garam (talk) 10:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You were extensively edit-warring in the article, and your arguments for inclusion of the template are not convincing, so far nobody agreed with you. Btw you reverted me at least once, which actually prompted me to go to the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:06, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: Sorry, is that a threat? And now you sidestep a point of contention. Please focus on this topic. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 10:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that if you continue edit-warring and not gain consensus for your edits I will request a block of your account. I do not see how this is irrelevant.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: I left my opinion to you about the template {{Korean name}} in the article for seamless communication, without any conflicts. But now you are saying to me about irrelevant facts to this topic. I feel it is a obvious threat. So, I should be indebted if you would focus on the topic. --Garam (talk) 10:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What I wanted to say I said in the first message of the thread (which I opened as a response to your revert; you have subsequently edit-warred and were reverted by other users). It is your disruptive behavior which keeps us off-topic.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And I am actually fine with the current state of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:34, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: My point is about your this edit, not "킴" or "김". In other words, there is no need to remove the template {{Korean name}} because of it is a template for family name. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 10:49, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In the very first message of this thread I explained why {{Korean name}} is not applicable: In case of Chloe Kim, this is not a Korean name, this is an American name. Note that you reverted my removal of the template, and another user had to remove it.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: I also explained why {{Korean name}} is necessary. And parents of Chloe Kim from Korean, and their name also came from Korea. So, family name "Kim" of "Chloe Kim" came from Korea, too. Of course, she is an American. I don't deny that she is not American. And for more information, see Bon-gwan. --Garam (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry but what you say is irrelevant and does not in any way invalidate my explanation. Please gain consensus for your POV before restoring the template, otherwise another block for disruptive editing will be coming.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: Sorry? I don't understand your point. Also, I think you have misunderstanding the template {{Korean name}}. The "Korean name" means both given name and family name. And family name of "Chloe Kim" came from Korean language "Kim", so it doesn't matter where she lives. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 11:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is incorrect. As soon as her given name is Chloe, which is not Korean, her name is not Korean and does not follow the structure of Korean names. Therefore, the template is misleading. Nobody disputes that her family name, Kim, is of Korean origin, and this fact is prominently featured in the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: The template {{Korean name}} is actually a template for family name, not all of given name and family name. (see Template talk:Korean name) And I don't know what your opinion was based on Wikipeida. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 11:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I obviously disagree with you, and I have already presented my arguments which you failed to address. Please seek consensus before readding the template.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: Do you know that your opinion for the template {{Korean name}} also no has WP:Consensus. --Garam (talk) 11:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for the time being your addition of this template was reverted by multiple users, which means you are obviously wrong.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: Sorry? Who is the "multiple users" in article history? I find one case only without your edits, but I don't understand what his/her wanted to say on edit summary. Therefore, I think it is not still consensus. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 12:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see how it is consensus if you are the only one defending your opinion (without any policy-based arguments), and there are two users who disagree. Per WP:BRD, the template can not be added.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Garam(Idh0854) has some previous convictions.[1] [2] [3] Be careful. 223.62.162.75 (talk) 10:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanhe: It is none of the discussions in English Wikipedia. Also, I don't understand why many times I explain it. Please see special:diff/800369593 for it. And I don't think that the discussions in English Wikipedia are "tendentious arguments". This is a process for WP:consensus. Please don't be swayed by puppets. That is just what puppets had wished would happen. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 07:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever thinks adding "클로이 김" is appropriate for this article is ridiculous and clearly doesn't understand how Korean names work. It looks like something a 12 year old koreaboo would be proud of. There are already several points that many users have noted on this thread why it's so stupid, so can we come to the consensus that it should be taken off? 2606:6000:60D3:9400:544:CFE4:9F63:DFC3 (talk) 02:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment

[edit]
Closing this RFC. The consensus is clear that the {{Korean name}} template should not be included in this article. Fish+Karate 11:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thanks. --Garam (talk) 13:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, what do you mean "strong oppose"? My question is no about "support" or "oppose". Thanks. --Garam (talk) 13:28, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly oppose adding the template to articles about people whose names are not Korean. It does not matter whether they belong to Korean diaspora or not. If a person with the name Kim Il-sung were a Canadian citizen born in Canada, the template were appropriate. However, the surname given name Chloe make its application misleading.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The surname is "Kim", not "Chloe". Thanks. --Garam (talk) 13:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for noticing a typo, I hope I made clear in my argument that I am aware of this fact.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:54, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are people who are unefficient enough to use "first name" and "last name" to identify the "family surname" and the "given name". So look at Chloe Kim. The first name comes first, the last name comes last. And now, look at Kim Chloe. The first name comes first, and the last name comes last. But there are people whose question is not "is Chloe before Kim in Chloe Kim" or "is Kim before Chloe in Kim Chloe". Their question is what is the surname, what is the given name. Since this is the us:wikipedia, the "minimal surprise principle" tells us that John Doe is to be parsed as given name= John, last name= Doe. If an US person uses "Chloe Kim" as identifiant, this has to be parsed as given name=Chloe, family name=Kim. If someone comes and adds a "Korean Name" template, this amounts to say that family name comes first, followed by the given name, leading to say family name=Chloe, given name=Kim. Pldx1 (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pldx1: We know what family name is, because of the template {{Korean name}} says, "... the family name is {{{1}}}". And already the template {{Korean name}} used in the cases of western name order, such as Syngman Rhee and Viktor An etc. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 07:09, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you misunderstand what the purpose of this template is. The purpose of this template is NOT to communicate to the reader that Kim is a Korean name. This is done in the article anyway. The purpose is to make sure that if a reader confronts with the name they can not really understand (they do not know what is a surname and what is a family name), they get useful information. In case of Chloe Kim, such information is at best useless (every reader would anyway assume Kim is the family name), at worst misleading.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is rather rude against Chloe Kim ! Being compared to Viktor An, this Russian citizen banned from participating in the 2018 Olympic Games due to some "undisclosed reasons", and to this CIA staffer deceased July 19, 1965 at Honolulu, Hawai! This reminds me of Kim Ki-chang: https://churchpop.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/181.jpg. Pldx1 (talk) 09:47, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: No, but if you think I misunderstand this template, please say to me where can I find the basis of the "purpose". And you said, "every reader would anyway assume Kim is the family name", is "Eurocentrism". It seems that you have not even considered the Kim (given name), and many people in world use their own name to eastern name order, such as Korean names and Hungarian names etc. For this, see Personal name#Name order. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 13:55, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What you say does not make sense to me. I am sorry for this.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Eastern name templates (Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese, etc) are needed only when the name is presented in Eastern name order, which may be confusing for the average reader of English Wikipedia. For an anglicized name such as Chloe Kim, they are totally unnecessary and clutter up the page. -Zanhe (talk) 23:58, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Zanhe: Sorry, what do you mean "oppose"? As mentioned above, my question is no for "support" or "oppose". Thanks. --Garam (talk) 07:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The question is about using the template "Korean name", when the full qualified name is written in the "John Doe" order, i.e. in the plain usual US way of doing. And the answer is oppose. What could be unclear here ? Dear Garam, your question was perfectly clear, and I don't understand what you don't understand in your own question. Pldx1 (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pldx1: I exactly understand my question. And "Korean name" means not only "name of Korean people", but also "name from Korean language". Thanks. --Garam (talk) 17:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not include the template (i.e. what everyone else calls "oppose" above). As Zanhe notes, the purpose of the template is to avoid confusion over what part of the name is the surname. There is not likely to be any confusion over that in this article. On a related topic, I also don't see the point of including the hangul spelling of her American name in the lead. For good reason, other articles about Korean Americans don't bother with this; they either include the actual Korean birth name like Howard Koh, or they don't include Korean at all like Tiffany Hwang. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 11:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not include. The template is intended for biographies where the subjects name is in "family name, given name" order. Adding it to this article is not only unnecessary, but confusing. For the record, I would support its removal from the Syngman Rhee and Viktor An articles as well. Scolaire (talk) 12:25, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chloe_Kim&oldid=1258749109"