Talk:Kamen Joshi

Naming style: Kamen Joshi

Kamen Joshi is displayed as two separate words in all Western media and official press materials. Please do not change this format without discussion and consensus. --GimmeChoco44 (talk) 06:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Western media and official press materials like what? Cite them. The group is spelled "Kamenjoshi" on the official Youtube-channel, on any video using romaji, as is true for concert posters in general. 'KamenJoshi Theatre' is written without a space in the English subtitle on the very theatre itself. The group is called Kamenjoshi on western iTunes, which to my knowledge is the only direct vendor in the west (As opposed to importers who write their own descriptions.). They're called Kamenjoshi in the English image on their Ameba page, and in general whenever someone from within the group tries to use English. Aside from the Mask Pride 2 poster, the group is only called Kamen Joshi by their Facebook and Instagram pages as far as I'm aware. So I'll have to hear some decent sources to be convinced that adding the space isn't a rare occasion for the group - as it said in the article before you changed it. And just to preclude it: Whether private fanzines use a certain spelling is irrelevant for the official default naming when the group itself is so consistent in spelling it as one word. Korn (talk) 20:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

In response to your request for articles, please search for "Kamen Joshi" or "Kamen Joshi news" and you'll find articles by several major English publications like Japan Times and Billboard among others. -- GimmeChoco44 (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

• I will move the page back to Kamenjoshi next week per reasons given, if no counterpoint to them is argued. Korn (talk) 13:23, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

iTunes might not be the most reliable reference for romanization, since, for example, Sakura Gakuin is rendered into one word despite officially being two words in English materials, while each generation of Morning Musume is written differently. It also seems that the titles in the YouTube channel and posters were meant to be stylized since they're written in all caps, and stylizations in title case capitalize the "J". When written in non-stylized form, such as in Facebook and Instagram as you mentioned, as well as the profile box of their official blog, it's consistently rendered as "Kamen Joshi". The video you linked to also has a noticeable space in the title card (0:14), and the group's website kamen-joshi.com uses a hyphen, which indicates that it's meant to be two words. Recent coverage of the group by English language media (Japan-based and international) [1] [2][3] [4] [5], with a few exceptions [6], use "Kamen Joshi". PetéWarrior (talk) 13:24, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Mostly fair points, although I'm not convinced that writing a single word as a single word in transliterations is to be taken as conscious stylisation rather than just the addition of the space being the typical randomness you get when Japanese people transliterate. Also, whatever iTunes does for other artists, whenever the musical group Kamenjoshi releases music, it is as Kamenjoshi, not Kamen Joshi, on both their direct release platforms. And even if that was stylisation, that would in no way preclude it from being the name of the article, as it would still be the name used by the group to refer to itself - we're not redirecting iTunes to *Itunes either, in general we respect the name the first party uses itself. Therefor I'm not sure how to place the articles cited. Notably I also find the space questionable in terms of consistency. We're not splitting the names of members into things like Hashi Moto and Kana Gawa, nor are we splitting e.g. Nogizaka46 into *Nogi Zaka or Momoiro Clover Z into *Momo Iro. Why are we splitting the name of this group? Korn (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Official press materials approved by the artist management have separated the group name into two words. In addition to the points raised above, the digital distribution stylization is provided by third party agencies and can be inconsistent for a significant number of Japanese artists, not just with this group.
Combining the two words into a single word does not serve the interest of the article, which would be more easily identifiable by Western audiences in the separate word format. Insisting on this stylization based on independent research is not justification enough, and the argument for combination is connected to the absence of word separation in common Japanese writing.
Editor Korn can't just make an announcement of a one week timeline to re-enact the name change. The majority of Western articles in English also support the separate word style for the English version of Wikipedia. -- GimmeChoco44 (talk) 10:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

You will find that there are no rules concerning announcements and editors can announce whatever they please. Further, I see no reason to leave things as they are when arguments to the contrary were presented but no discussion, i.e. effort to establish a consensus, is engaged in, which is how you conducted the reversal. Wikipedia has a stance of 'be bold' and not 'you can block everything forever by just saying no once and then making off'. Korn (talk) 10:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

"Be bold" -- yes. But not unreasonable. The page has stood in with its current naming for a significant amount of time, so there is no basis to rush a name change when other editors oppose it. Both sides of the argument must be presented, and significant time allowed for editors to notice the topic and address it. In this case, the citations for keeping the existing name convention outnumber those presented for changing it. Let's give it some time for all proponents to weigh in. -- GimmeChoco44 (talk) 11:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, we seem to mostly agree. Korn (talk) 08:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

ps.: I forgot to weigh in that the official Youtube channel seems to be a first party platform run by Alice itself. Question is whether it should be considered differently from the other social media as the primary platform for releasing music to the public. Also, Amazon Prime receives the labelling directly from the record companies, they are not third party texts. I find it unlikely that iTunes would incur staff costs to do the labelling work on their own instead. And because Wikipedia is sometimes overly filled with ego, I'd like to make clear that I have no vested interest in establishing the spelling without a space, I'm simply trying to determine some satisfying rules for how to handle the randomly changing spelling, and it seems to me that currently the group itself tends towards a single word, maybe because a different person is managing these things now. Korn (talk) 09:17, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Summary of the discussion so far:(as presented by editor Korn)

• Arguments against the space
  • This is a musical group. Whenever music is released on a platform where the group provides the spelling themselves, there is no space.
    • The claim that this was stylisation is not a counter-argument, since Wikipedia consistently uses first party stylisation, if the first party is largely consistent in the stylisation.
    • The claim that Japanese labels have a certain randomness when providing iTunes with labels is true, but does not apply to this specific group for recent years.
  • Kamenjoshi is written in Hepburn Romanization; inserting a space simply violates the applicable orthographic rules (page 7).
    • This would be irrelevant if it was consistent stylisation, per above. But the space is not used consistently.
  • Likely because of the prior point, the insertion of the space is essentially random and not done for other groups whose names include compound nouns like Nogizaka, Momoiro, Chugaku. Unlike Momoiro and Shiritsu, Kamen- is not a predicate nominal adjective either.
• Arguments for the space
  • Space is used on the social media platforms Facebook and Instagram. It is also used in the URL of the official website.
    • It is not used in the handles of any social media platform, even when on Twitter "kamenjoshi_w" indicates the space for West as a separate word.
  • Space is consistently used by many third party English publications based in Japan, and probably fans. The number of citations with the space largely outnumber those without one.
    • A counterpoint to this is that names are decided by their users, not third parties.

Korn (talk) 10:49, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

This is a lot of independent research, and probably more suitable for a dedicated fan forum. Wikipedia info has to be clear and succinct. The naming stylization you're suggesting isn't wrong, but it isn't the only reputable option, and the change would confuse new readers on the topic, which is who Wikipedia is built to serve. Perhaps a note or subsection on western naming variations would be a satisfactory solution for you. -- GimmeChoco44 (talk) 17:01, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

You keep saying independent research. Which of the 5 points I listed specifically are you referring to? The orthographic rules I cited from the US Library of Congress? The foreign publications which have some 7 citations higher up? The first party sources which I name directly? The Wikipedia articles which I link directly? Which one? Korn (talk) 22:49, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Please review WP:NOR regarding independent research, especially the sections on verifiability, neutral point of view, and examples of implied conclusion.
You might also want to consider that adding lots of text to this discussion does not tilt the scales in favor of your argument. I've already proposed a compromise which would allow you to include the alternate stylization in the article, but there are too many examples of the separated-word style to allow the combined-word style to be the sole/main title of the article.--GimmeChoco44 (talk) 23:52, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

You have not contributed a single hard reference to this debate, and you've not named the specific point you consider OR either. I've specifically listed the points made in a summary, to make it easier for later readers to weigh in, you just ignore the point about first versus third party usage, or just handwave to some unnamed supposed 'official press materials'. If you can't be arsed to provide arguments or actually deal with the arguments provided, stop obfuscating the argument by clouding it with hollow commentary. Korn (talk) 11:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Editor PeteWarrior listed several references earlier in this discussion. Other English-language references where articles were published in direct cooperation with the group's management (press releases, interviews) can be found in a simple Google News search, including but not limited to: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Furthermore, abusive language doesn't make this debate any easier. Please cite your counter-evidence, accept the compromise offered, or stand down. But civility is essential to productive discourse.--GimmeChoco44 (talk) 06:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Momoiro (color name), Nogizaka (street name), chugaku ("middle school"), and shiritsu ("private establishment") are always compound words in the Japanese language, while there is no consistent indication that Kamenjoshi is meant to be one. As the Hepburn guide notes, "In case of doubt, prefer the separate form".

Furthermore, being a musical group doesn't mean that iTunes and YouTube listings are more authoritative than other reliable sources. The group itself has used three different renderings of its name in its various publication material, sometimes in the same web page. On the other hand, reliable English language sources, many of which as editor GimmeChoco44 noted were published in direct cooperation with the group's management, and per WP:NOENG is preferable to non-English, overwhelmingly use "Kamen Joshi". PetéWarrior (talk) 14:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@Petewarrior: Sorry, what? Your arguments were all valid, but the idea that a group of girls wearing masks is meant to be called "Masks, Girls" with two completely unrelated juxtaposed nouns rather than a single compound noun "Mask Girls" is outlandish. There is no way to reasonably claim that this is a 'case of doubt'. Korn (talk) 11:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)