Talk:Sana (singer)

Article restored

I've restored the article as she has been voted the 17 most popular idol in Korea in Gallup's annual music poll, and the highest ranking Japanese K-pop star. Meets WP:ENTERTAINER. -Zanhe (talk) 00:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

If anything she passes notability only because of one-off event (controversy) just like Tzuyu and not because of that irrelevant fan voting, where not only she was not even TOP 15, there was also only 4,200 people surveyed, so 0.008% of Korean population. Snowflake91 (talk) 14:08, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Snowflake91: You need to learn a bit more about how polling works before dissing the results. Polling is based on the laws of statistics, especially the law of large numbers. A randomly selected sample of 4,200 is a large number representative of the entire Korean population with 95% confidence level, with only ±1.5% margin of error. Take a college statistics course if you have the chance. -Zanhe (talk) 22:31, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

At any rate I’m glad that it is restored since this girl and her band are such a big deal. BShaw20 (talk) 20:55, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Controversy section

Because any controversy involves conflicting opinions, it is useful to have the direct quote on which this one is based. It is openly-available, dependably-sourced, and suitably brief. @Snowflake91: If you honestly believe that Sana's notability is entirely predicated upon this controversy, you should reasonably regard the quote as not only amenable for inclusion, but vital to the article. As its utility should not be limited to those with Japanese literacy (not least because they may already have chosen sides), a faithful translation is also useful. As the translations I have found so far are machine-generated gibberish, I will have to insist that you accept the unreferenced translation as a good-faith edit until one of similar quality can be documented.

I am rolling back the recent reversions to the section and will not hesitate to seek the intercession of an admin should the above-named user escalate this into an edit war. Having viewed the edit history, it gives nothing if not the impression of a radicalised quest to de-content the article. —Patronanejo (talk) 20:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

"Direct quote" if its just a short text which is then included in the prose, and not entire long Instagram post which is then even translated by the Wikipedia user (WP:OR), and Insta is a primary source, if anything there should be only English quote and not the Japanese one. Snowflake91 (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Long quote? It's exactly two lines. We should all be uneasy using an imperfect translation on its own to represent a direct quote, but it's not worth the fight when the original can be linked via citation. —Patronanejo (talk) 21:34, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Adding her message is fine IMO, but the Japanese text is unnecessary. We have a reliably sourced English translation of her message by Asahi Shimbun here, which can be used. -Zanhe (talk) 21:08, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Included the Japanese because it would be shady as hell to cite an unreferenced translation to the original Instagram page. The Asahi Shimbun translation is close enough, but risks raising suspicion by being rather less literal (and incomplete). If anything, it's adequate as a placeholder and I thank you for encouraging its reconsideration. —Patronanejo (talk) 21:34, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Accuracy of career facts

The article states that:

"In her last year of middle school, she was scouted by JYP Entertainment on the street and auditioned on April 13, 2012.[7][5]" 

This is incorrect. Sana was scouted on November 2011 just prior to the annual JYP Japan Auditions. Most likely she attended the audition in Osaka which was held on November 19, 2011 . An article in the Chosun Ilbo Newspaper says that Sana was scouted the day before the audition. So that's then November 18, 2011. JYPE only holds two auditions per year in Japan, one day in Osaka and one day in Tokyo, usually in November.

The Chosun Ilbo article as well as other sites state that Sana said that after passing the audition and being offered to join the JYPE trainee program she attended a concert by JYPE group 2PM together with her mother. 2PM toured Japan from December 3-21, 2011 , with concerts held in Osaka on December 5th and 6th. So this corroborates that Sana passed the audition in November 2011. On April 13th Sana and Momo usually celebrate their anniversary with JYPE. April 13, 2012 was most likely the day that their trainee contract started, maybe even the day when both of them arrived in Korea. So it was their first day with the company, not the day of their audition. Momo also participated in the audition in Tokyo , while Sana most likely participated in the one in Osaka (see the different backdrops in Momo's and Sana's audition videos on the Chosun Ilbo article).

The wiki article furthermore confusingly states:

"She auditioned in a JYP audition in Japan and joined the trainee program in South Korea on January 2, 2014.[5][8]"   

This is incorrect as well, January 2, 2014 was the day Mina joined JYPE. The given source also points to an article about Mina.

Therefore I suggest the career section should read:

"At age 14, she was scouted by JYP Entertainment while out shopping with friends at Osaka's Namba Walk underground mall. Sana was invited to participate in the annual JYP Japan audition held the following day on November 19, 2011 in Osaka. During the audition she performed Girl's Generation's 'Mr Taxi' and passed. After finishing her last year of middle school she joined JYPE on April 13, 2012 to start her traineeship in Korea."

Sana re-visited the spot in Osaka's Namba Walk mall where she was scouted, for the Japanese TV show "Jonetsu Tairiku" in January 2019.

I think it's also worth mentioning that Sana together with her fellow Japanese group members took the 'University Entrance Qualification Examination' in 2016. Basically a High school graduation equivalent, since they had to stop their schooling when moving to Korea.

Another interesting fact is that she was a member of the Osaka branch of EXPG dance studio from 2009 until joining JYPE. We could also point out that Sana is the only Twice member whose old Twitter accounts are still online, although inactive since she left for Korea.

Unfortunately I am not very familiar on how to edit wikipedia pages (I just made this account). So I would be happy if one of the more experienced users here update the page with the correction.

References

Recent changes

Why were the recent changes rejected for 'poor sources', when the original text had no sources or even totally wrong sources? Most of the information in my changes come from an article in a major Korean newspaper. The reference even points to the English article. At the same time the old text had references to Korean articles which didn't even mention the facts they are supposed to be the sources of! Also in the current state the entire article is extremely poor. I absolutely don't see how the current article can be seen in any shape or form a better version than the changes I submitted. Can someone please explain? EinmalZweimal 15:40, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Koreaboo is not reliable, and you included some unsourced trivia/fancruft like "having received the nickname 'Kim Sana' by the Korean public" etc. Snowflake91 (talk) 15:50, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

OK granted. But you realize that the sources of the current version are even worse? One of the references even points to an article about Mina which has nothing to do with Sana. I will resubmit the facts which are sourced by the Chosun article and the MBS documentary. EinmalZweimal 16:02, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok, looks like you are reworking the page right now based on the things I submitted! Thanks! EinmalZweimal 16:09, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Naming of controversy section

The naming of the controversy section seems to have been causing edit warring between "incidents" and "reactions", but this is in part due to what appears to be a misuse of the WP:CSECTION. A note had been made under the section header stating "Please do not turn this into a "Controversy" section because "Controversy" sections should be avoided per WP:CSECTION". However, per that policy, if there is an incident that is reliably sourced enough to be included (which does not seem to be under discussion at the moment) then a section can be named "controversy", preferably to have it be named specifically to the incident. "Reactions" is more appropriate as a framing of responses and criticisms to works such as books and film, not incidents revolving around individuals. Nangears (talk) 06:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Do we even need this section at all? It just seems there's a lot of WP:UNDUE on it. lullabying (talk) 03:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)