Jump to content

Talk:Suga/Archive 1

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

Billboard article changes the status quo

I think this changes the status quo that had been in effect since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suga (singer). There is now some in-depth coverage in a reliable source (a US-based one, no less) about him specifically and his music. However, it's just one source.

Suggestions on how to proceed? I'm really thinking to move this to Draft:Agust D and develop it there. If there's coverage in a few more sources, then it's ready for prime time. —C.Fred (talk) 15:56, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Support: I myself, have been thinking that an article for Suga seems more liable now compared to past attempts at article creation. Considering the reference is from such a big source it seems a suitable decision. I am also more than happy help build a page for him, and I definitely agree that the namespace should be moved to Agust D as that is the correct format. Abdotorg (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Abdotorg, I reverted most of your edit for various reasons.

  • Per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the content in the article. Suga's birth name should be mentioned in the body of the article, which you removed. I restored that.
  • "Rapper" should be piped as [[rapping|Rapper]] per WP:PIPE.
  • "Songwriter" should not be linked per WP:OLINK.
  • "Suga" is not a Korean name, and should not be covered as one with an infobox.
  • Leads generally do not require citations if the information is uncontroversial and is cited later in the body. There is no need for the citations in this lead.
  • There is no main article to Suga's discography. BTS's discography is a related, and should be noted as a "see also" page.
  • Bigger bodies of work are always listed first. Why you swapped the order of the discography section to list songs first is beyond me.
  • "Soundcloud" is a platform, not a format.
  • You gave zero justification for removing Suga's production credits. This is a valid encyclopedic topic to cover, as you'll see under Category:Production discographies and Category:Lists of songs by producer.

ℯxplicit 00:17, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Awards

Suga has now won awards for the song he produced with Suran. Would that along with everything else on the page be enough to revert this and make it an official page?Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 17:44, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Passes #8 of WP:BAND I guess, altrough this "hot trend award" is really minor category of the Melon Music Awards just to make their awards ceremony longer. Snowflake91 (talk) 18:07, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
I was more going to argue based on WP:COMPOSER, since he passes #1 quite easily ("Wine" hit #2 Gaon Music Chart) and #4 ("Wine" one a more important award at the MMAs, best R&B/Soul track.). Nyantatata ^-^ (Say hi!) 18:22, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Notability

According to Wikipedia, member Suga is now notable enough for a wiki page. For biography, he now has won an award. For the entertainer part, he has a large fan base. All the sources in article are sufficient and he has become known on his own through his mixtape, winning an award for a song he produced outside of bts, charting solo songs, and producing outside BTSUkiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 21:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

He has a large fan base regardless of his solo career because of BTS, so using that as a reason to create an article wouldn’t be sufficient, his charted songs that are listed are credited as BTS on the albums, which were already released the last time this article was made. As for winning an award, it wasn’t a producer award so does that count? (Not hating for that, just questioning. I doubt it would have been changed to a redirect without the talk page being read first.) Alexanderlee (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Please check the requirements according to Wikipedia for Notability. He meets basic credibility, received an award from MMA which is one of the biggest Korean award shows, and for the fan base part a majority of people in groups on wiki meet this requirement because of their group so that is not a valid argument because then there would have to be a lot pages deleted. All facts also have verifiable links too. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 18:57, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Read and found wanting - nothing has changed to affect the last AfD.PRehse (talk) 18:58, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
If the fanbase is what you want to go on then literally every member of every popular group would have an article, yet they don’t because that is not the only factor to take into consideration. I still agree with the removal, especially seen as it was an administrator who changed it back to a redirect, and admins do have the final say in issues. Alexanderlee (talk) 19:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Read what you said. "If the fanbase is what you want to go on then literally every member of every popular group would have an article, yet they don’t because 'that is not the only factor to take into consideration'." Where have I ever said that is the only reason he is getting a wiki page? I never implied or said that. I've written various reasons throughout this post as to why he has a wiki page. That is only one reason. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Correct me if I am wrong; I believe Ukiss2ne14lyfe is refering to the fact that the individual won an award (post previous afd). Abdotorg (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
That was one of the biggest changes he's had since the last redirect and one of the things that was missing to require a page. He won that award and the song he produced won Soul/R&B song of the year. Both which have been placed on his page.Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 19:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

@Ukiss2ne14lyfe: I didn't say that was the only reason. You said "for the fan base part a majority of people in groups on wiki meet this requirement," which is why I said it, as other members not notable for an article also meet that requirement. Alexanderlee (talk) 19:53, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Please quote me correctly, I said, "for the fan base part a majority of people in groups on wiki meet this requirement because of their group." That end part makes all the difference. I'm not going to argue with you about this because it goes in circles and I do not think you are reading and comprehending what I am saying anyways. There is also this page on Notability for music and it only stated one requirement is needed and he meets number four. He may meet number one also, I am not positive. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 20:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm not arguing with you I'm simply stating my opinion, no need to attempt to insult my intelligence. I'm well aware of the notability page. Alexanderlee (talk) 20:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
There was a conversation about this on his old talk page here. He meets #8 in a sense WP:BAND, since the Melon Music Awards are a major Korean music award show. However, his reason for having a page is more based on WP:COMPOSER since he meets #1 and #4 with "Wine". The article should really put more emphasis on "Wine" including mentioning it in the lead, which I'll happily go through and fix. Nyantatata ^-^ (Say hi!) 21:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I agree with this. The biggest basis of him needing a page is because of his production and composition merits. Although I'm not sure what you mean by mention it in the lead? I did note it on his page that wine won best soul/r&b song of the year, and the other award I created an awards section for. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 06:28, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Mentioning it in the lead is just making sure it's in the summary paragraph at the top. Since composition is the biggest justification for him having a page right now it'd need to be there! I'll add it now. Nyantatata ^-^ (Say hi!) 22:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested picture channge

Hi, could I please request a change in the picture of BTS Suga's Wikipedia article, since the current one is pretty old? Something like this would be the best alternative.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Houseofcyphers (talk • contribs) 13:25, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

The linked picture cannot be used for copyright reasons. The current picture is the most recent picture of Suga in Wikimedia Commons that can be used. Alexanderlee (talk) 13:37, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
The current photo will soon be deleted anyway due to it being non-free content. A suitable replacement will be uploaded.Carlobunnie (talk) 18:59, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2018

Suga isn't just vocals, he also plays the piano as an instrument. BeanBoi1 (talk) 02:23, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: This is mentioned in the article in the section "Musicianship". The Instruments line in the infobox is to list what the artist is known for, not every instrument they've ever played. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 03:14, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Infobox

The only difference is that the way you put it has a yellow headline for his name and shows a header saying 'background information' both in yellow. It makes no difference to readability other than adding a highlighted header. It makes more sense to me to have the signature with the information that can all go into the person template rather than making a module purely for the signature, it still displays in the same place. Alexanderlee (talk) 16:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@Alexanderlee: My issue with the readability of the previous template is that in this version all headers are highlighted which makes the presentation of all the information, and more the important information, much clearer. Infobox person does not highlight the musician section and only the names section which puts more emphasis on them, and makes the presentation of the information significantly less clear. Anyways, the WP:MUSICIAN page for the infobox states that Infobox person can be used, but then the musician template itself states a background is required, and issues between editors have arisen on the Ed Sheeran and Camila Cabello pages for not having the background. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 17:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
@DanielleTH: my edit was based on Taylor Swift's article (featured article) also having the same format, but okay. Alexanderlee (talk) 17:58, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
@Alexanderlee: Then I guess it ultimately doesn't matter, so if you'd like to return it you're welcome to. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 18:06, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
@DanielleTH: In my opinion, the Infobox person can present the individual more as it has parameters such as marriage, partners, alma mater, etc. while Infobox musical artist can still be used as a module to potray the individual's musical section. It can be done based on Mariah Carey page. I feel that using just the latter (Infobox musical artist) will limit the presentation for Suga. Heolkpop (talk) 18:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Are the writing credits needed?

  • Hi. I currently feel that this section, relating to songwriting credits, is not necessary and could do with removal. It is unwieldy and overly long, without adding much detail to the article. Similar singer-songwriters who pen their own songs do not have such sections, and this one is rendered even more redundant by the fact that most of the songs were written within the group. Furthermore, it is currently wholly unsourced. Rather than simply removing the table, I have reworked it significantly to enhance its parsability and visibility with this diff, but would like to gauge community consensus on this table, which will only grow larger and uglier with time. Stormy clouds (talk) 21:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

There is no reason to remove it. We have articles like this, see Category:Lists of songs by songwriters, among them a featured lists like List of songs written by Tove Lo. The list in this article is poorly managed more than anything, so its best for it to be cleaned up. ℯxplicit 02:40, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

I believe this is important as a huge chunk of his music career is devoted to writing. He has had various collaborations with notable artists during the recent years. Pilipinas7107 (talk) 06:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Including Suran's nominations

Why are Suran's songs put in the nominations/win categories? Producers are never included in the win unless it was like the hot trend one that included Suga. It's Suran's song, not Suga's. He only produced it for her.Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 13:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

@Ukiss2ne14lyfe: Just noticed this now and I agree fully. The awards were given to Suran, besides the producer award. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 02:50, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
DanielleTH Someone changed the awards from just to Suran to both of them too. I just left it alone because no one else seemed to have a problem with it, but it never made sense to me to include her nominations on his page. I already deleted the one about her best vocals for the song a while ago.Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 03:05, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2018

I was wanting to remove the Kpop label from the genre because it's incorrect. 2601:CE:C180:36D5:591C:EB94:6900:9A7D (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:33, 10 October 2018 (UTC)


Poll results

Before adding this in I wanted to make sure this was an important survey because I'm not really sure. I hadn't heard of it before and if it's inconsequential I don't want to add it. https://entertain.naver.com/read?oid=408&aid=0000064217&spi_ref=m_entertain_twitter Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

According to that article, Idolchamp is an app that produces polls regarding idols that its users vote on. It looks incredibly trivial and would be on par with citing a BuzzFeed poll. ℯxplicit 02:00, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. I won't include it. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 17:02, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

"518-062"

Does "518-062" belong in the other songs listing? Suga only produced the song and did not rap in it and the song he produced for Suran, "Wine," isn't included in his charted song section. Either the Suran song should be added in or this one removed to be consistent. It seems misleading to me to label the song as "with d-town" when Nakshun is the one performing the song.

Also the source we're using right now for the song is re-upload to a Soundcloud page by a random fan. It's not available from any official sources. Baepsayed (talk) 23:27, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Billboard https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/k-town/8098832/bts-lyrics-social-commentary-political. Retrieved 2018-01-19. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2019

add more about suga and his relationship with his fellow members. I would want to make edits about his achievements Grxmrpr (talk) 09:04, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:25, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2019

Under the "Personal beliefs and philanthropy" section, change "₩100,000" to "₩100,000,000." This is the proper amount he donated (equivalent at the time to $88,000). Jinglink7 (talk) 22:00, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done Thanks! NiciVampireHeart 22:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Personal Life re: residence

"As of 2019, he currently lives in Hannam-dong, Seoul, South Korea. In 2018, he purchased a US$3 million luxury apartment located in South Korea but continues to live in Hannam-dong." - This wording does not make sense. Is not Hannam-dong, where he bought the apartment, located in South Korea? Or did whoever wrote this mean to say that he lived in x place (a different city) before buying y apartment in z (Hannam-dong) where he currently resides as of 2019? Whatever the case, it needs to be rephrased to properly identify the clear meaning, perhaps by merging both sentences to reflect something similar to what I suggested. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 04:19, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Years active

Presently Suga's years active are listed as 2010-present. What is the basis of marking it as 2010? If its based on the producing credit for 518062 which was an amateur song rather than a professional credit should we also change RM's years active to 2007 as thats when he released his first amateur tracks as well? If amateur tracks are not sufficient for the start of a years active date I would recommend changing Suga's date to either 2011 (the release of the original version of "Satoori Rap (Paldogangsan)") or 2013 as that's when he gets his first copyright credit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baepsayed (talk • contribs) 14:46, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@Baepsayed: it’s not related to copyright credits, it’s related to years active. The article shows that Suga was active in 2010 when it mentions 518062. RM’s article also shows activity in 2010 when it mentions the pre-debut songs in 2010–2011. Nothing is mentioned of RM’s 2007 tracks, which I presume is why it’s not started there. Scratch that, I was reading the wrong section of that article, I’m not sure for RM but this article shows activity in 2010. Alex (talk) 14:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Agust D (mixtape) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Philanthropy

I again removed the 'philanthropy' header. First, there is no need to sub-divide such a small section. There is barely anything about his personal life, separating it just creates unneeded clutter. Two, having a 'philanthropy' section for two or three relatively small donations made over almost a decade is pretty much false advertising. 'Philanthropy' is a term used for consistent or "the generous donation of money to good causes." Otherwise, everyone donating to charity could call themselves a 'philanthropist.' If there is going to be any section sub-heading, it should be charity or even activism, as you'll note the second paragraph is about giving non-monetary support to LGBT causes. Y‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 12:31, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Signature

can somebody add this in? Thanks

(if you have time, I left the same message on RM's page) Link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Suga%27s_signature.svg

SmallPotato talk 03:05, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2021

the song by Stony Skunk is "Ragga Muffin," not "Reggae Muffin." check youtube for correct title name. I cannot post the link here. Deedle2038 (talk) 08:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Chiyako92 08:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Melon Music Awards 2020 and other awards

should be edited: Best Rock Award: Eight (with IU), https://www.soompi.com/article/1441429wpp/melon-music-awards-2020-kicks-off-mma-week-with-3-award-announcements, 18. March 2021 2021: The 10th Gaon Chart Music Awards, Artist of the Year (May Digital Music): Eight (prod.&feat. SUGA) AND 2021: The HallyuLife Awards, Best Vocal Performance — IU’s Eight (prod.&feat. SUGA)

Source is unreliable --Lydïa (☎️ ◦ ✍) 16:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Not done: Suga wasn't nominated for those awards. They are irrelevant to his article. Either the song itself or IU alone (AOTY) was nominated. The HallyuLife awards are non-notable and should not be included in any article on Wikipedia. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 17:58, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Min Yun Ki /Min Yoongi

Min Yun Ki is already written his English name as“Min Yun Ki” on 2020 Festa profile. It is unreasonable to think his English name as Min Yoongi anymore Lisa19980325 (talk) 12:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Yunki and Yoongi are different romanizations of 윤기; both are correct. However, Yoongi is the one that is more widely used by western media. The official subtitles provided by Bighit on movies, BangtanBombs, shows like Bon Voyage, In the Soop, etc etc, all use Yoongi. Even his bandmates spell it as Yoongi. And Yunki is already mentioned on the infobox. - Ïvana (talk) 00:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
@Lisa19980325:I didn't rv your edits 'for no reason'. This isn't highschool and I'm not being petty. If you want to add something, make sure it comes from a reliable source (see WP:KO/RS). If it does then there's no reason to change it, as long as it supports the new info. And with Yoongi's name I already gave you a list of reasons as to why your change is unnecessary. You can respond here and if you still think I'm wrong then we can get a third opinion, or wait til another editor gives their two cents. Reverting edits for the sake of reverting breaks the rules (see WP:3RR) and it's bothersome for everyone involved. - Ïvana (talk) 13:22, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
@Ïvana:Firstly,you edited my news link and mistranslated news title. Secondly, Korean Wikipedia is namu Wikipedia, not Korean version Wikipedia. In namu Wikipedia for SUGA, Korean used Min Yun Ki as his official English name. Min Yoongi is unofficial name called by public. This is Wikipedia not your fanpage at all.In 2017, BTS Love Yourself teaser wrote SUGA English name abbreviation as "Y.K",which meant "Yun Ki". In 2018,UNICEF gave SUGA name tag as "Min Yun Ki". In 2020, SUGA wrote down his name as "Min Yun Ki". That is why Korean used "Min Yun Ki" as his English name. The English name is decided by SUGA only, not by Jhope nor the fan nor the public. Why does suga have to accept the name commonly used by the public? If he accepted, why did SUGA write another name with his own hand on last year Festa profile?"Min Yoongi" is not accepted by SUGA himself. Please respect him

User:Lisa19980325 (talk) 03:23, 13 March 2021 (KST) (talk) 03:23, 13

@Lisa19980325:I edited your news link because it wasn't a reliable source and the format was wrong, it has nothing to do with language. Once again, check WP:KO/RS. Regarding the name, you're mentioning random instances where Yoongi was written as Yunki. I'm not familiar with Namuwiki, but a quick glance tells me it's not very reliable. UNICEF used the McCune–Reischauer romanization, that's why they spelled Jungkook as Jeongguk, Taehyung as Taehyong, etc. Which is perfectly fine because, like I said, both Yunki and Yoongi are correct. That still doesn't deny the fact that Yoongi is the romanization used by western media on articles and Bighit on official subtitles. It's not an unofficial name if it comes from his company. And because this isn't my fanpage, I go with what the company says. - Ïvana (talk) 19:02, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
@Ïvana: Firstly, Korea Economic TV was founded on August 31, 1999, as a cable broadcaster specializing in 24-hour real-time economic news. Korean Economic TV is very reliable so that it is showed on SUGA NAVER search first page. It is time to update the reliable source Wikipedia. Secondly, Namu Wikipedia is full of accuracy and neutrality. Because it writes about BTS controversy very thoroughly. RM, Jungkook namu Wikipedia have written about the controversy but Wikipedia hide them. Thirdly, please explain why you undo Min Yun Ki news link in 2015. This is the official profile that given to reliable news agency to report.User:Lisa19980325 (talk) 04:17, 13 March 2021 (KST)
@Lisa19980325:Then go and request for the page to be added to the list of reliable sources. It's not there now, so Newsis is better. I don't really care about the specifics of Namuwiki, but your statement that is "full of accuracy and neutrality" is your personal opinion. And the website falls under WP:USERGENERATED so it's not valid. I asked you to show me Yunki is used more than Yoongi, and I'm still waiting for an answer. I didn't understand the last part, but at this point I'm just repeating myself so I probably answered it before. - Ïvana (talk) 19:32, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

I think this discussion is going the wrong way. The name should be determined by whatever convention Wikipedia has on Korean names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SkylightXO (talk • contribs) 14:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Taking Yoo Seung-jun as a reference can be helpful, who has both an English name and a Korean name. SkylightXO (talk) 14:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@SkylightXO:@Lisa19980325:Quoting WP:NCKO and WP:COMMONNAME, "Personal, organization, and company names should generally be romanized according to their common usage in English sources" and "Wikipedia [...] generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)". Sources like The Atlantic, Reuters, Forbes, CNN, Rolling Stone, Buzzfeed News, The Daily Dot, People, Vogue, SCMP, and The Washington Post (to name a few), which are considered reliable per WP:RSP, all use Yoongi. - Ïvana (talk) 16:52, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm late to this discussion, but Ïvana has been right from the beginning. Min Yoongi is the most known and widest-used romanization of his name (per reliable secondary eng sources, though non-eng sources use it as well) and that is what we use. That is what is used across most if not all Korean-BLP articles. Lisa19980325 Namuwiki is NOT Korean wikipedia, but rather a korean-lang based offshoot (please read the linked article so you're better aware of what NMW is and its questionability hence why it shouldn't be used as a basis for anything). What is done on both NMW and the actual Korean WP has nothing to do with English WP as these sites have very different practices (and I say this as someone who was fought down by another editor on a diff lang wiki—even though they were actually wrong and I wasn't— because they don't hold themselves to the same quality standards as Eng WP). If you would like to challenge the naming convention standard on Eng WP, then open an RFC and get consensus to overrule it. In the meantime, the page stays as is. Further attempts to change it will be treated as vandalism and you will be reported accordingly. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 21:44, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree with both of you, but it seems Korean names use hyphens, like Min Yoon-gi. I'm not sure what the rule about that is, so I fine with the one without the hyphen. SkylightXO (talk) 22:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2021

Suga also has a rare condition called Congenital Mirror Movement. It is where both hands do the same thing. It is completely harmless and cute. He is one of the few K-POP artists to have this condition 2A00:23C4:BB94:6C01:D419:A7C2:601B:E856 (talk) 08:27, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 10 October 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: (non-admin closure) NO CONSENSUS User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

There are quite a few pure votes on both sides. However, there is a policy-based argument that other topics (specifically Yoshihide Suga) are prominent enough that this is not clearly the primary topic. I'm not comfortable claiming there is consensus against the move, but there is certainly not consensus for the move. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

This is not a "no prejudice against speedy re-nomination" No Consensus close; please don't propose this move again in the next 6 months unless there is a new argument or data in favor of the move. There is no moratorium if you do have new evidence. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:36, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

– The rapper is the primary topic. It is a similar situation to when BTS used to be called BTS (band). Nothing else on the disambiguation page seems to have as much long term significance (except maybe Yoshihide Suga, but he isn’t known as simply "Suga"). Sahaib3005 (talk) 20:33, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Support as it is WP:PRIMARYUSAGE. Page statistics reflect that daily pageviews. Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 21:33, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose Suga may refer to:
  • Oppose per in ictu—blindlynx (talk) 15:44, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Support per Btspurplegalaxy. At over 95%, pageviews make this an overwhelming primary topic. Station1 (talk) 03:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose i don't think he's well known enough outside the fandom to warrant that. BTS is popular, but I don't think many of the general population know many of BTS names. No one that isn't a fan at least knows BTS actual names that I have met. I think it will just make things more confusing. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 03:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
    • @Ukiss2ne14lyfe:, I’m not a fan of BTS, but I still know most of their names because there quite famous. Sahaib3005 (talk) 04:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
      • Sahaib3005 I'm a fan of BTS. You know them because you're involved with kpop just like I know many names of kpop people I'm not fans of. If you weren't you would probably just know the name BTS. Most the random people I meet have heard of BTS at this point, but they don't really know their names. Half of them aren't sure which songs are theirs on the radio let alone names. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 14:19, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Page views aren't everything. Using this logic, V (singer) would be moved to V, and that article would be moved to V (letter). We can all agree that would be ridiculous. "Suga" is a highly ambiguous term, and I don't see the singer holding on to any long-term significance over all the other topics titled "Suga" with considerations to WP:PTOPIC. ✗plicit 14:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
    No, that logic would not hold at all. Pageviews need to be analyzed. Pageviews for V and V (disambiguation) did not increase once the singer became popular, showing that most people landing on V (which is an article) do not want the singer. On the other hand, Suga, which is not highly ambiguous, saw an increase in average daily views after the rapper came along, making clear that the majority landing there expect an article about the rapper and are simply inconvenienced by the dab page. Station1 (talk) 17:38, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose. No clear primary topic here. We cannot predict long-term significance for a 28-year-old. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:13, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Support per Btspurplegalaxy. The number of pageviews alone would make him a primary topic. I'm sure it changes per country, but searching on Google at least the entire first page always points to the rapper. Only occasionally you see the japanese politician. See images, news, videos, and all results. Anyone looking for another person/album/etc has to filter the results. I don't think him being young matters when he has been the most relevant "Suga" for years now. If he stops being famous we could always change it back. Right now, an overwhelming majority of the people searching for Suga wants to read about the rapper. - Ïvana (talk) 13:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Support, rapper clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:22, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The WP:Clickstream data for the dab page Suga shows that in the month of March, the link to the rapper was followed 543 times, the link to Yoshihide Suga – 143 times, and the links to the album and the EP: 10 and 35 times each. Taking into account the fact that links with fewer than 10 clicks don't make it into the dataset, then the total proportion of outgoing traffic for the rapper will be within the range 62–74%. That's smaller than what the pageviews above would lead you to expect, but it's still significant, representing at least twice as much traffic as the other topics combined. That will probably meet many editors' requirements for a primary topic with respect to usage. However, we need to also take long-term significance into account, and I don't believe this criterion has been met yet, especially given that the main contender is the former PM of Japan. For an indication that a celebrity is likely to meet this criterion, we'd need at least the current pattern of usage to be sustained for a longer period of time. – Uanfala (talk) 13:45, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
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.

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2021

he is a dancer also. 210.89.63.41 (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Suga's Health...

So, I read somewhere that Suga, RM, and Jin were diagnosed with Covid-19... 41.114.240.15 (talk) 09:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

This was inserted and reverted earlier. My comment was: WP:NOTNEWS. COVID is not a novelty at this stage. The infection has thus far not seriously impacting on the subject's career. – robertsky (talk) 09:46, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): Kelwest.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

"That That" sales clarification help

The BB article I used as the sales ref in the discog table cites 29,600 sales for the song's Global 200 entry and 18,800 sales for the Global 200 Excl US entry. Since I used the 18,800 figure as the WW sales, should I add 'US: 10,800'? Or just change the 18,800 to 29,600? -- Carlobunnie (talk) 03:28, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

@Carlobunnie: I would add US: 10,800. But as long as the total number is mentioned either options are fine. - Ïvana (talk) 04:00, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
I did it like that for now and included a hidden note explanation. If anyone feels differently, we can always change it then. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 04:55, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2022

" After hearing Epik High, he decided to become a rapper."

While this is true, the above sentence is missing context. In a VLive from 2012, Min Yoongi credits Epik High's "Fly" off their 2005 album Swan Song as the reason he decided to become a rapper. Alyssahlerner (talk) 18:41, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 01:59, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Multiple reliable sources on Suga conscription; should they go into the article?

There are over a dozen reliable sources which have reported this here: [2]. Should the news reports from multiple sources be included in this article? ErnestKrause (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@ErnestKrause: None of them give specific details ("may not enlist", "likely to enlist", "expected to serve as", "to reportedly enlist" etc). They may be reliable sources but the information is still based on rumours. Big Hit hasn't confirmed anything, so until then, it is pure speculation. - Ïvana (talk) 17:56, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
If you are concerned about those details, then it might still be worth including something about the conscription date itself as being immanent (its about 2 months away). Since there are so many reliable sources I've just linked above perhaps the article should mention that South Korean law requires him to face conscription before his 30th birthday coming up in early March? ErnestKrause (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I don't understand why the information can't be added only once an official statement has been made regarding it. All those reports are based on a so-called tip provided by a military insider to one outlet that a bunch of other news outlets then reported on. When Hybe officially states he's going then add it. We don't need to preempt his enlistment otherwise. And tbh, Ernest I find it very odd that you keep wanting to jump-the-gun so to speak, regarding enlistment-related additions. According to what you're suggesting, then we should also do the same to other BLPs who are nearing the time for their enlistment without any official notice provided, no? But I don't think you'd get support for that. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 19:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure your long response is something I can follow completely. All of the many reliable sources that have reported this agree that under South Korean law that Suga must report for duty by the time of his birthday in early March. I had not previously noticed that his birthday is within 90-days of Jin and that therefor they must both enter service together as a back-to-back event. Why exclude Suga's situation if Jin has been covered so thoroughly? It seems that some mention of South Korean law and his impended 30th birthday seems justified given the large number of reliable sources covering this. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
I don't see what's so difficult to follow in what I said. Media can write as many articles as they want saying that he has to enlist by x age or y date, but WP does not need to report on that as it is not a news outlet. With Jin, when Hybe officially announced that an enlistment date had been decided upon, that was added to his article. When he actually enlisted, that was also added. So similarly with Suga, when an official announcement is made by Hybe regarding his enlistment plans, that is when the information should be added. There is no reason to preemptively report on his supposed enlistment based on speculative reports from kmedia as no definitive information has officially been released by Hybe. Is that clear enough? -- Carlobunnie (talk) 17:39, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Whether you like it or not, then the edit is going to be in the article in 60 days or less by some editor regardless of what your criticism is here because of South Korean law and his impending birthday. If you dislike the edit now, then someone else will likely make it in one week, or one month from now regardless. Since its New Years today, I'll choose to fully ignore your weak parting jibe. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:32, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Ernest, I think you're not understanding our point. No one is denying the fact that he will eventually enlist. But why not wait until we have a confirmed date and details instead of preemptively add something like 'he will have to enlist before x date'? Why not add that to every article of every South Korean male then? Should we have a countdown for all of them? We cannot add information based on speculation or rumours; that is explicity against the rules. Waiting for an official statement from either BH or Yoongi himself is the right course of action. There's no harm in waiting a couple of months. - Ïvana (talk) 01:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Potential discography split

Is the Discog section large enough now to warrant splitting it off into its own article, as with RM's, or is it still too small to do so? -- Carlobunnie (talk) 19:23, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I think it's large enough. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 19:34, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I'll wait a few days, and if no one else comments I'll split it off. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 00:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
I also think it warrants its own article. - Ïvana (talk) 01:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
The draft is more or less done. I requested a move a few minutes ago. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 10:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Suga MV's section

I think it would be better to keep his MV's under filmography section. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 06:43, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Music videos are usually included as part of an artist's discography (e.g. Lifehouse discography, Linkin Park discography, Camila Cabello discography, Jessie J discography etc.) unless the list/section is large enough to warrant its own article. Suga's is not. I can't remember what the policy is for including/not including appearances on variety/talk shows, to say that we could expand the table that currently lists only his web show (we shouldn't even have a single entry table in the first place), but even then he doesn't have a lot of those either. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 11:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Tour concert photos

Here are some photos from his April 27 concert at UBS Arena, New York. I think it would be nice to post some pictures or create a gallery. Aioramu (talk) 10:38, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

You can post some photos that are relevant to the article but Wikipedia is not a indiscriminate collection of images Evaders99 (talk) 22:25, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Mentions of the singles

Carlobunnie, Why is there no mention of "People Pt. 2" (your excellent article) or "Haegeum" in the Solo career paragraph? Estyxxxx (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

No particular reason. I just didn't include them when updating all the other information at the time. They've been added now, though anyone else could've inserted them in the meantime. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 23:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Article name

Recently RM's article was changed from the dab rapper to musician. The reason was the following: "He's not only a rapper, but also a songwriter, music producer, and occasional singer". Same can be argued about Suga. There is already an article for Suga (musician) which redirects here. I'm not very good at moving pages so I wanted to see if anyone would oppose the move before requesting it. - Ïvana (talk) 15:54, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I personally didn't agree with RM's page move and didn't get the chance to oppose it the first time. So I'm definitely not in favor of this one being moved. I mean it's obvious that their musicians but I don't think we need to make that distinction when I feel that it would unnecessarily be disambiguating it further. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 17:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
How is musician a further disambiguation than rapper? Isn't the 'rapper' designation a subset of the broader 'musician' term? Musicians compose, conduct, or perform music. A rapper may perform music (i.e. his raps) but not necessarily write or compose it. While Suga is known as a rapper, over the years he's come to be prominently known for all his skills as a musician, including writing, composing, producing, and singing. While I confess I don't always understand the arguments for or against certain disambiguations, I can see the case for musician over rapper. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 16:07, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Right? I feel like using musician instead of rapper makes even more sense for Suga since he's been known as a writer and producer for years (not to mention all of his other skills). I think rapper in this case might be too specific. - Ïvana (talk) 20:12, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
How can we move forward with getting the page renamed to "musician"? Numerous published articles already refer to him as a "musician" these days, especially given all of this writing and producing credits. Not to mention the awards he's been nominated for and won as a producer. DownTheRabbitBurrow (talk) 09:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Also, I just realized that one could make the argument that "Agust D" may be a rapper, but "SUGA" is a full-blown musician. He sings as well as raps, plays musical instruments, has well over 100 songwriting credits in KOMCA, and has produced numerous songs for other artists in addition to "re-imagining" Samsung's signature ringtone (which is rapless!) DownTheRabbitBurrow (talk) 10:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

D-Day album and tour should be added to the intro

Both of his mixtapes are mentioned but not his first album D-Day, which had actually set the record for first day sales for a rap album, besting even the likes of Drake and Eminem. Rumor has it sales were over 1 million, but I don't know where to go to for source.

He also recently completed a 2-month US/Asia tour with the US portion setting several records, including the highest grossing arena concerts in US history by a rap artist of any nationality, and the first rapper to earn over $3 million in a single arena concert (which he did on each of his three performances at the Forum in Inglewood CA, per https://touringdata.wordpress.com/2023/05/12/suga-d-day-tour/ and https://twitter.com/touringdata/status/1661086707104530438). DownTheRabbitBurrow (talk) 11:07, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Agree. I'll try to add the bit about the album and tour later today if I have time. I'll also look for sources for the 1m record (saw it on Twitter a while ago but I don't know if anyone else mentioned it or if it is actually true). - Ïvana (talk) 14:00, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for adding the album! For the tour and the records it set, is it appropriate to at least mention it here? Or only on the tour page? DownTheRabbitBurrow (talk) 04:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
@DownTheRabbitBurrow: I tried to find sources regarding the 1m record sales but all of them referenced fansites in Twitter, so I couldn't include any of them. I'll check again later in Naver. For the tour I didn't have time to look for sources regarding the record attendance, I'll do that later. It needs to be added to the tour article first, and then maybe mentioned in this one, and then it can be on the lead. - Ïvana (talk) 21:09, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Does the link I had included in my first message on this thread (touringdata.wordpress.com) count as a valid reference? DownTheRabbitBurrow (talk) 09:53, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
@DownTheRabbitBurrow: Sorry I just saw this.. Both links fall under WP:UGC. I'll try to find better sources (probably this weekend - I don't have much time during the week) - Ïvana (talk) 14:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Filmography section

This section is pointless. All he actually has is his Disney+ docu and Suchwita, both of which could be mentioned in the Career section prose (the former already is) instead of these unnecessary tables (one-off appearances elsewhere don't count). Same for his brief Apple Music show, which was part of his D-Day promotions. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 20 July 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Suga (rapper) → Suga (musician) – See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Suga_(rapper)#Article_name

"He's not only a rapper, but also a songwriter, music producer, and occasional singer" 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 10:40, 20 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. – MaterialWorks 16:09, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Additional comment: I'm not changing my vote, but if moving it to Suga is an option I'll definitely choose that over this move. My suggestion:
Suga (rapper) → Suga
Suga → Suga (disambiguation)
Currently the Suga disambiguation page doesn't list anyone using it as a single name or stage name. Only a bunch of people with the surname. You can compare the pageviews here. It's evident that Suga (the rapper) is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Moving this article to Suga and adding a hatnote to the DAB page should be more than enough. - Ïvana (talk) 20:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 Works for me 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 15:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Comment, potential confusion with Shikao Suga. Hatnote to DAB page likely all that would be needed. ― Synpath 17:20, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose Yes, he's a songwriter, producer, etc. But he's most known and recognized as a rapper, so per WP:NC /WP:UCRN we shouldn't change the name of the article, or at least, if you insist, we can change it to only Suga instead of the current name. Lililolol (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
     Works for me 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 15:21, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Lililolol. Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 13:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Support. I get the arguments for and against, but I'm more inclined towards the move as it better encompasses his overall profession. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 03:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose I agree with Lililolol. It should be taken into account that Suga is way more known by his rapper position rather than a musician. I think you could have a higher chance of just getting Suga. Like the Jimin article. 52-whalien (talk) 13:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
     Works for me 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 15:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Comment: If this doesn't get moved, I think RM's article should be reverted back to the previous "RM (rapper)" title. RMXY (talk) 10:22, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Support "Musician" is more broad, accurate, and apt, "Rapper" is too narrow. Those who are listed as rappers on Wikipedia seem to be not just primarily rappers but for the most part exclusively rappers: YG (rapper), Scarface (rapper), Takeoff (rapper) -- whereas we often list rappers who sing and are involved in music beyond just rapping as musicians, even when they are primarily rappers, e.g. Drake (musician), Shaggy (musician), Ziatan (musician), MIKE (musician), Wiley (musician). I'm not super familiar with Suga or their work, but I've heard a couple BTS singles where Suga is singing a la Drake in addition to rapping. Criticalus (talk) 20:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
    Comment: Drake is a very good example of what I was thinking of. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 20:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
    Just adding in here a clarification. Move to Suga (musician) but extremely strong oppose to move to Suga per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Page views are not a good singular evidentiary point to move to Suga. Indeed, very likely Suga fails to meet the second criteria: A topic is primary for a term with respect to long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term.
    There is no basis for moving to Suga without the qualifier "musician" and I think everyone who is voting below should be very careful to reconsider. To say this one rapper/musician named Suga (who also goes by Agust D, and from a cursory glance of a bystander it almost appears that he prefers that name) should take the article over the dozens of other topics in the disambiguation listing verges on absurdity.
    To use the Drake reference above, Drake (musician) is one of the most notable musicians in the world today, arguably more notable than Suga (please don't crucify me BTS fans), yet Drake does not occupy Drake alone. Criticalus (talk) 00:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Support per nom, as better descriptor.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Support per arguments made by Criticalus and per nom. ⁂CountHacker (talk) 04:47, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Comment: The arguments seem convincing, but I'm more inclined to rename the article Suga per Ïvana's Additional comment above. Lililolol (talk) 10:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
 Works for me 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 15:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
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.

Requested move 4 August 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Clear consensus in support of a move. (closed by non-admin page mover) SkyWarrior 15:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

– This nomination can be seen as usual, that is, it can be viewed as my support for these page moves based upon the strong, compelling arguments for this entertainer to be the PRIMARYTOPIC as set forth in the [previous move request], which I closed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:40, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Note for closer: There was a prior WP:INVOLVED closure that has been reverted. Suga (disambiguation) was moved to Suga and retargeted. This can be fixed with one round-robin swap (regardless of the result). SilverLocust 💬 14:19, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
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.

Clan?

I'm seeing on Namuwiki that he's of the Yeoheung Min clan; can anyone find proof of this and add it to the article? toobigtokale (talk) 12:24, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Someone managed to confirm RM's clan using Run BTS; maybe similar would work here. toobigtokale (talk) 12:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
This should do. Chiyako92 16:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2024

Ana15867547 (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)


Change the profil picture because it's not accurate.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. how so? and to what? Cannolis (talk) 21:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Please update Suga of BTS profile. Thank you

We noticed that SUGA has a different profile and incorrect description. When you search 🔍 "SUGA OF BTS" The description and profile is very different , instead of "SOUTH KOREAN RAPPER AND SONGWRITER" it only says ; Song writer and the PICTURE MUST BE THE SAME as you used WITH OTHER MEMBERS. I kindly request that you consider updating Suga's profile picture and description . This will help ensure that users searching for information about Suga are presented with the most up-to-date +and accurate visual representation of the artist.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. We appreciate your assistance in updating Suga's profile picture and description on Google. 🫶🏻💜 158.62.2.104 (talk) 06:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has nothing to do with what Google shows. Chiyako92 07:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Including "guitar" in the Artistry section

Curious to know if anyone thinks his guitar-playing ability should be mentioned now. He started learning in 2020, went live with it quite a few times, played it in his music video for Snooze, it's in the documentary iirc, and he played it for the entirety of the D-Day tour. I'm unsure whether other editors believe it's enough to make the instrument synonymous with his artist persona now or not. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 19:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2024

Requesting photo to be replaced with alternative provided by BigHit Entertainment / Hybe. Reversion to previous would also be appropriate. Current image was taken illegally by media. Additionally, as this is a page for the public figure Suga, an official photo would make more sense rather than a photo taken of the civilian Min Yoongi (as he is currently enlisted). Jkking6 (talk) 03:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Additional context

Shouldn't additional context abt Suga's DUI be included with what's currently on the page? He fell while trying to park his scooter at his own home/in front of his own house, for one, not while riding it. Two, the police officer was already near/at his house, saw him lying on the ground after he fell, and made him take a breathalyser. Also, mention should be made of what SK's allowed BAC level is and that they have a law(s) for operating those kinds of scooters, to better explain why he was fined/awarded a DUI, and the military's stance on the situation, that he won't be penalized because he was drinking in his off time/outside of working hours. I can't remember if that's everything since there's been such an influx of articles about the whole thing, making it hard to keep up. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 13:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

More content should be provided. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 16:47, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
@Carlobunnie: We definitely need more context. On top of what you mentioned, he was fully cooperative and didn't harm anyone or anything, so that will result in a lighter sentence. Although he and the company have declared that his license was revoked, one source indicates that according to the police, that hasn't happened yet. Another source refers to a "scooter license" instead of just "license", I'm not sure if there's a difference. It's also mentioned that if revoked, the offender would be unable to re-obtain a license for one year. But I have no idea how the SK law works in this specific situation. Like you said, the influx of news (much of it sensationalist or purposely misleading for clicks) has made it difficult to determine the current situation. - Ïvana (talk) 21:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Some helpful links pertaining to the Road Traffic Act.
— Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
@Paper9oll I think the article relies a bit too much on speculative news sources right now. Especially the part that he had 0.227 in BAC level. In many countries BrAC tests cannot solely qualify for severe DUI since breath levels are not fully indicative on BAC levels. Since the police did not follow up with blood test, the only known fact is that he had over 0.08% in BAC level...making it a misdemeanor and not a felony. My recommendation is to remove the part taken from DongA Ilbo at the moment and wait for the outcome of the police investigation. 213.89.134.201 (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
@213.89.134.201 Your removal request isn't for me to answer on as I'm not the editor who added it, please approach the editor who added the content and/or establish consensus in this talk page for the content removal. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:02, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Why would it be? The press have lied about almost all of the evidence and at this point, publishing that photo of him in the photo line, which is a human rights violation and illegal, but still done by the press there, isn't that enough shaming of someone on a scooter for one day? 2603:8001:2EF0:A0D0:35C8:D8EE:CFEA:E8BA (talk) 03:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Replaced sources and removed content based on unverified claims. I also added the statement by the military. If it doesn't come directly from any of the parties involved then it is just WP:SPECULATION. The police hasn't said anything about his BAC level, only that it was higher than 0.08% which is grounds for his license to be revoked. - Ïvana (talk) 13:40, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

https://www.parismatch.com/people/desinformation-pressions-que-se-passe-t-il-avec-suga-de-bts-240859?at_medium=Fan+Page&at_campaign=Twitter+&at_creation=Paris+Match
Hello, please find an article written by a french journalist. I hope it will make the situation clearer as wikipedia is not a sensational newspaper. Have a very nice day 90.26.104.28 (talk) 10:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Please remove the most recently updated photo. It was taken during an illegal photo line. Revert image
back to Marie Claire image. 2601:681:4900:3C60:E0E1:81B6:D650:19F9 (talk) 03:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Agree. That photo was taken illegally. Please remove it and go back to the Marie Claire image. 2603:8001:2EF0:A0D0:35C8:D8EE:CFEA:E8BA (talk) 03:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Here is the evidence that this is illegally done. Please do not use these photographs because they are for public shaming and have led to suicide from those who must undergo them.
"The police rejected a photoline, a legal way for the press to gather and address serious criminals. Despite this, reporters were seen lining up outside on August 22, 2024. In fact, they crowded the entrance even more tightly and aggressively than usual, wanting to get a photo of SUGA at any cost. Since the police station had no backdoor option, SUGA would have had to push through the crowd."
https://www.desimartini.com/international/ott/army-have-the-last-laugh-bts-suga-does-not-appear-at-police-station-while-k-media-swarms-entrance-since-morning/10e1479f80842/
Also, this last year, the photo line was one of the reasons the Parasite actor Lee Sun-Kyun committed suicide. 2603:8001:2EF0:A0D0:35C8:D8EE:CFEA:E8BA (talk) 03:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2024

remove the whole DUI allegation section. Its nothing but diffamation ProtectBTS (talk) 09:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: the section is well referenced with reliable sources. If you have references to the contrary, then please cite them. Wikishovel (talk) 09:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Recommend changing hyperlink for electric scooter to e-scooter page. Confirmed CCTV footage (https://n.news.naver.com/article/448/0000471832?sid=102) shows vehicle closer to kick scooter than motorcycle scooter. Jkking6 (talk) 03:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
https://www.desimartini.com/international/ott/army-have-the-last-laugh-bts-suga-does-not-appear-at-police-station-while-k-media-swarms-entrance-since-morning/10e1479f80842/
"The police rejected a photoline, a legal way for the press to gather and address serious criminals. Despite this, reporters were seen lining up outside on August 22, 2024. In fact, they crowded the entrance even more tightly and aggressively than usual, wanting to get a photo of SUGA at any cost. Since the police station had no backdoor option, SUGA would have had to push through the crowd."
It's illegal. Wikipedia could be sued. As it is, the company will likely sue the news agencies who took the photo. 2603:8001:2EF0:A0D0:35C8:D8EE:CFEA:E8BA (talk) 03:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Everything in the DUI section is well sourced and presented in a neutral manner based on reliable information. Sorry it sounds like you WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT RachelTensions (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2024 (2)

I request you not to use that picture of yoongi and remove the DUI allegations ! 2001:4454:561:8800:9136:4B98:256B:733F (talk) 04:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Request change of photo

The photo edit of the illegal photo should be changed back to the Marie Claire photo or another professional photo. The one used presently was taken without consent in a photo line that was banned by the police. It is also not a professional photo.

As well, I request that anyone who makes edits like these be banned from editing BTS pages for any of the members as there may be malicious intent from someone who is engaging in what is known as a fan war, which is not professional or ethical on Wikipedia's pages. Odetteroulette (talk) 04:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The photo had already been removed prior to your request. A request for consensus for inclusion in the article has been posted at Talk:Suga#Infobox Photo though I doubt it will return as the main article picture.
Re: your request for edits like these to be banned from editing BTS pages... these are good faith edits that don't constitute a user being blocked. In addition, Wikipedia isn't a BTS playground, we can't block editors from only editing BTS-related pages. It's all or nothing. Sorry. RachelTensions (talk) 05:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
It's simply a caution that this particular user may be violating Wikipedia's rules. Odetteroulette (talk) 05:15, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
And thank you for removing the photograph and replacing it with something professional. Odetteroulette (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Technically, one can be partially blocked from editing from certain articles, but it will not be done in this instance as what @RachelTensions said, the edit was done in good faith. As far as I can tell, no Wikipedia rules have been being violated here.
Additionally, this is not taken in a photo line within the police station. Tracing back to the source of the image https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAazwHMO2NI, it was taken outside the police station, which anyone, as far as I can tell from the source, is allowed to take photos or videos. If there is a consensus to replace the image as such, you may also see WP:NOTCENSORED. – robertsky (talk) 08:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Photo lines in South Korea refer to the press line that forms outside of the station.
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/opinion/2024/08/638_262581.html
In this particular case, press reported that police stated there would be no photo line. The media disregarded and gathered outside anyway. Jkking6 (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
One resource is to request for file to be deleted on Commons. See c:Commons:Deletion requests and c:Commons:Deletion policy. – robertsky (talk) 15:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Done, thank you.
Regarding the edit being done in good faith, I looked through the user's previous edits and it is possible that the edit was made as part of a childish "fan war". A subset of fans of the group, whose pages the user edited, routinely antagonize BTS. The speed at which the photo was initially uploaded to wiki (from the time it was taken) seems opportunistic.
Additionally, there were recent news articles of fans of this group promoting drunk driving while pretending to be fans of SUGA with the intent to paint him and his fans in a negative light.
I recognize that this is likely not enough for a partial temporary block as there is no overt evidence against the user, but the editing is at the very least questionable. Jkking6 (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
I suggest that you retract your statement about the other's editing pattern made without evidence provided as this can be interpreted as casting aspersions and can be seen as a personal attack. – robertsky (talk) 02:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Anyone involved at all with Kpop, as the editor is, would know these photo line photos are a serious problem and that it isn't a professional photo, but a coerced one. It isn't personal to note that should be a known issue already. Including it was a problem. If these things do not happen from this editor in the future, I'm sure it will be fine. Odetteroulette (talk) 13:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
I acknowledged in my comment that there is limited evidence and was merely pointing out a potential conflict of interest. In my line of work, we routinely vet studies/articles to ensure lack of bias by checking who the authors work for and who fund them. It is not a personal attack to point this out. The additional information was only provided to give context to those who may be unaware of the current situation. Jkking6 (talk) 17:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
It is not a personal attack to point this out. No, it is. This is casting aspersions without concrete evidence. We simply don't do that here, and we don't talk smack about other editors unless we have definite proof. (Most of the time, the spidey senses are limited to WP:SPI or WP:COPYVIO.) That being said, a holler to @Flabshoe1 for your inputs on the above. Jkking6, your reasoning has a risk of broad application on other unrelated editors. Not every editor who edits on kpop articles routinely may be aware of the norms of the kpop scene. I certainly don't. Assume good faith and don't adopt battleground mentality. Keep this up and you may risk a block, if it is not from me, from other admins. – robertsky (talk) 06:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, this is a baseless accusation without evidence. I have never involved myself in editing any article content related to the DUI allegation and attempted to "antagonize" Suga in any way. When uploading Creative Commons-licensed photos from Blackpink's recent pink carpet event, I saw several recently uploaded videos from the same channel and thought it would be a good opportunity to update other lead photos to a more recent one as well. While I am aware of the DUI allegation, I was not aware of the concept of a "photo line" or that coercion was possibly involved, as this is not a commonly brought up topic in K-pop at all. It is a completely unfounded personal attack to attack me without any evidence and link me to misbehavior including "recent news articles of fans of this group promoting drunk driving while pretending to be fans of SUGA" (I have never heard of this before?) I respect whatever the community decides regarding the inclusion or deletion of these photos, since there is a greater context than I originally knew about. Flabshoe1 (talk) 16:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Apologies, occupational hazard on my end. When we point out potential conflicts of interest at work (i.e. sponsors of a study, author employed by the company behind the product, etc.), we don't do it as an attack on the authors but to raise awareness and remind readers to think critically about potential bias. Jkking6 (talk) 02:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

(RfC Complete): Infobox Photo

I've reverted the infobox photo from the photo of the subject at Yeongsan Police Station, back to the previous professional photo. I don't think it's particularly appropriate to have a photo of the subject at a police station as the lead photo given we have high quality professional photoshoots that meet Wikipedia's license requirements.

Can we come to a consensus whether or not the photo's inclusion would be beneficial if included inline in the DUI allegation section? RachelTensions (talk) 04:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Also it's pretty obvious to see that this article has a very high risk of being brigaded by BTS fans from Twitter who would rather the article be squeaky clean and remove any reference to the DUI allegation at all. RachelTensions (talk) 04:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
The photo is illegal. Right now, it's not supposed to be publicly transmitted to any sources. It is likely there will be lawsuits based on the use of the photo for those who do use it.
As well, those photo lines have been the reason some celebrities in Korea have committed suicide. I'd like to believe one would err on the side of caution about illegalities and also be compassionate. Odetteroulette (talk) 04:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
There is no issue to the incident being included in the article as the artist and company confirmed he did fall while riding a scooter after drinks at dinner.
The concern is that the S Korean press is flouting the journalistic code of ethics, behaving more like gossip magazines than actual reporters. There have been numerous occurrences of false and fabricated information being spread, incorrect CCTV footage, etc. The priority seems to be clicks and views rather than reporting unbiased facts, a worldwide issue and side effects of the Internet age.
Given that police officials also declined the photo line and press was not permitted to be on site, including the photo inline in the DUI allegation section does not appear to be particularly beneficial to the article. Perhaps including the confirmed CCTV clip and linking to the scooter traffic law would be more helpful especially since there have been recent changes/enforcements to the law. Jkking6 (talk) 06:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
What content from the DUI section constitutes gossip from South Korean media? As far as I'm aware the section reflects the facts that came directly from either the Police or Big Hit Music themselves. RachelTensions (talk) 06:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
I said the DUI section was fine to leave. I didn't say any of it constituted gossip from South Korean media. The only bit that may be iffy is whether or not the 3 officers recognized him; there were conflicting reports on that.
I brought up the South Korean media gossip in response to your comment that the article would be swarmed by fans trying to delete the section altogether and in regards to whether the photo should be included inline.
I believe the concern is due to the lack of reputable sources to cite as seen with a previous edit (which has since been rectified).
Including the photo in question given the circumstances in which it was taken and its source seems ill-advised as these publications that were previously thought to be reputable have now demonstrated to the contrary. Jkking6 (talk) 06:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
I will note neither this idol, who committed terrible acts against women nor this entertainer, who also committed more severe crimes, have their photo line photos anywhere in their Wikipedia pages.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seungri
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Beom-soo_(businessman)
Also, yesterday, the news organization Dispatch was suspended from X(Twitter) for sharing the video and photos from the photo line. Photo lines must be approved by the police. This one was not and is therefore illegal. Here is an article discussing how these are beginning to be considered human rights violation issues:
https://asianews.network/korean-celebrities-on-photo-line-walk-of-shame-or-equal-treatment/
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/opinion/2024/08/638_262581.html
I want to reiterate photo lines are not like press conferences that the celebrity willingly goes to and speaks. The press block the entrances and exits and create a pathway that the celebrity must follow and forcing them to have their photo taken and then won't let them enter until they speak. These actions have contributed to self harm and suicide by some celebrities and do not create a situation of adequate consent. I would hope Wikipedia would err on the side of compassion and caution, considering the very real possibility these photo lines will be banned in the future entirely.
I don't have any other complaints about the DUI section now that the information seems to be corrected and is now based on reliable sources. Thank you. Odetteroulette (talk) 16:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Also just to clear up any confusion re: the "legality" of the photo: it is important to state that the photo in question is of the subject appearing in public, standing in front of reporters, microphones, and cameras, giving a statement.
There was no possible expectation of privacy by the subject in this instance whatsoever. I'm not sure where the "illegal photo" mumbo jumbo on this talk page is coming from other than from people who just want to cover the whole incident up. RachelTensions (talk) 04:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
It isn't "mumbo jumbo." The police told them not to do it, and they did it anyway. There are sources included. I think consent here is highly questionable as the journalists blocked the entrances to the station so that he had to appear in front of them. Odetteroulette (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Maybe it would be better to discuss what a photo line is, as it is not a press conference with a willing participant, but an illegal situation where the press bars the subject from entering the building until they have "consented" to a photograph and a statement, something the police in this case told them not to do. There could also be longer discussion about the problem of the photo lines and their illegality and how they have led to suicide and include the problems of the press in this case, how the press had to apologize for lying, using fake CCTV footage that wasn't Min Yoongi, have no sources for the BAC. Or it might be prudent to wait until the investigation is complete and make the correct statements then. Odetteroulette (talk) 05:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
"The police rejected a photoline, a legal way for the press to gather and address serious criminals. Despite this, reporters were seen lining up outside on August 22, 2024."
https://www.desimartini.com/international/ott/army-have-the-last-laugh-bts-suga-does-not-appear-at-police-station-while-k-media-swarms-entrance-since-morning/10e1479f80842/
Media not permitted to gather outside police station by police = no photo line = no statement to press
South Korea: consent required to take a picture and publish a picture
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements Jkking6 (talk) 05:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't seem relevant, fair, or necessary to include the image in the article. It's not from an official press conference, nor is it evidence of the alleged crime. Looking at other Korean celebrity pages, sections for accused or convicted crimes do not include such photos. It's also not a long section that would benefit from being visually broken up with an image. If you feel an image is needed, we could brainstorm ideas that are less damaging and more relevant. Pintsizedpunk (talk) 01:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
I think WP:BLPIMAGE covers this: Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. This is particularly important for police booking photographs (mugshots), or situations where the subject did not expect to be photographed. Using that picture can create the false impression that he has been convicted of a crime, or that the situation is way worse than it is. We need to be extra careful with BLPs. I know the subject did not expect to be photographed part will be contested cause he spoke to journalists but, as other people have explained, there is a single entrance to the police station so avoiding the media was impossible. Moreover, refusing to publicly apologize in those circumstances is not really an option and pretty much expected from public figures. Coerced consent is not really consent.
BLP issues aside, is not even a better picture that the one being currently used. This one is a screenshot from a video, taken at night, and not very high quality. Obviously a professional picture will look better. Current picture is from last year, so no one can argue that the subject doesn't look like that anymore. - Ïvana (talk) 14:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Closing this RfC: consensus is that the photo's inclusion in the article wouldn't be appropriate in this instance. In addition the photo is nom'd for deletion at commons and will probably proceed. No further action needed RachelTensions (talk) 13:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2024

In the "DUI allegation" section of the article it is stated in the first sentence that "Suga was allegedly driving an electric scooter" with the hyperlink of electic scooter leading to a page about motorcycles. According to the official statement of Suga and the agency, but also, based on the confirmed cctv footage, what he was driving can be descibed best as an "E-scooter" or "Motorized scooter".

Attached is a link to an article as a source for the cctv footage [1]. Ollysf (talk) 10:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes it goes about 18 mph at top speed, and in the CCTV footage, he was going about 8 mph, wearing a helmet, in the bike lane. Odetteroulette (talk) 18:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Here is a link to a video about the exact scooter from Sean Kim. The important part of the video is at 10:49. It has a complimentary basket on the back and is marketed as a mini-scooter or mini-kick board. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nocMQUYm9V8
It is NOT a motorcycle or moped. Odetteroulette (talk) 18:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Please provide reliable & neutral sources that state as such. Your own statements and deductions based on pictures/videos do not constitute WP:reliable sources RachelTensions (talk) 20:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
The police literally released the information about the type of scooter that it was, and Sean Lim is a journalist who reported on what they said. He has the photos, the name of the scooter, etc. I gave you the link and the timestamp.
I'm not sure what is requested here then that would be considered "reliable" journalism since the media that released all the incorrect information passed muster earlier and had to be changed, yes?
I don't think a quote from Koreaboo is going to be very reliable. I did in fact give you a neutral source. It is not "my deduction." Also, I find this argumentative stance on your part a bit troubling. I am attempting to provide correct information and would like to be viewed as doing so, especially since I gave you literal links to a journalist with this information.
I would ask that you also remove your statements on BTS's fans here as those comments are "casting aspersions" without any proof. Thank you. Odetteroulette (talk) 22:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
The timestamps for the scooter information start at 7:20 on the link. He has the brand, the type, the photos, the speed, etc.
Obviously, it will be even more helpful when the police make their official report. At that time, we will know the real BrAC and they can confirm again what they said earlier that Mr. Lim is reporting. Thank you. Odetteroulette (talk) 22:52, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
On Wikipedia, the onus is on the requester to provide reliable sources for information that they want inserted or changed in an article. The reliable source currently cited in the article states the subject was riding an “electric scooter”.
We have reliable sources for “electric scooter”. I haven’t seen any information in reliable sources that states otherwise. Timestamps from a kpop gossip YouTube channel do not meet Wikipedia’s standards for reliable sources. RachelTensions (talk) 00:06, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
The report however comes directly from the police. However, I am not privy to all Korean media in Hangul so I'm relying on someone who speaks English to bring the news. And the e scooter in the video is an electric scooter that is also advertised as a kickboard. It even folds so it can be carried. The police simply released the brand name so everyone would know what it was.
I would hope in the future Wikipedia would be cautious about using Korean media at all, since Korean media are still reporting incorrect information. This one just came from the police. It is why I included it. Perhaps next time you should watch the video to see instead of an immediate dismissal.
Since the investigation is now supposed to be wrapped up quickly, per a translated Korean news source, we'll hear the brand name again and you can compare. I'm sure it will help in the future to create a more reliable system for sourcing than the one that was present in the last few weeks, which had to be corrected entirely. Odetteroulette (talk) 03:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I think I didn't site the article correctly. Here's the link https://n.news.naver.com/article/020/0003581843?sid=102 . It seems that in the source I accidently used the link of one of the images in the article. Anyway, I hope the full article helps back up my request. Ollysf (talk) 04:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate the source - Dong-A Ilbo is a reliable source per Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources. However, the translation of that article just says "electric scooter", which is exactly what is stated in the Wikipedia article here. I'm not clear on what should be changed. RachelTensions (talk) 04:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
It is translated as an "electric scooter", but it is not actually what the hyperlink of "electric scooter" shows in Wikipedia. The cctv shows that the image best fits an "E-scooter" or "Motorized scooter". I understand the matter of translation, but I think the most important thing is an accurate image of the vehicle. Someone reading the article and seeing the picture of a motorcycle while hovering over "electric scooter" is misleading. I will cite another article that doesn't metion the specific model but it says that it was foldable and for me personally translates it as kickboard at some points https://m.entertain.naver.com/article/609/0000883754 Ollysf (talk) 04:50, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
How about we just remove the link on "electric scooter" altogether since it seems there is still confusion. Part of the confusion lies in that the scooter in question very obviously has a seat as per what is stated in the article for electric scooter, whereas the articles for e-scooter or motorized scooter very clearly state that those vehicles are to be ridden standing.
Either way let's just remove the link because I'm not sure any of the articles we could link to accurately depict the vehicle in question here. RachelTensions (talk) 05:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I think that is the best option. Thank you! Ollysf (talk) 05:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
I think perhaps since the model is an electric scooter, it should be listed as one, but I would say we wait for the formal statement.
As for Dong-A Iibo being a reliable source, since absolutely everything so far has been wrong from that source, perhaps that needs to be reconsidered. 64.69.155.35 (talk) 19:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Feel free to take it to WP:KO/RS and discuss with other editors there. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 08:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done - wikilink on "electric scooter" has been removed as it is currently unclear which "electrified-scooter-related" article applies in this case. RachelTensions (talk) 05:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1823606678761431041/J0rAbttQ?format=jpg&name=small
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Suga/Archive_1&oldid=1255607476"