Template:Did you know nominations/Kanako Momota

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Victuallers (talk) 09:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Kanako Momota

(

)

~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) once landed on her rear end and bumped up to the top of the news?~~

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Great Fire of Tartu
Comment: Please try to think of a better hook. I'm trying too.

Created/expanded by Moscow Connection (talk), Shintaro Mori (talk), Morishin5555 (talk). Nominated by Moscow Connection (talk) at 23:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC).

ALT1 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) once landed a shrimp jump on her rear end and bumped up to the top of the news?~~

ALT2 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) once landed on her rear end and bumped up to the top of the news although she was not injured?~~

Hi. What do you think about my idea (ALT2)? --Anosola (talk) 15:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for coming. I think ALT2 is too long, but the fact that she was not injured can be used in some other alternative hook. --Moscow Connection (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Long enough, new enough, AGF on foreign language source, qualifies as expanded, hook is short enough but I don't like the phrase 'bumped up to the top of the news' - the news as most people know it isn't ranked!

ALT3 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) once landed on her rear end?~~

Also, as this is your twelfth nomination, you need to do a QPQ for it.--Laun chba ller 10:57, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

QPQ is there, see the "Reviewed" line. I will try to think of a better hook tomorrow, okay? For the time being, here's one more attempt.

ALT4 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) once landed on her rear end and bumped up to the top of the Yahoo! Japan homepage?~~

I'm desperately trying to make the hook more "hooky"... --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

for ALT4, and review otherwise done by Launchballer. Personally, everytime I turn on the television news, they lead with, "And in the top of the news..." meaning the lead stories. Maybe it's not that way everywhere. However, Moscow Connection, I believe you have a good hook with ALT4, so I'm giving the tick for that one. And confirming that your QPQ was done Jan 1. — Maile (talk) 20:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

The hook was pulled from Template:Did you know/Preparation area 1 by Ohconfucius (talk · contribs) (diff). I am reinstating the hook on T:TDYK per the instructions at Wikipedia:Did you know/Removed. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 13:47, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

* The hook isn't the worst of it, yet the assembled editors spent so much time fussing over it and missed a rather poor article chok full of assorted bits of unrelated trivia masquerading as a biography. I mean, only the most diehard fan will think that "Her image color in the group is red" is a fact that provides a good summary and important enough for the lead. It should have been nuked.

Come on, she did a 20,000 word interview – there must be something usable there... Also, as all the sources are in Japanese, the titles of this article's citations need to be translated into English. Above all, needs a Japanese-proficient reviewer (don't want a rerun of the "Daniel Caverzaschi incident" now, do we? -- Ohc ^¡digame! 14:36, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't have her interviews to write a better article. I've asked a Japanese editor named Anosola to look at it. And I asked another editor who lives in Japan here: Talk:Momoiro Clover Z#list of Things-To-Do (I'm not sure if he looked, though). Most of the personal details section was translated into English from the Japanese Wikipedia by one or two Japanese editors (see the DYK credits) and corrected by me.
There's no rule that would say that the citation titles must be in English. (The matter has been discussed many times already.)
By the way, it is the 546th most popular article in the Japanese Wikipedia: [1]. --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Although there's no rule that would say that the citation titles must be in English, I would remind you that you are writing for readers of English Wikipedia. And I think they would consider such translation would be a great courtesy to them. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 13:56, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I will translate the titles. --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I need help in rewriting it. I really tried, but Japanese magazines don't like to publish their articles online. --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
I will rewrite it. I will find something. I am very sorry that the article is so awful, but as you can see I've really tried to get help. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Moscow Connection, DYK has another editor fluent in Japanese: Nbarth. Maybe that editor will respond to this ping and assist. This one has not edited in a week. But if you are in a hurry, you might see if their email is enabled and try to contact them that way. — Maile (talk) 22:27, 24 January 2014 (UTC) I also put a request for you on the Wikiproject Japan talk page. We'll see if someone can help from there. — Maile (talk) 22:36, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I can find her interviews (for example, the 20,000-kanji interview for QuickJapan) and I will help to expand it and make it a decent article. --Anosola (talk) 06:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't think this article meets the criteria for DYK (at least not at the time of current writing). It's just not a very good article, despite all of the work that Moscow Connection has put into it.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:43, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Could you wait please? I am going to try and improve it. I am going to browse through all the interviews with the group on Natalie. And another Japanese editor has been contacted. --Moscow Connection (talk) 04:24, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I've copyedited and got rid of the worst of the fancruft and trivia. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 05:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

And your edits got rid of the hook showing that it's not terribly interesting.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, falling on your butt which is an inherent risk of doing somersaults on stage might cause a few chuckles on gossip/entertainment columns, but it's hardly of biographical merit. Good riddance to bad rubbish, I say. ;-) -- Ohc ^¡digame! 13:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Japanese idols is a very funny subject and you are not the first to be shocked. Believe me, the story is important. :) DYK hooks are supposed to be funny and stupid, there's nothing wrong with it. --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I'm familiar with Asian media inclinations and obsessions, but Wikipedia is not the news. DYK hooks are supposed to be "interesting", yes. But the article is a biography, and someone who once fell on her backside is neither funny, interesting nor biographical. As I said, if you habitually do somersaults on stage and fall over once, it's an occupational hazard. It's not as if she broke her neck or ended up in hospital with a fracture. It's slightly embarrassing for the performer, and some may perversely delight, that's all. End of story. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 22:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

moscow&gang, well, here i am finally… yeah, you may be sorry you asked but here we go…

sorry i'm not even gonna spend a moment of my time translating for you; only much more to poke holes in… and forget about the sources; it'd be dangerous to this articles existence for me to go there… meanwhile, here's a list of things to do here…

"(nicknames)" is unnecessary in the info box; it already states "Also known as"…
the "March 2011 announcement": why do you always find it necessary to list the "announcement" ?! either list the accomplishment or don't mention anything at all! if (she) didn't achieve the announcement/goal, would you write that too?? didnt think so~

while i'm at it: why is it that these idol articles are so full of their "announcement" dates, and mostly for disposable information… "on July 20 so&so announced she will learn to play piano better. on August 2 so&so announced she will try to be a nicer person. on September 15 so&so announced that she will make another announcement on September 25th…" please stop this practice. decidedly unencyclopedic, usually fannish trivia anyway…

these articles so quickly become random lists of dates overall, with no actual third-party coverage/commentary except that something occurred on the given date… its not teaching (me) anything (i'd) care to know (the purpose of an encyclopedia?)…

the whole thing about her & mommy book-shopping: boy thats a doozy of a paragraph! those 8-or-so sentences really drag things out clumsily; all just to say she passed an audition?? all of that could be said in 3-or-4 sentences with the fat trimmed…

you bring up concern of a "TV show ratings drop" in 2013, then just leave the topic hanging there (and again: another "announcement")… either report the full turn of events/outcome, or drop it…

is it really necessary to announce the numbers of the "long interview"?? is that teaching me something? its surely not impressing me; they likely spent those "20,000 characters" talking about her favorite perfume (oh, that's exactly what they spent 20,000 talking about!)…

why do we need to know the title of the Tamori episode or the topic (wild weeds? anyone… anyone…?) unless it held some relevance to her appearance??

MomocloverZ section: first 2 sentences can be merged…
NO need for the "shrimp jump" hiragana!
paragraphed sentence "(…other members doing cartwheels…)" sayonara seeya tomorra?
that whole "Personal" section reads like an online dating service profile than an encyclopedia entry; while we're on the topic: my dream is to keep wikipedia from becoming cutiepedia (< don't steal my new website name)…

stop worrying about making the hook more hooky, instead keep working on making the article more articley!… which brings me finally to: ALL of the proposed hooks are reaching/trying too hard but not quite cutting it! 頑張って下さいませ〜 Japanglish (talk) 03:42, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

LOL. Thanks for the feedback. Such is the nature of fancruft. I just said I got rid of the worst of it... -- Ohc ^¡digame! 03:55, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

You did say that, but much of what you deleted was restored to the article within a couple of hours. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:17, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

In order to achieve 5x expansion, this article needs to increase to 2925 prose characters from the 585 it had prior to expansion. The edits that removed unencyclopedic material at first took it down to around 2400 prose characters, which made only a 4x expansion. It's currently at 2895, only a bit shy of 5x, but I have to wonder at remaining sentences like "Her hobby is relaxing while watching DVDs at home", which isn't a hobby by any definition of the word I know. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

You're right, but I just cleaned it again. They need to come up with more/better biographical content. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 05:39, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I have come in possession of a new source. I need help from someone fluent in Japanese who is willing to provide his email address so I can send it to him.
I am going to expand the article using the forementioned source and other sources in the next couple of days. Presently I'm waiting for Japanglish to finish with the improvements. (I am not sure now is the right time for the improvements Japanglish implements cause the article is going to be expanded anyway. And the rewording has already resulted in several factual errors.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 06:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

i'm done & gotta run~ clean it up moscow, but i'll have to say i made it a point to stick to what already existed in the prose = if there are factual errors then its because the prior facts were vague to begin with; they still are: what issue/month of that magazine was her cosplay session printed? THAT should be the source, NOT the "announcement"... etc etc... seeya~ Japanglish (talk) 07:00, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. You should consult the sources when copyediting. I am not a supernatural being who knows everything. When writing, I am trying to stick to the sources. If some facts were vague, it was probably because the sources were vague. You should have looked at them and see what they say. If you looked, you wouldn't make the errors. --Moscow Connection (talk) 07:30, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, that's a accessory problem down to the fact that there are no English sources. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 08:25, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

The absence of English-language sources is not a problem. No English sources are required. And, as far as I can remember, Japanglish has said that he lives in Japan. If he can read Japanese, he should have put a little bit more of effort into it. --Moscow Connection (talk) 08:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

That's no reason to scoff and be so demanding. They didn't just stand around critising but has been pretty constructive in cleaning up the mess. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 09:48, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I know. I am greatful. I will try to preserve as many Japanglish's nice sentences in good English as I can when rewriting. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection: you make certain assertions but don't give reasons, so I'd like to know exactly:

why the falling over incident is "important" that it was reinstated contrary to my objection and that of what appears to be the majority of editors here and
the nature of the mistatement of facts that made this simplification require reverting?
In the meantime, I'll give you some space to develop the article, and I'll come and consolidate it again once you've done. ;-) -- Ohc ^¡digame! 13:25, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

It is just not true. You are the only one who removed the info twice and you were reverted by two different editors.
It is not a revert, I simply expanded the article, please read the addition attentively! I now wonder if you even read the article and tried to understand. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

But WHY is it "important???
I "unexpanded" it, your edit summary said Fixing factual errors. Expanding. WHAT EXACTLY were those factual errors???
-- Ohc ^¡digame! 16:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Why is it not? It is important because it has been discussed by multiple reliable sources. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:51, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Could you please stop asking questions here? There's an article talk page for that. I am sorry but it may look like you are trying to interfere with my ongoing expansion of the article. "Momota had long been interested in performing rhythmic gymnastics" was a factual error. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Throwing me back the question in the negative doesn't get you off the hook. Please enlighten us as to the issues those discussions touched upon – maybe the state of her coccyx. ;-)..Multiple reliable sources often report the news, and WP is not the neews.
There is no rule that says questions not alloeed here. All the action is here, and i don't want important points to get neglected or ignored. And after all, this page is transcluded in the article talk... -- Ohc ^¡digame! 17:37, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh, and we should take this article off the DYK nominees, close the discussion here and adjourn it to the article talk page. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 13:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I think you are biased against the subject and we should wait for more opinions. Cause you 1. removed the article from the DYK queue when it had been already approved; 2. tried to delete the fact used in the hook from the article several times; 3. decided to visit other random Japanese idol articles you had never edited before and removed some info as fancruft from them too. --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Delist. Careful now, as you now seem to be casting aspersions on my motivations. No, I'm absolutely not biased against the subject, but I do dislike unencyclopaedic and non-biographical details (aka fancruft) in biographies. My pulling the article enjoys general support and even you admitted it was poor quality. If I was against the subject, I hardly think I would have spent so much time and energy here and cleaning up the bios.
I decided to choose 4 idol articles at random to see what problems there might be, and found two that contained a few lines of fancruft that I removed. That does not make me "against" AKB48 or Momoclo or Momota. It's not as if I tried to have them deleted. ;-) -- Ohc ^¡digame! 15:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
@Moscow Connection: And please answer the questions above. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 15:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Why did you vote two times? Could you please stop attacking the article? --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:52, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup of unencyclopaedic material is not "attacking". Now please ANSWER THE QUESTIONS ABOVE, please, please, pretty please. Your answer will help determine whether the items in question are encyclopaedic or not. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 16:12, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's only two days since the article was first pulled from the prep area. That is far too soon to decide to reject the DYK once and for all. If the article is not brought up to standard within a reasonable time frame—at least a week, and more if progress is being made—or if it continues unstable for that period such that necessary changes aren't sticking and are unlikely to survive a main page promotion, then that would be grounds for closing it. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:02, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate that it's early days, but we just seem to be wasting a lot of time arguing "yes it is... no it isn't" without any understanding why the contested material keeps on reappearing. This sort of to-ing and fro-ing would be better on the article talk page instead of here, which is why I suggested delisting it, -- Ohc ^¡digame! 16:12, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

There's no reason that the discussion can't take place there while the nomination here awaits the results. DYK nominations sometimes await results of actions off-template; this seems to be a situation where such would be appropriate. I can't recall ever rejecting an article for DYK while such issues were actively being thrashed out. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:46, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Not reviewing but personally I think that the hook would be better on April Fools Day, that way there is a bit more flexibility on the hook. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:09, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Haha! A welcome dose of humour. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 16:12, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I assume you are making a joke and I hope I am right in that assumption. Because that was a serious suggestion. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Then, it's your creativity I should be applauding. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 16:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Moscow, not a very helpful demeanour towards reviewers. I have no problem with the original hook. Please remove the redundant "in order" in the bio section. "she did rhythmic gymnastics" ... not a nice wording; "she participated in rhythmic gymnastics class/training"? This sounds just too trivial: "a common topic of conversation among parents". "In the spring of 2008"—wrong on two counts, per MOS and MOSNUM: spring is September–November, so you're confusing me. And why are "the" and "of" needed? Just use the month. "In August, 2013, "—why the first comma? "late night TV show"—late-night as a compound adjective. "She has described herself as cheerful and competitive, and cites rhythmic gymnastics and basketball as her favorite sports."—Oh please. This is stooping low. Tony (talk) 01:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

moscow you're so predictable… & your unwillingness to accept constructive assistance makes you your own worst enemy… after i came along & made an article out of your fan-page, it may've been thisclose to passing, if simply by presentability alone… then you came back, crapped your pants, crapped on the article, & made everyone here care even less! i was polite about what i did-or-didn't delete & i worked with the fluff you provided, then you came back, accuse me of making factual errors in my deletions, and re-insert the same inanities that needed editing in the first place?? edits you've made since that accusation show that i didn't make any factual errors at all; you merely made it more obvious that i deleted things which simply didn't meet your approval…

please stop submitting inferior material — junk-food to begin with — & wasting everyones time by having them do your job, then reverting valid contributions! folks here are trying to make you look good by helping, but you come off as an undeserving feeb; people here are contributing for encyclopedic integrity, you're contributing breadcrumbs for fans… i noted at the outset of my contributions yesterday that i didn't have the time to deal with confirming sources at that moment & it'd probably be better for you anyway if i didn't confirm them (my aim yesterday was for neutrality/readability/overall encyclopedification)… well, today/this week i'm making time to fully confirm all your japanese sources: you can start squirming in your seat now, because i'll bet you haven't even read them~ you were correct, i live in japan… & i'm japanese… & my world directly intersects that of the very subjects you so fawn over… & now you can consider me your nightmare: wait in line as i take my time confirming your sources~ & don't ever again ask for my help (if thats not already obvious) Japanglish (talk) 04:09, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

i have to add a strike-two here; upon proceeding to the article to start confirming source material, i just noticed three desperately random refs added by moscow: #7 a random Vol. number?... #8 a random magazine description?... #11 unlinkable & close connection to the subject (their talent agency)... i'd have to say articles with moscow's fingerprints on them merit closer scrutiny, especially for sourcing, & should never be allowed to pass DYK based on good-faith for references. moscow, please don't add anything until/unless youve got it nailed! Japanglish (talk) 05:17, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

The volume number is not random: [2]. By the way, the tag about me having a close connection with the subject looked strange, so I untagged it. I should maybe be more careful with believing Japanese Wikipedia in everything, so I've just deleted some info based on a source I can't verify myself. And thank you for the "possible vote", I'm working on the article. --Moscow Connection (talk) 06:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
@Japanglish:This article doesn't deserve any more or less scrutiny than any other DYK, but truth is many DYK articles do not have enough. It doesn't help to sound provocative, in case all the attention makes it look that we're being combative and picking on Momota/Moscow (oh did I forget that easily I already stand so accused??? Humpf!). They ought to stop blaming you for not reading the Japanese sources before editing (it could have been me who made that "factually incorrect" edit they objected to) and me for pulling the DYK from the queue. Above all, MC should stand up accept responsibility for putting such inferior material up in the first place, and for continuing to reinsert trash non-biographic material in a supposed biography. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 06:35, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Moscow: by "random" (#7) i meant just throwing up a vol# w/no further specs is pretty half-assed way of providing a source… Ohc: someone's gotta somehow police these articles which rely solely on (insert any foreign language here) sources & take advantage of AGF during these DYK rushes, & i consider that my contribution~ i don't believe I've said anything out of line here; if Moscow&co are gonna continue submitting these lemons, he&his/hers should expect sour reaction (by the way, deletion of the Tamori program wasn't what i was pointing out; i was talkinbout the Meringue "ratings drop", which now officially falls within "mis-reps" listed below)… Moscow i've read through all sources completely, やはりお前が確認してね〜な〜 i'm not even gonna get into specifs here cause i'm no longer interested in spending my time making your work easier, but here's a summary:

yes, there are some sources which serve their citations, but thats mostly the bio info taken from the subject's own sites…
there are at least 5 cases of content which doesn't appear in the source provided…
1 of those use an advertisement as a source, which still doesn't actually say what youve cited…
there are also a few authoritative (tho disposable) statements inserted here&there which arent sourced at all…
there are approximately 7 cases of exaggeration &/or mis-representation of the source material to the benefit of the subject…
at least 1 wrong date…
you still haven't provided any specs for the "Zipper" & "Quick Japan" photo/interview publishings that would satisfy for verification purposes…
there're lots of ambiguous source specs, probably because youre citing sources who're citing other sources who reported the "announcements" you so love to list… (again: please stop? everyone makes announcements every day all over the world but wikipedia isn't the palce to list them all)
Bluemoonset/DYKadmin: don't "Filmography" sections need sourcing? there are none currently… &…
about the "Natalie" site Moscow heavily depends on: i'll let DYK superiors suss out whether thats a reliable source, considering sites like that in Japan are basically glorified FANzine-like Blogs who basically print whatever press releases they're provided, catering to every manic/fan-ic tidbit… again, the "announcements" Moscow favors…
also, Filmography: "as presenter"?? those aren't award shows; the "Television" header suffices, & anyway/also: the "Sekai Fushigi" is a variety show which doesn't belong under an (unnecessary) "as actress" sub-sub-header…
moscow keeps adding (& re-adding deleted) unencyclopedic filler…
& honestly, those few career accomplishments you've listed can be adequately summarized along the lines of "Momota has also made a name for herself outside of Momoclo through appearances on Japanese variety shows and magazine interviews" followed by only the briefest highlights, then insert all the refs for overall justfication… seems to me you always try to up the character-count just to make DYK, an affliction many DYK addicts seem to struggle with…

i can continue but… you're passing yourself off as the authority but you don't even know what your sources say… lets see you stand behind your product Moscow; get to it my friend, you've got some work to do now~ i'll confirm the references again when they've been properly tended to… Japanglish (talk) 06:44, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I can't act on your suggestions immediately cause I'm trying to expand the article first. (I have too few sources and I am still trying to find more information.) But I will start soon. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I think the hook should have been be simpler and more comprehensible for people who don't have the schema of her/Momoiro Clover Z. Here are my suggestions.

ALT5 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) performs an acrobatic high jump during a song?~~
ALT6 ~~... that Kanako Momota performs a so-called "shrimp jump" (pictured)?~~

Sorry to interrupt the discussion. 場違いな話題でしたら申し訳ございません。--Anosola (talk) 14:43, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

It's boring, no one will look at it. It would be sad if all my efforts resulted in less than 1000 views. And the fact has already been used on DYK, see Talk:Ikuze! Kaitō Shōjo. --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:00, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Your hook would be interesting in JAPANESE Wikipedia. But I think my hooks are suitable here.（背景知識のない人には、こちらの方がピンとくると思います）There's no rule that says we mustn't use a similar hook again.--Anosola (talk) 15:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

No one will click on the link. Your proposal brings the number of clicks from (for example) 5,000 to 1. The purpose of the DYK is to get as many views as possible (and to make the front page less boring). --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection: You're speaking like a tabloid hack. As I already argued, the "falling on her arse" hook may attract hits, but it is utterly sensationalist in a very tabloid way and plays up the already unacceptable undue emphasis of a biography on newsy and unencylopaedic content that shouldn't be there. At least it wasn't made up. Why don't you try getting the papers to write something like "Momota Kanako ate my Yamaha" (after "Freddie Starr ate my hamster"). We can then whip up a storm saying it was reported widely in reliable sources, and you can be the Japanese Max Clifford! -- Ohc ^¡digame! 15:54, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Many DYK hooks are like this. Good hooks either deceive people or say something strange. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

"The purpose of the DYK is to get as many views as possible and to make the front page less boring"? えっ?

"Good hooks either deceive people or say something strange"?? アホか?

thanks for unwittingly providing insight into the thought processes & priorities involved in your creation/expansion of these "idol" articles, which explains why they always turn up here in such a sorry state…

can someone please go through this "revised" version and re-edit for content, for starters, for the Nth time? i'll re-confirm sources BUT: i won't spend that time again until the CONTENT is reasonably finalized! at a quick glance i still see misrepresented "facts" which have not been touched, & a whole NEW batch of unencyclopedic filler/fat delivered in sub-substandard writing…

moscow this isn't your first time here, meaning: by now you really ought to know better! if you weren't so bad at this i'd suspect you were on someones payroll; you're still obviously some kinda fan, fan-club president, pen pal et.al, showing certain obsessive bias… show everyone you're paying attention & learning! in the future howbout working on this nonsense offline before taking it "live" nor submitting it here unprepared; you're just asking to be dumped on if you keep this up, and i'll wanna start Failing you on principal alone! Japanglish (talk) 14:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

For the sake of harmony, I probably shouldn't edit it (but that does not mean I will not). I've given Moscow space to put in what they consider material worthy of a biography. I notice that the article's word count has swelled, but the article hasn't moved a great deal in terms of substantive biographical content. The fancruft that I removed has reappeared, and I sadly note it has been joined by even more.
Some notes:

"Since the age of three, Momota did rhythmic gymnastics" – "did rhythmic gymnastics" isn't very encyclopaedic.

"She was in third grade when she enrolled in jazz dance classes at the suggestion of her coach, who thought she needed a better dance foundation" Disconnect between age and class level needs to be reconciled. Can be said in fewer words. Suggest merging the two: "Momota has been taking rhythmic gymnastics classes since the age of three, and jazz dance lessons since the age of [8 or 9]"

"Momota's mother decided she should audition too and bought an issue of a magazine specializing in casting calls and auditions, where came across an advertisement announcing an open audition for the Stardust Promotion talent agency" seems to be just verbose for its own sake. Suggest trimming to "Momota's mother bought an auditions magazine and responded to an advertisement for an open audition for Stardust Promotion"

"Momota joined 3B Junior, a section of Stardust Promotion that specialized in training and casting girls under 18 as actors". Suggest rewording to "Momota joined 3B Junior, a section of Stardust Promotion dedicated to training girls under 18 to become performers"

"She went to its acting classes, but decided to skip dance classes because they were too late in the evening" Trivia, "suggest" removal

"In the spring of 2008" – MOS:NUM violation. Rewrite as "In [month] 2008.

"Stardust Promotion founded an unnamed idol (vocal and dance) group consisting of girls close to Momota's age and put her in it" Suggest rewording to "Stardust formed an unnamed vocal and dance group with Momota and some other girls of the same age"

"Before that she had never intended to be an idol, although she had been a fan of Morning Musume; her aim was to be an actress" Trivia, "highly recommend" removal

"A few months later, Momota replaced Reni Takagi as group leader. Takagi was originally made the leader because she was the oldest,[6] but then the management thought Takagi was too serious-minded for the position and was "thinking too hard" Second half of sentence is fancruft that needs removing. What remains can be reworded: "Reni Takagi, originally group leader because she was the oldest, was replaced by Momota a few months later".

"In addition to leadership, as of 2014 Momota is officially the 'immovable center' of the group,[13][14] which means that she is the member who occupies the central position on stage during all songs" "Immovable center" is meaningless fancruft. Suggest "As of 2014 Momota officially takes center stage during all songs.[13][14]"

"The jump requires a warm-up (stretching), and therefore Momota needs more time to prepare yourself before concerts than other members, and the song "Ikuze! Kaitō Shōjo" can't be performed at any time. For example, during a kodomo matsuri (a concert especially for children) when the young audience, who didn't know about that, demanded the song as an encore, Momota had to leave the stage to stretch.[22] On October 4, 2013, she failed to land the jump and fell on her rear end. The accident caused a stir among fans and was widely reported by the Japanese media,[23][24] appearing at the top of Yahoo Japan website. Momota was not injured.[25]" – As previously mentioned, this is fancruft and I couldn't be more insistent on its purging. Merely asserting it isn't fancruft and reinserting it doesn't make it so, and of enduring importance or of due weight to a biography. In fact, it is a rather poor digression from the subject. Having said the above, I would have less of an issue if the paragraph was ejected to Ikuze! Kaitō Shōjo, where it is arguably relevant. It also causes less of a problem because it is not a WP:BLP.

"She continued her collaboration with Ninagawa in Mgirl magazine from Fall/Winter 2011/2012 and again in Mstar Spring/Summer 2013" – Apparent MOS:NUM violation: need to state months, or if its the name of the issue of the magazine, then explicitly state.

"Her family consists of five people: her parents and three siblings including herself and lives in a house in a residential area in 20-minutes' drive from Hamamatsu Station" Verbose and nonsensical. Rewrite as "She lives with her parents and two brothers in a residential area in 20 minutes' drive from Hamamatsu Station"

Does anyone want to borrow my gardening shears? -- Ohc ^¡digame! 15:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I will address the problems shortly. I am not sure if I have time for Wikipedia today, but the day after tomorrow at the latest. About "doing gymnastics", what is the encyclopedic way to say it? Just change the word. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I know I also promised you to translate the titles. I will do it. I will probably have to do it offline. I will try to finish in a couple of days. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

This fails the stability test Victuallers (talk) 16:35, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

That's only because Ohconfucius doesn't like it. The purpose of the DYK section is to reward users who create new articles. And I have certainly have put a lot time and of effort into it. (Tens of hours.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

So have I, now puhleez will you just stop moaning that you can't have it your own way. You know, together, we could make this into a Good Article. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 11:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

:D I had to return when I decided to check the thread one last time and saw this. Okay, let's work together. I will be back as promised. --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

[ec - I was going to insert this into my above comment] I've already set out details of how I would improve the article, without fighting you in the article itself. I've also already told you where you can put the little tabloid gem about her falling on her backside. ;-) And it's not as if you need me to tell it to you in more forthright terms. Looking forward to your further suggestions and amicable discussions. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 12:14, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I know people hate it because of the hook. I have another hook, it is good but not crazy as the currect one. I will find where I wrote it down. Please don't do anything. I am not sure if I have time for Wikipedia today, but I will be back the day after tomorrow at the latest. I will be back with a new hook. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

ALT7 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) is the 12th most popular Japanese idol of 2013?~~
ALT8 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) was ranked as the 12th most popular Japanese idol of 2013?~~
ALT9 ~~... that Momoiro Clover Z member Kanako Momota (pictured) is the 12th most popular Japanese idol of 2013?~~
ALT10 ~~... that Momoiro Clover Z member Kanako Momota (pictured) was ranked as the 12th most popular Japanese idol of 2013?~~

New hooks. Feel free to improve on them. I prefer ALT10. (The Momoiro Clover Z is tagged with a "multiple issues" tag, but I will temporarily remove it when the article is on the main page. (I'm not sure if Japanglish who tagged the article and then rewrote it agrees to remove the tag already or not, so I will just remove it temporarily.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Please put the nomination on hold, I will return the day after tomorrow. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

the hook for this nom still isn't the worst of your worries moscow; there7re still problems very clearly spelled out in the numerous lists provided above; content/sourcing/grammar, basically anything that can be wrong with an article, & again: i won't even spend the time re-confirming the sources until everything else is finalized~ & MomocloverZ?! no ma'am. don't even bring another article into this fray; that momocloverz article is even worse off than this one… you're better off not bringing it up! first of all, Momoz was tagged prior to all of this; the tag stays until those needs are met separately, NOT because its inconvenient for you! i already gave you leighway by not saying anything when you removed the "COI" tag i placed on this article (because it "looked strange"?? poor baby かわいそうな～) even though i still think your activities on this pages is suspect~ anyone who cares so much about so little reeks of agenda… youre basically the only one tending to the page, your contributions seem to come every time you see these folks name in the media (in the form of any-wittle-tidbit said media has provided), &/but anytime someone else makes an edit you're the first (& very promptly) to revert even the most helpful contribution! is this whole nom process your own little way of manipulating people to help do your work & attract attention to the articles to up your traffic quotas?? meanwhile get back to work on Momota. Japanglish (talk) 02:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

For obvious Fancruft magnet articles such as these, I am never surprised at spirited attempts by fans to either gloss up or cruft up. It's usually because they don't know any better or they have a distorted reality of what's truly important; it does not necessarily imply that someone is acting in conflict of interest. In fact, the rather amateurish content and poor English in the article suggests more of the "fan" than the "publicist" influence. Whilst I would see it appropriate to refer (and link) to Momoclo in any potential Momota hook, I completely agree that we should not contemplate temporarily removing cleanup tags for expediency purposes. I don't think DYK applies the same standards to accessory links as it does to the bolded target link. "Temporary" removal of the cleanup tag may reduce embarrassment to a small group of editors, but it will not stop readers from cringing if/when they read the content. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 03:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Dear Japanglish and Ohconfucius: Sorry to interrupt the discussion. I would appreciate receiving your comments to my hooks. I place them here again.

ALT5 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) performs an acrobatic high jump during a song?~~
ALT6 ~~... that Kanako Momota performs a so-called "shrimp jump" (pictured)?~~

If you don't like them, I'd like to hear your alternative plan. Thank you. --Anosola (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm fine with either, and marginally prefer 6 unless you have a source that refers directly to the jump she performs as an acrobatic high jump. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 15:40, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

a variation of ALT6 could work; just stay out of her "rear end" :- P ...1st-things-1st: content & sourcing or a hook wont matter! Japanglish (talk) 05:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Anosola's hooks are the worst of all (sorry). They aren't interesting at all, no one will click on them. Who will care if she performs something? --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

ALT11 ~~... that Kanako Momota (pictured) once failed her shrimp jump and bumped up to the top of the Yahoo! Japan homepage?~~

A version without her "rear end". --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

moscow: why are you so obsessed with the numbers? stop. also: why are you so obsessed with the yahoo bit? stop. having her name on the main page should be ample reward for the girl. stop. but your actions are moving her farther away from that. stop. please remove your blinders & get your priorities in order. stop. stop messing with the source title translations while there are much more pressing matters. stop. the article itself needs major attention, & everyone has outlined the problems very clearly. stop. earth to moscow: this telegram is sent w/ all best intentions. stop. Japanglish (talk) 12:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, I need some time to decide on this (on removals). --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure about some removals suggested. They remove all reasoning behind what happened. Read something like Paul McCartney#Childhood. Is it all fancraft too? To be honest, I am considering to abandon the DYK nomination in order to leave the article as it is now. And I can't see any real help in expanding the article from anyone. No one adds anything, everyone just removes. Probably I am the only one who cares. --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

That's part of the problem - the background shouldn't be there! They have articles for a reason. Take "Momota joined 3B Junior, a section of Stardust Promotion dedicated to training girls under 18 to become performers.", for example. People reading this article will want to know about Momota, not about Stardust Promotion - there is a separate section for it.--Laun chba ller 13:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Moscow. if I had two hours, and had the inclination, I would/could explain to you why the McCartney childhood section isn't fancruft but Momota's is. All I can advise is to sit down when you have a clear head, and analyse the two, bearing in mind what a biography is supposed to be. Launchballer, I agree that we must keep tightly focussed on Momota. It's true that Stardust's approach is rather formulaic, and what they do could go into their article as insights into their business model. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 14:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I am not really involved in this discussion. But from what I can see this review has been going on since the 23 January without any conclusion or anything even remotely close to a conclusion and resolution of the issues. Perhaps it is time to solve your personal issues with each other and try to figure out a solution to the main problems because this seems to be a never-ending debate. --BabbaQ (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

As someone seems to feel this is a "personal" matter for me (and presumably less of a good faith attempt to clean up a highly deficient article), it is time for my recusal from this discussion and from editing the article. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 17:36, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

shall we? really didn't wanna be one to do so… the article still needs major work, DYK or not, but… put it out of its misery here? lets all go have a snowball fight in the beautiful Tokyo snowstorm~ Japanglish (talk) 05:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

From what I can see that is for the best. It doesnt seem like a consensus to make this a DYK is even close to a consensus. It is better to aim at making this a GA article in the long run perhaps.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:25, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Sadly, it is not possible to make this a GA. I don't know why Ohconfucius suggested it. I've already used all reliable sources I have and the article is still very short. I've asked people at WikiProject:Japan and Japanglish to help, but no one did. --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:53, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Rewrite it as you wish, but keep the DYK. I've asked you to add something to the article, but you didn't. --Moscow Connection (talk) 11:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Hogwash Moscow - you don't do a DYK, nor should you ever nominate for DYK something that needs an immediate rewrite. This piece of work should NOT be DYK'd or featured anywhere - it shouldn't even be a live article in its current state, IMHO D P 12:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I would be okay if the two people (Ohconfucius and Japanglish) actually improved the article but they just wanted to delete something and ensure that the hook that had already been approved couldn't be used. Japanglish has been torturing me at Momoiro Clover Z-related articles since Template:Did you know nominations/Momoiro Clover Z (where he first appeared) and hasn't done much than that. It might be unfair to say that (I'm sorry), but I really feel sometimes that his purpose is to torture me. --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:38, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Again, this article does not deserve to be featured anywhere, let alone DYK. Begging is not going to change that simple fact D P 14:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK has very simple rules, it doesn't say anything about articles having to be good. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Japanglish, could you just rewrite the article, but keep it long enough for DYK? (I really feel like you are just torturing me. Sorry, but it's true.) If I removed everything Ohconfucius suggested, there would be some incorrect statements (Like, 1. Kanako's mother didn't just enter her for the audition, she just suggested that they do it. They did it together. 2. The part about acting lessons that I removed was there to show that she wanted to be an actress. Et cetera. I don't know why Ohconfucius's edits always change everything to say something that is not true or not exactly true. But as I said, I surrender. Do whatever you wish, but please keep the DYK.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:17, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm asking Ohconfucus, Japanglish, and DangerousPanda to help me. I will agree to any DYK hook. As for Ohconfucius suggestions, I'm deleting another part (about stretching) right now. I can agree it's unencyclopedic. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I asked Drmies at User talk:Drmies#Help and I removed most of the Personal section and the stretching routine. I can't explain why the introduction is important, so I removed it so not to scare people. (It's her gimmick, a joke, like a set phrase that she thinks characterises her and that she repeats all the time. All girls in AKB48 and in Stardust Promotion's idol groups have self-introductions.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I think I have done everything Japanglish suggested on January 28. I don't know which sources he didn't like, so I can't respond to his criticism. Anyway, many things have changed in the article by now. There was a reference to her official blog, I have removed it. There is only one reference to the official site left in the whole article and I don't need it cause there is another source for the same statement. But I think the reference helps to show that her central position in the group is official. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

pobrecito moscow~ please forgive if i dented your delicate sensibilities; what a meanie… anyone who'd like to know the reality of this DYK nom need only read thru the 365 page transcript above (soon to be a movie; screenplay credit please) if anyone cares to spend the hour reading… both Ohc & i have been most helpful here, unfortunately moscows clueless or just not paying attention… moscow, you asked for my input here, i didn't seek you out; i've never seeked you out: youre conspicuous merely by these submissions… now you're in panic mode, pointing fingers & whimpering?!

i stand by my

… content-vs-source discrepancies remain unchanged by team-moscow (you still have an advertisement posing as a source which doesn't even say whats cited; am i supposed to tell you which one it is?! another gem: that "television ratings were expected to drop" bit is cited to a blogger who's citing an anonymous comment posted on twitter! do you really want a full list of the holes in your sources??) proving they dont understand their own material, submitting it blindly, & i have neither time nor interest to rewrite it for you moscow; everyone is real-world-busy and if you can't nail this stuff before showing up here theres only so much anyone else is gonna be willing to do & no one is obligated to help you any more than they already have! i didn't point out specifics to you because i wanted to see just how deep in the dark you are about your own material, & if you're gonna be submitting this stuff nobody should have to be doing this for you anyway; you're getting a free education here but you're not learning anything! advice: give up google-translating Japanese wikis into English; what passes there doesn't qualify here… if i were to edit your article based on sources alone, you'd probably have around 10 sentences left, and then you'd be right back here adding about how her favorite ice cream is peanut butter coffee & she cried watching Titanic & her friends called her Pee-Pee-chan when she was 5-and-a-half years old, again just to add character-count… its sunday & i have a date for a stroll in the snow, i recommend you throw in the towel & do the same~ Japanglish (talk) 04:17, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

1. One date was incorrect, I've corrected it. 2. Is If this the "advertisement posing as a source". It's just a link to the issue on the publisher's website. The source is not the url but the issue itself. 3. I'm looking for a comment posted on Twitter. 4. The Japanese Wikipedia doesn't have much, therefore I'm not "google-translating" or translating it into English. --Moscow Connection (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Now, when you said where exactly the problem was, I agree about the ratings drop part. The source is AOL News (not a blog) and it says many people were worried about the future of the show or declared they won't watch it anymore, but the word "ratings" is cited from some random comment. I will change the part. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:34, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Yesterday I thought the Twitter problem was in the failed jump part. Since yesterday I prepared a review of the sources used in the paragraph, I will still post it: This and this articles just say that her fall was a hot topic on Twitter. I don't cite any Twitter posts or anything. These aren't blogs, one is News Post Seven published by Shogakukan Inc. and the other is My Navi News published by My Navi Corporation, originally a subdivision of The Mainichi Newspapers Co.,Ltd.. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Silly question, but what is Momota actually notable for? All I can see is being a member of a group. Everything else revolves around that.--Laun chba ller 16:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

She is notable per WP:GNG cause she has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject and per WP:ENT cause she has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows and has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

see whats happened now? in the end i'm left to do your dirty work anyway; you've succeeded in losing all other support (if it could be said you had any other support)… i still stand by my because youve abused privileges here —articles-just-shouldnt-arrive-here-in-such-state— but for the sake of validifying my point here're a few detailed examples of source discrepancies: three sources to say her official color is red (just to say she's the red girl!) bBUT: #13 shows a foto of the girl wearing red/white but no mention of an "official color"; #14 makes no mention of individual colors, just that they all wore red&white costumes (& shows a foto of all wearing matching outfits); #15 says it BUT: in a caption within an advertisement for MomoClover T-shirts… none say anything about her "using red in most of her costumes" as you've presented… (hey i've got this great foto of me wearing red in a Japanese magazine, wanna upload it to use here? i kinda look like her!) 0-for-4 there~ next?

source #25 about that "ratings drop" (now "popularity worries"): spun way out of context in favor of the subject: you're documenting it in wikipedia as a matter of the girl being "not well known" at that time BUT the source is reporting people being against her; not that people didn't know her, but more like "who-the-hell-does-this-chick-think-she-is?!" = youre clearly whitewashing a more pointed comment… &/but, CONTEXT: that source is posing conjecture anyway, & P.S: the original source may be AOL but you're citing a second-generation source: AOL-filtered-thru-"excite" which, along with "natalie" (as i've noted), are basically publicist sites whose gossip —sorry, reporting— must be kept in very close context if usable at all & depending how being used; a blog by any other name~ thats like quoting "Time Out Tokyo" as saying "Tokyo is great"; a "publication" basically fed by Tokyo Chamber of Commerce to promote the greater good of tourism: 100% bias brought to you thanks to whomevers ad spaces are outnumbering editorial space; nobody's delving into any deeper territory than catering to the lowest common consumer… your translations are only showing reliability along the lines of "yeah yeah thats what they said; something like that"… P.S.S: the way you've edited the "popularity/ratings worries" still falls short: WHOSE "worry", WHY, & to WHAT end?? your "source" doesnt even cover that, they're just listing twitter reactions to the "news"… moscow we can't keep this going this way; it'll be 2015 soon, i don't like playing tennis, and i'm repeating myself over&over: this article was rushed here ill-prepared and now you're expecting everyone to rush to your aid; instead, everyones expressed the overt shortcomings & now threw their hands in the air; we have reached an impasse… i respectfully ask DYK Admin to send this one back, with no ill intention to moscow personally: lets enter this week with all this behind us; live&learn Japanglish (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I will correct the article according to your suggestions tomorrow (I vaguely remember the phrase just being "Who is this girl?", but I will check and correct everything). If viewers hated her at first, I don't mind adding that to the article.
But please, please stop attacking me personally cause it is not nice and may be against the rules (this is another example of you targetting me personally, why are you doing it?) --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

context; its used dismissively, but it doesn't matter how the phrase translates anyway... those sentences ar inadmissible regardless, because that writer used conjecture to make news (news!) out of a list of tweets, & your buying it but wikipedia can't resell it, gossip among lamenting fans of Momoclo, not the many professional producers & arrangers who are in control of Japanese television; thats a long-running TV program with a very famous host, Momota replaced the much-more-famous Mana and the show survived & without Momota the-show-goes-on. context the same way you feel i'm attacking you... if i'm attacking anything (IF) its this collection of psuedo-facts being offered up as important just because someone somewhere wrote about it. youre your own worst enemy... have anice day Japanglish (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

"shrimp jump": 1st-things-first: Japan Wikipedia's 百田夏菜子 page doesn't even list the fall at all, neither that it happened nor that it made the "top of the news" (that Japanese Wiki is also very poorly handled but that has no bearing in this case anyway)… simple search of Japan Yahoo shows no record of it being at the top of their news, and shouldn't that be the best proof?? (we all know those posts come&go quicker than a DYK appearance anyway, and fuhgettaboutit if its a slow news day!)… 2nd-things-2nd: the sources provided are trustworthy in the same way her departure from that TV show was, meaning: only borderline blog-reportage of twitter activity after her fall =its safe to say only "she fell & wasn't hurt" if thats even notable for English wikipedias purposes~

while i have a few minutes between Olympic speed-skating competition… the fact that she does her "jump" during a specific song is also not in the source provided, & mention of the jump being a highlight of their shows is to that writer it was a highlight to him of the show he saw; the other source is just a foto of her doing the jump with the caption noting that at the time the foto was snapped thats the song they were playing~

half-a-dozen sentences which are still just-darn-silly writing, if quailfying as encyclopedic content at all… ?near Hamamatsu station (& the article says "20-minute drive from"… doesn't sound "near" to me; but who cares anyway?) &: "arguably" in the lead?? i've been hoping even moscow would pick up on that as time ticked by but... &: again: many sources are one writer reporting what another writer reported in a celebrity gossip magazine (which by the way contain topics more worthy of encyclopedia than the tidbits you've picked to suit your needs)… &: what part of where she lives (a year ago) constitutes encyclopedic? &: brothers ages? &: shall i continue?? thats why poor moscow thinks i'm "torturing" him; this article is torturous~ i bet Mommota herself doesn't care! i imagine a blank thought balloon over her head and the sound of crickets… sorry but this is just getting silly now; no ill will intended at all Japanglish (talk) 13:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Why are you talking about the Japanese Wikipedia? WP:OTHER is not a valid argument. Most of you say is just your personal opinion. I will check if the source mentions the specific song. There are plenty of sources, so there's ll be no problem to find another one. (I think the song was mentioned in the one I removed yesterday or the day before.)
If you actually read the article before, you would remember that the sentence about her brothers was in the Personal section two days ago. There's nothing that prohibits adding the info. (Look at Lady Gaga#1986–2004: Early life, etc... I think it is important.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:57, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

yeah good job moscow: using your own WP:OTHER (Gaga) to argue for your flimsy accusal of my so-called WP:OTHER... WP:OTHER arguments usually sway to the positive, my point was decidely to the negative... point: even Japanese people dont think it important enough to merit inclusion... i couldve told you that without even looking at either wikipedia! more importantly, where is a credible Yahoo source anyway?? this article isn't Gaga (& it obviously isn't McCartney), and this English article (about a Japanese performer) is far more creatively verbose than her own country's encyclopedia??? your spending more time here making yourself suffer; i hardly have to say anything (but apologies for saying so much; this is getting too easy now) again/repeat: your own worst enemy... but i think its more like: i'm your only friend... Your Honors: how much longer must this continue? really. this article is gonna end up as a stub again if this continues, because moscow isnt showing any signs of coming up with the goods, and is spending more of him time now accusing me of this that & everything... i'd like to go watch some more Olympic compettion now; goodnight all~ Japanglish (talk) 16:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay. I actually don't want to fight you, but you chose to kill this nomination so I have no other choice. I will think about what you said. I will try to correct the article. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

i didn't "choose" to kill anything; you chose to submit this (read: all-the-above). you were close to an other choice when you contemplated withdrawing the nom (read: all-the-above)... live&learn & try again next time?... source #3 for last sentence of lead: unsubstantiated in th source (& i already noted "arguably" is in-arguably unbecoming in the lead or anywhere in an encyclopedia)… there's a "#1" inserted in the sources title which gives the appearance of some kinda pseudo-"ranking" being pushed by that particular website, but that's all; within the "article/interview" there (usual banter of happy smiley idles) there is no other indication that any voting occurred or even by who standards is she considered "#1" nor the criteria which places her at "#1"… the only "fact" to be gleaned here: Stardust is her agency. the source site, again, borderline bloggish, bias, fan-page material not showing any actual critical concerns other than further promoting the idol-dujour; wouldn't be surprised if that "natalie" site traces to the same address as Stardust (笑)! another sentence Japanglish (talk) 06:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I am appalled by the length of this discussion, and I don't want to read it. I can't review the Japanese-language sources to check on hook accuracy or lack of copyvio, but the article (in its current form) complies with policy and DYK rules. Several of the hooks have WP:BLP issues, and others are not supported by the article and/or don't make a lot of sense to me. However, the following variation on ALT6 is supported by the article (I have to AGF on the sources), does not have BLP issues, makes sense, and is interesting:

ALT12 ... that singer Kanako Momota (pictured) performs a "shrimp jump" during live shows? --Orlady (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I support this hook. (It improves on Anosola's version a lot and sounds much, much better.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 01:16, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

just made some quick edits(deletions) seeing as i'm the only one left caring, then just noticed that Orlady commented here, cant waste much more time except to say: without having read all-the-above your tick is too quick: this is ALL about authoritative "facts" unsubstantiated by the sources and the nominator doesnt even KNOW his own sources & clearly taking advatage of AGF (which even you were willing to sign on?) for the sake of passing as "expansion"; ive deleted some of the worst but more remains, is it still an expansion? i never wanted to go on like this either! misguided dyk nom from the start! thanks for your input nonetheless Japanglish (talk) 06:02, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

reject. PLEASE. its what should've been done long ago! I've been giving the nominator plenty of opportunity to either redeem (him)self OR withdraw & let the article exist in its (then) current state(s)… this is clearly an article which didn't merit expansion & tried to make a mountain of a molehill (the faults surely existed prior to "expansion")~ i can keep axing faults in the sourcing &/but I've explained very clearly by doing so i'd be stripping the article to its bones; hell, i knew that weeks ago & now i'm only that much certain & certainer! i'm yelling from my window now, can you hear? take it away! i already feel like a sadist merely by association & i feel just as soiled as moscow must! i don't even wanna make any more deletions though there are considerably MORE! still want examples?? the current source 5 (see below) "referenced" 3 times for substantial lengths of "information"; for 2 of those, its the ONLY source, BUT: all that appears at the given link is the magazine cover (& i finally had to myself remove the T-SHIRT-AD posing as a source)! more? this nomination lists 2 Japanese "creators" (seemingly only to give an air of credibility?) but neither have appeared here in defense nor assistance! i had to spend the time! & Moscow ASKED me here!! please note that a handful of other editors already X'd this train wreck & all for now clearly valid reason! thats not even to mention that this has all been a very rude waste of my (free) time & assistance here!… jeezuz Japanglish (talk) 15:35, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

I am back and I am going to fix the sources for the song diring which she performs the jump and the color of her costumes now. I hope no one rejects the nomination because of minor stuff like that. --Moscow Connection (talk) 20:14, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

1. I have removed the part about red clothes. (I can't find a source that would say that she often or usually wore red costumes.) 2. There were already sources that said that she performed the jump during "Ikuze! Kaito Shojo" (the ones that talked about the failed jump), but I've added another one. 3. If I just remove the part about the future of the Merengue show, it will change the intended meaning of the paragraph (which talks about her growing popularity outside of the group). I must think about how to rewrite it. But anyway, people were indeed worried about the future of the show, the author of the news article was worried, so I'm just repeating and don't add anything. --Moscow Connection (talk) 01:08, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

?need i say more… going back to square one by instigating repetitive/circular distraction moscow? you've now reinserted unencyclopedic content which was deleted with very clear reasoning, & you're deflecting from other major problems very clearly outlined ad nauseum above; "minor" problems are still (still) the least of your worries… to anyone who can read what the sources they're presenting actually say, the numerous inaccuracies and outright misrepresentation i've pointed towards should've already been easily picked out & fixed, replaced, or otherwise reworded to accurately support the "facts" presented… you have been fooling with these processes all along to suit yourself, now only evermore blatantly by your actions of the past few hours… the truth which has been lost is that i've always been just as willing to pass this dyk, but unfortunately the nominator has only time&again successfully proven themselves ineligible, by longshots~ still standing by my Japanglish (talk) 06:07, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I have responded substantively to your past comments only to see the same comments again. I invited a good editor to rewrite it, I found new sources, I removed unsourced statements. --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:21, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Orlady. Your hook (ALT12) is much better than mine (ALT6), which was approved by Ohconfucius and Japanglish. What is more, Moscow Connection agreed to your hook. So ALT12 seems to work effectively! Dear Japanglish, you seem to have overused the reject mark. We can understand your position without seeing the mark so many times. I know your feelings but it might be better to calm down a little bit. Thank you. --Anosola (talk) 12:59, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

?why my repetition: you're not fixing the glaring problems you so emphatically claim to be fixing: I've gone back & highlighted one sample just prior to your latest fib… you keep shooting yourself in the foot moscow, your credibility about these Japanese sources is blown without any help, & if Anosola's involvement is to give any credence, then which of you can explain: how does a link to a magazine cover/content-page verify statements such as:
"three years her senior and six years her junior" > (& reinserted previously removed filler because he wasnt happy) &:
"Momota has been taking rhythmic gymnastics classes since the age of three, and jazz dance lessons since the age of 8 or 9 (third grade of elementary school). She enrolled in dance classes at the suggestion of her coach, who thought she needed a better dance foundation." > (1st of all, for these purposes, "elementary school" suffices; but this isn't an article about the Japanese education system anyway; or maybe you wanna say 8-&-a-half or almost-9 during the last quarter of the semester before finals?) &:
"In the spring of 2008, Stardust Promotion put her in a then unnamed idol (vocal and dance) group consisting of girls close to Momota's age." > (such authoritative statements sourced by a magazine cover? by the way, "vocal and dance": more filler; ample outline of what an "idol" is already appear throughout, & wikilinking suffices for inquiring minds)
i.e. none of the above is sourced; & would someone be so kind as to remove the invalid one? (in English says "As of yet i'm still a really no-good leader!" yeah) &: thats not the last of troubles; i'll happily provide more if necessary.

?still stand by your claim of having taken care of things? i've given half-a-dozen chances to pick-up on such glaring misrepresentations &, not only did moscow not remove that source, but one of the above lines was added as a 4th citation to the 3 it already misrepresented. a magazine cover/content page. its only proof Momota appeared in it. i'll give you credit though: a magazine cover as a source is better than that t-shirt ad!

Anosola, your input is very welcome but, you might wanna reconsider what you're backing here; i'd hate to find out you were suckered into procedures you're not familiar with, i've even watched without comment many times as moscow reprimanded you on talk pages for what moscow-didnt-like at all the idol pages falling under some seemingly assumed "territory"~ 意味分かりだろう？アいツがたダ大変にわがママ迷惑物だ、んで、もしかして騙されてるんじゃないんじゃないんこんな馬鹿げた？さ～あいつに応援し無い方は？ really wanna make yourself useful here? how'bout starting with telling everyone where in source #19(currently) does it say "collaboration" (& an inexplicable 2-in-1 source, neither of which even imply it was a "collaboration")?? as long as excuses/accusations/lies are all you can offer, i'll keep ing this to insure no one hastily moves this without confirming. こっち落ち着いてるよ楽しんでる実は、スミまセンね元気で everyone else, excuse my sarcasm truly but the nominator-in-question here is making a joke of these processes, if it isn't already clear. another weekend passes; i'm unavailable til late-Monday Japanglish (talk) 04:28, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

The source for all these statements is the issue of the magazine. I have read it. Buy the magazine and check it.
I don't know whether she was 8 or 9. The source says she was in 3rd grade. Ohconfucius asked to reword it like that (cause, it's just my guess, he didn't understand how old she was), he proposed the exact sentence.
I have added "vocal and dance" for the readers who don't know what idol groups age. It would sound too strange for non-Japanese and the Wikipedia article about Japanese idols doesn't really explain anything about idol groups either.
Collaboration is when people work together, from "co" and "labor". I can reword it. How would you suggest to reword it? --Moscow Connection (talk) 04:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Anyway, this is just a DYK. If you want to make a GA out of it, you are welcome to find more sources and expand it. It doesn't matter if there are minor problems. A DYK article is only required to be of "start" class and every paragraph must have a source. Right now everything is sourced. All the requirements are met. --Moscow Connection (talk) 05:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Apologies in advance if I'm not getting every detail right, but I've long lost interest in following all the intricate detail about this girl's existence and road to fame. I don't care one way or another any more, but my comments on how I would improve this version as follows:

I have no issue with ALT12. It wasn't proposed when I last participated in this marathon.
"coach ... better dance foundation" fancruft, as I said before.
In two successive sentences, the article talks about her age: gymnastics (aged three), and jazz dance (third grade). I was only suggesting some consistency so that the reader would not be thrown, but simply "jazz dance during elementary school" would be fine.
The age of her brothers? fancruft, as I said before, but relatively harmless. I'm just glad you don't have their dates of birth, or I'm sure these would be in the article.
She worked as a model on a photo shoot with a photographer, I can live with the term "collaborate" even though the word isn't used in the source. It's close enough to the definition of the word and this type of substitution can often help get around copyright violation concerns.
"Momota's mother decided ... fifth grade". fancruft, better than before, but still verbose. But I'm really glad you dropped the bit about her buying [Auditions] Magazine and "happened to see an advertisement" and all that trash.
"On October 4, 2013 ... Momota was not injured". fancruft, as I said before, but I would not object being in the song article, if relevant – strangely enough it's not there. I'd excise from the bio. If you must keep something, I could live with "During a performance in October 2013, her failure to land the jump caused a stir among fans although she was not injured". Anything else is definitely undue weight.
Adverts are not reliable sources, but can be used to attest to existence of certain products or events or promoters' claims in respect of same.
It may sound strange, but in terms of prose and content only, I feel that the article probably scrapes a pass wrt DYK criteria.
The other issues seem to relate to the accuracy or otherwise of Japanese translations, on which I'm not competent to have a view. However, the quality of the sources and the fidelity of their rendering into prose seem to be the most serious problems that need resolving.
Let's wind up this filibuster. At 94k, I might write to the Guinness Book of World Records and nominate it for 'Longest Ever DYK Nomination Discussion'. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 02:37, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

yup: more words than the subject's worth; my rational judgement to end it went ignored but… {{Red|Sorry: proven lack of neutrality & reliability on Moscow's part prevents me from allowing Good Faith on the sources which don't provide text (94k reasons why above)]] = Moscow: prove it or lose it please (#17). yes on the surface at least the article finally seems way better than it arrived but theres still matters of reliance of bias sources, trustworthiness & neutrality, & moscows edits of Feb 13th basically reinserted my biggest complaints. this nom as a whole didn't earn trust from the start, & moscow now telling me to "buy the magazine" doesn't say much. Moscow: just because a source doesn't say "blog" at the top, doesn't mean its not; all major media outlets employ "bloggers" and japanese ones you're citing are such obvious examples of the bias i'm referring to: might be trustworthy for dates or existence of "X" but not for the kind of (as Ohc says, i agree) "fancruft" you pad these articles with; context! a person who finds Virgin Mary on a potato chip may get more press than Virgin Mary herself but no more than "man finds Virgin Mary on potato chip" (& it still wouldn't warrant mentioning on Virgin Mary's Wikipedia article)…

source #19 (the 2nd of a 2-in-1 source, & the 1st is out of place there) doesn't portray a meeting-of-minds that "collaboration" implies here (think Quincy-Jones-&-Michael-Jackson not one-shows-up-with-camera-&-one-stands-in-front) = peacock~ basic facts please! context please! third time working together, easy! If senior editors can honestly say I'm wrong I'll gladly give; otherwise&anyway theres still other instances of similar source-spinning to inflate this subjects importance & we can go on forever arguing over… neutrality issues which moscow can't get over! i dont think i need to prove those points any further; impasse. separately, the "8 or 9…" by common sense alone Moscow shoulda got the point: wishy-washy documentation! was she 8? 9? in 3rd grade? 5th? what. ever. "elementary school"! Moscow also reinserted the "rear end" bit with insufficient reasoning; & childish grammar! from a bias source! yummy food anyone? moscow you should know better; you already assume/presume too much privilege by showing up with article needing full rewrite; very unfair to a busy community! everybody's supposed to help or put up with you while you get your act together because you rushed trying to squeeze an expansion out of thin air? & given the fact that your currently instigating arguments to get your way with other editors on articles related to this one, getting snotty here doesn't help~ you always dismiss this casually as "oh its just DYK" BUT yeah, its DYK: the main page of a worldwide project in the spotlight & people turn to for reliable info already taking flack for credibility! far as im concerned, anything being considered for main page should be a "good article", rocket science or not, actual "GA" or not… if you cared for quality as you care for traffic-to-your-idol-pages you'd make DYK and have a GA all at once! sorry, can't candy-coat my judgement.

i'll admit a mistake of my own & apologize to the community: as a polite gesture i told Moscow from the start i didn't wanna deal with sources (for moscow's sake!) because i foresaw trouble with them but, lesson learned: from now on i'll go straight to the sources! moscow you may've passed DYK before but AGFs no lifetime-pass &you've had it easy because Japanese Admins werent on hand (i'll check prior sources too) but even if this passes DYK this time, you can expect to meet again because Japanese quality control is my contribution to the project (not just moscow articles)~ DYK Admins: i'll bow to your expertise or majority vote, otherwise those are the facts & i already gave my

Japanglish (talk) 06:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Nearly there... Guillotine comes down at 100kB! ;-) -- Ohc ^¡digame! 07:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Strange echo from over 2 weeks ago is heard to say again "This fails the stability test" Victuallers (talk) 15:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

The article is stable. It has been reviewed and approved for DYK several times. I don't have to act on Japanglish's suggestions, especially since I think he wants to kill the nomination and will never stop. I don't know why he continues. I am starting to doubt his good intentions. --Moscow Connection (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

The article has been already looked at by several experienced editors who I asked to help (look in the edit history). Therefore I believe the article is not that bad as Japanglish suggests. If Japanglish and Ohconfucius want to make this a GA, they should stop now and return after the DYK. --Moscow Connection (talk) 21:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm bored with this subject and while I note that the article has improved, I am resigned to the fact that I can never make this into a GA, and I'm sorry to have made the suggestion earlier. With you at the helm defending all the fancruft, this pig's ear will never become a silk purse. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 03:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Article has been stable for four days, with just one (justified) removal of POV by Orlady and some copyediting. There is no edit warring going on now. Prose is decent, although certainly not GA or FA class. A bit of information could theoretically be removed as cruft (ages of brothers, for instance), but that's debateable. The main issue now, IMHO, is if this article is using its references properly (no close paraphrasing, no misrepresentation, etc.). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

As I indicated earlier, this article has had BLP issues and was formerly larded with fancruft, but that's been cleared out. I can't read Japanese, but I've seen Japanese sources in Google translation that support many of the key facts in the article, including the existence of an "Ebizori jump" -- and Ebizori translates at www.kabuki21.com/glossaire_2.php as "prawn bend." I see no reason not to AGF on this. --Orlady (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

But I've just asked for help. I think the nature of the concerns warrants a look by a Japanese speaker. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 03:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

How many more dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of hours do you propose to dedicate to scrutinizing this wisp of an article (and its 36 reference citations) to determine whether it can pass muster at DYK? In response to your past pleading, User:Hoary has told you "I'm really not the person to ask, as my background knowledge is near zero, my comprehension of Japanese is not so good, and my comprehension of pop-culture-magazine Japanese is worse," and has edited the article on at least 3 occasions. IMO, it's time to approve this and move on to something more productive. --Orlady (talk) 03:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I have just struck all the hooks except for the only one approved, ALT12, to avoid confusion should this be promoted. For convenience, I'm duplicating that ALT here, since it's hard to find otherwise:

ALT12: ... that singer Kanako Momota (pictured) performs a "shrimp jump" during live shows? —BlueMoonset (talk) 05:21, 18 February 2014 (UTC)