Talk:Phongchi

Name

The article name has been changed to Fonchi "per official site", while her official site says "Phongchi". http://sma-e.com/phongchi/ - 218.222.62.231 (talk) 21:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't even count as her official site. The page move was done by me per the name used on her own blog and Idoling!!!'s official website. If she herself uses Fonchi on her own blog, then that is the name we are to use. 夢追人^YumeChaser 04:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Source it. We see several sources like this saying that is her official website. - Freja Beha Erichsen (talk) 06:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Prove that there are "several" sources that say SMA-e is her official site. And that doesn't matter. Fonchi herself, romanizes her name as Fonchi and not Phongchi. Now, who better than the person in question knows how they want their name spelt? Certainly not the fans. 夢追人^YumeChaser 16:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Let's prove that this is her official blog, with at least one supporting source. - Freja Beha Erichsen (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Lol, The source that you posted, supports that it is here official blog. And it is evident that it is her blog. 夢追人^YumeChaser 03:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Now you have confirmed that the Sony Music is her official. Ironically. - Freja Beha Erichsen (talk) 13:58, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Wasn't talking about Sony. I was talking about this. 夢追人^YumeChaser 15:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Definition

This is a response to the repeated reverting by the editor, User:YumeChaser, who has claimed that the article is about a pop singer.

First of all, source it. As you know we don't give any importance to unsourced material. Currently we don't see any supporting evidence to classify her as a "pop singer".

• "Idoling No.8, a member of Idoling" - Source 1 Oricon
• "Gravure idol" - Source 2 So-net
• "a member of idol group Idoling" - Source 3 Bunkasha
• "Idoling No.8, a member of idol group Idoling" - Source 4 Nikkan Sports
• "a member of Idoling" - Source 5 ASCII
• "of female idol group Idoling" - Source 6 Sponichi
• "idol from Kanagawa, of Vietnamese descent" - Source 7 Ameba Category:Gravure
• "of Idoling" - Source 8 Sponichi "Gravure Idol Report"
• In the category "Gravure Idol" - Source 9 Fresh Eye
• "Japanese idol of Vietnamese descent ... a member of Idoling!!! who has also appeared on Yoshimoto Shinkigeki with Idol - Source 10 Oricon

- Freja Beha Erichsen (talk) 06:04, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Idoling!!! is a pop musical group. She is a singer in the group making her a pop singer. Use your WP:COMMONSENSE. Anyway I changed the infobox to the model version. And as you know trivia is not allowed on Wikipedia, so stop re-adding it when you are reverting. 夢追人^YumeChaser 16:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Your original classification makes no sense. Source it. Plus, let's see how "trivial materials" are defined - NOT-2.6 TRIVIA. - Freja Beha Erichsen (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Yahoo's pop singer (J-pop artist) category doesn't include her page[1]. Its general celebrity category includes her page.[2] PPChi (talk) 20:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Reverting : Again

YumeChaser, since you are making a claim about a BLP, you have the burden of proof. If she is considered a pop singer, why aren't there any secondary sources calling her as such? Per V and BLP people on Wikipedia are defined by RS. Editors do not get to describe, interpret, or explain sources.
YumeChaser, you are the one who doesn't get it. You cannot interpret primary sources without secondary sources supporting your interpretation. It is your interpretation that she is considered a pop singer. All of the RS call her an idol and/or a gravure idol. There is nothing in the NOR policy that supports describing a BLP without reliable secondary sources that support it. Until you find sources to support your claims, there is nothing to discuss. We have RS describing her as an idol and/or a gravure idol. We do not have RS describing her as a pop singer. If it was important or relevant to describe her as such here, you would be able to easily find sources for your description. You can't, so it isn't. We do not write articles based on your interpretations. You have not summarized or rephrased anything allowable by policy. Again, I've reverted the unsourced BLP claims. - Freja Beha Erichsen (talk) 00:27, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

"Trivia"

This is a response to the repeated reverting by the editor, User:YumeChaser, who has claimed that trivia is not allowed on Wikipedia per WP:TRIVIA

We read :

Avoid creating lists of miscellaneous information. A number of articles contain lists of isolated information, which are often grouped into their own section, labeled "Trivia", "Notes", "Facts", "Miscellanea", "Other information", etc. This style guideline deals with the way in which these facts are represented in an article, not with whether the information contained within them is actually trivia, or whether trivia belongs in Wikipedia.

Trivia sections should be avoided.

What this guideline is not - This guideline does not suggest the inclusion or exclusion of any information; it only gives style recommendations. Issues of inclusion are addressed by content policies.

- WP:TRIVIA

- Freja Beha Erichsen (talk) 03:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

You do not view poorly sourced sections about her weight as trivia? Ask as many other editors as you want and they'll tell that whole section should be excluded from the article. This is not a fansite. 夢追人^YumeChaser 03:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)