Talk:NewJeans

producer on lead section

@HueMan1 reverted my edit which added the role of Min Hee-Jin as the producer of the group on the lead section. I reverted it back. My edit is properly sourced and relevant enough to stay in the lead. Additional reverts should be properly discussed and motivated here. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 13:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@Btspurplegalaxy NewJeans was officially marketed as "Min Heejin's girl group" before they even debuted. She's is also prominently mentioned on NewJeans' Spotify bio. She's not just a footnote. Symphidius (talk) 19:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned before, it's not necessary to include this in the lead. For example, Lee Soo-man has played a significant role in creating many famous idol groups, yet he isn't mentioned in the lead of the artist he's created. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 05:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

this is what you wrote to motivate the reversion "It's not necessary to include this. While many producers contribute to the creation of idol groups, it's not essential to list them here. The lead should focus on summarizing the article."

The article make already ten of the most concrete and direct references to her name and role, and I added another source that further explain her role on the group. Did you read it? Min Hee-Jin is not just "one of many producers that contribute to a girl group" as you define it. She is responsible for selecting *every single song*, getting them through the recording process, establish and oversee each and every step of the other creative aspects that surrounds the song etc etc

If any other producer has this kind of group under her full creative control it should be on the first phrases of the lead. A K-pop group is not only the group members, you indirectly make an important point that any other major producers that contribute to the group and has their position developed in the article should be included in the lead as well. Either Lee Soo-man or Teddy for Blackpink Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 23:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Why do you feel it's so important for her to be listed? Min Hee-jin has worked with many idol groups throughout her career, and there are several K-pop groups created solely by a producer. Yet, the producer isn't typically highlighted. What makes her case different? Should we start making this the norm for every K-pop groups, articles? Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 07:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

On the message just before I already answered your two questions.

I explained why it is so important for her to be listed, and I explained how I feel about other pages in a similar state.

Again, what do you think about it?

Status quo is not an argument.Wikipedia guidelines clearly states "Even the best articles should not be considered complete, as each new editor can offer new insights on how to enhance and improve the content in it at any time. [...] Please be bold and add content summarizing accepted knowledge, but be particularly cautious about removing sourced content."

The question is not why I added her role in the group, but why did you remove it. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 20:18, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

It seems like you're overlooking the fact that this information is already included in the article. If you check other articles about K-pop groups, you'll notice that producers aren't highlighted in the lead. While Min Hee-jin played a key role in creating the group, it doesn't mean the focus should be solely on her. She's already mentioned in several paragraphs. I believe we've covered this adequately, and adding that one line doesn't really enhance the article. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 02:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

South Korean musical groups/bands are not solely produced by sole producer, it's an collaborative effort. Likelywise, Blackpink can't be considered as "produced by Teddy" mainly as Yang Hyun-suk is well-knowed to also contributed to their production. Including "produced by x" is simply too restrictive and possibly introducing factual errors, including but not limited to, interpretation. If required, a different compromise should be drafted instead for consensus. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

For space sake you have to be concise on lead. This means restrictions. Stating "produced by x" is factually correct, the reader will be able to further read into the page to get more informations about the topic.

Beside this theorical discussion you make a good point that South Korean K-pop groups (not south korean groups in general) are a collective effort, and this is also missing from the lead. I am all for adding multiple roles, or specifying what a role means with a concise but more precise definition. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 11:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I would like to clarify that I didn't stated South Korean K-pop groups, I did however state South Korean musical groups/bands. Also, there seem to be a miscommunication and/or misinterpretation causing unproductive tangents to be introducing into this discussion. As stated earlier, a different compromise should be drafted instead for consensus, hence my proposal is to have either [mainly] produced by x or [mainly] produced by x and y, whichever is applicable, in the second to forth paragraph of the lead with sentences that follow up immediately linking their involvement, this may includes materials like their contributions to their musical style, genre coverage, image, etc. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

This could make sense, I found the position next to ADOR being the most sensible since she is the CEO of it, and acts as a president of the subsidiary. Creating a whole second paragraph, before the songs achievement and such, with team roles etc could be an idea, the point is that Min Hee-Jin has such a wide role (president, executive producer with all details of the recording and selction of songs, oversees all the visual aspects etc) that it felt to me as a more heavy solution that just simply stating "produced by". Which is the solution that ADOR employs as well, each song on youtube is simply tagged in the description with "Producer: MIN HEE JIN" Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:02, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I believe I've already made it clear, twice, that a different compromise should be drafted instead for consensus. Therefore, I proposed earlier stating to have either [mainly] produced by x or [mainly] produced by x and y, whichever is applicable, in the second to forth paragraph of the lead. Your response seems to suggest a refusal to settle for a compromise and/or "agree to disagree" and/or seek consensus, which is neither constructive nor acceptable. Also ping @Btspurplegalaxy on their thoughts on the "compromise/agree to disagree" proposal above. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:24, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

And I was suggesting another compromise, while still possibly agreeing on yours.

Your response seems to suggest your refusal to even consider other compromises that your own. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how your proposal qualifies as a compromise, given that it's essentially the original version (i.e. w is a x formed by y and produced by z) that was reverted and disputed. In light of this, the statement Your response seems to suggest your refusal to consider other compromises than your own doesn't seem applicable here, as the proposal you're referring to isn't a compromise. A compromise involves finding a middle ground (i.e., different from the original disputed version) that addresses the concerns of all involved parties. Glad to heard that you're open to my proposal. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:42, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I said that your proposal makes sense. I think that mainly produced by is perfectly fine. As it is adding more people that have relevant roles, there again I agreed with you saying that South Korean groups (that I call K-pop groups) are a collaborative effort.

My only concern is on where to place all of this. That's why I kept elaborating the reasoning behind my first iteration, to try to advance the discussion about where to add these kind of info. The paragraph about songs and achievement doesn't seem appropriate to me, but maybe it is.

Symphidius what do you think about this? Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 16:01, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Stating something along the lines of "The quintet was produced by industry veteran Min Hee-jin" on the lead isn't controversial. Even recently, King Gnu member mentioned Min Hee-jin when describing NewJeans' artistry. NYT's Jon Caramanica references her on his review on NewJeans. @Btspurplegalaxy has continually brought up Lee Soo-man, but no group is known as "Lee Soo-man's girl group." He simply doesn't have the same name recognition or "brand" associated with his projects. Symphidius (talk) 01:49, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Relegating references to Min Hee-jin to "the second to forth paragraph of the lead" is effective erasure. Google only cares about the first lead, as does Youtube Music and a bunch other search engines. This is not a compromise. We're not dumb. @Btspurplegalaxy's only argument is that other K-pop articles don't mention their producer(s). This is false equivalence:

• we've told them they're free to do so
• there's no uniform guideline
• by that logic other K-pop articles don't try to describe their subject's looks and sound on the lead

The real question is, why is @Btspurplegalaxy so intent of leaving her out of the lead? The current ADOR (Min Hee-jin) vs HYBE (BTS's parent label) debacle isn't lost on me. Symphidius (talk) 01:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Pertaining to the misconception statement Google only cares about the first lead, as does Youtube Music and a bunch other search engines, please read on Wikipedia:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:FIXGOOGLE. And btw, the compromise proposal comes from me not Btspurplegalaxy. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 01:53, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

What am I misconstruing? Obviously Btspurplegalaxy would be in favor of your proposal. Symphidius (talk) 02:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I would expect that you follow talk page guidelines, assume good faith, and maintain neutral point of view on this discussions. Your behaviour here is unacceptable towards a editor helping out as third opinion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 02:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

What behavior? You've just entirely dismissed my points via WP:LAWYERING. Assume good faith? Here's an altered photo Btspurplegalaxy uploaded of NewJeans before I corrected it. Symphidius (talk) 02:50, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

For the second time, please aheld to talk page guidelines, assume good faith (AGF), and maintain neutral point of view (NPOV). For comments in relationship to the photo, I would abstain to maintain AGF and NPOV. Please note that, there won't be a third reminder, any further violations would bought up on WP:ANI instead. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 03:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

What's your issue? Bringing up a picture isn't relevant to this discussion. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 08:14, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I do appreciate @Paper9oll effort to build at least some sort of consensus. I understand @Symphidius distress because in my opinion sources would grant for a spot to the producer where I put it.

I don't think google or else is releveant, and having Min somewhere would be better then nothing. Especially considering than other K-pop pages are in an even worse state.

I'll reply on @Paper9oll drafts down below. Also please note that I am planning to change the definition of the musical style of the group that is also on lead, I hope it will not be as controversial... Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:30, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think you get to decide what's necessary. I wouldn't be opposed to Lee Soo-man in aespa's lead, after all he's the one who came up with their concept. That said, Min Hee-jin does interviews with foreign journalists, is introduced by the domestic media as "Min Hee-jin's girl group" and in general constantly mentioned in conjunction with NewJeans. According to Wikipedia:Content_removal#Consensus_on_removal, additions should remain in the article pending consensus. @Cinemaandpolitics's addition is properly sourced. The onus is on you, and a irreverent "it's not necessary" doesn't cut it. Symphidius (talk) 05:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

It would be different if it had been there from the start, but it wasn't. This is something that can be discussed before anything is added. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 07:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

No, that goes for unsourced material.

WP:BURDEN: Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source.

It's been 2 days and you've yet to make your case on why she should be removed other than that you don't like it. You have removed a good-faith addition. I'll be reinstating @Cinemaandpolitics's addition tomorrow. Symphidius (talk) 22:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm specifically talking about the lead section, not the sourced material. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 02:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

If you acknowledge Min Hee-jin's role in the creation of the brand, why remove it? Symphidius (talk) 20:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@Symphidius This definition could be more specific. To avoid confusion to what a "producer" is. Even though I think that it is not mandatory since I don't see any issue to "producer" having a broader meaning which is then developed in the body.

and produced by Min Hee-jin, who selects and curates each song. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 12:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@SymphidiusAlso looking at the same interview I noticed a way better definition that Min uses to describe what she is trying to achieve with the group "I wanted the team image to be cool, chill, sophisticated". This, in my opinion, works way better then the "girl next door image" that you criticized previously. It doesn't exclude it neither. A way better wording. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 12:07, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I essentially had a problem with the entire sentence honestly; users trying to distill their look and sound with no accountability of who said what. It's original research in guise of "summary." I would be going against a wiki-antediluvian and a very active Swiftie, time I do not have towards resolving this issue.

I'm in support of any properly sourced adjectives for NewJeans, and I agree it's way better than what's currently on there. Min Hee-jin here describes NewJeans as "whimsical":

I envision NewJeans as a truly “whimsical” group — not whimsical just for the sake of being quirky, but trying out what hasn’t been done in K-pop even though it should have been. Symphidius (talk) 21:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't see any problem either. Going by another interview (maybe add this source in the citations too?):

"Some people were convinced that it was unlikely to be a hit because it doesn’t follow the conventional “K-pop idol grammar.” But I didn’t care. I had a clear vision of what I wanted to do, and I was confident with the music I chose. The more I heard skeptical comments like that, it just made me want to showcase [NewJeans] sooner."

NewJeans is clearly a vehicle for Min Hee-jin's artistic expression. Symphidius (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

What do you think about "-helmed by" or "led by"? It mentions no "producer", rather just eludes that the entire operation is led by her. Symphidius (talk) 21:48, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I feel like "led by" doesn't change much, it's kind of the same idea. A Producer will always be something like that, even in movies. There is no perfect solution. I went for "Producer" for the very simple idea that this is how she labeled it and how each song is tagged in their official youtube videos.

"whimsical" feels a bit too complex for the lead, it could be added on body, but I actually feel that the NewJeans page is not missing content as much on body as compared with other K-pop articles, take for exemple Blackpink, which are basically 95% commercial prizes and no conceptual reflection whatsoever.

Like I said in the past discussion, probably people just wanted to add *anything* on lead. Which is of course almost nonsensical, you can't just pick such a precise definition from a couple of articles and expect it to define a group. Also it's not very productive in my opinion to put too much in a box a group that is already working in an industry that has a lot of constraints as K-pop. That's why I would directly quote Min with "cool, chill, sophisticated" stating that this is what she is/was looking for. It comes from a relevant actor, and is generally a good source, precise and open at the same time. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:10, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

It could also be reinforced by this source: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/22/arts/music/blackpink-born-pink-aespa-newjeans.html

Going from the title and first sentences it could be describing an important shift that NewJeans brought to recent K-pop, sadly I can't read the full article. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:14, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Here's a link to the archived version.

"-utterly cool and poised" - Jon Caramanica essentially echoes Min Hee-jin. I'm all for it. Symphidius (talk) 00:48, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Proposal

To move forward efficiently, below is four proposal for finding compromise that addresses the concerns of all parties involved. Rather than continuing a protracted discussion, let's focus on finding a middle ground (i.e., different from the original disputed version) that addresses the concerns of all involved parties by voting instead.

1. Maintain the status quo i.e. NewJeans is a South Korean girl group formed by ADOR. The group is composed of ...

2. Include mainly produced by Min Hee-jin in the 2nd paragraph of the lead.

Rough example, Mainly produced by Min Hee-jin, NewJeans debuted on July 22, 2022, with ...

3. Include mainly produced by Min Hee-jin in the 1st paragraph (NOT to be confused with the opening sentence) of the lead.

Rough example, NewJeans is a South Korean girl group formed by ADOR. The group is composed of ... and Hyerin. Mainly produced by Min Hee-jin, they are ...

4. Include mainly produced by Min Hee-jin in the 1st paragraph (NOT to be confused with the opening sentence) of the lead.

Rough example, NewJeans is a South Korean girl group formed by ADOR. Mainly produced by Min Hee-jin, the group is composed of ...

Please reply below with '''Support''' [OPTION(s) HERE] ~~~~

This proposal is specific to this article exclusively. To apply similar changes to other articles, a separate consensus must be reached on the each article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 03:10, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

• Support all options as nominator. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 03:21, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
• Support I believe option 2 would be a good choice.. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 08:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

• Support 3 - 4 because of how much she is relevant.

Partial Support 2 NOT on the current second paragraph, which would make no sense. We should have a new second paragraph instead where even more people from the team are referenced. Executive produced by Min, songs selection and general lead, produced by 250, styled by Choi Yu-mi etc etc This makes for a much more interesting read in my opinion. And I think it would also satisfy @Btspurplegalaxy and @Paper9oll concerns of Min being unfairly predominant. This is my favorite option by far. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the statement, We should have a new second paragraph instead where even more people from the team are referenced. Executive produced by Min, songs selection and general lead, produced by 250, styled by Choi Yu-mi etc etc and concerns of Min being unfairly predominant. I want to clarify that you misinterpreted my earlier comments. I specifically stated that these points were causing unproductive tangents to be introduced into this discussion. Therefore, my concerns do not stem from such tangents. To further clarify, when I mentioned that South Korean musical groups/bands are not solely produced by a sole producer, it's a collaborative effort, I was directly responding to the implication that Teddy [is the sole producer] for Blackpink. This is evidenced by my following statement, Likelywise, Blackpink can't be considered as "produced by [executive producer] Teddy" mainly as [executive producer] Yang Hyun-suk is well-knowed to also contributed to their production, in the same reply. I "agree to disagree" on the above proposal (four options) because as Min Hee-jin is the executive producer and CEO of NewJeans, is justified in being mentioned in the lead. I'm not open to any other deviations, including but not limited to, details about other "team" (note the intentional air quotes) members. These materials should be included in the body of the article rather than the lead, as these roles are subject to change and are not exclusively tied to the group. To avoid circular discussion, I won't reply any further on any further tangents and/or misinterpretation of my replies as I believe that I have explicitly stated clearly on my stance, including but not limited to, details about other "team" (note the intentional air quotes) members in the lead. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:34, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, I valued your idea that it is a "collaborative effort". A discussion about this is not an "unproductive tangent". You always seem to think your opinions as conclusive and definitive.

Anyway, then I Oppose 2. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

• Support 3 - 4 as she is usually featured in the 1st or 2nd sentence of third-party and official bios regarding NewJeans. A simple "conceived by Min Hee-jin", "executive produced by Min Hee-jin" or variations thereof. K-pop is a lot like theatrical production; a lot of people are involved but it's the director/producer that's part of the top billing. Symphidius (talk) 03:53, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

  executive produced is clean. funnilly enough the main body gives enough reading to let the read understand the rest, which is so rare for a K-pop page. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 18:42, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

References

Defining NewJeans

@Ippantekina Why do keep trying define how they sound like? NewJeans themselves defined themselves as "fluid... not putting ourselves in boxes." They're not a hip-hop group or whatever you're trying to label them as. Symphidius (talk) 06:50, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Symphidius: Why not? They are a musical group so a brief introduction of their sound is helpful. I didn't even write that they are a "hip hop group" or whatever phrasing you might want to attribute to me. Ippantekina (talk) 06:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

"Their music features styles of pop, R&B, and hip hop from the 1990s and 2000s decades." According to who? Who gets to decide this is their sound? You? Symphidius (talk) 06:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)