Talk:SMAP

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

Research Request[edit]

Research request: I know that one of the members of SMAP has done signficant anime seiyuu work, including the role of Riiya in Akazukin Cha Cha. Let me look that up on AniDB or someplace like that. Also, SMAP is freqeuntly satirized in anime, particularly the reference in Sensei no Ojikanj where one of the characters has an unhealthy obsession with a Goro-like singer. Michael Hopcroft 19:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm amused you haven't heard of Howl's Moving Castle.--24.5.125.75 08:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Backstreet Boys[edit]

You know, it really should read that the Backstreet Boys are an American version of SMAP instead of the way it's written now. The unfortunate boy-band tradition is older in Japan than America, and hell - SMAP has been around longer and has had more per capita success. I guess it really is hard for you Americans to not have a white-centric view of the universe. Kenzilla

And I guess it's really hard for you non-Americans to avoid pointing out every perceived flaw of Americans, real or not, never mind the fact that there are much, much worse cultures and governments in the world. And introducing the racial aspect of it - nice race-baiting. I've been to Europe, I can attest that Europeans are definitely as a whole more racist than Americans as a whole, and don't even get me started on Australians. I will guess by the tone of your comment that you have never been to the U.S., which is the prerequisite qualification for America-bashing. Having said that, Backstreet Boys and SMAP both suck.--220.49.228.16 (talk) 08:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Europeans may be more racist. I don't know. Americans are more insular, though, which is the real point of Kenzilla's statement. TRiG (talk) 14:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Project Assessment[edit]

This is probably the longest, most detailed entry on a band I've seen yet. Far too many restrict themselves to the discography, with little prose. A picture of the band would be great, though. LordAmeth 01:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you checked out the very good articles on The Beatles, Pink Floyd, AC/DC, or Nirvana? - cgilbert(talk|contribs) 20:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture?[edit]

Any particular reason the current picture is uh.. of TOKIO? You know, being as they're an entirely different band (albiet of the same promotional agency) and all.

Yes, a picture of this page is TOKIO.Somebody should correct as soon as possible.
This misunderstanding appears to be the result of some anon vandalising Image:SMAP.jpg, which understandably is of SMAP.--ZayZayEM 03:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The picture has been changed to a real picture of SMAP. ;) (Calamity-Ace 14:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mother Series reference[edit]

Should we added that SMAP is referenced in Mother 2? SMAP is one of the default choices for "Favorite thing."

Dragon Quest?[edit]

There's no date for when SMAP became the spokespeople for the series. Was this a one-time thing, or on-going? More information would be great.--Gocchin (talk) 22:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think they've got so.They appeared that CM for three time(DragonQuest7(2000),DragonQuest8(2004) and newest,DragonQuest9(2009)) and Tsuyoshi appeared on the press conference of making DQ9.
  • And...I know some of this article got old but I don't have enough command to edit wikipedia in natural English,I'm Japanese speaker.Somebody please edit those in natural English!
  • Their record of six-day tour in Tokyo Dome had broken by KAT-TUN...they did eight-day tour.
  • Goro's "Goro's bar" was reformed to "My fair lady".
  • Shingo's Sma-STATION's title had changed "SmaSTATION-6" to "SmaStation!!" again and "Tokujou! Tensei Shingo" came to an end.
  • Masahiro's hair is no more long now.it's so short...well,I don't wanna think of it so much,but it's losing.
  • It's English version of wikipedia,why don't you write about "Black Eyed Peas" with SMAP?They appeared SMAPxSMAP for three time and they made two songs for SMAP("Theme of 019"&"Here is your hit" of "super.modern.artistic.performance")--220.156.33.229 (talk) 14:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (1)[edit]

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Clear consensus to keep current title.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SMAP → Smap — all naming conventions for articles of this nature discourage the use of all capitals merely because that is how name appear on artwork etc. — Lets Enjoy Life (talk) 12:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Oppose. SMAP stands for "Sports Music Assemble People", and therefore it's an abbreviation. As stated in the Wikipedia's naming conventions, use abbreviations when "almost exclusively known only by its abbreviation and is widely known and used in that form". --staka (T) 03:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Reason clearly mentioned above. Quality check 17:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose for same reason as above: because the name is described as an acronym in the article. --DAJF (talk) 07:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose move. The sources and their own website refers to them invariably as SMAP. It's an acronym, and as they aren't currently called "Sports Music Assembly People", it only makes sense to keep this article at the acronym, which should be fully capitalised. Maedin\talk 11:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Requested move (2)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was page moved. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 12:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Sports Music Assemble People → SMAP — This article was moved to Sports Music Assemble People without discussion by an editor to enable the creation of a disambiguation page on which the only other entry is a red link. The band name is clearly the dominant use at present, and they are never referred to anywhere as "Sports Music Assemble People", which is probably a Backronym anyway. Any disambiguation in the future could easily be handled by creating SMAP (disambiguation) if necessary. DAJF (talk) 23:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as a matter of procedure, basically. It was undiscussed prior to being moved, and the existence of a prior movereq discussions should have tipped off whoever moved it that this would probably be controversial.
    — V = I * R (talk) 05:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support--Cckerberos (talk) 05:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; should be non controversial. I've started a deletion request for the current disambiguation page and will gladly start up the new one at SMAP (disambiguation).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 12:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move (3)[edit]

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

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Cúchullain t/c 17:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

– Computer protocols are at least as important as boy bands. Relisted. BDD (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC) Nouniquenames 14:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: The band has in the past proven to be the primary topic by which the name "SMAP" is applied to, and that still seems to be the case. The Simple Mail Access Protocol article is short, unsourced, and does not appear to be in any way widely known in order for the band to no longer be afforded the acknowledgement by the English Wikipedia to be the primary topic by which "SMAP" is associated with.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:01, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; no evidence of primary topic. Powers T 17:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    They're one of the best selling groups in Japan and the other topics (that are on Wikipedia) in question are certainly not the primary topic either. Simple Mail Access Protocol is a stub and has been for years (no one's even bothered to edit it in 2 years and it seems to be about a defunct product). Soil Moisture Active Passive relies on primary sources and hasn't even been used yet. And Supervisor mode access prevention is only a redirect. From JHunterJ's previous revert of the original move, it certainly seems that he decided that the band was the primary topic. A simple search on Google also seems to bring up the band more often than any other option and prefers the band as a result rather than any other subject which may share the acronym, including a BBC News article.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The first non-Wikipedia result on Google for me is Soil Moisture Active Passive. Remember, our main criterion for primary topic is that the topic is not just being more likely to be sought, but more likely than all others combined, and far more likely than any other single topic. I need something more than just a Google search to convince me of that. Powers T 19:24, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's compare the articles then. This one is twice as long as the other two we have on Wikipedia combined and is also the best sourced. And going back tot he search, it brings up more suggestions for the band as related searches than for the single satellite which won't be launched for two years and the e-mail protocol that apparently has never been implimented across platforms. I would say that's enough.—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per primary topic usage criterion. Below is a list of page views for SMAPs. The disambiguation page's page view is only about 2.5 percent of the plain title and the page view ratio for the band and rest is about 10 to 1. I don't think other topics has long-term significance that outwaigh the usage statistics. --Kusunose 10:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Powers' findings for the real world (ie. not limited to Wikipedia) -- 70.24.245.16 (talk) 21:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    What findings? He just says that the first link in Google that wasn't Wikipedia was the NASA satellite which hasn't been put into service yet, while I pointed out the bulk of the rest of the links regard the band. And we can see that the article about the band is the most visited on Wikipedia. Why should facts about our internal visitor count not be included?—Ryulong (琉竜) 12:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The visit count is inherently flawed by the article's position as the first encountered, as opposed to clicking through the dab at the shared title. From a technical standpoint, it is useless for this purpose. --Nouniquenames 01:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Look at the dab page's visits though. That basically means that only 256 of the 10238 people who went to SMAP then went on to SMAP (disambiguation).—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:20, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The page view statistics do seem to indicate that the band is overwhelmingly the primary topic here. --DAJF (talk) 08:00, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why was this relisted? That's never done for RMs as far as I've seen.—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The page view numbers that Kusunose provides look pretty conclusive. Only 1.8 percent (537 / 30374) of traffic goes to the DAB, so the current setup seems to be working for most readers. Kauffner (talk) 05:06, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What policy or guideline allows historical pageviews to determine ongoing primary topic? The pageview numbers are meaningless to the discussion. --Nouniquenames 02:27, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You forgot to add "IMO" to that post of yours.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Find something that says I'm wrong, and I'll strike it completely. As it stands, nothing in the policies and guidelines I've found allows use of pageviews to determine primary topic. At best, that would be OR or SYNTH. --Nouniquenames 01:53, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but OR and SYNTH only apply to article content rather than meta content.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:06, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - how does this move benefit Wikipedia or anyone else? SMAP are probably the most famous group of entertainers in Japan, and "Simple Mail Access Protocol" is a very short article on what does not appear to be a particularly significant protocol. And even if the move takes place, a disambiguation page is put into the prized position, for what purpose? JoshuSasori (talk) 14:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • It saves a click and a pageload for the significant number of persons not interested in boy bands. Powers T 19:18, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Of which less than 5 percent of the visitors to the page consist of.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Visitors to which page? Using what data? Powers T 22:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • This one. Using the data posted above. The data you keep refusing to accept.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            There's a lot of data posted above. I explained my objection to the data you posted, and I've never objected to the data posted by Kusunose. So what, if you don't mind me asking, are you going on about when you say I "keep refusing to accept" data? What data?
            Second of all, you seem to be saying that fewer than 5% of visitors to SMAP, the article on the band, are disinterested in the band. To which I say: So what? The relevant figure is how many visitors who arrive at SMAP by searching for that title are disinterested in the band. There's a difference, because the latter figure excludes the no-doubt enormous percentage of readers who arrive here via deliberate links and would still arrive at this article in exactly the same fashion whether it was titled "SMAP (band)", "SMAP", or "Sports Music Assemble People". They don't coun't, because the title does not affect their ability to get here; the only readers germane to the discussion are the people who search for SMAP. And you can't tell me that 95% of them want to read this article, because you don't have any data to show that.
            Powers T 21:35, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            Fine. I don't. And I've nothing left to say except this discussion has been going on for much too long and it should have been closed at least 2 weeks ago.—Ryulong (琉竜) 21:48, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move (4)[edit]

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

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus from the previous RMs have shown that there's no consensus to move. No substantive policy based reason has been presented here. Ryulong's reasoning is in line with article naming policy. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


SMAP → SMAP (band) – Notice SMAP would be redirected to SMAP (band) not SMAP (disambiguation) Fgnievinski (talk) 14:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: The band is the primary topic, as determined in the previous requested move from this past December/January. This page should be moved back to SMAP post-haste.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't dispute the primary issue. Redirecting SMAP to SMAP (band) would take care of that.Fgnievinski (talk) 14:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's the primary topic, it does not need to be disambiguated.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on SMAP. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:40, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SMAP&oldid=1212599486"