Talk:Damaged Lady

RFC
Note:Starting on a specific relevant article page, may need a further RFC with a refined question on some China/Korea/Japan or Song or Title guideline page after wards depending on progress. Question 1 regarding English approximations of Korean Japanese Chinese titles: Should Korean, Japanese and Chinese, songs and albums where (condition 1) a clear English title is not used on cover artwork, and (condition 2) translated English versions only can be found in html sources, blogs and listings, and not consistently in English printed books, be considered an exception to WP:MUSIC title guidelines which are designed for songs and albums where a clear Latin-alphabet (e.g. English, Spanish, French) title exists, and defer to the policy objectives of WP:CRITERIA which requires recognizability and as a result in all cases base names (e.g. Damaged Lady) should redirect to a recognizable title giving artist name such as Damaged Lady (Kara song) or Can't Be A Lady (Kara song) (technically this is possible: see Harusame which redirects to Japanese destroyer Harusame (1937)). Question 2 regarding Latin-script romanizations of Korean Japanese Chinese titles: Likewise in all cases where a song or album title is a romanization from Korean hangul, Japanese script or Chinese hanzi, then again base names should redirect to a recognizable title giving artist name, e.g. Sugnyeo ga mos dwae (Kara song). The reason why this would be more needed for romanization of Korean, romanization of Japanese, romanization of Chinese is that in all 3 languages there are multiple schemes and in Japanese and Chinese schemes a loss of the meaning given by ideograms. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:33, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Survey Question 1

 * For songs at English name based only on web articles example Damaged Lady, Disdain (EP)


 * Yes add (FOO song), where no English on cover and no highly reliable (Google Book) source available. Not for disambiguation, but for recognizability. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No. There's nothing to disambiguate, unless the title can be confused with another topic. --Cold Season (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, there is nothing to disambiguate, and we don't use "Foo (bar)" article title format except for disambiguation.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:48, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Survey Question 2

 * For songs with romanization of Japanese Chinese Korean - example Japanese Koi ni Ochiru Toki, Chinese Le Tian Pai, Korean Jalmot Haesseo


 * Yes, add (FOO song) in all cases to offset the problem of romanization reducing recognizability, not for disambiguation. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * This is a disambiguation, not part of the name of the subject; it does not apply to recognizability as such per WP:CRITERIA. --Cold Season (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, correct, exactly as Harusame redirecting to Japanese destroyer Harusame (1937) In ictu oculi (talk) 10:46, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You are applying Naming conventions (ships), I have no interest to contest a convention for ships. It also does not apply to what you are proposing at all. Furthermore, that article was unilaterally moved to a parenthesis disambiguation, while ironically the aforementioned convention states (and I quote) "If there is only one ship of the name, it is wrong to disambiguate, per WP:PRECISE". So, that's a wrong example and just proves the point that disambiguation is for ambiguous titles (thus not supporting your proposal). --Cold Season (talk) 13:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * No. There's nothing to disambiguate, unless the title can be confused with another topic. There's also a lot of foreign topics other than songs that's transliterated, similarly applies to those too. --Cold Season (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, there is nothing to disambiguate, and we don't use "Foo (bar)" article title format except for disambiguation.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:48, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Comment - as drafter of RFC, firstly thank you for your time. Secondly I recognize that lumping Chinese Korean and Japanese together is slightly problematic - Japanese romanization of hiragana and katakana names is much more transparent than a pinyin name for a Cantonese sung Chinese character title for example. Hopefully discussion can tease out those differences.... In ictu oculi (talk) 03:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right, I reject this arbitrary lumping together. Furthermore, there are far more languages with transliterations, meaning that this focus on East Asia is inconsistent. --Cold Season (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, yes that's why I said it, thanks for participating. But one reason for lumping them together is the common Chinese/Japanese ideograms, another that many of the same singles in Chinese/Japanese/Korean with no English name, or an English name invented from blogs come from the same music management in Seoul, and a third reason is that it is easier to generate critical mass for a discussion with 3 projects rather than 1.
 * I don't understand your point about (presumably you mean) Russian and Arabic - those languages aren't ideograms, so romanization of Russian and Arabic song titles is pretty easy. Eurovision song Razom Nas Bahato, Nas Ne Podolaty is easily identifiable (Ukrainian: Разом нас багато, нас не подолати), so for that reason don't see widening this to Cyrillic is called for, yet.
 * The same goes more so for your point on foreign songs, yes, see Category:Eurovision songs of France. For example Femme dans ses rêves aussi represents "Femme dans ses rêves aussi" perfectly. But Damaged Lady does not represent "Sugnyeo ga mos dwae" (숙녀가 못 돼; Can't Be A Lady) perfectly. That's all. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't presumably mean anything stated, I mean all languages without Latin letters. Secondly, romanization is romanization; each of those languages have its set of basic rules, including those from East Asia. This is straightforward. Thirdly, you are suggesting disambiguation; there's nothing to disambiguate and there's no other reason to do so. --Cold Season (talk) 13:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You don't need to repeatedly (or at all) thank people for participating; it's distracting and comes off as false cordiality, like saying "good day, sir" when you mean the opposite. This is a wiki; all we  is participate, and that's why we're here.  It's like saying "thanks for drinking" to people at a bar/pub.  ;-)   Anyway, I have to agree with Cold Season, and the underlying implication of that editor's point is that this random, obscure article talk page is not the venue for a proposal to very broadly change article titles policy by mandatorily adding descriptive parentheticals to names that may be unfamiliar simply because they're foreign and transliterated.  The proper venue for that is WT:AT, with the RfC broadly advertised at WP:VPP and WP:CENT.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I've struck the thanks. FWIW it was genuine. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)