Talk:Yuna Ito

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

Biography assessment rating comment[edit]

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee 23:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blog version[edit]

Apparently, there is an edit war going on between a blog version and the translated official version of Yuna Ito's biography. There still seems to be no effort to merge these 2 versions.

The blog version seems to be written originally by Mara, a site admin within the nana-nana.net/yunaforum website. This blog version seems to be problematic, in that there are numerous grammatical and spelling errors, and seems to be posted into Wikipedia by anonymous user(s). Also, there may be a problem with the Wikipedia:Citing sources policy, as the blog version is never properly cited within the article.

The translated official version is based on Sony's official version in Japanese (click biography), translated by bemmu.com, and posted into Wikipedia by actual Wikipedia users (Kamezuki, Yajimari21, etc.).

I propose to merge these 2 versions, if the following conditions are met. I think we need to know where Mara obtained her information: a childhood friend of Yuna, or an ex-employee of Itochan Sushi, or whatever. I think we need to reveal the identity of the source of this information. Even then, the material from the blog version should be merely supplemental to the translated official version. Also, any grammatical & spelling errors must be corrected.--Endroit 20:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you Endroit, the blog version is very... unprofessional, exclamation points, colloquialisms *shudders*, but if Mara could be contacted somehow and reconfigure the fan-bio so that it could be a nice supplement it could be added. This edit war is becoming ridiculous, and over such a small matter as well. If any users are able to contact Mara please post in this discussion. Yajimari21 02:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Before I was aware of this stupid war, I editted the biography because no offense, it was filled with way too much cuddly words and sounded really bad due to the grammar. Someone should help edit the singles too, they seem to be in the same style as the original biography.--Bakahito 09:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes, this is pretty badly written. (I can write 'fluent' kana too, that means almost nothing) 16:16, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Editing with mom's help[edit]

Yuna, is common name among Korean female. Plus its funny and stupid why would Yuna Ito or her mother be offended if the name " Yuna" can be common name in Korean and Japanese. Yuna Ito by blood she is part Korean. Please leave out bias opinion please. As Yuna Ito fan and Honolulu, Hawaii residence as a perosn who does know her mother well. Her mother is not type of person who would be offended if name Yuna be common used name in Korean and Japanese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korea4one (talk • contribs) 10:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I was having dinner at Aki-no-No in Honolulu earlier tonight. I'm close with both Yuna and Yuna's parents who own the restaurant. Her mom was searching around the Internet for mentions of her daughter. When she came across the Wikipedia article, she was totally shocked at some of the mis-information. She sat with me and made the corrections right at the restaurant's computer. Although the information corrected isn't recorded anywhere else as Wikipedia requires, there's quite a bit of personal information in the article that you just can't prove citing published evidence. Maybe using her parents as a source may not be valid citing within Wikipedia, but leaving false information un-changed is just as bad.

One thing that upsetted her was the Korean name. To set the record straight, the context behind the name "Yuna", according to her parents, is Japanese. Yuna does not officially have a Korean name as assigned to her. Her mom can read and speak Korean, and she says the Hangul-written name was incorrect. Also, she never attended Iolani School. Before her 7th grade year, she attended an elementary school which I won't mention here. And, she lives in an apartment in Tokyo and not in Hokkaido. I re-wrote references to McKinley High School to clarify that she in fact graduated from the school in 2001, and not that she just "left" the school in 2001 which could be intepreted as dropping out. Groink 10:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not sure whether you are close or not with the mother of this pop star but please do help out this poorly written article, thanks a lot. --Bakahito 12:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Heartcover.jpg[edit]

Image:Heartcover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kanji[edit]

The article clearly states that she is "a native-born citizen of the United States and was brought up in Hawai'i." As a native-born US citizen, it is impossible for her official (legal) name (as given on a birth certificate or passport) to have kanji. (At best, she can register an alias (通称名), but that does not take precedence over the orthography given in a passport.) In addition, the Japanese wikipedia clearly states that the kanji is ateji, which makes sense as she is a US citizen.

Assume for the moment that somehow it officially is 伊藤由奈. In romanization, that is Itō Yuna or Yuna Itō. Why does Itō become Ito? They are radically different surnames. The common Japanese surname is Itō, but there is also Ito (see Hiroshi Ito). So it is not as simple as merely dropping the diacritics for convenience. And yet I imagine there would be huge resistance to moving the page to Yuna Itō.

I have no issue with listing the kanji for her name. However, it is deceptive to omit the note that it is ateji. Until several recent edits, this page did in fact say so, just as the Japanese article does. In all fairness, I propose the following compromise: list 伊藤由奈 in another section and state that it is ateji. If necessary, clarify that her real surname is Ito and not Itō and why the two are different. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 03:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:MOS-JP. Her Japanese name, as referenced on her own official website, CDs, media releases and other official published material, is 伊藤 由奈 Itō Yuna, and which therefore must be cited in the article, along with her trade name, as explained quite clearly on the WP:MOS-JP project page. Original research and unreferenced claims, e.g. statements asserting the status of her name or romanizations, such as whether they are official or not, cannot be included in articles due to it being unsourced, as well as being possible original research or speculation. Please refrain from putting comments on articles. Thank you. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 21:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Over the years, I have probably read the WP:MOS-JP several hundred times. I am intimately familiar with it. First, note that it is a guideline: "Guidelines are not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." You are under no obligations to list kanji for her name.
Next, regarding the issue on "trade names" that you brought up. From WP:MOS-JP, quote:

Use the official trade name if available in English/Latin alphabet.

. 伊藤由奈 is not "English/Latin alphabet" so is meaningless to this issue. More importantly, you do not seem to understand what a trade name is. Quote from article:

[... a] name which a business trades under for commercial purposes, although its registered, legal name [...]

. People do not have "trade names". And even if they did, you would need to provide a source specifically claiming so. Your "reference" does not say that 伊藤由奈 is a trade name. Thus, it is unsourced and subject to removal. Remember what WP:PROVEIT says: "Do not leave unsourced information in articles for too long". If you insist on it, then you will need to provide a source that specifically states that it is a trade name, and in which case state in the article that it is a trade name. Trade names are legally registered so it should not be hard to find. However, people do not have trade names, but the burden of proof is up to you for it to remain in the article. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 23:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, when I was talking about trade names, I was referring to her most commonly-used English name (in this case, Yuna Ito) and how according to WP:MOS-JP that be included in the main article along with a subject's Japanese name - that's exactly what WP:MOS-JP states. "My" reference i.e. her official website, and several of her CDs and official media publications, proves her name is transcribed officially by official sources as 伊藤 由奈 Itō Yuna - these are official published resources. So yes, it must definitely be included within the article's body, if you happen to disagree kindly raise this matter on WP:JP. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 02:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also have no idea as to what you're referring to when you say "the issue of trade names"; the most common spelling of her name is already the article's title and neither have I expressed any qualms on that. My point, as I had clearly stated, was that her Japanese name, according to her official sources, is 伊藤 由奈 Itō Yuna and so is to be included in the article's body intro per WP:MOS-JP. Quite simple really. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 03:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is no issue with her name being Yuna Ito. The issue is 伊藤由奈. She is a US citizen, and her name is Yuna Ito, not 伊藤由奈. Putting it in the nihongo template implies the opposite: her name is 伊藤由奈 but is romanized as Yuna Ito. Your (two) references for 伊藤由奈 do not back this point. Rather, to fairly reflect your references, 伊藤由奈 should be moved to a section stating something like the following: "In Japan, Yuna Ito uses the kanji 伊藤由奈 (Itō Yuna) for her name." <ref1, 2>. The Japanese wikipedia says that 伊藤由奈 is ateji, but that point can be omitted without a better resource. However, leaving 伊藤由奈 in the nihongo template implies something that your references do not state. That is unacceptable. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 03:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The references clearly state the fact that her name is officially transcribed in published Japanese sources as 伊藤由奈 Itō Yuna; this, actually, is a published verified fact. A subject's transcribed Japanese name, as well as the standardized Hepburn romanization of that name, has to be included in the introduction of Japan related articles along with its most common variation per WP:MOS-JP. Please refer to the several hundreds of other articles on the project, such as Sudoku (FA class), Hypsizygus tessellatus, and Holly Osmanthus, which contain both the most commonly-transcribed English and Japanese variations of their name respectively. An exemplary instance is the featured class article Sudoku, a game which was invented by an American and first published originally by an American company in the United States under an English name (Number Place), but became popular primarily in Japan initially and thus influencing its international popularity, therefore we have its Japanese published name as its article title, as well as the Japanese transcription (kanji) and the Hepburn Japanese romanization of its name in the article's intro, though the game happens to be non-Japanese. The policies of WikiProject Japan are therefore quite clear regarding the inclusion of the transcription of Japanese names and its romanizations in its many articles. I would therefore ask you to refer to these policies which I have listed above, and if you happen to have any queries regarding these, please feel free to raise them up on the Project's respective talk pages. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 06:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
None of which respond to the only issue here. No one is arguing that Japanese sources use 伊藤由奈. Nor do I have any fault in your romanization of it. However, by initially listing her name as "Yuna Ito (伊藤 由奈, Itō Yuna [...]", this falsely indicates that her real name is 伊藤由奈 and this is romanized as Yuna Ito. This is backwards. As an American citizen, her real name is Yuna Ito. Do you have any references stating that as an American citizen (remember, she is not Japanese), her real name is 伊藤由奈? I do not, but then I am not the one making the assertion.
Lets consider another US citizen, just like Ito, who often makes Japanese news for comparison: George W. Bush. He is in the Japanese news basically everyday, certainly much more than Ito is at any rate. So, do you think it would be acceptable to put a nihongo template on that page stating that his name is ジョージ・W・ブッシュ? It is certainly verifiable and he is big part of Japan. Any why stop at just Japanese? Ito's mother was part Korean as well. Shall we put 이토유나 (Ito Yuna) in there, too?
I offered a compromise: move the section about 伊藤由奈 elsewhere and simply state what your resources indicate: Ito goes by the name 伊藤由奈 (Itō Yuna) in Japan, which just happens to be different from her birth name of Yuna Ito. This is how the article was until you began editing it recently. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 07:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid you are not familiar with the policies of WP:MOS-JP and WP:JP. For a subject that is relative primarily to Japan, such as Yuna Ito, WP:MOS-JP and WP:JP's policies are to be applied. So for such a subject, the most common and widely-published Japanese transcription or spelling of her name, in this case 伊藤由奈 (as cited by official references) is to be included in the introduction. WP:MOS-JP makes this quite clear. This is why other articles, that happen to be covered by the project, such as Sudoku (an exemplary instance as it is a featured article and follows every established policy) have the Japanese transcription even though these topics are not originally Japanese in the first place. However, it was you, my anon friend, who actually removed her Japanese name and template from the article, without citing any single policy or reference in the first place, even though the nihongo template was already used in the article long before your reverts: a skim at the article's history page shows your insistence in diligently removing her Japanese name from the article and reverting other editors even though you did not cite a single source for your own claims. WP:JP and WP:MOS-JP is completely clear about this matter. Her Japanese name will continue to stay, if you happen to disagree, then raise this matter on the WP:JP talk page. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 20:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Contrary to your claims, WP:MOS-JP and WP:JP are not "policies". WP:MOS-JP is a guideline. WP:JP is a WikiProject, which is just a "a collection of pages devoted to the management of a specific topic or family of topics". Neither override official policies such as WP:V. Please quote the exact parts of WP:MOS-JP and WP:JP that you feel say otherwise.
Neither the WP:MOS-JP or the WP:JP are relevant on this matter. It is entirely about verifiability. Without any further explanation, the initial "Yuna Ito (伊藤 由奈, Itō Yuna [...]" means: Her name is 伊藤由奈 and this is romanized as Yuna Ito. However, in reality, it is the other way around: her name has always been Yuna Ito (born in the US as a US citizen with that name) and was never just a romanization of 伊藤由奈 (Itō Yuna). Do you have references specifically stating otherwise? None that you have presented at least. I have in my hands now several of her (Japanese) CDs. They use the spelling "Yuna Ito" in Latin script, not 伊藤由奈. Regardless, some references apparently use 伊藤由奈. So note it. But do not mislead readers by being vague and not saying anything at all on the matter.
Please review WP:PROVEIT (an actual official policy). Any challenged information without appropriate citations may be removed. You assert that her name is 伊藤由奈 and I ask you to prove it. Your "references" are not appropriate for your assertion. Your references at best could argue that her "stage name" in Japan is 伊藤由奈 (even though her CDs use Yuna Ito), but then you have a responsibility to actually say so, not mislead readers overwise. The only reason I have not edited it myself is to discuss it rather than begin an edit-war with you. Again, I do not oppose mentioning 伊藤由奈 in the article. However, it needs to be appropriately described to be fair to the references. That is all that I am asking for. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 00:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The references I've cited clearly identify the fact that 伊藤由奈 is used by official published sources, not just "some" sources, and so it is indeed completely understandable it be used; whether or not you disagree does not change the fact that it meets every single requirement outlined at WP:MOS-JP, WP:V and WP:NOT. However, you haven't provided a single reference or proof for your claims, why shouldn't WP:PROVEIT apply to your own unreferenced additions? If you happen to be interested in actually improving this article, why such an emphasis on this matter? Please try adding references to this article, but if you still disagree, please raise this matter on the WP:JP talk page, where I'm sure other editors would be willing to share their views on this topic. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 03:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"The references I've cited clearly identify the fact that 伊藤由奈 is used by official published sources" <-- I fully agree and have said so above. However, what do they say about her name? If anything, 伊藤由奈 is her stage name. Repeat for the third time since you are not getting it: Without any further explanation, the initial "Yuna Ito (伊藤 由奈, Itō Yuna [...]" means: Her name is 伊藤由奈 and this is romanized as Yuna Ito. However, in reality, it is the other way around: she was born a US citizen under the name Yuna Ito and thus is not just a romanization of 伊藤由奈 (Itō Yuna). Do you have references specifically stating otherwise? None that you have presented at least. I am not the one asserting that her name is 伊藤由奈 without any clarifications. You are, and thus you need to WP:PROVEIT. is can mean a great deal of things. Her legal name is Yuna Ito, not 伊藤由奈. Her stage name is (according to your references) 伊藤由奈. On her CDs, her name is Yuna Ito. So what do you mean by her name is 伊藤由奈? You do not need to answer me. Rather, you need to put it in the article. Thus, clarify the issue. Something like: Born as Yuna Ito... she releases CDs under the same name... her stage name in Japanese is 伊藤由奈. Say what your references say. Otherwise your references do not back the point. I would be happy to make the edit. However, I am not looking for an edit-war which is why I am here discussing it. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 04:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A note citing the exact usage of her name in Japanese sources should suffice, per the references and WP:MOS-JP, whether or not it is just a stage name is not something that can be added on the basis of WP:OR. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 07:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The note is an improvement in the right direction. However, more details are needed than a simple note. Questions:

  1. Are we agreed that she was born as a US citizen as Yuna Ito?
  2. Do you recognize that her CDs use Yuna Ito on the covers?
  3. Do you recognize that Ito and Itō are different (regardless of the reasons)?

More on this after we discuss these issues. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 08:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The note is everything that the reference actually suggests. Your claims above, as well as any other unsourced statement in the article, have been already tagged as original research or unreferenced by other editors in the article so obviously they will be removed per WP:PROVEIT unless you can provide references. Original research or unsourced statements will not be tolerated on Wikipedia. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 18:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Will you answer the question? The article currently states that she is a US citizen and her name is Yuna Ito. Do you disagree? If so, this can be removed from the article. The CDs use Yuna Ito. That is not original research and is self apparent. Ito and Itō are different. That too is not original research and is self apparent. Now, do you agree or disagree on these points? 125.207.240.11 (talk) 21:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If the article claims something, it needs to be backed up with reliable sources per WP:V, otherwise it's to be removed. I have absolutely no interest in the article's subject, so whether or not I disagree is of no consequence, if you are claiming something: just back it up with reliable sources. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 21:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, then it shall be removed. And all of the other unreferenced bits should eventually be removed if no references are supplied within a reasonable amount of time. (WP:PROVEIT states: "Do not leave unsourced information in articles for too long".) Links to CD images should suffice to demonstrate the spelling. I'll probably get to that this weekend. 202.221.192.193 (talk) 00:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yuna Ito's status in Hawaii[edit]

I'm totally shocked! Someone from Wikiproject Hawaii dropped Ito's status to "low". This editor doesn't have a clue. I'm also from Hawaii (Pearl City). The reason why Yuna is virtually an unknown in the islands is that the local media as a whole won't give her the coverage - just because she's not "local" enough and doesn't speak da-kine. She chose the Japanese market over the U.S. That's not something to hold against her. Look at Jasmine Trias... Her only claim to fame is being on American Idol (and she didn't win). Ito, on the other hand won the same OC16 singing event as Jasmine. She appeared in a major movie in Japan. She appeared on Kouhaku, which is recognized even by the local contingency in Hawaii and the world. And, she's even worked with Celine Dion. All Jasmine's done is compete in a demon-dialing voting campaign (which btw was an embarrassment to Hawaii,) and is now catering almost exclusively for the Filipinos. If Jasmine's rated as "mid", Yuna should also be "mid". Groink (talk) 02:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Unless you are a member of the project, you probably should not be changing our assessments. Your reasoning above shows a basic misunderstanding of how the importance field is used by a project to prioritize the workload. Since this parameter is not generally understood or used, many projects have stopped using it, and I plan on doing the same. To the best of my knowledge, this article is of a low priority for the Hawaii project for several reasons: other projects are already working on the article, and as you admit above, it is not as Hawaii-related as Trias. Usually, an assessment is made by an editor who is not biased, one way or the other. In the future, please do not change project assessments unless you are sufficiently neutral and are working on the project. To contest an assessment by a project, use the project talk page. Lastly, I find your complaint somewhat ironic, since I raised the assessment from start to C-class, and that is the only criteria that matters on the frontend. The "importance" field is for use on the backend, and has no bearing on the quality of an article. Viriditas (talk) 05:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My complaint about the "importance" field is exactly what you mentioned - you guys should be working more to boost this article than Trias. Is it because an article like Trias is easier to write because of more interest to the locals, while Ito's article requires more research? The "bias" you mention shows throughout your importance rating system in your project. And no, I did not say that Ito's article is not Hawaii related. She is just as kamaaina as Trias, and both she and Angela Aki (an article which btw your project hasn't even tagged) are probably doing more for the Hawaii economy by boosting Japanese tourism and bringing more Japanese productions to the islands. Groink (talk) 07:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, again. Your comments above show that the general rule about "bias" on Wikipedia holds true. Basically, whenever an editor makes an accusation of "bias" on a talk page, 9 times out of 10, it is the editor making the accusation who is biased, not the person or project that they are targeting. In case you missed it the first time, the importance field has nothing to do with the quality of an article. It has to do with whether the project is prioritizing the article as part of its workload. This has absolutely nothing to do with bias, and everything to do with whether there are editors on the project who work on these types of articles, whether the article itself is directly related to the project, and whether other projects are already working on it. If for some reason this isn't making sense to you, feel free to ask me questions, or ask someone else, or post a query on the project page. Your comments above are only your opinion, so if you want to convince me that there is some reason I should stop working on more important Hawaii-related articles and prioritize this one, then you'll need evidence. In case you have forgotten, this is a volunteer project, and there's no reason why WikiProject Hawaii should make this article a priority when it is the domain of other more topical projects. Your entire argument here lacks any sort of evidence, so please provide it (i.e. sources) if you reply. You say that the Hawaii project should be doing more to "boost" this article, but that isn't how WikiProjects work. Your misunderstanding has led you to make some false accusations, and I suggest you take some time to think about your position before replying again. Viriditas (talk) 08:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My last comment, because you are totally blowing my comments out of context, and one can't debate an issue when the other person's in left field. The purpose of WikiProjects is to provide resources for articles that need the resources. The "importance" indicator indicates the amount of resources an article needs, i.e. if an article has "mid" importance, it should have more people working on it than a "low" importance article. Simply, the overall goal every Wikipedian has is for the article to reach "good article" status. You have the importance factor totally bass-ackwards. It appears that articles that many Hawaiians know a lot about have the higher importance ratings, such as Barack Obama where it should be "low" importance since a ton of people from other projects are already working on it. In fact, it should be the reverse: the Hawaii-related articles people know less about should have higher importance status, and be improved so that the Hawaiians will know more about the subject matter of the article. That is how, as you put it, "prioritizing the article as part of its workload." I have no bias towards this article than any other Hawaii-related article. I just have a concern about how your project uses the "importance" and how the workload is managed. Groink (talk) 08:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's the silliest comment I've read in a long time, and it does not deserve a response. As I said before, please take any concerns you have about project assessment to the project talk page. Even after I explained how "importance" is used, you either refuse to understand it or are unable for some reason. Telling me how you think the project should use the importance field is a nice bit of fantasy/fiction, but we need to discuss how we actually use it. Like I said, it is for the backend only, and has no bearing on quality. You don't seem to understand how importance is used. Importance is based on project scope. You are welcome to educate yourself by reading this article. According to that link, you should not have changed the assessment. Viriditas (talk) 09:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Yuna Ito. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 13:27, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Yuna Ito. 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) 15:00, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Links[edit]

I don't know the rule when it comes to retired artists and the infobox, but as the bot points out above, http://www.yunaweb.com is no longer her website. The bot used this Archive.org link. http://web.archive.org/web/20100826031406/http://www.yunaweb.com:80/. --98.201.151.186 (talk) 17:35, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Yuna_Ito&oldid=1207548362"