Jump to content

Talk:Love & Girls

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

Set Phrase: Lingua Franca

[edit]

The SNSD song "リンガ・フランカ" means "Lingua Franca". It is an internationally used set phrase which is used since the 17th century[1]. That's more than 400 years of writing it that way! A Lingua Franca is a language used for communication among people of different mother tongues. In the SNSD song they sing about love being their global language, their Lingua Franca: "Fall in love around the world, girls! Now it's lingua franca, lingua franca", "¡Enamórense alrededor del mundo, chicas! Ahora es lingua franca, lingua franca", "世界中で恋せよgirls! 今リンガ・フランカ　リンガ・フランカ". Writing the set phase "Lingua Franca" as "Linguafranc" must be considered a misspelling.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.122.181 (talk)

Under "Chart" section (of Love & Peace (Girls' Generation album)), there is "<!--Don't change this. "Lingua Franca" is an unofficial (fan) romanization-->". The user which included this has a reason for its addition. Sni56996 (talk) 06:19, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"リンガ・フランカ" was first released on the "Love & Girls" single (June 19, 2013). Therefore,
the appropriate place for a central discussion is, in continuation of an identical thread there,
Talk:Love & Girls#Set Phrase: Lingua Franca, please. (Has added advantage of additional
international comparative romanised wikis.)   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 10:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC) (Comment moved from Talk:Love & Peace (Girls' Generation album) - Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 05:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC))[reply]
I've put a <fact> on "Linguafranc", reasoned as follows: "Linguafranc" is abstract, unpopular, does not fit "Ringa furanka", it's "Lingua franca" all other romanised wikis and does not appear on Universal-Music.co.Jp.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 11:25, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your reasoning, but on all English iTunes[1], it is listed as "Linguafranc". "Lingua Franca must have been a fan romanization and we don't accept those here on Wikipedia. "Ringa Furanka" is a direct Hepburn romanization from リンガ・フランカ. As per WP:MJ, "Japanese terms should be romanized according to common usage in English-language reliable sources", therefore "Linguafranc" instead of "Lingua Franca". Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 12:21, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Must? Could be a typo in en.iTunes!
Whatever the authenticity of "Linguafranc", "Lingua Franca" seems 13-times more popular, in the wild, 52:4 listeners. Plus, given the unanimous adoption of "Lingua Franca" (and exclusion of "Linguafranc") on the other four romanised wikis (ko, id, pt and vi) – "Lingua Franca" is an established de facto name for the track and, IMO, worthy of at least a "[...] commonly known as [...]" entry, here.
Also, even if it's an en.iTunes typo, that's now a matter of history and that too would warrant a "[...] commonly known as [...]" across all wikis.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 12:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is a fan romanization. The title "Linguafranc" is used on all English-language iTunes. Last.fm is not considered a reliable source. We have different policies here regarding romanization and since this English-language source lists it as "Linguafranc" instead of "Lingua Franca" it should be titled as such. Heck, if there was no English-language source it would simply be listed on this wiki as "Ringa Furanka" (リンガ・フランカ), as per WP:MJ. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 16:08, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also please don't add citationneeded tags to the page, thanks.Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 16:10, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have clear proofs!
  1. Official song title: The official title of the song is リンガ・フランカ ! Only this Japanese title exists! Proof are the official tracklist by the label Universal Music Japan[2] and the official press release of the entertainment company SM[3].
  2. Common title use in Wikipedia: It is common to use the official song titles in a Wikipedia article, example: 첫 눈 by the group EXO (Chinese release: 初雪), only the original song titles are used. Parentheses (round brackets) inform about meanings and/or translations![4]
  3. Translations: Translations of song titles should be real translations! Official dictionaries should be used to get correct translations. In the case of リンガ・フランカ the official English translation is "lingua franca".[5][6][7]
  4. Specialty of "lingua franca": It's a loan word[8] which is usually only used by people with advanced language skills!
  5. Correct title editing: リンガ・フランカ (Romanization: Ringa Furanka, English: Lingua Franca)
  6. Concerning the alleged iTunes spelling: If iTunes does have the song listed as "linguafranc", it's an embarrassing misspelling! Only correct language spelling should be used in Wikipedia!
  7. Wikipedia admins: This is what I will send to the Wikipedia admins to prove my point and in case I will still be harassed with false accusations. --ONITOPIA (talk) 08:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Yes, people are aware that it appears like that on the Japanese release.
  2. The official title in this case being "Linguafranc" because of the English-language iTunes.
  1. I am very sorry but iTunes is not responsible for spelling in the English language. ;) --ONITOPIA (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. That may be true, except romanization presides here. The romanization being "Ringa Furanka" since there are no Japanese sources stating that their official romanization of the song is "Lingua Franca". But since the English-language iTunes publishes it as "Linguafranc", that is the title to use.
  2. That doesn't have anything to do with the way the song is spelled. For example, the Britney Spears song "I'm a Slave 4 U" uses SMS language. Do you think that you can convince other people that it should be moved to "I'm a Slave for You"? A few other examples: "Watagatapitusberry" → "Wata Gata Pitus Berry" or "Whyyawannabringmedown" → "Why Do You Want to Bring Me Down"
  3. On the English wikipedia, the romanization (pref. official) should be listed first (unless an official translation exists, followed the Japanese letters in parentheses with romanization or translation if applicable) People are not stupid and don't need to see a translation for lingua franca, just like vice versa or touché. (But to be perfectly clear, there is no translation for necessary for this song, since it is just the same word written in katakana like ロスアンジェレス.)
  4. Same as #4. A Wikipedia editor's opinion on how a song should or should not be spelled doesn't matter.
  5. Nobody is harassing you with anything, what exactly do you mean?
  6. Sni56996 kept undoing all changes concerning Lingua Franca and wasn't willing to discuss it. I officially warned him twice, the third warning (to be send to official Wikipedia admins) forced this discussion. A good thing official Wikipedia rules and official Wikipedia admins make people talk about something.--ONITOPIA (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 16:34, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@ONITOPIA: I think we will achieve the best consensus by consolidating talk on this naming. The track originates from Love & Girls – thus, I think the equivalent discussion at Talk:Love & Girls#Set Phrase: Lingua Franca is the best place. Are there issues you have with the usage that are particular this article?   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 04:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC) (Comment moved from Talk:Love & Peace (Girls' Generation album) – Raykyogrou0(Talk) 08:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC))[reply]

"Lingua Franca" and/or "Linguafranc" Consensus

[edit]
  • I vote "Change" to "Lingua Franca". When I used Google Translate feature of Chrome on this official page, the romanization came out as "Lingua Franca". Honestly I agree with ONITOPIA that iTunes really DID make an embarrassing mistake with "Linguafranc" which in no way was an intentional or desired. It is a misspelling as well as a grammatical error. "I'm a Slave 4 U" was intentional but this can't be. We shouldn't blindly repeat the mistake iTunes made. I think it would be reasonable not to. Wikipedians are called a 'community' for a reason - so we will reach a consensus good old-fashioned way. I have always respected Raykyogrou0 and even respect his opinions now. And HE has in no way harassed anyone. Such a false accusation is not needed here. FudgeFury(talk|sign|contribs) 20:21, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add (both namings are in common usage, see my earlier) and more.
  • add "Lingua Franca" to the existing three track naming, it it the romanisation in most common usage, de facto.
  • add some "Linguafranc" citation, at least good enough to indicate to reads that we have not initiated a typo here.
  • add rightsholder and/or highly-authoritative unbiased cite (unconnected with iTunes), the re-sequence/couch "Lingua Franca" and "Linguafranc", accordingly, vis which one rightsholder(s) positively intended.
  • until then, obtain consensus on "Lingua Franca" / "Linguafranc" ordering/couching.
  • for that consensus, I vote "Lingua Franca" 1st, "Linguafranc" 2nd with "Linguafranc" couched (possibly a Note) to the like of "Possibly the rightsholders' intended spelling, but strenuous efforts have failed verify such and it is otherwise widely considered an iTunes typographical error."   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I hardly doubt iTunes made any mistakes because they take the data they get from the record labels, not just make it up or something. It's actually not that uncommon to paste the words together. (Why on earth would they publish it like that if that was not the intended song title anyways) We cannot take Google Translate as a source here for romanization because it's unreliable. (I'd also like to point out that リンガ・フランカ romanizes to "ringa furanka" and translates to "Lingua franca"--we don't take unofficial translations here either). On wikipedia, we use guidelines like WP:MJ: "If an article uses only Japanese-language reliable sources, use the romanization given in them. If no romanization is given by the reliable sources used in an article, use modified Hepburn romanization." and "If an article uses English-language reliable sources and those sources use a particular form of romanization to name a topic, give preference to that romanization in the article title and body text." (in this case, the English-language iTunes). What you guys want is to ignore the fact that we don't accept fan romanizations or translations here. I have yet to see any predominantly English WP:RS using "Lingua Franca" instead of "Linguafranc".Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 05:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are other Wikipedia articles useing the correct English title of Linuga Franca, and Sni56996 never bothered to change them: List of songs recorded by Girls' Generation[9] & the article of Lingua Franca writer Andreas Öberg[10]. This obviously led me to the song's writer Andreas Öberg. He uses Lingua Franca as title on his Facebook page[11], in his blog[12] and also in his tweets[13]. In case anybody believes the song's writer doesn't know how to spell, you may contact him via his homepage[14]. As for the English spelling disbelief of Raykyogrou0, the prrof I've already given is sufficient enough... unless deleted again. However, the OED (Oxford English Dictionary) or the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary[15] are the most acknowledged dictionary for the English language, recommended for people who study English. In any comment I certainly proved that the official translation is Lingua Franca and that Lingua Franca is the officially correct spelling in the English language. Additionally, I showed the officially correct use of 'Lingua Franca by the song writer. iTunes is proven to have a misspelling as song title. Therefore, my consensus is to change all incorrect linguafranc spellings before 2014. If all of that keeps people to insist on the fan spelling of linguafranc, I will certainly know I've done all and told the truth, nothing but the truth. I can't convince everybody the world is not a disc. --ONITOPIA (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Onitop: I've never looked at those pages before, so thank you for pointing those out--I've now corrected them. Once again, you cannot vote against changing Wikipedia policies. If you would like them changed, go to their respective talk pages and open a discussion. Also once again, quite contrary to your popular belief, iTunes does not do misspellings. If the songwriter really believed it was "spelled wrong" then he certainly would have contacted the record label which in turn would have contacted iTunes to change it. Also once again, the opinion of a Wikipedia editor on how a song should be titled does not matter. Also, a dictionary spelling does not apply to a song title (as I pointed out before, the way a song is titled is up to the artist, songwriter, label, etc.--but most definitely not us) Thank you for understanding and you have yet to show a wiki policy or guideline which says we are to ignore the presence of WP:MJ (and other relevant policies/guidelines). (ps. I'd like to point that AllMusic uses the correct spelling, are you also suggesting that AllMusic isn't a reliable source? Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 03:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Raykyogrou0:: I have two problems with your attitude. The first problem, you are still arguing with the attitude that your opinion is the correct one and that this discussion is worthless. One is supposed to invest into a discussion to get a compromise, not just what one wants. The second problem, despite the discussion not being over you act as if you are always right and always will be by changing all Wikipedia articles you dislike and would "help" other people's point. You did forget one thing though! Not only English articles use Lingua Franca. It's in the Portuguese article, the Indonesian article, the Vietnamese article, and also the Korean article use Lingua Franca. It would be very arrogant to change all those entries before a clear consensus happened, and it would show how much one respects other people, social skills. --ONITOPIA (talk) 15:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MetroLyrics is a licensed lyrics re-publisher, thus bound by rightsholder authorised representation of the work, e.g. the name given. As a purveyor of UMG copyright material, they have a parallel relationship (to the origin), with digital download retailers (e.g. iTunes). MetroLyrics do not list the song as "Linguafranc" – in fact, furthmore, "Linguafranc" does not appear in the above lyrics page, or the whole of MetroLyrics.com (Google.com).
Thus, the rightsholder(s) and/or their authorised agents have used two romanised names for the track: "Lingua Franca" and "Linguafranc". Reiterating, I think, they should both be listed, with the most popular one first (an nominated to be the preferred Wikipedia naming, i.e. hypothetically defining WP:PRIMARYTOPIC name of an article dedicated to song).   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 12:39, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @DjScrawl:: That's a general Wikipedia (and also general) problem! Composer and Writer are term very loosly used here. For instance, a Kpop idols might be praised for writing a song. Some people simply see him as the writer, some people see him as the writer the (Korean) lyrics. Both sides are correct, but de facto there is a difference between being the writer of just the lyrics and all of a song. That being said, Oberg might be a producer in the English article, but Oberg is the composer in the Chinese article while the people who supposedly composed Lingua Francain the English article, only wrote the lyrics in the Chinese article. Those composer/writey/lyrics/producer sections are never totally reliable. I prefer the official homepages of composers as reliable sources... or a physical release with (hopefully) correct information. --ONITOPIA (talk) 15:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, verification allowing, the production exploits of Öberg and chums is valid article-body content. My only significant objection to artiste websites is the preponderance of graphic designers who think that's all there is to website design :P (... and, of course, we can blame Tom ;) If "physical release" cuts-it, my fav'e source is Discogs with hi-res' artwork. BTW: (As if it matters), the language in question is Japanese, although it's early approximation to Korean was the subject of much forum chat, e.g. on the fabulous Mr. Taxi, the accents are added fun! (Dance ver. YouTube)   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 21:36, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@DJ: Actually, MetroLyrics doesn't input these lyrics. Common users like you and me do. It is only considered licensed if it has the "LyricFind" logo at the bottom, like on this page. I'd also like to point out that MetroLyrics can definitely not be considered reliable for song titles (when unlicensed): for example when searching for the song "Fuck You" by Lily Allen, I also get this page which lists the song as "Fuck You (Very Much)" instead of just "Fuck You". But as was kindly pointed out on an RfD, the fact that iTunes and Allmusic list the song as "Linguafranc", it seems more likely that readers are looking for this instead of "Lingua Franca". Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 04:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting, thanks for the LyricFind heads-up! I was not aware of the provisos on Template:MetroLyrics song, etc. and assumed all their content came from Gracenote – not that they typed it themselves. :/ I'd like to know their content management process better and how they reward rightsholders while content is pre-LyricFind. In hindsight, all the page shows is that at least a significant number of people use the "Lingua Franca" romanisation – but we already known it's by far the most popular one (Google, Last.FM, etc.) – so no significant new evidence there, until there's the LyricFind mark. It seems like some of this is relevant/verifiable for the MetroLyrics article (I've watched it to remind me).   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 17:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure of your point with the "Fuck You" (Lily Allen song) searches. You seem to intimate that MetroLyrics is amenable to the use of track names (rather than expressly song names) and may sometimes list non-rightsholder authorised track names. – Was that it? Assuming so – a song that has changed name an extraordinary number of times (five in our not necessarily exhaustive article), is a poor test-case. "Guess Who Batman" is also listed (non-LyricFind), I'm a little surprised there's not more.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 17:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd still like a compromise like the one used in the Vietnamese article: "Linguafranc" (Tiếng Nhật: リンガ・フランカ Ringa Furanka, Tiếng Anh: Lingua franca)! That means as seen in the Vietnamese article, I'd like the original Japanese title due to the fact it's the only officially given song title (by both labels). Additionaly, I'd like to acknowledge that some people know the song by linguafranc no matter whether it is a misspelling, a fan title or not. Plus, I'd like the correct English term Lingua Franca displayed because it's de facto the correct English term and English translation for the Japanese title as well as what is officially used (by composer etc.). That would be something like this: リンガ・フランカ (romanization: Ringa Furanka; English: Lingua Franca; largely known as: linguafranc). As far as I can see *@DjScrawl: and I are for this compromise while *@Raykyogrou0: and *@Sni56996: seemingly are against any compromise/consensus in favor of enforcing their personal believes. Did I get each faction right? --ONITOPIA (talk) 15:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Onitop: First of all, what on earth are you talking about with regards to the Vietnamese wikipedia? (I'd like to point out that what other wikipedias do does not apply to the English wikipedia) Second of all, once again what you think--your opinion on how it is to be spelled--does not matter. Clearly, if "Lingua Franca" was the "correct" English title of the song they would have used that instead of "Linguafranc". Also, the romanization/translation is to be displayed first in the article because not everyone can actually read japanese characters. My "personal beliefs" have no influence on this matter, you see I'm actually referring to a Wikipedia guideline instead of an empty argument. Also, once again if you want to form a consensus to change said guideline--please do so at their respective talk pages and not here. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 16:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ONITOPIA: Qualitatively, you'n'I're in the same ballpark, yes – though I've dogged faith that a win-win, from balanced factual portrayal, will pre-empt kludging. A good happening today is that you've positively joined me 'in the Add-camp' and, notwithstanding the topic's IP-originator, no one's objecting to "Linguafranc"s presence. I hope a corresponding reduction is defensiveness will result a much improved dogmatism:productivity balance.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 22:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @DjScrawl:: I reported Raykyogrou0 and Sni56996, and I also refered to User talk:DjScrawl. It's seemingly their ploy to enforce their will by intimidating other users by threatening them with "official" warnings, and all their defamatory remarks. I'm not falling for a fake discussion to find a consensus while they seemingly only use it to not be reported (fail) and having it only their way (fail). I don't care about being investigated by official Wikipedia admins as long as they truely investigate what those two are doing. --ONITOPIA (talk) 19:03, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Re to off-topic comment: these warnings were issued to you after repeatedly harassing my (and sni's) talk page. I also informed you that striking out other peoples' comments is generally not allowed as it potentially alters the intended meaning. Seeing as you ignored these warnings, I opened a discussion at ANI. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 19:20, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ONITOPIA: I sympathise, though was unaware that this level of antagony was going on. Level-headed chat about this is welcome on my talk-page, whilst I agree with Raykyogrou0 that it's OT, here. (I suggest you cut/paste your post above to my talk-page, leaving only a we've moved note and a breadcrumb link, then I'll zap this.)
    ¡de todos ha de haber en el mundo! – Miguel de Cervantes (Takes all sorts to make a world!)   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 23:14, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sourcing of "Lingua Franca" as a rightsholder/agents' romanisation

[edit]
  • Thanks for the Linguafranc RfD heads-up (2013 December 26#Linguafranc, I'll vote target song). Although on your summary of the ramifications of Rybec's research on spellings, typos, traffic, etc. – which show a "Linguafranc" searcher is overwhelmingly more likely to be searching for リンガ・フランカ/Lingua Franca/Linguafranc (the song), rather than lingua franca (the phrase – note capitalisation – your "Lingua Franca" suggests otherwise, by delimiter too). BTW: You'll remember that I've never been against "Linguafranc" as a romanisation for the song (I'd more usually use リンガ・フランカ, BTW). As I've said since 12 Dec, both "Linguafranc" and "Lingua Franca" are de facto accepted romanisations of the song-name – just that the latter is more likely to be the reader's (at least, prior) preferred romanisation, i.e. again I think they should both be in the article.
As for: Which should lead? Extreme popularity ratios might sometimes justify exception to a most popular of rightsholders' romanisations is preferred over any folksonomic romanisation rule, which you seem keen repeating with various wordings – However, I don't think any such exception is required, as "Lingua Franca" is also evidently a de facto rightsholder romanisation. We have ONITOPIA's Andreas Öberg (composer and producer) points, at #ONITOPIA 23:28, 26 Dec2013: Andreas Öberg.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 17:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@DJ: iTunes and AllMusic trump Yesasia as they are both predominantly English-based sites while Yesasia (as implied in its name, is Asian). Yesasia sells mostly asian music and conveniently provides their own translations/romanizations if needed--thus unreliable. Also, "unanimity" has no play here because this is not a discussion to change the guideline at WP:MJ, so any "consensus" to change the spelling of the song to the fan-translated one would be considered invalid because it violates WP:MJ. I have yet to see any actual arguments here pointing to a policy or guideline that says we are to ignore the other and prefer a fan translation over one by reliable English sources. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 19:20, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lingua Franca" is the romanisation used by composer/producer Öberg and YesAsia (a Top 500 e-commerce website that sell Asian entertainment goods, primarily in English). It is prejudicial to describe it as a "fan-translation".
If there's wider consensus on the reliability, or lack thereof, of YesAsia as a romanisation source – beyond your opinion – please point it out. Googling site:wikipedia.org "YesAsia" "reliable source" | "WP:RS" romanisation yields only two false positives (Talk:Leslie Cheung#Infobox and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chinese-language entertainment/Archive 2#Album releases in China).
Are you referring solely to the 1st half of Wikipedia:MJ#Determining_common_usage? I which case, I think we have two WP:RS'd candidates qualified for "Redirects for all likely romanizations should be created to make sure people will be able to find the articles easily regardless of which form they use in their search." – and both sufficiently well sourced/commonly-used to be noted in the article (at the 1st mention of リンガ・フランカ) – and going into the "To determine if the non-macronned form is in common usage in English-language reliable sources, a review should be done of all the related reliable sources used for the article (as well as any which may not have been specifically used, but can still be considered reliable per WP:RS)." process – Is that where you're "trumping" and how did Öberg get 'trump'ed?   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 03:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's more like an unofficial translation-as in, Yesasia provides these English translations whereas iTunes and allmusic don't. It's actually quite common for record labels to have a final say in a song's title regardless of the original composer's preference (i.e. "Tell Me Your Wish (Genie)" instead of "I Just Wanna Dance".) Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 03:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your "It's [...]" lacks traction without accompanying citation and/or prior consensus
     – Did you mean: "I think it's [...]"?
Yes, record co's commonly have final say on branding. – Speaking of actuality. – We have no clear or direct evidence that such deviation occurred, in this case. A pre-release press-release with a romanisation on it would be nice. Meanwhile, Öberg's usage is the closest we have to direct rightsholders' word.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 03:59, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yesasia sells imported Asian goods to other countries (that don't necessarily speak the language of origin), so they have to provide English translations. Clearly iTunes uses the desired spelling by the record company, otherwise they would have changed it months ago in June. And as I said before, the record company mostly has a final say on how a song is spelled--which means that Oberg's usage does not apply. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 04:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Poor logic, repetition and lashings of conjecture; does not a rationale make!
  • The rightsholder corrects retailer argument cuts both ways: YesAsia (since week before release) and iTunes (since unknown).
  • Things commonly have more than two names.
  • The page about a song and a track, both called "リンガ・フランカ" and both with other names. A rightsholder (Öberg) commonly calls the song "Lingua Franca" – Fact!.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 04:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I still fail to see any argument made about a policy that says we are to ignore WP:MJ and use fan/unofficial translations/romanizations. (Love & girls was on itunes since june btw) Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 05:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

[edit]
Okay, wow. The pages are now locked as a result of the ANI. I have an alternate solution/proposal before this is moved to dispute resolution. Would anyone agree to a note at the bottom of the page(s) saying that the song is also known by unofficial/fan translation (whatever you want to call it) "Lingua Franca"?--This would then be the only instance of it appearing in the article(s).Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 20:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "lingua franca". Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 11 December 2013.
  2. ^ "2013年第1弾シングルが5/29に発売決定！タイトルは「LOVE&GIRLS」 カップリングにも新曲を収録！". Universal Music Japan. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
  3. ^ "少女時代3rd Album「LOVE&PEACE」リリース！！". SM Entertainment Japan. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
  4. ^ "Miracles in December". Wikipedia. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
  5. ^ "「リンガ・フランカ」で始まる言葉 - 辞書すべての検索結果". Goo 辞書/Goo Dictionary. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
  6. ^ "リンガ・フランカ". Babylon. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
  7. ^ "リンガ・フランカ". Google Translate. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
  8. ^ "Latin Loan Words". English for Students. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
  9. ^ "List of songs recorded by Girls' Generation". Wikipedia. Retrieved 26 December 2013.
  10. ^ "Andreas Öberg". Wikipedia. Retrieved 26 December 2013.
  11. ^ "Andreas Oberg Guitarist". Andreas Oberg. Retrieved 26 December 2013.
  12. ^ "Nr 3 in Japan on the Oricon single chart w Girls Generation". Andreas Öberg. Retrieved 26 December 2013.
  13. ^ "Excited about the new @GirlsGeneration release in Japan on June 19th. I co-wrote the song "Lingua Franca (リンガ・フランカ)"". Andreas Öberg. Retrieved 26 December 2013.
  14. ^ "ANDREAS OBERG contact". ANDREAS OBERG. Retrieved 26 December 2013.
  15. ^ "lingua franca". Cambridge Dictionaries online. Retrieved 26 December 2013.

Sources

[edit]

Simon (talk) 13:17, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Love & Girls. 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) 17:44, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Love & Girls. 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) 08:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Love_%26_Girls&oldid=1208597160"