Talk:Bang Chan

Re-adding dancer

@Btspurplegalaxy

Hi there, I noticed that you reverted the addition of "dancer" to Bang Chan's role. I just wanted to clarify that in multiple interviews and performances, Bang Chan has introduced himself as a singer, rapper, and dancer, including during Stray Kids' official debut. Additionally, the main Stray Kids article reflects his role as a dancer. I’d be happy to provide sources supporting this. Could you kindly share your reason for removing it? I’d appreciate your thoughts on this matter. Thank you for your time! RDWolfgang (talk) 18:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

You'll need a reliable source for the information. Interviews and performances can't be used as primary references. That's why the content was removed. If you can find a solid source confirming his occupation as a dancer, feel free to add it back. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 18:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi there,

Thank you for your response. I understand the need for reliable sources. However, I would like to point out several articles that confirm Bang Chan's role as a dancer in addition to singing, rapping, sonwriting, and producing.

1. In an article from IS Plus, Bang Chan is referred to as an "all-rounder artist," stating he is active as a leader, producer, vocalist, dancer, and rapper. You can view this article here.
2. The South China Morning Post describes him as an "artistic jack of all trades," mentioning that he "often takes centre stage in Stray Kids’ choreography formations where he’s able to show off his years of dance training" (link).
3. An article from Top Class emphasizes his "multi-talented" nature, highlighting that he possesses skills in rap, singing, dancing, and producing (link).
4. In a Rolling Stone interview, it's noted that Bang Chan has "exceptional singing voice and dance ability" (link).
5. Finally, comments from Park Jin-young underscore his capabilities, stating, "Chan is good at dancing, singing, rapping, and feeling" (link).

These sources not only affirm his role as a dancer but also support the information present in the main Stray Kids article. It may have been beneficial to cross-check these references before removing the term "dancer."

I appreciate your time and consideration, and I hope to reach an agreement on this matter.

Best regards! RDWolfgang (talk) 19:13, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I would use the second source. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 19:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback regarding the sources. However, I didn’t quite understand what you meant by "I would use the second source."

I would love it if you could elaborate on your opinion regarding the inclusion of "dancer" in Bang Chan's role. I believe that acknowledging him as a dancer is essential to represent his profession accurately, especially considering the multiple reliable sources I've provided.

If we could find a way to incorporate this information based on the sources available, I think it would give a fuller picture of his contributions to Stray Kids.

Thank you for your time! RDWolfgang (talk) 19:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say any of these say he's a "dancer". When I see someone listed with their occupation as "dancer" I think of someone who is known for their dancing, standalone. Bang Chan is a singer and rapper who happens to dance as part of those occupations. But that doesn't make his occupation be dancer.

Just because those sources are saying he's talented at dancing doesn't mean "dancer" is his occupation. RachelTensions (talk) 01:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I second this. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 05:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you for your feedback. While I understand your point about distinguishing between someone who is primarily a dancer versus someone who dances as part of their musical performances, I’d like to clarify that in Bang Chan’s case, his role as a dancer is specifically mentioned in an official source. The Elle Japan article explicitly lists his position in Stray Kids as "leader, lead vocalist, sub-rapper, and lead dancer" (link: Elle Japan). Since this refers to his official position in the group, it should be considered valid for inclusion. After all, we recognize his roles as a singer and rapper in the same way, based on these positions.

It would have been better to review this article and the other sources before making edits, as they do provide reliable support for his inclusion as a dancer. I also think it would have been helpful to discuss this matter beforehand to avoid confusion. I hope we can reach a consensus on this, and I’d really appreciate your thoughts. RDWolfgang (talk) 06:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Someone else can chime in here but as a general rule for K-pop groups/members, we don't include group "positions" like main X/lead Y/sub-Z. As far as I'm concerned he's a singer who dances; Beyoncé is also a singer who dances but we don't have her listed as a "dancer" because she only dances as part of her job as a singer.

As far as reviewing the sources before making edits; there were no sources cited in the article regarding this. RachelTensions (talk) 06:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia does have guidelines that suggest being cautious when including specific titles or roles like "main X/lead Y/sub-Z" for musicians, especially in genres like K-pop.

While I understand the general approach to avoiding the inclusion of specific group positions, Wikipedia’s guidelines on content about musicians, particularly in the context of K-pop, emphasize that the roles listed in reliable sources can be relevant and informative.

According to Wikipedia's Manual of Style for biographies, it's encouraged to mention notable roles or positions that are widely recognized in reliable sources. In the case of Bang Chan, his role as "lead dancer" is mentioned in the official Elle Japan article, which provides reliable support for his inclusion as a dancer.

Moreover, I understand the analogy to Beyoncé, the key difference is that K-pop groups operate with specific hierarchies and roles that are part of their public personas. These roles are not merely functional; they are a part of how the group is marketed and perceived by fans and the industry. Just as we recognize Bang Chan’s contributions as a lead vocalist and sub-rapper based on his official positions, it is equally valid to recognize him as a dancer given that he has been formally assigned that role within Stray Kids.

The guideline on Verifiability states that we should rely on reputable sources to establish facts. Since Bang Chan's position as a "lead dancer" is acknowledged in an official article, it aligns with Wikipedia's standards for verifiable information. RDWolfgang (talk) 06:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

When it comes to BLP article of K-pop group members, being in the "dancer" position doesn't necessarily warrant the inclusion of dancer as an occupation. For example, Jungkook is also the lead dancer of BTS, but we don't put 'dancer' as his occupation. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 06:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Bang Chan has contributed to the choreography for several Stray Kids songs, which demonstrates his active involvement not only as a performer but as a creator in the dance aspect of his group. This goes beyond just being a "lead dancer" in performances and highlights his role as a dancer more significantly.Jungkook is known as the "main vocalist" of BTS and also holds the position of "lead dancer." However, the focus of his career and public recognition leans more heavily on his vocal performances rather than choreographic contributions. His Wikipedia article might not list "dancer" as an occupation because his primary role in the group has been recognized as a vocalist, even though he is also a skilled dancer. You can look at J-Hope from BTS, whose Wikipedia article includes "dancer" as one of his occupations. This is especially relevant because J-Hope is recognized not just for performing dance but also for choreographing certain performances, much like Bang Chan. J-Hope's involvement in BTS's choreography and his prominence as a dancer make his case similar to Bang Chan's. If J-Hope's article includes "dancer" as an occupation, it provides a strong precedent for including it in Bang Chan's article too. Another example, look at articles such as Taemin from SHINee, where "dancer" is listed as an occupation. Taemin is recognized for both his dance skills and contributions to choreography, which justifies including "dancer" as a prominent part of his career. RDWolfgang (talk) 13:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

As for J-hope, the inclusion of 'dancer' makes perfect sense because he was part of an underground dance team and has won dancing competitions prior to debuting with BTS, which he was well-known for. I don't see any source that proves Bang Chan is notable as a dancer outside of his career in Stray Kids, including in the two sources you recently put in the lead. @Btspurplegalaxy: if you have time, I would like your opinion on this. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 05:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I think it would be fine without the dancer occupation. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 05:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 05:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Birth name

Am I the only one that finds the spelling of "Christopher Chahn Bahng" a little dubious? I know it's sourced to Billboard but the way it's presented by the source is in an inconsequential manner, almost in passing, like it could be a typo. No other sources refer to him in this manner, in fact sources from Korea and vetted as reliable by WP:KO/RS refer to him as "Christopher Chan Bang": Cine21 [1]

So either we remove it altogether, find further sources supporting one or the other, or we add a note about "sources differing" on the spelling of his birth name. Thoughts? RachelTensions (talk) 01:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe it's a typo, but I agree that it would be wise to find more sources before making a final decision. Verifying the correct spelling through additional reliable references would help clear up any uncertainty. RDWolfgang (talk) 06:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the spelling is typo because Bang Chan confirmed his name twice (once during a live broadcast and one at a content video (will search for it if needed)) but I believe we can't put those sources in the article, right? The only source I could find about the spelling right now is only from the said Billboard article. — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 07:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

If you can find the source of him confirming his name is "Christopher Chahn Bahng" then that'd probably be enough, IMO, to supplement the validity of the Billboard article and disregard the Cine21 article, so we'd avoid having to do a "sources differ" note. Right now sources are 50/50 for each way. RachelTensions (talk) 07:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Given Billboard's reputation for accuracy, it's unlikely they would make such an error. RDWolfgang (talk) 08:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Both sources are known to be reliable. RachelTensions (talk) 08:05, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

In conclusion, we need to find at least one more source to confirm the spelling from other reliable source (not from Billboard or Cine21) to not be conflicted because of "source differ" between two reliable sources. Is this understanding correct? — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 08:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

That'd be my opinion on the matter... right now we have two known good reliable sources that differ. We need something to tip the balance one way or the other. If Chan said it somewhere then that'd be a self-published primary source which is fine as long as it meets the criteria under WP:BLPSELFPUB RachelTensions (talk) 08:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh, so you mean the video of him confirming the spelling! Okay, I will search for the video first and give you all an update later. — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 08:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I have added a YouTube video from a reputable source where Bang Chan himself recently confirms his name as "Christopher Chahn Bahng," and the video clearly shows this. I believe this provides a credible source for his name, and I hope we can all agree to conclude this discussion on this note. RDWolfgang (talk) 10:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the source that @RDWolfgang added was the one content video that I mentioned above. Thank you for finding it earlier than me. I also found the live broadcast video of his own content Channie's "Room" Ep. 201 (streamed and uploaded on Stray Kids official YouTube channel) here when Bang Chan spelled his own full name in English alphabeth as "Bahng Christopher Chahn" (occurs at 41:14).— Shenaall (t ♣ c) 02:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I have added this Youtube video source to the article as reference #3 which is valid under WP:BLPSELFPUB. RachelTensions (talk) 01:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Weird comment about name

What's up with this commented out line in the article?
DO NOT REFER TO BANG CHAN AS JUST "CHAN" or "BANG". UNLESS REFERRING TO HIS BIRTH NAME, USE "BANG CHAN", NOT "BAHNG CHAHN"
This goes against the manual of style for names located at WP:SURNAME. His surname is Bang. His (Korean) given name is Chan.

We don't refer to Ava Max as "Ava Max" throughout her entire article, that'd be weird. RachelTensions (talk) 05:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Agree, I believe we can standardize how to refer him as "Bang" in the body as per WP:SURNAME. But one question, what is the reason of not use "Bahng"? Is it because WP:COMMONNAME too? — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 08:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

If their commonly known name has a surname in it, whether it be their real one (as is the case here), or an assumed name, then we use that. Again using the Ava Max example, we use the surname "Max", not "Koci", or for David Bowie we use "Bowie", not "Jones". If the subject was mononomous then we'd refer to them as their singular name. RachelTensions (talk) 08:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Understood, totally agree with you in this area. — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 08:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Before I go through and fix every instance I'm pinging @User:HypeBoy @User:Btspurplegalaxy for participation as recent contributors to discussions here so we can come to a consensus on what should be done RachelTensions (talk) 05:52, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm unsure who placed the note there, but I believe it might be best to remove it as it doesn’t seem to serve a beneficial purpose. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 05:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, the note doesn't seem to pay any mind to the manual of style here. I went and make the necessary changes per RachelTensions' argument and MOS:SURNAME. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 06:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@RachelTensions: I didn't realize you added to your comment, sorry that I went ahead and made the changes. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 06:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Bang Chan needs to be used since it's the article's name. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 06:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Doesn't MOS:SURNAME apply in here? I'm happy to self-revert my last edit if it's against common practice. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 06:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Refer to the third paragraph under MOS:SURNAME Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 06:48, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Clarify? Not understanding how referring to him as "Bang Chan" at every instance instead of just "Bang" has anything to do with the name of the article being "Bang Chan"

Per WP:SURNAME he should be referred to as "Bang" as that is the surname as presented in his most commonly known name... not using the whole article name every time he is referenced. RachelTensions (talk) 06:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Bang Chan is his stage name so it needs to be used. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 07:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed RDWolfgang (talk) 07:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Thousands of people have stage names but we don't use their full name at every instance; we refer to them as what is the most obvious proxy to a surname in their stage name.

Here's a whole list of articles for people that use stage names; none of them break from WP:SURNAME just because they're using a stage name.
Lady Gaga, a featured article
David Bowie, a featured article
Brie Larson, a featured article
Katy Perry, a featured article
James Blunt, a GA
Tony Bennett, a GA

In every instance they use what is the most obvious proxy to a surname in their stage name. In this case it's Bang. The surname in his stage name is Bang. WP:SURNAME applies. RachelTensions (talk) 07:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I don’t see any problem with using Bang Chan. It can also be stylized as Bangchan. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 07:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I guess we'll have to wait and see if others participate in this discussion to come to a more clear consensus; right now it's 3/2 for just referring to him as his surname. RachelTensions (talk) 07:45, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to ping @Paper9oll for his opinion. I'm curious to know what he would think would be best. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 07:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Using "Bang" only may confuse readers, as it does not align with how he is publicly recognized. "Bang Chan" is widely recognized as his professional stage name, and the Wikipedia MOS:SURNAME for pseudonyms supports the use of an artist's pseudonym or stage name (or full stage name) is often used throughout articles. "Bang" is not Bang Chan's actual surname—his legal surname is "Bahng." Since "Bang" in his stage name is not used as a standalone surname in this case, it does not fit the example provided in the Wikipedia guideline where a pseudonym has a "recognizable surname." RDWolfgang (talk) 08:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

"Gaga" is not Lady Gaga's legal surname either but her FA doesn't call her "Lady Gaga" at every reference. RachelTensions (talk) 08:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your perspective and am seeking to clarify my understanding. While "Gaga" is not Lady Gaga's legal surname, her stage name is widely recognized as a single entity. In Bang Chan's case, could "Bang" be considered part of a two-word stage name rather than a standalone surname? How do we know that "Bang" is his surname and "Chan" is not? There is no mention of "Bang" as his surname in the article. I look forward to your thoughts on this! RDWolfgang (talk) 08:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

In Bang Chan's case, could "Bang" be considered part of a two-word stage name rather than a standalone surname? How do we know that "Bang" is his surname and "Chan" is not?
Because it's just a simplified spelling of his legal surname and his middle name in the order that follows Korean naming customs; to imply that "Chan" could be considered the surname would be obtuse. RachelTensions (talk) 08:32, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

(responding to ping) (talk page watcher) Using "Bang" or "Bang Chan" works either way. For example, Hyun Bin where Hyun is used for subsequently mentions in prose or Gong Yoo where "Gong Yoo" is used for subsequently mentions in prose. However, based on observations across South Korean BLP articles, the generally rule of thumb is to follow the article's title i.e. if it's titled using the subject's legal name (e.g. Kim Soo-hyun) then WP:SURNAME applies here, if it's titled using the subject's non-legal stage name but still following Korean name convention of having surname and two syllabus given name (e.g. Song Ji-hyo) then SURNAME still applies here, lastly if it's titled using the subject's stage name (e.g. Felix) then SURNAME does not applies here. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:48, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

"While 'Bang' may be a simplified surname, I feel this lacks reliable sources for verification. We cannot assume things, as both 'Bang' and 'Chan' could validly represent parts of his stage name. As @Paper9oll described, we can use 'Bang Chan,' in the entire article as Gong Yoo. 'Bang' is misleading and may confuse readers, given that the majority of English sources refer to him as 'Bang Chan' and not 'Bang.' What's your thoughts @Btspurplegalaxy @Shenaall

Edit: Another example could be Lee Know. When I mentioned assumptions regarding the surname 'Bang,' I meant that we lack concrete proof for this claim. I did not mean to be unreasonable or hurt anyone's feelings.RDWolfgang (talk) 09:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

That's where MOS:SURNAME comes in. It's not an "assumption" to follow commonly practiced policy throughout Wikipedia. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 09:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Like Paper9oll said it's fine to just use Bang Chan. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 09:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I'm fine with either; I'm just responding to a point I find arguable. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 09:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I understand, I just feel it's simpler to stick with Bang Chan. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 09:14, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm fine with keeping Bang Chan used for the article. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 09:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@RDWolfgang: You most certainly didn't hurt anyone's feelings, this is a civil discussion for everyone involved. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 09:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I think RDWolfgang made a good point in this, so I will follow the majority. Keeping Bang Chan throughout the article is also fine because it's also his most known name that mentioned in the majority of sources. — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 11:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

FYI: I've posted a request for participation at WP:Korea in an effort to get some more viewpoints on this and hopefully get a little bit more of a clear consensus. RachelTensions (talk) 21:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with RachelTensions on this one, I think he should be referred to by his surname per MOS:SURNAME. I think even people not familiar with his work (like me) know that his stage name is simply (one romanisation) of his given and surname. Most people are known by their full names but are still referred to by their surnames, this is an encyclopedia. orangesclub 🍊 23:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Hoping to close the loop here...

Right now the position of the discussion seems to be:

• 2 for just "Bang" after the first mention,
• 2 for "Bang Chan" always, and
• 2 for "either is fine"

So, where do we go from here?

also pinging for @Seefooddiet and @User:Geraldo Perez for their input as editors whom I've seen participate in similar manual of style discussions recently:

Does the name "Bang" in "Bang Chan" represent a reasonable approximation of a surname, and therefore he should be referred to as "Bang" when referencing his name after the first mention in the article,

or

Should the name "Bang Chan" be considered to be a stand-alone entity (a double mononym, if that makes any sense), and therefore he should always be referred to with the full name, as "Bang Chan", when referencing his name after the first mention in the article?

RachelTensions (talk) 16:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

@RachelTensions I think that it is 3 for "Bang Chan always" and 2 for both "either is fine" and "just 'Bang' after the first mention." Also, please refer to MOS:BIOEXCEPT RDWolfgang (talk) 08:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

I think referring to as just "Bang" is fine if Bang Chan is considered to be Korean name or stage name that look like real name. But I also prefer either "Bang Chan" and "Bang". PepeBonus (talk) 09:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

I know I said 'either is fine', but since I'm leaning more toward "Bang" since the beginning, I'm going to change my support to "Bang", per RachelTension's arguments. I believe WP:SURNAME should apply here. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 21:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

So I think now we're at:

• 3 for "Bang" after the first mention
• 3 for either is fine
• 2 for "Bang Chan" at every mention

@Shenaall can you clarify whether you're in the "either is fine" club or the "Bang Chan always" club? Seems like at the beginning you were in the ""Bang" after the first mention" club, but then switched and the statement could be read as an "either is fine" or "Bang Chan always". I just want to make sure I'm counting accurately. Thanks! RachelTensions (talk) 02:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @Shenaall for clarification re: above so we can maybe put this to bed RachelTensions (talk) 00:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello, sorry for the late response. I'm leaning toward "Bang Chan" more right now since Bang Chan is more like a stage name derived from his real name and not really his official legal name (it has different spelling) — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 06:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification!

Adjusting for that, we're at:

• 3 for "Bang" after the first mention
• 2 for either is fine
• 3 for "Bang Chan" at every mention

So we'll leave it at that and hopefully a few other people decide to chime in to swing it one way or the other. RachelTensions (talk) 06:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @Windborne Rider, @User:Nkon21 and @User:K-popguardian to hopefully get their opinion (as other perennial K-pop editors I can think of from a quick look at recent contributions to some similar articles)

The question:

Does the name "Bang" in "Bang Chan" represent a reasonable approximation of a surname, and therefore he should be referred to as "Bang" when referencing his name after the first mention in the article (WP:SURNAME)

or

Should the name "Bang Chan" be considered to be a stand-alone entity (a double mononym, if that makes any sense), and therefore he should always be referred to with the full name, as "Bang Chan", when referencing his name after the first mention in the article?

RachelTensions (talk) 06:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

None of us said it's a double mononym, and I think we understand the meaning of mononym. The point here is that we can also use Bang Chan throughout the article and the way you are presenting the things makes it seem like, by keeping the two words, we (@Btspurplegalaxy@Shenaall@Paper9oll@PepeBonus) are not making any sense, even though there are clearly other articles available using the title throuout (Meghan Thee Stallion, Gong Yoo, Lee Know). If WP:SURNAME applies here why can't we consider MOS:BIOEXCEPT? Why are we so hell-bent proving our point and dragging this out, instead of reaching to a consensus earlier when it was 3 for keeping "Bang Chan" always, 2 for either being fine, and 1 for "Bang" only? Honestly, I don't have the enegy for this endless debate. RDWolfgang (talk) 07:59, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep "Bang Chan" as is as it fits what stated at WP:UCRN and I quote "..it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the five criteria.." 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 08:11, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Citizenship

Do we have any sources that he is an Australian citizen or are we just inferring that because that's the country he's associated with? He lived in Australia from the ages of 3 to 13, but was born in South Korea and has lived in that country for 16 of his 26 years (per WP:RS that say he moved to Australia when he was 3 and back to Korea when he was 13.)

Furthermore, do we know (via Wikipedia:Reliable sources,) that he's not a South Korean citizen? For all we know (from WP:RS, not fans examining his passport colour in paparazzi photos from the airport), he could be an Australian permanent resident and Korean citizen.

I know this might seem obvious but we need to be careful with Wikipedia:BLP. RachelTensions (talk) 06:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

As of now, the reliable sources available primarily indicate that Bang Chan was born in South Korea and spent significant time in Australia from ages 3 to 13. The news article detailing his planning of Stray Kids' "Australian tour" and mentioning his hometown in Sydney provides additional context supporting his Australian background, illustrating his connection to the country Donga. While there may be implications about his association with Australia, we currently lack definitive sources that confirm his citizenship status. Regarding his citizenship, it would be prudent to state the facts as they are known: he was born in South Korea and lived in Australia for a considerable period. Unless we can find reliable sources that explicitly state his current citizenship or residency status, we should avoid making assumptions or inferences based on the duration of his stay in Australia and in South Korea. RDWolfgang (talk) 06:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

In that case I'm going to change the lead to something more general and remove the "citizenship" section of the infobox until we can find something more concrete, or unless someone suggests an alternative. RachelTensions (talk) 07:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I believe we should refer to him as Australian-Korean, as it better reflects his background. The NME article supports this designation, stating that he is Australian-Korean (source). RDWolfgang (talk) 07:44, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Great, don't forget to cite that. RachelTensions (talk) 07:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

@RDWolfgang Looks like you added Australian-Korean to the lead and to the citizenship on the infobox but didn't cite the source RachelTensions (talk) 08:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

We do not cite in the lead section i have added the source in his Career section in a relevant place you can see that there RDWolfgang (talk) 08:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

There's nothing that says you shouldn't cite your sources in the lead section, especially if that statement isn't repeated somewhere in the main body of the article and cited there, and especially if the information could be seen as controversial.

The source is included in the career section (citation 13) but it's sourcing a statement about him training with Day6, nothing to do with his citizenship. RachelTensions (talk) 08:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

It's only natural he has Australian citizenship. There's no source to verify his citizenship of South Korea. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 09:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Born in South Korea to South Korean parents and lived there for more than half his life - why would it be "natural" that he has Australian citizenship but not South Korean? We have no source stating he renounced ROK nationality.

edit: I guess Nationality Act Article 15(1) says ROK citizenship is automatically revoked if someone lives abroad and acquires foreign citizenship so if he is indeed an Australian citizen it is safe to assume he is not South Korean RachelTensions (talk) 09:12, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

A person can be born in one country but not acquire its citizenship. In this case, both of his parents live in Australia, not Korea. It’s only natural that he would hold Australian citizenship, having been raised there his entire life. A good example of this is Choi Woo-shik. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 09:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I completely agree with you on this matter. In several interviews, Bang Chan has identified himself as Australian, and many sources refer to him as such. For instance, Ryan Reynolds called him "his favorite Australian," and the Hollywood Reporter states, "Felix and Bang Chan (who also happen to be from Australia)" (link: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/deadpool-and-wolverine-soundtrack-stray-kids-1235951736/). Additionally, Bang Chan mentions Sydney as his hometown, further supporting his identification as Australian. The fact that his family resides in Australia also suggests that he would hold Australian citizenship. I believe it would be reasonable to conclude this discussion by recognizing him as Australian, given the evidence and his own statements. RDWolfgang (talk) 09:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:FANCRUFT in "Impact and Influence" section

Looking at the "Impact and Influence" section it looks like a lot of it is bordering on WP:FANCRUFT as a way to accumulate random rankings and fan-voted polls in an effort to pad the section. Before I go and take a hacksaw to the section I wanted to bring it up here for discussion.

The worst offenders, IMO:

• The sentence about "Boy Group Individual Brand Reputation Rankings"
• The sentence about "81st most-searched K-Pop idol in 2020 by K-Pop Idol Chart's '2020 Top 100 YouTube Worldwide Search Rankings'."
• The whole paragraph about the Mubeat polls

I'd also include the paragraph about him being a "wealthy artist" from his songwriting credits, in the "Artistry" section.

Thoughts? RachelTensions (talk) 18:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

You don’t need to ask for permission to remove that information. If you notice something that doesn't belong and it's in line with the guidelines, feel free to proceed with removing it. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 19:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

I know permission isn't needed but I thought I'd bring it up because it's basically the entire section. But, sure. RachelTensions (talk) 19:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

If that's the case then all of it needs to be removed. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 05:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for taking the time to review the article and provide such valuable feedback.

Regarding the "wealthy artist" phrase: I completely agree that instead of removing it, we can rephrase it in a more focused way.

Boy Group Individual Brand Reputation Rankings: Similar mention in Jimin

YouTube Search Rankings: A similar mention is included in Jungkook’s article

Tumblr Rankings: Again, reference: Jungkook Han.

Mubeat Polls: Wikipedia’s guidelines do not explicitly prohibit fan-voted polls, as long as they are well-sourced from reliable outlets like Billboard or Ilgan Sports. Mubeat polls, though fan-voted, are backed by reputable sources such as Ilgan Sports, making them suitable for inclusion. As long as these rankings are presented in context and supported by reliable sources, they can be kept in the article, similar to how polls are included in other K-pop idol pages like Jimin's.

I really want to know your thoughts on this @Btspurplegalaxy @Shenaall

Edit: I have already made changes in those areas RDWolfgang (talk) 06:43, 5 October 2024 (UTC)