Talk:Hey! Say! JUMP

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

Non-Deletion Justification[edit]

Why this page should not be deleted:

Hey! Say! JUMP is a new debuted group from Johnny's Entertainment - which means it is a senior group just like KAT-TUN, NEWS, Kanjani8 and the like. This alone should warrant it's non-deletion. Besides that, they are singing the theme song for Japan's World Cup Volleyball Relay for 2007. They are also an expansion of Hey! Say! 7, a gold status single holder, charting at least #20 in the 2007 Oricon Yearly Charts as of 12 September 2007, and was #1 in Oricon Weekly Charts for a week. - Akaru 17:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a counter arguement, the relevent guideline, WP:MUSIC, especially the relevent section titled "Criteria for musicians and ensembles", has twelve criteria that would allow a band or group to have an article here at wikipedia. This group meets NONE of those criteria. However, since this is being contested, I will move the discussion to WP:AFD for further comment. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree, I find 4 points in that criteria that this group meets, including:
* Has had a charted hit on any national music chart - Hey! Say! was #1 in the Oricon Japan charts
* Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country - Hey! Say! is certified GOLD by the RIAJ
* Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album - Is performing the theme song for Japan's Volleyball World Cup effort, etc.
* Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network - Had a whole 40 minute timeslot dedicated to their debut announcement just today, besides another appearance in another music program barely 2 hours later
- Akaru 17:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Say 7 or Hey Say may be notable bands; I make no comment on that. However, that does not make Hey Say Jump notable by extension. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is true; Hey! Say! 7's achievements do not verify Hey! Say! JUMP's notability. However, leaving Hey! Say! 7's accomplishments aside, Hey! Say! JUMP as individual group, quoting Akaru,:
- Is performing the theme song for Japan's Volleyball World Cup effort, etc. [Criteria 10]
- Had a whole 40 minute timeslot dedicated to their debut announcement just today, besides another appearance in another music program barely 2 hours later. [Criteria 12]
These accomplishments within 2 days of their official debut are proof of Hey! Say! JUMP's notability.
This in addition to the fact that:
- Members Ryosuke Yamada, Nakajima Yuto, Yuuri Chinen, Yuya Takaki and Daiki Arioka have all been involved in Hey! Say! 7, a group which is and has been approved by Wikipedia as a notable group. [Criteria 6]

Overall, Hey! Say! JUMP meets criterias 6, 10 and 12 of the WP:MUSIC, fulfilling Wikipedia guidelines. Thus, this page is of a notable topic which should not be deleted. Frozencrumbz 07:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I recieved a message just then, informing me that this page is, yet again, nominated for deletion. If one will read the arguement by put forward by Akaru 5 months ago, I think it's pretty clear as to why this page is of notability.

I honestly don't understand why this debate is happening all over again... Frozencrumbz (talk) 06:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hanayunoyume (talk) 16:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC) This is my first time doing this, reason for this post is: A while ago I was browsing this Hey!Say!JUMP page. I always do that whenever I need information. I was really confused why Takaki Yuya and Kei Inoo doesn't have their own page? Kei inoo not having his own page due to lack of notability is kinda acceptable(but still i hope he can have his own,just by being a student of meiji and part of Gachi Baka! drama) But for takaki yuya who has been involved in many drama's and movies (Gokusen, Gokusen The Movie, Shabake, Shabake Uso Uso, Gokusen Special Graduation, etc) isn't this kinda unfair?He also have same information like the other members: Solo song, CM, movies and dramas. So i don't really get why he can't have his own page here.. Im hoping for this member's page too. Thank youHanayunoyume (talk) 16:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Information Regarding Temporary Unit Hey! Say! 7[edit]

Do not consider me harshly, but this article contains information which is not relevant to the article topic itself. We must recognise that Hey! Say! JUMP did not exist until the 24 September, 2007; it is different from the temporary unit, Hey! Say! 7.

Think of it this way: in Wikipedia, we would not put information regarding the Johnny's Jr. ex-group, 4tops, in the article of NEWS; even if one of its members, Tomohisa Yamashita, became a NEWS member afterwards.

I will remove those parts now (as in, the information regarding the temporary unit, Hey! Say! 7).

Unless the Hey! Say! 7 article merges with this article, history and information regarding temporary unit Hey! Say! 7 prior to the Hey! Say! JUMP debut should be listed in its own respective article and not, in this one.

If you disagree and feel that this is an incorrect thing to do, feel free to discuss it here. Frozencrumbz 08:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merging of Hey! Say! 7 and Hey! Say! JUMP[edit]

I hereby disagree to a merge. There is too much information regarding the Hey! Say! 7 temporary group (which had existed prior to the formation of Hey! Say! JUMP). A merge right now may cause confusion, even to, perhaps, the authors of the Wikipedia pages themselves.

Besides, would it not be a better idea to consider a merge after a decision concerning the deletion of the Hey! Say! JUMP page is finalised? Frozencrumbz 08:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I proposed and support the merge because I think that by merging the articles, it would be more appropriate as Hey! Say! 7 is now a subgroup under Hey! Say! JUMP. As such, that was why I included Hey! Say! 7's history in Hey! Say! JUMP's page, as Johnny's had personally said that Hey! Say! JUMP is an expansion of Hey! Say! 7 in a way. I feel that it'll be easier to explain the situation by merging both articles, then indicating the name change of Hey! Say! 7 to Hey! Say! JUMP, adding of 5 new members, and then the division of this new Hey! Say! JUMP into Hey! Say! BEST and Hey! Say! 7. This way, we can preserve all the history of Hey! Say! 7 as Hey! Say! JUMP's, as well as properly differentiate the new second generation Hey! Say! 7 and the old Hey! Say! 7 temporary group.
    If the merger happens, the question of notability won't even be a question anymore, and thus the deletion of the page shouldn't be taken into account into consideration of this merger.
    - Akaru 18:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, I daresay you have a point (yes, I can be easily swayed).
    As long as the merged page can be carried out in a clear and orderly manner and will not confuse those reading the article, I guess that'll be alright.

    Personally, I just wish Kitagawa Johnny didn't make things so confusing... Frozencrumbz 02:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Merged, tell me if you've any objections to how I did it. Akaru 13:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Kei Inoo[edit]

Since there is no notability asserted for bandmember Kei Inoo outside of the band in the wikiarticle on Kei Inoo, why not merge the info contained therein with this article on the band: Hey! Say! JUMP. — SpikeToronto 07:19, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with merge, the only problem is that I'm not sure there is anything worth merging, the article is mostly all unsourced trivia. A simple redirect may be more appropriate.J04n(talk page) 11:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If that’s the case, then I agree with you. It actually had been made a simple redirect, but then that was getting vandalized last night, appearing on my Huggle screen. When I discovered that the redirect was done without discussion, I restored the page and created this merge discussion. I have no horse in this race since I am not an editor of either of these two wikiaritcles. My only interest was in ensuring that the right procedure was followed: i.e., that there should be some discussion before removing all the material and replacing with a redirect.

I leave it to you and other regular editors to decide if there is anything worth merging. Let’s set a time limit of seven days, as is done with AfDs, and we can implement whatever consensus emerges. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 19:30, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stumbled upon this, its been seven days, there's nothing encyclopedic here, no sources, it's all, for lack of a nicer term, fanboy garbage. I'm BOLDly implementing a redirect. Sven Manguard Talk 05:28, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Silence can be construed as consensus, so redirect away! — SpikeToronto 15:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Kei Inoo article has been resurrected without explanation. At first glance, I can still see no greater notability than the subject’s membership in this band. But, I may have misread the new article. Also, if it is the case that Kei Inoo indeed has no notability outside of Hey! Say! JUMP, does this mean that the merge discussion has to be re-started? Thanks! — SpikeToronto 19:29, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reinstated the redirect. The article previously at Kei Inoo is an unsourced BLP, utter fancruft, and easily fails all of the relevant notability guidelines. Such nonsense as "He joined Johnny's because he thought he could eat delicious food. But, turns out, the food was just normal," seems to provide for a great sampling of the quality of that article.

Wikipedia has far too much bloat consisting unsourced or poorly sourced articles on nobodies and near-nobidies with various levels of delusions of grandeur and/or musical talent, we must strive to remove such things at all cost. That being said, I have no personal grudge against Mr. Inoo, nor do I really even know who he is. The article itself simply does not warrant inclusion on Wikipedia. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:05, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sven. I didn’t want to act unilaterally without knowing whether the previous merge discussion still applied after more than two months. Btw, I also got a laugh out of the delicious food line! It has to be one of the single most informative (tongue pressed firmly in cheek) biographical details I’ve ever seen in an article! Thanks! — SpikeToronto 21:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is Ryutaro Morimoto really a past member?[edit]

I think we should not recognition that Ryutaro Morimoto is a past member.
And it isn't good that in isolation describing as not to within Hey!Say!JUMP members.

In fact, his actively is suspended, but still one of a member, I think.
So I suggestion that lists in him again to members.

How do you think about it?
(My English is not perfect...sorry.) --yuta*ﾟ (talk) 06:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Resolved When I check this page, Ryutaro is within a member (out of a past member). This question was solved. Thank you. --yuta*ﾟ (talk) 13:19, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Hey! Say! JUMP. 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) 22:50, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hey! Say! JUMP. 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) 22:58, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hey! Say! JUMP. 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) 09:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit[edit]

@Sai-chan: you recently reverted my copy edit and cleanup of the article but did not leave an edit summary. (You also removed the {{advert}} cleanup template, which I could see with my copy edit in place but not with it reverted.) Could you please explain what you found objectionable about my edit? There were a lot of Manual of Style fixes (dashes, capitals, acronyms, italics, etc.), and various edits for clarity, conciseness and tone. I don't think my copy edit was perfect, but I felt it was an improvement. I'd like to reinstate the parts of my copy edit that you don't object to, then discuss the parts you don't like. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:43, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reidgreg: I am in consensus of your edits and have reverted them back. @Sai-chan: you have been warned about this before on your talk page, but you reverted my edit so I am assuming that you are aware of this. Please use edit summaries and discuss with other editors before reverting good faith edits. lullabying (talk) 20:46, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lullabying: I'm not aware of the earlier history but I don't feel there's anything so horribly wrong with an initial revert, which is basically an invitation to discuss, following the WP:BRD cycle. So long as the reverter is open-minded and willing to discuss the edit and constructively work toward the article's improvement. @Sai-chan: let's hold off any further reverts and discuss the changes. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:17, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hey!_Say!_JUMP&oldid=1207500155"