Talk:Min Hee-jin

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Min Hee-jin article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Korea Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Korean popular culture working group.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in, have 10 edits and an account age of 4 days

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Photo choice[edit]

Is it a standard policy to use as a main photo a picture of someone in emotional distress? This is especially concerning since there is an ongoing legal battle around this person. Isn't there another copyright free photo? Or at least a better screenshot from that video? --Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 17:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not the greatest photo but I don’t think you can get a good image of her from the video. There wouldn’t be no other available copyright free pictures of her. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 04:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what is the intention of the OP for uploading such photo, seem to be non-NPOV imo. I looked through the YouTube video which is licensed under CC, there are portion that are better (not crying or unglam) but not the best (quality wise) nevertheless those better portion are better than this controversial image. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I'd like to apologize if the photo comes off as inappropriate as I don't have any intention of demeaning her whatsoever. I tried to look through more sources for better quality photo/photo of her not in distress but unfortunately those are what I am able to find at the moment. If possible then I can request for deletion for this photo and the other two that I uploaded. Again, I should've known better and I'll try my best to avoid uploading such photos like this. YuhakGuardian (talk) 09:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@YuhakGuardian I believe that you should request "G7. Author or uploader request deletion" instead given that concerns raised here and also on Commons. However before you request for G7, you will need to remove the photos on all Wikipedias (just give a appropriate edit summary when doing so else risking getting reverted) if it is currently being utilized otherwise your G7 will be rejected. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The photos should be gone by now as I've requested for a G7 for all related photos that I uploaded. Once again, I'm sorry for causing such concern like this. I will be more mindful next time when it comes to these sorts of topics, and thanks for the advice as well. YuhakGuardian (talk) 11:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@YuhakGuardian Thanks you for initiating G7. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear I still think that a better screenshot from that video is possible.

This is the video link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt3AafMk3XI

If someone wants to give it a shot maybe they could post a selection here and then decide which one would work. It seems to me that her story highlights multiple topics in the korean entertainement industry so a photo would still be useful. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 12:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since another picture was added I took the time and found a screenshot where she at least looks straight and not downward. It seems to me that it doesn't hold the same emotional distress value than the others selected. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 20:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I went back to the video link that I used initially for the main image: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkhMzgyJ0yw

I did notice that there was a short moment in the video where was smiling (approx. at 7:03 or 7:04 mark of the video). I wonder if that is appropriate to be used or not? Or do we need one that's more of her looking normal and not in distress? YuhakGuardian (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@YuhakGuardian Looks okay. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I favor the more neutral look of the one that it is up now, but the smiling one is also OK. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 13:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"pedophilia allegations" section[edit]

This section was recently titled following the expansion of the second one about management. Starting from the title there is an issue since the various sources points to a sexualisation minors and not to pedophilia age range. Secondly the section is confusing to read and unclear to what it actually refers to. There is no precise reference to what has been the critique about New Jeans (mainly the lyrics of Cookie) where and how was she "supporting" pedophilic content and such. Or other accusations of sexualization that she had in the past. I'm going ahead to rewrite the whole section to better reflect the various points. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 12:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I proceeded to expand the paragraph. If someone that knows her better wants to write a proper and better developed paragraph, distinct from the controversy section, about her inspirations (minor sexuality, naziexploitation but also maybe something else?) here there's a longer interview with her:

https://magazine.beattitude.kr/artist-project/artistproject-minheejin-part1-eng/

https://magazine.beattitude.kr/essay/artistproject-minheejin-part2-eng/ Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I went to add an "allegedly" to the section since I can't seem to find an original verified copy of her posts on Instagram which should have been these ones:

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cab2iuMpTfS/

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cab1H0Fp2z1/

https://www.instagram.com/p/CW2kY5SJry9/

I guess that there's ground to scrap the whole section since it only refers to tabloid sources (https://www.koreaboo.com/news/min-heejin-ador-pedophilia-problematic-minors-inspiration-instagram/). Still it seems to me worthy enough to keep in its present form, waiting for a more comprehensive writing about her inspirations.

What do you think? Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 20:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that, Koreaboo is considered as unreliable source as per WP:KO/RS#UR in which this article is part of the WP:KO. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what I imagined. That's why I didn't linked it as source and falled back to the general definition of "people online".

Except for the title my edits were fully reverted, which is troublesome because in this state there are the same exact issues of having no source plus the whole paragraph is unclear and confusing:

1) One movie that she allegedly shared on her instagram is noted but not the others. There is no context whatsoever to the whole thing.

2) There is still a false "pedophilia" claim on the body of the paragraph.

3) There's no reference to what has been the conflict regarding New Jeans (mainly the lyrics of Cookie) while on the Cookie page this has been properly analyzed.

What's the point of reverting to a previous state that is even more confusing and equally unsourced? Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The new information added was wholly unsourced. I have no issues with what you want to add if you provide reliable secondary sources. None of the films or the Sherlock info you added were mentioned in refs. Everything that is now in the page IS sourced if you check. Only info that could be added is about "Cookie", since it's mentioned in the fourth ref. Poirot09 (talk) 14:36, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the version you reverted to? There is the exact same issue with sources but worst because there is no context. Where are the sources? Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 20:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are literally four refs? Here: ^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4] Poirot09 (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So let me get it straight, your issue is about adding the name of the other two movies and album that are not directly mentioned in this article (https://sports.khan.co.kr/entertainment/sk_index.html?art_id=202207281604003&sec_id=540101) even though the article is refering to the exact same instagram posts that had them as well?

Then I am rewriting it with my second formulation that at least made clear what age are we talking about, what was mentioned about new jeans, where those images come from etc Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 00:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HypeBoy Since you keep reverting can you please be explicit about what parts are not supported by references? The lyrics of Cookie, the outfits? This is the core of the debate and explicitelly named on the first reference.

You are reverting to a previous version that is just more vague and confusing. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 12:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Lee, Sun-myung (July 28, 2022). 하이브 민희진 '롤리타 성향' 논란...뉴진스 론칭 거부감 확산 [Controversy over Min Hee-jin from Hybe's 'Lolita tendency'... Spreading disapproval for NewJeans' debut]. Kyunghyang Shinmun (in Korean). Archived from the original on February 6, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023.
^ Hwang, Hye-jin (August 10, 2022). 민희진, 로리타 의심 악성루머 고소 "뉴진스 악플러도 선처 NO" [Min Hee-jin sues over Lolita malicious rumours. "No mercy towards NewJeans' malicious commenters."]. Newsen (in Korean). Archived from the original on May 11, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023.
^ Choi, Jae-won (February 2, 2023). 뉴진스 소속사가 '악플러' 대거 고소하자, "여자만 팬다"며 난리난 여초 커뮤 회원들 [After NewJeans' agency sued a large number of 'malicious commenters', members of the female community went crazy saying, "Only women are targeted."]. Insight (in Korean). Archived from the original on April 2, 2023. Retrieved February 7, 2023.
^ Yang, Haley (August 30, 2022). "Under 19 and full of innuendos: NewJeans controversy is latest in K-pop sexualization". Korea JoongAng Daily. Archived from the original on August 17, 2023. Retrieved August 17, 2023.

Dispute with Hybe section[edit]

With the dispute still ongoing it seems to me like particular care of this section is needed. In the current state the section has a mix of a timeline feeling while at the same time being each day more and more incomplete. I am not for listing every step, at the contrary I think that the two main parts involved should be represented better in a more distinct fashion. Min Hee-Jin position is unclear, there's a repetition regarding the difficulty to get Hybe control, and the accusation of ILLIT copying take way more space then the rest. On Hybe side there's an even more misterious tone since reading the paragraph doesn't really give any insight on their relationship and actions beside the audit. If nobody takes a shot at it I'll try to work on it when I'll have time in the next few days. Please instead of randomly reverting it if you find something unsourced or badly written tag it appropriately and come discuss it here first! Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 00:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reverts weren't "random", all material about living persons that are unsourced or poorly sourced are to be removed immediately without discussion per WP:BLPSOURCE. Keep that in mind the next time you're adding information to this page. Thanks 「HypeBoy」^TALK 02:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts were random. You reverted sourced informations about 1) the origin of her movie influences 2) the lyrics of the track cookie 3) the school girl outfits.

Please avoid doing so in the future in other sections as with the dispute with hybe. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. You wrote "minors in age of consent" which were not stated in any of the sources. 2. You wrote that Min Hee-jin "deleted" her instagram pictures which were not stated in any of the sources. 3. The info about f(x) and NewJeans having a lolita concept were already there, which made your edit unnecessary. My point stands, for your future edits, either put a reliable source for ALL your edits or don't edit at all, because like I said, unsourced edits in biographies of living persons are to be removed without discussion. 「HypeBoy」^TALK 19:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1) "minors in age of consent" is literally the age we are talking about regarding the movies she shared. Is "pedophilia" better just because the source, who is just copy pasting twitter talks, wrote it? You do realize it makes it only more libellous?

2) If you accept the first source that comment about those pictures of her appartment then you have to accept that Min Hee-Jin deleted them. They are not on her current instagram.

3) Lolita concept doesn't mean anything. It is a vague slander category that should be avoided. I added a precise reference to what is the topic discussed and that gave the whole section a more neutral and factual tone.

You should indeed discuss all of this into a talk page. We are even in the wrong section now.

Again, the Hybe Dispute section needs a rewrite as well since in the current state it is unclear for both parties involved. Discuss it instead of reverting it. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 10:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Lee, Sun-myung (July 28, 2022). 하이브 민희진 '롤리타 성향' 논란...뉴진스 론칭 거부감 확산 [Controversy over Min Hee-jin from Hybe's 'Lolita tendency'... Spreading disapproval for NewJeans' debut]. Kyunghyang Shinmun (in Korean). Archived from the original on February 6, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023.

[2] Hwang, Hye-jin (August 10, 2022). 민희진, 로리타 의심 악성루머 고소 "뉴진스 악플러도 선처 NO" [Min Hee-jin sues over Lolita malicious rumours. "No mercy towards NewJeans' malicious commenters."]. Newsen (in Korean). Archived from the original on May 11, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023.

[3] Choi, Jae-won (February 2, 2023). 뉴진스 소속사가 '악플러' 대거 고소하자, "여자만 팬다"며 난리난 여초 커뮤 회원들 [After NewJeans' agency sued a large number of 'malicious commenters', members of the female community went crazy saying, "Only women are targeted."]. Insight (in Korean). Archived from the original on April 2, 2023. Retrieved February 7, 2023.

[4] Yang, Haley (August 30, 2022). "Under 19 and full of innuendos: NewJeans controversy is latest in K-pop sexualization". Korea JoongAng Daily. Archived from the original on August 17, 2023. Retrieved August 17, 2023.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]