DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

Talk:XG (group)

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác

"Girl group"

[edit]
CHANGE TO SOMETHING
(non-admin closure) As this discussion has grown stale, I'll close it via WP:BARTENDER. There's consensus to change "girl group" to something else: "group", "idol group", and "vocal group" have variously been proposed. There is no consensus as to the target of the eventual link. I recommend that another discussion or proper RfC be made to clarify this and that said discussion be more narrowly focused. Iseult Δx talk to me 20:47, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

XG member Cocona has announced that they're transmasculine and uncomfortable with being seen as a woman. IMO, there's nothing wrong with updating "girl group" to just "group," e.g. this article about Cocona's coming out describes XG as simply a "hip-hop and R&B-inspired group" (minus the "girl"): https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/music/music-news/xg-cocona-comes-out-transmasculine-nonbinary-1236443919/
A lot of groups on Wikipedia are described as just "vocal groups," "dance groups," and "rap groups" in their opening sentence in the lead section. Bloomagiliw (talk) 09:22, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tldr, oppose. Only one member has announced a personal identity, the group itself has not changed its branding, and reliable sources describe XG as a "girl group" and continue to do so. Anything else would be original research. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 10:59, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not going to continue this conversation beyond this because in the interest of transparency, I don't like you (and I'm sure you feel the same way), so I don't want this to end up sounding uncivil. My message was meant for other editors to consider – not necessarily to implement changes now, but perhaps at some point in the near future when we see how Cocona coming out might change the group's branding. As you can see in the page's edit history, there's a lot of back and forth regarding this involving multiple editors. Respectfully, this was not an invitation to do the "support" and "oppose" stuff. Bloomagiliw (talk) 11:36, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As per WP:NPA, comments should address content, not editors. For my part, I don't have an issue with you, and I participate on English Wikipedia to discuss content based on policy. My previous comment was intended only to address the sourcing question. As always, if reliable sources or the group's branding change in the future, the article can be updated accordingly. Since you mentioned you did not wish to continue this exchange, I'll leave this part of the conversation here. I will continue to participate in the wider discussion and do not intend to step away. Thanks and regards, — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:02, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kuzrock FYI. The Hollywood Reporter source refers specifically to Cocona as an individual, not to XG as a group, so drawing broader conclusions about XG from that would constitute WP:SYNTH, a form of original research. As noted above, Wikipedia reflects how multiple reliable secondary sources describe XG, which is as a "girl group"; this is longstanding and as per existing consensus, and we are not here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. As per WP:BRD, you required to participate in this discussion to gain WP:CONSENSUS instead of editing disruptively. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:14, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should be a simple and non-controversial change to just refer to them as an "idol group" in the lead sentence, which neutralizes things without delving into OR and rebranding them as a "co-ed group" which is a whole separate sort of dynamic, but that's just me. RachelTensions (talk) 14:07, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, but "girl group" is currently linked to girl group. What should "idol group" link to? Japanese idol doesn't fit, since they don't follow the typical conventions and are more akin to Korean idol given that the lead states they are based in South Korea. Also having concern that linking to Korean idol (piped as "idol") immediately after "Japanese" might unintentionally trigger another cycle of disruptive edits, so we may need to rephrase the first sentence of the lead to avoid that. If we leave it unlinked, though, others may add a link anyway, which could also lead to further disruption. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:35, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe we should go with "group" for now over "girl group" or "co-ed group". We should avoid misgendering anyone, and there's no original research involved with going with a more general descriptor. — Cactoideae♫♪ (talk) 22:14, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Same as above, "girl group" is currently linked to girl group. What would "group" be linked to in this context? On another note, XG's name is an acronym for "Xtraordinary Girls", so it's not clear what problem a terminology change would be addressing, especially since the group itself has not changed its branding. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:38, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Group" linking to Musical ensemble or within the same page Musical ensemble#Vocal group makes sense to me, if it must be linked to something. To me, XG being an acronym for "Xtraordinary Girls" isn't relevant to changing the descriptor used for the group. After all, we have groups like Barenaked Ladies where, as far as I know, none of the members are ladies. To be clear, I think for now we should use just "group" and wait to see if sources consistently use "girl group" or "co-ed group" from now. — Cactoideae♫♪ (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm OK with calling them a vocal group. Separate note: I would argue that the "Xtraordinary Girls" name is a core concept to their brand identity and is a separate case from Barenaked Ladies. I agree that calling them an "idol group" would lead to edit wars between Japanese idol and Korean idol. lullabying (talk) 05:57, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, this is still a straightforward case of WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS not supported by reliable sources nor the group's own core branding. The analogy provided is not comparable, as one name was intentionally created as joke branding (as sourced there) while the other reflects the group's intended identity. If a proposal ignoring reliable sources is still being considered despite that, then using "group" or "vocal group" linked to Musical ensemble#Vocal group is the only workable middleground, as adding genre would only cause further disruptive editing or lead to a cluttered laundry list, especially given that genre classifications for K-pop groups tend to change frequently with every other comeback. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:59, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As of today, the official XGALX website identifies XG as the acronym for ‘Xtraordinary Girls’ and still states that it is a group of 7 girls.
The idea of changing it to a ‘Co-Ed Group’ or ‘Xtraordinary Group/Genes/Galaxy’ is just speculation or imagination from a certain part of the ALPHAZ fandom.
When XGALX or Simon JAKOPS (aka the CEO of XGALX) makes an official statement about any change, then the XG Wikipedia page should be updated accordingly.
Otherwise, it should remain as it is. AgentPatch (talk) 21:11, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, no one has suggested using "co-ed group" or to change anything about what XG stands for in this talk page discussion. The topic is about changing "girl group" to just "group", or "vocal group" per a more recent suggestion. — Cactoideae♫♪ (talk) 22:01, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think group is probably the best descriptor at this point. I understand the hesitancy because of a lack of sourcing, but rules have exceptions, and it needs to be recognized that the "girl group" branding isn't consistent with the current lineup, and may be offensive to some. Atriskofmistake (talk) 05:14, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(procedural reply) – Closure requested at WP:CR (permalink). — 🎄☃️ Paper9oll ☃️🎄 (🔔 • 📝) 03:58, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Request for comment

[edit]

What term should replace "girl group" in the lead and short description of this article?

— 🎉🎆 Paper9oll 🎆🎉 (🔔 • 📝) 09:53, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Option A as it's more general Atriskofmistake (talk) 15:05, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Option B. It's less likely to get changed. — Cactoideae♫♪ (talk) 00:47, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Option B per Cactoideae. If consensus is with A, I see little reason to link it. 1brianm7 (talk) 04:23, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Grl Gvng" or "GRL GVNG"

[edit]

I added the link to their single "Grl Gvng," but the article title is all caps ("GRL GVNG"). Which is the correct article title, "Grl Gvng" or "GRL GVNG"? --~2026-3852 (talk) 03:39, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved per WP:AT. — 🎉🎆 Paper9oll 🎆🎉 (🔔 • 📝) 09:27, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]