Talk:BoyNextDoor

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: Musicians

	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 WikiProject Musicians (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.

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Japanese single album

The term "single album" don't exist outside of the South Korean music industry. The Japanese market only recognises singles and albums (including mini-albums). And, or "Good Day", should instead be categorized as a maxi single, which refers to a single with multiple tracks. I've edited the page to reflect this, as well as having moved the single's main page from And (BoyNextDoor single album) to Good Day (BoyNextDoor song). George13lol2 (talk) 15:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also looked at the two cited sources and both refer to And as a single, not a single album. George13lol2 (talk) 15:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 October 2024

It has been proposed in this section that BoyNextDoor be renamed and moved to Boynextdoor.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

BoyNextDoor → Boynextdoor – Similar case to our previous discussion over at Talk:Babymonster#Requested move 10 October 2024, I'm proposing eliminating the CamelCase in the article title.

As usual, the most common way the name is presented in RS is in the all-caps stylization, which doesn't help us here. I've clicked through about sixty pages of search results to pull together every instance I could find of reliable sources presenting the group's name without all caps:

Reliable English-language sources for Boynextdoor:

Reliable English-language sources for "BoyNextDoor":

There are some sources that use "Boy Next Door" but those are outliers and Maeil Business Newspaper tends to use "Boynext Door" for whatever reason. Hybe and KOZ both refer to the group in all-caps almost exclusively so they're of no help.

MOS:CAMELCASE defers to whatever appears to be most common; based on what I've found in English-language RS, "Boynextdoor" is the most common, and Wikipedia has a general attitude of avoiding unnecessary capitzalization per MOS:CAPS. RachelTensions (talk) 06:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the English site of Maeil Business Newspaper should be disregard (see this discussion). 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 07:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would explain why they refer to the group in three different styles within one article. RachelTensions (talk) 09:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom's survey of independent reliable sources showing a majority with lowercase, along with the recent outcome at Talk:Babymonster#Requested move 10 October 2024 and Wikipedia's general tilt toward lowercase per MOS:CAPS's opening sentence: "Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization." —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Dicklyon (talk) 21:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per MOS:TMRULES and noms survey. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support-ish. Given that this is kind of a transliteration, a de-marketing-stylization of something presented in allcaps (in English) for aggrandizement purposes, and which (in transliterated Korean) is usually given only with a leading capital B, an argument can be made to do this. But it comes at the expense (albeit a slight one) of the result being harder to read and parse. I don't see that we really gain anything by it at all, but I suppose it's faintly more consistent with some previous odd cases like this. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:10, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I didn't make it through 60 Google search pages, but my finding is that usage is split. Actually, the overwhelming majority of English language sources I found use all-caps BOYNEXTDOOR. I was surprise to see BOYNEXTDOOR in sources like People[1], Rolling Stone[2], Teen Vogue[3][4] and USA Today.[5] These are general audience publications that cover a wide range of entertainers. Yahoo! Entertainment, another general audience pub, used all caps initially and then BoyNextDoor.[6] Many sources are split. The nom notably references Korea JoongAng Daily for both stylings (Boynextdoor and BoyNextDoor). My Google search turned up multiple Korea JoongAng Daily articles using BoyNextDoor[7][8] and when you search their site[9] BoyNextDoor is the predominant result. The nom lists The Korea Times as using Boynextdoor but they also use all caps here[10][11]. I am in no way suggesting all caps. Since usage is variable among sources that don't use all caps, I don't see that this clears the bar for a name change. I concur with @SMcCandlish that BoyNextDoor improves readability and little is gained from the proposed change. That would be less salient if widespread usage were more consistent, but given the variability, it is a worthwhile consideration to keep the article title as-is.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you're suggesting not using all caps (which is obviously the most common usage, but would obviously go against guidelines), but are instead supporting maintaining the camelcase (which is a the third most common usage by a fairly large margin, per the survey of English-language sources, and goes against the guidelines at WP:CAMELCASE)... can you clarify? RachelTensions (talk) 02:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to clarify. I do not agree that there is a fairly large margin and I disagree that this goes against guidelines or policy. MOS:CAMELCASE states: Trademarks in "CamelCase" are a judgment call; the style may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable. I did not find an overwhelming difference in BoyNextDoor vs. Boynextdoor. I do find that BoyNextDoor improves readability. Your bulleted lists appear to show a 10:4 difference, but that's when you throw out something like 90% of references that use an unallowable all caps style, the outliers like Boy Next Door, and the fact that many of the same sources are not consistent from article to article and sometimes not within the same article. Per WP:TITLECHANGES: If an article title has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed. Consensus among editors determines if there does exist a good reason to change the title. I appreciate that you and I disagree on whether there is a good reason to change this article title and that you are seeking consensus. My assessment is that there is no clear usage preference or pattern between the two proposed styles. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]