Talk:Map of the Soul: Persona

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Albums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum Korea Mid‑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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Korean popular culture working group.

@DanielleTH and Ukiss2ne14lyfe: Hi! i'm pinging you because you're the 2 main contributors i've noticed for Persona's wiki article.
MOTS: Persona was called an LP by rollingstone (as written/cited in the main article), but some publications/sites have called it an EP, such as Entertainment Weekly [1] and HitsDailyDouble [2].
How would it be decided, which format it really is? (more precise would be, which source is priority in believability) Kleool (talk) 13:15, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kleool: Pitchfork and AXS called it a studio album as well. I'm tempted to believe the EW article given that the author was at Big Hit, but that necessarily doesn't mean she got the information verified from them. To be blunt I'm honestly very confused by the inconsistency. DanielleTH ^{(Say hi!)} 13:21, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DanielleTH: hmm, the pitchfork article you linked says "new album", nothing about the format that i can see? the only thing i can see is implied with "It’s the follow-up to the K-pop group’s 2018 record LOVE YOURSELF 轉 ‘Tear’", but it can be interpreted in too many ways in my opinion, to be used as proof for an LP? I aggree that the inconsistency is pretty blinding. It used to be mentioned at least in the korean articles, but this time? nope... our only hope are more articles i guess ..Kleool (talk) 13:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure what it is. Instead of guessing we could just wait to see how many songs are on it or if Big Hit or BTS clarify. There's too many articles going back and forth so I have no clue. Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 14:58, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: They also happened to have released a trailer for the song which was referred to as simply “Persona”. I don’t know what made you so mad in this comment but you might as well move Persona (song) to Intro: Persona if you feel so strongly that “Intro:” is part of a song title. Hayman30 (talk) 11:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hayman30: I'm not particularly worried about the duality; it can be both and it is. However, in context of the EP, it's "Intro: Persona", hence my disagreement and revert. If you're worried, you can start a move discussion on Persona (song). I created this page, I don't need to be tagged but thanks for the heads up all the same. Ss112 11:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kleool I accidentally clicked thank for your most recent edit but I actually wanted to ask if the sales ref needed to be removed for the US figures? I only changed it for the UK because that source didn't reflect what the album has been certified for, but does that mean other figures in the table (like the US ones) also have to change similarly? Idk what the precedent is for sales/certs and I thought the US entry was ok as it was so I'm asking. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 11:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Carlobunnie: hi! I try to base on how older editors worked on artist pages like Madonna etc. The certification itself already gives information about certified units (units = pure sales + track equivavilent + stream equivavilent).
Salesamount (parameter in reference) + ref (link to articles etc) is meant to be used specifically to show pure sales, not units. It'd actually be more accurate to remove "salesamount=xxxx" parameter from the reference (it would fill the units automatically)
It depends a lot on upkeeper editors, on what they wish to keep. Some choose to leave pure sales number (especially if it's high), as a sign of "this album units aren't made up of 90% streams". Example would be 21 (Adele album) - RIAA 14x platinum is 14m units, but sales column contains lower number - 12m. But this information says "album sold (in pure) extremely well".Kleool (talk) 13:17, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kleool: ah, I see. Thank you for explaining! -- Carlobunnie (talk) 13:34, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking in adding this information "In a V Live, RM revealed that he was responsible for writing a lot of the lyrics for the album adding: "In this album, I was a lyric-writing bot. I wrote more lyrics on this album than any other album. Except for Suga and J-Hope’s rap parts, I wrote 80 to 90 percent of the lyrics for this album. I guess I wrote pretty much all the lyrics." ^[1]" but first I wanted to discuss here if I should add it. Testiduk (talk) 16:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]