This article must adhere to thebiographies 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 orpoorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentiallylibellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue tothis noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please seethis help page.
This article wascopy edited by a member of theGuild of Copy Editors on 8 August 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related topop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited tojoin the project andcontribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to thedocumentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related toKorea. All interested editors are invited tojoin the project and contribute to thediscussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to thedocumentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofwomen on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofWomen in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
As I noticed that the latest picture for the article is dated in 2023, I've searched for recent pictures and found the following. I think we may consider choosing among these options for updating:
Option 1 (2023, currently used)
Option 2 (May 2024)
Option 3 (May 2024)
While I think the one currently being displayed should probably be fine to continue to be used, please feel free to determine which one we can use. Personally I think option 2 works well.☆YuhakGuardian(talk)13:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current picture is the best of the three and her appearance hasn't really changed since 2023 so a new photo sacrificing quality just for the sake of finding something newer isn't necessary.She has a new album coming out next week, we might get something better anyway.RachelTensions (talk)14:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there is a better image available than what is currently in the article then I’m all eyes. Until then we shouldn’t sacrifice what is a perfectly good picture just for the sake of newness.RachelTensions (talk)14:54, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. As RachelTensions stated, "we shouldn’t sacrifice what is a perfectly good picture just for the sake of newness". Moreover, the proposed image isn't "Much better quality" – it features a top-angle shot, her bowing slightly, not smiling, with an awkward hand position, a random blurry head, and watermarks. Overall, this isn't a natural image and is clearly taken when she is in motion, resulting in awkward shooting angles. In addition, there's no need to persistently update the lead image simply because the subject changes her hairstyle frequently (as many K-pop idols do).Wikipedia is not a social media platform. The current image effectively serves its purpose: "to give readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page". Minor details, such as hairstyle differences, are not relevant to this purpose and do not prevent readers from visually confirming that they have arrived at the right page. Lastly,Wikipedia has no deadline, with upcoming events like The Tense, there are clearly more opportunities for possible better front-facing images.—Paper9oll(🔔 •📝)08:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care either way, but I will point out that the current image has been run through an AI upscaler whereas the proposed one appears to be clean. So there's that.RachelTensions (talk)08:36, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The issue isn’t her changing her hairstyle we could even use a photo from 2010 if you want, but as others have previously mentioned the current photo being ascreenshot that’s been upscaled with AI is a not a good choice at all since it edits her face a lot more. We can change it to the one I proposed which is an actual photo, or any other photo that has not been upscaled. You can change to The Tense photos later when the time comes if you prefer to.BrightSightLight (talk)10:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't expect this discussion would turn out this way but I just want to hop in and clarify that I'm only suggesting the above photos as to see if it's reasonable to update the infobox (for the sake of avoiding making unnecessary or disruptive edits).
I totally agree that the current photo (or to be exact, a screenshot taken from a video) should be fine to keep (but minus the upscaled AI thingy), and that there aren't much differences between 2023 and 2024 photos (i.e. change of hairstyle, different photo angle, actual photograph instead of screenshots, etc.). At the end of the day, this is just to confirm if we really need something new or up-to-date.
I believe the best approach would be for the editors involved to choose from the three listed options, with the most chosen becoming the new image. This should simplify the process. Personally, I would prefer Option 2.Btspurplegalaxy💬🖊️11:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A constant misconception nowadays hence some here is some technical explanation of the difference between AI upscaling and monitor upscaling. AI upscaling refers to "using artificial intelligence algorithms to intelligently increase the resolution of an image" while monitor upscaling refers to "displaying a 4K video on a higher resolution (e.g. 6K or 8K) monitor, the monitor is essentially 'upscaling' the image to fit its higher resolution". For context, my monitor is Dell UltraSharp 32 8K Monitor.—Paper9oll(🔔 •📝)11:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the difference. In this case, the image currently in the article is a screenshot from a video that has had its quality enhanced with AI, as evident by the eyelids, teeth and hair.RachelTensions (talk)18:11, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just markedFile:Taeyeon at Incheon Airport on 210723 (3) (cropped).png as AI upscaled on Commons, where there are alot of undisclosed upscales of South Korean celebrities. (Possibly ko.wikipedia.org has no policy against using upscales in articles.) I flagged this article as using an upscaled image just now, and Paper9oll has replaced the infobox photo with a non-upscaled version.
.png)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
![[1]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fcommons.wikimedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3a01_240518_TY_024_(54027960369).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).png){kind=link}