Talk:South Korea/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

---

Untitled

This article was refactored on the 14th of October, 2005, for readability, length, and removal of out-dated discussions. To view the refactored text, go here [1]. Masterhatch 03:31, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Introduction

I partially disagree with a few of the comments made by the writer below and want to know who removed the whole 3 intro paragraphs without stating any reason. All countries have at least 4 paragraphs of introduction and it consists of a general intro, history, politics and economy.

Regarding the writer below, shipbuilding is a vital and crucial part of the Korean economy providing over 10% of total GDP to the nation. While it may seem like nothing important to normal consumers (who don't get to buy ships), if you are an economist, you would know that shipbuilding is a major industry in the world. The fact that South Korea overtook Japan in 2004 as the no.1 shipbuilder was a national festival and celebration, so you can see the level of importance of shipbuilding to Koreans.

Anyway, I did take your comment in account though, and edited out the details. Hope this resolves the problem. I also editd out a few words that make it look a bit propaganda like, in my opinion, the intro now gives an excellent introduction to the country, and covers the important history, a bit of politics and two important paragraphs summarizing the economic aspects:

One to show general economics about the country and the other about its major industries. Details are written at each designated sections after the intro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.36.188.10 (talk) 22:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Is this really encyclopedia article?

I mean really, I went to this page because my family is deciding whether to travel to South Korea for the summer and I was interested in the culture. I have since also went on to WikiTravel instead. This is one of the few encyclopedia articles about a country that hardly even seems like an encyclopedia article at all! I should also mention that I am a CHINESE born in Canada in case any of the Japanese/Koreans here start hating me.

I just edited: "In the 1950s, South Korea was one of the poorest countries in Asia.[7] At the end of World War II, the country inherited a colonial economic system designed solely for Japan's *exploitative* needs." NPOV PLEASE. You don't put your own little subjective descriptions. Even the wiki article on IRAQ is not filled with subjective nonsense.

Also, I'm wondering if it is really necessary to put a blurb about South Korea's entertainment industry in the INTRODUCTION. I think it should be included in the article... but in the introduction? That's like talking about hockey in the "Canada" wiki page or Hollywood in the United States article. Might as well mention Starcraft in the introduction as well then.

Last, there are other way too subjective words and strange content in the introduction. "South Korea has been a VIBRANT multi-party democracy for two decades."; "UNIQUE cuisine" "South Korea is the largest shipbuilder in the world in terms of tonnage." Honestly, a 5-party system is vibrant? Does anyone really care if South Korea is the largest shipbuilder in the world (whatever that means- it's a highly ambiguous phrase)? I honestly cannot tell if some proud Koreans wrote this article or if the South Korean's government's personal propaganda team wrote it.

I suggest the people editing this article take note of proper "country" articles like Canada, United States, Russia, France, etc.EvolutionaryCreationist 22:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree this article is innacurate and reads like propoganda. Bigblair 10:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I certainly agree with everything you say there, except maybe the bit about ship building. Ship building may seem like a kind of obscure topic, but it's kind of more indicative of a country's overall heavy industry abilities. Serious heavy equipment for things like nuclear power plants and a whole host of industries will almost always have to be made in shipyards. It's pretty significant for a nation the size of S. Korea to have such a title, and can probably give them a competitive edge in certain industrial exports dispropoxrtionate of their size. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the ship building, actually there are people who actually cares about this kind of information. An encyclopedia article about a country should list an indication of a heavy industry ability, and ship building is definitely a part of it. 69.144.184.243 07:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Infrastructure

Quote:uch of the country's infrastructure was destroyed during the Korean War that followed in 1950-1953.[citation needed] After the war, South Korea became heavily dependent on U.S. aid.[3]"

This is incorrect. In fact, infastructure actually INCREASED during the war, as infastructure frequently does during conflict. The American military paved South Korea. We created I think it is Highway 6, the largest highway in korea, for example.

Um, no you didn't. Pres. Park Chung Hee did when he modernized/industirialized Korea. And roads were built more, but everything else got destroyed.

Flag

According to "Flags of the World" (ISBN 0-517-07316-1), red, white, and blue are the traditional Korean flag colors at least since the 19th century. The yin-yang has "its customary Buddhist fusion-of-opposites meaning"; the white background represents purity, and the four black trigrams represent simultaneously the four seasons, the four cardinal directions, and sky/heaven, moon, earth, and sun. --Brion O_O

Buddhist?? As what you have learned, Yin-Yang is a Taoist term rather than Buddhist. Actually, all patterns on the South Korean flag are Taoist contents rather than Buddhist. Including the Taichi pattern (Yin-Yang) and the four Gwa out of the Taoist eight Gua (Ba Gua) on the flag. The flag is sooo fricken sweet!!!

Romanization of Korean

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)#Romanization for all spelling enquiries about Romanising the Korean language

East Sea vs. Sea of Japan

For the usage of "East Sea" and "Sea of Japan" in Korean articles see here:

• Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)#Sea of Japan (East Sea)
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style
• Sea of Japan naming dispute

Religious composition

In the article it says

Christianity (31.7%) and Buddhism (23.9%) comprise South Korea's two dominant religions.

but later we have

Other religions comprise about 9.4 percent of the population.

Now according to my math that totals 65 percent. So what about the remaining 35 percent? Cheers, Io 13:15, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The remaining 35% are probably atheist; I noticed that there wasn't an atheist category, so that's probably it. Either that or the Unification Church just got bigger :p FvNK 01:35, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, only 50.7% of the Korean population are religious. Data of 1995

Christian 26.3%   (Protestant 19.7% and Roman Catholic 6.6%)
Buddhist  23.2%
Confucian  0.5%
Wonbulgyo  0.2%
Cheondogyo 0.1%
Other      0.4%
===============
Total     50.7%

Looks to me like the figures are not correct anyway (I can't imagine "other" fluctuating from 9.4% to 0.4% in a few years... --dfrki 13:44, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Religion section is currently a mess. Where do these figures come from? Why are they unreliable? -- Visviva 13:49, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I think my edition is as close as it gets when it comes to statistics on religion, based on data from Korea National Statistical Office. [2] Still, if anyone can tidy up these paragraphs, that would be better. noirum 15:56, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

My experience leads me to believe that a majority of the population is either atheist or agnostic. The monkeyhate 12:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, everybody's really pretty much confucian, in my experience. Also, Wonbulgyo means "Original Buddhism". Cheondogyo is, IIRC, the final remnants of the Dong Hak movement. --Dan 17:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Wonbulgyo doesn't mean Original Buddhism; won(圓) means circle, which probably represents a state of perfection. Also, most Koreans take Confucianism as a way of life, not as a kind of religion. -- noirum 20:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. I always thought that was original - sort of a return to the religion's roots. In any event, it is a branch of buddhism. Whether confucianism is a religion or not has been debated forever, but if the government's going to count it as one, then they should count all the practitioners. Makes you wonder what their survey questions look like. Shouldn't your username be Mooirum, or maybe Kongirum? ;-) --Dan 20:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The numbers simply mean just a few people profess themselves as confucianists. Although they do practice many kinds of ceremonies that were originated from Confucianism, ordinary Koreans will decline to have themselves classfied as confucianists. Plus, you have no clue how my username is made up of;-) -- noirum 21:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm joking with you about your username, guy, don't take offense. When you say things like "you have no idea", it tends to come across as angry. Are you thinking I don't speak Korean? --Dan 21:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

If I sounded angry, that's entirely my fault: I'm not. I checked your userpage too. Incredible you've been in Hwasun, I grew up in Gwangju, by the way:) -- noirum 21:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Aaaeeeggoooo, pangopsuraoo, eeng! Kwangju nom eegooma! Those were the days! You're right, most Koreans will deny being official confucianists - they nevertheless follow the philosophy, usually without realizing it. Think how important the five relations are, for instance. I think it comes down to a question of what is a relgion. To most westerners, it has to include some sort of belief in god or gods, or it isn't religion. But to quote the Dalai Lama (and probably not exactly), "Some people need that central authority figure in their faith, that they can point to and say 'this is the creator'. And others do not need that", which I suppose by some standards makes the Dalai Lama an atheist. Heheh. Did you know he lived in Korea for a while not long after he was exiled? He stayed at my wife's college dorm. --Dan 21:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The purpose of survey is to classify the realities out there into measurable numbers and figures, so it's no wonder the numbers don't carry beliefs and practices beneath the superficial results. Really, if we do count the numbers following the way the Dalai Lama dictates, probably half of the Christians in Korea will be classified as "shamanists," you know. Anyway, the thing about the Dalai Lama is unbelievable, if your wife is correct. Possibly the government didn't bother with the Chinese then. -- noirum 22:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Under "Demographics", it says 8.6 million are Christian, 5.1 million are Catholic. Last time I checked, Catholics were still Christians, so I take that the first number should be "Protestants"? Varana 12:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Im no expert on demographics but that 8.6 million christians could be reffering to all christians, catholic and protestant together, and the second number telling that there are simply 5.1 million catholics in that number, but mentions them individually as they are the majority majority, therefore there should be 3.5 million protestants and obviously a very small number of orthodox. If this is the case it may be better to change this so it mentions that there are 3.5 million christians not belonging to the catholic faith to avoid confusion, or to mention each minority respectively.-------R.A

Economy

I updated the South Korean GDP as per the IMF 2006 list. That list can be found at: [3] -Doug Johnson

How could South Korea enter the 'trillion dollar club of world economies' in 2004 if its GDP in this year is 720,772 million dollars? (List of countries by GDP (nominal)) --no direct evidence. Actually, S. Korea entered the trillion dollar club : links: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ks.html

The same happens with the data on the top of the page (NO):

GDP - Total (2005 est.)- $1.099 trillion in the List of countries by GDP (nominal) using data from 2005 its $0.72 trillion. You use purchasing power parity values, which I think is not the right way. At least you have to mention it! -Hey, yo(u), I really disagree with your thinkings! How about China and Japan and India? They are also doing rapid economic growth! Your reasons do not make sense! Also, there are a lots of different datas. But, usually, the country uses the official determination of either the bank of that country or of credit organization such as World Bank, Moody's.

GDP/head - $22,543 in the List of countries by GDP (nominal) its 14,784!

You really should say if you use PPP or nominal values. As for example in People's Republic of China.

... as nobody answered, I felt free to change the above mentioned points.

• The GDP per capita has the old rank (33), which is probably pre-update. I'm not sure what's correct, or how to go about fixing that. Also, shouldn't it include the year it was relevant to? ehudshapira 23:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

rok

why is the title of this article south korea rather than republic of korea? if their official name is the republic of korea.

isn't this a valid point? does anyone object?Appleby 18:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd rather see it under ROK, but Wiki seems to have a policy of using the most common English name for articles. Sometimes, though, using "official" names is better. An example of an article using the official, not the most common, name is Mighty Ducks of Anaheim. The most common name for that team is Anaheim Mighty Ducks, but as you can see, the official one is being used. So far, no one has actually objected to the "move" that you have suggested, so if you want, I suggest you try moving the page and see what kind of response you get. Who knows, you might get a backlash or you might get support. But this does draw a question into play that must be answered before a move takes place. In other articles related to the Koreas (we would have to move North Korea if we were to move south Korea), do we leave the links at South Korea and North Korea or do we go around changing the links to Republic of Korea and Democratic People's Republic of Korea? Just some food for thought. Masterhatch 04:14, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Here's an old discussion on the name of this article: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Korean)#Republic of Korea vs. slang/inaccurate South Korea. According to that discussion, South Korea is used because of Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Masterhatch 04:52, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

thanks for the reference. looks like there was never much of a discussion. the anonymous original suggestion was about the article title; the body should use the familiar name first, then a parenthetical to the official or alternate names, then subsequently familiar name. i think this would be consistent with wiki style policy.

germany, russia, mexico, etc are all under the common names, but these refer to a historic/geographic entity and the current polity together. but "korea," the former, has its own article, and "south korea", the latter, is completely identified by "republic of korea". same reason there are the separate entries for china & prc (under official name).

with referral webpages, there is absolutely no inconvenience or confusion, you type "south korea," you get the page about south korea, it is identified with the proper official title & you go on reading the text with the familiar shorthand name.

current state isn't really "wrong" but does look unprofessional & somewhat illogical. i'd be interested in hearing more pro/con arguments.Appleby 06:12, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

There is no "South Korea". This is only a term used for convenience. As you can see, the West Germany article is minimal and China and Taiwan refer to the People's Republic of China and Republic of China articles. I think this article should be renamed Republic of Korea and any searches for South Korea should be redirected to it, not vice versa.--Sir Edgar 00:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

---convenience shouldnt be an excuse. if you look at ireland it is listed as the republic of ireland. its kinda similar to korea, divided into north and south. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Republic_of_Ireland

Also 대한민국 means the Greater Republic of Korea, and refers to both north and south Korea, which under the south Korean constitution are both part of the same country. Remember the two are still technically at war, and although north Koreans don't recognize the term 대한민국, it is not the name for just the southern part of Korea, just as 조선 is not the name for just the north.Bigblair

What Percent of S. Korea Speaks English?

How prevalent is english? If I picked an 18yr old, a 30 yr old, and a 50yr old at random from the S. Korean population, what are the odds they'd speak english? Exact numbers nice, but just a general guess will suffice. Alecmconroy 06:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

not to be flippant, but depends on what you mean by "speaks english." most would know numbers & "yes/no," but holding a elementary school-level conversation, probably less than 20% of 18 yr olds (a majority of them could read a young teen novel, slowly). of 30 & 50 yr olds, my gut feeling is less than 5% & 2%, especially if you sampled the whole country, not just big cities.Appleby 06:35, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

I am a South Korean and many people try to learn English. 12yr old kids try to get (iBT)TOEFL 115 (like me). And the answer is If you choose 18 yr old man, I think 70-80%will know how to speak Basic english. 30 yr old man, well I think it is the same, a little lower 60-70% and if you choose 50 year old, 40-50% I think. And If you ask an old man(65 and over) I think less than 2% can speak english.

This issue branches off the question you asked, but this is a growing problem in Korea. Fanatical Korean parents pound their kids' brains with english, english, english, actually succeed in making kids' knowledge of the English language much larger than that of Korean. It is an utter shame. This was debated in Chosun Ilbo, Korea's top newspaper.Oyo321 15:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

latest revert

sorry, looks like in the confusion of a different revert war with militant, i reverted this article 4 times. the section seems pretty obviously pov, either unsourced or sourced to japan pov, ungrammatical, & overall apologist in tone. if anyone other than militant wants to undo my 4th revert, please go ahead, i'd be glad to continue discussion here before further reverts. funny how newly registered militant immediately starts a volley of japan pov edits, including at Korean-Japanese disputes, but is intimately familiar with 3rr & article move & redirect procedures. Appleby 07:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Renaming?

The article should be called Republic of Korea, with South_Korea redirecting to it, not vice versa. The article for NK should be Democratic People's Republic of Korea, with North_Korea redirecting to it. Can someone take care of this? 69.118.247.101 20:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't. See Wikipedia:Use common names. -- Visviva 05:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

deletion of Korea Scout Association from South Korea

+ Why was Korea Scout Association removed from South Korea? It is related, it is not vandalism, no reason was given as to it was removed. Chris 03:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't do it, but I'd guess it's because it is no more related to South Korea than many other articles contained in the many subcategories of Category:South Korea. This is why we have the List of Korea-related topics, to which the KSA article has been added. -- Visviva 03:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

It's part of the culture of the country and should go there. I see massive sets of reverts in the history of this article. Unless you form a South Korea WikiProject, these self-appointed guardians have no right to repeatedly revert edits--it is not in the Wiki spirit. And if you do revert, you should provide an explanation. If you form a project, you could claim it's in the scheme of the project to do so, otherwise; you are just another Wikipeidian. Rlevse 23:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I have no doubt that it is part of South Korean culture. So are the topics of all of the articles in Category:Korean culture, and many more besides. Should we add them too? -- Visviva 07:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and for my part, I didn't revert; I removed a large number of other inappropriate links. I see that the external links section needs some work too. -- Visviva 07:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I have little or no knowledge of a Korean Boy Scout Association, nor must it be very popular, because as I have mentioned, have never seen a single poster, ad, or banner revering a Korean Scout Association. I will not make any changes, but I highly support the insertion of this topic by a person more learned in that scope. Oyo321 15:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

No, this should not be included in the article. Sure, it's related, but it holds little importance as part of the article. 69.144.184.243 07:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

South Korea relationship with United States

From South Korea: Foreign relations: "Koreans also have some bad relations with the United States, its main ally, mainly due to abuse by soldiers at American bases and also regarding aggressive militarism over the war in Iraq."

bad relations? what is this? too vague, shallow and biased.

Well there is the famous case of the GIs who ran over and killed (2?) School girls. Also there is a large Anit-Americanism (stemming from the US support of the military dictatorships and the percieved permission that went towards the Kwangju uprising) movement in Korea. Also (from living in Seoul as a foreigner perspective) the GIs and certain English Teachers can be rather uncaring to the more conservative Korean culture and customs, especially when in clubs or bars. Many Koreans are also upset that Korea has sent troops to Iraq in a war that they dont feel they should have any part in. And the recent attempts by the US government to gain access to the rice market in Korea as well. All of these things add up to a general anti-americanism at a cultural level but at a Political level I do not think this is the case. Rufusde 16:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I concur. --Nissi Kim 20:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

It's a highly nuanced situation. There are certainly Koreans who think a strong relationship with the US is helpful and protective, while others feel strongly that the US is exploitative and has only its own interests at heart. Even among those who would prefer to distance the US some, like Noh Moohyun, it's a very tricky dance. --Dan 20:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

"Yankee go home." A familiar rally cry for Koreans. I myself am Korean, and I hate the fact that America supports South Korea, and that the United States was there, defending South Korea even when no help was needed. The reason why Korea was split into South and North Korea is because of America. America and the Soviet Union fought over Korea and therefore, the country was caused to split into two. Families were seperated and never got to see each other again. When Russia and the US first liberated Korea from Japan, Koreans could travel freely from north to south and south to north. The reason Korea is split in two is because the Chinese Communists entered and extended a war that was basically over, and the US was war weary and sued for peace. You can thank China for separating the Korean people. If they hadn't entered the war, the peninsula would have been unified. Bigblair 10:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

America is merely defending Korea for a diplomatic reason, to keep its own sphere of influence by stunting the pervasion of communism. But there are those American casualties. Americans who didn't even know what they were fighting for, dying at the hands of Chinese and NPRK.

Today's young generation is true to believe America to be its enemy. If America cuts its connection with South Korea, it will be a happy day for many. North and South Korea may once again join and therefore, the rejoined Korea will have the world's second highest military forces combined with North Korea's weapons.

And for the infamous incident of and US armour running over, yes, two schoolgirls was highly exaggerated. Can you imagine how restricted an armour's crew's vision can be? It was a march through a Korean street. Why were Korean schoolgirls in the way? It was America's fault. all of it! thats what i believe and no one can change my thoughts! God bless Korea. User:blackshadowsxiii 15:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Im not korean so I can't realy comment acurately on what Korean people feel, but waht the guy just above me said seems a little extreme. I think that many Koreans dislike the fact that 50 years ago America drew them into awar that ultimately used south korea as an American pawn and NK as a soviet/chinese pawn simply because the two neevr wished to fight each other directly, many Koreans also want unification or at least a more independent government. However at the same time I think many Koreans also understand that American backing since the Korean war and American support have been neccessary, and that if it had to be a choice between supporting the communists like the North (just look a tthe stae it is in now) and supporting the Americans, the later has seemed to have paid off, however a lot of Koreans seem also to wish t liberate themselves from following a set American foreign policy. I do not however, think that putting the south under the control of the strange facist/communist government of north Korea (a kind of paradox) is the awnser to Korea's unfication problems, and that having nuclear weapons and a huge army makes everything better, and I would suggest a lot of Koreans feel the same.

---

R.A

User:Kunosoke 's recent edits regarding Foreign Relations of South Korea

I've decided to erase Kunosoke's edits regarding SK foreign relations. It was poorly termed, POV, and false.

The South Korea-Japan relation became intimate by Kim Dae-jung. (Japanese culture openness policy etc)　However, the South Korea-Japan relation is returned by Roh Moo-hyun in the age of "Apology and compensation".[4]

Not only was this excerpt poorly termed, there is no mention of President "Roh-Moo Hyun" returning Korea-Japan relation to age of "apology and compensation." He simply reprimanded for ambassador Takano's statements regarding Liancourt Rocks, and said that he understood Japanese people's anger on NK abductions of Japanese citizens, but to remember the fain pelt by Koreans during Japanese colonial rule of Korea.

"Touching on the issue of Japanese citizens allegedly abducted by North Korea, Roh expressed understanding of the Japanese people's anger. "But I call on the Japanese to understand the sufferings of Korean people forced to serve as comfort women and laborers during the colonial period,' he said. "

"President Roh stressed the need for the two nations to be reborn as close neighbors based on sincerity in a bid to jointly open an era of Northeast Asia, noting this year marks the 40th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries."

Commision on Human Rights clarified an intimacy in North Korea and a diplomatic war to Japan in South Korea with South Korea. 2005/04/07､South Korea united with North Korea and did the complaint to the history education of Japan. [5]

Again, poorly worded, and the reference this time is a Political cartoon. The caption in itself has nothing to do with SK working with NK. It just shows Presidedent Roh Moo Hyun saying "it is unfortunate to be living near Japan". Again, it's not his direct quote, rather a "Political Cartoon".

South Korea is politically conflicting with Japan after the president Roh Moo-hyun declares a diplomatic war against Japan in 2005.[6]

This is the most Ridiculous claim I've heard. First of all, President Roh Moo-hyun never DECLARED a diplomatic war to Japan. See this exact quote from his address.

"These tasks will not be easy to achieve. It is not only a tough but also uncomfortable thing to try to find fault with and point fingers at others. The two countries may confront each other more often than they did. It could also be very embarrassing to quarrel with each other for the whole world to see.

There could be a tough diplomatic war. And that may adversely affect exchanges in economic, social, cultural and various other sectors, especially causing concern about possible economic difficulties."

President Roh-Moo Hyun declares a diplomatic war? Oh really? That was a deliberate twist of his quote to seem like he "declared war" on Japan.

For Goguryeo part, this is a quote from Talk:Goguryeo

"But China in April took what is viewed as an apparent attempt to claim the kingdom wholly as its own, abruptly declaring it as part of its history and deleting references to Goguryeo as part of Korea from its Web site.

"The move followed a series of similar actions by Chinese academic and media organizations to claim sovereignty of the kingdom, which ruled the upper part of the Korean Peninsula and what today is Manchuria in China from 37 B.C. to A.D. 668."

"Then, on Thursday it was discovered that China has now deleted from its Foreign Ministry Web site its entire section on Korea's history up until 1948, when South Korea was formally established."

Deiaemeth 19:52, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• I agree that our friend Kunosoke could do with some help in style and developing a more NPOV style, but I think his Posts are in good faith, so let's try to build on them rather than revert them wholesale. Deiaemeth - I thought some of the stuff you'd done in this section was on the mark - please could you augment my rather amateurish revision of Kunosoke's latest efforts. Thanks to you both Hongshi 23:53, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't see any problems with your edits, as your edits seem to be NPOV and factually accurate. I rv'd user:Kamosuke's edits because he boldly inserted his brazen POV views (suggesting "south korea does not care about north korea human rights), deliberate misinterpretation of sources (citing UNCHR resolution as un acknowledge korea declare diplomatic war on japan), factual inaccuracy (claiming there no diplomatic relationships between china and korea!!!), etc, etc. If he wishes to contribute constructively to any Korea-related articles, or any articles, his edits will be welcomed. But as you can see in the page (and other Korea-related articles) history, his edits have been deemed unsuitable and reverted by many other editors. Deiaemeth 00:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Deiaemet Simply, if you want to see only the praise article on South Korea, you should not use Wiki. And, you must stop a wrong explanation. Simply, Roh President is declaring "Apology and compensation to Japan" and "Diplomatic war to Japan". (Official announcement of South Korea government that I quoted. )And, because Japan had not agreed to his demand, Roh President discontinued the promise to do the summit regularly to Japanese Prime Minister. You are tedious in the speech of the speech. The reason is that your personal insistence is spoken long. Could you bring your insistence together within 300 characters --Kamosuke 12:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Contemporary Culture

Can I ask someone with more knowledge about Korean culture than me to please take a look at Contemporary culture of South Korea? PhatJew 20:29, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, PhatJew. I can't claim to be any kind of Korea expert, but I lived there a few years, dabble in the language, have been happily Korean-married going on 12 years, and go back to visit the in-laws and the country every other year.

The article looks good at first glance, if a little list-ish. Some sort of historical overview-statement or framework, similar to the one that was recently deleted, without the editorializing POV, may be appropriate. I did a little touch-up on the Karaoke section.

I'm a Wiki-newbie, and have been working on the Cinema of Korea article off & on for a little while. I had a lot of fun writing a biographical sketch of Na Woon-gyu, and I'll keep Contemporary culture of South Korea in mind and add whatever I can to as time allows.

Rizzleboffin 22:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC) Rizzleboffin

Great! I remember having a set of biographies of famous people in Korean (위인전), and I read about Na Woon-gyu and how he dedicated his life to cinmatography. It's good to see more editors working on Korea-related articles, as some materials definitely need some expansion. Deiaemeth 23:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Deiaemeth. I don't think it's mentioned in the Na Woon-gyu article... maybe in the article on his film, Arirang... but a Japanese film collector who died last year may have had copies of some of Na's films. Since Na Woon-gyu's films are all presently presumed lost, it would be wonderful if one is rediscovered. As a lover of both silent film and Asian film, I am hoping we will be able to see one of Na Woon-gyu's films some day.

Rizzleboffin 18:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

names

i may be biased because i contributed a lot to Names of Korea, but i think it would be helpful to have a link to that article near the top of this article. it would be consistent with not only Korea and North Korea, but with most other country articles to explain the country's name in the lead. WP:WPC: "If the etymology of a country's name is too long to explain in the lead section, split it out into a separate section (titled "Name" or similar)." i'm not wedded to the previous wording specifically, but i would like to see a bit more info on the name at the top. Appleby 18:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The introduction must be kept as easy-to-read as possible. One issue that I would like to bring up is that there are articles entitled "People's Republic of China" and "Republic of China", but not "Republic of Korea" and "Democratic People's Republic of Korea". Instead, we have the unofficial "South Korea" and "North Korea". I really think South Korea should redirect to Republic of Korea, not vice-versa. In other words, this article should be entitled "Republic of Korea".--Sir Edgar 02:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Peter Yu?

I removed the sentence below, because I cannot find any trace of a "famous South Korean diplomat" by this name (유근우? or maybe 유건우?). It might just be a matter of spelling -- if anyone can verify this content, please feel free to return it to the article.

Famous South Korean diplomat Peter Yu (Yu Keun-woo in Korean), once said, "The change of the peninsula to simplified characterisation played a central role in converting the power structure and development of future generations."

Cheers, -- Visviva 14:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

new Portal:Korea

User:Visviva has worked hard to create a brand new Portal:Korea. Please take a look & contribute if you can. I think the new Template:Korea topics has the potential to be a more useful reference tool than categories or lists, if editors continue to expand and update it. It's also a good reminder for help & requests on ye olde notice board. Hopefully, this will help revive some activity all around. Appleby 21:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion for korea

Suggesting we add a section about major transportation systems.

Cb vicious 15:44, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

We do already have Transportation in South Korea, which could use some work BTW. I would personally prefer not to add any more sections to this article, which is already 36 KB large. However, perhaps we could add a paragraph on this subject in the "Economy" section? -- Visviva 23:26, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. Lets get that together then? --Cb vicious 15:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

National motto

I reverted the change of the national motto to "역동적인 한국 / (Progressing Korea)" because I can't find any evidence that this has become the country's official motto. Also, I think it's generally translated "Dynamic Korea," but that's neither here nor there. -- Visviva 23:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

In fact, I'm hard pressed to find any evidence that Hongik In-gan is the national motto either, although it was the "foundational concept" (건국이념) of the Republic. Does the ROK even have a national motto? If so, why do no government websites seem to mention it? -- Visviva 23:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

i've wondered about that myself. a while back, trying to find a good translation for hongik ingan, i couldn't confirm that it was a "national motto" either. i'd personally be ok with hongik ingan as a similar substitute, or with "none". Appleby 02:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have a reference for the one currently listed, "Broadly bring benefit to humanity"? A Google search only yields Wikipedia mirrors. Pruneau^talk 00:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

References

I respect the need for the article to be readable, but that does *not* trump the need to cite sources. Reformatting references would be acceptable. Removing them in bulk is very uncool. Also note that peer review noted the inadequacy of the article's prior references. I don't have the time right now to go through all of the edits that have been made and restore this content without losing new content. Please restore the footnotes or provide some policy-based reason for removing them. Thanks! -- Visviva 04:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

All the facts on there are common knowledge that anyone can dig up when researching South Korea on the Internet. I don't know what needs to be proven. Why is this article under more scrutiny than others? For example, I've worked on the Japan article extensively without having to put references on every other single sentence. If you insist on making this article appear the way it currently is (looking like a research paper still in progress), then I refuse to help improve it. Make it readable to visitors to Wikipedia!--Sir Edgar 23:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, here's the deal. If you are going to put assertions of fact into an article, they need to come from a reliable source. Saying that something is "common knowledge that anyone can dig up" does not cut it. This is per Wikipedia:Verifiability, which is an absolutely immovable policy. Removing references for non-trivial information (for example "the economy grew at 8.6%"), as you did, would meet many editors' definition of vandalism.

In terms of style, I gratefully welcome your efforts. I am well aware that the previous version left much to be desired (as the current one still does). In fact, working on the style had been on my to-do list for some time. Thank you for attempting to fix it. The underlying problem may be that there are still too many details (which call for detailed citations) in the article. This is always a difficult balance; even summary sections need illustrative details, and those details need to be cited.

I am personally trying to hold this article to the highest possible standard, because I hope that it will become a featured article in the near future. Adding unreferenced and POV assertions ("this solid economy"), and removing information about one of the most notable aspects of South Korea today (its labor climate) does not aid this process. But once again, I thank you for your efforts at improving the article's style. Your intentions are appreciated. -- Visviva 13:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

i would agree the notes are slightly excessive in demographics, economy, & culture sections. these are supposed to be summaries, with the specific content in the daughter articles. as an aside, i personally think these ref notes style is a bit of a hassle for new editors to learn, slowing down contributions, make copying (for example, to a daughter article) more cumbersome, and even just reading the citations a little less intuitive (no longer visible by mouse hover or while section editing). i guess they are more professional, but still a barrier to an "encyclopedia anyone can edit," imho, not that i can do anything about it.Appleby 00:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to move details to the daughter articles as you see fit; but bear in mind that an unreferenced summary is also in danger of being original research. I believe that there is now an automated process for converting the ref/notes templates to cite.php format. Cite.php solves most of the back-end problems with the ref/notes format, since the notes lie directly in the text which they support. (I would have converted it manually, but that would involve some hours of tedious work). Converting to cite.php doesn't solve any of the front-end ugliness issues, however. --Visviva 13:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I found this page by using Cyde's Wikirefs tool. I converted this article, as well as the History and Economy of South Korea articles. Happy editing, Mysekurity ^[m!] 22:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Visvisa, I did a thorough editing of the history and economic sections. If I deleted something that you feel is an integral part of the section, please speak up. But I had no intention of "vandalism". The "solid economy" description comes from the CIA country report on South Korea.

I think clarification of facts should be in the Discussion section. Compare the readability of this article to others. I understand that there was a lot of work done in referencing facts and I am sure that much of it was because of people challenging their validity. However, for the average reader of this article, the footnotes are excessive. Can we please leave out most footnotes and just keep the more obscure and likely-to-be-questioned ones? Appearance and readability are half of an article.--Sir Edgar 23:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Military and Foreign relations

I think the military and foreign relations parts should be seperated, with more info added on Military part. Right now, there are only two sentences describing military of Korea - that does not do the Korean military justice! The paragraph on Military should be how it came into effect (expansion after Korean war), number of personnels, history of Peacekeeping operatives, etc.Deiaemeth 04:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

We do have a size issue here; the article already weighs in at 39K. -- Visviva 05:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, many other articles on countries tend to go over 50K ... I guess there is just too much info to incorporate. If the size is the problem, I guess the current state is good enough. :) Deiaemeth 05:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The introduction looks terrible.

It does not read like a country article. I do not agree with recent edits at all.--Sir Edgar 05:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? Many recent edits were yours. :-) -- Visviva 11:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Fabrication of the history----No nation called Korea existed from 1910-1945. Why do the Koreans tell a lie like breathing?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.132.88.221 (talk)

We might as well ask why you systematically engage in personal attacks and fail to assume good faith. We might also ask why you assume that all edits to this article (aside from yours) were made by Koreans. Regarding your specific complaint, the current form of the sentence was incorrect. On the other hand, it is true that Korea was united as a single entity from 935 to 1945. Korea was not a country from 1910 to 1945, but it was nonetheless united. -- Visviva 11:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The incorrect sentence should be accurate,so I re-wrote it.(Korea was just a province rather than entity during 1910-1945.Because the word "entity " seems to imply Korea as a distict existence from Japan. Could Korea at that time establish an independent stand from the Japansese rule?)But someone reverted again.The reason why I assume the reversion was made by Korean is derived from the fact that the participants in the discussion on the Korean-related topics are clearly the Korean-side.From another viewpoint, the articles or the discussion chracterise phobia against or disgrace to Japan.(I really enjoyed the discussion on the dipute on the name of "SEA of JAPAN", the activitives of the Korean are just come from the ambition to delete "Japan " from the name of the SEA. What the Koreans truly desire to change into "SEA of KOREA!!! "EAST SEA" is just a means to delete "Japan "!!!) The race which does such kind things can receive benefits is the Korean or the Chinese....But the Chinese should be excluded.Because the benefits of the Chinese will not appear if participating in the Korean-related topics.(Before that, the Chinese may take a different stand against Korea on the entity itself or the history from the Korean's viewpoint....) Do not eliminate other viewpoints under the name of "good faith".

As a non-Korean with ties to both Korea and Japan, 211.132.88.219, let me just say I see no sense in your argument. Was Korea divided or unified during the 1910-1945 occupation? I've never heard that it was divided until after the occupation. End of discussion, right? Rizzleboffin 23:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Firstly I would like to say, I hesitate to believe a person calling him/herself non-Korean in Japan-korean related topics.Because Koreans tend to pretend neutral by borrowing a name of another country,aiming at the support for the Korea in the vitual or the real world.Secondly,your remark "the 1910-1945 OCCUPATION" may not be appropriate.Because,the word "occupation" gives indirectly what was all done in the place to be occupied to negative image. Even during 1920s-1930s, the average of GDP is 4.1% and that of GDE is 4.24% in Korea.(at that time the 1% growth in the Europe,3% in Japan and the U.S.),according to Prof.Lee of the National Seoul University .See the source(if you can read the Japanese. the Korean version may be available. ).http://japanese.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2004/03/03/20040303000075.html]Thirdly, your question is out of the point that I would like to focus upon.It's nonsence.And finally, what I have been trying to point out in Japan, Korea, and Japan-Korea related topics of Wikipedia is that the Koreans have always been trying to improve INAPPROPRIATELY the image of Korea and to disgrace Japan at the same time by fabricating the truth or re-creating the history.Of course, the activites of improving bad images of Korea is acceptable. But the way of Korean participants here or the VANK is not. What the Koreans should do to improve the images is not writing something in the net or sending huge amount of emails somewhere. Trilozengy

Trilozengy, your comments are not only rude, but racist and offensive. They are also unproven accusations. I think you should refrain from making such statements. All it does is reflect poorly upon your character.--Sir Edgar 04:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

One thing I've learned about people, Sir Edgar, is never trust someone who assumes everyone else is a liar. Also, it is impossible to have a rational conversation with such a person, and a waste of time to even attempt one. -- Rizzleboffin 20:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I can only agree with your remark "it is impossible to have a rational conversation with such a person, and a waste of time to even attempt one". Probably that's what all people on the earth want to say to persons on,from or,close-relationship with a nation on a certain penisula in Asia.(Mmm...The World Cup Germany may remind us of the nation.....) Most mysterious is it that a person calling him/herself no-relationship with the nation does enjoy so many movies produced there that the world does not care!!! Trilozengy

This is a typical racist remark that many Japanese often make. Whenever critical comments are made about Japan, someone always says, "I knew it was a Korean!" Or if a crime is committed, "It had to be a foreigner!" Just pathetic and sad. You sound like a total baby.

A lot of people like Korean movies, Trilozengy. Does that make them a bad Korean? Many are foreigners, often Westerners. Please stop the racist remarks or I will be forced to report you to admin. Stick to the discussion.--Sir Edgar 04:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Very very quick response,Sir Edgar.firstly ,advantages and disadvantages give energy to participation.In the dispute between Japan and Korea, what benefits can give to the outsiders?It is easily understood when taking an example of the dispute on the history between two neibouring nations in Africa for the Koreans.For the outsiders, the dispute between Japan and Korea is out of curiosity.It is natural to assume the participants here are the Japanese or the Korean.Secondly, are Korean movies popular? The number of DVD dealt in Amazon.com is not so many, however you remark "a lot of people like Korean movies" .Tell me why. Trilozengy

It's easier to labell rude ,racist or offensive on comments you Koreans want to avert than to refute. That's a loser's way. By the way, why are you Koreans in Wikipedia so free to revert articles or adding comments for Korea? Are you professional Wikipedia participants directly or indirectly hired by your government? VANK is well-known connected to the government.....Trilozengy

I know I'm going to regret responding to you, Trilozengy, as it seems like it would be a waste of time. But why do you assume everyone is: 1. Korean 2. from VANK 3. agents for the Korean government? Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Unless you are going to contribute to the discussion and use reasoning and facts without insulting other Wikipedians or making baseless accusations, I think everyone (including me) will ignore you. Please try to change your behavior and act civil. There is no need to be emotional and rude in every post. I think you should apologize to Rizzleboffin and others you have offended here.--Sir Edgar 02:41, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

To reply your questions,I would like to answer firstly as the common to the three questions:The questions themselves you made imply your connection to Korea or the VANK. If you have no relationship with Korea or the VANK, you can easily ignore my assumption. But the questions have led to show you are very sensitive to it.Why are you so sensitive?Moving to each question,for the q.1,fortunately or unfortunately ,the image of or the evaluation against the Korea in the world has been worse.(The World Cup 2002 tells the world what the Korea is,for examle.)The image or the evaluation will not take stand for the Korea. But,in Wikipedia,the description in Japan or Korea,or Japan-Korea related topics are clearly Korean-sided,and at the same time,disgracing Japan.There is a gap between what appears in the real world and that in Wikimadeia. Therefore,it easily arrives at an assumption that the Korean-sided description was all written by the Korean(including natualised citizens from Korea).For the q.2, very very quick and close-tied response by the frequenters to commnets or modification the Koreans want to erase.Only regular monitor and close-tied activities do make it possible. In my case, one or two hours later after I wrote here,Sir Edgar made a response. For the q.3,what is an economic benefit of the "VOLUNTARY NETWORK" if it succeeded to change the name of sea or to brainwash the world on the sovereignty of the tiny two islands in the SEA OF JAPAN? Is the VANK a Korean fishermens' network? Show the details about the VANK,for example ,the economic source of running the network itself,or of the TV or newspapers ads on EAST SEA(probably the ads costed very high),and the reasons why you can show the details if the VANK is not connected to the government.Trilozengy

Visviva, I'm working on the introduction. It will take time. I am, however, focusing my attention on Korea-related articles now and less on the Japan-related ones.--Sir Edgar 23:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I must have not been paying attention, but where did all the references go? I found a citation for "most wired country, South Korea," I believe it had a "citation needed" in the article. [7]. Is it even needed anymore? Tortfeasor 22:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is, per core Wikipedia policy, which some people seem to be ignorant of even though notices are posted at the bottom of every edit screen. I'm afraid I don't have the time or energy for to keep reverting the ridiculous changes that are being made to this article, but any efforts anyone can make are much appreciated.

In any case, I would question whether that source is reliable, given the findings of the IPSOS survey this year. That article doesn't clarify the source of its information, but one suspects it is somewhat out of date. -- Visviva 07:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I see that the section which discussed the most-wired claim was blanked. I have restored it (see below). -- Visviva 08:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Rizzleboffin has fabricated the history of Korea in the article of the introduction. No country called Korea existed during 1910-1945, Rizzleboffin has reverted into the phrase"it was a single country called Korea until 1945".To be correct and neutral, I erased the phrase " until 1945" and added "before".Rizzleboffin ,show the evidence that Korea was an independent country from Japan.Before that, I would like to point out that the Treaty between Japan and Korea in 1910 was valid with the signature of the complete power of attorney of Korea.Can you understand the complete power of attorney ? And the American occupation is different from your phrase"Japanese occupation"(which,I don't think it neutral,should be changed into "the period of the Japanese sovereignty" or something like that ,as mentioned before.). The period of the Japanese sovereignty in Korea was just the result of the Treaty in 1910,on the other hand ,the American occupation was a temporary postwar procedure. Rizzleboffin is lack of the ablity to distinguish the essentials in the two things.And it is enough to describe the state of "the end of the war" to just say "the end of the war".Tell us the reason why the phrase"Japanese occupation" should be added when describing "the end of the war" in connection with the separation of Korea.The additon suggests "the period of the Japanese sovereignty" itself as something all wrong and as the connection with the separation. And finally,"East Sea " should not be added on the English version of Wikimedia(It is free to describe on the Korean version). Because Sea of Japan has been stable and matured to be easily recongnised.It is the Japanese Archipelago that can be distinguished from the Pacific Ocean.When people hear "east sea",no one but the Koreans can recongnise.Probably the Koreans will drag "North Sea" into this issue, "North Sea" has been long stable.So has Sea of Japan.No need to change the name of the sea. --Trilozengy 06:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Rizzleboffin,I have long been waiting for your evidence that Korea was an independent country from Japan during 1910-1945!!!--Trilozengy 11:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Korea was not an independent country during those 35 years, much the same way that Poland: "A Polish state was formed more than 1,000 years ago and reached its golden age near the end of the 16th century under the Jagiellonian dynasty, when Poland was one of the largest, wealthiest, and most powerful countries in Europe. Soon afterwards, the country ceased to exist after being partitioned by its neighbours Russia, Austria, and Prussia." was under another country's rule. (oh and please correct me if I am wrong)

About the sea of japan: (well i got this from the Wiki itself and maybe you could argue that it was edited falsely, but wouldn't that be ironic) "Although Sea of Japan is the commonly used term to refer to the sea amongst the international community, both North Korea and South Korea have advocated for a different name to be used. South Korea has argued that it should be called the "East Sea"; North Korea, the "East Sea of Korea". However neither of these two names has achieved any formal international recognition." Yes, the international preference seems to be for Sea of Japan,but what does this mean than?? "IHO and UNSCGN resolutions endorse the principle of the simultaneous use of different names when countries sharing a geographical feature do not agree on a common name. " Cipher_text

Article removed from Wikipedia:Good articles

This article was formerly listed as a good article, but was removed from the listing because it no longer meets criterion 2 (verifiability). It also has recurrent NPOV and stability issues. -- Visviva 08:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it qualifies for status as a Good Article yet. I worked on the Japan article far more than I have with this one, unfortunately. It deserves more attention really.--Sir Edgar 04:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

No go in South Korea?

I'm surprised that there is no mention of go/baduk (the board game) at all in an article about South Korea. Reasons why I think it deserves a mention:

• Koreans dominate the international go scene
• As far as I know, it is highly popular and esteemed there.

Can anyone find a place to fit it?

naming?

I was wondering why this article is not named "Republic of Korea", which is an official and common name? BlizzardGhost 04:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• You are right. The official name of the country is "Republic of Korea" and in my opinion they deserve respect for forming such a successful country. If we look at the GDP and HDI ranks we can clearly see that. North Korea- South Korea thing is popular culture, has no connection with offical terms and also has no place in Wikipedia. With respect, the son of nomadic warriors, Deliogul 15:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipeda standard is to use the popular name, not the official name. --70.142.40.34 22:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

recognition

so who exactly recognises "south korea" aka hanguk as being an actual country? for many years china never considered hanguk to be a country, taking the side of chosun (north korea).

which states recognise chosun, and which hanguk?

this is particular interesting especially since all of korea was called chosun in the past.

Erm, China has an embassy in South Korea, meaning that it diplomatially recognizes South Korea? Many countries have diplomatic relationship with both South and North Korea. Deiaemeth 06:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by the question that, "who recognizes South Korea?" Are you indireectly stating that, Korea is not a country and part of China?

Korea was Chosun. After the Japanese pulled out, the U.S. supported South Korea, while Russia supported North Korea. After South Korea became an independant country, it was named Republic of Korea. North Korea, on the other hand, decided to keep the name of Chosun, depite that its offical name is DPR Korea. People in North Korea sometimes refer to themselves as "Chosun-in" or "Chosun people." Oyo321 20:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

perhaps a better way to undertand this debate is first know that the origin of the name korea dates back centuries to when the ruling dynasty on the peninsula was named koryo. europeans eventually translated that term into corea/korea.

in 1945, "korea" (which was a nation from 1910-1945, stateless nations do exist ala the palestinians and kurds) was divided by a decision made by the US military. until 1948, all the folks living on the peninsula referred to themselves "choseon saram" or "choseonin" (조선사람/조선인). in 1948, the government of the north used the term choseon in their official title. the southern government in 1948, in order to differentiate themselves from the north, starting referring to themselves as hanguk saram (한국사람). so, the use of hanguk is a more recent invention created by the southern government.

so, both north and south are "korean" in that each represents its name to foreigners using that term, but each nation uses a different indigenous language word for themselves, each of which is translated into english as "korea." i hope that helps a little bit. Hongkyongnae 00:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Computer games?

How can South Korea be a leading producer of video games? Surely there's been some mistake. For some reason (goodness knows why), there is, apparently, a law in this country that prohibits media depictions of Ninjas. Many games feature ninjas - off the top of my head: The Last Ninja, Tekken 5, Mortal Kombat (+ sequels), Pokémon, Sonic Heroes, Metal Gear Solid (1 & 2), Wario Ware Touched!, Final Fantasy Tactics, Shadow the Hedgehog, Ninja Gaiden and Donkey Kong Jungle Beat. South Korea may produce a few games, but it can't have produced many that I've heard of. RobbieG 19:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

-I believe that it refers to the popularity of gaming in Korea; see Starcraft for an example.

True, South Korea has not produced many games in the past. Although game development is increasing, you probably were misinformed. Maple Story, Lineage, Mabinogi etc. are games developed by Koreans. I have never heard of such a laws in Korea either. Oyo321 14:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Korea is leading producer of video games. #3, I remember. That is... number of games produced. This doesn't necessarily mean that such game titles are any big or influential. (Wikimachine 21:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC))

Well, I live in South Korea and I can tell you. The country is in online games. You see, there are hundreads(I'm not joking, really, if you count all the online games in Korea, there should be more than 200 hundread games running now) of online games, like linage and many else. Almost all Boys (8-14) are in games. And all the games they play are produced in Korea. This is not a joke, as a student in Junior High in Korea, guess what other kids (not me) are using if they get money? They buy game money cheapest is Approximately 5 dollars(5000Korean Won) and they buy it. And that is the cheapest. Most kids used more than 50 dollars to buy game money. And what is that for? Game Items.

South Korea also hosts the World Cyber Games, which is nationally played on TV and anyone can compete it in a variety of games including Warcraft III and Starcraft. South Korea is also one of the countries that started "cyber cafes" where computers are linked for mulitplayer mode between friends and also for internet access. South Korea has also produced famous and popular games such as MapleStory, Lineage and Lineage II, Warrock, etc. Good friend100 00:55, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Well I live in South Korea too. Most of people in America think that S.Korea is still poor country, but it's not true. Americans think that they have the highest technology in the world. Well, that's ridiculous. Since Americans think that they are the center of the world, they don't care about the world. They are really, I mean, silly. Do you know what Samsung, LG, and other Korean electronic companies make? As you know, they manufacture high technology mobile phones, LCD Monitors,high technology semiconductor devices, etc.. For example, Samsung and LG makes really high technology mobiles phones, but...that's not all. The mobile phones that are made in America by Samsung and LG are pretty old ones. Even it's high technology phones in U.S.. Besids, if you visit Korea and watch TV, you can see really high technology phones in commercials. I'll tell you the reason why Korean electronic technology increases rapidly. If you see Koreans, they are really interested about online games, cell phones, internets,etc.. For example, if you don't have cell phones at school, other students migh ask you some questions. "Why don't you have cell phones?", "Why don't your parents doesn't buy you a cell phone?", "Are you poor?" If you go to the Junior High and High schools in Korea, you will see weird sceneries. Boys sit around together and talk about their cell phones such as games, TV programs, movies, musics and pictures they taken, and etc.. They also criticize about the cell phones. You might think that Koreans are crazy about games. It's because they talk about the games for over 2 hours. There are internet places (We call them PC Room) everywhere in Korea. Many students go to play online games in PC Room after school and play about 2hours. The interests of electronic stuffs make Korean electronic industries develop. To go to school in Korea, you must have MP3, cell phones basically. And also, you have to know lots of things about cell phones and computers or you will be teased by that. Now I'll talk about internets or networks. Most of Koreans do lots of things with their cell phones. They search internet, watch TV, download musics, movies, games and other stuffs. That's not all. It is used for credit cards too. In addition, there is a really high technology stuffs that people in the world might not have seen. To experience those, you might have to visit S.Korea. You still think that America or Japan makes really good games? Yeah,~well they make pretty good games, but!! they make the video games not onlines games^^. There are too many onlines games that are unable to count. To play online games, the internet connection has to be really fast and high technology because there are over 10,000 people playing same online games. Besids if the internet connection is disrupted for few seconds while playing games, then that player has to go out. You know why? It's because Koreans can't play online games with slow internet speed as America. If I talk about online games to Americans, they might think very stupid games such as internet reversi, checkers of stuffs like that. If you suggest those silly games to Koreans, they will smash your face right away ^^. Koreans play games that has really good graphic. If you think that Korea is poor as China and low technology as other poor countries, then you are completely wrong. There lots of other high technologies that I didn't talk about. Remeber!!Koreans call our country, "IT Korea"

South Korea vs. Republic of Korea

Republic of Korea is the official name of the country, and I think it would be better if we re-maned the article. -The monkeyhate 12:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. There should also be a link in the header of Korea directing to Republic of Korea, just like the header of China directs to People's Republic of China. Why don't you start a poll?--Sir Edgar 01:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

While i agree that a name change should take place, wikipedia has a policy of using the most common name and not the official one. Masterhatch 02:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but "People's Republic of China" is the offical name of China, the latter being the common name and the former the offical, and yet the name of the article is "People's Republic of China". The name goes for Taiwan: Almost everybody refers to the country as Taiwan, and yet the Wikipedia article is called "Republic of China". Either both the "Chinas" should be re-named to their common names, or the both Koreas should be re-maned to their official names. - The monkeyhate 12:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Then rename both of the "Chinas". (you probably won't be successful, because redirects are fine) --70.142.40.34 22:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The article China is about the Chinese civilization. The article Taiwan is about the island of Taiwan. We can't rename both of the "Chinas" because of the naming conflict. We need to fallback to the official names. For both of Koreas, however, the common names do not conflict with other articles. --Kusunose 07:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

No. I say we stay as Souith Korea. People are more familar with that name. (Wikimachine 21:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC))

I agree with The monkeyhate a lot. I think if this article stay as South Korea, then the article of the Republic of China should be changed to Taiwan, since it's more common.--Jerrypp772000 23:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Two small problems in section "History"

(1) "general Park Chung-hee ... thought that the communification of the peninsula would be inevitable". -- "Communification" appears to be non-standard English.

(2) "In 2004, South Korea joined the "trillion dollar club" of world economies" -- No Wikipedia article for trillion dollar club. Can somebody please start a stub on this, or define the term within this article?

- Thanks -- 201.78.233.162 14:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Out of context my guess would be that trillion dollar club refers to national GDP. Communification refers, I believe, to the spread of Communism, so communization would be the standard English word. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 16:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Korean War

When will the war continue? Oyo321 14:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Who knows? --The monkeyhate 09:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Soon, possibly >_> 70.16.161.132 14:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Erm ... Hard question. It seems like the two countries are quite enjoying their time of peace away from the war and I hope it prolongs until we reunite. Or I'll be having to face the Korean War Part 2. :( --Dsdukcy 14:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean continue? The war is still officially going on between the two governments (N and S Korea). Only the militaries are at armistice. Unfortunately, even that gets broken from time to time and shots ring out across the DMZ or the NLL, even nowadays.Bigblair (talk) 14:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Country's motto

As far as I know, 弘益人間 is 홍익인간. What is the corresponding hanja of “널리 인간 세계를 이롭게 하라”? --Hello World! 16:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

“널리 인간 세계를 이롭게 하라” is the translation of 弘益人間 into Korean. 홍익인간 is just a Korean transliteration of 弘益人間. -- 211.207.221.58 23:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The motto 홍익인간 or 弘益人間 in Hanja is attributed to be that of the first state founded by Danggun, a semi-legendary, almost mythological figure and cultural forefather of the Korean nation. The website of the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade used to list the motto as simply "홍익인간" until recently.Mkhkoh 08:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Culture

Shouldn't we add a sub-section dealing with Korean culture?

That's strange, there used to be one. -- Visviva 17:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Must be some vandalizer that escaped any notice. I hate vandalizers. They make everything ugly. Good friend100 15:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Fear not my friends, the culture section has been recovered from a vandals deletion back in May 2006. Shame on everyone for not noticing - that's a pretty aggregious error to miss... Icactus 16:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

"Seoul, the third largest metropolitan area in the world."

This is incorrect.

According to the "List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population" According to the chart, Seoul is 23rd largest with 9.6 million inhabitants. There is a foot note at the bottom indicating that the korean government doesn't count the metropolitan areas directly around Seoul, making the population of the city more close to 22 million. And if the population was 22 million, that would make it the second largest metropolitan area in the world.

I'm going to edit it to read "second largest" instead of "third largest"

-edit- Every other edit I have seen had the person's name after it. I assumed this was added automatically. I guess not though. this edit was made by "Mister Ninja"

the second highest number of broadband Internet connections per capita IN THE WORLD

It has the second highest number of broadband Internet connections per capita in the world...

The BBC link which is cited as reference to this claim apparently suggests that South Korea is second amongst OECD countries. In reality these two claims might be and probably are the same. Still, I feel we need to clarify this by amending the above sentence as follows:

It has the second highest number of broadband Internet connections per capita amongst OECD countries...

I would like others who may have a different view on the matter to share it here. RedZebra 11:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Which country has the highest number of broadband internet connections? Good friend100 14:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

According to this, it's Iceland. --Zonath^Yak 15:14, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I have clarified the sentence as regards the reference. Hence, the second highest number of broadband connection among OECD countries. RedZebra 11:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Hanja Name for Seoul

There IS a Hanja name for Seoul (首尔: 서울, '으뜸가는 도시'). See Seoul#Demographics. The Hanja name for Seoul was chosen at the specific request of the Seoul Metropolitan Government. I wrote it but someone keeps reverting it to 서울.Mkhkoh 06:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

You can also see the link to the official Seoul Metropolitan Government website announcing this: [8] [9] Mkhkoh 07:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Those announcements seem to be announcing the Chinese language (중국어/중문) name of Seoul; that would be rather different from hanja, which are Chinese characters used in Korean and generally pronounced according to Korean conventions. The announcements you provide focus on the Mandarin Chinese pronunciation; if this were truly a hanja name, one would expect them to use the Korean pronunciation. -- Visviva 09:56, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

First of all, the name was chosen to more closely resemble the Korean pronounciation. Second, 首尔 is an official name and should be included with the other official names. Third, the Seoul government is proactively promoting this new name instead of the older 漢城.

I personally think the change is both justified and necessary based on the grounds that 1. it was an official government choice, and 2. because Chinese or Taiwanese wiki users might think the name is still 漢城, which is decidedly not a "Korean pronounciation" and is instead 'chinese-style name' ("중화적 명칭").Mkhkoh 17:43, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it was chosen so that the Chinese pronunciation of the characters would resemble the Korean pronunciation of Seoul. That makes it a Chinese name, not a Korean hanja name. A small distinction, but an important one. You are right that this information should be included in Wikipedia; however, it should be included in the Seoul article rather than this one -- and in fact, that article already contains a discussion of the matter. Cheers, -- Visviva 06:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

ok, i get your point. Still, we need to address the issue of Chinese-language users still refering to Seoul as 漢城. Mkhkoh 07:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

"首尔" is the name that the South Korean government uses to refer to "서울" in Chinese. However, "尔" is part of the simplified character set which is not used in Korean. Therefore the 한자 for Seoul are "漢城" in Korean. In Simplified Chinese, the simplified form of "漢城" ("汉城") is most common. No Chinese person I ever met used "首尔", less still any Korean. Although the Korean government would like people to use it, to the best of my knowledge, most unofficial sources are still using "hancheng" to refer to Seoul in Chinese. --Ce garcon 23:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I did a little Google searching:

漢城: 3,950,000 首爾: 1,850,000

汉城：3,960,000 首尔：1,840,000

한성 remains far more widely used by far. --Ce garcon 23:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Human Rights

There needs to be a human rights section for the article on South Korea. South Korea has human rights problems along with North Korea. Full Shunyata 06:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, the article should include the abuses under Park Chung Hee, who is acknowledged as a dictator by human rights organizations. Full Shunyata 06:24, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. We seriously need to address the absolute violation of human rights that took place during the japanese occupation. I suggest having separate sections titled: Comfort Women, Cultural Suppression and Distortions, Forced Child Labor Conscription, Rice Confiscation and Malnutrition, Banning of Korean Language, and Japanese Human-Subject Experimentations. Mkhkoh 07:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I also disagree with Shunyata in that the human rights issues under the Third and Fourth Republics are 1. common-knowledge and therefore specifics should be placed under the article particular to Park Chung Hee and 2. it would be an unnecessary lengthening of what is otherwise a summary introduction to a modern political entity.Mkhkoh 07:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Human rights problems as how? A section for how Korea was abused of basic human rights by Japan, China, etc? Or human rights problems committed by Korea?

Korea was a human rights violator mostly during Park's presidency and Roh Tae-woo, and one more, I can't remember. There were around three dictators in Korea who removed freedom of speech, press, and expression. Good friend100 03:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Chun Do Hwan was the third person I believe...24.13.4.186 21:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I highly support a section based on the issues of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean human rights abuses. It is a very important part of Korean history. Oyo321 15:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This article is about South Korea. Human rights issues before the establishment of South Korea is not within the scope of this article. On the other hand, summary of Human rights in South Korea would be nice. --Kusunose 17:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Poll

If there is an admin. present, I would like to suggest a poll concerning the renaming of "Korea" to "Republic of Korea." I myself am for the move. Oyo321 15:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Please follow Wikipedia:Requested moves to propose a page move. --Kusunose 17:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

And see Wikipedia:Use common names for reasons why that is unlikely to happen. -- Visviva 07:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Chosun ilbo

Check this article on the Chosun ilbo I know that there is a digital Chosun in English but I don't know how to get this article in english, sorry for those of you who can't read korean...

[10]

Basically, it is an interview with James Lilley, former ambassador to Korea and China, who said that when the communist government of North Korea will fall, China will rush to occupy at least half of North Korea and claim it as theirs. How shocking. Good friend100 15:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Phase out of US military

I had read that in the near future we will be phasing out forces in S Korea. I'm unclear about just how many and how fast. Brian Pearson 18:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Too bad the US forces are. Stupid Koreans can't remember American help during the Korean War. Thanks to the US, we still have half a peninsula to live in democracy. So unaware of things around them. Koreans have serious problems. Good friend100 13:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

another edit war

Will an admin please lock this article from being edited by retarded Japanese nationalists? Good friend100 13:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

history

Has it been decided that the prehistoric and medievil history of Korea be left out of the article? If it was, I am against that, and it would be helpful for someone to tell me why the articles are not merged together, even if its just a sentence or two on the history of Korea prior to independence in 1945. Oyo321 00:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The history of Korea before the founding of South Korea should go in Korea, not in this page. Kiersta 02:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wording and formatting discrepancy in infobox

For the attribute "establishment"

North		South
[[Gojoseon|Kojosŏn]]	[[24th century BC|2333 BCE]]	[[Gojoseon]]	[[October 3]], [[2333 BC]]
[[March 1st Movement|Independence declared]]	[[March 1]] [[1919]]<sup>h</sup>	[[March 1st Movement|Liberation declared]]	[[March 1]] [[1919]] (''[[de jure]]'')

I'm not sure if this is because of different Romanization methods used by the two sides. If not, please synchronize. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 12:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Shipbuilding, etc.

Why nobody introduces something about the shipbuilding industry? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whutes (talk • contribs) 07:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

I believe that the article should be protected

There is too much vandalism going on --Kingj123 21:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Lock it down for a week or so.

I requested for protection, and it is accepted. This article is now under semi-protection. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chulk90 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

koreans are awesome

notes off by 1

Why does note 1 show up in the text as note 2? All the note numbers seem to be off by one. --Gbleem 09:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

The first one is in the infobox. Ntsimp 19:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Korean Laws section

Unusual Korean laws are interesting and factual. Prostitution and mans/business culture are of interest. Please discuss this before removing again. Adultery is documented in the Korean constitution. You only have to look around in Seoul to see prostitution abvertised everywhere. Read the Korean Hearald. Anyway, lets discuss. I've no doubt this section needs tidying up however....

Your additions are completely uncited, poorly written, and did not assert the encyclopedic import of providing such "curious" but useless info. VanTucky 19:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Well VanTucky. Now I will add citations. I have added a link to the wikipedia Korean prostituation section. I only just discovered that a whole section existed on this. I have also added the Korean legal reference to the ROK adultery laws

A section on Korean laws focusing only on those types of laws and containing editorializing comments are a direct violation of NPOV as they give undue weight to a single point of view on Koren laws. A comprehensive section on Korean laws would be helpful, but as you use the section to push a point of view only about certain types of Korean law and its application, it is inappropriate and considered vandalism. Thank you VanTucky 19:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. The laws I focused on are unusual from an English speakers point of view. This is the English language section of wikipedia and therefore should concern the interests and unusual aspects of Korean life from a native western speaker (USA, UK, Australian, Canadian etc..) A person speaking another language will use their language section. A Korean person will use the Korean section and read the article in Hangul. I hope also that a Korean person would have noticed that I have not made any mistakes in my information. As to your point on point of view..... I actually quoted the article of law that said that adultary was illegal in South Korea. How can this be considered POV? It is set down in Korean law. South Korean is nothing to do with my opinion - I am not that powerful. Maybe you are a Korean-American (forgive me if I'm wrong) and want to leave the rest of the world ignorant of Korean life. This is not the aim of wikipedia. Wikipedia's aim is to disperse information.

I find that because you just deleted everything you arre trying to censor this. You even deleted wikipedia links which should have been left at the bottom of the page as references. I will improve this article and give links to the 2 English language newspapers in South Korea; The Korean Herald, The Korean Times. Then I will re-present this section with references. Please do not think however that my POV is powerful enough to affect South Korean law. Would someone please mediate this in future please.

Please keep in mind that this is a summary article providing a very brief summary of key information (see Wikipedia:Summary style). The appropriate place for this level of detail is the South Korean law article. The adultery information would also be particularly relevant to Marriage in South Korea, and referenced information on prostitution laws would be a wonderful addition to Prostitution in South Korea. -- Visviva 17:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks I will redirect my efforts to the subsections mentioned. I had no idea the South Korean law article existed. MFMB

Failed Good Article review

I've quick failed the article, mainly due to inadequate referencing. The article needs to have much more extensive referencing - many paragraphs are completely uncited. The references which are used are often poorly formatted (eg. 1,3,4,35,36,38). See Wikipedia:Citation_templates for how to do them correctly.

Other issues I see include:

• the section are in a strange order - Military and Foreign relations should be directly after Government.
• the article contains no information about ethnic groups and languages of the country.
• the first paragraph of history should maybe be about the pre-WWII origins of Korea.
• the Transportation section is a mess: Main article: templates should only be used at the top of a section. The need for a separate Transportation section is also questionable - it should probably be merged into Economy as per other country articles which have FA status.
• The International rankings section is questionable - country articles with FA status don't seem to have it. Some actual do have them.
• The Administrative divisions section doesn't mention that Seoul is the capital. Also, why is Jeju a Special self-governing province?
• The Government section doesn't mention the structure of the country's court system, and also contains inadequate details on how the rest of the government is structured and functions.
• The article is overlinked - text like metres or inches does not need to be linked. * Who are the major export markets and suppliers of imports for the country?
• Demographics section doesn't mention the population of the country.
• Culture section mentions almost nothing about cuisine, literature, TV and radio stations.

In general I'd suggest that each of the sections in this article needs to be compared against some FA standard country articles to see what needs to be improved.

(Caniago 15:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC))

Thank you very much for the detailed information. Good friend100 21:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what 'democrazation' is

Chun's seizure of power triggered national protest asking for democrazation, particularly protests in Gwangju, South Cholla province.

Is it demarcation or democratization or...? Brian Pearson 03:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it means that the people want a democratic government. The wording could have some more work there. Good friend100 03:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

"Democratization" may be best, then, unless someone wants to do some rewording. Brian Pearson 03:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

After Division

The first sections of the After Division part is unfortunately not correct. First off all, it was not the north who blocked an election. The election in the south was an election for a regime for south korea only. The north dismissed this as a move to make the division of the country permanent. Instead they organized a referendum for a common regime for the whole country. But participation is this election was outlawed by the US-controlled regime in the south. Second, when Syngman Rhee was elected, only some 30% participated, since the Korean people in the south seemed to draw the same conclusion as the people in the north, that the election was for a south-only government and thus illegitimate. Third, Syngman Rhee was talking loud several years about "going north" and at the same time he made several military provocations against the north. The US knew that the military in the north was fully capable of defending against the Syngman Rhee forces, and they viewed this "going north"-talk as a way to disaster. But when a military provocation went into a full-scale war, at 1950, they claimed in the UN that it was the north who started the war since they had the greatest military strength. Nor China or the Soviet Union was consulted by the north at this time.

under "China" --

"...and a fear of ethnic Koreans in Manchuria ceceding to a newly unified Korea." I don't believe that's a word. I'm assuming it meant "seceding, but I'll let ya'll decide that. Brian Pearson 04:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The motto is wrong

Wrong korean grammar.... "널리 인간을 이롭게 하냐?" "~냐?"is rude questioning sentence. Also, the motto cannot be a question! "널리 인간을 이롭게 한다" is the right one. It is ridiculous to use questioning sentence as one country`s motto.

--Sam 05:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Taekwondo for Military

I'm confused by the claim that "All Korean military units are required to have a 4th Dan black belt degree in Taekwondo." In addition to "degree" and "dan" being redundant in this context, what does the statement mean? What is a "unit?" Does this mean that one instructor of this rank must be on staff per "unit?" It surely can't mean that every South Korean soldier is a 4th dan, since it takes much longer than the average length of service to earn the rank. This needs rewording, or better yet, deleting since it looks like an irrelevant interjection by a martial arts fan. MrGalt 00:25, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. The statement makes no sense, and is not sourced, so I've removed it. --Michael Johnson 01:26, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Photos

I think someone is posting random Seoul skylines in irrelevent places such as "Government" and "History." I have deleted some photos recently. I think it is fine now, but no more Random Seoul Pictures Please. Kingj123 21:02, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

"Archaeological research"

I think "archaeological research shows that Korean peninsula was occupied during..." in the second sentence of the second introductory paragraph is not encyclopedic at all. Kingj123 21:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Bitterly cold?

I'll leave it to someone else to decide whether to edit it or not, but there's a disconnect between the article's description of the winters being "bitterly cold" and the stated average January temperature:

"The local climate is relatively temperate, with precipitation heavier in summer during a short rainy season called jangma, and winters that can be bitterly cold. In Seoul, the average January temperature range is -7 °C to 1 °C (19 °F to 33 °F)"

Is that range correct? "Bitterly cold" elsewhere in the world is more like -15C to -25C or worse. (Ask any Minnesotan or Muscovite) Either the editorializing should go or the temperature needs to be checked. MagikDragon 14:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The Northeastern Mountain ranges in South Korea can reach to -25'C, however, Seoul, because of the water moderation, is quite warm in the winter. Kingj123 00:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Distortion of information

I found recently someone has stived to do harm on the thread of South Korea by the Jjk82. I have checked his contribution, and I found that he has been obessed with altering and adding the information on variuos threads regarding South Korea to demote its reputation. I have no idea the reason why this user have done this, but this is a serious crime, and I won't disregard his misconducts. The enviroment section, the Jjk82 added, was suppored barely by some columnists' private opinions. In addition, the Jjk82 concluded South Korea is a dirty country with his pathetic so-called references, but on those references, they also refer and indicate that many other developed or developing countries, including Japan and Taiwan, also have the same problem. Moreover companies like toshiba and other Japanese companies were rated lower than Samsung and LG. So can I claim that the those countries are disgusting and dirty, and those companies are sick and ignorant to enviromental issues? I will ask administrator to assess the user Jjk82's conduct. This Jjk82 reminds me of someone who had tried to do vandalism on the Seoul's thread. Please remember that defaming other rivalry country is not a patriotic deed. It's nothing but huge disgrace on your country.Patriotmissile (talk) 20:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Jjk82

I am quite surprised by what the user Jjk82 has commited on the South Korea article. What he has cited to support his claims were not directly relevant to his urges. In addition, most of those references are just nothing but opinions made by certain individuals.

I traced back the user, Jjk82, and this guy is insanely obsessed with messing up the articles-related to Korea. Can anyone legally request administrators to trace Jjk82's accession country by checking IP address.

I have noticed administrators investigate on Jjk82 for his distorted intention on the series of his revisions and additions on [South Korea] and other relevant articles in Wikipedia. Please feel shame on that kinda misconduct. This kinda humiliation on other country won't bring glory to one's mother country.Patriotmissile (talk) 21:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

In defense of JJk82

The South Korea article is far from complete, especially in regards of environment, history, education and culture. My main sources? Direct quotes from US State Department, GreenPeace, Amnesty Internation and Korean published NewsPaper Articles. If they have a negative tone to it, don't blame me, blame those organizations for beening anti-Korean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjk82 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, those did not seem the only sources. Your edits seem to be all about the bad. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, and you must be careful to not give undue weight to good or bad. Please work with the other editors to gain a consensus on how to achieve balance. Seek outside opinions from editors not directly involved. Be careful not to inflame or anger other editors by presenting extreme views unrelentingly. Good luck, and happy editing. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 03:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Jjk82, don't excuse yourself for your countless lies and disruptions. I checked on everything you added onto the articles, and I concluded that you're merely a vandal wishing Korea to look bad as possible. The bogus and irrelevant links are revealing just your strong anti-Korean sentiment. According to the report made by greenpeace that you brought up for your obsession at the Korean environment, eletronic devices and gadget manufactured by Apple are the most problematic. The next bottom is Toshiba, Japanese company. Your false and excessive emphasis just on Korean appears to be disruptive and biased. You even made bluffing links not external links as if you had put citations. Besides, what is the problem with the hagwon article as you added 'black list for English teachers to avoid?'. I doubt that you're a newbie because you seem to be acquainted with many complex wiki rules already. If you continue doing such the disruptive behaviors, I'll report you as soon as possible. --Appletrees (talk) 10:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Sennen Goroshi

I found that the user Sennen goroshi has joined the same club with Jjk82 and Keyngez. Now this user has asked to block the article and discuss to settle down this disruptive situation, so let's discuss! To initiate discussion, I'd like to transfer and post my message I left in the Sennen goroshi's box containing a part of my opinion.

Sennen goroshi, I found you just have joined the club along with your friends, Keyngez Keyngez and Jjk82 Jjk82, in which people who like to change and add contents in all Korea=related articles in a disruptive way.

First of all, upon your remark on your recent revision on the South Korea article, you said to me that the leave the contents supported with your so-called justifiable references and try to argue with some positive contents. I will tell you what. First, your idea telling the references you are urging that they cover the disruptive contents so firmly in a rational way is just merely your own opinion. Those references, mostly cited from news papers, were just topics introducing a small part of society. It is you and your seemingly friend, Jjk82, who draw the disruptive conclusions about the characters of South Korean society. You and your friend cannot generalize the society with small cases with aggresive attitude.

Let's say this way. For instance, last time I saw the news article referring a psychopathic Japanese lady killer who poisoned and killed children with no certain reasons. Can I bring and cite the news to Japan article here in Wikipedia and urge most Japanese ladies have a tendency to kill children? Absolutely not accepatble, right?

In addition, I have lots of articles referring to poverty and starved-to-death homeless persons in Tokyo, Japan, as well as the news article telling the full of hatred toward foreigners and foreign workers by Japanese people. Do you want me to generalize and define the characters of Japanese in the Japan article here in Wikipedia by quoting those articles? I can start it rightnow as you guys have done to the South Korea article, but I am a rational person.

Why don't you do some positive contribution to your Japanese-related articles, rather than spending your times on disrupting Korea-realetd articles in Wikipedua. I also found that you have a history to argue with other Korean fellow, and you harrassed him by saying unacceptable words. Please be courteous to other Wikiusers. Patriotmissile (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to conclude that Sennen's actions around Korea-related articles have become too disruptive. Something has to be done and Sennen has to be warned by an outside user, its clear that he won't realize that his edits to here and other articles are just venues to express hatred against Koreans. Should Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts be appropiate or is Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct better for a report? It doesn't matter if his disruptive edits can be reverted or not. He's done his job of disrupting this place by having South Korea placed under an edit-protect (therefore we cannot edit freely anymore), which is certainly not neccessary considering Sennen is the only problem and that there are no vandals here. Good friend100 (talk) 20:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Goodfriend100, First of all, I agree with your opinion upon the talk). In addition, I am also greatly concerned about the possible consequence about loss of protection against vicious and false revisions, you explained. With common sense, it is so easy to tell what kind of character (Sennen goroshi) has along with his gangs, Jjk82 and Keyngez.

About your question on which site is more pertinent to make reports, I think we may can post reports on both of places. Are there any rules preventing plural reports here? Goodfriend100, thank you for your participation to make a better Wikipedia.Patriotmissile (talk) 23:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

This is a content dispute, not vandalism (which I have been accused of) neither is it disruptive editing. If you are annoyed that the article is locked, then perhaps you should blame patriotmissle, not me. I made ONE edit in the article, Patriotmissile made FOUR edits within 24hrs, making a single edit is not edit-warring - because of patriotmissile's FOUR edits, this article got locked. I think all of the above users, need to understand how wikipedia works, and what wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is not the place for you to put everything positive about your nation, and delete everything negative about your nation. Wikipedia is for facts, if there is pollution caused by certain Korean companies, and it is a fact, IT STAYS. If there is racism within Korea and it can be cited, IT STAYS. This is not a tourist brochure, in which you try to make your country out to be perfect. To say that I should not edit Korean articles is not going to happen. Perhaps someone who is not Korean is able to edit these articles in a less biased manner, also I have seen so many Korean editors making hugely negative edits on articles refering to other nations, I am starting to wonder, do you want the best of both worlds? Do you want Korean articles to be only positive and only edited by Koreans? but at the same time do you also want other articles (Japanese articles for example) to be edited by everyone and to show every negative aspect of the nation in question?

Sennen goroshi, what a contradiction you are making! Now are you accusing me of cause of this situation? First of all, you are the one who revert the content to the point beyond the disputes has settled down. As you can see, administrators has sentenced that Jjk82 has made disruptive revisions in South Korea thread. However you just simply turned the situation back to the old disputable chaotic situation. That's the reason why I had to revert the content back to the point where the situation has settled, and due to this reversion, I inevitably exceeded the limit of reversion. Do you understand what I'm saying?

In addition, you said wikipedia is open to the public, and regardless of shameful facts anyone can upload anything to wikipedia if it is based on facts. In part, may be you're right. However, you disregarded something huge. The ultimate purpose of Wikipedia is rooted from the spirit of sharing knowledge, not for tools to attack someones or somethings. Moreover, you are urging that South Korea is a dirty place and South Koreans are racist, right? As I told you numerous times already, regardless you cited some news articles referring to daily-basis tiny little cases involved in yoor claims, but you just cannot generalize and define the South Korean society based on those rare cases. In any country, accidents happen all the time, and news from any country is always full of accidents and crimes. In accordance to your logical flow, in Wikipedia, anyone can describe any countries to the places in which are sick and dirty & full of racists using those kinda news as references.

You said anyone is allowed to change contents in the Japan article, right? I have many news articles referring to the dark side of Japan, including political corruption, rape, homocide, pollution, discrimination on foreginers including zainich (Koreans living in Japan), genocide commited by Japanese soldiers, and so forth. You name it, I can give you any darkest stories about Japan in a second to you. Are you telling me that I can simply go and add all these contents to the Japan thread with these fact-based references? Please let me know I am always ready to do so. So far, my common sense is telling me that that kinda act is silly and irrationale. Do you believe Japan is a perfect place where only angels reside? Please wake up! You know, your bullets shot by yourself can also harm yourself. Patriotmissile (talk) 23:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Is it time for me to be burnt at the stake now? Isn't that what happens in witch hunts?Sennen goroshi (talk) 04:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Sennen goroshi, well there's an old Korean saying, 'He that commits a fault thinks everyone speaks of it.'. It looks that your behaviours and comments may fit into this old saying. Those who are justifiable should not worry about this process. Since most users in Wikipedia have sound mind, not like some small parts of impurities here. By the way, wasn't it you who asked this debate? Now you can find yourself complain this process. What an irony! Isn't it? :Sennen goroshi, please remind that it is exteremely easy to harm others by using particular references covering only rare cases with prejudiced tone. Even I can start let people know darker sideof Japan using those kinda references, as you and your friend have done. However, I don't do that for now, since I and most wiki users have normal and sound mind. As you may know, it is common sense that you and your friends' behaviour will sculpt other users' one toward you and the Japan article. At last, I'd like to tell you that we have tried and will try to solve this problem with only legal channels in accordance with wikirules. So why don't you stop trying to entrap us to be categorized into witch hunters? I will also report your this kinda disregarding and disrespectful attitude, too. Patriotmissile (talk) 15:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

If the Sennen Goroshi is to be reported, may I suggest that you chose a single route for now. For example, report to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct or to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, but not both. I think rpoerting in two place could cause confusion or possibly diffuse the act of reporting. Or, if you choose to report the use in both places, please leave a note that you have also reported the user in in the other venue. Thanks! Phlegmswicke of Numbtardia (talk) 14:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Sennen, didn't you revert the page along with LG Eletronics because you WIKISTALK me, huh? Besides, you NEVER cared the articles unless I corrected the vandal's disruptions. He was a vandal whatever you justify yourself because he even uploaded "FAKE" images of Korea, now they were erased. The number of edit is not the point at this time. The point is that you make wikistalk edtiors and add unrelated info and bogus citation to make dispute and enrage Koreans. Your serious POV is the matter of this discussion. Don't undercover your misbehaviors any more. --Appletrees (talk) 15:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

actually I didn't know you were editing the LG article, I looked at it because Jjk82 was editing it, and I was interested in his edits.Sennen goroshi (talk) 16:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

So Sennen goroshi, does it mean you're a loyal follower of Jjk82? I think you have made too many nonsensical excuses already. I will report your previous disruptive acts along with your acts you have shown in this article.Patriotmissile (talk) 22:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

It seems that User:Jjk82 is a Korean in late teens or early twenties who has a psychological problem with his environment. Let him do whatever he wants to do. His country deserve this vandalism. This reflects Korean sociopathology especially with regard to ultrafast economic growth and high competition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lihmwiki (talk • contribs) 19:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Lihmwikw, please refrain from irresponsible remark. What do you mean 'His country deserve this vandalism'? I wonder how you deduced that Jjk82 is Korean as well a teen. To me, judging from circumstantial evidences, it looks quite obvious that Jjk82 and his friends, Sennen goroshi and Keyngez, are Japanese who plausibly reside in South Korea. Lihmwiki, I have no idea where you got the idea that this vandalic situation was caused by internal problematic Korean people. Please keep your imagination inside your mind, not here.Patriotmissile (talk) 22:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

If this is how all of you solve a dispute, I pray for the future of this encyclopedia. Maybe I'll go lock all pages under the Japanese-Korean spheres for fun now. east.718 at 01:02, November 27, 2007

This is farking ridiculous. Stop trying to hammer your ideals into Sennen, he's asking if its time for him to be burnt at the witch stake. I have nothing to say to that comment. Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts is the option that I see as most fit for this and I'm not going to let ONE bigoted editor disrupt this community because Sennen is getting all the attention he needs with you all exploding on him. Good friend100 (talk) 03:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

My fellow editors, it is past time to get back to editing articles. This thread is not going to solve anything. Remember -- resolving the dispute is what is required here. Editors in this thread are simply seeking to stoke the fire of pointless dispute. Wikipedia is not a personal attack site and editors may not use Wikipedia as a nationalist soapbox. Happy editing! Phlegmswicke of Numbtardia (talk) 13:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am not sure whom your pungent criticism aims, but I think it is inappropriate use the terms, such as nationalist and personal attack here. Please check the previous traces of those users issued here and contour the overall pictures of this situation. You will see what has been and is going on in the various South Korea-related articles in Wikipedia. Like you said, Wikipedia is not a battle field. I totally agree with it. However since we are living in imperfect world, so when there are numerous disputes occurred in Wikipedia, please consider the people who start and are caused problems.

How many countries could possibly avoid downfalling into a dirty and racist country in Wikipedia if described as those issued users, Jjk82, Sennen goroshi, and Keyngez, with supporting by daily-news articles? As I remember, the US is the most country in which fossil fuel are used, and consequently generates much higher amount of pollutes any other country in the world, plausibly. You can see the news everywhere referring to this fact, even from Al Gore's speak. However, is there anyone who claims that US is a dirty country? In addition, about the issue of racism, can we conclude that most of Western countries where minor racist clans are being there, such as KKK, neo nazi, and skin heads, are all racist countries?

Please please my fellow editors and administrators, I am asking all of us to see the cores of current issues with more intropective and sound views and approaches. Wikipedia is definitely not the place where people freely excrete hatrism toward any objects due to personal feelings.Patriotmissile (talk) 16:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's Move on

{{editprotected}}

Users like Jjk82 and Sennen goroshi should not edit here due to their own biasism and favority. Anyways lets move on. I could make a Science and Technology section here, only if this dispute above stop, and unlock the article.--Kingj123 (talk) 21:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

See WP:RPP. Sandstein 06:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sennen goroshi

I filed an RfC on Sennen. Please offer your opinions. I feel that this is long overdue and we need to stop these kind of attacks made upon Korea related articles. This is totally not fair because Wikipedia does not have bands of anti-Japanese editors who tear apart Japan, yet editors like Sennen can get away with his hatred of Koreans. Good friend100 03:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I totally understand how you felt on the series of unfair issues you have gone through. I tasted a bit of bitter truths about English Wikipedia. I still can't believe what the administrator of Wikipedia from Hong Kong made the illogical and unfair decision on the issue caused by Jjjk82 and Sennen goroshi. I now realize the system for how this Wikipedia is operated. what actually is going I will try to work on the subject you issued.Patriotmissile (talk) 22:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I sincerely apologize for presenting specific country on my above remark. I still don't undetstand the standard of logic h applied to make his decision. However, I apologize again to make mentioning unnecessary comment, Hong Kong. Thank you for reminding me this, Grunty Thraveswain.Patriotmissile (talk) 20:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, please don't beat yourself up with the matter. Just keep you calm and neutral as possible even if everything seems unreasonable, this is not the end. Btw, when can this article be out of the protection?--Appletrees (talk) 22:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Huh, your not going to be able to do anything unless you certify that Sennen is at fault. The RfC's lost so theres no point bothering with you guys writing now meaningless posts. Good friend100 (talk) 04:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Reiteration of the same attitude

Right after relieved from the recent blocking on South Korea article, Jjk82 began to commit the exactly same disruptive revisions on the article. As one of the administrator, Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim, has already agreed, most Jjk82's revisions on various articles-related to South Korea are very like to be POV (Please check my talk to see his comments). Regardless of series of warnings issued previously, Jjk82 continues his own journey in Wikipedia.

Please remember that the main reason of blocking South Korea artcle was due to violation of 3RR, caused by irresponsible reversion to the previous diputable status by Sennen goroshi, which has lead to inevitable reversion that resulted in 3RR violation.Patriotmissile (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Let's Move On

Like previously suggested, let's move on. I changed the tone a little in History section. Should the 9th citation be after swift recovery or after economic power? And what about that Science and Technology section?--Gireogison (talk) 00:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Environment

There is an environmental section on the wikipedia japan, china and taiwan, but not in korea. Why? - jjk82

Yes, you made and expanded on the articles.--Appletrees (talk) 14:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

There are rankings for Gross Domestic Product, Gross Domestic Product, Ease of Doing Business, Global Competiveness, Index of Economic Freedom, Worldwide press freedom index, Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index, Human Development and Index Annual work, Automobile Production, but NOT one ranking regarding the environment? What will readers conclude with absence of enviornmental rankings? Also, this environmental section need improvement and, most importantly, documented sources. --Jjk82 (talk) 05:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

IMPROVEMENT

There are zero sources reported in the Environment and Military sections. This needs to addressed soon. Also, Economy sections is strongly biased in favor of Korea, especially with quotes like:

"Peter Bartholomew, the managing director for Industrial Research & Consulting, a business consulting company, says that the "South Koreans are always working to keep three, four, five steps ahead of the Chinese and Japanese"."

I will be contacting third party members to ensure that this is done properly. --Jjk82 (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I will erase "the quote" until the argument is resolved. --Kingj123 (talk) 02:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Wait a minute... it is a quote from a source: Herald Tribune a respected news corporation. How can you deny this source? Are you stating that the article in this source is biased? If you are concerned about that contact there. --Kingj123 (talk) 02:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Shall I add this quote?

"One should always treat one's inner circle with complete respect and courtesy, while one treats strangers with indifference. Korea is not an egalitarian society; one is either of a higher or a lower status than other people. How do foreigners fit into this scheme? The simple answer is - they don't. Foreigners are completely off the scope." - U.S. State Department --Jjk82 (talk) 05:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Or how about this quote?

In recent years, less than 10 percent of Koreans traveled abroad, most often on group tours with other Koreans, or on business trips. - U.S. State Department

As you can see, quotes aren't balanced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjk82 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Military: Source #24 doesn't work and Source #25 is only the main website, info couldn't be found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjk82 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Environment: The source couldn't be verified...poorly referenced material...such as "The government in planning to close down many old coal plants with the replacement with nuclear power plants and hydroelectirc power plants" where is the source?, not to mention, "hydroelectirc" is misspelled. --Jjk82 (talk) 05:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Jjk82, please do not generalize your own idea to make conclusions. I don't think it is you, Jjk82, who can decisively judge and comment the status of referernces. If you wanna criticize anything in the South Korea article, as you do almost everyday, please let it be clarified by decision by majority. By the way, the references you indicated not working will be replaced soon.Patriotmissile (talk) 23:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Have fun edit warring, POV-pusher. Good friend100 (talk) 02:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you mean Jjk82.

Come on, there are so many Korean ultra-nationalist editing this article, it is a far distance from being balance. This article needs some serious work. --Jjk82 (talk) 02:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, there is no paragraph about the Korean War...was it not important? Just a minor internal conflict?--Jjk82 (talk) 04:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Come on, Jjk82. Are you telling us that most editors here are ultra-natinalists? That's one serious accusation. You will take a responsiblity on what you've just talked. With your theory, can I consider that there are tons of anti-South Korea editors striving to mess up South Korea-related articles every single day. By the way, Jjk82, I fixed the dead link you mentioned, and added proper reference on military section. I'd like to remove the tag. If you have problem, raise your problems very in detail and also you need others' consent for your claims.Patriotmissile (talk) 16:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

POV tag

Jjk82, I think you misundertand the meaning and purpose of POV tagging. Jjk82, it looks that you have overissued POV tags in South Korea article without reasonable and persuadable explanation as well as with no consent of others. The POV tag is definitely not a weapon to disrupt articles in which one personally abhors. I will surely report to administrators about this issue.Patriotmissile (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Demography section=

I removed some of the contents which definitely and clearly can produce misunderstanding referring that most South Koreans are racists and foreign orgin-wives beater. This is definitely not true, and those contents were all supported by Jooang Il-bo letters that were written by not journalists, but individual coulumnists or reader contributioners. This absolutely can lead to huge bias on contents of references themselves. In addition, Jjk82 and his friends generalized and concluded that most South Koreans are racists and violent in a mysterious way using minor cases occurring even everywhere in the world everyday, which even those references don't support their conclusion in that way. If the Jjk82 and their friends' logic covering these contents is acceptable in Wikipedia, then there's no countries on earth, which can avoid a dishonorable stigma as racists and violent gangs.Patriotmissile (talk) 22:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

What I love

I love how there is a paragraph about "pre-division" and "post-division", but not one single word about the korea war. 500,000 "westerners" fought for the foundation of the county, but not one word of recogition. In addition, when someone writes an article for about the korea war, you delete it, like you delete histrory. It truely reminds me of Neo-Nazis - "IT NEVER HAPPENED"! Also, I love how Koreans use the term for "pure Korean blood", that term also reminds me of Nazis and while I'm at it, I love how Koreans don't fully accept Gyopos as truely Korean, as they are somehow tainted from western influences. Also, how many believe that real gyopos speak lesser english then their white counterparts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjk82 (talk • contribs) 06:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Jjk82, why don't you response to my request? You're being accused of using sockpuppetry. And what is the anon with Iran ip, 202.136.142.171 address altering your comments without any permission from you? [11], [12]. Unless the anono is you, you're disguise yourself as using several ip addresses. I believed that you're currently residing in South Korea, but my thought can be simply wrong if you're using fake ip address. And stop insulting Koreans. Neo-Nazis and tainting? Ha!--Appletrees (talk) 11:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Jjk82, I have no idea why others, including myself, should be brainwashed by watching the lists of what you love. Wikipedia is definitely not a place where one posts his/her diary. You keep urging some unacceptable matters, including discrimination and pure blood stuffs in Korea. I hope you understand you should provide supportive data on your every such remark. Otherwise, your such remarks will be considered as defamation and vandal even further. For the record, almost all of your references are written by individuals, not by authentic sources, and described only minor cases, leading to be inappropriate to be used as reliable references. By the way, when I say the data, that means the statistical data confirming that most Koreans have such tendencies as you have claimed. I have no idea where you had such kinda ideas, but I can tell you for sure that your remarks are not true and cannot reflect overal character of Koreans.Patriotmissile (talk) 19:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Korean War

Nearly 3 million died in the Korean War between 1950-1953 and there isn't a word about it in this article. How many deaths are needed to get a word of recognition on this article? There is a paragraph about the coloned dog, snuppy, is he really more important? How about the two articles about ship building in Korea. Is this really more important? How about the 500,000 foreign soldiers are fought unselfishly in the war, not to mention the 33,000 American soldiers who died for the creation of South Korea? Not worth mentioning? Why not make this article balanced? --Jjk82 (talk) 12:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

For the record. This disruptive editor, Jjk82 has been infinitely blocked for his abusive sockpuppetry. See this Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jjk82

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5