|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Busan article.|
|Busan has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Geography. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Two or Three cities?
- 2 3RR
- 3 Busan
- 4 Population "...could be as high as XX.."
- 5 Meaning?
- 6 red links
- 7 History section
- 8 Tourism section
- 9 Fusan
- 10 Area???
- 11 Proposed move
- 12 I don't accept to move "Busan to "Pusan"
- 13 I support moving "Busan" to "Pusan"
- 14 Expand?
- 15 Some Request
- 16 Some Demographic changes...
- 17 Can someone explain why there's not a flag for this city?
Two or Three cities?
The article lists three cities not captured by the Japanese and yet says that two cities were not captured. This is an obvious contradiction. And why does every Korean page contain so much rampant nationalism and bias? You guys are literally arguing over a single letter... P or B... By the way... Its a B, I was just there last weekend and its spelled with a B virtually everywhere you go!
I believe that user Luccas is coming dangerously close to violating the 3-revert rule. His vandalism of my edits, changing the name Pusan to the nonsense word "Busan" is beginning to get ridiculous. I wish he would stop and realize that this is the English language Wikipedia, not the Korean language version.
- Who are you?? If you really have done some edits on Busan please log on your account and restate your objection, because there are no contribution on this article done by 126.96.36.199. In the mean time I would appreciate if you read the following articles:
- Wikipedia:3-revert rule; "An editor must not perform more than three reversions, in whole or in part, on a single Wikipedia article within a 24 hour period"
- Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean); "Place names are romanized according to the official romanization system of the country the place is a part of"
- Revised Romanization of Korean; "The Revised Romanization of Korean is the official Korean language romanization system in South Korea"
Luccas 09:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe it would be a good idea to add, “formerly known as Pusan”? Similar to “It was formerly known in English as Peking or Peiking [English Pronunciation]” on the Beijing article. I know on a lot of older maps, and history books you’ll still see Pusan, and this could lead to confusion. I didn’t realize they changed the Romanization, I know it’s a bit of a PITA with Hangul. - Mefanch 22:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
the correct romanisation is Busan.
In english (which this is an english article) the name of the city is pusan. THIS MUST BE CHANGED the name may be busan in some other language but it is officially pusan in the english language
- This is incorrect. The official name of this city in the English language is Busan. The official site of the city  has no mention of Busan other than for perhaps educational institutions (for which romanization of their names have been unchanged, so both Busan and Pusan can be seen on this page). Also, please refer to the brief by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism here. It is my belief that the official name is none other than Busan following the promulgation of the Revised Romanization of Korean in 2000. pencil_ethics 13:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Please note that regardless of which system of transliteration of Korean into English is preferred, the use of Busan is making the article very inconsistent. There are references to "Pusan National University", for example. I suspect that until the new romanization system gains greater acceptance, "Pusan" should be used. Additionally -- should other articles be changed? (See, e.g., Pusan Perimeter, Pusan National University. I think a reference to the fact at the beginning of the article that Pusan is also spelled "Busan" would be sufficient for now. Please let's not get into an immature argument over this, eh? 188.8.131.52 01:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see the inconsistency. "Pusan National University" is the name of that (distinguished) university; calling it "Busan National University" would simply be incorrect. The Pusan Perimeter is a more complicated case, but here Wikipedia:Use common names would seem to apply. "Pusan Perimeter" is a historical term, and if historians are a bit retrograde in their choice of romanization that shouldn't come as a surprise. Cheers, -- Visviva 10:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- I also agree with Visviva's position on this matter. In any case, following the promulgation of the Revised Romanization, all locality names in English were updated accordingly (i.e. Inchon => Incheon, Kwangju => Gwangju, etc.) and Busan is not exempt. In fact, it is notable that neither the Incheon or Gwangju articles have discussions in the talk page about the correct romanization. pencil_ethics 13:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- One additional point of note: neither the Incheon or Gwangju articles mention the former names. pencil_ethics 13:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- The current condition of the article is unfortunate. I strongly suggest that the name of the city be expressed in the article text according to Wikipedia conventions. In the current state of the article, as of the date of this post, a number of spellings are being used concurrently. What's going on here? Mumun 無文 12:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- I also go with Busan. When the Korean Government adopted the Revised Romanization in 2000 it spent a great deal of money to immeditely instore the new system. So it's with the rest of the world that the new romanization system is slow to gain greater acceptance. — Luccas 15:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- The article is the subject of periodic and patterned vandalism regarding romanisation of Busan. I think it clear that, with a few exceptions listed above, romanisation should follow the Revised romanisation of July 2000 following Wikipedia convention. However, in order to avoid revert wars and trollish behaviour as per WP:Troll, let's be gracious and patient (esp. with anon. IPs), give obvious but mild warnings, and practice slow reverts if possible. However, we need to be very firm with those who ignore logic and policy. It is vandalism to repeatedly insert 'Pusan' according to Wikipedia policy, so let's report repeat offenders and similar IPs to the persistent vandalism board. Then if they cause a fuss, we can refer their behaviour to the incident board -- Mumun 無文 11:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Population "...could be as high as XX.."
Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and so there will be no guessing or estimating what Busan's population might be given X circumstance. The passage that attempted to guess what some population "might be" or "could be" was removed. Here we are to use only the most current data from the current national census. Please check Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. However, and somebody please correct me if I am wrong, we could add the official census populations of Busan, Gimhae, and Yangsan together and use that as an unofficial figure somewhere in the text. Mumun 無文 10:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Using info from Wikipedia I added the populations of Gimhae, Yangsan, and Busan together and get 4,287,991. This is somewhat lower than the number that previously appeared in the text. Mumun 無文 22:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
When did the name Busan/Pusan come about, and what does it mean? That is to say, why is the city called iron kettle (釜) mountain (山)? This would be interesting and useful information. LordAmeth (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't think we should have links to nonexisting articles in the introduction. It looks unprofessional and contributes to Wikipedia having a bad reputation. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 01:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
This section should be expand considering Busan in South Korea's 2nd largest city. It's very important city for Korea. --Korsentry 05:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Busan is also the popular tourist destination for Japanese & Russian because of close proximity and being largest port access point for Korea. Please expand it. --Korsentry 05:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm noticing this in every Korean city article I'm searching up. Inconsistencies. The Busan city home page places the area at 765.64km2, the Busan article places the area at 765.94km2. What is the area??? --Exec. Tassadar (comments, contribs) 10:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm probably not the first to suggest it, but I propose we move "Busan" to "Pusan". The vast majority of Wikipedia articles refer to the city as Pusan. To wit: Pusan International Film Festival, Battle of the Pusan Perimeter, Pusan National University, Pusan University of Foreign Studies, Pusan Film Critics Awards, etc. Also, most maps, encylcopedia, and web pages refer to it as Pusan. I say move. What say you? RM (Be my friend)
I don't accept to move "Busan to "Pusan"
I support moving "Busan" to "Pusan"
I agree with Reenem. The Revised Romanization has been adopted by South Korean government and thus can regulate the use of English only within S. Korea. The rest of the world still use "Pusan". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 11:19, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
We should expand Busan by adding more references and sections. Is it okay to add the section "Population"? If somebody is not answering me for a week, I'll do it myself. I post this on April 7, 2012 according to the US time. Lee, Eungki C. (talk) 13:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Someone should add some of these images as the first 3 are relating to the history of Busan.
I strongly suggest to have some of those included in the article, and to put the images relating to tourism on the be on the tourism section in a gallery. Nice Stranger5810 (talk) 14:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- User:Nice Stranger5810 I will try placing some up. Are the pictures yours? Cause if it is, maybe a barnstar would be my offer. Thanks for the contribution. HanSangYoon (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Some Demographic changes...
The article is in need of a "Demographics" section. I could do this by my self but it should not be removed unless if there is a reason. I'll wait for a day to edit this article, I hope there will be a fast reply or no reply as normal. Nice Stranger5810 (talk) 11:35, 3 October 2013 (UTC)