Talk:Sea of Japan

	A fact from Sea of Japan appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 18 October 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: "Did you know ... that according to a legend, the Heishi rock (pictured) represents the God of the Sea of Japan?"

An entry from Sea of Japan appeared on Wikipedia's Lamest edit wars ever in the Ethnic feuds column on January 19, 2007.

South Korean waste dumping into Sea of Japan

Appletrees is demanding to delete "South Korean waste dumping into Sea of Japan" from "Japanese-Korean disputes". He explained, "The South Korean government has not been disputing the matter with Japanese government." [1] Therefore, "Envirommental destruction of the Sea of Japan by South Korea" is discussed on this page.

The part that he deleted is posted. Qwyrxian (talk)

South Korean waste dumping into Sea of Japan

About 23,000 plastic containers having a capacity of about 20 liters, one third of them carry Hangul characters for "hazardous" or "oxidizing agent," while others carry chemical formulas for hydrogen peroxide solution and nitric acid, have washed ashore on the coast of Japan on the Sea of Japan by February, 2008. The Ministry of the Environment (Japan) asked the South Korean government to investigate the cause and to take preventive measures. The officials said it is possible that plastic containers left on the coast of South Korea have drifted to Japan since gim seaweed farmers use acidic liquids to disinfect nets and the previous drifts of plastic containers since late 1990's occurred during the winter.

Some part of waste dump areas in the Sea of Japan designated by the South Korean government overlaps with the exclusive economic zone of Japan. South Korea has dumped waste in these areas since 1993. The Japanese government has protested to Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (MOMAF) of South Korea, but the response delayed until November 2007. South Korea designated two waste dump areas in Sea of Japan since 1988 while the parts were designated beyond the demarcation line between the continental shelves of South Korea and Japan and beyond the borderline of the EEZs. However, an official of MOMAF said, "We've banned waste dump in the Japanese-controlled areas since 1998, so our government will not have to take responsibility for it. But it's true that we've infringed Japanese jurisdiction, so we'll work out ways to redesignate waste dump areas." The area was designated as one of the most affected areas by human activities. Qwyrxian (talk)

typo

Page "Sea of Japan" The box down the right side with the name Sea of Japan or East Sea translated into various languages.

North Korean name Chosŏn'gŭl 조선동해

replace Chosŏn'gŭl by Chosŏn Donghae

South Korean name Hangul 동해 replace Hangul by Donghae

(i.e. in both cases, you have the name of the language where you should have the name of the sea. Chosŏn'gŭl and Hangul are the Korean alphabet)

Miles Reid Miles.Reid@warwick.ac.uk

---

Sun 25th May 2008 Qwyrxian (talk)

Edit request from Seungshink1, 19 February 2011

To whoever it may concern: Hello. I'm Kim, So-yoon from Republic of Korea and a member of VANK(Voluntary Agency Network of Korea). VANK is a non-governmental organization and also a voluntary organization. VANK consists of elementary, middle and high school students who provide correct information about Korea to international textbook publishing companies and publishers. Recently, I visited a wikipedia website about the corner, Sea of Japan, that you edited and was quite surprised to see that. Using a proper name for the body of water between the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago is not just changing names. It is rather a part of national effort by the Korean people to erase the legacy of Japanese Imperialism and to redress the unfairness that has resulted from it. It is an absolutely mistaken thing to hear one side of story and follow. If we let this kind of things alone, it brings about a serious problem to disturb order of International society. For your reference, the world's largest commercial mapmaker, National Geographic, Graphic Maps, and the travel guidebook, Lonely Planet Publication promised us that they would now use the name 'East Sea'. Also, many big companies are now using the name East Sea instead of Sea of Japan. As a member of VANK, I urge you to remove the page that you edited and say that the sea isnot Sea of Japan, but it is the East Sea of Korea. Once Korea and Japan agree on a common designation, which is in accord with the general rule of international cartography, we can then follow the agreed-on designation. Thanks a lot for reading, and I am looking forward to your reply. Yours very truly, VANK(Voluntary Agency Network of Korea) http://www.prkorea.org Email: soyoon99@naver.com

As reflected in this article, international authorities use the name "Sea of Japan" that wikipedia must follow. "National Geographic, Graphic Maps, and the travel guidebook, Lonely Planet Publication" are not such authorities. Wikipedia can not be involved in a political battle you mentioned. Materialscientist (talk) 10:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, so then can you please explain these international authorities to me? because it seems like it's really not a reliable thing to follow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.138.69.222 (talk) 15:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

By "international organizations" I've always referred to organizations like the UN, INTERPOL, and the EU. Corporate entities such as National Geographic, Graphic Maps, or Lonely Planet Publication aren't quite on the same level. Efforts to change the name in your native language are admirable and I would encourage you and your classmates to change things as you see fit, but in english (or, more specifically, on en.wikipedia.com), that geographical region is almost universally known as the Sea of Japan. As for your claim that these large mapmakers promised to change the name of this region on English speaking maps, I'm gonna have to go with [Citation Needed]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.196.233.202 (talk) 02:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

EAST SEA

I think sea of japan is wrong. because, East sea is Korean sea. So, Change please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sky4327 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

You're certainly welcome to your opinion. Wikipedia, however, decides the names of places based on the name most commonly used in English. In fact, the name "Sea of Japan" is actually written right into our guidelines because of past disputes on this issue; you can read those at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)#Sea of Japan (East Sea). Also, we have an interesting article on the subject at Sea of Japan naming dispute; if you have any new sources that might be beneficial in further filling out the dispute, please discuss them on that article's talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Info box title

Recently someone changed the infobox title from "Sea of Japan (East Sea)" to just "Sea of Japan". I actually thought that was 'correct', but upon checking found that "Sea of Japan (East Sea)" has been there for quite a long time. (Years?)

I looked within Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Korean)#Sea_of_Japan_.28East_Sea.29 and I am trying to see if the title is one of those (logical?) choices. Does this fall under rule

• For all Japan/Korea and South Korea articles use: Sea of Japan (East Sea)

I hate all this naming silliness, and don't know why people don't understand it is *all* relative. To me, it's the quiet pond next to the loud pond. Shenme (talk) 04:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Interesting, I never noticed that before (I often don't notice or pay attention to infoboxes). Technically, this falls category 1 of those naming conventions, as this is an international article--that is, this isn't about the "sea between Japan and the Koreas", but is, rather, the general article about a body of water. So, in fact, it should just say "Sea of Japan". I'm going to change it to say just "Sea of Japan" per our naming guidelines. Thanks for noticing. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with Qwyrxian. Arguably it could be classified as an international article, but really it's pertinent mostly to Japan and the Koreas, so "Sea of Japan (East Sea)" is more appropriate. Certainly for NPOV we should give both names - have you seen how many Koreans use this talk page to lobby for a name change? Bazonka (talk) 08:03, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Given that the Russian coastline is longer than the combined Korean coastlines, and given that it also borders China, and that most of the waters are international waters, I'm not understanding how this isn't an international article. NPOV isn't the relevant issue here--the whole point is that the naming guideline already is the "neutral" name--because that is the name widely and primarily used in English sources. Unless editors could show that this is not an international article, the naming guidelines must be used. If people disagree with the naming guidelines, this is not the place to argue about them--that would be on Talk:Naming conventions (geographic names). The whole point behind the conventions is that the were decided through a long and extensive process to stop just these sorts of arguments from occurring across multiple pages. Finally, that editors on one side of the (geopolitical) debate are unaware of, or choose not to follow our guidelines isn't a reason to bend on them. In fact, it's a strong reason to continue to enforce them--because otherwise, it's just the side with the more persistent POV-warriors that wins (instead of being a decision based upon reliable sources and Wikipedia policies). Qwyrxian (talk) 09:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I strongly agree with Qwyrxian. This is an international article. Please do not confuse international names and local names. See Korea Strait. The Japanese local name is not included in the infobox. Just because Japanese people do not protest it should be Tsushima Strait? Tsushima Strait is better known by the battle of Tsushima. Why should we add the Korean local name East Sea to the infobox? Just because Koreans say the name should be East Sea? This is en WP. The Sea of Japan is the common name in English speaking countries and the international name. Oda Mari (talk) 09:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Main problem seems to be that so few people are actually taking the time to review this talk page before making their demand for change. I actually found it an interesting read.Coradon (talk) 09:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I also think that many people don't read the discussion page before posting. Would it be appropriate to reorganize all the similar demands for change under a single section on this discussion page? Traveling matt (talk) 05:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I doubt it would make a major difference to be honest. There's a controversial tag at the top of this page anyway and people don't seem to read that when they have the motivation not to - I imagine enough people might be concerned that moving comments around the talk page might change the context of comments. There might be some mileage in tagging the article as needing consensus as well, although, again, I doubt it would make any difference. The controversial tag might move to the top of the talk page though - which may help a wee bit. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Lake of Japan?

• During the Ice Age, did the world ocean level ever drop so far that all the straits between and in Korea - Japan - Sakhalin - Siberia became dry and the Sea of Japan became a super-big inland lake draining by a big river in the dry bed of one of these straits? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:32, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

East Sea (Sea of Japan)

Should Japan be able to name a sea?? I really don't think they should claim it. South Korea's name for it (the East Sea), doesn't include "Korea" or "ROK" or "South Korea" or "Hanguk" in it. Gv5028 (talk) 21:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Countries name seas all the time; "Pacific", for example, was named by the Spanish, though the name is also used in English. However, in this case, Japan didn't name it--it's the international name used, well, everywhere except for Korea. So a better question is, why would we consider replacing the international name with one used in only 2 countries? Qwyrxian (talk) 21:50, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The Korean name is just as much of a 'claim' as the Japanese one is, just less explicit about it. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Oriental Sea (Asia)

It is not clearly named in outer side, so to settle this bad non-controversy, and for neutralization policy, name it as Oriental Sea until one side of opinion clearly dominates other and approximately 90% of map could say it's Sea of Japan. --권정우 (talk) 12:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, that's pretty easy, since right now 95% of maps do say Sea of Japan. Korea is the only place that uses anything else; a small number of international organizations use (East Sea) in paranthesis after SoJ. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Maps

2 maps currently used in the article have Korean names. If we strictly follow WP:NC-SoJ, this article should use maps only with international names. Unfortunately it seems that Commons does not have such maps. I think I'll make a request for them at Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop. Comment please. Oda Mari (talk) 16:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Is there a clear discussion that established this article as an "international article" (meriting SoJ) rather than a "Japan/Korea and South Korea article" (meriting SoJ-ES)? Shrigley (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

The sea also borders Russia (and almost China), so it's more than just a Japan/Korea thing. Bazonka (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Oda Mari, that seems like a good idea. I know nothing about making maps, so thanks for taking the initiative. Shrigley, there actually was a discussion before, some time within the last year or so, but for the life of me, I can't find it. The only discussion of the name that I can find is Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Korean)/Disputed names#RFC on East Sea use in Korea-specific topics, but that was someone trying to argue for a change to the current conventions. The discussion I remember basically argues the same thing Bazonka does--this is the article about an international body of water...I feel like someone even said that the Russian coast is actually longer than the combined Korea's, but that could be me remembering something else entirely and grafting it onto this discussion. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:14, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I found a discussion here, so I'm satisfied that this is an "international article". Shrigley (talk) 16:11, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Heh...I was looking through all of the archives on WP:NCGN and its dependent pages, and other Wikipedia namespace pages...I never thought to just, you know, look up. Thanks for finding that. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:21, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I updated the two images locally. I am able to upload the images anytime. Sea_of_Japan_Map.png, Sea_of_Japan.jpg or Sea_of_Japan.jpg white version ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you, Phoenix7777. Please upload them. I also thank you for the JAL related works at Commons. Oda Mari (talk) 14:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I uploaded the two maps. File:Sea of Japan descr.jpg was updated, while File:Sea of Japan Map en.png was newly created rather than updating File:Sea of Japan Map.png because the older file are used so many artcles other than en:Wikipedia. I will replace the map of other articles over time. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 09:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the two image files. But you forgot something. There is still the name (Ulleung Basin) on the maps. Though the issue is not as big and known as the Sea of Japan naming dispute, it's the same kind of dispute and I don't think the Korean name is accepted as the international name yet. As there is Tsushima Basin, I think another version of the maps is needed. "Sea of Japan Map with international names" or something similar might be appropriate for the new file name. Oda Mari (talk) 09:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I understood. However a raster image with a complicated background requires a bit of complex work, I will update the images when I have a time. Please be patient. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Request to Edit

Whoever deleted my comments, please give an explanation why it got deleted. I just gave reasons why the Sea was The East sea, and it got deleted. It is an outrage.

As I had said before, Japan has no right to claim the Sea. The Korean name for it does not claim it as Korean. Also, The only reason why Korea failed to claim for the sea is because the name of the Sea was decided by the IHO on 1929, when Korea was being colonized by Japan. AND PLEASE DO NOT DELETE THIS AGAIN. That is not a good way to silence me. I will continue posting if you continue deleting.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki12379 (talk • contribs)

Put simply, en.wikipedia does not choose titles based on whether they are "correct" or "right". It bases it on English usage, which is quite predominantly "Sea of Japan". Also, forget the idea that "East Sea" is any less nationalistically claimant than "Sea of Japan". It's not East of any non-Korean country. CMD (talk) 15:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Sea of Japan was named by Europeans and the name has been widely used in Western countries. Herman Melville used the name in his 1851 novel Moby-Dick when Japan was in seclusion. That was why the name was accepted by IHO in 1929. You are mistaken. Japan does not claim the sea like Mexico does not claim the Gulf of Mexico. And the sea would be Pacific Ocean if there is no Japanese archipelago. I'm afraid your request is based on Korean ethnocentrism and not on neutral point of view. Oda Mari (talk) 15:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Our naming convention is based on common practice, not on officialness nor historical precedence. In other words, we name things by how things are named, not by how things should be named.

For the porpose of naming an anrticle on Wikipedia, geographic reasonings, usage on historical documents, or international laws do not play a significant role. Of course, they influence what name come to be used commonly but it cannot be the determining factor. Please refrain from making an argument solely based on them. --Kusunose 06:15, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I saw this before, but only got time to respond now. However, what Oda Mari and Kusunose say is correct (including for the stuff that got removed because it erased other people's stuff). I understand your concerns Wiki12379, because when I first came to Wikipedia, I also assumed that people had discussions to decide what is "right". However, I learned quickly, as I hope you will, that we don't really think about "right" or "wrong", but rather about what sources say. And right now, sources say that in English, overwhelmingly, the sea is called the Sea of Japan. Most of the points you raise are covered in the Sea of Japan naming dispute article; that article lays out Korea's arguments, as well as counter-arguments made by Japan, along with quite a bit of the IHO and UN history you describe. If you have reliable sources about the dispute that aren't currently included, I encourage you to add them to Talk:Sea of Japan naming dispute; of course, the articles will, no matter what, call the sea the Sea of Japan, and will not actually "decide" who is "right", but if there are well-sourced arguments on either side that are being missed, and we pay attention to WP:UNDUE, there may be room for more. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)