User talk:Junohk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Greetings from your Campus Ambassador![edit]

Hey there, Junohk! My name is Deneille and I am one of the campus ambassadors assisting with your KMD course this term. I can see you've been experimenting with headings and titles. Take a look at the Cheatsheet for a quick reference guide on how to get those headings working and for a more in depth explanation, take a look at the Sections page. HINT: Make sure to add the "=" signs on both sides of the heading title to complete the code. If you need any help, drop me a note on my talk page! Happy editing! Deneille Rochelle (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Radical Media[edit]

On re-reading it, the tone is fine; I think I just made a snap judgment after skimming the article. (Besides, I'm not the sole arbiter of Wikipedia, just one of many editors. :) Looks good. Trivialist (talk) 22:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Oda Mari[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Oda Mari. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Joseon without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Oda Mari (talk) 15:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Joseon, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Please use article talk page with RS. Oda Mari (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I can see you have been trying to camouflage the historical fact around the Chinese Empire's tributary relations. This kind of a statement belongs in the text of the article, not at the top. The tributary relation is already mentioned in the article. Also these tributary relations did not only happen between Joseon, Qing and Ming dynasty but also with Ryukyu, Toyotomi and several other Japanese states as well. Without this being mentioned on other articles properly, mentioning it on the title bar of the dynasty is a distortion of historical fact. Displaying this fact as a banner immediately below the name of the dynasty only in Joseon's context without much explanation in the same language is 'strongly' misleading. I can see this being mentioned several times on the article's talk page as well as on yours. Please be considerate of other's opinions and presenting more accurate information on Wikipedia. --Junohk (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Joseon, you may be blocked from editing. Please see Ashikaga shogunate and Ryukyu Kingdom. The articles clearly say they are tributary state. Oda Mari (talk) 16:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Joseon. Please answer my question on the article talk page. Oda Mari (talk) 17:33, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I request you to provide reference in Battle of busan(1592) for edition.[edit]

As I heard from the record that the actual Japanese casualties in Battle of busan is approximately 8000. I tried to change it in Battle of busan(1592) but Oda Mari is keep turning back the edit reasoning that I do not have any references. I lack the ability to put reference on text. Can you do it for me? Every other country's Wikipedia says they have approximately 8000 casualties. So I request to you. Also battle of qingshanli is also have to be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heeyoong (talkcontribs) 11:36, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Mongol's tribute country was over 30 countries and only Goryeo's status is cited as tribute country on top.[edit]

I want to officially refute this but Oda Mari is keep reverting my edit without reading my summary. Find Mongol Empire in Wikipedia and they report that over 30 countries were tribute. But only Goryeo and one country is cited as tribute country. Can you officially refute this for me? I wait for your answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heeyoong (talkcontribs) 12:06, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Can you answer me please on editting Goryeo's status?[edit]

I stated above and it is totally wrong to state only Goryeo as tribute state. Please contact me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heeyoong (talkcontribs) 05:32, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

About Jikji[edit]

I see Jikji is the Korean movable type.I know Johannes Gutenberg is the most famous inventor for movable type. I just wonder whether Jikji ever reached Europe. Article movable type states there is no evidence that movable type from the East ever reached Europe. Is this the consensus of the mainstream historian? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.33.238.98 (talk) 19:49, 6 May 2014 (UTC)


Hi [Special:Contributions/72.33.238.98|72.33.238.98]] (talk),

there has been some on-going debates regarding the trading route between the East and the West during the medieval era. Professor Shin Jong-Rak from Sunkyunkwan had some interesting thesis on this topic in German. I have not yet looked much about this theory but basically it looks at; i) how similar printing technologies were invented around the silk road cities; ii) spread of paper; iii) how it only took about 10 years to invent moveable metal type for Gutenberg without much knowledge about printing technology in general (prior to his time, printing was not popular in Europe while moveable typeset is already widely used in China during 10th to 11th century)

I hope this was helpful... let me know if you have any questions :)

Cheers,

--Junohk (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

From your answer, it seems some research theories suggest there are relationships between east(maybe Jikji) and west movable technique but no decisive evidence to support. Ok, make sense. Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.33.238.98 (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2014 (UTC)


No worry, 72.33.238.98 (talk) it depends on how you see decisive. there is also no clear evident that Gutenberg invented the technology on his own. It is highly sceptical that he could have done that without any reference as there was no similar printing technology in Europe before. However, who invented what is not really that important as printing technology itself was not the sole cause of social reformation. Also the literacy rate in Europe until late 18th century was extremely low/nor the printed materials were written in the vernacular language.

Please see: Polenz, Peter von. 1991. “Deutsche Sprachgeschichte vom Spätmittelalter bis zur Gegenwart: I. Einführung, Grundbegriffe, Deutsch in der frühbürgerlichen Zeit.” New York/Berlin: Gruyter, Walter de GmbH --Junohk (talk) 00:13, 7 May 2014 (UTC)