Talk:Anti-Korean sentiment

wow, just wow. Reading this article makes it seem like the Chinese are a bunch of uncivilized, petty, jealous, ignoramuses with a huge inferiority complex. Clearly some of the issues are presented somewhat one sided, but does an encyclopedia really need so much details on every incident of anti-korean sentiments? Alot of the issues could be summed up in one or two sentences. -anon

This article is aimed for the "discrimination infobox template", since there was no article for Korea, yet there is racism present against Korea. This page is based on the format of the Anti-Japanese sentiment page. Large amount of info taken from Chinese Wiki article regarding Anti-Korean sentiment. More info, examples, links and sources will be added soon. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 05:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Clearly this whole article is korean propaganda. 99% of the sources are korean, and some don't even have links. Opinions from single sources are also presented as mainstream. This is representative of typical korean edits in Wikipedia as the koreans try to convince the world of their view point as the correct one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.100.35 (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

In response to the person above, I originally wrote this article in an entirely different manner and format, however after much argument, much of it has been shredded and rewritten. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 07:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me the origin of the Confucius claim? A youtube video does not suffice to show that claim. My local newspaper says that it originated from a hoax article. http://www.todayonline.com/articles/270518.asp Also, where is the origin of claim that Korean claims that Hanzi was a Korean invention? Can anyone prove it and cite some sources for us to see? HistoryManiac (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

in fact, 高丽棒子 and 韓棒子 refer the same term. The reason why the Korean is referred as 棒子 (bàng zǐ) by many of the Chinese people is, as explained in many of the online forums, that during the Japanese invasion into North-eastern region of China (during World War II), Korean soldiers constitute the second part of the invasion forces, under the control of the Japanese Army. This is actually why the Japanese was referred as "鬼子" (devils) and the Korean being 二鬼子"second devils". However, the Korean soldiers were not equipped with weapons by the Japanese. Instead, the Koreans themselves picked up clubs "棒子" to beat the native Chinese people. This is reason why they were also referred as 棒子"club". This is what I understand from reading the online forums. You mentioned the term how the Korean was called by Chinese people but do not make sufficient explanation. In fact, nowadays in China, almost no one call the Korean "clubs". Instead, the youth Chinese are open to current Korean culture and fashion, and it does become popular as a major fashion in China between the youth. I post these comment to avoid a negative impression of the Chinese being made. In fact, the Chinese people are far from raciest and those terms mentioned above were produced under historical reasons.

According to the Chinese Wiki, 二鬼子 is used. Do not delete portions of the article without verification from others; this may be considered censorship. Also, use tags and avoid "===", use proper format. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 02:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I have noted your edits to be POOR.

Just to avoid confusion, I didn't delete any portion of this article. I just added new a paragraph by clicking on the new section tab. Maybe someone else did. I added a paragraph as I think you didn't sufficiently explained the terms "second devil" and "club". In fact, "clubbers" will be more precise than "clubs".

• "half belong" is poor english, and BIASED. Chinese dont believe that they "half belong" the mountain. Use of "violence to" is not only poor english, but has a BIASED TONE. Additionally, both sides on the Torch Relay day engaged in violence; you cannot state that only Chinese were aggressors. Koreans took part in the violence.

where do you see "half belong"? I could not find it except in your paragraph, well of course, and mine now.

• Avoid words like "nationalistic" and "radical" - biased. Avoid weasel words like "some japanese" and "some koreans" "Radical Anti-CNN" can be seen as VANDALISM. It is also libel against Jin Rao, a living person.
• Additionally with biased censorship, much of the english is written at a poor level, roughly at a primary school exit level. Do not edit if you cannot improve the article, keeping it error/bug free and unbiased. You claim that this is biased against Korea; your edits are pushing the bias towards Korea. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 02:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

reduce POV word. also there is no evidecne all korean claim same. 222.106.188.74 (talk) 05:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

---

• 高丽棒子

The Korean invaded China with Imperial Japanese Army. And Korean with the club caused Chinese.So Chinese call Korean 高丽棒子.

• 二鬼子

The Korean invaded China with Imperial Japanese Army. The Korean was a Japanese subordinate.So Chinese call Japanese 日鬼子(Jpanese devils).AND Chinese called Korean 二鬼子（2ND DEVILS）.

The source mentioned above

日本が韓半島を侵奪した後、満州を経て中国を本格的に占領する時期のことと関連があるようだ。 日本の手先として、棒を持って横行しながら中国人を苦しめた韓国人ということだ　中国人が当時、自国を侵略した日本人には「日鬼子」、その手先だった一部の韓国人には「二（２番目の）鬼子」という称号を付けた。 【噴水台】高麗棒2008.08.28JoongAng Ilbo(Japanese)

下面的说法似乎更有说服力，即日本在吞并韩半岛之后，通过满洲地区向中国发动侵略，而部分韩国人（当时国号为“大韩帝国”）则作为日本的傀儡手里拿着棍棒欺负中国人。中国人当时把日本侵略军称为“日本鬼子”，把日本的傀儡——韩国人称为“二鬼子”。考虑到这一点，我们可以认为“高丽棒子”的词源与其是有一定关联的。韩国中央日报：高丽棒2008.08.28 JoongAng Ilbo(Chinese) --Propastop (talk) 13:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

tag

Please explain your rationale for using these tags on the talk pages when adding tags to articles.[1]--Propastop (talk) 11:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

please explain why you delete tag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.135.161.242 (talk) 11:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

please explain why you add tag? and you are WP:TW.--Propastop (talk) 11:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

You have no reason. tags are not attached by me. return to previous version. 121.135.161.242 (talk) 12:01, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

What is the reason that deleted a description with the source?[2]--Propastop (talk) 16:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hard to make sense out of this discussion, but I guess the username Propastop says it all. Anyway, this article needs major work, at the moment it is just a random collection of incidents that with a lot of fantasy could be interpreted as examples of Anti-Korean sentiments. Novidmarana (talk) 01:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Reply to user "Novidmarana"

Quote: "Anti-Korean sentiment involves hatred or dislike for Korean people, culture or either of the two states (North Korea/South Korea) on the Korean peninsula."

"Either state" includes both North and South Korea. Sentiment against the DPRK is also anti-Korean sentiment. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 02:33, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

This article is about Anti-Korean sentiment, and not about US-Korean history. War and diplomatic crises are not necessarily fueled and do not necessarily fuel Anti-Korean sentiment. Rather, the inclusion of these events in this article suggests that this is the case, but then it should be said explicitly. Furthermore, this paragraph is completely without sources, and citations are vital for an article on a subject matter that by its nature is not very factual. And if we are at it, this paragraph reads rather POV making many assumptions and interpretations, with all those interpretations going into the same direction. Novidmarana (talk) 02:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

You have a different perception of Anti-Korean sentiment. Your interpretation is only in regards to South Korean disputes. Anti-Korean sentiment also includes North Korea as well, or otherwise it would not be called Anti-"Korean" sentiment, rather Anti-"ROK" sentiment. It would be best for this page to be as detailed as possible, to make it more credible and appealing. Leaving out North Korea does not help anyone. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 02:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

[3] check old news of china. cleary, before 2006, 二鬼子 is not refer to korea. however, Chinese internet user changed word meaning, since 2006. 222.106.188.74 (talk) 05:14, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Check plublic trusted chinese dictionary,

◎ 二鬼子 èrguǐzi

[traitor] 抗战中蔑称汉奸卖国贼

二鬼子 mean traitor, not korean. But Chinese made fabrication that this word refer to korean. Wikipedia can't accept fake and hoax and original research.222.106.188.74 (talk) 05:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Confucius was Korean [6], that Hanzi was a Korean invention, and that the holiday of May 5th is a Korean tradition 

South Korea goverment never claim it. it is chinese made fake that all korean(even goverment) claim that fucius was Korean!. : that is the fabrication and chinese side POV.222.106.188.74 (talk) 05:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

“韩国人说孔子和老子是韩国人”和“甚至把释迦牟尼也说成是韩国人”……这类报道一出，当然会激起华人年轻网民的愤怒。“干脆连希特勒、墨索里尼和本拉登也说成是韩国人吧”之类的讥讽言语也向韩国人迎面扑来。韩国人闻所未闻的内容在台湾媒体上被歪曲得好像真的一样，成为批判和讽刺韩国的工具。从韩国人的角度上看，没有比这更冤枉的事了。"Chinese fabrication that korean claims that Confucius was Korean? .... etc... was korean? Korea never heard it before. this absurd claim made by Chinese. "Korea newspaper chosunilbo222.106.188.74 (talk) 05:26, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

[4]

二鬼子 [èrguǐzi] 1. noun A disparaging designation of puppet armies and traitors during the Anti-Japanese War. 他在抗日战争时期当过二鬼子。 He was a traitor during the Anti-Japanese War.

Originally, 二鬼子 word not refer to Korean. but chinese internet user hate korean, so they made "new" definition. also it is a fake meaning. 222.106.188.74 (talk) 05:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh well, apparently there is not much love between internet users in China, Korea and Japan. Keep on the good work, at least your clumsy English is quite amusing. Novidmarana (talk) 07:22, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

• 高丽棒子

The Korean invaded China with Imperial Japanese Army. And Korean with the club caused Chinese.So Chinese call Korean 高丽棒子.

• 二鬼子

The Korean invaded China with Imperial Japanese Army. The Korean was a Japanese subordinate.So Chinese call Japanese 日鬼子(Jpanese devils).AND Chinese called Korean 二鬼子（2ND DEVILS）.

The source mentioned above

日本が韓半島を侵奪した後、満州を経て中国を本格的に占領する時期のことと関連があるようだ。 日本の手先として、棒を持って横行しながら中国人を苦しめた韓国人ということだ　中国人が当時、自国を侵略した日本人には「日鬼子」、その手先だった一部の韓国人には「二（２番目の）鬼子」という称号を付けた。 【噴水台】高麗棒2008.08.28JoongAng Ilbo(Japanese)

下面的说法似乎更有说服力，即日本在吞并韩半岛之后，通过满洲地区向中国发动侵略，而部分韩国人（当时国号为“大韩帝国”）则作为日本的傀儡手里拿着棍棒欺负中国人。中国人当时把日本侵略军称为“日本鬼子”，把日本的傀儡——韩国人称为“二鬼子”。考虑到这一点，我们可以认为“高丽棒子”的词源与其是有一定关联的。韩国中央日报：高丽棒2008.08.28 JoongAng Ilbo(Chinese)--Propastop (talk) 13:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

二鬼子 also refers to Koreans, as per Chinese Wiki. Look it up yourself. Do not tell me it only refers to KMT. The slur against Koreans is modern slang. Words change. For instance, the Korean word "Ippa" (japanophile) never existed until recently. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 01:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

to some korean

Some Korean invaded China with Imperial Japanese Army. Korean want to hide this FACT. BUT THIS IS THE FACT.THIS EDIT IS KOREAN POINT OF VIEW ..[5] --Propastop (talk) 14:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

A few points

• Do not edit English Wikipedia if you cannot speak and write proper English. If you wish to edit, you must be able to commit to simple English writing conventions; poor grammar only worsens the article. The point of contributing Wikipedia is to IMPROVE it. There is a reason why this is called "English Wikipedia".
• For trolls who are constantly editing and introducing POV, this page is not for your biased POV. Just refer to the Anti-Japanese sentiment page; Japanese trolls do not edit it day and night because they don't like what is written.
• Just becuase it does not appeal to your bias does not make something original research.
• Many are also VANDALISING because of events within other articles. Such revenge attacks are meaningless.
• It is very hard to eliminate POV as only certain users are capable of editing. The only "sides" that are capable of editing are those affiliated with Japanese and Korean sides. Even the Chinese Wiki is mostly edited by people from Taiwan, and overseas Chinese, since Wikipedia is blocked in China. Thus it is almost impossible to obtain an equal POV from all sides. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 02:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Removal of points

Why was the mentioning of the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake removed from the introduction? This was an incident where, accused of poisoning wells and looting, ethnic Koreans were massacred in Japan, which was highly xenophobic at that time. Additionally, why has all mentioning of nationalism been removed? Certainly nationalism plays a large role in anti-Korean sentiment. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 12:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Canvassing by Benlisquare

Note that Benlisquare is canvassing at Anti-cnn and is asking to manipulate Wikipedia to counter a perceived Anti-Chinese bias, see [6]. This article is mentioned in his forum post. Novidmarana (talk) 18:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)