Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea

Hwanbyeokdang Pavilion

Just started a little article on Hwanbyeokdang Pavilion. I can't find a picture does anyone know where to get one? (Msrasnw (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC))

Empress Myeongseong

• Empress Myeongseong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Sennen goroshi (talk · contribs) requests for move on Empress Myeongseong to Queen Min without any plausible argument nor evidence for his claim. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks.--Caspian blue 19:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice canvassing, CB. Sennen goroshi (talk) 19:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Drop the absurd accusation and personal attack, Sennen goroshi. You've warned for your absurd allegations to people. This talk page is to notify such RM, or anything to be discussed by editors if you do not know it until now. Look trough this Wikiproject or Japanese Project page. --Caspian blue 19:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I did not make a personal attack, I suggested that you were canvassing, that is all. Sennen goroshi (talk) 20:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Not nice excuse for your behavior.--Caspian blue 20:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Queen Min? It is only common using word in Japan and few of the Korean. Therefore, Move on Empress Myeongseong to Queen Min is incorrect. --Historiographer (talk) 01:22, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Should "Queen Min" not be used dozens of times in the text of the article, then (as it is currently)? In the first instance it's not even noted that this is the same person as the person named in the lead. Badagnani (talk) 01:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

CB you make me smile at times, I love the way you said I had no plausible argument - when I outlined my reasons quite clearly. If any of my fellow WikiProject Korea members are interested, go to the related talk page.Sennen goroshi (talk) 16:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Hirohito

The leader for Korea (1926-1945) while it was under Japanese rule, Hirohito is proposed to be renamed "Emperor Shōwa" via WP:RM 76.66.198.171 (talk) 08:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:Chinilpa

A request has been made to merge this category into Category:Korean collaborators with Imperial Japan. Discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 January 1#Category:Chinilpa. PC78 (talk) 14:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposal to convert Template:WikiProject Korea

A proposal has been made to convert our project banner template {{WikiProject Korea}} to use {{WPBannerMeta}}. Currently our banner looks like this:

and if converted it will look like this:

The purpose of this change is to simplify the template's code, making it easier to maintain in the future. The new template will also have other advantages over our current one. At the moment it is only possible to have one work group per article using the wg= parameter. The new template will make it possible to have as many work groups as is necessary, so for example typing:

{{WikiProject Korea|film=yes|nk=yes}}

will result in:

Any comments on this proposal should be made at Template talk:WikiProject Korea, but for what it's worth I think this is something worth doing. PC78 (talk) 15:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Sin Chang-won

Could someone help with the following sentence from this source [1]?

친구들과 수박서리를 했다는 얘기를 들은 아버지는 ‘아들을 바로잡기 위해’ 신창원을 파출소에 데려갔고, 결국 소년원까지 보내졌다.

Specifically, what does 서리 mean here? Thanks. --Amble (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Please transcribe the Korean characters on this poster

Hi! Would someone please transcribe the Korean on this poster File:Sajwoehara.JPG so the text can be posted to the Liancourt Rocks article? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 20:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this image looks like a copyvio since it is entirely a derivative work of the poster, whose copyright status is unknown. I have tagged it as such on Commons. --Amble (talk) 22:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No need; it's unlikely the poster creators will sue us; any reuse of their poster is good publicity for them. Badagnani (talk) 22:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, "unlikely to get sued" is not good enough, not by a mile. Commons is for freely licensed material only. If there's a good rationale for fair use, it can be posted here (on en.wikipedia) instead. --Amble (talk) 22:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, here's the transcription: "독도 영유권 억지 주장을 되풀이하는 일본은 역사 앞에 사죄하라!" And at the bottom (Seoul Metropolitan Council): "서울특별시의회". --Amble (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I suppose we can get the poster moved onto EN. Anhow, I put the Korean into Google Translator and, judging from the way Google Translator "translated it" - I came up with "Japan, apologize for claiming the Liancourt Rocks in the face of history" and put it here: Liancourt_Rocks#Recent_conflict - If anyone can think of a better translation, please feel free to edit it :) WhisperToMe (talk) 06:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

The file is deleted now from commons. I saved a copy, in case someone would like to post it on en.wikipedia with a fair use rationale and doesn't have the image available. --Amble (talk) 09:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WP:KOREA cleanup

Just a note that per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WP:KOREA cleanup, i've deleted the three sub pages listed there.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

What is the reading of 가천의과학대학교 Gachon University of Medicine and Science?

What is the reading of 가천의과학대학교 Gachon University of Medicine and Science? WhisperToMe (talk) 06:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Are you looking for the romanization? [2] It's the same as before, with an extra "hak". Nice work updating the article. --Amble (talk) 09:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

What kinds of diplomatic activity does the Chongryon do? Any sources for that?

What kinds of diplomatic activity does the Chongryon in Japan do? Any sources? On Talk:Diplomatic_missions_of_North_Korea#Chongryon there was a debate over whether the Chongryon would count as a diplomatic mission of North Korea? Does the Chongryon do official DPRK government communication in Japan? What else does it do? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring at South Korea

A user has repeatedly removed cited information and images from South Korea#Religion, saying that it's POV and the sources are bad but not saying why. I went through and cleaned up what I could, removing POV assertions (like the assertion that Buddhism is the "largest religion in Korea," which was only sourced to a Buddhist website) and sources that are affiliated with Buddhism and whatnot; I also tried to improve the referencing style where I could (there are lots of bare URLs, so I converted some to {{cite web}}). But the user has continued to revert, without explaining why the sources are bad, and so far has ignored requests to discuss at talk. I would appreciate if someone could come in and offer a third opinion regarding this section. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 16:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Good luck on the POV edit-warrior. I can't offer any help there. But about religion in South Korea: I'd always heard from my (Buddhist) in-laws that Buddhism was the largest religion. These things change, of course, but according to The CIA World Factbook, the 1995 census shows: Christian 26.3% (Protestant 19.7%, Roman Catholic 6.6%), Buddhist 23.2%, other or unknown 1.3%, none 49.3% I'd say that's a pretty reliable source. Dekkappai (talk) 17:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah; one source in the article (I've removed it, but I can dig up the url if you like) written around Aug 2008 claimed that Buddhism is the largest religion in Korea, with 11 million practitioners...but an article just published today in The Straits Times, and written by Agence France-Presse, says that "official data" report 10 million Buddhists and 13.7 Christians. I went with that AFP article, since it's more recent and by a more reliable source. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

No need to show the older source-- I suspect that's what's happened-- Christianity overtook Buddhism by 3% in recent decades. I'd go with the Korean census data, if you can track that down, or the CIA data which cites it. Might even be interesting to show older census data, if that can be found, to show the shift over time... Dekkappai (talk) 18:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

There are a lot of non-practicing, non-religious people in South Korea whose families are nominally Buddhist. Therefore, the percentage of Buddhists could change significantly depending on exactly how the counting is done. --Amble (talk) 22:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Kim Dong-ni

Started an article on Kim Dong-ni, famous Korean author. Could someone please add the Korean Spelling, since I dont speak Korean. THnax - User: Singularity Rider, 3 February , 19:14

done. --Cheol (talk) 15:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Project banner

The above proposal to convert the banner to {{WPBannerMeta}} has now been implemented. Everything in the banner will continue to work as before. However, while it is still possible to use the |wg= parameter, each working group now has its own parameter making it possible to assign as many working groups as possible to an article. Please refer to Template:WikiProject Korea/doc for instructions on usage.

Also, each working group has it's own icon (except Arts and Cuisine because I couldn't find anything suitable); these are completely negotiable so if anyone objects to any of them or has any better suggestions then please say so and the banner can be updated. :) PC78 (talk) 01:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

May I borrow someone who speaks korean?

Subject just about says it all, I am dealing with a (South) Korean who wants to put an article about themselves in the English Wikipedia, but they don't speak English that well, and I don't speak Korean at all. Rather than try to explain why people shouldn't write articles about themselves in English, I think it would be better to have someone explain it in Korean. Anyone willing to help me? Please? :) Prodego ^talk 20:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Is this the user who sent you an email? :) PC78 (talk) 21:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

yep. Prodego ^talk 22:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

satellite Kompsat-2 or Arirang-2

It has been suggested that the article [Arirang-2] or section be merged with [Satellite Kompsat-2]. I agree with this suggest. I purpose the title Satellite Kompsat-2 or Arirang-2 because :

• Kompsat-2 is more famous in the world, Arirang is famous in South Korea
• To write satelitte in the title because Arirang is also a Korean folk song, a TV, a film and more.

I will propose in few days a merged article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PascalMichelSI (talk • contribs) 10:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Korean Food

I'm not sure how this works, but why isn't anyone here speaking up against dog consumption in Korean Food section? While we shouldn't deny dog is consumed in Korea, currently it's listed along with beef, chicken, and pork.

I'm sure everyone here is aware dog comsumption (whether you think it's ok or not) is a controversial practice that's frawn upon by rest of the developed world. There ought to be more concentration on the controversy of the practice rather than it's consumption. Current description is biased towards bringing to practice to wiki-users as a norm in korea when estimated only 10% of koreans have tried dogs. The current editors do this by using words like "most popular" and with it's entry being longer than that whole "fish and seafood" category.

Food is doorway to a new culture and more and more non-Koreans are learning about Korea through the food. While the dog consumption in Korea does happen, it is not a staple as the editor (article semi-protected) of that page claims.

And how is an American with very limited knowledge on Korean food in charge of our doorway of who we are to the rest of the world? Santaria360 (talk) 03:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

We simply do not function as an ethnic battleground at Wikipedia. Please do not attempt to turn our encyclopedia into such. Please also see WP:SPA. Badagnani (talk) 06:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

and you should not hold hostage of an entry that doesn't belong to you, smearing it with biased language. What part about Korean cusine do you not understand and what makes you an expert? From our conversation 2 years ago, your expertise to Korean food is the fact that you eat a lot of korean food and you have "many" korean friends... Also, still looking for answer to that question on why you INSIST that you keep dog eating as a major entry in Korean cuisine Santaria360 (talk) 07:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

To Santaria360: Since when is the English language edition of Wikipedia “[your] doorway of who [you] are to the rest of the world”? That's so not what Wikipedia is about.

I'm sorry to say that I can't be bothered to read through the discussions, but I'm sure there are simple ways to make everybody happy by mentioning that dog meat is consumed (that's noteworthy to many English readers, however rare it may be!), while also leaving no doubt about what status fido has in Korean cuisine by saying that it “is far from being an everyday food for the vast majority of South Koreans”, that “most South Koreans have only ever eaten it a few times and some deliberately avoid it”, or something along those lines. Readers will get a better picture if Wikipedia gives more information instead of hiding away dog consumption.

Frankly, I don't believe that only 10 % have ever eaten dog. Also, that's just South Korea and says nothing on the significance of dog meat in North Korea and Manchuria. – Wikipeditor (talk)

First, whether Wiki is doorway or not is subjective and whether that's what wikipedia is all about is secondary to the what the readers actually feel about the content at hand. Second, nowhere in the article mentions any of that distinction between dog, beef, chicken, and pork consumption and my solution isn't a censorship of dog eating, but presenting idea as a separate topic rather than pick and choosing the content readers should know, which is current what it is. Third, you very well know that when referring to Korea, people typically mean South Korea. Nowhere in the article can you find foods popular in North and statistics from it is rare and not dependable. Also, you said "Frankly, I don't believe that only 10% have ever eaten dog." Since when was Wikipedia about what you believe to be true? And if you want to count Koreans in North and Manchuria, why stop there? Why not people of Korean ancestry (first, second, third... generations) in US, Brazil, Canada, and etc see what % of them had eaten dogs. Santaria360 (talk) 01:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This is all nonsense. "Korea" & "Koreans" usually refer to "South Korea" & "South Koreans," and when were we talking about Koreans in Manchuria? That's like saying we should merge national statistics of France with those of French in the US, etc... We don't know anything about N. Koreans, so don't bring them up & only fact we've got to play around with is that less than 10% of S. Koreans have eaten dog meat. (Chunbum Park (talk) 20:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC))

The Wall Street Journal says that one in three South Koreans has tasted dog meat.[3]. That seems a significant number. Badagnani (talk) 22:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

the article if you read it is not what Wall street Journal says. Please don't misrepresent. WSJ is quoting Korean TV station SBS on what they surveyed. We do not know the purpose of the survey, sample size, and the wording of it. If you ever created a survey with a help of Gallup, then you would know that statistics can be manipulated based on they way question is asked and who you ask. I got 10% from an animal rights group article in Korea. Whether that's true or not is disputable, so that only goes to further my point that there should be a separate section about controversial Korean foods. Santaria360 (talk) 01:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Please read the discussion archives straight through before commenting further (as you were earlier asked to do). "Dog meat" originally had its very own section in the Korean cuisine article, discussing it as a controversial food, but lengthy discussion and consensus between many Korean and non-Korean editors led to its being integrated into the "Meats" section and given a much more streamlined treatment. Part of the reason for this was that the "Dog meat" section on its own, at the end of the article, was thought to draw too much attention to this controversy. You'll see this reasoning when you read the discussion archives straight through. Badagnani (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Again, as I said on the "korean food" forum. I care about what's now, not the previous editions of what was before. I've been reading Wiki for awhile. I do remember some of the previous entries. You say that the too much attention is drawn to the controversy, but obviously article is still drawing controversy the way it is. I don't see any reason why, because it didn't work certain way in the past, that it shouldn't work another way with revisions. Santaria360 (talk) 02:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Here, ~60% of Koreans under age 30 won't eat dog meat, according to a survey by a government ministry. Still, my perception is that dog meat consumption is not common. (Chunbum Park (talk) 02:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC))

Perceptions are often shaped by one's experience; it's much better to rely on the statistics. If you would read the discussion archives straight through, it would be very helpful. Daily and annual tonnages for dog are supplied. Badagnani (talk) 02:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I did and I'm still not satisfied. Maybe I'm misunderstanding and you can give me clear reason as to why to my question on the korean foods discussion. Like I've said before, statistics can be manipulated based on the way a question is asked, the purpose, who you ask, and what's really important now, is the time that it's asked(as in what else is happening in current event). Currently in Korea, there's mad cow scare and fear that people will get sick when they eat beef. Person's answer can very easily be altered on what's going on with a current event. May I remind you that after 9/11, going to war against Iraq was a very popular idea on any polls and statistics you looked at because people being polled were vulnerable by the fears of another attack. Few years later, it's completely a different story. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by Santaria360 (talk • contribs)

I was addressing User:Chunbum Park in the above comment. Badagnani (talk) 03:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with the article covering only South Koreans, but then please move it to “South Korean food”. To Badagnani: Perceptions are shaped by experience, but if you ask a whole bunch of people who have spent some time in South Korea and nobody of them will tell you that dog is a common food, then by common sense it no longer looks like a randomly shaped assumption, is it? Of course, that would be original research and shouldn't go in a Wikipedia article. But statistics can be wrong, too. For example, a family I've visited in Gyeongsang reared a few dogs and it wasn't their main source of income, so I wouldn't be surprised if those dogs never appear in any papers and statistics. That's the only farm I've seen in detail, so while from my limited view there may be a lot of farmers out there rearing undocumented dogs on a small scale (which would mean statistics show less than what's really produced), it may just as well be a highly unusual thing. Oh and it would be cool to have separate figures for both production and consumption for each country involved in the business. And import/export numbers. Not here, but in the dog meat article, of course. Who knows, once we have all those figures, it may turn out that South Korea produces quite a lot of dog meat but then exports much of it to other dog-appreciating places. – Wikipeditor (talk)

Translation

I need translations for the following titles: 악재 겹친 '동방신기', 비상 {-} 동방신기 영웅재중, 친자 확인 소송 {-} <속보>영웅재중 생부 가족, "재중이 위해 소송취하하겠다" {and} 영웅재중 “난 김재중으로 살고파”. Feel free to remove this if I am breaking a rule... 月と日の出 15:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

List of Korean inventions

List of Korean inventions

I propose that this article should be deleted. Everything mentioned is already list under Science and Technology in Korea article Anyone else agree? Jegal (talk) 02:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)