Talk:Sejong the Great
|Sejong the Great has been listed as a level-4 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
MEOW The title should be "King X of Joseon". Sejong is no problem with Korea, but collisions would occur at Taejo and Gojong. -- Nanshu 12:28 Feb 26, 2003 (UTC)
- In the first place, isn't there convension about naming of rulers? In fact, all of Japanese emperors are named in the format "Emperor (name) of Japan" except some exception like Hirohito even though in the case there is no ambigousness. Shouldn't we simply use convension? -- Taku 16:22 Feb 26, 2003 (UTC)
- I don't know. If not, we should make and apply a convention to avoid needless confusion. -- Nanshu 11:53 Feb 27, 2003 (UTC)
- Inventing a convention is unnessesary. The hangul script on the monuments to him literally translated read "Sejong great king."
Japanese conventions for naming emperors have nothing to do with how Koreans name kings. It would probably be best to refer to him as Sejong the great (it has worked good for every single Korean I know and I know a lot.)188.8.131.52 08:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Let's just say we leave Peter the Great as "Peter the Great" as how we leave King Sejong the Great as "King Sejong the Great". King Sejong is the heart and soul of Korean culture. As a peace loving nation, cultural and technological advancements under him are deeply honored by Koreans instead of kings that wanted conquest after conquest. Hence personally, I don't think it's appropriate to label him just like any other Kings of Korea. Shushinla 03:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't really get what confusion can be produced by labeling him as "King Sejong the Great of Joseon". The convension for naming Japanese rulers has nothing to do with how we name Korean Kings. It is not the question of simplifying the names, but that of history, cultural significance. He is the one who created the written "Korean" language which enables his people to express their own thoughts in written language (and note that until then the written language was the privilege for nobility), who framed the most important cultural policies and who obtained a staggering academic achievement even supported by the very grass-root level at that time. I think this fact shows enough why his title should stay as it is. He is one of the nation's soul-that deserves such title "King Sejong THE GREAT of Joseon" - btw personally I'd like to ask Nanshu what he/she means by "Sejong is no problem with Korea" ; considering Nanshu doesn't seem to be a Korean name, it is somewhat thoughtless to judge other people's cultureHappyshannon 13:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
This article has several grammatical errors, especially in the "Technology" section. It's quite a shame actually... Ajcmksq 20:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I added a verification-needed tag to the un-sourced last paragraph on Hangul. Saying that Sejong was involved but didn't invent Hangul conflicts with the statement at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangul#History that Sejong apparently invented the script alone; since the archives record the Hall of Scholars complaining that he hadn't consulted them. (The Choson archives were uniquely-reliable for ancient times; since the court couldn't read and thus influence the accounts of the current reign, according to the biography below -- I'll try to get the citation.)
I read a similar account at more length in a short biography of Sejong that my son bought at a Seoul museum: Hangul was Sejong's invention, and most of his interaction with his think tank was trying to overcome their Chinese-character-steeped opposition. To be fair, the biography also said that the labor had affected Sejong's health, which might coincide with this paragraph's claim that a scholar found him passed out at his desk from exhaustion. However, the story about Mongol scripts and cave inscriptions I haven't heard anywhere before, and I think it is right to ask for sources -- there is nothing I see, unless it's in the Korean characters my browser doesn't handle. Again, to be fair to the claim, I read that Sejong did send scholars far and wide for projects like the vast medical encyclopedia and astronomical almanac printed during his reign. So while it's conceivable that this paragraph is true, we really need to see at least one credible source. --Howie Goodell 22:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Wtf... the article seems to have shrunk.
- Someone with the IP address of 184.108.40.206 seemed to have erased most of the article. I have restored the article. Wookie919 (talk) 23:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Lesbian incident... ??
That bit is interesting, but does it belong here? Seems bit odd sitting there. Was it a big scandal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 06:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC) It was a big incident before.. at it really happened — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:46, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
This section, an excerpt from the referenced link, is presented here without its context and does not fit with the rest of the article. I propose its removal.
|Revised Romanization||I Do|
That's the spelling according to modern South Korean dialect. But back when he lived, it was slightly different:
|Revised Romanization||Ri Do|
- No one uses NK spelling except in NK and by North Koreans in Japan. Korean all around the world uses the South Korean standard spelling which is phonetically more accurate.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 22:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Date of Birth
According to this site http://www.koreanhero.net/kingsejong/index.html# King Sejong the Great was born on the 15th of May 1397. I would like to know which is correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 15:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Good question. The Wiki article also contradicts itself on Sejong's age at death. The sidebar says he died at 53 while the main body of the article says he died aged 54.Muzilon (talk) 02:44, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Sejong's appearance on the won bills released in 2007 might be worth mentioning:
- Zimmer, Benjamin (18 June 2009). "More linguistic numismatics". Language Log. Retrieved 19 June 2009.
Was King Sejong's new calendar based on the latitude Seoul, or on its longitude? The latter seems more plausible astronomically, as it would directly affect hours and sometimes dates, and is implied by the mention of the Seoul meridian in the Korean calendar article. Pending a definite resolution, I have changed latitude to longitude in the article.CharlesHBennett (talk) 09:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
File:King Sejong.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:King Sejong.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:King Sejong.jpg)
Fair use candidate from Commons: File:King Sejong.jpg
The file File:King Sejong.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:King Sejong.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 13:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC)