User talk:Appleby/Archive2

Marginal sea argument

On March 31, you removed a line that I had in the East Sea dispute article, saying in your comment that my addition was redundant, and to read the discussion to see why.

I've looked through the discussion, but was unable to find anything specifically on that issue. Could you point me to the place where that issued was settled? Unschool 17:42, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Korean artists

I have collection of information about over 400 Korean (mostly K-pop) artists and increasing the collection on weekly basis. A lot of entries are introduced and edited in kpopwiki first and when the content is ready for inclusion here, I will try to import with minor editing so it conforms to Wikipedia guidelines. Monni 20:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

History of Korea

You have told me to provide a source for changes I have made to History of Korea article. I did provide the reference, so if you have eyes, go and read it, and stop reverting without valid reasons. Sydneyphoenix

Hello Appleby. I think I should make a point. You keep reverting my edit to History of Korea page, citing your reason as 'reverting vandalism' and so forth. Well, I suggest you go and find the definition of vandalism in your dictionary. What I have done is merely to state that ther exists an alternative theory to ancient history of Korea, which is quite natural as no one can be certain of events that occurred many thousands of years ago. I did not get rid of the your contribution to the page, only reworded it, so that to the future reader it is clear that there are alternative view to the history. By getting rid of my statements that alternative interpertations to these events exist, you are showing me that you cannot accept that alternative interpretation of events exists, and by doing so, you are violating Neutral Point of View policy yourself.

If you have urge to get rid of all my contribution again, instead of constructive edit, explain exactly how my previous edits to the page qualify as vandalism. Otherwise, restrict yourself to constructive editing to the page so that neutral point of view (which you hold dear, and so do I) can be maintained through the presentation of different interpretation of ancient Korean History.

P.S. In case you think that I am a hwandan-gogi believing Joe Blow who just picks his history knowledge from internet, with no education in history, I currently study History at the University of Sydney and have access to English version of the historical sources such of Samguk Yusa and Shi Ji. I wil be grateful if you stop questioning my motivation as a wikipedia editor.

Have a good one, Appleby -- Sydneyphoenix

Korean people image

Hey, nice work on the images for the Korean people article. I'm glad that got sorted out. I'll be on the lookout for CC or GFDL images of Korean women that we can add. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 22:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Come to think, there's probably a Wikipedian somewhere who would agree to serve as our model for that purpose, or who could find someone else who would. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 22:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, there certainly are useable images on Flickr ... I feel kind of weird about appropriating a stranger's image to serve as postergirl for her ethnicity, though., even if it is CC. I guess they should have known anything was possible when the image got copylefted ... - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 05:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

East Sea RfC

Aye, there's the rub. Not totally straightforward, & open to various arguments. This one deserves some thought - will provide my input fortwith on the East Sea page.Bridesmill 05:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Korea Portal

Great idea! Unfortunately i will be rather busy until the end of June. i'll still try to contribute now and then, but there's quite a bit going on right now. Mikhail Koh 23:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Kumdo

Hello. I am Michael Friedrich. Please look at talk:Kumdo. I left an answer to your comment. Please read it and leave a comment, whether you're still against the merger or not. As for now, 3, including me, are for the merger and 3, including you, are against it. This talk is not over yet. If you don't leave a comment, I understand it as approval for the merger. Thanks.Michael Friedrich 15:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Buddhist Scripture

Hello! Well, I took a wikibreak for four days, but I came back. Anyway, I'm planning to write an article on the world's oldest printed document, 무구정광대다라니경. It was discovered in Bulguk-sa and was designated as one of national treasures of Korea. I wanted to write an article about it, but the problem is, I can't find an English name for it. I'm just wondering, do you know the English name for it? Or do you konw if there is a special naming convention for Buddhist scriptures? Regards, Deiaemeth 05:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Chae Yoon Eyee

Hey Appleby, how are you doing?

I got your message & replied to it. Just in case you missed it.

Woong-Jin-Wee-In-Jun-Gi #11 Jang Young Sil by Baek Sauk Gi. Copyright 1987 Woongjin Publishing Co., Ltd. Pg. 61.

This is my bibliography. It says in Korean that although China was the first one to print, a Korean named Chae Yoon Eyee (eui) invented the first iron movable type printing.

And then... Jang Young Sil (장영실), under the instruction of King Sejong, made a better iron movable type printing with the purpose of printing out the newly published Hoon-Min Jung-Eum (book on Korean alphabet). (Wikimachine 05:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC))

http://www.samboart.co.kr/information/info03.html

"⑶ 구리 활자 : 고려 고종 21년(1234)에 만들어 최 윤의(催允儀)가 집필한 ‘상정고금예문’ 50권을 인쇄하였다. 이것은 독일의 구텐베르그가 금속 활자를 발명한 것보다 211년 앞서는 것이었다." (Wikimachine 05:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC))

He made the 1st iron movable type printing. He's an inventor. Chinese made the 1st wooden movable type printing. Thanks Appleby. (Wikimachine 05:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC))

You are so persistent! I suspected that you were Korean. So am I, but I'm not good in my native language... so I'll type in English.

Here it says that Chwe Yoon Eye made & printed with that iron movable type.

"세계에 널리 알려지지는 않았으나, 사실은 우리 조상이 세계 최초늬 금속 활자를 발명하였읍느다. 고려 인종 때 쵀윤의가 지은 <상정고금에문> (에절에 관한 글을 모은 책)을 고려 고종 21년 (1234년)에 처음으로 활자를 만들어 인쇄하였던 것입니다."

pg. 61 웅진위인전기 11 장영실 by 백석기. (c) 1987 웅진출판주식회사

Thanks Appleby for your fervent effort to spread Korean culture and history. (Wikimachine 17:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC))

also, in my previous post, i put this: http://www.samboart.co.kr/information/info03.html

"⑶ 구리 활자 : 고려 고종 21년(1234)에 만들어 최 윤의(催允儀)가 집필한 ‘상정고금예문’ 50권을 인쇄하였다. 이것은 독일의 구텐베르그가 금속 활자를 발명한 것보다 211년 앞서는 것이었다." (Wikimachine 17:41, 23 April 2006 (UTC)) I hope that this helps.

Vandalism at Developed country page

The anonymous IP address that keeps removing South Korea from the list seems to be from one source. WHOIS IP database reveals that the user originates from Japan, and several of the IP addresses (different ones) had same gateways and ISPs. We may need administrator intervention on the continued vandalisizing of the pages. Deiaemeth 00:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Received your message. It may be him, but I doubt it because the anon IP addresses all seem to be coming from one ISP provider in Japan, and Cantus's edits not only removed Korea but other entries as well and modified other parts of the article too. It is becoming increasingly annoying. Deiaemeth 00:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Tsushima

There has been a great controversy at the Korean naming conventions, and I feel that you are taking a great risk by doing a revert. Appleby, one step at a time. I would rather that you engage in discussions at the talk page than engaging in reverts: The matter will just get from bad to worse with political entanglement.

For me, I find that there is nothing wrong on the Korean etymology. The Koreans have exerted political, cultural and historical influences on Tsushima, and with a section on Tsushima at the Korean-Japanese disputes, I feel that there is a need to highlight on the Korean way of referring Tsushima, and this point, being referred to Tsushima's co-neighbour Korea, is substantial in nature as Korea, like Japan, is a great nation and had thousands of years of civilisations. After Japan, Korea is the next nation who have exerted substantial influence on Tsushima.

I have no intention of spurring or hurting Korean-Japanese relations. Yes, I'm the one who authored the paragraph, but let's resolve the matter step by step with the pro-Japanese users who otherwise opposed to my Korean naming reference, seen from their User page profile and the way they wanted a consensus. Indeed, I can't find what's wrong with the paragraph. As for the sources this User:Dwy suggested in otder to support my statement, need sources. We can look for it, but such sources are certainly indeed only available in Korean.

Be it a supporter, or opposition of my contribution, I would certainly encourage you to debate the matter on Tsushima's talk, rather than reverting. Doing so these edits won't last, and it would possibly make matters from bad to worse. Let's be the gentlemen, and let the small fries bite the garbage first. Cheers! Mr Tan 04:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Kwan-Wook Park

I only wrote his name that way automatically, because that's how he (my uncle) always preferred it; he's not particularly well-known in English-speaking countries, but there have been English-language brochures/catalogs about him that spell his name the way I did. Use your discretion––it's not a huge deal to me. +swaly 18:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Geumdongmireukbosalbangasang and Bangasayusang, do you think there are better names? Anyways, glad you're back. Tortfeasor 03:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Korean notice board

How did you go about creating the Korean notice board? I wanted to make one for Hindu related topics but the current one is very inefficient and stressful to edit.--Dangerous-Boy 06:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Invitation to Shinkansen article

Hey Appleby. Could you look at the discussion at the Shinkansen article? I know that you are good with NPOV and neutrality. I disagree with the fact that an article for bullet trains is named Shinkansen just because Japan was the first to pioneer the bullet train market. I've never heard of the word in my life. None of my friends call the bullet trains Shinkansen. Thanks (Wikimachine 15:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC))

User:220.150.117.118

Were you warning them or me about WP:3RR? - CobaltBlueTony 18:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

No prob. They were FAST too!!! I have T1 connection & pop-ups and he was reverting with 10 seconds! - CobaltBlueTony 18:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Can we revert it to the version I was trying to preserve instead of theirs? - CobaltBlueTony 18:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, someone else did something good with it. - CobaltBlueTony 18:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

As I'm sure you've seen, I've reduced protection to semi-protection, but if our friend raises concerns on the talk page, be sure to at least hear him out. --Spangineer^[es] (háblame) 18:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Hinduism in Korea

Go ahead.--Dangerous-Boy 20:07, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

So are you going to start it?--Dangerous-Boy 08:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

hi buddy

I cann't find anything reasonable about where eng & foreign lang sources conflict, eng usually prevails, so please explain to me where is you so-called conflit？ the turtle ship is the first ironclad？ or the chinese is not a ironclad？ I just cann't help being exasperated by three of you deleting all my paragraph without a sound reason. To be neutral! This is wiki, not Korea! Ksyrie 21:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Images from Flickr

Hello Applby! I noticed, that you uploaded many nice pictures about Korea. Thank you for that, I like them alot. But I have some points to say.

• First about licensing: The Images are licensed under the terms of the by 2.0 or sa-by 2.0 versions of creative commons, not in the 2.5 versions. As far as I know, it's not possible to upgrade the license (without the premission of the copyright holder). You can't select these codes from the drop-down, but you can enter them manually to the input field: {{cc-by-2.0}} and {{cc-by-sa-2.0}}.
• Also, the licenses require you to give attribution to the copyright holder of that work. I do adding the flickr user name to the image discription.
• It would be greate, if you upload the images to the Wikimedia Commons. You probably know that place, but if not: The only thing you have to do is to create an account there and upload the images there. You can use the images from there exactly like images in the English Wikipedia, by adding [[Image:Imagename]] to the source code. I'm a German user and like to use the photos in the German Wikipedia, but if you only upload them to the English Wikipedia, if have to reupload them.
• I also noticed, that you don't use the biggest version of the images available. Most pictures at flickr are available in a bigger version. Just click on the "ALL SIZES"-Link right above the image. Since the Wikipedia software is capable of resizing the images, there is no reason for not using the biggest version available. This could become useful, if monitors advance in the future or for an print version of the Wikipedia, which usually have a much dense resolution than todays computer displays.

Thank you! iGEL (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply! ^^ iGEL (talk) 10:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

apology

I apologize for taking up room on the Wikipedia discussion board. You are right that I took up so much room. Thank you for your correction. However, please do not make negative comments about my style of writing which is less important and make direct attacks against my facts. Is this concise?

Sea of Japan: Naming dispute

Why you don't discuss about editing the page, before you simply revert the page? That part you are adding repeatedly is obviously Korean POV. I already have one support comment, but you have none. It seems that you are avoiding discussion. Naming standardization by IHB in 1919 maybe true, but is only a fragment of the history of naming. Adding only that part without data of usage before the conference is misleading. Therefore, such a misleading part should be deleted.Isorhiza 03:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Korea with a 'C' or a 'K'

Hi, Appleby, thanks for the note and the article. I'm very sorry if I appeared to be rude at the South Korea article. I had about 15 seconds to leave the desk when the section was added, and I had to work fast. Maybe I should have left it for someone else.

I've heard the arguments in the article you sent many times before, and, personally, it's perfectly fine with me if they want to spell Korea "Corea," if they think that will somehow be good for the country (though personally, I think it's as absurd as "Freedom fries"). But how are they going to convince users of English, German, and other languages to follow suit?... And what's the point if they don't? And will they then blame Japan for the ill-feelings they create by trying to dictate to other countries how to use their languages? And will Korean immigrants mind if I stand on a street corner in Koreatown, Los Angeles and rant that I'm not a "waeguksaram" in America... (But I wouldn't do that, of course, I just let them use their own language as they see fit.)

Anyway, this is a subject I know Koreans are quite passionate about, but I have looked into a bit myself and am fairly well convinced it's another (of many) national myth. I am very fond of the country, the culture and the people (and my wife is Korean), but I still understand that all countries-- Korea is no exception, neither are Japan or America-- have their myths and their nationalism. We all know Japan has plenty to be blamed for, and the Japanese are great self-mythologizers themselves, but that doesn't let the Koreans off the hook.

Even ignoring whether it happened or not, the theory falls apart, because 1) Even if the name were 'officially' changed from 'C' to 'K' by the Japanese, the Japanese do not control English spelling (and neither do the Koreans) 2) If the name was officially changed from 'C' to 'K', and that is the reason it's spelled with a 'K' in English today... why is it still spelled with a 'C' in French and Italian? and 3) I have an extensive list (did I say "dozens?" I should have said "hundreds") of books and articles published in western languages before 1900, all using the 'K' I'll be happy to share that with you if you are interested.

I admire the fine work you've done on the Korea article, and again, apologize if I appeared rude. -- Rizzleboffin 03:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, Appleby. Yes, I agree with all your points completely. I certainly wouldn't put it past the Japanese to have done something like that during the occupation (and I also believe they may have), because they certainly did worse things than that. But I don't believe that's why we spell it "Korea" today. Partly because I've seen many writings in English, German and other languages, going back as far as 1840, published in the west and Korea, that use the 'K.' I've also seen French writings based in Japan that use the "C." -- Rizzleboffin 05:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I suppose what would be needed is not a composite list of "Western" spellings pre-occupation, but a list of how it's spelled in each language pre-occupation. My assumption would be that the 'K' is used in the Germanic languages, and the 'C' in the Latin. A quick glance through my list seems to confirm this-- 'K's primarily used in English, German & Swedish-- though, certainly I do find some English articles using the 'C'. I wonder if such a thing is worth a Wiki article? But I'd really not want to get into it, knowing what a political/cultural/historical can of worms it would open. Not really my interest-- I'm more a film/music/art live & let live kind of guy... -- Rizzleboffin 14:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to pick away at this, Appleby, but I assume you have some interest in the topic too-- My contention is that it's a linguistic preference-- indeed "Corea" would be pronounced "Chorea" or "Tsorea" in some languages. Anyway, it occurs to me that checking whether the French & Italians switched to the 'K' spelling during the occupation would hold some weight too. Particularly Italy, since they were an Axis power, and therefore an ally of Japan. If Japan were dictating this change from "C" to "K" surely Italy, as an ally, would have followed suit before the English and Americans. But this all ventures into Original Research, so doesn't belong in any article anyway. And the whole story goes into the petty tit-for-tat tendencies that just keep Korea & Japan at each other's throats, rather than working together for the common good. I guess it does give North & South Korea something to unify behind though... ;) OK, I'll leave the topic for now. -- Rizzleboffin 17:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment on the Cinema of Korea page, Appleby. It's been a lot of fun putting that together. Still a lot of work to be done. I've kind of got an outline of the history in place, but want to fill in more details now... and it sure is hard finding meaningful information on North Korean cinema! Thanks for pointing out the noticeboard too-- I didn't know how that worked. I've been wandering from topic to topic here as my interests go-- a little work here, a little work there. If I'm ever stumped for something to work on, I'll go there for ideas. -- Rizzleboffin 05:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Robot Taekwon V

Hi, Appleby-- I may have another little Japan/Korea spat started up at the Robot Taekwon V page. An anonymous editor put in a bald accusation that the Korean cartoon plagiarized the Japanese cartoon Mazinger Z. I rewrote it trying to hold back from dismissing the charges out of hand, but probably put in my own bias in the process. If you get a chance and have any interest in the subject, maybe you could check on it & comment? Thanks. -- Rizzleboffin 18:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Appleby. Much better. However, that 1966 TV series info must be wrong. I see it at IMDB, but can't see how it could be true... Possibly it refers to another series? I vaguely remember a Korean sci-fi series from that era, which might be worth mentioning when I remember the title... Or could the date just mistaken?... I'll leave it as is for now, but it bears further research... Anyway, many thanks! -- Rizzleboffin 18:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

what is NPOV?

Hi. Your act violates the policy that all wikipedians are reqiuired. I hope you'll learn what is NPOV. Keep the neutral term in the articles. Ciao. --Yuan.C.Lee 16:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions[1] made on June 1 2006 (UTC) to Sea of Japan

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 48 hours. William M. Connolley 15:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Re your mail... well I suppose it might be obvious vandalism, but it wasn't obvious to me. Why do you think it was? William M. Connolley 19:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Liancourt Rocks is a redirect to Dokdo, so i was correcting redirects, and explained so in edit summary. Appleby 20:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

OK. You're unblocked in 2 mins time. Advice: stick to 3RR even in cases like this; and/or discuss it in terms that even a blocking admin can understand on the talk page William M. Connolley 20:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

thank you. Appleby 20:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

But don't push your luck [2] William M. Connolley 22:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Please answer

I wrote a question to you at Talk:Sea of Japan#Ocean currents. Please answer.--Mochi 02:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Did you delete without reading?--Mochi 03:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Jipan

Do you do Korean history articles? It seems to me that the city of Jipan (Ji'an) in Chinese, which is today located in China, should be mentioned somewhere. It was a Geoguryeo area and has important tomb paintings. Badagnani 21:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

i'm no expert, but have worked on korean history articles. the Goguryeo article does mention ji'an briefly. as a practical matter, it may be difficult to add details about goguryeo to the Ji'an article, because of the political tensions. & it wouldn't make sense to create a separate article on the same city. we should have an article on the goguryeo world heritage site in china, but that's just an obvious invitation to an edit war. do you have specific suggestions? Appleby 22:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

It shouldn't be a problem at all; the Koreans aren't claiming that part of China. The Ji'an article currently up on Wikipedia is a different Ji'an, in a region of China not near Korea. Is there a Goguryeo World Heritage Site (UNESCO) in China? If so, China must have put it up for nomination in the first place. Badagnani 07:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

3RR warning

Please make sure you are not reverting content-disputes more than three times in a day or you may be blocked for violating the three revert rule. Thanks! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 18:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikilinking years

Thanks for note ... I do try to be judicious about wikilinking years. If, for example, an article about Bob Dylan and it has years like 1962, 1964, 1965, etc. I wouldn't wikilink all of them as it doesn't seem to add much. But for ancient years like 542 or 1120 I sometimes Wikilink them because I think it's very interesting to click through and see what was going on in the world in that year. Actually normally I've seen the years usually wikilinked at the top of biographical articles in the birth and death dates. Glad to meet someone else who's interested in Korean articles. I've made a lot of new ones in the last few weeks. Badagnani 21:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

korean civil war and a whole bunch more

thanks for the message concerning re naming of korean war to korean civil war. i understand your point on renaming, and will work within wikinorms as best i can. but as is the case with the east sea (aka sea of japan) and Corea vs Korea, much more is at stake than mere spelling or semantics. to give a crude example of where form indicates substance and should be considered as important as substance.... in the US there used to be a very derogratory name for african americans. (the word is so repugnant to me i will reframe from naming it here) technically both terms refer to the same group of people, yet, as we all know, there is a very different set of discursive baggage and meaning carried with each word. to use the word i have omitted here usually means the speaker approves/agrees with the deeper meaning of that word about african americans.

in the same way, korean civil war vs korean war. the latter is a name that assumes the cold war views and narratives are "correct"/valid and functioning. these narratives were authored by large and powerful nations with their own agendas (not all koreans) on communism, etc. the real question is who controls the language/narratives by whichso many koreans (or anyone) is represented.

similarly, "sea of japan" is not "neutral" simply because it the most commonly used phrase in the US for that body of water. the origins of the term are rooted in japanese imperialism and control of koreans, both as a people and how they are seen by others. the "sea of japan" is one small part of a larger attempt by the japanese from 1905 to 1945 to culturally eradicate koreans. to perpetuate this term, whether consciously or not, is to perpetuate one small artifact of japanese policies towards koreans.

add to this that wikipedia is not simply about "stating that which is already accepted or know." wikipedia is producing knowledge, and the type of knowledge it produces is not neutral to all parties concerned. (many koreans dont find "sea of japan" neutral. many japanese dont find "east sea" neutral. there is NO neutrality in this instance.)

also add this, this debate/use of "sea of japan" (or KCW, or Corea) as an issue/argument/discourse takes on the particular form it does in english language wikipedia because most of the readers and writers are european, north american, or some similar group whose countries have at one time or another engaged in colonial activities. (i may be mistaken, but perhaps a survey would discern that) regardless of what wikipedians like to say about NPOV, the disproportionately large number of folks connected to such ex-colonial countries (relative to the total population of the earth) does have an affect upon wikipedia's production knowledge. for many americans, "sea of Japan", korean war" and "Korea" seem emminately reasonable. perhaps, but it does not mean these terms are "neutral". it only means that in THIS particular setting, they seem neutral to a group who already share certain cultural values. i am not saying this is "wrong", but i am saying that NPOV is really not what it seems to be, AND, that by denying alternative voices ("east sea, etc etc) is to confirm an existing POV.

(this is also one reason why on my user page i designed that cute little user box... "No NPOV - this user believes that NPOV is the opiate of the wikipedian masses.")

next, the rationale that simply because it is the most commonly known/used version or a term so we need to keep/use it, is not always compelling. indeed, if ALL such arguments were settled this way, there would be little room for innovation and new thinking.

so, to wrap up my long-winded post, i find that i am largely in agreement with you (appleby) in your efforts to rename certain terms about korea. for beneath your effort, whether consciously or not, you are asking THE most fundamental question when knowledge is produced.... who benefits, why and how? Hongkyongnae 15:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Korea/Korean Peninsula

Hello Appleby. I'm not sure I understood the point of your revert. I have little doubt that the same issue exists with Japan, which of course has not always been referred to as Japan, and I would absolutely support removing anachronistic references to Japan as well, if they exist. But I think it is misleading to say that something came from "Korea" when Korea was not Korea at the time but a number of kingdoms on the Korean peninsula. Note that I do not think all references to Korea or Japan are wrong, like Korean history, or Japanese history. But to use those references when making a point that is confined to a particular period in time is wrong. References confined to a particular period of time should refer to the geographical region (the Korean peninsual) or to the specific kingdom or city in question. I'm not sure I understand why this is so controversial, or what the problem is with saying rice cultivation was introduced from the Korean peninsula?-Jefu 07:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Gaogouli

Well, I did the references this time.

Again,I did the references. Read it before you delete.

Wikimachine

Hey Appleby! I will be restricted from internet connection (thus Wikipedia) most of the time, and I will not be able to respond to many of the arguments that I had already exposed myself to. I discussed much with you, and I think you are a very experienced Wikipedian.

So, on my talk page, I left a list of Wikipedians whom people might contact in place of me. Such people might include User talk:Objectman and many other JPOV advocates.

Also, if you happen to scroll over arguments that I used to continue, and the JPOV Wikipedians' comebacks aren't answered, you could answer them for me -that is, if you happen to know about the subject.

Thanks for doing this favor! (Wikimachine 21:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC))

---

Today I found out that I am availed internet access. So, never mind! (Wikimachine 14:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC))

Support needed

Please support me on renmaing some Seven-Year War articles. Thank you. Taeguk Warrior 12:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Samulnori

Hi, thanks for the note -- very cool but you've caught me at the edge of my knowledge. I mostly know nori as a type of seaweed used for gimbap (ha ha) but seriously I've looked at the photo and it appears to be the dance with the revolving head streamers that goes with samulnori (4 percussion instruments). In this case it's not really 4 because there are multiples of each instrument. I think you probably already knew about this. It's my understanding that this kind of samulnori is a revved-up/modernized/formalized version of farmers' music that is suitable for stage performance. There aren't too many real Korean farmers who perform this kind of thing.  :) Does that help at all? If you need Korean music help in the future, don't hesitate to ask. Badagnani 06:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I've done some research and it looks like pungmul nori is the original farmers' genre from which Samulnori is the modern derivation. I've added a link that should explain things. Badagnani 06:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, now I see that madang nori ("outdoor performance") is a genre created out of nong ak and other folk genres about 30 years ago. I wasn't familiar with the distinction between this and samulnori and guess I'm still not. Badagnani 06:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

From what I now know about madang nori, one could say in the caption something like "A performance of madang nori, a popular modern form of Korean folk music and dance, with percussive accompaniment provided by drums and gongs." Does that cover the bases? Is it too long? Badagnani 18:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, my Korean musicologist friend just looked at the photo. She is a composer who writes contemporary pieces based on pungmul nori and has been to the Folk Village where the photo was shot. She said this performance isn't madang nori but instead it's pungmul nori or samul nori. The reason for this is that madang nori is more of an outdoor opera (drama) similar to the Peking Opera of China, with 20-30 performers, more elaborate costumes than the ones shown, and also including dialogue and storytelling that is very similar in delivery to pansori, with dance and minyo folksongs, etc. So the caption should probably be changed to call the photo pungmul nori or samul nori. Badagnani 23:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe this should take more research. My friend said samulnori can have the streamer hats but let's do some more checking. There's a lot of Korean music that's not so well known, but our work is cumulative, so we'll cover it little by little until it's all well documented for the English-speaking world! :) Badagnani 14:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

It was absolutely helpful! I think many, if not most Koreans don't know this info, at least in so much detail. On a related note, see my comment regarding the photo for buk. While "buk" is the generic term for drum, the one depicted is probably not what most people call a "buk" (the samulnori buk or pansori buk) but a classical drum with a different and more specific name. Badagnani 18:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

3RR on Talk:Tsushima Basin

I have listed you on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR for 3RR. You know the process, i guess. -- Chris 73 | Talk 20:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I may have missed that, but on what voter base was there a consensus for Ulleung? Historically, the discussion was on Sea of Japan for quite some time. Also, a while ago when you asked me to change the map from Tsushima to Ulleung, I did it without hesitation. I also rolled back the map to Ulleung (Tsushima) once during the vote because of a bad quality alternative map. While I voted, I would say that I am still rather neutral. Please rest assured that if there would have been one voter more for Ulleung than Tsushima, I would have changed everything to Ulleung (Tsushima) without hesitation, and declared Ulleung the winner. About the 60%, that is a recommendation, but not a rule if i read the text right. I added the vote notice on three talk pages, and added a closure notice after the vote with the result that I believe to be correct. Unfortunately, we cannot have both names in parallel, and one has to go first. A majority preferred Tsushima, hence Tsushima it is. On your side I would strongly advise you to do less revert warring, and also live once in a while with a outcome that you personally don't like. Thanks -- Chris 73 | Talk 21:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Lets see what User:Nightstallion says. If he says no consensus, then that it is. But I believe that if the article says tsushima, then the map should say so, too. Different variations are very confusing. -- Chris 73 | Talk 21:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

hello!

Hey, long time no talk. I was wondering if you could chime in your opinion here Talk:Plzeň about moving the article to its English name. Thanks! Masterhatch 02:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hwarang

Hi Appleby, The changes look good to me, thanks for the communication. I do tend to get overwhelmed by info so I am more than happy that you are willing to clean things up.

Straitgate 09:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Images, 9.0

A: Last time, I swear. Are [3] and [4] okay to use? The former is for Wongudan and the latter, I believe, is an image of the Wongaksa Pagoda. I will figure out the rest if they're okay to use. If not, I'm going to get a flikr account and get those people to share their photos. Thanks! Tortfeasor 05:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)