![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Lol, some funny guy changed the currency name from won to lost. Egrian ( talk) 18:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
It is hard for me to believe that LOL! If it was a sound similar to lost it would be a long name that seems too long. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happy1892 ( talk • contribs) 23:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
www.daehanking.com www.universalking.pe.kr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.105.193.156 ( talk) 12:27, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
As well as I know, "锦绣江山" generically refers to beautiful/scenic nation and does not specifically point to Korea. Quick internet search reveals the source as Dupu, a Chinese poet in Tang dynasty. 唐·杜甫《清明二首(其二)》:“秦城楼阁烟花里,汉主山河锦绣中。”
Could someone who is better at Chinese/Hanja confirm this? ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.30.28 ( talk) 09:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Korea original name is Chosun from ( Ko-Chosun Kingdom/ Puyo Kingdom in center of Manchuria/ North Korea). Korean word for Han-guk is modern Korean name for Korea.
Ko-Chosun: Chosun Dynasty 500 years. 1910 Korea was named Chosun. Korguryo, Koryo, Korea. Modern day Korea derived from Two Korean Kingdoms ( Korguryo Kingdom, Koryo Kingdom). Two Korea states after Korean War: North Korea: Chosun. South Korea: Hanguk ( Modern day Korean name). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korean1net ( talk • contribs) 02:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
What is Korea called in the Korean language? The Korean page uses "한국" in Hangul, and "韓國" in Hanja, and also "조선" in Hangul and "朝鮮" in Hanja. I think the second one is "Choson" or something like that, the name in Japanese for the first one is "Kankoku" and the second one "Chōsen" (which I why I think it's Choson).
moocowsrule
(Talk to Moo)
22:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I added the names for Korea before the split, and for both the two names after :) - RyukWar
Koreans generally refer to Korea as Daehan Minguk (한국). Joseon is the name of a former dynasty.-- 119.149.173.3 ( talk) 11:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC) korea name is '한국' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.218.56.2 ( talk) 07:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
The origne of name of Korea was given by Koryea. It was known by silkload. Chosunis a name of till 19C. Before korea-war, the name of chosunwas change into hanguk.--
210.218.56.2 (
talk)
07:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Koreans in the Republic of Korea (South Korea) refer to Korea as Hangook (한국). Koreans in the People's Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea) refer to Korea as Chosun (조선). In the People's Republic of China (mainland China) Korea is referred to as Chaoxian (朝鮮) and in Taiwan Korea is referred to as Hanguo (韓國). South Koreans refer to North Korean as Buk (north) Han (북한) and North Koreans refer to South Korea as Nam (south) Chosun (남조선). Can it be any clearer than that? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sinkorhon (
talk •
contribs)
12:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Just to add my two cents, Hangook (한국) is a short version of Dae-han-min-gook (대한민국), literally meaning The Great Country of the Han {this Han (韓) is different to the Han (漢)People of China} People. I would disagree that all Koreans call Korea, Hangook. The North Koreans calls Korea, Chosun (조선) and North Korea and South Korea as Pook-Chosun (북조선)and Nam-Chosun (남조선) respectively. While the South Koreans call Korea, Dae-han-min-gook (대한민국) or Hangook (한국) and North Korea and South Korea as Pook-Han(북한)and Nam-Han (남한) respectively. Hantheman ( talk) 19:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The official name of South Korea is The Republic of Korea, Daehan Minguk (대한민국 - 大韓民國). The official name of North Korea is The People's Democratic Republic of Korea, Chosun Minjujuui Inmin Gonghwa Guk (조선민주주의인민공화국 - 朝鮮民主主義人民共和國) Sinkorhon ( talk) 07:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that the first paragraph is possibly POV, stating that North Korea is a member of the Axis of evil (which is the term coined by GWB and doesn't have enough significance to be mentioned) and that North Korea is a rogue state (again, this is a term applied only by the US) so I put a NPOV template on the article. Kenneth Vergil ( talk) 05:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
The edit warring on this page is ridiculous. There's no reason why by now editors shouldn't have at least tried to discuss consensus on the talk page. There's a three-revert rule for a reason, and it's been completely disregarded here. I'm nominating this page for semi-protection, and hope that consensus can be reached on what the dablink, amongst some of the other backs and forth here, should finally say. —— Digital Jedi Master ( talk) 05:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Merriam webster definition of "civilization": 1 a: a relatively high level of cultural and technological development ; specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained b: the culture characteristic of a particular time or place
Lots of universities have courses on "Korean civilization": http://www.indiana.edu/~korean/koreanstudies.html http://depts.washington.edu/asianll/lang_degs/prog_korean.html http://eastasianstudies.missouri.edu/courses.html http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/archive/catalog/2001_03/catalog-229.htm http://www.eastasian.ucsb.edu/content/courses_korean.html http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/ealc/undergraduate/ealc.html
I don't know what the guy's beef with Korea is, but the introduction sentence about "Korea is a civilization ... " has been stable for ages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koreaeditor ( talk • contribs) 15:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The sentence is grammatically correct.
The three concepts are placed in a series, with the identical implied subject and verb. So the sentence is properly formed as "Korea is a [1] civilization, [2] formerly unified nation, and [3] geographic area ..."
The sentence at the top is a disambiguation notice about the page navigation, not a part of the topic of "Korea." The first sentence of the article about Korea (not necessarily the first printed words on the web page) should fully describe what Korea is, including the fact that it is a civilization.
Adding "civilization" is necessary to fully describe the topic, because the topic of this article includes the society and culture before and after the formerly unified nation, and also occupied geographic areas more or less than the peninsula, depending on the historical period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koreaeditor ( talk • contribs) 13:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
If it is felt that some reference to the notion of Korea as a culture is "necessary to fully describe the topic" then perhaps someone can try to find a better form of words to express it, but that is not how the word "civilization" is used in English. France is a nation, a country, a state, etc. It is even at a stretch possible to say that France is a culture, though it is more usual to refer to "French culture". However, France is not a civilization: that is not how the word is used in English. Exactly the same applies to China, Australia, Japan, Peru, etc etc. Korea is no different in this respect. At the moment I cannot think of anything better than "Korea is a culture": would that be acceptable to both sides? Or can anyone think of a better form of words? JamesBWatson ( talk) 20:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually, China says it is a civilization, and above you can see major universities have courses about "Korean civilization." I think it's a little different from France, because Korea is not a current country (there is no dispute that South Korea is completely described as a country) but a region with changing boundaries throughout a long, ancient history, with a record of early writing and cultural development. If you search for Japanese civilization or French civilization, you can see many Wikipedia articles refer to such. As for culture, there is a separate article on Korean culture, and as with China, Chinese culture is a subtopic of China, the civilization.
If you look at the history of this page, you will see that only one anonymous editor with two ip addresses has been continuously vandalizing this, olive and some other Croatia-related pages, so persistently that he has been blocked. This page, with the "civilization" introduction, has been stable and without dispute until that editor since February 2006. There is no dispute among editors, and if you would like to begin a discussion, I would suggest we try to gain consensus before changing. Thanks. Koreaeditor ( talk) 12:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
In the prehistory section it claims that 100 000 year old human fossils were found in lava. As far as I am aware this is impossible. Looking at the provided cite it claims the discovery was made by the 'Korean Academy of Social Sciences'. I googled this and could find nothing, and the website provides no extra details on the paper that announced the discovery. Furthermore, the website seems to be some some of religious advocacy site and seems to be trying to prove a longer history of humnan existenance than is currently accepted by science.
In short, I think this sentence is highly dubious and should be removed unless someone can find a more reliable source. Ashmoo ( talk) 21:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
are you telling me that google more reliable than Corean Academy of social sciences?? you must be kidding. google is about american information, It lacks information from other countries.
The statement of "Gojoseon's founding legend describes Dangun, a descendent of heaven, as establishing the kingdom in 2333 BC until the fall in 108 BC" is very unreliable. The legend of Gojoseon should end before 1126 BC when the history can be found in the written record. The written record of Shi Ji said King Wu of Chinese Zhou dynasty assigned Gija to be the King of the Joseon without being the vassal of Zhou. In 1126 BC Gija established his kingdom which ended in 195 BC, and this historical period is called Gija Joseon. In 195 BC, Wiman, who is a general of state of Yan from Chinese Han dynasty, defeated the Gija Joseon and start the Wiman Joseon until 108 BC. The record of Wiman has also been found in the Book of Han and Weilue. The following wiki links is another reference on Gija Joseon and Wiman Joseon. http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AE%95%E5%AD%90%E6%9C%9D%E9%B2%9C http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%AB%E6%BB%A1%E6%9C%9D%E9%B2%9C http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A1%9B%E6%BB%BF
No...Well, the fact that Giza came to Joseon is right, but he was in fact a descendent of Joseon people. Giza-Joseon is considered as Joseon because Giza never developed a new country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.58.128.139 ( talk) 18:58, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Let me get one thing straight - this article is supposed to be about 'Korea' (as a whole) not 'South Korea'. Hence, both sides should strictly have an equal amount of content and pictures.
Furthermore, the opening sounds very unprofessional.
South Korea, officially the Republic of Korea, is a capitalistic, democratic developed country with memberships in the United Nations, WTO, OECD and G-20 major economies, and home to such global brands as Samsung, LG Electronics, and Hyundai.
North Korea, officially the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, is a single-party communist state founded by Kim Il-sung and currently led by his son Kim-Jong-il, who has maintained relations with the People's Republic of China and Russia.
Maintained ties with PRC and Russia? This is too vague. What ties? Source? Are these 'ties' unique only to NK? The phrase needs to be re-worded. Why only pick out Russia and China? If you mean economic ties then I think you'll find SK has such ties with these countries also.
Bear in mind, there are more faults than this in the opening. The entire article is riddled with biased, distasteful views. The neutrality of this article is intensely one sided.
Couldn't agree more. The article sounds like propaganda material. So unprofessional, not worthy of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.55.147 ( talk) 01:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
-- Platinum inc ( talk) 18:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Is this history? "Gojoseon's founding legend describes Dangun, a descendent of heaven, as establishing the kingdom in 2333 BC." even the text as stated says its a legend. Do legends have a place in the history section? well yes.. but only when we can see their influence on the history. This is clearly not the case.
Korea has a long history. Through Gojoseon, Goguryeo, Baekje, Shilla, Goryeo, joseon Korea has a history of thousands of years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.101.195.74 ( talk) 08:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Gojoseon existed. It's not just random potterry and artifacts. Gojoseon people were the ancestors of the Sinla, Beakjae, and Kokuryeo (i dont know in english...sorry). The founding story is legend, but the fact that Gojoseon existed and it was the part of Korean history...that's undebatable facet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.58.128.139 ( talk) 19:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
This looks as though there is a whole set of info missing. It can't possibly be meant to start "(and conurbation (population)) : Seoul". 1500 edits ago, it said "Capital Pyongyang, Seoul 37°32′N 126°59′E / 37.533°N 126.983°E (and conurbation (population)) Seoul" but that still doesn't seem right (and it displays wrongly for that data anyway). I'd try to fix it if thsi was about a country, but Korea is 2 countries and is therefore different. NEEDS FIXING. -- SGBailey ( talk) 15:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC) population:48,289,037 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.97.65 ( talk) 02:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC) the best is to set the capital in the info box to what it was right before the country split.
Currently, Sennen goroshi constantly insisted with his own interpretation. I already noticed some reasons that almost history contents in this article to fill with political history, not these minor. And I also perceived why he suddenly insist it. Aocduio opposed his edits, so he chasing to this user, as if did me before. I think that is Sennen's unconditional resistance intention, not neutrality.-- Historiographer ( talk) 14:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
If only the naming debate was as simple as the Japanese say. Their Ministry of Foreign Affairs webpage is dated from 2004, and, not surprisingly, the Japanese say the name is agreed upon as Sea of Japan. But take a look at this -- a UNESCO agenda from 2007, where it looks like the issue is open: [1] Have fun! -- S. Rich ( talk) 04:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
See WP:NC-KO#Sea of Japan (East Sea) for the best discussion (and decision) on this topic. (No need to reinvent the wheel here!)-- S. Rich ( talk) 15:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Why is the East Sea being notated as the only reference to the ocean naming system between Japan and Korea? I looked into the history of this article and some have tried to indicate that this is disputed. Why is there no mention of this dispute? Whether or not the name has historically been "East Sea" or "Sea of Japan" is not the issue. The issue is that there is debate and dispute about this - and this should be noted in the article.
The other blatant Wikipedia no-no of this article is the obvious Korean revisionist slant on the "history." There is simply no evidence to show that "Korea" goes back to 2333 BC. This should be nowhere in Wikipedia. Unless someone can come up with reliable, dependable citations referencing conclusive archaeological evidence for the claim that "Korea" history back to 2333 BC then it is required to be removed. Wikipedia articles are a place for information that is backed up by reliable sources, research, and proper citations. It is not a forum to enforce revisionist or nationalist historiographies. Computer1200 ( talk) 18:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
The Korean Peninsula is about 85,240 square miles, give or take a few square miles, depending on your exact source. It's nowhere near 136,167 square miles like it says in the Quick Info Box. 136,167 square miles does not equal 219,140 km2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Quintapus ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering about that too. I was going to fix it, but there's a comment in the existing markup that says: "Do not remove per [[WP:MOSNUM]]". WTH does that mean? – Mike Uchima ( talk) 14:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I think using Sea of Japan is fine, but it's not necessary to impose it here. Articles unrelated to the dispute should use "Sea of Japan (East Sea)," Japan-specific articles, "Sea of Japan," and Korea-specific articles, "East Sea." ( Chunbum Park ( talk) 19:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC))
"Contaminated Rivers and Poor Mountains" (금수강산, 穷山恶水) and "Eastern Nation of inferior" (동방예의지국, 東方低劣之國)? Somebody made a nonsense to "Cultural and Art' part like this. I think that the one who changed this sentence can't read&write Korean language since he doesn't x changed Korean word(금수강산, 동방예의지국) but he changed English words and Chinese characters. It was originally '"Rivers and Mountains Embroidered on Silk" (금수강산, 錦繡江山) and "Eastern Nation of Decorum" (동방예의지국, 東方禮儀之國). I consider that this nonsensical rewrite of article is obviously from a malicious intent, and I think that it should be corrected again as original article.
i cant find it in the article so if anybody know, please add it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 ( talk) 12:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello. South Korea and North Korea are very different countries but maybe I am wrong but I do not think so. Anyway in Korean North Korea is called 북조선 and South Korea is called 한국. 북 means north and is pronounced kind of like book. Do you guys think the beginning part should be changed?
Happy1892 (
talk) 18:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)Happy1892
Happy1892 (
talk)
18:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
This article at one point described Korea as a divided country, now it discribes it as a region made up of two sovereign states, which is more acurate? I personaly view it as a divided country, since that is the position of the DPRK and ROK governments. Charles Essie ( talk) 23:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
This redirects here, but the article does not discuss this topic at all. Could someone perhaps stub it at least? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 18:02, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
I just realized there is not a Korean Flag anywhere. Davidkim2106 ( talk) 21:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Even the Vatican has a little map. JohndanR ( talk) 01:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Corea may be a largely obsolete spelling now, but is frequently encountered in older texts, compare Names of Korea#English usage. Compare now-uncommon but formerly common alternative names for cities, such as Peking for Beijing, which is mentioned right at the beginning of Beijing. Until now, this article didn't even mention Corea once! -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 16:28, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Have you seen PSY (he of Gangnam Style fame)'s new tv ad for Korea? It keeps saying "Wiki Korea!"... is that a direct referral to this very wikipedia page?? It's a major TV ad!
youtu.be/0E8h-3y2eIc —- 184.161.146.190 ( talk) 18:31, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
It's pretty darn long. How about moving the last paragraph? Minorview ( talk) 00:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Don't include needless pronunciations, alt pronunciations, and respellings here. Korea is perfectly straightforward for anyone with enough English to read the article, so leave that to the Korea entry at Wiktionary. The Korean pronunciations aren't necessarily straightforward, but the IPA can be moved to the name section since we have one.
Similarly, do specify who is using which name for Korea and don't include DRAMATIC!!! warning text protecting your edit. If there are vandals, revert them and talk to the admins; if there are good faith edits you disagree with, use WP:BRD and include reliable sources to back up your point. — LlywelynII 22:40, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Korea has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change all the internal links to Mahan (as in Mahan) to Mahan confederacy, thanks. 14.200.68.118 ( talk) 18:09, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
The occupation section mentions that there is a debate on the neutrality of that section (date Sept. 2012). The parent page, Korea under Japanese rule, however, is not marked for neutrality problems. I cannot find any mention of colonialism, occupation, imperialism, etc. on this Talk page. If there is no longer a debate around that section's neutrality then I suggest that NPOV banner be removed; if there's some other reason the banner should stay then the discussion should obviously continue. If no-one has anything to add, I'll probably remove the banner in a few weeks to a month. Strangejames ( talk) 04:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
It is now July 31 and no-one has replied, which is longer than I intended to leave this open. Tomorrow I will remove the banner unless others would like to re-open the discussion. If the discussion re-opens, please re-apply the template. Strangejames ( talk) 18:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
"Tomorrow" didn't quite work out, but anyway, the banner has been removed. If you'd like to carry on the discussion, by all means do so, and then re-apply the neutrality template. Cheers, Strangejames ( talk) 18:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
This is completely not the place to post this, but I don't know where the right place is. I assume there are editors on the Korea article that speak Korean.
We are going through an overhaul on the No Gun Ri Massacre article, and I would like to include a translation of the name of the event in Korean. I don't speak Korean, or any other southeast Asian language, so I'm totally out of my depth. Any help is greatly appreciated. Timothyjosephwood ( talk) 04:47, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Busan has a larger population than Pyongyang. Should it also be listed under major cities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:4080:5960:78ED:5924:9F35:3E7C ( talk) 01:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Needs editing both for grammar and citation. I am not familiar with Korean history and don't really feel I could properly edit it more than I have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgallagher8 ( talk • contribs) 19:00, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
"South Korea ranks second on math and literature and first in problem solving[citation needed]. Although South Korean students often rank high on international comparative assessments, the education system is criticised for emphasising too much upon passive learning and memorization. The South Korean education system is rather notably strict and structured as compared to its counterparts in most Western societies. Also, the prevalence of non-school for-profit private institutes such as academies or cram schools (Hagwon [학원]), which too emphasise passive memorisation, as opposed to conceptual understanding, in students are criticised as a major social problem. After students enter university, however, the situation is markedly reversed[citation needed] In Korea, university is hard to enter, and graduation is comparatively easier than entry."
Who is criticising the education system for empasising too much passive learning? This is vague and biased. Do you mean Westerners? Or...? who? where? ..."are criticised as a major social problem." Again, who is criticising anything? Also, what does memorisation have to do with major social problems? Where is the evidence that they ONLY or MAINLY memorise? Do they not work out problems using the memorised (btw ALL countries have children memorise information, it is a basic part of learning! Such as 1+1=2) information? This is just so simplistic and childlike.
You're showing "largest city" with two *cities*. Please don't make me explain. (Also, "Geopolitical".) Sadsaque ( talk) 03:01, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
IP recently made a change to mentioning of "east sea". Hidden text points to Sea of Jap Naming Con which seems to indicate it should properly be Sea of Japan and East Sea or East Sea of Korea should be used once parenthetically at the first mention. That is, unless I'm missing something. Timothyjosephwood ( talk) 13:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
We probably should remove the last sentence of the music section. There is no source for why these particular bands are included and others aren't, and it's acting as an invitation for every IP and their mother to add in their particular favorites. TimothyJosephWood 15:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
I have a question for the regular watchers of this page. I recently added pending change protection to this article because of what I interpreted as recurring but not-terribly-frequent vandalism. But I see that in the last few days it has been necessary to revert bad edits multiple times a day. That level of vandalism usually calls for semi-protection, because it can be awfully hard for the regular watchers to keep up with reverting the problem edits when they are occurring that often. I would like some feedback from those of you who monitor this article: Has the vandalism increased recently? And is there sometimes constructive editing from IPs, or does it pretty much all need to be reverted? Thanks for your input. Pinging @ Timothyjosephwood and Nizolan: -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Why does this article have an entire section devoted (redundantly) to public holidays in South Korea, but makes no mention at all of Public holidays in North Korea? Seems a bit of an imbalance. Mark Froelich ( talk) 05:00, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I recently noticed that clicking anywhere on the article for Korea sends the user to a twitch stream. Someone put a transparent overlay called "Arimaa-border.png" over the entire article - I have heard that a couple other articles were attacked in this way, as well. Please fix this quickly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshmaster ( talk • contribs) 09:36, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Actually, it was divided into military occupation zones in 1945 (just as Germany and Austria also were). The sovereign states didn't come into existence until a few years later... AnonMoos ( talk) 14:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Common marking the Sea of Japan in the world. But, this is a document about Korea. Then, Do whatever Korea wants. For example: East sea of korea (Sea of Japan) AoslwjdlqslRk ( talk) 13:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Why Koreans cannot talk about 'Korean pages' in Korean? Why English can talk about 'England pages' in English? Pwd01149 ( talk) 09:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
This is NOT The Gyeonbok-gung place(Laft image). fallow image with thumbnail is geunjeong - jeon(Office). The Office is main hall of Gyeonbok-gung.
And, right image is part of The Gyeonbok-gung place. So, this subject is very serious thing. Pwd01149 ( talk) 09:54, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
What does D.M.Z. mean? In ictu oculi ( talk) 19:19, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Presenting the sub-chapter about the Korean war as the end of History is a little awkward.
How about this: From subchapter "Division", move the last half of text beginning with "Since the 1960s, the South Korean economy has grown enormously and the economic structure was radically transformed" after chapter "war" with a new title: "Recent history" (or so) ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:89:2F18:8677:227:10FF:FE26:D460 ( talk) 02:56, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Korea
I think K-pop can be added in "music" because there is only information about traditional music which these days k-Pop is rising.(
Popcorn0099 (
talk)
12:13, 23 April 2018 (UTC))
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Korea is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Korea until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 10:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Maybe we should add a "Geography" section in this article and link it to the article "Geography of Korea". Since this article is about a region, it should include the region's geography. A planetree leaf ( talk) 06:31, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that the "heads of state" section only includes the heads of state of the Empire of Korea and the Republic of Korea (South Korea), adding another table which includes heads of state of the DPRK should be a good idea. -- A planetree leaf ( talk) 06:48, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
See List of heads of state of North Korea.:
Which ones do you want to list? Dimadick ( talk) 14:49, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Add information that Dokdo, in addition to Jeju island, is overtly South Korean territory. Dokdo is resided by only South Korean people and guarded by Armed Korean Police. Sdwarcht ( talk) 07:21, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Korea has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please switch the order of the second and third sentences in the introduction, so that it reads:
(Perhaps also merge "Korea is a region" and "Korea consists" into one sentence.) There are two description sentences ("region" and "consists") and two geopolitical, and the pairs of sentences should be next to each other instead of being mingled. 208.95.51.53 ( talk) 18:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Also, please reword Dokdo so that it reads
Korea and Japan still dispute the ownership of the Dokdo islets, which are located east of the Korean Peninsula.
The current version "Dokdo, islets" looks unusual at best. 208.95.51.53 ( talk) 18:22, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Korea has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Arirang as the Sporting anthem for the whole Korean Peninsula. Mtonna257 ( talk) 11:03, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
I propose that Korean Peninsula be merged here. There is a lot of overlap between the two articles. This issue was discussed before: a proposed move of "Korean Peninsula" to Geography of Korea in 2012 and a proposed merge of "Korea" to "Korean Peninsula" (apparently) last year. However, I think the problem has not been resolved. Most articles that link to "Korean Peninsula" use it as a synonym for "Korea" (including both North and South). If you oppose this, please to not use semantic arguments. We know that "Korea" and the "Korean Peninsula" are not the same thing. The question is why do we need two articles? How are these articles supposed to be differentiated?-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:00, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
There has been no response to this. I therefore carried out the merger according to Wikipedia rules. A few editors have reverted the merger without discussing it. So let's have a proper discussion as to why it shouldn't be merged.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 00:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Please do not modify it.
Any subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
A copy of this template can be found here.
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Lol, some funny guy changed the currency name from won to lost. Egrian ( talk) 18:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
It is hard for me to believe that LOL! If it was a sound similar to lost it would be a long name that seems too long. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happy1892 ( talk • contribs) 23:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
www.daehanking.com www.universalking.pe.kr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.105.193.156 ( talk) 12:27, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
As well as I know, "锦绣江山" generically refers to beautiful/scenic nation and does not specifically point to Korea. Quick internet search reveals the source as Dupu, a Chinese poet in Tang dynasty. 唐·杜甫《清明二首(其二)》:“秦城楼阁烟花里,汉主山河锦绣中。”
Could someone who is better at Chinese/Hanja confirm this? ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.30.28 ( talk) 09:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Korea original name is Chosun from ( Ko-Chosun Kingdom/ Puyo Kingdom in center of Manchuria/ North Korea). Korean word for Han-guk is modern Korean name for Korea.
Ko-Chosun: Chosun Dynasty 500 years. 1910 Korea was named Chosun. Korguryo, Koryo, Korea. Modern day Korea derived from Two Korean Kingdoms ( Korguryo Kingdom, Koryo Kingdom). Two Korea states after Korean War: North Korea: Chosun. South Korea: Hanguk ( Modern day Korean name). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korean1net ( talk • contribs) 02:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
What is Korea called in the Korean language? The Korean page uses "한국" in Hangul, and "韓國" in Hanja, and also "조선" in Hangul and "朝鮮" in Hanja. I think the second one is "Choson" or something like that, the name in Japanese for the first one is "Kankoku" and the second one "Chōsen" (which I why I think it's Choson).
moocowsrule
(Talk to Moo)
22:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I added the names for Korea before the split, and for both the two names after :) - RyukWar
Koreans generally refer to Korea as Daehan Minguk (한국). Joseon is the name of a former dynasty.-- 119.149.173.3 ( talk) 11:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC) korea name is '한국' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.218.56.2 ( talk) 07:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
The origne of name of Korea was given by Koryea. It was known by silkload. Chosunis a name of till 19C. Before korea-war, the name of chosunwas change into hanguk.--
210.218.56.2 (
talk)
07:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Koreans in the Republic of Korea (South Korea) refer to Korea as Hangook (한국). Koreans in the People's Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea) refer to Korea as Chosun (조선). In the People's Republic of China (mainland China) Korea is referred to as Chaoxian (朝鮮) and in Taiwan Korea is referred to as Hanguo (韓國). South Koreans refer to North Korean as Buk (north) Han (북한) and North Koreans refer to South Korea as Nam (south) Chosun (남조선). Can it be any clearer than that? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sinkorhon (
talk •
contribs)
12:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Just to add my two cents, Hangook (한국) is a short version of Dae-han-min-gook (대한민국), literally meaning The Great Country of the Han {this Han (韓) is different to the Han (漢)People of China} People. I would disagree that all Koreans call Korea, Hangook. The North Koreans calls Korea, Chosun (조선) and North Korea and South Korea as Pook-Chosun (북조선)and Nam-Chosun (남조선) respectively. While the South Koreans call Korea, Dae-han-min-gook (대한민국) or Hangook (한국) and North Korea and South Korea as Pook-Han(북한)and Nam-Han (남한) respectively. Hantheman ( talk) 19:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The official name of South Korea is The Republic of Korea, Daehan Minguk (대한민국 - 大韓民國). The official name of North Korea is The People's Democratic Republic of Korea, Chosun Minjujuui Inmin Gonghwa Guk (조선민주주의인민공화국 - 朝鮮民主主義人民共和國) Sinkorhon ( talk) 07:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that the first paragraph is possibly POV, stating that North Korea is a member of the Axis of evil (which is the term coined by GWB and doesn't have enough significance to be mentioned) and that North Korea is a rogue state (again, this is a term applied only by the US) so I put a NPOV template on the article. Kenneth Vergil ( talk) 05:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
The edit warring on this page is ridiculous. There's no reason why by now editors shouldn't have at least tried to discuss consensus on the talk page. There's a three-revert rule for a reason, and it's been completely disregarded here. I'm nominating this page for semi-protection, and hope that consensus can be reached on what the dablink, amongst some of the other backs and forth here, should finally say. —— Digital Jedi Master ( talk) 05:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Merriam webster definition of "civilization": 1 a: a relatively high level of cultural and technological development ; specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained b: the culture characteristic of a particular time or place
Lots of universities have courses on "Korean civilization": http://www.indiana.edu/~korean/koreanstudies.html http://depts.washington.edu/asianll/lang_degs/prog_korean.html http://eastasianstudies.missouri.edu/courses.html http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/archive/catalog/2001_03/catalog-229.htm http://www.eastasian.ucsb.edu/content/courses_korean.html http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/ealc/undergraduate/ealc.html
I don't know what the guy's beef with Korea is, but the introduction sentence about "Korea is a civilization ... " has been stable for ages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koreaeditor ( talk • contribs) 15:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The sentence is grammatically correct.
The three concepts are placed in a series, with the identical implied subject and verb. So the sentence is properly formed as "Korea is a [1] civilization, [2] formerly unified nation, and [3] geographic area ..."
The sentence at the top is a disambiguation notice about the page navigation, not a part of the topic of "Korea." The first sentence of the article about Korea (not necessarily the first printed words on the web page) should fully describe what Korea is, including the fact that it is a civilization.
Adding "civilization" is necessary to fully describe the topic, because the topic of this article includes the society and culture before and after the formerly unified nation, and also occupied geographic areas more or less than the peninsula, depending on the historical period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koreaeditor ( talk • contribs) 13:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
If it is felt that some reference to the notion of Korea as a culture is "necessary to fully describe the topic" then perhaps someone can try to find a better form of words to express it, but that is not how the word "civilization" is used in English. France is a nation, a country, a state, etc. It is even at a stretch possible to say that France is a culture, though it is more usual to refer to "French culture". However, France is not a civilization: that is not how the word is used in English. Exactly the same applies to China, Australia, Japan, Peru, etc etc. Korea is no different in this respect. At the moment I cannot think of anything better than "Korea is a culture": would that be acceptable to both sides? Or can anyone think of a better form of words? JamesBWatson ( talk) 20:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually, China says it is a civilization, and above you can see major universities have courses about "Korean civilization." I think it's a little different from France, because Korea is not a current country (there is no dispute that South Korea is completely described as a country) but a region with changing boundaries throughout a long, ancient history, with a record of early writing and cultural development. If you search for Japanese civilization or French civilization, you can see many Wikipedia articles refer to such. As for culture, there is a separate article on Korean culture, and as with China, Chinese culture is a subtopic of China, the civilization.
If you look at the history of this page, you will see that only one anonymous editor with two ip addresses has been continuously vandalizing this, olive and some other Croatia-related pages, so persistently that he has been blocked. This page, with the "civilization" introduction, has been stable and without dispute until that editor since February 2006. There is no dispute among editors, and if you would like to begin a discussion, I would suggest we try to gain consensus before changing. Thanks. Koreaeditor ( talk) 12:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
In the prehistory section it claims that 100 000 year old human fossils were found in lava. As far as I am aware this is impossible. Looking at the provided cite it claims the discovery was made by the 'Korean Academy of Social Sciences'. I googled this and could find nothing, and the website provides no extra details on the paper that announced the discovery. Furthermore, the website seems to be some some of religious advocacy site and seems to be trying to prove a longer history of humnan existenance than is currently accepted by science.
In short, I think this sentence is highly dubious and should be removed unless someone can find a more reliable source. Ashmoo ( talk) 21:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
are you telling me that google more reliable than Corean Academy of social sciences?? you must be kidding. google is about american information, It lacks information from other countries.
The statement of "Gojoseon's founding legend describes Dangun, a descendent of heaven, as establishing the kingdom in 2333 BC until the fall in 108 BC" is very unreliable. The legend of Gojoseon should end before 1126 BC when the history can be found in the written record. The written record of Shi Ji said King Wu of Chinese Zhou dynasty assigned Gija to be the King of the Joseon without being the vassal of Zhou. In 1126 BC Gija established his kingdom which ended in 195 BC, and this historical period is called Gija Joseon. In 195 BC, Wiman, who is a general of state of Yan from Chinese Han dynasty, defeated the Gija Joseon and start the Wiman Joseon until 108 BC. The record of Wiman has also been found in the Book of Han and Weilue. The following wiki links is another reference on Gija Joseon and Wiman Joseon. http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AE%95%E5%AD%90%E6%9C%9D%E9%B2%9C http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%AB%E6%BB%A1%E6%9C%9D%E9%B2%9C http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A1%9B%E6%BB%BF
No...Well, the fact that Giza came to Joseon is right, but he was in fact a descendent of Joseon people. Giza-Joseon is considered as Joseon because Giza never developed a new country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.58.128.139 ( talk) 18:58, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Let me get one thing straight - this article is supposed to be about 'Korea' (as a whole) not 'South Korea'. Hence, both sides should strictly have an equal amount of content and pictures.
Furthermore, the opening sounds very unprofessional.
South Korea, officially the Republic of Korea, is a capitalistic, democratic developed country with memberships in the United Nations, WTO, OECD and G-20 major economies, and home to such global brands as Samsung, LG Electronics, and Hyundai.
North Korea, officially the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, is a single-party communist state founded by Kim Il-sung and currently led by his son Kim-Jong-il, who has maintained relations with the People's Republic of China and Russia.
Maintained ties with PRC and Russia? This is too vague. What ties? Source? Are these 'ties' unique only to NK? The phrase needs to be re-worded. Why only pick out Russia and China? If you mean economic ties then I think you'll find SK has such ties with these countries also.
Bear in mind, there are more faults than this in the opening. The entire article is riddled with biased, distasteful views. The neutrality of this article is intensely one sided.
Couldn't agree more. The article sounds like propaganda material. So unprofessional, not worthy of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.55.147 ( talk) 01:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
-- Platinum inc ( talk) 18:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Is this history? "Gojoseon's founding legend describes Dangun, a descendent of heaven, as establishing the kingdom in 2333 BC." even the text as stated says its a legend. Do legends have a place in the history section? well yes.. but only when we can see their influence on the history. This is clearly not the case.
Korea has a long history. Through Gojoseon, Goguryeo, Baekje, Shilla, Goryeo, joseon Korea has a history of thousands of years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.101.195.74 ( talk) 08:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Gojoseon existed. It's not just random potterry and artifacts. Gojoseon people were the ancestors of the Sinla, Beakjae, and Kokuryeo (i dont know in english...sorry). The founding story is legend, but the fact that Gojoseon existed and it was the part of Korean history...that's undebatable facet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.58.128.139 ( talk) 19:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
This looks as though there is a whole set of info missing. It can't possibly be meant to start "(and conurbation (population)) : Seoul". 1500 edits ago, it said "Capital Pyongyang, Seoul 37°32′N 126°59′E / 37.533°N 126.983°E (and conurbation (population)) Seoul" but that still doesn't seem right (and it displays wrongly for that data anyway). I'd try to fix it if thsi was about a country, but Korea is 2 countries and is therefore different. NEEDS FIXING. -- SGBailey ( talk) 15:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC) population:48,289,037 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.97.65 ( talk) 02:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC) the best is to set the capital in the info box to what it was right before the country split.
Currently, Sennen goroshi constantly insisted with his own interpretation. I already noticed some reasons that almost history contents in this article to fill with political history, not these minor. And I also perceived why he suddenly insist it. Aocduio opposed his edits, so he chasing to this user, as if did me before. I think that is Sennen's unconditional resistance intention, not neutrality.-- Historiographer ( talk) 14:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
If only the naming debate was as simple as the Japanese say. Their Ministry of Foreign Affairs webpage is dated from 2004, and, not surprisingly, the Japanese say the name is agreed upon as Sea of Japan. But take a look at this -- a UNESCO agenda from 2007, where it looks like the issue is open: [1] Have fun! -- S. Rich ( talk) 04:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
See WP:NC-KO#Sea of Japan (East Sea) for the best discussion (and decision) on this topic. (No need to reinvent the wheel here!)-- S. Rich ( talk) 15:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Why is the East Sea being notated as the only reference to the ocean naming system between Japan and Korea? I looked into the history of this article and some have tried to indicate that this is disputed. Why is there no mention of this dispute? Whether or not the name has historically been "East Sea" or "Sea of Japan" is not the issue. The issue is that there is debate and dispute about this - and this should be noted in the article.
The other blatant Wikipedia no-no of this article is the obvious Korean revisionist slant on the "history." There is simply no evidence to show that "Korea" goes back to 2333 BC. This should be nowhere in Wikipedia. Unless someone can come up with reliable, dependable citations referencing conclusive archaeological evidence for the claim that "Korea" history back to 2333 BC then it is required to be removed. Wikipedia articles are a place for information that is backed up by reliable sources, research, and proper citations. It is not a forum to enforce revisionist or nationalist historiographies. Computer1200 ( talk) 18:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
The Korean Peninsula is about 85,240 square miles, give or take a few square miles, depending on your exact source. It's nowhere near 136,167 square miles like it says in the Quick Info Box. 136,167 square miles does not equal 219,140 km2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Quintapus ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering about that too. I was going to fix it, but there's a comment in the existing markup that says: "Do not remove per [[WP:MOSNUM]]". WTH does that mean? – Mike Uchima ( talk) 14:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I think using Sea of Japan is fine, but it's not necessary to impose it here. Articles unrelated to the dispute should use "Sea of Japan (East Sea)," Japan-specific articles, "Sea of Japan," and Korea-specific articles, "East Sea." ( Chunbum Park ( talk) 19:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC))
"Contaminated Rivers and Poor Mountains" (금수강산, 穷山恶水) and "Eastern Nation of inferior" (동방예의지국, 東方低劣之國)? Somebody made a nonsense to "Cultural and Art' part like this. I think that the one who changed this sentence can't read&write Korean language since he doesn't x changed Korean word(금수강산, 동방예의지국) but he changed English words and Chinese characters. It was originally '"Rivers and Mountains Embroidered on Silk" (금수강산, 錦繡江山) and "Eastern Nation of Decorum" (동방예의지국, 東方禮儀之國). I consider that this nonsensical rewrite of article is obviously from a malicious intent, and I think that it should be corrected again as original article.
i cant find it in the article so if anybody know, please add it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 ( talk) 12:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello. South Korea and North Korea are very different countries but maybe I am wrong but I do not think so. Anyway in Korean North Korea is called 북조선 and South Korea is called 한국. 북 means north and is pronounced kind of like book. Do you guys think the beginning part should be changed?
Happy1892 (
talk) 18:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)Happy1892
Happy1892 (
talk)
18:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
This article at one point described Korea as a divided country, now it discribes it as a region made up of two sovereign states, which is more acurate? I personaly view it as a divided country, since that is the position of the DPRK and ROK governments. Charles Essie ( talk) 23:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
This redirects here, but the article does not discuss this topic at all. Could someone perhaps stub it at least? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 18:02, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
I just realized there is not a Korean Flag anywhere. Davidkim2106 ( talk) 21:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Even the Vatican has a little map. JohndanR ( talk) 01:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Corea may be a largely obsolete spelling now, but is frequently encountered in older texts, compare Names of Korea#English usage. Compare now-uncommon but formerly common alternative names for cities, such as Peking for Beijing, which is mentioned right at the beginning of Beijing. Until now, this article didn't even mention Corea once! -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 16:28, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Have you seen PSY (he of Gangnam Style fame)'s new tv ad for Korea? It keeps saying "Wiki Korea!"... is that a direct referral to this very wikipedia page?? It's a major TV ad!
youtu.be/0E8h-3y2eIc —- 184.161.146.190 ( talk) 18:31, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
It's pretty darn long. How about moving the last paragraph? Minorview ( talk) 00:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Don't include needless pronunciations, alt pronunciations, and respellings here. Korea is perfectly straightforward for anyone with enough English to read the article, so leave that to the Korea entry at Wiktionary. The Korean pronunciations aren't necessarily straightforward, but the IPA can be moved to the name section since we have one.
Similarly, do specify who is using which name for Korea and don't include DRAMATIC!!! warning text protecting your edit. If there are vandals, revert them and talk to the admins; if there are good faith edits you disagree with, use WP:BRD and include reliable sources to back up your point. — LlywelynII 22:40, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Korea has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change all the internal links to Mahan (as in Mahan) to Mahan confederacy, thanks. 14.200.68.118 ( talk) 18:09, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
The occupation section mentions that there is a debate on the neutrality of that section (date Sept. 2012). The parent page, Korea under Japanese rule, however, is not marked for neutrality problems. I cannot find any mention of colonialism, occupation, imperialism, etc. on this Talk page. If there is no longer a debate around that section's neutrality then I suggest that NPOV banner be removed; if there's some other reason the banner should stay then the discussion should obviously continue. If no-one has anything to add, I'll probably remove the banner in a few weeks to a month. Strangejames ( talk) 04:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
It is now July 31 and no-one has replied, which is longer than I intended to leave this open. Tomorrow I will remove the banner unless others would like to re-open the discussion. If the discussion re-opens, please re-apply the template. Strangejames ( talk) 18:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
"Tomorrow" didn't quite work out, but anyway, the banner has been removed. If you'd like to carry on the discussion, by all means do so, and then re-apply the neutrality template. Cheers, Strangejames ( talk) 18:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
This is completely not the place to post this, but I don't know where the right place is. I assume there are editors on the Korea article that speak Korean.
We are going through an overhaul on the No Gun Ri Massacre article, and I would like to include a translation of the name of the event in Korean. I don't speak Korean, or any other southeast Asian language, so I'm totally out of my depth. Any help is greatly appreciated. Timothyjosephwood ( talk) 04:47, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Busan has a larger population than Pyongyang. Should it also be listed under major cities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:4080:5960:78ED:5924:9F35:3E7C ( talk) 01:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Needs editing both for grammar and citation. I am not familiar with Korean history and don't really feel I could properly edit it more than I have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgallagher8 ( talk • contribs) 19:00, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
"South Korea ranks second on math and literature and first in problem solving[citation needed]. Although South Korean students often rank high on international comparative assessments, the education system is criticised for emphasising too much upon passive learning and memorization. The South Korean education system is rather notably strict and structured as compared to its counterparts in most Western societies. Also, the prevalence of non-school for-profit private institutes such as academies or cram schools (Hagwon [학원]), which too emphasise passive memorisation, as opposed to conceptual understanding, in students are criticised as a major social problem. After students enter university, however, the situation is markedly reversed[citation needed] In Korea, university is hard to enter, and graduation is comparatively easier than entry."
Who is criticising the education system for empasising too much passive learning? This is vague and biased. Do you mean Westerners? Or...? who? where? ..."are criticised as a major social problem." Again, who is criticising anything? Also, what does memorisation have to do with major social problems? Where is the evidence that they ONLY or MAINLY memorise? Do they not work out problems using the memorised (btw ALL countries have children memorise information, it is a basic part of learning! Such as 1+1=2) information? This is just so simplistic and childlike.
You're showing "largest city" with two *cities*. Please don't make me explain. (Also, "Geopolitical".) Sadsaque ( talk) 03:01, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
IP recently made a change to mentioning of "east sea". Hidden text points to Sea of Jap Naming Con which seems to indicate it should properly be Sea of Japan and East Sea or East Sea of Korea should be used once parenthetically at the first mention. That is, unless I'm missing something. Timothyjosephwood ( talk) 13:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
We probably should remove the last sentence of the music section. There is no source for why these particular bands are included and others aren't, and it's acting as an invitation for every IP and their mother to add in their particular favorites. TimothyJosephWood 15:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
I have a question for the regular watchers of this page. I recently added pending change protection to this article because of what I interpreted as recurring but not-terribly-frequent vandalism. But I see that in the last few days it has been necessary to revert bad edits multiple times a day. That level of vandalism usually calls for semi-protection, because it can be awfully hard for the regular watchers to keep up with reverting the problem edits when they are occurring that often. I would like some feedback from those of you who monitor this article: Has the vandalism increased recently? And is there sometimes constructive editing from IPs, or does it pretty much all need to be reverted? Thanks for your input. Pinging @ Timothyjosephwood and Nizolan: -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Why does this article have an entire section devoted (redundantly) to public holidays in South Korea, but makes no mention at all of Public holidays in North Korea? Seems a bit of an imbalance. Mark Froelich ( talk) 05:00, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I recently noticed that clicking anywhere on the article for Korea sends the user to a twitch stream. Someone put a transparent overlay called "Arimaa-border.png" over the entire article - I have heard that a couple other articles were attacked in this way, as well. Please fix this quickly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshmaster ( talk • contribs) 09:36, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Actually, it was divided into military occupation zones in 1945 (just as Germany and Austria also were). The sovereign states didn't come into existence until a few years later... AnonMoos ( talk) 14:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Common marking the Sea of Japan in the world. But, this is a document about Korea. Then, Do whatever Korea wants. For example: East sea of korea (Sea of Japan) AoslwjdlqslRk ( talk) 13:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Why Koreans cannot talk about 'Korean pages' in Korean? Why English can talk about 'England pages' in English? Pwd01149 ( talk) 09:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
This is NOT The Gyeonbok-gung place(Laft image). fallow image with thumbnail is geunjeong - jeon(Office). The Office is main hall of Gyeonbok-gung.
And, right image is part of The Gyeonbok-gung place. So, this subject is very serious thing. Pwd01149 ( talk) 09:54, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
What does D.M.Z. mean? In ictu oculi ( talk) 19:19, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Presenting the sub-chapter about the Korean war as the end of History is a little awkward.
How about this: From subchapter "Division", move the last half of text beginning with "Since the 1960s, the South Korean economy has grown enormously and the economic structure was radically transformed" after chapter "war" with a new title: "Recent history" (or so) ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:89:2F18:8677:227:10FF:FE26:D460 ( talk) 02:56, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Korea
I think K-pop can be added in "music" because there is only information about traditional music which these days k-Pop is rising.(
Popcorn0099 (
talk)
12:13, 23 April 2018 (UTC))
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Korea is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Korea until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 10:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Maybe we should add a "Geography" section in this article and link it to the article "Geography of Korea". Since this article is about a region, it should include the region's geography. A planetree leaf ( talk) 06:31, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that the "heads of state" section only includes the heads of state of the Empire of Korea and the Republic of Korea (South Korea), adding another table which includes heads of state of the DPRK should be a good idea. -- A planetree leaf ( talk) 06:48, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
See List of heads of state of North Korea.:
Which ones do you want to list? Dimadick ( talk) 14:49, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Add information that Dokdo, in addition to Jeju island, is overtly South Korean territory. Dokdo is resided by only South Korean people and guarded by Armed Korean Police. Sdwarcht ( talk) 07:21, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Korea has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please switch the order of the second and third sentences in the introduction, so that it reads:
(Perhaps also merge "Korea is a region" and "Korea consists" into one sentence.) There are two description sentences ("region" and "consists") and two geopolitical, and the pairs of sentences should be next to each other instead of being mingled. 208.95.51.53 ( talk) 18:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Also, please reword Dokdo so that it reads
Korea and Japan still dispute the ownership of the Dokdo islets, which are located east of the Korean Peninsula.
The current version "Dokdo, islets" looks unusual at best. 208.95.51.53 ( talk) 18:22, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Korea has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Arirang as the Sporting anthem for the whole Korean Peninsula. Mtonna257 ( talk) 11:03, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
I propose that Korean Peninsula be merged here. There is a lot of overlap between the two articles. This issue was discussed before: a proposed move of "Korean Peninsula" to Geography of Korea in 2012 and a proposed merge of "Korea" to "Korean Peninsula" (apparently) last year. However, I think the problem has not been resolved. Most articles that link to "Korean Peninsula" use it as a synonym for "Korea" (including both North and South). If you oppose this, please to not use semantic arguments. We know that "Korea" and the "Korean Peninsula" are not the same thing. The question is why do we need two articles? How are these articles supposed to be differentiated?-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:00, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
There has been no response to this. I therefore carried out the merger according to Wikipedia rules. A few editors have reverted the merger without discussing it. So let's have a proper discussion as to why it shouldn't be merged.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 00:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Please do not modify it.
Any subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
A copy of this template can be found here.