This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Republic of Korea Navy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't this article be titled "South Korean Navy"? Per WP:COMMON? 18:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I think we have to follow the proper meaning of the official abbreviation ROKN that's most widely used in literature. We have a lot of ROKN out there but no SKN for example. ROKN means Republic of Korea Navy. The same way RN and USN means Royal Navy and United States Navy and not British Navy and American Navy. Desagwan ( talk) 20:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
But we don't title abbreviations, we title common names. Since South Korea is the common name, I think that should be the title and ROKN can be a redirect. Also, the common name policy I mentioned explicitly says to ignore official names when confusing or unclear, and "Republic of Korea" is unclear to most readers, who don't know which Korea has which name. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 23:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to reserve my opinion until other editors share their views on the matter. For now I just want to point out that the common name policy does not 'explicitly' state that we have to 'ignore' official names under circumstances groovily outlined. We have to settle this matter with a consensus among editors, as the common name policy does not explicitly set any obligations whatsoever on this subject. It only suggests recommendations and it's up to us which one to follow it. Desagwan ( talk) 05:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. Favonian ( talk) 17:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Republic of Korea Navy → South Korean Navy – Per Common name policy. This country is rarely called Republic of Korea, even in Korea, except by the few knowledgable enough to know the official names. The official names are also unclear and confusing (we all know the north is not a democratic republic). D O N D E groovily Talk to me 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you also simultaneously propose renaming PLAN to Chinese Navy, ROC Navy to Taiwanese Navy, and JMSDF to Japanese Navy per common name policy? Desagwan ( talk) 11:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello editors! A section on the Republic of Korea Navy has recently been added to the article Blue-water navy, under countries described as having an emerging blue-water navy. However this could benefit from further attention, particularly from those who can read Korean, which I can't! Would much appreciate it if anyone here could have a look. The objective is not to make the section longer, but to improve the quality and focus. Many thanks Thom2002 ( talk) 12:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
The list of naval engagements ought to include the sinking of ROKS Cheonan. Royalcourtier ( talk) 05:33, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Google's ngram tool records no hits for any form of his name in the English language corpus they use.
Based on actual usage in English, it would appear that "Son Won-Il" should be the proper name in usage for the article. Based on the WP MoS for Korean names, ( WP:NCKO), "Son Won-Il" should still be the correct listing.
What is the basis for the non-standard romanisation used in this article (and the article for the man himself)? Based on these google results, I would say both articles should use Son Won-il. If there is a prior history of a non-standard romanisation, these google results do not lend any credence to it being "common". Rhialto ( talk) 11:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
You have demonstrated that there is at least one use of that non-standard romanisation, which I have never disputed. And you've also shown that at least one such usage is from a reputable source. However, the criterion for adopting a non-standard spelling isn't either of these. The criterion is that it has achieved common usage in English-language usage.
Here is another wikipedia search, which should firmly remove any counts of other people named Son Won-il:
This search once again shows that the most common spelling for the man is Son Won-il.
Although not (afaik, but it certainly should be) in the MoS, I would accept a strong preference from the man himself regarding how his name should be spelled. However, he is dead, so we can't ask him, and I am not aware of any statements from himself on the matter. Are there any? Rhialto ( talk) 12:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
As a counter-point to the photo, here is a historical document dating back to 1949 (a year earlier than the photo with the other spelling), also ultimately from the US government, which uses the "Son Won Il" spelling. Whatever else they had to say about the man, they were not consistent in spelling his name. Rhialto ( talk) 13:06, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
The hit counts noted above are low enough that this can probably be considered a case of divided usage. I would propose the following:
Rhialto ( talk) 13:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
FYI: A digital archive: 'January 29, 1954 Letter, Minister of National Defense Won-Yil Sohn to General Maxwell D. Taylor' (Adm. Sohn served as the Minister of National Defense from 1953 to 1956.) http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/122897.pdf?v=d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e Bin2k1 ( talk) 15:00, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Republic of Korea Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Republic of Korea Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mnd.go.kr/news/mndNews/content.jsp?enewsFlag=mnd§ion=p_sec_3&enewsId=155119621{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mnd.go.kr/cms_file/Focus/2008.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
The table of commissioned ships that has been removed is not a redundancy; it is a summary of commissioned ships of the ROK Navy, and this kind of overview isn't found elsewhere. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to give a concise summary for those who do not wish to go through detailed info on the list page. For example, articles on the US Navy and the Royal Navy all provide enough information or an article page before referring to the list page.-- Bin2k1 ( talk) 17:48, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
The article has been updated and revised extensively since September 2018. Bin2k1 ( talk) 11:50, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:22, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Republic of Korea Navy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't this article be titled "South Korean Navy"? Per WP:COMMON? 18:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I think we have to follow the proper meaning of the official abbreviation ROKN that's most widely used in literature. We have a lot of ROKN out there but no SKN for example. ROKN means Republic of Korea Navy. The same way RN and USN means Royal Navy and United States Navy and not British Navy and American Navy. Desagwan ( talk) 20:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
But we don't title abbreviations, we title common names. Since South Korea is the common name, I think that should be the title and ROKN can be a redirect. Also, the common name policy I mentioned explicitly says to ignore official names when confusing or unclear, and "Republic of Korea" is unclear to most readers, who don't know which Korea has which name. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 23:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to reserve my opinion until other editors share their views on the matter. For now I just want to point out that the common name policy does not 'explicitly' state that we have to 'ignore' official names under circumstances groovily outlined. We have to settle this matter with a consensus among editors, as the common name policy does not explicitly set any obligations whatsoever on this subject. It only suggests recommendations and it's up to us which one to follow it. Desagwan ( talk) 05:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. Favonian ( talk) 17:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Republic of Korea Navy → South Korean Navy – Per Common name policy. This country is rarely called Republic of Korea, even in Korea, except by the few knowledgable enough to know the official names. The official names are also unclear and confusing (we all know the north is not a democratic republic). D O N D E groovily Talk to me 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you also simultaneously propose renaming PLAN to Chinese Navy, ROC Navy to Taiwanese Navy, and JMSDF to Japanese Navy per common name policy? Desagwan ( talk) 11:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello editors! A section on the Republic of Korea Navy has recently been added to the article Blue-water navy, under countries described as having an emerging blue-water navy. However this could benefit from further attention, particularly from those who can read Korean, which I can't! Would much appreciate it if anyone here could have a look. The objective is not to make the section longer, but to improve the quality and focus. Many thanks Thom2002 ( talk) 12:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
The list of naval engagements ought to include the sinking of ROKS Cheonan. Royalcourtier ( talk) 05:33, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Google's ngram tool records no hits for any form of his name in the English language corpus they use.
Based on actual usage in English, it would appear that "Son Won-Il" should be the proper name in usage for the article. Based on the WP MoS for Korean names, ( WP:NCKO), "Son Won-Il" should still be the correct listing.
What is the basis for the non-standard romanisation used in this article (and the article for the man himself)? Based on these google results, I would say both articles should use Son Won-il. If there is a prior history of a non-standard romanisation, these google results do not lend any credence to it being "common". Rhialto ( talk) 11:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
You have demonstrated that there is at least one use of that non-standard romanisation, which I have never disputed. And you've also shown that at least one such usage is from a reputable source. However, the criterion for adopting a non-standard spelling isn't either of these. The criterion is that it has achieved common usage in English-language usage.
Here is another wikipedia search, which should firmly remove any counts of other people named Son Won-il:
This search once again shows that the most common spelling for the man is Son Won-il.
Although not (afaik, but it certainly should be) in the MoS, I would accept a strong preference from the man himself regarding how his name should be spelled. However, he is dead, so we can't ask him, and I am not aware of any statements from himself on the matter. Are there any? Rhialto ( talk) 12:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
As a counter-point to the photo, here is a historical document dating back to 1949 (a year earlier than the photo with the other spelling), also ultimately from the US government, which uses the "Son Won Il" spelling. Whatever else they had to say about the man, they were not consistent in spelling his name. Rhialto ( talk) 13:06, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
The hit counts noted above are low enough that this can probably be considered a case of divided usage. I would propose the following:
Rhialto ( talk) 13:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
FYI: A digital archive: 'January 29, 1954 Letter, Minister of National Defense Won-Yil Sohn to General Maxwell D. Taylor' (Adm. Sohn served as the Minister of National Defense from 1953 to 1956.) http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/122897.pdf?v=d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e Bin2k1 ( talk) 15:00, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Republic of Korea Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Republic of Korea Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mnd.go.kr/news/mndNews/content.jsp?enewsFlag=mnd§ion=p_sec_3&enewsId=155119621{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mnd.go.kr/cms_file/Focus/2008.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
The table of commissioned ships that has been removed is not a redundancy; it is a summary of commissioned ships of the ROK Navy, and this kind of overview isn't found elsewhere. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to give a concise summary for those who do not wish to go through detailed info on the list page. For example, articles on the US Navy and the Royal Navy all provide enough information or an article page before referring to the list page.-- Bin2k1 ( talk) 17:48, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
The article has been updated and revised extensively since September 2018. Bin2k1 ( talk) 11:50, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:22, 8 November 2019 (UTC)