This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Korea Times 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 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In recent years there have been a series editorials of anti-foreigner/anti-English speaker articles written by Kang Shin-who. These articles do not necessarily represent the views of the newspaper as a whole, but the fact that the newspaper endorses--and in some cases, encourages with awards--is rather disturbing and casts doubt as to its objectivity.
Although blogs are hardly Reliable Sources, the sheer number of both postsand readers' reactions to these articles makes this phenomenon noteworthy. 203.249.73.204 ( talk) 04:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Most of the incidents reported here have no information about the controversies cited. There should at minimum be a one-sentence summation of exactly what was controversial about the cited material; failing that, no information has been communicated and the text is just taking up space. And at least one such instance doesn't even include dates.
May I suggest the Bernard Wideman entry - which does cover the territory - be taken as a model to upgrade the other paragraphs in the section? Laodah 21:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of the controversy section. It reports mixed quality information and goes into TMI in some incidents, giving it an NPOV feeling. The rest of the article isn't so fleshed out; only fleshing out the controversy section feels biased. 211.36.142.234 ( talk) 23:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Korea Times 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 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In recent years there have been a series editorials of anti-foreigner/anti-English speaker articles written by Kang Shin-who. These articles do not necessarily represent the views of the newspaper as a whole, but the fact that the newspaper endorses--and in some cases, encourages with awards--is rather disturbing and casts doubt as to its objectivity.
Although blogs are hardly Reliable Sources, the sheer number of both postsand readers' reactions to these articles makes this phenomenon noteworthy. 203.249.73.204 ( talk) 04:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Most of the incidents reported here have no information about the controversies cited. There should at minimum be a one-sentence summation of exactly what was controversial about the cited material; failing that, no information has been communicated and the text is just taking up space. And at least one such instance doesn't even include dates.
May I suggest the Bernard Wideman entry - which does cover the territory - be taken as a model to upgrade the other paragraphs in the section? Laodah 21:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of the controversy section. It reports mixed quality information and goes into TMI in some incidents, giving it an NPOV feeling. The rest of the article isn't so fleshed out; only fleshing out the controversy section feels biased. 211.36.142.234 ( talk) 23:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)