![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was initiated by some berk who used it to graffiti and use abusive language. Unfortunately instead of using it an dcreating a proper stub the article was speed deleted.
Not a very good idea IMHO. I have therefore recreated the article in stub form Refdoc 19:37, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The intro to the article states that he attempted to kill the Showa Emperor (Hirohito) but the article mentions he managed to put a bomb into some army food in Shanghai during the emperor's birthday party. Given Showa never went near Shanghai, I'm curious about how this was an attempt on his life. -- Jusenkyoguide 11:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
This is absolutely ridiculous, I'll block anyone who furthers this assassin/terrorist stuff in any of these articles about Korean independence activists using VandalProof as a legitimate vandalism. ( Wikimachine 21:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC))
Lactose created this category as a subcategory under "Korean Criminals". If this isn't inflammatory POV BS, I don't know what is. This isn't the purpose of wiki categories. melonbarmonster 19:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't OhmyNews more or less a news wiki? Wouldn't that, like Wikipedia itself, make it a non-acceptable source? -- Jusenkyoguide ( talk) 01:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Last year the submarine ROKS Yun Bong-gil was launched, as mentioned here, among other places. Would be good to include in the article. -- Difference engine ( talk) 19:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yun Bong-gil. 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) 05:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
There are a lot academic garbage published. By definition, terrorism have criteria on its organized nature, motivation, undermining of a government by influencing policies, spreading of fear among a group of individuals, randomness, etc. So an act needs to qualify all these criteria to be considered terrorism. Otherwise the whole world are terrorists, because the Japaneses and Nazi were undermined/destroyed by organized, violence forces with strong motivations by the allies. I think you should remove such ridiculous POVs from the article. Using biased sources violated Wiki's POV policy. 钉钉 ( talk) 03:48, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
I think somebody is trying to push POV. Yun is considered a hero by the main stream. What Tessa Morris-Suzuki wrote in her paper is that If acts of violence by resistance organization or guerrilla forces are considered terrorism, then Yoo was a terrorist. But resistance organizations or guerrilla forces may not necessarily be terrorists. In other words, she didn't equal Yun with a terrorist. Shouldn't the allied forces in World War II be resistance organizations in the eyes of the Japanese and Nazi? 钉钉 ( talk) 04:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Nobody doubts that this is English Wikipedia. You need to be aware this is not a Japanese Wiki. The Japanese were Nazis during World War II and were defeated by UN allied forces. It is a mainstream of the whole world and Yun did the right things to kill Japanese Nazis. You are trying to push your Japanese POV to white wash Japan's dirty past. 钉钉 ( talk) 06:23, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I do doubt your English capabilities. I don't think adding "conditionally concurred" would change the meaning of the original quote. To avoid edit wars, I'll leave this to other editors. But the bombing happened during the Japanese invasion of Shanghai. Those killed by Yun are certainly invaders. It is also totally your POV to say that "Invasion requires an invasion force, active fighting".Three are culture invasions, now technology invasions etc. On the other hand, there were active fighting when Japan invaded Korea. It is only that you don't know. There is no doubt that Japan occupied Korea against the wills of most Korean people. That also can be called an invasion. Anyway, the bombing happened in Shanghai. Those killed are invaders, no mater Japan invaded Korea or not. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
You know nothing about Asian history. The war between China and Japan ended only when WWII ended. The Japanese occupied parts of Shanghai after Japan's first invasion of Shanghai. As you know they were killed while celebrating this in Shanghai. They are invaders by all means. For the wording "concur". I think what Tessa Morris-Suzuki wrote is not a total agreement. It should be "somewhat concurred". 钉钉 ( talk) 02:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Jusenkyoguide You are being reported for personal attacks. What I said above is that the Japanese invaders were killed by Yun while they were celebrating their success in invading part of Shanghai. The bombing happened in Shanghai and funded by the Chinese. The bombs Yun used were also manufactured by the Chinese army. It really doesn't matter whether Japan invaded China or Korea, or both. You're being nonsensical. Those killed by the bombing are invaders for sure. 钉钉 ( talk) 08:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
As long as they were occupying other countries, they are invaders. China is the ally of Korean independent activists. They were together to fight against the invading Japanese. The birthday celebration began with a celebration of Japanese success in invading Shanghai. The source used is an academic research journal on Korean Study in China. It is a good reliable source by Wiki standards. It should be not removed by any means. "invaders" is also the wording of the source. You need to be consistent with what you said:" Do not remove anything that is considered a good source under Wiki policy." 钉钉 ( talk) 08:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
You need to make discussions in a civil way like people who have education do. The format of the source has been modified, with quote provided. The original word in the source is "invaders"(侵略者). You don't have the right to change the original meaning of the source. The current English wording you made basically says that Yun would kill anyone who is Japanese. That's a total distortion and vandalism. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Ok, go ahead and ask help from the community. If you think that "aggressors" are acceptable, please add it after "Japanese" in the article before you seek help from others. The sentence you made basically says Yun would kill anyone who are Japanese. 钉钉 ( talk) 09:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Jusenkyoguide You are not doing anything. 钉钉 ( talk) 03:04, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Except some diplomats, people attending the party were all Japanese. I used "Japanese invaders (top military and political officials)" before, because the original words in the source are "侵略者头目"。 But you maliciously deleted them all. 钉钉 ( talk) 10:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
I think you'd altered the original meaning from the source. These sentences are in the controversy section, showing the views opposite to what you think it is the mainstream. Your wordings sound like there is no controversy. I'll rephrase this part using direct quotation and do the translations. 钉钉 ( talk) 08:25, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm very tired of this discussions with you. Those Chinese sentences are not easy to translate. I'll leave it to future editors. At present, I think we can use the "Yun only attacked the Japanese top military and political officials attending the event, and no other civilians were hurt by his bombing" wordings you proposed. 钉钉 ( talk) 07:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
For a short article, are we putting in too many images? Jusenkyoguide ( talk) 01:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
It was you who pointed out that this section maybe image heavy. I reduced the China memorial pics from 2 to 1. It is disruptive for you to revert back. Each picture needs have am explanatory caption.The memorial in Japan is only a monument. It is not comparable to those in S Korea and China. It is wrong for you frame it together with the one in S Korea without any captions explaining which is which. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
In that case, all these pictures need to be grouped together. There is no need to have 2 pictures for China memorial. 钉钉 ( talk) 05:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Jusenkyoguide. "Yun Bong-gil memorials were built in South Korea ( Seoul), China ( Shanghai) and Japan ( Kanazawa)." This is a fact without any doubts. You have maliciously removed this sentence from the article twice. You'd better provide a solid good reason here. Otherwise you will be reported for vandalism. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Word of advice to 钉钉, your English is not as good as you think it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.165.246 ( talk) 11:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was initiated by some berk who used it to graffiti and use abusive language. Unfortunately instead of using it an dcreating a proper stub the article was speed deleted.
Not a very good idea IMHO. I have therefore recreated the article in stub form Refdoc 19:37, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The intro to the article states that he attempted to kill the Showa Emperor (Hirohito) but the article mentions he managed to put a bomb into some army food in Shanghai during the emperor's birthday party. Given Showa never went near Shanghai, I'm curious about how this was an attempt on his life. -- Jusenkyoguide 11:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
This is absolutely ridiculous, I'll block anyone who furthers this assassin/terrorist stuff in any of these articles about Korean independence activists using VandalProof as a legitimate vandalism. ( Wikimachine 21:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC))
Lactose created this category as a subcategory under "Korean Criminals". If this isn't inflammatory POV BS, I don't know what is. This isn't the purpose of wiki categories. melonbarmonster 19:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't OhmyNews more or less a news wiki? Wouldn't that, like Wikipedia itself, make it a non-acceptable source? -- Jusenkyoguide ( talk) 01:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Last year the submarine ROKS Yun Bong-gil was launched, as mentioned here, among other places. Would be good to include in the article. -- Difference engine ( talk) 19:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yun Bong-gil. 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) 05:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
There are a lot academic garbage published. By definition, terrorism have criteria on its organized nature, motivation, undermining of a government by influencing policies, spreading of fear among a group of individuals, randomness, etc. So an act needs to qualify all these criteria to be considered terrorism. Otherwise the whole world are terrorists, because the Japaneses and Nazi were undermined/destroyed by organized, violence forces with strong motivations by the allies. I think you should remove such ridiculous POVs from the article. Using biased sources violated Wiki's POV policy. 钉钉 ( talk) 03:48, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
I think somebody is trying to push POV. Yun is considered a hero by the main stream. What Tessa Morris-Suzuki wrote in her paper is that If acts of violence by resistance organization or guerrilla forces are considered terrorism, then Yoo was a terrorist. But resistance organizations or guerrilla forces may not necessarily be terrorists. In other words, she didn't equal Yun with a terrorist. Shouldn't the allied forces in World War II be resistance organizations in the eyes of the Japanese and Nazi? 钉钉 ( talk) 04:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Nobody doubts that this is English Wikipedia. You need to be aware this is not a Japanese Wiki. The Japanese were Nazis during World War II and were defeated by UN allied forces. It is a mainstream of the whole world and Yun did the right things to kill Japanese Nazis. You are trying to push your Japanese POV to white wash Japan's dirty past. 钉钉 ( talk) 06:23, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I do doubt your English capabilities. I don't think adding "conditionally concurred" would change the meaning of the original quote. To avoid edit wars, I'll leave this to other editors. But the bombing happened during the Japanese invasion of Shanghai. Those killed by Yun are certainly invaders. It is also totally your POV to say that "Invasion requires an invasion force, active fighting".Three are culture invasions, now technology invasions etc. On the other hand, there were active fighting when Japan invaded Korea. It is only that you don't know. There is no doubt that Japan occupied Korea against the wills of most Korean people. That also can be called an invasion. Anyway, the bombing happened in Shanghai. Those killed are invaders, no mater Japan invaded Korea or not. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
You know nothing about Asian history. The war between China and Japan ended only when WWII ended. The Japanese occupied parts of Shanghai after Japan's first invasion of Shanghai. As you know they were killed while celebrating this in Shanghai. They are invaders by all means. For the wording "concur". I think what Tessa Morris-Suzuki wrote is not a total agreement. It should be "somewhat concurred". 钉钉 ( talk) 02:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Jusenkyoguide You are being reported for personal attacks. What I said above is that the Japanese invaders were killed by Yun while they were celebrating their success in invading part of Shanghai. The bombing happened in Shanghai and funded by the Chinese. The bombs Yun used were also manufactured by the Chinese army. It really doesn't matter whether Japan invaded China or Korea, or both. You're being nonsensical. Those killed by the bombing are invaders for sure. 钉钉 ( talk) 08:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
As long as they were occupying other countries, they are invaders. China is the ally of Korean independent activists. They were together to fight against the invading Japanese. The birthday celebration began with a celebration of Japanese success in invading Shanghai. The source used is an academic research journal on Korean Study in China. It is a good reliable source by Wiki standards. It should be not removed by any means. "invaders" is also the wording of the source. You need to be consistent with what you said:" Do not remove anything that is considered a good source under Wiki policy." 钉钉 ( talk) 08:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
You need to make discussions in a civil way like people who have education do. The format of the source has been modified, with quote provided. The original word in the source is "invaders"(侵略者). You don't have the right to change the original meaning of the source. The current English wording you made basically says that Yun would kill anyone who is Japanese. That's a total distortion and vandalism. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Ok, go ahead and ask help from the community. If you think that "aggressors" are acceptable, please add it after "Japanese" in the article before you seek help from others. The sentence you made basically says Yun would kill anyone who are Japanese. 钉钉 ( talk) 09:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Jusenkyoguide You are not doing anything. 钉钉 ( talk) 03:04, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Except some diplomats, people attending the party were all Japanese. I used "Japanese invaders (top military and political officials)" before, because the original words in the source are "侵略者头目"。 But you maliciously deleted them all. 钉钉 ( talk) 10:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
I think you'd altered the original meaning from the source. These sentences are in the controversy section, showing the views opposite to what you think it is the mainstream. Your wordings sound like there is no controversy. I'll rephrase this part using direct quotation and do the translations. 钉钉 ( talk) 08:25, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm very tired of this discussions with you. Those Chinese sentences are not easy to translate. I'll leave it to future editors. At present, I think we can use the "Yun only attacked the Japanese top military and political officials attending the event, and no other civilians were hurt by his bombing" wordings you proposed. 钉钉 ( talk) 07:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
For a short article, are we putting in too many images? Jusenkyoguide ( talk) 01:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
It was you who pointed out that this section maybe image heavy. I reduced the China memorial pics from 2 to 1. It is disruptive for you to revert back. Each picture needs have am explanatory caption.The memorial in Japan is only a monument. It is not comparable to those in S Korea and China. It is wrong for you frame it together with the one in S Korea without any captions explaining which is which. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
In that case, all these pictures need to be grouped together. There is no need to have 2 pictures for China memorial. 钉钉 ( talk) 05:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
@ Jusenkyoguide. "Yun Bong-gil memorials were built in South Korea ( Seoul), China ( Shanghai) and Japan ( Kanazawa)." This is a fact without any doubts. You have maliciously removed this sentence from the article twice. You'd better provide a solid good reason here. Otherwise you will be reported for vandalism. 钉钉 ( talk) 14:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Word of advice to 钉钉, your English is not as good as you think it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.165.246 ( talk) 11:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)