# Talk:Letter to Yi Ŭngt'ae

After a few quick searches, I couldn't find a translation that's unambiguously copyright-free, so I wrote one myself. I'm not 100% confident in minor details in it, but I like it better than I like some other popular translations that gloss over some details in the letter (and are written a little flowery beyond the original content of letter).
The quote about 'see and have something to say' confuses me, maybe I'm just mistranslating or is it referring to something only the couple would know about? toobigtokale (talk) 14:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Grapesurgeon: The romanisation should be modern SK because this letter is specifically became very popular in the media and fiction after its discovery. I'm not saying all premodern stuff should be listed that way, I'm saying this letter in particular is popular in South Korea and has been for like two decades. This is mentioned in the text and is a solid reason to use the SK system. Also, yes, I made an error romanising Won; that's not an argument against use, that's an argument for correction. Ogress 13:58, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Consider this example: if a British written work written in British English was popular in the US, should its Wikipedia article be written in American English or British English?
Similarly, if a North Korea-related topic became popular in South Korea (South Korea has far more international reach than North Korea), do we write its article in McCune–Reischauer (a variant of MR is used in North Korea) or Revised Romanization (official system of South Korea)?
MOS:ENGVAR doesn't really make clear what to do for the above cases, and WP:KOREANNAME is designed with similar principles in mind. At present, the widespread standard for pre-modern Korea is to use MR; we've established this is the standard via the research documented in WP:ROMANKO. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2025 (UTC)