Talk:Northeast Project (Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)

message: According to Chinese Encyclopedia 360, Goguryo was not kinship to the rulers of the Goryeo Dynasty
(The ruler of Goguryo had the surname Gao, while the ruler of Goryeo had the surname Wang.).
 
but,Chinese Encyclopedia 360 says that some of the refugees from Goguryo entered the Goryeo dynasty and integrated with its.https://baike.so.com/doc/5092872-5321020.html#5092872-5321020-8
1.As mentioned below, the Hongshan culture and other so called "Korean culture", but the Hongshan culture gene test results are N1, O2 (originally called O3), C, not the South Korean O1B2.However, the part of the N1 gene in the "Hongshan Culture" Wikipedia entry had been changed to read "N1 is a Korean gene" and later changed back by someone else,and correct.
Then an enthusiastic German user changed O2 back to its old name (O3).
https://bmcecolevol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-13-216
Among them, a lot of Chinese and Mongols have N1, O2 (formerly known as O3), and C genes.
Haplogroup N-M231
Haplogroup O-M122
Haplogroup C-M130
 
This just shows that before the Northeast Project,Korean people think Hongshan culture is Korean culture. Otherwise, how could they consider Hongshan culture as their own?They may not even know about the Liaohe region (Liaodong Peninsula) and the Longshan culture from the Yellow River regionhttps://news.gmw.cn/2018-02/27/content_27820444.htm
 		 
	
2.Moreover, the Northeast Project thought that the Goguryeo rulers had nothing to do with the Goryeo dynasty, but admitted that the Goguryeo were not Han and that the ethnic integration of the Goguryeo branches was related to Korea. It did not deny that the Koguryeo provided the genes for Koreahttps://baike.so.com/doc/6956206-7178638.html but the Northeast Project believed that it was a minority ethnic group in ancient China.There is no mention of Dangun in the Book of weihttps://www.zggdwx.com/weishu.html<（ This is the directory of Book of Wei, click on the chapter title to read it）So, who are the thieves?Is it the author of Book of wei?Doesn't the entry of Dangun entry and story that Dangun history cited the book of Wei ?Excuse me, why is this?How does the Wei book not have this paragraph?The Koreans, however, claim that Dangun ruled Manchuria, but it has already been proved that Dangun was a fabricated figure,
3.In this article, it was claimed that China extended the Great Wall to Heilongjiang Province in 2012, But the Great Wall  in Heilongjiang is the Great Wall of Jin and Liao Dynasties，The Great Wall of the Jin Dynasty and the Great Wall of the Liao Dynasty were clearly identified in the 2008 Wikipedia entry on the Great Wall，
And in the history of China, there are many dynasties built the Great Wall.The Chinese government is not on the Great Wall to extend, can click on the link to see the Great Wall in 2014 entries and compared 2008 entries,
Please find the photos of "Map of the Whole Wall Constructions" in the entry of the Great Wall in 2008 and in the entry of the Great Wall in 2014 and compare them, 2008 Great wall entry and 2014 Great wall entry, both the Great Wall entries contain photos of "Map of the Whole Wall Constructions" which need to be looked up
 	
2008 Great wall wikipedia entry photos of"Map of the Whole Wall Constructions"In the fifth photo on the left of the article.
2014 Great wall wikipedia entry photos of"Map of the Whole Wall Constructions"In the second photo on the left of the article.
Secondly, in the news of China Intranet in 2006, there was a mention of the Jin Dynasty  Great Wall （Jin dynasty border trenches）,Han Dynasty Great Wall    was greatly damaged，2006 Chinese great wall new.And in a 2009 news report about it, it said that the early Great Wall (The Great Wall other than the Ming Wall) could not be repaired (because it was too damaged)2009 Chinese great wall New.According to the Book of Liao, [Liao tai zu]  built the Liao dynasty Great Wall：《辽史》载：太祖二年冬十月“筑长城于镇东海口”《辽史》载：太祖二年冬十月“筑长城于镇东海口”
This is just China and Japan found evidence that Korea stole history, South Korea dissatisfaction and rumour, warning South Koreans: do not think that after deleting your web page we can not find the original content, please remember there is a thing called the original content of the web page backup!
(Someone else): Only China claims Goguryeo originate from the Hongshan culture which is Western Manchuria. Japan, Korea, and most modern East Asian historians thinj that Goguryeo, Buyeo, Gojoseon, and the Yemaek people likely originate from Northern Manchuria or Southern Siberia. Hell we know the Ye maek even exist because of Chinese records. This is backed up by Ancient Chinese books recording the approximate location of each dynasty. And they knew Buyeo definetly came from the Northern parts of Manchuria not the Western. And genetic studies done by the Europeans (one specifically specializing in these types of genetics) also seem to think that Goguryeo came from Buyeo which came from the Ye Maek or the fragments of Gojoseon. Also what Koreans claim Hongshan as Korean? Far as I know they don't even know what Hongshan is since historically it's never involved them. They don't need to know Chinese history and it's ethnic groups so they don't. Far as I can see from your citations you don't show any definite proof that Goguryeo was the Hongshan people only what the Hongshan people are today not that Goguryeo came from that area. Literally everyone knows that Dangun isn't real he's mythological. That's like saying the Greek Gods were real obviously they're not. There might have been a Dangun like figure in Gojoseon but there was no Dangun himself. That's only something North Korea thinks. 
I am not a Korean nationalist I am from North America. I like learning all of East Asia. I think China has an amazing history, is the reason for many of Japan and Korea's modern very well known attributes like their distinct yet familiar architecture and clothes. However Goguryeo is not one of those things. Goguryeo for the longest time including the Chinese has thought it to be Korean. Kublai Khan considered vassalizing Goryeo the same as Goguryeo, a Ming general was disappointed with Joseon considering to them they're Goguryeo's direct descendants, hell MAO ZEDONG thought the same. Turkiye does as well as Goguryeo and the ancient Turkic Khagnate had good relations until the Tang beat them up and sent them packing to Turkiye. However they still kept in contact with Later Silla, Goryeo, and Joseon considering them the same as Goguryeo. 
There's even evidence that Goguryeo, Baekje, and Silla shared the same language and their cultures were noted by the Chinese to be so similar they also called them Samhan later on since there wasn't really a need to differiate them if they're weren't dealing with them individually. 
Your info you gave is very interesting. It's just not Goguryeo since the Hongshan and them to most historians outside of China are not the same. I say this in goodwill because I do respect China and its very rich history. But I also respect Korea and its rich (yet not well known) history. 
As for sources they're all on this wikipedia I just don't know how to cite sources since I don't do stuff like editing or replying.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:F825:7400:21FA:8090:BA43:B14A (talk) 10:18, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Strange places in this article (suspected Korean nationalists)

message: A fine start, and a rather interesting and important topic. Though, I do think it should be fleshed out to better represent that this Korea/Goguryeo thing is only one aspect of the impact of the project. I think a longer, more thorough main section about the project should come before discussions of impact or controversy. right? (BTW, I recognize of course that this is a work in progress, and I don't mean to criticize that you have to get on it right now. Just, for later editors who come by and look to see what needs doing or whatever...) LordAmeth 11:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: We strongly recommend private mediation.  To request an account on the private Mediation Wiki, please click on the mail link in my signature.  Include "Goguryeo" somewhere in the subject, e.g. "Private wiki account request for Goguryeo mediation".  If you do not have email enabled on your account and are unable to use the mail link, please click on my username in my signature and let me know on my talk page.  You should also read the Mediation Committee policy on confidentiality.  This message is being posted elsewhere.  Thanks, Armed Blowfish (mail) 19:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Mediation taken by Armed Blowfish and Daniel Bryant 

message: The current edit warring is inappropriate.  I was tempted to block both  and .  I won't do that at the moment, but I am protecting the article in the alternative.  Please discuss your changes, and don't intentionally insert your POV that you know is disputed into the article.  I'm going to probably unprotect tonight, to see if parties have sufficiently calmed down.  Resumption of edit warring will draw 3RR blocks, and particularly since these parties have been guilty of doing this previously, they will be blocked a particularly long time if they resume the behavior.  Please watch yourselves.  (For reference for any admins who might take a look here -- for Cydevil38's former edit history, see .)  --Nlu (talk) 16:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nlu, I feel deeply insulted. I've been abiding by the 3RR rule, and I've been reverting blatant vandalism, not edits made in good faith. And it's funny you only accuse me of "edit warring", when Goodfriend has been also engaging in similar behavior - reverting vandalism. Also, the Northeast Project fits every meaning of the term "historical revisionism", so why did you delete that link? Tibet and Turkistan are also relevant links, as China's been doing the same to those regions. This article has much potential for expansion, but not deletion. Cydevil38 00:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: And do have in mind, Assault11 was deleting most of the article's contents, not just the "See Also" links. I just didn't feel any need to respond to such blatant vandalism except simply reverting them, though I did add a source attesting to the existence of the Southwest Project and the Northwest Project. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cydevil38 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In light of the parties' apparent inability to see how their behavior is inappropriate, unprotection won't happen for now.  I'll leave unprotection in the discretion of the mediators.  --Nlu (talk) 07:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I said no such thing. My reply was only directed at your suggestion of imposing 3RR blocks, which is something I have not violated. I admit that my past behavior was not up to par with Wikipedia's standards, and to this, I stand corrected. However, I still consider my past reverts - not necessarily actions - to be legit and in compliance with the NPOV policies of Wikipedia. Assault11 23:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: We have discussed this already. I have provided a link to the official NEP website and stated time and again that the Gaogouli dispute does not represent the entire Northeast Project. If you can read Chinese, please verify it, if not, don't reply. I have no interest in arguing over semantics. Assault11 02:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: Would it be better if we merge most of the information that talk about the Goguryeo Controversy, text book incidents and its history etc. to this page, and just briefly mention about it here in the Northeast Project page? I think it would satisfy both sides. (AQu01rius • Talk) 23:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea. However, Goodfriend integrated the background section into Goguryeo controversies, a part of which I believe has more relevance in the general background of the subject than on Goguryeo specifically. Well, we can't edit the article right now anyways so lets wait unil it's unprotected. Cydevil38 23:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Goguryeo controversies]] 

message: I added a request for a reference citation on the figures for funding. Also what is the source of the funding. The article seams to be saying that this Northeast Project is closely connected with the Chinese government and government policy, however, it rather seems to be just a collection of research papers published by one, albeit quite distinguished, college. Rincewind42 (talk) 10:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Funding 

message: Today I fixed two broken ref links on this article, however one other ref link appears to be broken and I am unable to source the new page for that content. See  reference 6. "项目介绍 (Topic Overview)" (in Chinese). Centre of China's Borderland History and Geography Research, CASS. 2007-07-04. Retrieved 2009-07-28.
In addition, several references point to Korea or Chinese language websites without translation. As per WP:NONENG an English translation of the relevant section of the source should be included in the reference. Rincewind42 (talk) 14:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refernces on this article 

message: I suggest this page be merged into Goguryeo controversies. This article doesn't have much content on the Northeast Project itself - except for the "list of research topics", which indicates that the Project is much more than the article talks about. Some of the sources cited in this article don't even mention the Northeast Project, but rather just the Goguryeo controversies. Per #Funding, it seems that this article is a POV fork from Goguryeo controversies, created to suggest that the Chinese government endorses a particular view in the controversies, when this seems to be unclear, or even opposite to the truth (for example, China has agreed in 2004 to censor the view that Goguryeo was solely Chinese from its textbooks, in order to please South Korea's government). The actual content on the Northeast Project could fit into a section of the Goguryeo controversies article. Shrigley (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, there has been enough time for discussion among interested parties. Rincewind42, thank you for your reasoned argument. Cydevil38, you do not address the main argument, which is that this page is not about the Northeast Project itself, which is a list of research topics. To write an independent article about a subject, we need to have sources that deal with only this subject, or at least deal with it in depth, which we don't for the specific CASS research with that name. As this article is redundant, it is merged. Shrigley (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

text: It's funny and interesting how you've only seeked to beg for help from one side, as opposed to notifying all relevant sides, per WP:CANVASS. It's also quite interesting on how you've pretty much begged the question with loaded lexicon in your notification message (after all, everyone who disagrees with you is a POV editor, right?) -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 13:16, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I managed to dig up a few more sources that might be useful on this article.
* China's "soft" clash with Korea by JH Chung - Asian Survey, 2009. (paywall)
* China’s Nationalist Historiography of the “Northeast Project” and the Australian Response to Its Challenges by Pankaj N. Mohan, The University of Sydney.
* China and Northeast Asia: A Complex Equation for 'Peaceful Rise' by JH Chung - Politics, 2007. (paywall)
* History of Koguryŏ and China’s Northeast Asian Project by Park Kyeong-chul - International Journal of Korean History Vol.6, 2004. (paywall)
* History as a Strategic Weapon The Korean and Chinese Struggle over Koguryo T Roehrig - Journal of Asian and African Studies, 2010. (paywall)
* Identity Politics, Nationalism and the Future of Northeast Asian Order C Moon, SW Suh - The United States and Northeast Asia: …, 2008]
Rincewind42 (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some more sources 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Northeast Project of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081016223934/http://chinaborderland.cass.cn:80/show_News.asp?id=1837 to http://chinaborderland.cass.cn/show_News.asp?id=1837
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Read this page while researching Balhae. Immediately checked the Talk, because of its obviously fake claims. I see it was removed many years ago. Who let it back?
Sources cited are ridiculous even in that they are Korean only. I checked one, #5, China’s Northeast Project: Defensive or Offensive Strategy? (p. 103). 
The claims on page 103 of this "research" article are backed by nothing. Citations don't back them at all.
This page is little more than an attack on China by South Korean nationalists.
Suggest removal. I'm not biased, I'm Russian living on top of Balhae ruins in Russia, Chinese nationalism is not in my interests at all. 77.34.158.133 (talk) 05:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Korean nationalists rule en.wiki? 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Move the first one. (non-admin closure) History6042 (talk) 20:04, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: WikiProject Korea has been notified of this discussion. —Usernamekiran_(AWB) (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject China has been notified of this discussion. —Usernamekiran_(AWB) (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 18 August 2023