Talk:North Korea/Archive 8

message: surly  that word should be in speech marks, its not democratic at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ajuk (talk • contribs) 15:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  For the umpteenth time, it needs to be explained that the DPRK is a PEOPLE'S DEMOCRACY, aka a socialist government, or so it claims to be - this is not 'double speak' at all, but rather misunderstanding by many.  This is NOT the same as a liberal democracy as most Americans or Europeans understand.  Jsw663 10:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Democracy means "rule of the people". North Korea, however, falls under tyranny, rule of few. 195.210.233.250 18:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The word democracy is used in the article only in the sense of the DPRK's self-naming. I don't think it's appropriate or necessary to put scare quotes around a word in a formal name.  Most people are aware that words like "democratic", "people's", etc in a country name don't really mean anything. Raymond Arritt 18:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Raymond Arritt. The country's official legal name should be reported without speech marks. It's up to the reader whether or not they think it's a 'democratic' country - the article needs to stick to the facts. Walton monarchist89 10:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The government and ruling party were democratically elected to create a one-party state were they not?  So in that case it could technically be interpreted as democratic!  As far as I'm aware, government officials are democratically elected, only the voters are very much filled with political propaganda.  So therefore I guess the formal name of the country is genuine.  Johnx4 17:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The elections are not competitive: there's one candidate for each seat in the Supreme People's Assembly.  That doesn't match what's meant by "democratic" in most of the world.  But of course, there should not be quotation marks around any part of the country's official name.  That would be editorializing.  --Reuben 18:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Democratic? 

message: To which part of the article does the POV tag refer? somebody should say what they believe is POV, or the tag should be removed. 131.111.8.98 22:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: :::Although it has the word 'Democratic' in its name DPRK, the communist regime is very far from being a democratic nation. This is a dilibrate practice of doublethink by the totalitaranian government, which twists news and facts into whatever shape they want and make the people believe them.'
I've reverted this edit by user:Japanese1; however, if anyone wants to revise and then keep it, then feel free to. To me it sounded to POV, however, the neutrality is already disputed. It's up to you. --lovelaughterlife♥talk? 05:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you, lovelaughterlife... it's hard to keep the 'North Korea' section relatively neutral / Wikipedian... after all many people on here seem to continue to support naming the country North Korea rather than the DPRK, but maybe that's another issue altogether.  Jsw663 08:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, many people do... :-) -- Visviva 00:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why not include both? "North Korea's official name is DPRK.", etc. Specusci 16:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sounds a little POV to me... 

message: a matching interlanguage- m:uz:Shimoliy_Koreya ? Schissel | Sound the Note! 19:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added, thanks. -- Visviva 00:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I don't know the language, but did a random jump and this does seem 

message: Hopefully no one saw it. it was pretty bad. Lots of cussing. ````Captain Bingo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Captain bingo (talk • contribs) 16:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All your edit did was reintroduce vandalism.  What happened?  Gerrish (talk) 16:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, jump right in any time, Captain. TheQuandry 17:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Vandalism 

message: Looks like we may have a return of User:Frogsprog and/or User:NoJoyInMudville, or at least a similar editor.  Watch out for attempts to replace actual information with pro-NK and anti-American interpretation.  I will not revert more than once / day.  Other editors please keep an eye on NK-related articles.  --Reuben 19:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like we may have an unsubstantiated accusation after I tried to make the article more two-sided, please don't accuse me of anything without proof... I am here to edit articles about my profession, I was slightly angered by this article and changed it, but I am not here for political reasons --RuleBrittania 20:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You may or may not be the same as another user, but your editing is very similar, both in style and substance.  Please don't replace factual content with editorializing.  It will only be reverted.  If you think that there is bias in the article, please contribute with sourced, verifiable information that's on topic to the article. --Reuben 20:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:RuleBrittania]] 

message: For the attribute "establishment"
North                                            	North                           	South                                     	South
Kojosŏn                             	2333 BCE    	Gojoseon                              	October 3, 2333 BC
Independence declared	March 1 1919h	Liberation declared	March 1 1919 (de jure)
I'm not sure if this is because of different Romanization methods used by the two sides. If not, please synchronize. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 12:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's because of the different Romanization methods.  South Korea changed to Revised Romanization about 2000, while North Korea stayed with McCune-Reischauer.  In practice, neither one seems to be very consistent.  --Reuben 19:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording and formatting discrepancy in infobox 

message: I can't help but notice something...  In a recent issue of the magazine Muse, there is an article on a man who visited Pyongyang.  While he is there, he can't help but notice that there a no crippled or ill people in the city.  When he asks his guide about this, the guide said,"There are none... we're a very homogenous nation.  All North Koreans are born strong, intelligent, and healthy." Hmmmm... that sentence seems to indicate that the North Korean government is weeding out the weak, sick, and crippled... doesn't that sound like something a certain someone did between 1939 and 1945?  It just seems very similar.--Dude 777 777 777
:If you can find the magazine article in question and cite it as a reference, then you can add this information to the article. Please don't add it without doing so, however, as this is a controversial topic, and uncited additions are likely to be reverted. Walton Vivat Regina! 19:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weeding Out the Weak?

message: The following video is a compilation of various news broadcasts about North Korea spliced together with an audio overlay. I'm not sure if I should add it to the end of the links or not. The reason for me wondering about this is the allusion of the video suggests North Korea is a dictatorship and is really just an opinion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBzHCVv5GeQ
If it is added then I believe it'll be worthy because it will make people more aware of how North Korea is.
Adam 16:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube video from LINK 

message: I can't help but notice something...  In a recent issue of the magazine Muse, there is an article on a man who visited Pyongyang.  While he is there, he can't help but notice that there a no crippled or ill people in the city.  When he asks his guide about this, the guide said,"There are none... we're a very homogenous nation.  All North Koreans are born strong, intelligent, and healthy." Hmmmm... that sentence seems to indicate that the North Korean government is weeding out the weak, sick, and crippled... doesn't that sound like something a certain someone did between 1939 and 1945?  It just seems very similar.--Dude 777 777 777
:If you can find the magazine article in question and cite it as a reference, then you can add this information to the article. Please don't add it without doing so, however, as this is a controversial topic, and uncited additions are likely to be reverted. Walton Vivat Regina! 19:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A more apt comparison may be to Pol Pot's Cambodia. (Whip It On Jim 05:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weeding Out the Weak?

message: For the attribute "establishment"
North                                            	North                           	South                                     	South
Kojosŏn                             	2333 BCE    	Gojoseon                              	October 3, 2333 BC
Independence declared	March 1 1919h	Liberation declared	March 1 1919 (de jure)
I'm not sure if this is because of different Romanization methods used by the two sides. If not, please synchronize. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 12:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's because of the different Romanization methods.  South Korea changed to Revised Romanization about 2000, while North Korea stayed with McCune-Reischauer.  In practice, neither one seems to be very consistent.  --Reuben 19:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording and formatting discrepancy in infobox 

message: Dictatorship is not NPOV in any sense of the world, and gives the false impression that communism is dictatorship, a false lie being peddled on this article. Communism is the highest form of democracy because it puts the means of production into public hands (the whole populace), as opposed to capitalism which puts the economy into private minority elite hands, that is why NK is the 'Democratic' people's republic. 
In any case the most appropriate government type is socialist republic, the DPRK is listed in the wiki of 'list of socialis countries' as a socialist state, so that's how it should be on this article, the same as Vietnam, China and Cuba. The right-wing loons should quit trying to enforce themselves on these articles.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.225.104 (talk) 07:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't post in the middle of the talk page, as it breaks up the flow of discussion and makes it likely that your comments will be lost, without any response.  I don't see any right-wing loons around here, and I think you need to do some more reading.  Leaving aside outside sources for the moment, the North Korean constitution itself disagrees with you on many points.  It does in fact describe the country as a dictatorship in certain contexts; the state and the party do not represent the whole populace, nor do they claim to do so; the goal is the eventual construction of Communism, rather than a functioning Communist system today - the means of production are primarily owned by the state; and this is not connected with the use of the word Democratic in the name of the state, which refers to a form of political rather than economic organization.  --Reuben (talk) 21:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dictatorship 

message: The following video is a compilation of various news broadcasts about North Korea spliced together with an audio overlay. I'm not sure if I should add it to the end of the links or not. The reason for me wondering about this is the allusion of the video suggests North Korea is a dictatorship and is really just an opinion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBzHCVv5GeQ
If it is added then I believe it'll be worthy because it will make people more aware of how North Korea is.
Adam 16:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, biased sources (and links to such) have no place here. How north Korea is, will not properly be portrayed by a video with inherent bias.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.160.159 (talk) 13:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube video from LINK 

message: Source 12 comes from someone who is referred to as "the unofficial spokesman of North Korea and Kim Jong-Il."
Please use some acredited sources like the New York Times and World Bank, not an opinion piece. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 148.85.1.102 (talk) 01:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "opinion piece" was written by a well published academic on the issue.  All journalism that draws conclusions can be describe as "opinion" - it is the creditials of the writer that determine how acceptable the "opinion" is.  In any case, nothing is asserted in this wikipedia article from that source that is an "opinion".  the writer is simply testifying to the implimentation of economic reforms - which he is qualified to do.  If you are suggesting that all NK officials are biased toward NK and therefore should be discredited, that is a separate, and dangerous, issue altogether.  Icactus 23:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias source