Talk:History of Japan–Korea relations

message: There are two different reference sections in the article, one in the normal position and format but there's another in the center of the article...
Plus, one reference section is longer than the other.
Maybe you could either merge them or something, but i think that needs to be fixed.
173.79.68.101 (talk) 21:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed too@Aqua3993 74.202.147.214 (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem in the reference section(s) 

message: This is very complicated, and it will not be simple. There are 2 points of views and multiple references. The last version was under Japanese POV. Please update my version but please do not delete my references you may fix the sentences but you can't keep information hidden because you do not like what the facts state. The Gosashi tomb is a huge part of relations between these two countries. National Geographics thinks the countries related to each other in terms of Imperial line. You can't just leave that out because you don't like it. New York Met Museum sees the relationship of ancient Korea to Japan, any Japan cannot just ignore it because you don't like it. Please edit fairly. --4.23.83.100 (talk) 05:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: History of relations between these countries

message: Please take a look at this. Getting rid of "East Sea" could be understandable, but changing "Dokdo" to "Takeshima", switching the order of the words Korea and Japan (from "Korea-Japan Friendship Year" to "Japan-Korea Friendship Year"), and adding nonsensical and useless statements such as "Now, The Japanese literature is the highest ratio in the foreign literature translated into South Korea." are exactly what I wanted to prevent in this article. Here goes another revert. The article is pretty much messed up, I don't see much benefit in trying to improve it -POV will always ruin the works I've invested in it. (Wikimachine 22:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: The section below the "2005 a tempestuous one despite being 'Japan-Korea friendship year'" paragraph is JPOV. 
*First of all, the section describes the compensation with the word "secret", as if the deal was revealed in 2005 - which is not at all true. The "secret" compensation is, indeed, in Korean textbooks, and I have mine with the info about it. 
*The issues about comfort women were raised since 1992. It didn't begin in 2005.
*S. Korean government still abides by the treaty. However, private organizations still demand for compensations. Therefore, there is apparently no contradiction (although I've read a JPOV article about how the compensation must be dealt in government-to-government level. 
(Wikimachine 02:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no rebuttals in the South Korea culture and the Japanese culture. Therefore, this part is returned. --Sir Joestar 13:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sir Joestar, I'd like to ask about your restoration of two cites. First one is from mofa.go.jp. Could you translate the site from Japanese to English and post the translation here? I transcribed the text into Google language tool, and I'm not quite sure if the cite says what the article says. And as for the Howl's Moving Castle reference, that is only specific to Howl's Moving Castle. That single movie being popular in Korea does not imply anything. You need a separate article saying that Japanese culture is popular in S. Korea. Or, it's WP:OR. (Wikimachine 19:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highlighting POV here 

message: That should be the standard international naming schemes for studies in international relations. Alphabetical. JK. (Wikimachine 03:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there was no contrary, it moved.--Forestfarmer 02:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! (Wikimachine 01:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to protest the move, please talk here. (Wikimachine 04:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to [[Japan-Korea relations]] relations 

message: Before I talk about KPOV, let me remind Sir Joestar to discuss before reverting.
*Weasel wording (i.e. "harsh Japanese colonial rule over Korea")
*Original research (i.e. "Polls during the postwar period in Japan and South Korea showed that the people of each nation had a profound dislike of the other country and their people.")
*Lack of citations Although the previous editions also lack citations, that should not mean that future edits should also be neglected with references. To not provide cites continuously would set a bad precedent through which POV & further original research can stem. Future edits should include proper citations because this is a very controversial article under intense stress all the time & we want to distinguish between what's fact & what's opinion. (Wikimachine 22:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a good source because it is comprehensive in how it engages in the subject. Providing source for just one movie won't be enough. So what if a single movie happened to be popular in Japan? That doesn't mean that Korean movies are popular in Japan, right? No, you need an article that actually says Korean shows are popular in general. (Wikimachine 00:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sir Joe Star, look at the site. (Wikimachine 19:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: That's right. You don't know how Wikipedia operates. To say that mentioning just 2 dramas that were successful in Japan is WP:OR. However, if you were to substantiate your claims using an article that specifically states that Korean dramas are popular in Japan, in general, then there you have a nice ref. (Wikimachine 19:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-explanation of KPOV in recent edits 

message: Please write the drama in South Korea that succeeds in Japan. I can examine the audience rating. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.212.102.244 (talk) 22:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a good source because it is comprehensive in how it engages in the subject. Providing source for just one movie won't be enough. So what if a single movie happened to be popular in Japan? That doesn't mean that Korean movies are popular in Japan, right? No, you need an article that actually says Korean shows are popular in general. (Wikimachine 00:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sir Joe Star, look at the site. (Wikimachine 19:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: That's right. You don't know how Wikipedia operates. To say that mentioning just 2 dramas that were successful in Japan is WP:OR. However, if you were to substantiate your claims using an article that specifically states that Korean dramas are popular in Japan, in general, then there you have a nice ref. (Wikimachine 19:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: many successful dramas

message: Japanese 　Box Office 
Why did 'Gemul' fail in Japan? 
"King man" failed from "Gemul". 
Challenge of the last South Korea movie "Natsumonogatari" was failed
The South Korea movie did not succeed in Japan at all. 
 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.209.158.205 (talk) 19:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *They're all WP:OR. (Wikimachine 21:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Korean Wave sorce

message: There have been a lot of collaborations on films as of late as well between Japan and Korea. This might be a good thing to add. Because it's not just importation, but cooperation on artistic ventures. --Hitsuji Kinno 00:24, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaborations 

message: Could the map be updated to zoom to south Asia more? -- Cat chi? 22:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know they should. is wiki trying to mock the size of Korea and Japan? :|  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.93.192 (talk) 04:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: This article makes it look like the two countries hate each other.  
As a Korean national, I can say for certain that the vast majority of people treat citizens from the other side(s) with respect and general politeness.  While there are underlying tensions, the extreme-right minority (on both sides) is blown way out of proportion by western media.  Although there may be initial resistance, cultural exchange and cooperation is happening on a huge scale, in public or behind closed doors.  154.20.68.26 08:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Positive relationship downplayed 

message: The South Korean insists that the South Korea culture is popular in Japan on 
the Japanese culture that succeeds in South Korea. The Japanese insists it is unpopular on the South Korea culture in Japan. Which is correct?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.218.131.136 (talk) 14:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Did the South Korea culture become popular in Japan?

message: After reading this article, it seems to be based mostly on japanese POV. For example, when the article states, "In recent years, South Korea tried to spread South Korean pop culture to Japan.", it subconciously makes one think as if South Korea was the bad one. When it states, "South Korea tried", does it mean that South Korea, as a nation purposley attempted a spreading of Korean Culture on Japan, but failed? Overall, I am a bit dissatisfied with the article, and I think it should be either rewritten, or enourmously revised.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.27.49.57 (talk) 02:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese POV 

message: In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) 
* "atimes2" :
** 
** 
* "chosun3" :
** 
** 
DumZiBoT (talk) 02:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot report : Found duplicate references ! 

message: Talking to a Japanese friend, he told me that there are about 600,000 North Korean citizens currently living in Japan (this figure might possibly include all South and North Korean citizens). After Japanese colonization efforts in Korea, many Korean citizens chose to settle in Japan apparently, and Japan did not issue Japanese citizenship to them. These people were issued citizenship in North and South Korea, depending on their place of origin. Since Japan does not have diplomatic relations with North Korea, this means that there are significant numbers of people who have been living for decades in Japan with no recognized citizenship. The children of these people go to North Korean ethnic schools in Japan. There have apparently been scandals where children in these North Korean ethnic schools in Japan have been taught highly biased accounts of Japanese history that are not complimentary to Japan. Many of the North and South Koreans in Japan are involved in the Pachinko (sp?) gaming industry. 
Do we have any material on this strange situation? Should we?--Filll (talk | wpc) 13:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about North Koreans in Japan 

message: There are more disputes between Japan and North Korea not mentioned in this article and should include the missile launches and hostile relations. While South Korea and Japan relations go deeper in territory dispute and pop culture exchange. So I suggest that we should split this article. One about North Korea-Japan relations and a article about South Korea-Japan relations.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DoctorRabbit (talk • contribs) 04:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree there should be seperate articles on this topic RogerTelemundo (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree as well making seperating this article to Japan-North korea and South korea-Japan relations it can give more vital information.Treyembark (talk) 01:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: We should make seperate articles about North-Korea-Japan relations

message: I noticed a number of relatively quick and sizable additions and deletions on this page in my Watchlist.  A cursory look suggested that user Juzumaru may have been adding in POV content, which also unfortunately wasn't written very well (various grammar and spelling problems).  Juzumaru's edits were either missing edit summaries, or had not-very-explanatory edit summaries, so I reverted Juzumaru.  I noticed a bit more back-and-forthing between Juzumaru and one or two anons, and looked further into the history of the article, which made it clear that Juzumaru probably wasn't adding in new POV content so much as reverting its previous removal, and also that the anon users have been adding substantial additional content in small bits.  The large changes I noticed happened after Juzumaru reverted a bunch of anon edits in one go, touching off the current editing spat.
I regret wading into this.  I'm not sure which party is in the right, but whichever it is, this article needs a major overhaul.  The structure of the article is confusing, and despite the title, it does not appear to be organized along historical lines.  Moreover, there are numerous grammatical and mechanical issues in the writing.  Some of it is frankly just gibberish, such as this gem:
Yìlóues(korean) is Chinese and Japanese were differed from. A feces pool is surrounded and it is structure about a dwelling.
Some of it is more understandable, but plainly wrong:
In 660, Japan was attacked by Tang Dynasty China and fell.
I can't tell if this is vandalism, weird POV pushing, a horribly incorrect attempt at translation, or evidence of some alternate universe.  Whatever the case, this article is dreadfully in need of help in its present state.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 06:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing, apparent edit-warring with anons, and writing has issues 

message: An answer is very easy. 
Yìlóues(korean) is Chinese and Japanese were differed from. A feces pool is surrounded and it is structure about a dwelling.
Yìlóues is an ancestor of South Korean people who live in the Korean Peninsula now. 
They are the slaves taken to the present position by Tang Dynasty. 
In 660, Japan was attacked by Tang Dynasty China and fell.
Korea is not an independent country. 
Korea of those days was a han territory autonomous region of Tang Dynasty. 
Japan fought with Tang Dynasty,Risk the hegemony of the Korean Peninsula. 
I think that Juzumaru is Korean. 
He is trying to hide the fact that Korean was a slave.
123.225.236.178 20:30 25 June 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.225.236.178 (talk)  
* I don't care who or what Juzumaru is.  The core problem is that you are adding unsubstantiated gibberish to this article.  Please stop.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The concealment problem of a historical fact 

message: This article doesn't even mention this rather key concept... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:25, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "Rather key concept"? It's not even clear what Mimana means. Perhaps Prokonsul Piotrus would like to elucidate? Kortoso (talk) 18:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mimana]] 

message: Can someone who is more knowledgable about Korean-Japanese history please help clean up the grammar in this article. I'm doing what I can, but it's really hard to understand. Kortoso (talk) 18:07, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: What does Tsushinshi mean? Please provide a definition or alternate term. The following sentence makes no sense; please re-word:
"Tsushinshi were sent from Korea to pay homage to a new shogun or to celebrate the birth of an heir to a shogun. Korean envoys were provided with the same role as an envoy to bring tributes to a Chinese emperor or was used for showing the prestige of Tokugawa shogunate."
Kortoso (talk) 18:36, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shamefully poor grammar 

message: Under the Japanese section, it makes it look like sakoku was initiated to protect Korea from Japanese piracy. Furthermore, I doubt that Hideyoshi invaded the mainland to protect Korea from pirates. Please cherish the truth. Kortoso (talk) 18:28, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  12th-15th centuries 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on History of Japan–Korea relations. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20111010040955/http://www.gangje.go.kr/admin_view0305.asp?idx=711&page=1 to http://www.gangje.go.kr/admin_view0305.asp?idx=711&page=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on History of Japan–Korea relations. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120226023335/http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/035th_issue/98032502.htm to http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/035th_issue/98032502.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080512000405/http://www.koreandb.net/Sam/bon/samkuk/04_250_2001365.htm to http://www.koreandb.net/Sam/bon/samkuk/04_250_2001365.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120712004202/http://www35.atwiki.jp/kolia/pages/11.html to http://www35.atwiki.jp/kolia/pages/11.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100502044945/http://www.comfort-women.org/index.php to http://www.comfort-women.org/index.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:40, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: # write the names of all chemicals
# write why India, China, Sweden and South Korea are unable to produce enough of these chemicals (lack of patents, know-how, laziness [let the Japs do it])
::: The patent excuse is inaccurate because:
# most chemicals are old
# if a country doesn't negotiate fairly, and if it causes major harm, breaking a patent (under these specific conditions) is legal
:: Japan is the victim many say. Japan is forced to create these chemicals because other industries are lazy to evolve better processing techniques and new chemicals. Japan is forced to take the money of these lazy nations.
Translated from retardese: Me dumb dumb, me likey make retard post  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7DE1:E300:B9C3:D9A:E841:C075 (talk) 22:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japan didn't provide enough chemicals to South Korea in 2019 

message: Not too long ago, an anon  the following text from the bottom of the #Ancient Era section:
At the time of Mongol invasions of Japan, Japanese people were scared by the attacks of the Mongol and Goryeo army, saying, 'moko kokuri no oni ga kuru (the devils of the Mongol and Goryeo will come)', which phrase later came to represent something scary; thus a tradition spread to the whole country to scare children into obedience by saying 'mukuri kokuri, oni ga kuru'.
Their edit comment was "Zero sources cited for a sentence that seems like a folk-etymology description that doesn't have any relevance whatsoever to the main paragraph."
I agree that the removed text was out of place.  Digging around in the page history, it seems like it was more fitting in an earlier version, but not anymore.
That said, this is not a folk etymology, so in case it's useful, and in case anyone can figure out a relevant place to put this, I'd like to expand on the etymology here.
=== Variations ===
* , 
: As a compound, mukuri kokuri or mokuri kokuri refers to both the mukuri / mokuri or Mongols, and the kokuri or Goryeo.  Originally, this was part of a warning cry that the combined Yuan and Goryeo invasion forces were on their way, as indeed was attempted twice in 1274 and 1281, as detailed in our article at Mongol invasions of Japan.
: The combined phrase later shifted in sense to refer more generally to something big and scary, and was used to try to get crying children to shush.  The sense then shifted further to refer to something unconscionable.
:* The term mukuri with the sense of “Mongolia; Mongol” is first attested in 1276, interestingly older than Middle-Chinese-derived mōko, which is not attested until the early 1300s.  I suspect both are cognate, with mukuri arriving via perhaps the languages of the Korean peninsula, and mōko then borrowed directly from Chinese.
:: The variant mokuri only appears in combination with kokuri, never in isolation, from what I can find.
:* The term kokuri with the sense of “Goryeo” is first attested in 1717, as a shift from older kōkuri in reference originally to Goguryeo.  I cannot find an initial citation date in Japanese for the older reading, but considering that the kingdom itself fell in 668, the influence it had on next-door neighbor Baekje, and the close relations between Baekje and the Yamato court, it is likely that this name in Japanese is quite old indeed.
:: While mukuri seems limited in meaning to “Mongolia; Mongol”, the term kokuri on its own can also refer broadly to anything big and scary, with this sense attested in a text dated 1614–1624.
* 
: Literally, "the Goryeo and Mongols run away".  Idiomatically, "run away in complete disarray".  The kokuri mokuri portion functions essentially an adverb; compare the sound texture of higgledy-piggledy.  This is in reference to the manner of the retreat of the Yuan and Goryeo forces -- in complete disarray after their fleets met with storms.
: Date of first attestation not listed in any sources I've consulted to date.
* References:
:* Encyclopedia Nipponica.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  Also mentions the longer phrase mukuri kokuri no oni ga kita ("the googaly-moogaly demons have come").
:* Nihon Kokugo Daijiten.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  Also mentions the longer phrase mukuri kokuri no oni ga kuru ("the googaly-moogaly demons are coming").
::: Entry for both  and  available in Kotobank here.  
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.
:* Digital Daijisen.  
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  Also mentions the longer phrase mukuri kokuri no oni ga kuru ("the googaly-moogaly demons are coming").
::: Entry for both  and  available in Kotobank here.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.
HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 08:28, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Mukuri kokuri'' snippet 

message: * , 
: As a compound, mukuri kokuri or mokuri kokuri refers to both the mukuri / mokuri or Mongols, and the kokuri or Goryeo.  Originally, this was part of a warning cry that the combined Yuan and Goryeo invasion forces were on their way, as indeed was attempted twice in 1274 and 1281, as detailed in our article at Mongol invasions of Japan.
: The combined phrase later shifted in sense to refer more generally to something big and scary, and was used to try to get crying children to shush.  The sense then shifted further to refer to something unconscionable.
:* The term mukuri with the sense of “Mongolia; Mongol” is first attested in 1276, interestingly older than Middle-Chinese-derived mōko, which is not attested until the early 1300s.  I suspect both are cognate, with mukuri arriving via perhaps the languages of the Korean peninsula, and mōko then borrowed directly from Chinese.
:: The variant mokuri only appears in combination with kokuri, never in isolation, from what I can find.
:* The term kokuri with the sense of “Goryeo” is first attested in 1717, as a shift from older kōkuri in reference originally to Goguryeo.  I cannot find an initial citation date in Japanese for the older reading, but considering that the kingdom itself fell in 668, the influence it had on next-door neighbor Baekje, and the close relations between Baekje and the Yamato court, it is likely that this name in Japanese is quite old indeed.
:: While mukuri seems limited in meaning to “Mongolia; Mongol”, the term kokuri on its own can also refer broadly to anything big and scary, with this sense attested in a text dated 1614–1624.
* 
: Literally, "the Goryeo and Mongols run away".  Idiomatically, "run away in complete disarray".  The kokuri mokuri portion functions essentially an adverb; compare the sound texture of higgledy-piggledy.  This is in reference to the manner of the retreat of the Yuan and Goryeo forces -- in complete disarray after their fleets met with storms.
: Date of first attestation not listed in any sources I've consulted to date.
* References:
:* Encyclopedia Nipponica.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  Also mentions the longer phrase mukuri kokuri no oni ga kita ("the googaly-moogaly demons have come").
:* Nihon Kokugo Daijiten.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  Also mentions the longer phrase mukuri kokuri no oni ga kuru ("the googaly-moogaly demons are coming").
::: Entry for both  and  available in Kotobank here.  
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.
:* Digital Daijisen.  
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.  Also mentions the longer phrase mukuri kokuri no oni ga kuru ("the googaly-moogaly demons are coming").
::: Entry for both  and  available in Kotobank here.
::: Entry for  available in Kotobank here.
HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 08:28, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variations