Talk:North Korea/Archive 7

message: *In North Korea, listening to South Korean radio is regarded as betrayal of the regime for which the accused and all his family members are imprisoned and severely punished. 
:Wikipedia is not a forum. If you have evidence for this, add it to the article. If it's just your opinion, then this is the wrong place to discuss it. And please sign your username or IP with four tildes - I hate anonymous contributions. Walton monarchist89 14:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oppression 

message: The label under the flag reads Flag and the coat of arms has the same problem. I tried to change it but it seems to be part of the template. Does anyone know how to fix this? sijarvis 10:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag and Coat of Arms label 

message: The state's name is DPRK, not North Korea.  "North Korea" is a controversial word like Ostdeutschland.Everton 10:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is more commonly known as "North Korea" among English-speaking people, so maybe that's why. (Stefan2 10:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostdeutschland is a German term... that the German speakers themselves had no problem making an article out of... so isn't it a bad example?--Greasysteve13 03:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read earlier sections of this talk page, this debate has already taken place twice, with very little productive result. Since the intro uses both names, and "DPRK" redirects to this page anyway, I don't think it really matters. Walton monarchist89 14:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah.--Greasysteve13 06:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why not DPRK? 

message: I noticed some examples vandalism on this page. I reverted one version where it said things such as "Stupid DPRK" and manually removed the text "(a g@y)" from the name of the Chairman of the National Defence Commissioner. I couldn't find the version where the text was added, though, so maybe it's better if someone checks the whole text for other, similar, errors. (Stefan2 10:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly, politically-motivated vandalism is always a huge problem on these kind of controversial pages. I will keep checking the article text for any deliberate errors. Walton monarchist89 09:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Surely the 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence ("North Korea is often referred to by global media sources as Stalinist, isolationist, and authoritarian.") and 2nd paragraph about the US professor's quote is more apt for the section where it talks about politics later on. Otherwise the (pre-)intro is hardly a 'summary', and provides so much opinion that one cannot read the rest of the article without a biased mindset from the start. Jsw663 14:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the diff of the edit in question, you can see that the target was in fact a stray new vote in the archived straw poll section.  But I goofed this time, and unintentionally removed some other edits along with it.   I have restored the comments that were affected.  Thanks for pointing out my error.  --Reuben 16:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Pre-' Introduction 

message: This is tough since I've seen reports that the seismic activity magnitude was 3.6 and others that say that it was 4.2.  The article states both in two different paragraphs.  Can someone verify and correct? --Damae 13:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The numbers are from different sources.  4.2 is the number reported by the USGS; South Korean scientists reported 3.58. See OhMyNews and Janes, also USGS report. -- Visviva 14:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. I've therefore removed the contradict tag. Walton monarchist89 14:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seismic Activity Contradiction 

message: The last of the opening paragraphs mentions ways in which North Korea differs from superficially similar states, but the main article never goes into detail. Can someone who knows about this provide some? Maybe in an Ideology section? DavidBofinger 00:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the article on Juche. Walton monarchist89 10:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass Line (Mass Games?) and Intellectuals 

message: Some things I noticed, doing a mass diff over the last few days:
:although all outside experts view the nation as a totalitarian, single-party dictatorship under the absolute control of Kim Jong-il–"a living, breathing Stalinist" state.Whelan, Charles. "North Korea: a living, breathing Stalinist state." The Sydney Morning Herald
 5 Mar. 2003. 
The "all outside experts..." phrase does not appear in the source. And, given some of the moshing around on this page, I seriously doubt that "all outside experts" agree on any thing. Should we do someting about this language, or just wait for one of the pro-NKs to throw a winger?
::Aircraft holdings include 190 MiG-21s, 30 MiG-29s, 60 MiG-23s, 40 Q-5 Fantans, plus an additional 250 or so of older MiG-19s, MiG-17s and Su-7s. Since the 1980s, the air force has expanded its inventory of helicopters from 40 to 275.
As far as I can tell from the source , that should be 150 MiG-21s. Am I reading the source wrong?
We also need a source for Amnesty International and North American Free Speech Association statement in Human Rights section. crazyeddie 00:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some oddities

message: Any chance of this page being protected/semi protected?
As much as I enjoy a good chuckle, "OMG KOREA HAS T3H NUKEZORZ, KIM JONG ILL IS INSANE" doesn't quite grab me as encyclopedic.203.129.42.54 02:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is on my watch list.  There was a flurry of extra vandalism right after the test but it seems to be waning.  I doubt the admins would go for SP status as the article isn't markedly vandal-prone relative to other articles on controversial topics. Even non-controversial articles such as The Beatles are vandalized about as much as this one. Sure, vandalism is an annoyance, but the more serious damage to this article is done when someone comes in determined to push a POV. Raymond Arritt 02:18, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonetheless, I think vandalism is a problem, particularly viz-a-viz recent nuclear developments. The problem with vandalism on this page, compared to The Beatles, is that almost all of it is politically motivated - and much of it is more subtle than OMG KOREA HAS T3H NUKEZORZ, KIM JONG ILL IS INSANE. Walton monarchist89 11:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection of Page in the wake of atomic testing? 

message: Again, 12 japanese girls abducted by North Korea and used as slaves to teach North Korean spys how to act. This is ALL OVER the news right now, if we don't edit this in. I will tomorrow morning. 71.236.225.50 05:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't heard anything about this. If you add it to the article, make sure you provide adequate and specific citations. Walton monarchist89 10:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Actually, I see the guy hasn't put it up there, or if he has, it's been removed. It's been mentioned in quite a few publications over the years and former Japanese PM Koizumi Junichiro went to NK to discuss the matter, among others. In fact, Charles Robert Jenkins, a US Army deserter who fled to NK to avoid being deployed to Vietnam, married a captured Japanese woman. So, I mean, the cases are documented, it's just a matter of citing them. I'll look into maybe adding it later. Shadowrun 22:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  12 japanese girls abducted by North Korea and used as slaves to teach North Korean spys how to act 

message: Does anyone have a reference for the motto? A Google search only yields Wikipedia mirrors. Pruneautalk 19:01, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motto 

message: Forgive my lack of Wikipedia techno-savvy, but what the heck is up with this picture?  Is that Wil Wheaton?  The high-res version used in the article is unaltered, at least. Hiddekel 01:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kim Jong Il and Madeleine Albright 

message: " an East Asian country situated on the northern half of the Korean Peninsula run by a reportedly exiled transgendered mentally-challenged extra-terrestrial going by the name of Kim Jong-Il, who formerly played on Saturday Night Live the character of "Pat," a sexually ambiguous and androgynous individual. "
That sounds funny, but does not belong here. Should be protected! 195.70.48.242 10:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That (and some other recent vandalism) is taken care of; vandalism has been very intense here lately.  Would not object to semi-protection here.  -- Visviva 11:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the vandal is back! the whole page is full of this junk now, including the image subtexts --Maximilian77 16:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree, the level of vandalism has become too hard to keep up with and the article needs to be semi-protected.  Will request. Raymond Arritt 17:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Raymond Arritt 03:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandal alert! 

message: If the DPRK is a Communist-led state, why are some people poorer than others?  An extremist dictatorship like that of Kim, is no better than fascism.
SENSAY911 14:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, Kim is a rogue, Axis of Evil dictator. Cerebral Warrior 14:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: None of this is relevant. Wikipedia is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Please restrict your comments to those relating to the article itself. Walton monarchist89 09:39, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Of course it's relevant. Some people believe that North Korea is not Communist-led, and might want to change the article accordingly. I can't see how this has nothing to do with the article...Specusci 18:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of Government 

message: It's really unnecessary to have all that information about how people in different languages call him.  I think it ought to be cut.
:No, it's not irrelevant. The title of Kim Jong Il is a matter of controversy, and is an immensely important part of DPRK political life (owing to the cult of personality). The fact is, everything about DPRK is so controversial at present that any changes to this page, however trivial, could be viewed as politically motivated. So I'd advise you not to cut any of it. Walton monarchist89 10:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kim Yong Il's Title 

message: Earlier, it was agreed that this page should be semiprotected, due to the high levels of politically motivated vandalism - but it doesn't seem to have been given semiprotected status yet. I strongly feel that this page should be semiprotected. Walton monarchist89 10:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It had been semi-protected for about 12 days, but was unprotected today.  See here.  Shall we request re-protection? -- Visviva 13:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Note:  In the approximately 12 hours since un-protection, there have been three cases of clear vandalism by anons or new users, and one anon test.  If this keeps up, which it surely will, we're looking at about 6 rvv's per day; that's not impossible to handle, but it's more than enough to get in the way.  I've got plenty of other pages to patrol for vandalism, so I myself am leaning towards requesting re-protection.  -- Visviva 13:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do note that when I unprotected the page, the page was not linked off the main page. Since then it's been linked back on the main page again. I don't believe 6 reverts on one page per day is beyond Wikipedia's capabilities, and Wikipedia should aim to minimize the number of protected pages. However, I'm not entirely opposed to re-protection, as long as someone remembers to un-protect it when vandalism subsides. theProject 16:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Visviva and strongly request re-protection. Walton monarchist89 11:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Semiprotected status

message: I changed some of the information that made North and South Korea sound like they where getting better in their relations. Perhaps this is true on part of the government, but the citizens of both nations despise each other. Two south korean friends of mine use "north korean" as an insult not all that dissimilar from english phrases like "fag". 
~Specusci
:Fair enough, but bear in mind that you need to provide citations for any information that you add to the articles. By the way, to sign your username, use four tildes:  ~~~~  Walton monarchist89 11:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And extraordinary claims require extraordinary references.  My own experience suggests that your friends are far from representative of the South Korean people. -- Visviva 13:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry you feel that way, Visviva, but these friends have only been living outside of South Korea for about a year now. They're more or less average koreans. But I will look for references, as I agree that the opinion of a friend is not substantial enough. Specusci 19:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  North-South relations 

message: I know that not much of what we might consider politics goes on in NK, but still, a section on "government and politics", such as it is, wouldn't be amiss, right? Biruitorul 08:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True - every other country has one. I'm going to start work on a government and politics section. Walton monarchist89 11:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Excellent. Thank you very much. Biruitorul 01:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Politics

message: Just wanted to let you all know I removed a short clause stating the United States and North Korea are technically still at war, since a peace treaty was never signed. If we're going to refer to technicalities, North Korea and the United States were technically never at war to begin with. There was a citation for the statement which seemed relevant to the article as a whole, but not to that statement specifically; I removed it as well. Ogthor 03:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An interesting point.  North and South Korea are still at war -- or at least that's the prevailing understanding -- so I expect that's the source of the mistake.  -- Visviva 10:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, it's supposed to be North and South Korea that are still locked in a state of war, not North Korea and the United States. It could have even been vandalism? Specusci 18:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  State of War 

message: I am fairly certain that North Korea is NOT officially atheiest.
Crocodilicus 21:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The separate article Religion in North Korea says ever since the rise of communism, free religious activities no longer exist as the government sponsors religious groups only to create an illusion of religious freedom, with a citation. This seems more precise to me than 'officially atheist' so I will rewrite the main article to reflect that. Walton monarchist89 10:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Maybe it's just a secular nation? I don't think there would be any officially atheist nations, would there? Specusci 16:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Albania under Enver Hoxha declared itself an atheist state.  I don't know of any others. --Reuben 19:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Er, yes. But how is that relevant? Anyway please sign your comments. Walton monarchist89 10:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion 

message: I added the tag to block unregistered users to edit this article. It appears that vandalism is a problem here, along with other similar articles, ie. Middle East, Germany...
Only neutral facts please. --Loco123 22:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that the article is not presently protected.  Hence the tag you added was inaccurate.  Adding that specific tag to an article does not actually protect it.  That must be done seperately by an administrator. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 07:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  While wikipedia is editable by any when unprotected, normal users do not have the power to lock articles. That would just cause chaos with people vandalizing the articles and then locking all other users out so that the vandlism stays...only administrators can lock or add certain tags.Specusci 15:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The page urgently needs to be semiprotected. Walton monarchist89 17:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only registered users can edit...for now