Talk:Itaewon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Map of Korea WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea. Pavilion at Gyeongbok palace, Seoul


[edit] Changes by User:Hardyandtiny

The above user visited the Itaewon page and changed some of the descriptions, essentially: "military personnel from Yongsan garrison and the UN base as well as civilian visitors from the wider world" to "foreigners" and "English-speaking cutie peeking out of a doorway" to "prostitute"

I reverted the initial change as I felt it took some of the life out of an article about a vibrant, diverse part of Seoul. I also left a note on the users talk page (along with a welcome message, this is a brand new user) but the change was remade almost instantly. I'd be interested to hear everyone - especially Hardyandtiny's - views on these changes, I personally think the original sounded better and is a great description of what goes on in Itaewon. The changes strike me as somewhat sanitary and that's not, imo, supposed to get in the way of good prose in WP articles. Deizio 01:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I would actually tend to favor Hardyandtiny's changes -- at least the ones you mention--, per Wikipedia's preference for clear, succinct writing. "Cutie" is a particularly problematic word. -- Visviva 01:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Hmm indeed. I've seen plenty of examples of overly wordy prose in WP, and this isn't in the top league by a long way. "Cutie" refers to a cute girl who is using her cuteness to entice you into something. If you'd ever walked up Hooker Hill you would know the term is more than suitable. If dry text is what people want then that's what they shall have, however the paragraph you've quoted from the style guide also says "Conciseness, however, does not justify removing information from an article."

In any case, Hardyandtiny seems set on writing his own version of Seoul with absolutely no interest in discussion or consensus building with other editors. Such behaviour is, imo, in many ways as bad as including blatant POV or vandalism. I'll be watching his future contributions with interest. Deizio 15:31, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV

I was about to comment on how grossly POV this article sounds (it sounds more like someone's travel blog than a bona fide encyclopedia entry to me), but it looks like there has already been some discussion about the situation. I tagged it, but if someone is already carefully monitoring the article, then the tag can be removed. --Merkurix 10:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)