Talk:Japanese-Korean disputes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Japan To-do:
Map of Korea This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a project to build and improve articles related to Korea. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Archive
Archives
Archive 1 : Aug 2003 - Mar 2007


Contents

[edit] Recent controversy issues

[edit] Liancourt Rocks

It seems that a few editors wish rewriting of the intro like the following from the current version.

"Currently under South Korean control, these islets are also claimed by Japan. The islets are called "Dokdo" in Korean and "Takeshima" in Japanese. There are valuable fishing grounds around the islets and reserves of natural gas have also been found recently."

However, it already discussed about this intro issue for long time on the main article's talk page, and it has reached agreement with the current version. If you will force revert without an explanation from now on, it will be regarded as vandalism. Because you will be violate of POV fork unless you are able to be convinced of other editors in the main article.--Watermint 14:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] See of Japan

The current intro seems to me surely Japanese POV. Therefore, I propose rewriting as follows;

The Japanese government protests that the name "Sea of Japan" is geographically and historically established in Europe from the late 18th century to the early 19th century and is currently used all over the world. But, both North and South Korean governments protest insist that Japan promoted the usage of the name "Sea of Japan" while Korea lost effective control over its foreign policy under Japanese imperial expansion. South Korea argues that the name "East Sea," which was one of the most common names found on ancient European maps of this sea, should be the official name instead of (or at least used concurrently with) "Sea of Japan."

The description which is "the same with the title of "East Sea"" should be attached the reliable citation. At first, please present us the reliable citation.--Watermint 14:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Since there was no objection, I had corrected such as [1]. --Watermint 12:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plagiarism of Japanese products

Personally, I'm thinking that the paragraph does not need to delete cause I seem to be written based on some sources. --Watermint 14:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I found several sources that Japanese companies copy Korean products such as cell phone, and LCD products. That also should be added. --Appletrees 12:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This article is on 2channel's watchlist

No wonder this article may have a long history of edit warring because it has controversial issues itself and has been designated as one on the watchlist by Japanese editors deeply associated with 2channel, the largest Internet forum not only in Japan but also in the world. The watch list encompasses throughout articles related to Japan and Korea and some of China. Unfortunately, many Japanese meat/sock puppets relevant the board have been deeply involved in editing those articles. Therefore, I leave a note for people to be cautious in future. You can see the whole list as clicking the collapsed box.

● refers to problematic articles by 2channel people
○ for articles with heated edit warring

I hope everything is clear soon. --Appletrees (talk) 14:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jjok (talk · contribs)'s addition about "Environment" issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese-Korean_disputes&diff=195226158&oldid=194097498

Since it is proved at WP:ANI that Jjok has violated several important rules in editing articles, I checked this disputed article which he edited and not surprisingly he did wonderful job like the above. Well, I saw Jjok expanded environment issues of Japan, so he likely put the almost same contents to there. I think this section be revised and discussed. Besides, Sea of Japan (East Sea) is not solely administered by Japan, but Jjok described such which is a violation on WP:NPOV.--Appletrees (talk) 19:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Environment dispute and ghost fishing in Sea of Japan (East Sea)

  • "South Korean waste dumping into Sea of Japan" and "Poaching and ghost-fishing in Japanese EEZs and joint fishing zones" the thread title is too long for editors to write a note at summary field, so replaced with the above. --Appletrees (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Moved from Talk:Sea of Japan#"South Korean waste dumping into Sea of Japan" and "Poaching and ghost-fishing in Japanese EEZs and joint fishing zones". 76.246.149.216 (talk) 03:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The controversy of South Korean waste dumping into Sea of Japan and Poaching and ghost-fishing in Japanese EEZs and joint fishing zones of Japanese-Korean disputes has occurred. A Korean user Appletrees insists that "The Sea of Japan is not being ruled by Japan. Only Japan is making noise to the pollution of the Sea of Japan. Therefore, this problem is not "Discussion of Japan and Korea.". And, he deleted all these parts.[2] [3] [4] However, the Japanese loves Sea of Japan. Therefore, the Japanese is worrying about the pollution of the Sea of Japan. The Japanese and the South Korean are beginning the edit war. Can anyone mediate this problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.168.215.11 (talk) 07:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Japanese anonymous dion editor, If you want to request meditation, use your "official account" and request by yourself. Ah...Saintjust (talk · contribs) or Hermeneus (talk · contribs) also uses the big ISP. "The" Japanese? who? you? write your reason not bashing on me.--Appletrees (talk) 12:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
The information you have been removing contains citations to reliable sources. Before anyone talks about mediation, you need to say why you think the sources are inappropriate if you believe they are. If you believe the sources are appropriate, then you need to say under what policy or guideline you are removing the material. If you have no reason based in the rules, then you should not remove the material. And, by the way, IP editors have the same rights as logged-in users except in obvious cases of abuse. Are you alleging abuse on the part of 210.168.215.11? If so, state your case. 76.246.149.216 (talk) 03:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
The meditation remark is urged by the dion anon not me as you clearly see. When I removed the content, I already my reason why it should be discussed at here first. It deals with a very controversial issues and solely written by some Japanese point of view. The sea is not "Japanese sea", but the overall tone of the addition is as such. The excessive account for Korean doing is also off from balance. Jjok seems to try making Korea as bad as possible. When a content is added onto an article, not only 'what' content is addressed, but also 'who' writes is important. Jjok who introduced the contents has violated several big rules such as WP:V, WP:UNDUE and WP:NPOV. You may see the report on him at ANI. When you want to add something controversial, you can't put it without discussion or consensus. I don't totally disagree on exclusion of the contents, but suggested to "rewrite" it. So it is your turn why you think you have to keep it AS IS. The contents is also more like environment problems, and the South Korean government has not been disputing the matter with Japanese government. As for ISP, the anon made horrendous personal attacks on me other place, so my reasoning for the anon to play fair is not an excessive suggestion. --Appletrees (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, South Korean waste dumping into Sea of Japan moved to the Sea of Japan. However, Poaching and ghost-fishing in Japanese EEZs and joint fishing zones is a problem of Japan and South Korea. (problem of fisheries agreement on Japan and South Korea)
And, Korea instead of Corea is deleted. Because "Japanese government has not been disputing the matter with South Korean government." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.168.215.11 (talk) 05:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
That is not "OK". You unilaterally inserted the content with revision. As well as poaching in Japanese EEZs and off-season fishing due to the exhaust of marine resources around the Korean Peninsula, ghost fishing by lost or abandoned fishing gears by Korean fishermen continues to catch aquatic organisms and thus causes of further loss of the resources in addition to damaging trawlnets. Cxhaust of marine resource? What a good practice of WP:NPOV and WP:V? --Appletrees (talk) 12:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

These problems are admitted also even in South Korea. (Please look at the source. )Dishonor in South Korea should not be concealed. --61.23.15.246 (talk) 04:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)