Talk:North Korea/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 →

Contents

Democratic?

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).

--In western conversation, yes, but the word is part of the country's name. A lot of Stalinist regimes do that; double-speak is very common among totalitarian regimes. In any case, it shouldn't be in quotes because it's actually a part of the country's name. Magicflyinlemur 10:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)

POV?

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)

Sounds a little POV to me...

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)

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)
Yes, many people do... :-) -- Visviva 00:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Why not include both? "North Korea's official name is DPRK.", etc. Specusci 16:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know the language, but did a random jump and this does seem

a matching interlanguage- m:uz:Shimoliy_Koreya ? Schissel | Sound the Note! 19:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Added, thanks. -- Visviva 00:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed Vandalism

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).

All your edit did was reintroduce vandalism. What happened? Gerrish (talk) 16:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I saw really bad vandalism and tried to find the closest thing possible to the original article and revert to that version. I didn't know there were other bad things in the version I reverted to. Captain bingo 16:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Captain_Bingo

There is APALLING vandalism on this page which should be sorted out post-haste. -Nordland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.186.145 (talk • contribs)

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

User:RuleBrittania

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)

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)
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)

Three-party system

Last time I checked this article said that North Korea was a three-party system. This is also the official type of goverment. I don't see anything about this now, why was it removed? Techefnet 10:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It is known that the other two parties are under the control of the Korean Workers' Party, led by Kim Jong-il. It is only a three party system in a very superficial sense.
67.171.43.170 04:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Wording and formatting discrepancy in infobox

For the attribute "establishment"

North South
[[Gojoseon|Kojosŏn]] [[24th century BC|2333 BCE]] [[Gojoseon]] [[October 3]], [[2333 BC]]
[[March 1st Movement|Independence declared]] [[March 1]] [[1919]]<sup>h</sup> [[March 1st Movement|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)

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)

Weeding Out the Weak?

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)

Dictatorship

North Korea is under a dictatorship along with its Juche State Gov't -Mrsanitazier

YouTube video from LINK

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)


Weeding Out the Weak?

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)
A more apt comparison may be to Pol Pot's Cambodia. (Whip It On Jim 05:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC))

This link indicates that in pyongyang the elderly and disabled are either pushed out the edges of the city, or told to stay indoors to reinforce the whole "young, strong people" idea. Should this be added to the article? [1] --Stvfetterly 14:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

So now saying the truth is vandalism you fascist f@#ks?

I just changed the description of "Juche State" (what the hell nobdody cares...) to a more accurate form of government that as I remember is called "Totalitarian Dictatorship". I can't be suspended because of saying the truth. I guess there's a lot of anti-western world are crippling these articles. North Korea IS a Totalitarian Dictatorship, just accept it.

Look, the amusing part of all of this is that the quip "(what the hell nobody cares)" about a "Juche State" is that you are ironically missing probably the most essential part to understanding the system in North Korea. Of course the system can be labeled a "totalitarian dictatorship" just as easily as someone can label Bush a "war criminal". The point of the information is not to qualify the nature of government (otherwise the US would have to change it's description to say "limited quasi-representative democracy"), but to inform the reader with the system to country uses to regulate itself. In North Korea that is called a Juche State and "Juche" is the single most important ideological element in the workings and implementation of the government. To ignore that is to fundamentally dismiss North Korea as a nation and that is not what wikipedia is about. Besides, the argument that North Korea has strict control over state planning and other "totalitarian" aspects are explained within the article, but it is of the unmost importance to recognize the relevance of the country beign a Juche State. I hope i don't ever have to write an obvious paragraph like this ever again. thanks- Icactus 13:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Icactus is correct! Either way you ve never been in North Korea so you know nothing more than what your news channel tell you. So shut up, and keep wikipedia neutral. Fotis2005 15:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah! I see. So as per some policy I haven't read, we should rely on original research from people who have been there and ignore information reported by reliable sources. Now that's a neat twist on Wikipedia! Rklawton 17:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Considering that :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarian states:

"Totalitarianism is a term employed by political scientists, especially those in the field of comparative politics, to describe modern regimes in which the state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior."

I think that the term may be used on this article.


A vote perhaps?

Noserider 12:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


I entirely disagree on the use of the term totalitarian, however advocate a vote. Essentially, totalitarialism is a biased word. The term is used by political scientists, but in bias. Let's stick to the official terms. To give further description to my edit, I removed the sentence stating "North Korea is a Stalinist, Authoritarian..." due to the fact that it goes against NPOV and the first sentence two paragraphs above describes it properly and officially. On a side note newspaper, radio, television and internet news articles are not reliable sources of information - journals are. This is a most accepted fact amongst professionals in any field. Let's keep it neutral and factual.
58.169.160.159 12:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

"North Korea IS a Totalitarian Dictatorship, just accept it" And you'd know this personally, right?

Just to make sure we're being accurate - fascist fucks implies a national militarism that i am not advocating - just to set the record straight. Icactus 22:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Who Changed the overall discripttion?

This is radically different than the NK page I saw 2 months ago! Please .. a "positve growth rate since 1996" do in part to a "military-first" policy??? Are you kidding me? That policy is choking the life out of the NK people. Look, whether you hate America or not, you cannot "spin" NK to look good, in any way or metric. Zero positve. It is the most repressive and draconian country on the face of the Earth. The geography may be beautiful, but hell, Saturn looks nice from a distance, but that doesn't mean I would dare set foot on it if I was able. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.133.239.162 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 14 March 2007 UTC

We shouldn't spin any article to make the subject look either good or bad. Just state facts from relevant, reliable sources. Keep it NPOV.
58.169.160.159 12:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

The article is so changed now, looks so pro North Korea now. It does not do the horrors that are taking place there justice. (Lithdoc 17:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

'Junche dictatorship' is total POV bias, this is supposed to be factual content not opinion, Junche is an economic policy close to autarchism, it literally means self-reliance. More appropriately the government type should link to 'socialist republic', 'people's republic' or 'communist state'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.131.41.64 (talk) 12:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The term dictatorship is, not only biased, but completely incorrect. It is a socialism/communism (whichever you want to call it). Politics 101 first lesson: there are three major broad types of political systems: a democracy, a socialism/communism and a dictatorship. All three are completely different systems of government. However, in whatever biased way you might have heard the term Juche being used, it is actually the official name for their style of goverment. This is the term that the North Korean people (including their leader) use. Socialist republic and communist state are the generic terms. Juche state defines it more specifically. Peoples' republic is only used by specific countries and is a bit risky. As a suggestion we could say "Juche state - a form of socialism/communism".
58.169.160.159 13:04, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there's any room to disagree that the military-first policy is what has the economy growing at between 1-2% per year. This is not the forum to debate the merits of the policy or the adverse effects it has. It is simply stating that military spending has sustained the country's economy with the assistance of foreign food aid. all of this is made clear in the paragraphs.

Again I call for neutrality. Can we really be certain that the millitary first policy caused the growth. Just state that the economy has grown 1-2% per year and that they have a millitary first policy, without linking them.
58.169.160.159 13:14, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the issue here is not about spinning NK to look "good", but instead identifying what is happening in reality and simply stating it. There is no need to make NK look "bad" and i certainly don't think there is any prevailance of "Pro-NK attitude" on this page. I only intend to keep it neutral - and to label NK draconian and to say there is Zero positive does little to help maintain neutrality.

I do appreciate that you raised concern on this discussion page as opposed to just deleting and rewording. Also, please tag your comments so we can tell who's raising the issue.

thanks- Icactus 12:40 - March 15, 2007 UTC

Typically, economic growth statistics should not include foreign food (or energy) aid. Rklawton 16:39, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Are food and energy aid being included in the economic growth statistic? I guess i don't see that part. Icactus 16:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You did, here: It is simply stating that military spending has sustained the country's economy with the assistance of foreign food aid. Rklawton 16:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
On the ARTICLE PAGE there is no statistic that includes foreign aid in its calculation for economic growth. I think you just misunderstood what i said on the talk page - that without foreign aid, the economy would not have been able to produce the 1-2 percent growth rate. that doesn't mean that foreign aid is included in any statistic. Lets try to stick to dealing with what is actually printed on the article page instead of nit picking people's comments on the talk page. this is really getting silly.Icactus 15:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

User:RuleBrittania

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)

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)

Two things. 1. I don't blame RuleBrittania for being angered - there are a lot of cases of people beleiving whatever they hear on Fox News and duplicating whatever they say onto wikipedia. 2. We want 0-sided, no bias towards either way in any statement.
58.169.160.159 13:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
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)

Three-party system

Last time I checked this article said that North Korea was a three-party system. This is also the official type of goverment. I don't see anything about this now, why was it removed? Techefnet 10:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It is known that the other two parties are under the control of the Korean Workers' Party, led by Kim Jong-il. It is only a three party system in a very superficial sense.
67.171.43.170 04:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no tree party system in North Korea. Even the Korean Workers party is only a tool of the Kim Family. North Korea is a medieval state ruled by a family not by a party. Kim Jong-ill became leader after his father died, he just took that power, and nobody sad no against him. --UDSS (talk) 14:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Wording and formatting discrepancy in infobox

For the attribute "establishment"

North South
[[Gojoseon|Kojosŏn]] [[24th century BC|2333 BCE]] [[Gojoseon]] [[October 3]], [[2333 BC]]
[[March 1st Movement|Independence declared]] [[March 1]] [[1919]]<sup>h</sup> [[March 1st Movement|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)

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)

Dictatorship

North Korea is under a dictatorship along with its Juche State Gov't -Mrsanitazier

Good thing the Allies liberated it, though. See also: China, Eastern Europe. --NEMT 01:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
This gets repetitive, but once again NORTH KOREA IS NOT A DICTATORSHIP - IT IS A SOCIALISM/COMMUNISM (whichever you like to call it). THESES ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SYSTEMS OF GOVERNMENT. Don't tell me "what the hell nobody cares" about such "technicalities", because wikipedia is meant to be a factual source, getting the technicalities right.
58.169.160.159 13:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Dictatorship

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)

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)

Stalinism and Maoism are both systems made by power-hungry people. Mao and Stalin did not care about the working class, they only cared about there own live. Stalinism killed may, but Maoism killed many more in China. But because they called them self Communist, the western world believes that Stalinism and Maoism is Communism. Today what America calls Communism is the Stalinist version of Communism. But the only Stalinist nations today are Cuba and North Korea, the other Stalinist State have turned back to capitalism. --UDSS (talk) 14:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

YouTube video from LINK

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)

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)

1984

I watched a national geographic documentary the other day about North Korea, and I couldn't help but notice the MANY MANY MANY similiarites with George Orwells 1984. I might try to contribute a list of similarities between the two totalitarian states (imaginary and real). Would that be a good idea? Swiffer 07:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

While I agree that there are a number of interesting similarities between 1984 and the current regime in Pyongyang, a list such as the one you suggest would necessarily constitute original research and, as such, is inappropriate for this article. If there are scholarly articles out there which deal with this issue then it would possibly be ok to cite them, but otherwise this type of information simply isn't appropriate for Wikipedia. --The Way 22:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with The Way. In addendum, however, you will find similarities because George Orwell based 1984 on the ethics and philosophy of communism, and North Korea is the last remaining communist nation. You will find, however, that even non-communist nations have huge posters of their leaders plastered around their cities -- Syria, Iran, Cuba, to name a few, Iraq also had a similar set up before the Americans sadly bombed it back to the stone age. Adam 01:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Umm, getting a little off topic, but the Communist party does have a monopoly on power in Cuba, as well as Vietnam and the PRC - they are Communist states. North Korea's not the last one, it's just the last one that's not on relatively good terms with the West. Of course, Cuba's not on very good terms with certain large nations, and I'm not sure how to classify Laos. It seems to Lao People's Revolutionary Party fit the bill, but its foreign relations are improving. --Reuben 06:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree with The Way. Wikipedia 101: Neutral point of view, information from relevant, reliable sources only. Of course, Reuben is right on the fact that there are other socialisms/communisms besides North Korea. Don't know where you got that idea Adam.
58.169.160.159 13:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Telephones

If North Korea's econmany is so bad then why did the Cia factbook ([2])report 980,000 phones in North Korea? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.80.177.50 (talk) 14:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

With a population of 25 million, that makes one phone for every 25 people. Imagine where such a ratio would place you in the world economy. Oh yes, the NK economy must be over-heating, what with all the commercial negotiations taking place over the phone lines, all those contracts being negotiated over fax lines, and that easy access to the internet to boot! Booming economy! You must be Adam Smith reborn. Except for, you know, that minor mistake of thinking that in this day and age 1 phone for every 25 people is a sign of a good economy. Evensong 04:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
OK first of all Adam Smith was a right-wing advocate and couldn't possibly have condoned NK more. You might mean somebody more like Marx or Lenin.
58.169.160.159 13:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Bias source

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).

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)


I am suggesting that statements by NK officials should be treated with the appropriate caution. If you fail to see why in a totalitarian regime such a thing as propaganda and misinformation are a risk then perhaps you might question your own bias, it's not as though there is an opposition press in NK to balance the views... if there is, please correct me and cite the opposition publications. Failing that, I call NPOV on you. Noserider 12:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)