Talk:North Korea: Difference between revisions

Archives

Archive 1 created August 9, 2006 by crazyeddie Archive 2 created August 31, 2006 by crazyeddie Archive 3 (July-August 2006), created November 7 2006 by Visviva. Archive 4 (September 2006), created November 7 2006 by Visviva. Archive 5 (November 2006), created April 13, 2007 by User:Mahanga

Korean: B; Hanja: top; RR: dprk

This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate! Guide to WikiProjects Directory of WikiProjects

Shortcuts WP:WPC WP:COUNTRIES

This WikiProject helps develop country-related pages (of all types) and works toward standardizing the formats of sets and types of country-related pages. For example, the sets of Culture of x, Administrative divisions of x, and Demographics of x articles, etc. – (where "x" is a country name) – and the various types of pages, like stubs, categories, etc.

Updated daily by AAlertBot — Discuss? / Report bug? / Request feature?
Click to watch (Subscribe via  RSS  Atom) · Find Article Alerts for other topics!

This WikiProject is focused on country coverage (content/gaps) and presentation (navigation, page naming, layout, formatting) on Wikipedia, especially country articles (articles with countries as their titles), country outlines, and articles with a country in their name (such as Demographics of Germany), but also all other country-related articles, stubs, categories, and lists pertaining to countries.

This WikiProject helps Wikipedia's navigation-related WikiProjects (Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge, WikiProject Categories, WikiProject Portals, etc.) develop and maintain the navigation structures (menus, outlines, lists, templates, and categories) pertaining to countries. And since most countries share the same subtopics ("Cities of", "Cuisine of", "Religion in", "Prostitution in", etc.), it is advantageous to standardize their naming, and their order of presentation in Wikipedia's indexes and table-of-contents-like pages.

• List of all subpages of this page.

Many country and country-related articles have been extensively developed, but much systematic or similar information about many countries is not presented in a consistent way. Inconsistencies are rampant in article naming, headings, data presented, types of things covered, order of coverage, etc. This WikiProject works towards standardizing page layouts of country-related articles of the same type ("Geography of", "Government of", "Politics of", "Wildlife of", etc.).

We are also involved with the standardization of country-related stubs, standardizing the structure of country-related lists and categories (the category trees for countries should be identical for the most part, as most countries share the same subcategories – though there will be some differences of course).

1. Provide a centralized resource guide of all related topics in Wikipedia, as well as spearhead the effort to improve and develop them.
2. Create uniform templates that serve to identify all related articles as part of this project, as well as stub templates to englobe all related stubs under specific categories.
3. Standardize articles about different nations, cultures, holidays, and geography.
4. Verify historical accuracy and neutrality of all articles within the scope of the project.
5. Create, expand and cleanup related articles.

This section contains an essay on style, consisting of the advice or opinions of one or more WikiProjects on how to format and present article content within their area of interest. This information is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.

Although referenced during FA and GA reviews, this structure guide is advisory only, and should not be enforced against the wishes of those actually working on the article in question. Articles may be best modeled on the layout of an existing article of appropriate structure and topic (See: Canada, Japan and Australia)

A country is a distinct part of the world, such as a state, nation, or other political entity. When referring to a specific polity, the term "country" may refer to a sovereign state, states with limited recognition, constituent country, or a dependent territory.

For lead length see, #Size

The article should start with a good simple introduction, giving name of the country, general location in the world, bordering countries, seas and the like. Also give other names by which the country may still be known (for example Holland, Persia). Also, add a few facts about the country, the things that it is known for (for example the mentioning of windmills in the Netherlands article). The primary purpose of a Wikipedia lead is not to summarize the topic, but to summarize the content of the article.

The first sentence should introduce the topic, and tell the nonspecialist reader what the subject is, and where. It should be in plain English.

The etymology of a country's name, if worth noting and naming disputes, may be dealt with in the etymology section. Foreign-languages, pronunciations and acronyms may also belong in the etymology section or in a note to avoid WP:LEADCLUTTER.

Example:

Y Sweden,^[a] formally the Kingdom of Sweden,^[b] is a Nordic country located on the Scandinavian Peninsula in Northern Europe.
N Sweden,(Swedish: Sverige [ˈsvæ̌rjɛ] ^ⓘ) formally the Kingdom of Sweden,(Swedish: Konungariket Sverige [ˈkôːnɵŋaˌriːkɛt ˈsvæ̌rjɛ] ^ⓘ) is a Nordic country located on the Scandinavian Peninsula in Northern Europe.

Overly detailed information or infobox data duplication such as listing random examples, excessive numbered statistics or naming individuals should be reserved for the infobox or body of the article.

Example:

Y A developed country, Canada has a high nominal per capita income globally and its advanced economy ranks among the largest in the world, relying chiefly upon its abundant natural resources and well-developed international trade networks. Recognized as a middle power, Canada's strong support for multilateralism and internationalism has been closely related to its foreign relations policies of peacekeeping and aid for developing countries. Canada is part of multiple international organizations and forums.
N A highly developed country, Canada has the seventeenth-highest nominal per-capita income globally and the sixteenth-highest ranking in the Human Development Index. Its advanced economy is the tenth-largest in the world and the 14th for military expenditure by country, Canada is part of several major international institutions including the United Nations, NATO, the G7, the Group of Ten, the G20, the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, the Commonwealth of Nations, the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, and the Organization of American States.

There is a table with quick facts about the country called an infobox. A template for the table can be found at the bottom of this page.

Although the table can be moved out to the template namespace (to e.g. [[Template:CountryName Infobox]]) and thus easen the look of the edit page, most Wikipedians still disapprove as of now, see the talk page.

The contents are as follows:

• The official long-form name of the country in the local language is to go on top as the caption. If there are several official names (languages), list all (if reasonably feasible). The conventional long-form name (in English), if it differs from the local long-form name, should follow the local name(s). This is not a parameter to list every recognized language of a country, but rather for listing officially recognize national languages.
• The conventional short-form name of the country, recognised by the majority of the English-speaking world; ideally, this should also be used for the name of the article.
• A picture of the national flag. You can find flags at the List of flags. A smaller version should be included in the table itself, a larger-sized version in a page titled Flag of <country>, linked to via the "In Detail" cell. Instead of two different images, use the autothumbnail function that wiki offers.
• A picture of the national coat of arms. A good source is required for this, but not yet available. It should be no more than 125 pixels in width.
• Below the flag and coat of arms is room for the national motto, often displayed on the coat of arms (with translation, if necessary).
• The official language(s) of the country. (rot the place to list every recognized or used language)
• The political status. Specify if it is a sovereign state or a dependent territory.
• The capital city, or cities. Explain the differences if there are multiple capital cities using a footnote (see example at the Netherlands).
• If the data on the population is recent and reliable, add the largest city of the country.
• Land area: The area of the country in square kilometres (km²) and square miles (sq mi) with the world-ranking of this country. Also add the % of water, which can be calculated from the data in the Geography article (make it negligible if ~0%).
• Population: The number of inhabitants and the world-ranking; also include a year for this estimate (should be 2000 for now, as that is the date of the ranking). For the population density you can use the numbers now available.
• GDP: The amount of the gross domestic product on ppp base and the world ranking. also include the amount total and per head.
• HDI: Information pertaining to the UN Human Development Index – the value, year (of value), rank (with ordinal), and category (colourised as per the HDI country list).
• Currency; the name of the local currency. Use the pipe if the currency name is also used in other countries: [[Australian dollar|dollar]].
• Time zone(s); the time zone or zones in which the country is relative to UTC
• National anthem; the name of the National anthem and a link to the article about it.
• Internet TLD; the top-level domain code for this country.
• Calling Code; the international Calling Code used for dialing this country.

There is a long-standing practice that areas out of a state's control should be depicted differently on introductory maps, to not give the impression the powers of a state extend somewhere they do not. This is for various types of a lack of control, be it another state (eg. Crimea, bits of Kashmir) or a separatist body (eg. DPR, TRNC).

A section should be written in summary style, containing just the important facts. Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to the depth of detail, the quantity of text, prominence of placement, the juxtaposition of statements, and the use of imagery. Main article fixation is an observed effect that editors are likely to encounter in county articles. If a section it is too large, information should be transferred to the sub-article. Avoid sections focusing on criticisms or controversies. Try to achieve a more neutral text by folding debates into the narrative, rather than isolating them into sections.

Articles may consist of the following sections:

• Etymology sections are often placed first (sometimes called name depending on the information in the article). Include only if due information is available.
• History – An outline of the major events in the country's history (about 4 to 6 paragraphs, depending on complexity of history), including some detail on current events. Sub-article: "History of X"
• Politics – Overview of the current governmental system, possibly previous forms, some short notes on the parliament. Sub-article: "Politics of X"
• Administrative divisions – Overview of the administrative subdivisions of the country. Name the section after the first level of subdivisions (and subsequent levels, if available) (e.g. provinces, states, departments, districts, etc.) and give the English equivalent name, when available. Also include overseas possessions. This section should also include an overview map of the country and subdivisions, if available.
• Geography – Details of the country's main geographic features and climate. Historical weather boxes should be reserved for sub articles. Sub-article: "Geography of X"
• Economy – Details on the country's economy, major industries, bit of economic history, major trade partners, a tad comparison etc. Sub-article: "Economy of X"
• Demographics – Mention the languages spoken, the major religions, some well known properties of the people of X, by which they are known. Uncontextualized data and charts should be avoided. (See WP:NOTSTATS and WP:PROSE) Sub-article: "Demographics of X".
• Culture – Summary of the country's specific forms of art (anything from painting to film) and its best known cultural contributions. Caution should be taken to ensure that the sections are not simply a listing of names or mini biographies of individuals accomplishments. Good example Canada#Sports. Sub-article: "Culture of X".
• See also – 'See also" sections of country articles normally only contain links to "Index of country" and "Outline of country" articles, alongside the main portal(s).
• References – Sums up "Notes", "References", and all "Further Reading" or "Bibliography"
• External links – Links to official websites about the country. See WP:External links

Articles that have gone through FA and GA reviews generally consists of approximately 8,000 to 10,000 words as per WP:SIZERULE, with a lead usually four paragraphs as per MOS:LEADLENGTH.

• Australia = Prose size (text only): 60 kB (9,304 words) "readable prose size"
• Bulgaria = Prose size (text only): 56 kB (8,847 words) "readable prose size"
• Canada = Prose size (text only): 67 kB (9,936 words) "readable prose size"
• Germany = Prose size (text only): 54 kB (8,456 words) "readable prose size"
• Japan = Prose size (text only): 51 kB (8,104 words) "readable prose size"
• East Timor = Prose size (text only): 53 kB (8152 words) "readable prose size"
• Malaysia = Prose size (text only): 57 kB (9092 words) "readable prose size"
• New Zealand = Prose size (text only): 62 kB (9761 words) "readable prose size"
• Philippines = Prose size (text only): 62 kB (9178 words) "readable prose size"

The link should be shown as below: Avoid link clutter of multiple child articles in a hierarchical setup as hatnotes. Important links/articles shoukd be incorporated into the prose of the section. For example, Canada#Economy is a summary section with a hatnote to Economy of Canada that summarizes the history with a hatnote to Economic history of Canada. See WP:SUMMARYHATNOTE for more recommended hatnote usages.

Y== Economy ==

N== Economy ==

As prose text is preferred, overly detailed statistical charts and diagrams such as economic trends, weather boxes, historical population charts, and past elections results, etc, should be reserved for main sub articles on the topic as per WP:DETAIL as outlined at WP:NOTSTATS.

Galleries or clusters of images are generally discouraged as they may cause undue weight to one particular section of a summary article and may cause accessibility problems, such as sand­wich­ing of text, images that are too small or fragmented image display for some readers as outlined at WP:GALLERY. Articles that have gone through modern FA and GA reviews generally consists of one image for every three or four paragraph summary section, see MOS:ACCESS#FLOAT and MOS:SECTIONLOC for more information.

As noted at Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes the number of templates at the bottom of any article should be kept to a minimum. Country pages generally have footers that link to pages for countries in their geographic region. Footers for international organizations are not added to country pages, but they rather can go on subpages such as "Economy of..." and "Foreign relations of..." Categories for some of these organizations are also sometimes added. Templates for supranational organizations like the European Union and CARICOM are permitted. A list of the footers that have been created can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries/Templates/Navboxes, however note that many of these are not currently in use.

Transclusions are generally discouraged in country articles for reasons outlined below.

Like many software technologies, transclusion comes with a number of drawbacks. The most obvious one being the cost in terms of increased machine resources needed; to mitigate this to some extent, template limits are imposed by the software to reduce the complexity of pages. Some further drawbacks are listed below.

• Transcluded text may have no sources for statements that should be sourced where they appear, have different established reference styles, contain no-text cite errors, or duplicate key errors. (To help mitigate these, see Help:Cite errors)
• Excerpts break the link between article code and article output.
• Changes made to transcluded content often do not appear in watchlists, resulting in unseen changes on the target page.
• Transcluded text may cause repeated links or have different varieties of English and date formats than the target page.
• Transclusions may not reflect protection levels, resulting in transcluded text perhaps having a different level of protection than the target page. See Cascading protection
• {{excerpt}} and related templates may require using <noinclude>, <includeonly> and <onlyinclude> markup at the transcluded page to have selective content; that would require monitoring that the markup is sustained.
• Excerpts cause editors to monitor transcluded pages for "section heading" changes to ensure transclusion continues to work. (To help mitigate this, see MOS:BROKENSECTIONLINKS)
• Excerpts can result in content discussions over multiple talk pages that may have different considerations or objectives for readers.

To determine which entities should be considered separate "countries" or included on lists, use the entries in ISO 3166-1 plus the list of states with limited recognition, except:

• Lists based on only a single source should follow that source.
• Specific lists might need more logical criteria. For example, list of sovereign states omits non-sovereign entities listed by ISO-3166-1. Lists of sports teams list whichever entities that have teams, regardless of sovereignty. Lists of laws might follow jurisdiction boundaries (for example, England and Wales is a single jurisdiction).

For consistency with other Wikipedia articles, the names of entities do not need to follow sources or ISO-3166-1. The names used as the titles of English Wikipedia articles are a safe choice for those that are disputed.

• WikiProject Former countries
• WikiProject Micronations
• WikiProject Limited recognition

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries/Popular pages

Template:WP1.0

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

"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)[reply]

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 (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))[reply]

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.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

For the attribute "establishment"

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

If North Korea's econmany is so bad then why did the Cia factbook ([1])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).[reply]

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)[reply]

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).[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Juche should be quoted, as it is not a widely recognized type of state, and its professed ideology is not particularly well respresented anywhere in the world, including North Korea, and as such NK is only a Juche State in that its own government defines it as such. --NEMT 19:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• placing Juche in quotes suggests there is something artificial about the system - for example referring to the "democratic" people's republic of Korea. Whether or not the system of self-reliance is "widely" replicated elsewhere in the world should have no barring on whether it is a legitimate term to describe the north korean state, and infact it can be well argued that understanding the NK use of the term Juche to describe it's governing system is essential to understanding NK. Without delving to far into personal analysis, the fact that NK uses a unique term to describe it's own system is in itself part of the idea of Juche. At the very least, there needs to be a good reason to place quotation marks to qualify any term - and a good reason has not been given. It is a dangerous assertion if it is made without any backing and you will be hard pressed to find an academic to back this opinion. (Icactus 23:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Can you provide an academic source that describes North Korea's form of government as a "Juche State"? Without this, you won't have any grounds to stand on. Rklawton 15:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Here is the beginning of North Korea's constitution as revised in 1998:

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a socialist fatherland of Juche which embodies the idea of and guidance by the great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung.

The great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung is the founder of the DPRK and the socialist Korea.

Comrade Kim Il Sung founded the immortal Juche idea, organized and guided an anti-Japanese revolutionary struggle under its banner, created revolutionary tradition, attained the historical cause of the national liberation, and founded the DPRK, built up a solid basis of construction of a sovereign and independent state in the fields of politics, economy, culture and military, and founded the DPRK. I understand the value of providing sources for everything but i think it speaks to part of the problem of Wikipedia which is people contributing to topics of which they know next to nothing. I appreciate your desire to avoid spreading propaganda, but in doing so you end up pushing the North Korea is a "rogue state" and "outpost of tyranny" proganda which is neither academic nor particularly informative. Icactus 15:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• A search on North Korea and Dictatorship yields about a 7:1 ratio for dictatorship to Juche. A search limited to scholarly sources produces a similar ratio. A search on world governments by type also reveals that North Korea is a dictatorship. Is anyone shocked? Let's keep North Korean propaganda out of this article as best we can. Rklawton 15:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another search reveals a more detailed description: "Communist state one-man dictatorship" with over 700 exact matches to this term for North Korea. Rklawton 15:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Again, i must say your "rule by google scholar search totals" is not helpful here. I'll cite the leading athority on North Korea - Prof. Bruce Cummings of the University of Chicago: the guiding philosophy is known as 'Juche' - essentially the idea that the country should be self reliant and independent in all areas of economic and political life. If you would like to learn more about Juche you can read some of Cummings' books, but here's a quick link to a summary of some of it:[2]. In the interest of Wikipedia being and education tool, lets use it to educate people about North Korea instead of pushing anti-north korea propaganda. I am certainly not in favor the north korean style of government but i think it is irresponsible not to learn what it really is before judging it - and not using the label "juche", with the link to the Juche ideology page, is irresponsible.Icactus 15:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• This is really silly. Look, a search for "hitler loves north korea dictatorship" on google scholar yields 1,390. "Kim Jong il dictator" yields 374, while "Kim Jong il Juche" yields 543. Basically unless someone knows academically what they are talking about i really think they should avoid editing on contensious points - especially with no personal background in the issue. It just really seems irresponsible to me. I'm certainly not going to go to a page on Islam and try to mediate an argument over whether it's an "evil terrorist religion" or not just because i have been fed one set of information. Icactus 15:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll tell you what. You add "ruling philopshy" as Juche State, and we'll leave government type at "Dictatorship." Rklawton 16:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the interest of being neutral (as opposed to providing a US viewpoint) it seems appropriate to default to the language of the country's constitution (as is done on China (PRC)'s page with the term "Socialist republic") and use the country's term of Juche state. The term "Juche" is much more informative than "dictatorship" and makes sense for the same reason that Cuba is a "military Junta" and not a "dictatorship". A lack of knowledge about what Juche means is not grounds for dismissing it as the governmental structure of a nation - unless the attempt is to discredit the constitution of the DPRK which takes us to a point which is certainly not Neutral. lets air on the side of information. If it pleases one admin, the CIA assessment (as universally NPOV as that can possibly be) can be cited in a footnote.Icactus 16:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scholars categorize governments by type. The type "Juche State" does not exist in this scheme. When we declair the government type for this article, it needs to be in keeping with scholarly work and not the nation's own propaganda. Rklawton 16:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think categorisation into a larger category that is used outside NK is in order. I am pretty sure the majority of countries describe themselves differently in their constitution compared to the infobox. (e.g., the French constitution talks about "République indivisible, laïque, démocratique et sociale" (should we put that in the infobox??); the Dutch constitution does not explicitly mention a government form (apparently it has none??) but it mentions this (about the monarch: "Nadat de Koning de uitoefening van het koninklijk gezag heeft aangevangen, wordt hij zodra mogelijk beëdigd en ingehuldigd in de hoofdstad Amsterdam in een openbare verenigde vergadering van de Staten-Generaal. Hij zweert of belooft trouw aan de Grondwet en een getrouwe vervulling van zijn ambt." should we add that??? or can we abbreviate this to "Grondwettelijke monarchie"). In brief what is in the constitution of a country should not be binding without discussion. Arnoutf 17:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How shall we proceed? We've got two editors who revert any changes to this on sight - and one has (at least on my talk page) stated baldly that he refuses to discuss the matter. Rklawton 23:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think everyone agrees North Korea at the most broad descirption is a communist state. (please repsond if you disagree).

I think that also everyone agrees that NK calls itself a Juche state. (which is the most detailed specification I know).

We all agree that CIA factbook lists the country as "Communist state one-man dictatorship" but may not be unbiased.

IMHO The question is whether Juche state gives sufficient information to the unknowing reader (after all, this is a encyclopedia, not an expert to expert forum). Personally I think most people will not understand Juche; so we might need to change that slightly.

Again in my opinion the phrase communist should be somewhere in the government type. However I can agree with the problems against the one-man dictatorship communism. First of all because almost all dictatorships are one-man rule; so this addition is trivial. Also the fact that many other typical dictatorships (e.g. Zimbabwe) are not listed as such in Wiki (nor in CIA factbook for that matter) should count for something.

As far as I understand Juche has a typical part in the worhship of KimIlJung (IMHO not unlike the roman/medieval veneration of emperors (as Gods) or Kings (as appointed by God - recall Louis XIV - The state is me). This is fairly exceptional in worldwide state forms nowadays, so some specific name may be in order after all.

Combining all my own arguments my suggestion would be to change "Juche State" to "Juche Communism". This gives (IMHO) due account to the specific case of the North Korean leader worship, while giving lay-readers the information that this state form is a subdivision of Communism.

I hope this is an acceptable solution for everyone involved Arnoutf 21:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as compromises go, it's OK with me. Rklawton 01:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, Juche is what North Korea is classified as. Just because 99% of the world is ignorant and doesn't know it, doesn't mean you re-write the encyclopedia to accomadate their asses

If you want to characterize others as ignorant for not sharing your point of view, you should put more effort into spelling properly. Also, please sign your comments. --Reuben 06:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Kingfisher Childrens encyclopedia' (maybe not the best of sources) lists the form of government for every state on earth. For N. Korea, they simply put 'communist'

It is Juche, not Communist. For the Iran page should we change it from 'Islamic Republic' (a term which the Iranians invented) to a theocracy? I heavily doubt it. Regardless of your opinions on the DPRK and their ideology, the page should simply state, 'Juche State'.

I have not completely read the wikipedia article on Juche so perhaps the source of contention lies in how it is being demostrated on this site. I hope people aren't writing with wikipedia being their ownly knowledge of the term.Icactus 21:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Please Keep fairness I cannot understad why someone deleate Nuke Warhead issue without discussion even I showed proof. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.239.229.7 (talk) 02:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

These pictures make North Korea look like a paradise! Look at those high-tech industries! Why is there not a single picture of the countryside? Most North Koreans live in the countryside outside of Pyeongyang and Hamhung. I can't believe Wikipedia has turned into a source of North Korean (and recent South Korean) propaganda. --JakeLM 01:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Foreigners who visit North Korea aren't allowed to venture anywhere unattended, and the tour guides obviously won't take you to the countryside. See its corresponding Wikitravel article. Who'd want to spread North Korean propaganda? Carson 02:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you'll read this article's edit history, you'll see... Rklawton 03:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, isn't it anti-North Korean or just basic vandalism? Carson 22:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's the funny thing about North Korea. Telling the truth about it can be easily confused with POV pushing or vandalism. A few editors have made a concerted effort to make North Korea sound and look as nice as any other country - to the point of removing a rather telling satellite image showing the Korean peninsula at night. Rklawton 00:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are people who have made it very clear that they /are/ intending to push a certain anti-North-Korean point of view. I am by no stretch of the imagination 'pro-NK' but you really have to temper yourself. This is an encyclopedia. If you want to get polemic, start a blog. 65.60.208.212 17:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The level of anti-north korean bias is amazing. Just because the country is run by a dictatorship doesn't mean it doesn't have cities, or industy, or big buildings, or sunny days. South Korea was a dictatorship too until the late 80's but nobody seems to go argue there that the wikipedia page is "too nice". I think it is important for people to see pictures of Pyongyang so that this image of North Korea of a country of nothing but wasteland can be reassessed. I am particularly annoyed by the self-appointed North Korea "experts" that are only interested in the aspects of human rights and democracy as if they were the only true defining qualities of a "real country" and that discussing anything else about the country isn't worth the time. To further address specifics, that photo of the blackout that Rumsfeld was so fond of was taken during a blackout in the North (except for pyongyang which has electrical priority as the largest and most necessary for function city in the country) and inaccurately depicts the north as a country in the "middle ages" compared to the glowingly modern south. Here's a helpful statistic i hope many will take to heart: China's per capita income for 2006 was $1750. North Korea's was estimated at $1800. That compares with South Korea at $14000. I don't see anyone objecting to pictures of downtown Beijing or Shanghai as unfairly representing China. North Korea was devistated by the collapse of the Soviet Union and the US gave billions to South Korea to build it up. I don't see how it is unreasonable to see that North Korea was given the short end of the stick simply because it did not care to do business with the US for many many many reasons and as a result is struggling to sustain itself an its Juche policy of self-reliance. This is not the place to discuss whether or not it is acceptable or excusable, but it is the place to point out that not everything in North Korea is a shit-hole and for people who don't have any academic knowledge of the country to voice displeasure with the view they learned from who knows where seems academically irresponsible. Besides, isn't wikipedia trying to be an academic collection of knowledge? If you want to call the regime a "Juche Communism" because it makes the most number of people happy even though nobody uses that term, then that's fine because that's how wikipedia chooses to operate and i accept that. If you wanted to use "Juche Communist Dictatorship" that would be even more accurate. If people want to pretend to be academians though and speak their mind without knowledge of facts or a historical background of any sort, i really don't understand or accept that. Icactus 17:43, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What a load of rubbish, do you think we should also go to the London page, remove the images of Westminster, the London Eye and Wembley, and replace it with pictures of deprived estates featuring dilapitaed blocks of flats, drug dealers and homeless people on the streets? Anti-NK drivel, the page is fine as it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.153.220 (talk • contribs)

Actually, some of those are great ideas. I've long held the opinion that Wikipedia makes solid efforts at maintaining neutrality in every aspect except in its photography. The East St. Louis, Illinois article springs quickly to mind. What I find especially appealing in the satellite image is that it shows the entire picture all in one shot. On the other hand, I don't see how this image represents anti-NK drivel. Perhaps you should argue that NK's energy conservation efforts lead the world in "green" policies instead. I wouldn't. But you might. Rklawton 22:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was merely stating that he claims the pictures make the country look like a 'Paradise', yet I'm sure most country pages have similiar images. It's well known that Pyongyang is made to be a supposed showcase capital, and it shows in the pictures. Famine or no famine, Pyongyang can be a beautiful city with stunning buildings. If somebody has some of the less flattering pictures of NK, though, do feel free to put them up.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.41.153.220 (talk • contribs).

Please provide examples of non-neutral text in the main article so they can be examined and corrected if necessary so the neutrality tag can be removed. If none are provided after a certain length of time i would imagine it would be acceptable to remove the tag. Icactus 22:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a dispute about the appropriate label for North Korea's form of government

Statements by editors previously involved in dispute[3]

• Most reliable sources list this country as a Communist Dictatorship. However, I've accepted the compromise "Juche Communist Dictatorship." A novice editor wishes to change this compromise back to "Juche State." Rklawton 17:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This particular issue is only the tip of the iceberg. Over the last several months this article has been "sanitized" by several pro-North Korean editors, and I would like to invite all experienced editors to review this article, its edit history, and its editors in detail - up to and including use of Check-User.[4] Rklawton 17:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Juche is North Korean propaganda and has no place in an encyclopedia article, at least not describing the form of government, IMO. In this case its best to default to the most common label used by reliable sources, of which the North Korean government does not qualify. If there is any doubt to that last assertion then ask them about the Ryugyong Hotel. My two cents via RfC. IvoShandor 17:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Classifying as a "Juche state" is not very informative. It's the North Korean leadership that defines the term Juche, rather than the other way around. The terms Juche, socialism/ist, and communism/ist all appear in the national constitution, so I don't see a fundamental reason why any of them could not be used here. Something along the lines of "Communist State" is most informative, but there are many other variations that would also be acceptable. Expanding to "Juche Communist State" doesn't add much, because "Juche Communism" amounts to saying the same thing as "North Korean Communism." By the same token, it doesn't hurt anything to include the extra word. --Reuben 17:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To address this issue of novice editors, i would appreciate seeing some form of cited arguments when dealing with issues of neutrality - especially regarding the juche discussion. For those who find "juche" to be north korea propoganda, i think the discussion would benefit from finding a source to back such a claim, or a scholar who agrees that juche is propoganda and not objectively accurate in describing the north korean system. I think you will be hard pressed to find anyone in the field who agrees with such an assertion and i don't think it is helpful to wikipedia to make decisions without some scholarly backing. Bruce Cummings (prof at u. chicago) is considered the foremost authority on north korea and contends strongly that juche is essential to understanding the uniqueness of the origins of north korea as well as finding it an accurate term. I know wikipedia attempts to give weight to academic works over a simple majority in resolving disputes and i think it is paramount for those who express personal opinions on this cite to have some academic backing for what they say. otherwise it really is just glorified hear-say - and that goes for both anti- and pro- north korean editors. What this page needs more of are healthy doses of people who are qualified to write about the country and there are just far too few. So please, use sources! Icactus 21:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

on a separate note, i don't have the source here but i will get it and retract this comment if i can't find it, but North Korea is fine with the term "Dictatorship" and they are quite proud of their "Rally round the leader" model. So long as juche is included (and communist is almost equally essential if we are aiming to be educational with our description) it seems rediculous to ban the inclusion of "dictatorship" as a descriptive term. RKlawton, i appreciate your compromise and your effort to help find a neutral way through this. I only favored the picture of Pyongyang at night (as opposed to the satellite photo (which has pyongyang and the other major cities lit)) because it shows people an idea of north korea that probably contradicts what they imagine in their head. The notion of the capitol actually being a functioning city seems to be unbelievable to many people. including both is probably cluttering, but i thought to challenge conventional notions with that picture would be educational without automatically being "propoganda". Icactus 21:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a novice editor and the gist of my comment was use what the reliable sources say, I will let the editors around here decide what that constitutes, it is my opinion that anything the government of North Korea has to say about it is not reliable concerning this article. North Korean history didn't start with communism so I doubt that juche is essential to understanding the origins of North Korea. While it has its place in any discussion on North Korea that place is the Juche article not here in a description of the government (maybe a sentence or two referring to the main article somewhere). Per RKLawton it would seem that most reliable sources categorize the government as a Communist dictatorship. And while Wikipedia attempts to give weight to academic sources it isn't going to give undue weight to the opinion of one scholar, but if we have other sources that continuously assert that this a more descriptive and accurate means of describing the government in North Korea then they should be included in this discussion. It is my impression based on what Lawton said (an editor whose judgment I trust) that those won't be found. IvoShandor 21:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

north korean history didn't start with communism?? i know this isnt' the forum for discussing actual topics and only for discussing changes to the article but that's a suprising assertion, unless you ment someting else. The "People's Republic" as it was originally described was the essential difference that the north used to try to gain support from the southern people to push-out the pro-japanese pro-american leadership that Rhee brought with him. I wasn't categorizing you as a novice editor, i'm only asking for those who wish to edit to source the things they say. I understand that there are other sources that don't use the term Juche because it is too specific and they prefer broad terms like "communist republic", etc. but i'm just asking for future assertions (like "juche is propoganda") to be backed by a source who is making that claim other than the wikipedia editor. While i generally agree with Reuben, i disagree that juche is the same as saying North Korean communism because in korean the word has special significance and including it in the description will encourage readers to click link and learn what juche is and why the north finds it so important. I appreciate Reuben's suggestion that it doesn't hurt anything to add it, but i would argue that it significantly enhances the article to include it for educational value.Icactus 21:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that the link doesn't have value I just don't think it would be the correct description of the government if we are going to use reliable sourcing, since it is used specifically by the state to describe itself, I can find some sources if you want, but I assumed Lawton already had since that was what he essentially posted, and he was merely looking for viewpoints on whether juche was appropriate, based upon his assertions, I say we go with the reliable sources. As for the North Koreans, the people, land and whatever makes them distinct certainly existed prior to the split, whether or not you could call that North Korean is up to opinion I guess. IvoShandor 23:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lawton doesn't have any sourcing that discredits juche because there isn't any to be quite frank. I appreciate that you have edited wikipedia for a while and have that knowledge, but when it comes to north korea from what you've just written you really don't have any idea what you're talking about and it is that kind of mindless editing that doesn't help us here. Icactus 02:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And to be fair, you haven't produced any sources either, other than your own assertions, glass houses, stones and stuff. Your tone is, to be frank, a bit uncivil. Perhaps if you produce some sources that outweighs the points Lawton brought up here I may be more prone to agree with you, but just calling it a day by characterizing my edits as mindless and being done with them isn't really assuming too much in the way of good faith. Come with the sources now and I will do the same. IvoShandor 02:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone notice that "Juche Communist dictatorship" yields one result, this page. I haven't looked for sources yet but we are going to use the most common terminology used in reliable sources, not a neology like "Juche Communist State," which isn't a type of government. I recommend adding Juche as a parenthetical link, I don't like it but after the government type, which because this is an encyclopedia we must follow what most reliable sources use, now if you can find some other sources on the government type being described as a Juche Communist State, then we can discuss inclusion. I will try to post my sources tonight, I am still compiling them. IvoShandor 18:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than try to hold some sort of debate here i'd like to just offer this article from globalsercurity.org (we use it on wikipedia often enough as a neutral source and it's not a bad primer on juche) that explains the function of Juche as both a model of the FORM of government as well as the IDEOLOGY and even the RELIGION of north korea. Since we all don't have JSTOR access this is the best thing i could find on short notice that wouldn't be labeled "one-sided": [5] Having a box with the word "Government:" seems overly simplistic and i have been pushing for a more educational phrase involving some inclusion of the Juche influence. The compromised "juche communist dictatorship" is not an officially recognized "category" because it was not my aim to just use a popularly recognized category to describe the government. I just think it would be helpful to describe the government's unique qualities with some qualifying term, and Juche (like Marxist or Stalinist) is a term to qualify the nature of the government and the manner in which the government fuctions. If the consensus only wishes to purely categorize the government using a limited number of option then i can understand why people wish to omit the word Juche. I just hope after reading this article you will understand the helpfulness the word provides when being included. If anyone has a JSTOR account there are many articles on the topic but if you're looking for newspaper articles to say "North Korea, the Juche Communist Dictatorship" you won't find many as such - but i don't think that makes the title less informative. We could add the term "fascist" because the country is rallied around a militaristic center, we could add "authoritarian", we could add "hyper-sovereign" to describe the juche ideology's determination to keep all decisions regarding north korea's land to be made by north korea (that means approving all foreign influence), we could add militaristic, we could add Stalinist because some scholars like to argue that the North was merely a puppet state of russia (though they would be wrong as Cummings documents in "Korea's place in the sun" because of the abscence of material and miltary aid during the korean war), but we could still use it because some scholars have argued it. The point is that if we have to only pick a few words we could just use "dictator" of just use "communist" or just use "Juche State" but if we aim to be educational (and if you have read a bit about what the word juche means) i think we should preserve the current phrase "Juche Communist Dictatorship" as a compromise - certainly nobody can argue that North Korea is not that. and certainly nobody can argue that some aspect of the manner of governing is not included. I have never had the desire to mask the existance of north korea's "communist dictatorship", only to insist on the consideration and inclusion of "juche", much like the use of "Federal" to describe the united states as a "federal republic".Icactus 05:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored this famous image to the Economy section. It had been replaced a couple of months ago with an image showing only the capital city at night - an image that failed to represent in a glance the state of North Korea's economy. While this satellite image captures only one moment in time, similar images taken in other years show a very consistent picture.[6] As a result, this image is both extraordinarily illustrative of the state of North Korea's economy, and it does so in a fair and neutral manner. Rklawton 21:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]