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.
Greetings. This is my first time participating in the Wikipedia community, so forgive any mistakes or misunderstanding in how to proceed. My wife's father is Jong Soung Kimm, who was born in Seoul in 1935. He is an architect of some renown (e.g., designed the Seoul Hilton). His paternal grandfather was Baron Kim Sa-Jun. His father was the third of three children had by Kim Sa-Jun and his wife. The oldest of these three children was Kim Su-Deok. But, the wikipedia article on Kim Su-Deok mistakenly says that she was the only child of Kim Sa-Jun and Lady Hwang (rather than the oldest of three children). I don't want to edit the page directly, and prefer to leave that to someone who's already active in maintaining the page. I'm happy to connect someone with my father in law, who has many interesting stories about the family. He recalls visiting his aunt (Kim Su-Deok) in the prince's palace, as a child. His father, the 3rd of the three children, started university in London, but returned to Seoul upon his father Kim Sa-Jun's death. After some travel with Prince Yi Kang, and a period in California, he returned again to Seoul. After WW2, he was made president of the Korean Red Cross, roughly 4 decades after his sister's husband Prince Yi Kang had been head of the Korean Red Cross in the early 1900s. Shortly after North Korea invaded Seoul in 1950, he was taken prisoner by the North Koreans, while escorting his then 9-year-old daughter (my father-in-law's sister) to a more-safe farm about 30 miles outside Seoul, and was never seen again. Put another way, Kim Su-Deok's youngest brother (and Kim Sa-Jun's youngest son) was disappeared by the North Koreans. Anyone with an interest in this, reply and let me know how to be in touch. Siegfried Proust (talk) 17:49, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Interesting, thank you for sharing.
I'm not seeing an article for him in English, is this for the Polish Wikipedia? This WikiProject is for the English Wikipedia on Korea-related topics. I encourage you to post on the talk page on whichever version of the article you're interested in.
For your understanding, generally speaking, on Wikipedia the bare minimum type of source required is a primary source (recorded somewhere, either written in a respectable newspaper or even published by a well-reputed youtube channel). See WP:RELIABLE. Preferred are written tertiary sources, usually either journalistic pieces or peer reviewed publications.
While I believe you're very likely to be correct, a direct interview from one of us is unlikely to be sufficient for inclusion as far as I know. toobigtokale (talk) 21:09, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Although at a quick glance it looks un-cited anyway. You can probably just edit it without citing anything to be honest, as long as you're not adding a lot of information (a paragraph at most). It's not technically encouraged and other people are free to delete your work so just be aware. toobigtokale (talk) 21:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Uh-uh. Please read about WP:V, WP:SPS and WP:OR. Wikipedia does not allow using information from one's family members, not unless they have been independently published and verified. This is unfortunately not a good practice. Bottom line: every fact needs to be sourced, via a footnote, to a reliable, independent source. Otherwise it may be removed as unverifiable. Up to an including the fact that we cannot verify that you are who you say you are - how can we know that you are not adding a hoax? There is WP:AGF, and we trust that you mean well, but if we cannot verify the information you add we will have to remove it. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here03:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
While you're correct, given that Korea-related articles are often in such a poor state and missing so much info, I would still sleep comfortably at night knowing that a few tidbits that are probably true are being added on an otherwise uncommonly edited and viewed article. If it was like an entire article or if the article was heavily trafficked or thoroughly curated I would be pickier.
Please dial down the condescension a bit. I've seen and read the essay before, and understand it. I've already acknowledged I'm slightly in the wrong, but I just don't enjoy punishing a person's edits when they asked us here politely and made an effectively harmless edit in the grand scheme of things. Millions of worse, large, harmful edits go unnoticed (I know, because I'm also on the front lines cleaning them up). I'm just not all that bothered by this, which is part of why I'd never make the cut to be an admin 😅.
It is really a sad dead horse problem. So many folks have been discouraged for contributing to Wikipedia because they are either unable or unwilling to reference their edits, and it is quite unfortunate when those folks are good faithed and "correct". I have talked to quite a few academics who cannot understand why their edits were reverted ("but I am the world's foremost expert on Foo, why should I need to cite anything, I wrote similar stuff for Academic Encyclopedia of Foo and Journal of Foo and they accepted my words without the need for footnotes"). Ditto for the case here. But in the end, Hoary is right to link VNT essay. We can assume good faith, but we have to verify that information is true. And that policy also is needed to make sure that we don't AGF hoaxse, slander, or jokes. Trust me, I am Trump's wife and I know he is an alien from the 9th dimension... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here06:04, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
PS. The reason I am not reverting this is because it replaced one unreferenced, unverified claim with another. How are we supposed to know which version is correct? Both fail V, and in theory, most information in that article should be removed, but at the same time, we all know that nobody cares because it is probably mostly correct. That's why the article has maintenance templates and low assessment category, shrug. Maybe our newcomer will try to improve it. Or maybe they won't and the article will wait for years or decades to reach a higher quality level. Shrug. Millions of articles need fixes, millions need to be written, and we have only few thousand active volunteers... that's wiki life for you (us). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here06:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
your best bet would be to have (legitimate) articles published off Wikipedia first on third-party, independent sources. Someone will then pick it up from there. – robertsky (talk) 09:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
I just wrote this article: Letter to Lee Eung-tae. Is there some way to get the old Korean lettering to display in blocks properly? I think maybe there's some text encoding stuff at play that I don't understand. For example, Hunminjeongeum has old Korean text that shows up as boxes with x's in them on my Mac. Maybe that's the lettering in blocks that I need, but I wouldn't know where to begin in 1. getting that to show up on my Mac, and 2. how to translate the stilted lettering I have into blocks. toobigtokale (talk) 14:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Can one, or some, of you have a look at this article and the recent history? I have no idea what's going on or why the stakes seem to be so high--but in my experience article improvement is the best way to prevent disruption. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
By the way, I originally thought of waiting for a month, but it looks like I don't even need to wait that long. Unless something unusual happens, on February 1 (that is three weeks since I opened the discussion), I will add what I wrote on that discussion page to the MOS-KO page and make a bot request. 172.56.232.202 (talk) 17:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Correction and clarification: (Unless something unusual happens,) I will close the discussion at 23:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC); the edit and the bot request will be made after that. 172.56.232.216 (talk) 04:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
North Korea, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Sagflaps (talk) 00:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
MR article title naming conventions
An IP asked a valuable question here that's been bugging me too.
Can we get momentum to change the policy to allow MR markings? I don't get why articles about other countries get to have markings and we don't. toobigtokale (talk) 09:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
I stumbled upon this stub: Eulji Mundeok Hansi. Is this really the oldest poem as the article claims? Big if true moment. I feel like it can't be; it's probably from the 7th century or later, and we have a reasonable amount of writing from before that era. Even regular writing could have been seen as poetry based on how old Chinese worked. I gave it a quick Google but if someone's willing to take it up that'd be appreciated toobigtokale (talk) 03:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
You may have noticed I've been using Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser to edit the formatting of references on thousands of Korea-related articles. I wrote a custom find+replace script to do this.
Scope:
Author names
Removes some spurious first/last names (dates/timestamps in names, or the names of newspapers instead of people)
Splits entire Hangul names squeezed into the last= into last=... |first=
Currently when the entire name is squeezed into author=, I leave this alone.
Removes the term『기자』("reporter") from first/last/author params.
Publication names
Fixes some typos or spelling variations
Links to Wikipedia article if it exists
Currently includes many Korean publications, publishers, and organizations (government and private), as well as major Japanese newspapers
Titles of articles
Removes some unnecessary artifacts in titles, namely repeating the name of the publication.
Language tag: fixes language=krtolanguage=ko. "KR" corresponds to Kanuri language, not Korean.
Sorry for editing some pages several times with this script; I'm still actively developing it (I tweak the script every few pages basically), so it's changed greatly since I first started running it.
Please let me know ASAP if you disagree with any edits or spot any mistakes. I tried to make the features uncontroversial. While AWB is semi-automatic (I look at and manually approve every edit), I may still occasionally overlook things. I've gone back and manually fixed things when I misclicked. toobigtokale (talk) 03:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Also, if you'd like to request that I run the script on any page/pages, please let me know. I may not get to running this on every single Korea-related page (I currently discover the pages by recursively searching categories), but I try to prioritize major pages first. toobigtokale (talk) 03:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
@Toobigtokale Almost a week since you started this your WP:COSMETICBOT/WP:MEATBOT edits via AWB, will this ever be completed as I see no end to this given that instead of running once per articles, you have been running your COSMETICBOT/MEATBOT twice on certain articles (to cherrypick few examples out of more than 100: Red Velvet, Pentagon, Shinee, Nam Ji-hyun, Park Gyu-ri) and even ridiculously 5 times on Ok Taec-yeon. Clearly doing a fuzzy search category by category is not working. In addition, I also noted that you have been adding additional rule to your COSMETICBOT/MEATBOT instead of having a clear fixed scope which should have been the case prior to starting the first edit. —Paper9oll(🔔 • 📝)19:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Appreciate the feedback. You're definitely right that there is a scope creep problem; I've been getting greedy with fixing more and more things over time. It does need to stop at some point; I'll look into finding a way to run this once more on every page on WikiProject Korea then give it a rest. Maybe I'll rerun it periodically on new articles, but that's it.
While some of these changes are purely cosmetic, linking Wikipedia articles for publication names (which was my original purpose before scope creep) I'd argue is helpful. I started doing this because I've had several different discussions on Wiki where someone questioned the reliability of a major South Korean newspaper because they didn't recognize it; I'm hoping this contributes to transparency when people look at sources. Furthermore, I've also noticed several cases where unreliable sources are frequently being used on Wikipedia that are harder to spot (particularly OhmyNews). And for controversial topics I think having the links handy for easily scrutinizing sources is nice.
@Toobigtokale Thanks for the speedy reply. May I have an estimated timeline when "I'll look into finding a way to run this once more on every page on WikiProject Korea then give it a rest" would be completed, end of this week i.e. 10 March 2024. —Paper9oll(🔔 • 📝)19:23, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Yeah I think 10 March 2024 is reasonable. I'll start looking into getting that running. There's around 50k articles in WPK, so I'll need a few days to get through that stack probably. toobigtokale (talk) 19:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
The 성규환 example is an interesting one; I've seen its format around but haven't yet taken a deep look at it yet. It follows this pattern of |last=[some email address] |first=[name and usually some misc text]. I have to think through how to write a regex for it. I've noticed it maybe 10-20 times over all of my edits. If you can help me with writing a regex for it I'd appreciate it; otherwise I may get to it later, as it's a little infrequent. toobigtokale (talk) 03:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
@Paper9oll, @Remsense and others, I've finished a bit ahead of schedule. There are actually around 33k articles on WPK, although my script only made changes on around half of them (many are too small or uncited). I still kept making additions while running the script, so some earlier pages (alphabetically sorted) don't have my later ones, but those are mostly cosmetic or minor changes. But I'll wait at least a year (lmk if I should wait longer) until I rerun this on any significant scale.
You may see me still running AWB, although I'll either be:
Running it for a different primary purpose, although this script's features are general so I may still run it anyway
Running it for a new page or a page that's since changed significantly
Future:
Fixing mistakes. I'll be looking out for them, but if you ever spot any, please ping me and I'll be happy to fix it.
One particular culprit is mixing up The Korea Times vs. The Korea Times (Los Angeles). I may run through "what links here" articles for both of these and fix everything up in near future.
There's still some unrelated AWB tasks for Korea-related pages that could be run. For example, as Remsense pointed out here (User talk:Toobigtokale#AWB to tag CJK text) automatically wrapping Korean text, perhaps by using Template:Korean (benefits of this explained on template page). However, to my understanding the impact of this is minor; won't make a significant impact on how almost all users will see pages.
I'm unlikely to do large-scale edits like this in the near future though.
Also to the IP user; I really think you should just make an account. I see you've been manually making dozens of changes that'd be easy to do with AWB, and AWB requires an account with adequate reputation. You'd be great with the program. You wouldn't have to stick with your account long term; just gain enough reputation to earn AWB privileges (I'm happy to vouch for you) and just use the account for AWB.
My understanding of WP:SOCKPUPPET tells me that if you want to edit on controversial topics, you're free to log out of your account and do so. As long as you're constructive while logged out and do not pretend to be multiple people to create the illusion of consensus, that wouldn't be considered sockpuppeting. toobigtokale (talk) 02:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Well, I originally didn't plan (and still am not planning) to stay here long. I appreciate your recommendation, but still not sure about that. 172.56.232.215 (talk) 07:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
I've become a little skeptical of using and encouraging the use of Template:Expand Korean and similar. At the moment, many articles on it have a systemic issue with poor sourcing; possibly influenced by Namuwiki. I think it can be nice to look at for ideas or book/source recommendations, but encouraging people to translate it I think may create some work for us in sourcing and fact checking. toobigtokale (talk) 06:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
I tell my students to find references for uncited content before translating. Overall I don't see a problem - if someone translates unreferenced content we feel is iffy, it can be removed per WP:V. But some content there is well referenced. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here22:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Definitely sympathetic to your points; wanted to record my doubt for others to see, as well as to spark any discourse. I will say most people won't be as careful/nuanced as you are with your instructions to your students. As we speak I'm on the front lines of cleaning up a lot of unsourced information that was often ported over from the kowiki 😅. It's a lot of work that I'd rather people didn't create more of. toobigtokale (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Frankly, I am more concerned about improperly referenced content. I fear many people - including my students - are adding references that do not fully back up the text they are attached too. Cleaning up unreferenced content is only the tip of the iceberg :( Frankly, after 20 years here, I believe that unless the article is GA+ or has been written primarily by an experienced trustworthy editor, much of the content that appears referenced probably isn't :( Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here02:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Korean monarch names in infoboxes
I've noticed that in many infoboxes for Korean monarchs, their name is written in Hangul/Hanja as "[State] [Name]", for example『고려 성종』("Goryeo Seongjong").
But I've never really seen a similar naming pattern used in Korean to describe kings like this. For example, the string『고려 성종』does not appear a single time on ko:성종 (고려).
I feel like this may have been artificially done to match the English naming pattern ("[Name] of [State]"), but I feel like this gives misleading emphasis on the use of this kind of naming pattern in Korean.
Does anyone know about this? I don't have much background in pre-modern Korean history. If there's consensus that this is unusual, I may propose going through using Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser to automatically redo every infobox to remove this kind of pattern. toobigtokale (talk) 07:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC)