Talk:Korea

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

We have articles om SK and NK, and there is no country nowadays called "Korea." Do we need this? PFoster 18:14, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

No! (Specially as it's written by someone who can't spell.) SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:31, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
Why was this brought back from the dead? PFoster 19:23, 17 December 2008 (EST)
Because it is somtimes relevant to refer to the peninsula or Korea or to Korean culture without specifically referring to N or S Korea. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 19:27, 17 December 2008 (EST)
Why is South Korea labelled "hysteric"? That makes no sense to me. Researcher 13:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
That comment was made by a Japanese editor. See also his comments here. In my experience, this sort of thing is par for the course in relations between Japan & Korea (& China too). Revert if you think it should be more neutral. WèàšèìòìďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:36, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete or what?[edit]

Why the fork? Delete or what? Acei9 01:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a disambig for N and S Korea, as well as the Korean War. -- Nx / talk 01:57, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeah, just looked weird. Acei9 02:00, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

all my edits being reverted for no reason[edit]

I made 4 edits, 1 removing the ideological anti DPRK language ('real life 1984', 'Kim Jong-un's nuclear addicted country') which got reverted (annoying but presumably justified, given this is a radlib wiki and you guys want to maintain your anti communist stance), and 1 edit correcting the line about the peninsula being divided into the republics of 'north' and 'south' Korea to actually referring to the republics's names (2 correcting a typo and a grammar mistake "that juts").

I don't understand why my edits correcting the spelling and grammar mistakes in the article, or my edit actually putting the republics's names got reverted (and the article locked due to 'extensive vandalism', how was what I was doing vandalism?).

Could my edits be implemented, or be given an actual reason why what I was doing was deserving of being reverted or vandalism?

2A02:85F:F8A5:4F00:E3CE:4640:2705:CDCE (talk) 07:43, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

There were no spelling and grammar mistakes in the part you edited. You misunderstood the meaning of the text. -- blobcat (°U°) 08:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)