Talk:Kim Dae Jung

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
Map of Korea This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a project to build and improve articles related to Korea. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Please help us improve this article.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

My edits are based on news reports.

--Nanshu 03:29, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Then how about the comments made by Director of Norwegian Nobel Institute? (Provided you can read Korean)

Also a commentary from the press you've refered to:

Finally, on Kim's knowledge about NK's nuclear program: I think it only constitutes an attack on the personality intended to make Kim look untrustworthy, with no regard to the encyclopedic content.

I think it's fair to mention that Kim has been accused (current version). We don't have to decide whether these accusations are true or not. Also, keep in mind the balance of the article (how important this is compared to the rest). Kokiri 09:32, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)


Very nice to see some news site like OhMyNews here.

Lobbing for Nobel Prize:

  • No wonder the committee denied the Korean lobbying activity. It's a scandal not only of South Korea but of the Nobel committee.
  • Kim's lobbying does not neccessarily means that the Nobel Prize was the result of lobbying.

Whether Kim realzed North Korea's nuclear program or not is an important key to judging the nature of his activity. Keep. --Nanshu 01:51, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

Put 'accusations' only if they are from jurisdiction, or at least if there had been some investigations by authorities.

If you want those things, create 'Anti-Kim Dae Jung opinions' page, and put a link.

What is Kim's real birthdate, 1924.01.06 or 1925.12.03?

Contents

[edit] better picture

The current picture shows Kim Dae-Jung from behind. Isn't there a decent official picture of him that at least shows his face?

[edit] spelling

seems like his name is spelled either Kim Dae-jung or Kim Dae Jung. both seems to have about equal support, but nytimes changed from the former to the latter in about 2001. either way, it is not "Daejung" so the article needs to be (re)moved. Appleby 22:00, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Per the arguments given above by Appleby, and given that this was one of a series of dubious unilateral moves by a certain user, I have requested that this page be moved to Kim Dae Jung -- given the roughly equal frequencies of Dae-jung and Dae Jung, the officialness of the second would seem to tip the scales.

Done. —Nightstallion (?) 07:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Small clean up and additon

The result was a split the opposition vote, with Kim Dae-jung recieving 27% of the vote; the result being ex-general Roh Tae-woo -Chun Doo-hwan's hand-picked successor- to win with 36.5% against Kim Young-Sam and Kim Dae-Jung's combined 55%.

Small little addition, though it could be linked to the election page, it maybe help elaborate on the statement. Also cleaned up some broken language.

[edit] POV

This article leans too much on POV of Kim Dae Jung and his positive effects. This rotten president's negative points outweigh and foreshadow whatever scraps of good he did for South Korea. He continues to be a voice in Korean politics-a foreboding and cruel one, and this former president continues to be pro-communist. His ratings are very low-his image is of idiocy. The article gives an untrue impression of him, and it should be changed. ChockStock 18:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

That's what all the Korean dictators said about him. Huangdi 23:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

POV. Shame on you about your political opinion. I doubt you have any opinion

Yes, This article looks horribly biased and should really be re-written by some-one who a. knows more about the topic than I do and b.Can write with an NPOV

[edit] Date of birth

According to his bio on the Nobel prize site[2], he was born on December 3, 1925. According to the article, it is January 1926. Which is true?

  • I realized that also and fixed it. The correct date in Dec. 3, 1925. Duran 20:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Not so fast. There are various cites (not all of them mirrors of Wikipedia) that say he was born 6 January, but the year is unclear.
  • We used to have 6 January 1926, and that appears elsewhere on the net. It's also still at our own January 6 page under Births.
  • These 2 say it was 6 January 1925 – [3] and [4].
  • These 2 say it was 6 January 1924 – [5] and [6].
The last one is particularly interesting as it sheds some light on how "3 December" came about:
  • According to his official biography, he was born on December 3, 1925 and was raised in a poor and remote island, 30 miles off the southwest Korean coast. In an unpusblished [sic] biography, written in 1993 by a relative, he is quoted as saying that he was actually born on January 6, 1924, and that his parents later falsified his birth date so he could avoid Japanese military service during World War II.
Unfortunately, this is on the say-so of a website that refers to an unpublished biography, so we can't check it out. But it's still intriguing, given that 6 January was his accepted birthdate everywhere until relatively recently, until 3 December started putting in an appearance. Thoughts, anyone? -- JackofOz (talk) 23:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)