User talk:Sydneyphoenix

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia

Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:


Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkSoul 06:50, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Goguryeo

Hello, Sydneyphoenix! Thanks for your interest in the Goguryeo article. One of your changes to that article is rather confusing. I'm referring to your replacing the tables of kings with a single list of "emperors."

On the Talk page, User:Nanshu had posted what is -- for him -- a very cogent explanation of why the Goguryeo rulers should be referred to as "kings" rather than "emperors." In fact, every Korean history textbook I have read uses "king" (왕/대왕) rather than "emperor" (황제/천왕) for the Goguryeo rulers.

For the time being, I have changed this section back to the version created by User:HappyDog and User:Babelfisch. If you think that is in error, please explain on Talk:Goguryeo. Thanks! -- Visviva 02:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

please note that all your hard work will be reverted, by others if not me, unless you can provide some convincing citations. wikipedia policy is to avoid interpreting ancient, foreign language original texts, because there are already too many self-appointed experts with their own interpretations, and we can never resolve conflicts between personal conclusions. we have to rely on reputable publications, preferably in english, preferably reference works. you may notice that i've done some work on many korean history articles, including the monarch list, and while there is much more to be done, i've tried to limit myself to independent english sources, or, if i can't find any, widely used hangul encyclopedias accessible through daum, naver, yahoo korea (britannica korea, pretty useful).
i hope you do stick around and make meaningful contributions, because many korea-related articles desperately need help. but your work will only make a difference if you can convince others not to revert you, and you do that with good references. thanks. Appleby 16:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

thanks, that's much better, although i'm not entirely comfortable with such detail in an overview article. would you mind also taking a look at Balhae and Buyeo (state)? they need much more detail. First Manchu expedition to Korea and Second Manchu expedition to Korea also needs much work. thanks. Appleby 23:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] new Portal:Korea

User:Visviva has worked hard to create a brand new Portal:Korea. Please take a look & contribute if you can. I think the new Template:Korea topics has the potential to be a more useful reference tool than categories or lists, if editors continue to expand and update it. It's also a good reminder for help & requests on ye olde notice board. Hopefully, this will help revive some activity all around. Appleby 22:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Million years

Hi again! I'm just dropping by to ask if you might be willing to share your source for stating that some scholars believe Korea to have been occupied for 1,000,000 years. It seems plausible, but I haven't been able to find a specific scholar who does so. Since you'd like to keep this text in the article, would you please share your source with us? Thanks! -- Visviva 09:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History of Korea

Erm, Hi! It's good to see editors working on History of Korea article, but please discuss some of the changes you make at the discussion page. Erm, also, please refrain from using MR Romanization for Korea-related articles (unless they specifically pertain to North Korea ) and use Revised Romanization instead - I think this was stated in a Wikipedia guideline before. :-) Deiaemeth 06:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

oops, sorry about 3rr, so tired of chasing vandalism on various pages, didn't realize this page was getting up there. i didn't think of the previous version as a "truce," was just grateful that you stopped doing wholesale reverts of copyedits and wikilinking, which you started again this time. i think i gave you references to the most widely read korean encyclopedias on the topic, & hoped you'd read up on it. everything i've read then & since only confirms that gija joseon is downplayed by scholars today because they think gija has been mythologized by later generations, but nothing in the encyclopedias or any overview of korean history has ever suggested that gija joseon-gojoseon coexistence theory is a widespread academic view. you haven't provided any sources indicating that either. until you do, i'm going to have to rely on sources like [1] [2] [3]. when you start out with wholesale reverts, and do not provide references that counter references previously given to you, frankly, it looks like vandalism. i do apologize about 3rr, though, & i've self-reverted. Appleby 06:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

if you can spare the energy towards preserving accuracy & neutrality in korea-related articles, we could use more knowledgeable people monitoring Sea of Japan naming dispute, Dokdo, Goguryeo, and many others. Appleby 06:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blue-water navy

Hi, please do not re-add the Russian Navy to the list. This issue has come up repeatedly, and I & other contributors do not consider it to be truly blue-water. Many navies have some blue-water capability, but few are really blue-water. Given the massive problems concerning the Russian Navy, it would ridiculous to given them this special status. Cheers, John Smith's 16:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The main issue is that we want to keep the list short, so can't just throw in any old navy with some decent ships. And because the Russians really can't mobilise their assets any more, it's an easy one to keep off the list. John Smith's 11:04, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Korean Provisional Government

Hi, I know that many Koreans fought for the Allies in WW2 but the list in Allies of World War II is about officially-recognised, independent states, which Korea was not in 1941-45. We do not include India, the Philippines and others or the same reason. They can still be mentioned elsewhere in the article, however. Grant65 | Talk 01:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Korean Penisula.

Hi.

good compromise! Better than the ping-pong back and forward between Korea and Chosen.

Thanks. 125.203.207.252 10:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dokdo naming dispute

Hey, another Dokdo naming dispute has arisen, & RM has taken place. Please check archive for previous discussions & pariticipate in the vote. Thanks. I'm also going to note all others who participated in the previous poll. (Wikimachine 18:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC))