Talk:Miracle on the Han River

Korea Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by one or more inactive working groups.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The image could potentially be misleading

The image at the entre of the article, depicts the Gross Domestic product of North and South Korea, as opposed to GDP growth, or GDP percent growth. The graph makes it look like growth was quickest after South Korea became a democracy, it was fastest according to the world bank, during the 17 year reign of Park Chung Hee. See here: google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=world&idim=world:Earth&idim=country:KOR:PRK&ifdim=world&hl=en_US&dl=en_US&ind=false Hong kuslauski (talk) 21:03, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it could be replaced, or else a second image added, which depicts percentage growth of South Korea, with or without North Korea for comparison. Hong kuslauski (talk) 21:03, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

South Korea a part of the Four Asian Tigers?

I am not sure where is best to put this.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.160.19.244 (talk) 02:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The link to Seoul becomes the "Miracle on the Han" is no longer available. I'm not sure of the correct protocol in this case. Do I just delete the link? Or annotate it as broken? --Frazmi 11:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page was a bit too nationalistic. It reads like a poor translation of a nationalistic children's textbook. I've removed some slogans and replaced some phrases with more neutral phrases with the same meaning. For example, a trade surplus is not an "achievement", it can have negative as well as positive qualities and can be seen as a sign of an underdeveloped consumer market as much as an exemplary export market. I've also removed allusions to how the imposition of travel restrictions during the 1997 economic crisis "shows the greatness of Korea" I have referred to the country as "South Korea" since the northern half of the peninsula has not enjoyed much of an economic miracle. I have removed or toned down references to Korea's hosting of athletic events, since their economic importance is largely symbolic.

Here is a more radical proposed rewrite. I will wait until consensus before implementing it: Miracle on the Han River refers to the stunning economic growth of South Korea begun by the junta of Park Chung Hee in 1961 and continuing to the present. In this time, South Korea has risen from one of the poorest countries in the world to a developed member of the OECD. For more information, see Economy of South Korea.

The Economy of South Korea article is vastly superior to this one. David s graff 12:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as how this article was originally intended as nothing more than a (very short) article about a catchphrase rather than a fork of the Economy of South Korea article (which would be inappropriate anyhow), I wouldn't mind if we just took out all of the 'background information' and just left a link to the economy article. I'm going to go ahead and revert the article to the state it was in a few days ago, and add the link to the economy article. --Zonath^Yak 18:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone revise this article?

Is it me, or half the article is a panegiric of Korea's various military juntas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.152.131.101 (talk) 15:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not you. And it goes on to praise the economic growth in dubious tone as well. Might've come from an undergraduate research paper. This article is definitely less-than-neutral. It needs some work. Who wants to overhaul it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.72.85 (talk) 21:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to revise much of the grammar and include [needs citations] notifications in the coming weeks.--BBAmp (talk) 18:09, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible Article

This article does not mention and completely ignores a multitude of other factors that helped propel South Korea to a major economic power. For instance, the massive compensation paid by the government of Japan to South Korea after the signing of the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the ROK. Instead the article makes it look as if the ROK managed this on its own - which is entirely false. 96.55.113.54 (talk) 03:35, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be polite here. If you wish to remove false information, please do so at your leisure. Someone clearly took the time to write this article and calling it "terrible" is really unnecessary. You have the power to fix these mistakes yourself.--BBAmp (talk) 18:11, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Several Ambiguous Paragraphs

This paragraph: He led South Korea to the first economic boom, thanks to the implementation of an important land reform. This provided for the redistribution of land, thus removing a potentially problematic social issue. is very unclear. What did this land reform do? How did the land reform remove a problematic social issue? What are the potential problematic social issues that arise from land reform? If anyone can answer these questions I can finish editing that paragraph.

This other paragraph is also ambiguous: However, this 5-year plan did not bring about an immediate self-reliant economy. There was a rapid period of growth out of this policy. The ambitious plan had simply looked for better policies in modernizing and preparing for long-term economic success. The government's efforts were designed to bring about policy reform.[6]

The paragraph is disjointed. Specifically, it's not clear to me what the government's plans have anything to do with the 5-year plan. The paragraph starts by talking about how the economy did not become self reliant, then ends with talking about policies. If anyone can point out a connection between the government's plans and the initial success of the 5-year plan, I can also finish writing this paragraph

If any original author(s) are reading this, please take this as constructive criticism. I am here to improve the article to the best of my abilities. Kind regardsBBAmp (talk) 10:02, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New edits March 2013

Although I am a fairly regular Wiki contributor I am remaining anonymous for now as I am in South Korea and have some concern for being identified, which may result in harassment for being less than absolutely flattering of the country. In the article I have attempted to tone down the jingoism and re-organize and copy-edit sections, and I have added a new section on challenges to the term itself. I'll be happy to respond to suggestions or criticisms if it's felt that I've edited too strongly.

Overhaul

I am currently working on organisation and copy editing of this article, focusing on merging many of the sections, removing independent synthesis of research, and working on grammar. There were a few sections where meaning was unclear, and rather than removing them completely, I have put them here so that anyone who can elucidate can put them back in the article:

"Private funds generated here flowed on disposal of vested firms left by Japanese, so vested firms became large firms. According to a Korean study, out of 89 of South Korea's large company in 1950's, 40 were from vested firms. A total of seventy five percent of the cotton textile companies hailed from vested firms, and a total of eighty percent of the metal and machine large companies hailed from vested firms." -Ref: 1950년대 한국의 자본가 연구,공제욱, 백산서당, 1993

This is removed from the First Republic section. I am not sure what "vested firms" are, so unsure of what the relevance is to the article.

"In second republic, the Korean won-US dollar exchange official rate raised from 65 to 130,"1". supporting plan for an export industry was introduced,"2". Public Utility Rate was rationalized by raising."3". Siting of Mega-Project over 45,000,000 man-days began to reduce unemployment rates by government."4". at the same time ministers prompt to acquire a loan briskly for basic industries such as construct oil refinery, the greatest chemical fertilize factory. plantrefinery"5"."6". it was obstructed by General Park Chung Hee who staged a military coup however he succumbed shortly."

Removed from Second Republic section. It seems to be an automated translation and although it has sources it is not at all clear what it is saying. Perhaps someone who knows more about economics/Korean history could clarify and return this to the article w/ citations?

"Although The plan was announced by a general Park Chung-Hee it was built by ‘Council for the Development of Industry(Mar. 1958. - May. 1961.)’ under the ‘Ministry of Revival(Feb. 1955 ~ May. 1961.)’ which was formerly the ‘Ministry of Work’ with Dr. Caharles Jr Wol follow Chang Myon’s instructions on constructive criticism of the 3-year Industry Development, That is a part of 7-year plan made by Rhee administration.[7]

Removed from Second Republic section.

[7]: Ch'oe, Yong-ho, Peter H. Lee, and Wm. Theodore de Bary "Politics and Economy in South Korea" Sources of Korean Tradition Volume II: From the Sixteenth to the Twentieth Centuries. Columbia University Press, 2006. Pages 370–373.

Yannaynay (talk) 03:53, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Miracle on the Han River. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the phrase

Is it known who first coined the phrase? From what I've seen in a few sources, the phrase "Miracle on the Rhein" is largely a Korean thing; most other use "Wirtschaftswunder", so the origin is likely Korean. toobigtokale (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]