Talk:North Korea–South Korea relations

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the North Korea–South Korea relations article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

A news item involving North Korea–South Korea relations was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 3 April 2013.

Wikipedia

International relations Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Associated working groups:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea.
	This article is supported by one or more inactive working groups.

East Asia (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles

Archives

Index

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Reconciliation subsections

I propose the "Reconciliation" section be one chronological narrative, without subsections. As it stands, there are seven short subsections covering the events of this year. The summits have their own articles, and don't need much detail here. Most of the detail is about scheduling, which is trivial with hindsight.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead, Jack Upland. By the way, I think "reconciliation" is too strong a word here. Maybe just use "During Moon Jae-in administration"? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:30, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "reconciliation" seems a bit presumptuous. Perhaps "thaw". I don't think the article should be organised by the terms of SK presidents.--Jack Upland (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've edited the section.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:51, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Country comparison (2)

I propose the removal of this section (I already did but an IP returned it). It's off-topic. This article is about the relations between these countries, not their similarities and differences. If it's an attempt at contextualization, it's exceptionally lazy: it's not prose and these details are not discussed in the rest of the article. It's also entirely unsourced and outright wrong (Kim Tu-bong was the first head of state).

These sections are not part of the guideline at Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations#Bilateral relations and searching for the archives of that project there seems to be no consensus to have these. GA class articles that I checked don't have these in the reviewer versions. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:08, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should be removed. As I said before, a comparison is not a relationship. The table represents an ugly roadblock between the lead and the rest of the article. It tells us nothing that is useful in this context. Even if such a table was suitable for a bilateral relationship, which I doubt, Korea is a special case. And the details are debatable. Who is the current head of state? Kim Jong Un? Kim Yong Nam? Kim Il Sung???--Jack Upland (talk) 09:39, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it again.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:32, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Essay–like?

Dylan Smithson, can you explain why you tagged this article? What is the issue? Are there examples? This article has been written by multiple people, so it can't reflect one editor's opinion.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jack Upland, the tagging doesn't appear to be valid. Mztourist (talk) 03:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There being no explanation, I will remove the tag. If there are stylistic problems, they should be dealt with individually.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:30, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved (closed by non-admin page mover) Calidum 20:16, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

North Korea–South Korea relations → Inter-Korean relations – Since the term "Inter-Korean relations" is being more widely used over "North Korea–South Korea relations" (for example, in this, this, and this), I guess this article should be moved to "Inter-Korean relations". Since I've given supporting evidence on the term "Inter-Korean relations" being more widely used over "North Korea–South Korea relations", if you want this article to be moved to "Inter-Korean relations", please reply. 69.160.29.28 (talk) 04:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I think this sounds better. "North Korea-South Korea relations" is repetitive (repetition of Korea) and grammatically ugly (NK-SK not being an adjective). I agree Inter-Korean relations is more widely used.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the discussion above. It is not obvious to me at first glance what "Inter-Korean relations" refers to, and the title should be WP:RECOGNIZABLE to anyone who may not be familiar with it. The present title is also WP:CONSISTENT with other titles at Category:Bilateral relations of South Korea. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 07:20, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose while I take the point about the repetition, I think that the current name is more Recognizable. Mztourist (talk) 07:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per WP:RECOGNIZABLE ~ Amkgp 💬 15:51, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Like other East Asian languages, Korean puts south before north. So it's "South-North relations". "Inter-Korean" represents an effort to split the difference between English-language usage and Korean-language usage. Allan Rice (talk) 15:11, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Allan Rice, are you sure you mean "oppose"?--Jack Upland (talk) 16:40, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The current title is consistent with other articles on international relations. Dimadick (talk) 15:34, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency is irrelevant because other examples cannot be expressed as "Inter...", nor do they have repetition.--Jack Upland (talk) 16:40, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative: change the name to "North Korea—South Korea—Marilyn Monroe".
Strong Oppose The current title is consistent with the naming convention between two sovereign nations. Just because they're similarly named with historical ties to each other is irrelevant. True CRaysball | ^#RaysUp 01:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2024 Aggressions

Not sure if this is Wikipediaworthy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/east-asia/north-south-korea-trash-poop-balloons-b2553025.html https://www.voanews.com/a/north-korea-sends-poop-filled-balloons-into-south-media-report-/7632935.html https://time.com/6983012/north-korea-south-balloons-trash-feces-propaganda/ https://consequence.net/2024/05/north-korea-poop-balloons-k-pop/ https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/kim-jong-uns-balloon-barrage-bags-of-excrement-fly-into-the-south-9f19d3d6 https://www.yahoo.com/news/north-korea-reportedly-sends-balloons-141213498.html 73.169.153.73 (talk) 23:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Belongs at Korean conflict. See also Balloon propaganda campaigns in Korea.--Jack Upland (talk) 03:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]