Talk:Yi Sun-sin/Archive 1

Archive 1

Top four ranking battle

I've removed the passage in the intro that goes something like "His Battle of Hansando is one of the top four ranked battles in naval history." There had been a citation needed tag there hanging for weeks, and no one seem to be interested in providing the citation. But I'd argue that even if there is a source cited, this kind of statement is obviously subjective by nature and should not be refered as a fact. And anyway it wouldn't belong in the intro anyway. If whoever really want it to stay, put it in the the section about the battle of Hansando, along the line of "so and so has ranked it among the top four battles in naval history." Uly 14:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

It's fact, but more like "The four major victories of Imjin war". It was some joseon king that decreed four korean victories to be named and made it official. so, it's ok to put in here, but citation is needed. -w

# of cannons.

3 to a stern, 6 to a side, and 2 at the bow?

ridiculous. it was 2 to the stern, 2 to the bow, and 11 to each side.

i've posted the evidence. (Wikimachine 02:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC))

it's actually 10 to a side. (Wikimachine 01:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC))

Specials

The Turtle Ship was definitely the first ironclad ship. Japan never had ironclad atakebune. Toyotomi Hideyoshi just requested for ironclad warships during the war. The Turtle Ship was the first ironclad in the world. Don't listen to any bogus that you read in books that the "Merrimack and the Monitor" were the first ironclad ships in the war.

I also just read that someone wrote that Admiral Yi was not the reason why Japan retreated. That is not true!!!! Admiral Yi was the biggest reason why Japan retreated. His victories and the number of ships and soldiers Japan lost were too much for them. Also, Japan retreated because their supply lines were being destroyed frequently. Please do not discredit Admiral Yi because he is an extremely venerated man to Koreans.

Good friend100 20:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Is Gŏbuksŏn (거북선) really the first ironclad warship?

1. Was Gŏbuksŏn an ironclad? It wasn't fully covered but roofed with iron plates. Or just the roof was thorny so that enemy soldiers were unable to take to the ship. [1] Anyway I don't know the precise definition of ironclad.
2. Around 1578, Oda Nobunaga had iron-covered Ōatakebune (大安宅船) made against Mōri's navy. It was earlier than Gŏbuksŏn.

--Nanshu

1. Oxford English Dictionary says that "ironclad" is "...[c]ased wholly or partly with thick plates of iron or steel." [emphasis added] But I doubt all readers this specific definition. The Merriam-Webster doesn't not specify this degree, for example. So for reason of clarity, I suggest that it to changed to "a partial ironclad." --Menchi 02:54 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

I changed it to "iron-roofed". What do you think? --Nanshu

It's very clear. --Menchi 04:11 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

It's very clear, but it's also kind of pointless. Is there any other such "iron-roofed" ships at all? The turtle ship is very innovative and unique, but it's neither ironclad by a narrow definition, nor the first by a loose definition. As such, I think it's somewhat pointless to make such comparisons at all.

Unlike the Korean turtle ship, the Japanese ship couldn't navigate in deep waters... Oct. 2005

---

Yi Sunsin wasn't the primary reason of Japan's retreat. It is because Toyotomi Hideyoshi died.--Nanshu 02:42 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

Uh-huh... sigh.... again, Japanese editors have started their discrediting of Korea in every way possible... Leonhart

Hehe, hey, the Japanese teach their kids an alternative history. It's not Nanshu's fault. Some still think Pearl Harbor was a lie. An excuse for the US to invade Japan only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.94.41.89 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 28 October 2005

In reply to Nanshu, the boats you are referring to were not warships but floating forts and never were used in the open sea, unlike the Gŏbuksŏn, which I know makes you want to cry but actually did screw the Japanese badly. Haverton

Also in reply to Nanshu, there are many evidences that Gŏbuksŏn wasn't an Yi Soonshin innovation, but made in earlier period, only fully utilized by Yi Soonshin.

I find Yi Sun-Sin in sources also as Lee Sun-Sin. Is this another style of transliteration or something else ? Sorry for my english..

Alternate romanization of the Korean family name 이. See Lee (Korean name). Yi is more common for historical figures. -- Visviva 05:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Just to say this before it is misunderstood...이 is not a romanized text. 이 is the actual Korean way to write "Yi", "Lee", "Rhee", "I" etc... Whenever something is Romanized, it has been transliterated (in other words, the sounds are converted into the texts that make it sound like the originial text) into Roman characters (a,b,c,d,e...u,v,x,y,z, etc...)

In addition, there have been some people (unmentioned, you can see for yourself) who want to play with history and suggest that Yi Sun-Shin wasn't quite the strategist as he was. Perhaps wew have to blame history, because we all learn it with different biases. However, it is very true that Admiral Yi was an excellent tactician and soundly beat the Japanese navy in every battle that he fought. If he wasn't, why would the Japanese waste their time trying to get rid of him from his post before resuming their attack? Why would the Japanese rout when he commanded in battle and soundly whip the Korean navy when he wasn't in charge? You can read most of these records from Japanese and Korean documents from the era (unfortunately, I have only read Yi Sun-Shin's Diary and the Yi Court's summation of the Imjin War), and most of them agree on Admiral Yi's greatness. I cannot dispute the fact that Hideyoshi's death did precipitate the hasty retreat from Korea. However, considering Yi's talent on the seas, the Japanese might have conquered Asia with all of the ships and supply they lost on the South Korean seas off Jŏlla Province because of him.

So in one way, Hideyoshi's death did end the war. However, considering that Hideyoshi was withdrawing troops from Korea before his death, it was quite obvious to him that he couldn't win this war under these terms.

Additionally, the Gŏbuksŏn was a first developed in the 15th century to help defeat Japanese pirates operating on the east coast of Korea. While the innovation itslef succeeded, they were poorly equipped and maintained that the Yi Court scrapped the project after a few decades, calling it a failure. Just before Japan invaded, Admiral Yi came across the ship designs and ordered the construction of the ships. The point of this is not whether or not Admiral Yi invented the first ironclads, but rather that because of his command, he could inspire his men to do great things and achieve great victories, regardless of the technology or manpower available. No matter how much Japanese or Korean texts may slander him (Koreans did hate him, because he was against their particular coalition in the Yi Court), Admiral Yi's actions at the sea earned him a reputation as one of the greatest commanders alive. Again, even Western texts praise Admiral Yi, with one British author saying, "It is always difficult for Englishmen to admit that Lord Nelson ever had an equal in his profession, but if any man is entitled to be so regarded, it is [Admiral Yi Sun-Shin]." It is only a pity that his influence did not project into his home government, that would have created a formidable state to maintain its independence through the annexation in 1910 (although, considering the system in Korea at the time, it would have been a matter of time before Admiral Yi's accomplishments went awry to court corruption and incompetence).

Oh, by the way, if you would like to, you can go to South Korea and go inside a Geobukson and decide for yourself whether it was an ironclad or not. Then compare it to the Amereican versions and see how they are alike and different. I'm not going to say whether it is or it isn't. It is quite a hard thing to define though, so the best way to determine it is to examine it yourself.---DaeHanJeiGuk (2005.09.25)

Yes, one could make a very good case that Yi could have crushed Japan's navy even if Hideyoshi did not die and continued the invasion, but the simple fact is that Hideyoshi's death was the immediate impetus for Japan's withdrawal. Some of the invasion forces did start to retreat prior to Hideyoshi's death, but that's more likely due to the need to strengthen Hideyoshi's or the lords' internal position rather than in preparation for a general withdraw.

Furthermore, despite what many Koreans seem to think, Japan actually did not have a long tradition of trying to conqueror Korea. The whole invasion was something of Hideyoshi's personal pet project to begin with, so it was not surprising that no further attempt was made to conqueror Korea after his death, until the rise of imperialism anyway. To say that Japan kept its paws off Korea in fear of brilliant admirals like Yi is a fanciful interpretation. I realize that many Koreans take the issue very personally and take any suggestion against Admiral Yi's achievement with hostility. But it's my opinion that overstating Yi's legacy does him no service, and giving him a more objectified presentation does not diminish his greatness in anyway. Being neither Korean nor Japanese, I hope everyone can look at this with a little more reason and good faith and less nationalist passion. Uly 23:48, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Whoever said that Japan retreated because Hideyoshi died is not true. It is because of Admiral Yi. Admiral Yi's efforts to kill the Japanese forced them to retreat. If you didn't know, Japanese officials kept Hideoyoshi's death a secret to keep Japanese moral from dropping. Japanese foot soldiers finally learned of Hideoyoshi's death in 9 months after he died.

To answer Uly...Yes the invasion was Hideyoshi's idea, but the Japanese idea of trying to invade Korea has been their custom ever since Koreans made the regretful mistake of sailing to Japan and teaching them to become smart in the 1100s. If you didn't know, there are countless countless number of times Japanese pirates that have attacked coastal towns and killed many Koreans. Japanese imperialism has been in their blood for a long time. Look at today. Japan claims the Liancourt Rocks as Japanese territory when they do not have strong claims. Liancourt Rocks are really Korean. Japan is in a dispute with China over a small islet (cant remember), and they are not in friendly terms with Russia about the Kuril Islands. Japanese imperilism still runs today in some Japanese people. Good friend100 02:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Unexplained edits

There have been a number of unexplained edits made to this and related articles by User:Kkkiii (contributions). In particular I point to this edit, which left the article to suggest that Yi Sun-sin died three days before he was mortally wounded. I'm not familiar with this subject myself but the user seems to have a history of these sort of edits so I would ask those with more knowledge here to keep an eye on the article. Flowerparty ^talk 13:34, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

It is true that Hideyoshi had died, but the Japanese forces were on the verge of retreating anyway. They could not march upper anyway because their supply lines were cut by admiral Lee. Of course, Hideyoshi's death has prompted the retreat but already Japan was losing forces because of Lee Soon Shin's strategies. In the final phase of the war, Amiral Lee cut off enemy supply lines, ravaged the Japanese fleet of 333 with only 13(some say its 12 but historical evidence proves it to be 13. Also admiral Lee sunk 31 or so Japanese battleships and damaged about 100 Japanese battleships beyond repair), controlled the ocean, and practically instilled great fear among the Japanese invaders. This is really unbelievable. Personally I think this battle of Myung-ryang is greater than the famous battle of Hansan. I mean, how can 333 ships fail to defeat only 13 and be completely defeated? It is doubtless that admiral Lee achieved absolutely unbelievable victories. Also, ss any person who studied warfare will know, losing control of the ocean and the supply lines is critical. Also, I don't think it is good to boast about not retreating because what ruthless acts the Japanese commited upon Chosun civilians is just simply too horrifying even to describe. I mean, they should be ashmamed of making war and butchering so many innocent children and civilians.

Don't start talking emotional. We are here to discuss the article on Admiral Yi. Also, Japanese war crimes are already known throughout the world and we all know they can't hide it. Good friend100 02:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

heihachiro

Togo Heihachiro? As in General Togo of Japan during WWII? I have never heard of Heihachiro, nonetheless compared to Admiral Yi. His article on Wikipedia doesn't even mention Admiral Yi. Heihachiro's place seems to be written in to show how "tactical Japanese commanders can be". Its inappropiate, especially for an admiral who killed Japanese soldiers, to be compared by a Japanese commander.

Even with a source, I believe that the comparison is not widely known and Nelson's comparison is the best, since both their strategic capabilities and similiar death are good reasons. I don't think that Heihachiro has a strong comparison or likeness to Admiral Yi other than they were both skilled at strategy. I deleted Heihachiro from the first paragraph because of hte above reasons. Good friend100 17:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe you're confusing Togo Heihachiro of Battle of Tsushima fame, with Hideki Tojo aka the WWII PM of Japan/General of the Imperial Armies. Other than that, I'm sort of dubious about the whole "his military exploits is often compared to other famous admirals" part of the article, since it's unreferenced, and doesn't say who does the comparing, nor for what they're compared. (Nor, by the way, does the article on Nelson compare him to Yi.) --Zonath 21:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh I didn't know there were two people with the name of "Togo". I deleted the section about him. Good friend100 01:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I have seen such comparisons, but it's usually done by people who are trying to introduce the character to people who know other admirals of similar strategy. Togo and Nelson are compared a lot, so as he's similar to one it explains why some compare him to the other. Zonath--I think you're right, though, about the comparison section--I don't feel it adds a lot, and perhaps could be eliminated--or maybe converted into links at the bottom in the "see also." Would that be too odd? LactoseTI 22:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm personally of the idea that this whole article deserves a thorough rewrite to remove or rephrase some obviously problematic language. I'd drop in a {{cleanup}} tag, but I'd really like to start discussing improvements here before outsourcing the job to someone else. As for the Nelson reference -- I don't think dropping it altogether would necessarily be a bad thing. After all, the article mentions that Yi Sun-shin is an admiral -- inviting comparisons to other admirals just leads off into POV-land. I say drop the reference altogether rather than placing a link to Nelson's article into the 'see also' section -- that's what Category:Admirals is for. We could also drop in [[Category:Killed in action]] for good measure. --Zonath^Yak 09:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Having such a comparison in there also seems to invite others to add even more comparisons, even if it's a rare or "one time" comparison done somewhere. LactoseTI 13:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

"Ironclad"

After an extensive period of research, I have determined The turtle ship is in fact, the first ironclad warship in world history. There is no tangible record in any other historical accounts, besides in the "Nanjungilgi" , "seonjo sillok", and other books I have yet to read. The Earliest dated Ironclad vessel dates 1592, which is the legendary turtle ship, constructed during the joseon regime. The ridiculous nonsense of an ironclad O atake-bune, is a false claim. The "Nihon maru", the only O-atake bune at that time, built by warlord guki Yoshitaka as a gift to hideyoshi, was armed with an Iron head to ram into enemy vessels, but that relating to an ironclad plating is highly Irrelevant. There was a certain vessel dating 1608 feudal Japan, which was an encased refit of the "kobaya" , that probably gave rise to the Japanese claim that they had created an ironclad vessel before the Koreans did.

As much of the world regards the C.S.S Virginia and the U.S.S Monitor as the first ironclad vessels, most do know in fact, they were actually wooden frigates plated with iron only on the TOP. Should those vessels be regarded as Ironclads The geobuksun, or "turtle-ship", deserves the title as an Ironclad vessel.

If there is any error in my part, please give me some correspondence titled EDWARD.

Thanks for your input. I agree totally. (Wikimachine 19:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC))

Where is his image in the beginning gone?

It's free image now, nontheless it was deleted. the painter died in 2005. Anyone knows how to bring the image back? Ginnre 16:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Please see the old PUI discussion. Since the painter died in 2005, it's not a free image. Komdori 17:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)\

I just love how you delete images. Good friend100 18:16, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I noticed it was an unfree image. I hope your comment was not meant with sarcasm--surely you don't believe that the Wikipedia project is better off by violating copyrights? You are constantly putting people down for helping out pages like this. Please think about it.

In any case, I moved the free image up in its place; I think the article is significantly better this way. —LactoseTI^T 00:10, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

thats nice. Good friend100 21:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

CHINESE ROLE

Look WikkiMachine or w/e. The Chinese or Ming barely did anything except just sit there in Chosun and get grains from the poor farmers. And WHAT THE HECK 450 BATTLESHIPS?! Those are lies Ming sent only maybe between 50-100 ships but 450? LOL. Here we go again Chinese getting credit because China is larger than Korea and Japanese getting all the credit because...what, because they have "cool" samurais? WikkiMachine i strongly disagree that China didnt even help Chosun at all. And all they did was conspire with the Japanese so they can get gold. Go watch Yi Soon Shin on WYBE. Theres a drama about "The Seven Year War" and what i see is lazy Ming officers doing nothing and chase Chosunese women. All Ming did was to discredit Yi Soon Shin AND conspire with the Japanese and get in the way of Chosun. I say again WikkiMachine i strongly disagree AND wherever you get these stories i strongly suggest that you look somewhere else. -KoreanHistorist

OMG are you actually citing a friggin MOVIE as reference. Now I'm not predisposed against any side (I'm half Chinese btw, getting that out of the way) but I want to see some proper and at least more credible reference apart from a movie that is obviously SUBJECTIVE. Whodhellknew 02:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

His references come from a movie but it is true that China was just as bad as the Japanese. Yes, they did help Korea defeat the Japanese but Chinese soldiers raped, looted, and pillaged Korean villages as well. That is a true fact, it is just that the Japanese did it on a larger scale and are more shameful for that. Good friend100 15:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll have to second that. Ming navy, though, small as it may be, did offer more help than the Ming army, which pretty much took advantage of Chosun's pitiful plight to suck up a lot of money. So I have to agree with Koreanhistorist, and everything he says is true-except that a reference to a Korean Imjin War drama isn't liable to be credible evidence. Oyo321 03:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you give me some reference? I mean, the original record or history book about the role of China in the war and the conditions of navy forces of the three country. I'm interested in them.

It's better to add some add more references including history book by Chinese and Japanese, especially some english history literatures from the forth country. It seems the role of China was abased.

fine. i guess the chinese helped out by logistical means, but despite a considerable amount of firearms, the chinese still screwed around. i know that korean books have this info, and im pretty sure the japanese have it too. if the ming court actually sent a real general, the war would have been over in months. the chinese did not take this issue seriously.

You guys need to read this book!!!!!

I was looking around in a Korean bookstore the other day , and I saw this book about the turtle ship. It was this elaborate black book with a picture of an oversized turtleship. My computer does not have Korean text, so..

geobukson sinhwa easo yeoksaro by kim jung jin and nam kyung wan

Thanks for your recommendation. Is it in a Korean book store? (Wikimachine 15:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

yup, but i saw an english review of it. i forgot which website, so just look for a really ugly looking TURTLE SHIP on google images. ODST

Yu Seong-ryong?

I've noticed that there's no Wikipedia entry for Yi Sun-sin's friend, Minister Yu Seong-ryong. Can someone start a stub at least?

hes not important. screw that politician.

This anonymous user should apologize. (Wikimachine 16:41, 23 October 2006 (UTC))

dude, who deleted my apology? Yu sung ryong was great. I was just in a trance went I added the rude comment.Odst 02:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

oh no

what happened to the picture of Admiral Yi? Good friend100 02:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It was removed by a vandal. It's now restored. --Kusunose 03:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

False Depiction

I am also noting more and more references to the "Immortal Ii Sun Shin" drama. It is NOT an asset or resource to true history. There are MAJOR FLAWS in the drama, and it proves nothing, except the commercial value and the satisfaction of the audience, neither of which was fully achieved. Immortal Ii Sun Shin holds no true facts, and I will delete pathetic references to it immediately.

IMO, the drama was a typical failed Korean drama-dragged out and long, poor graphics, and terrible flow and historical truth. It was very dramatized, unable to achieve any great recognition. Oyo321 16:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree in some parts. Some of the battles were re-enacted properly, though the locations were not entirely correct. It makes the japanese better than they actualy were. the japanese didnt wear shoes, they were barefooted. The Japanese guys all had similar purposes and looks, but actually the halberdiers,spearmen, archers, and swordsmen did not get their exact looks. The officer's armors were that of an arquebusier, and arquebuses were nonexistent in the series. The guys from the drama wore costumes only vaguely similar to musketeers.

The Korean navy actually wore varieties of colors of uniforms, depending on province. the eastern army wore blue, the western army wore white, the north army wore black, and south red. The capital's army wore yellow. I am pretty sure the navy went by these standards. Those blue guys with the water symbols on their chests are fake, or at least i think it is.Odst 01:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

rv move

Its Yi Sun-sin

we need to keep this article consistent with all the other articles on Korean people. Good friend100 00:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that the move was done by cut and paste so I have requested a history merge by using {{db-histmerge}}. After its completion, let us move this article by usual procedure (WP:RM). --Kusunose 01:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

history-merge

I history-merged from Yi Sun-sin as asked. Anthony Appleyard 21:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Exactly why did you history merge when we are going to move the page back to Yi Sun-sin? (Wikimachine 21:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC))

On 14 October 2006, annon cut-and-pasted form Yi Sun-sin to Yi sunsin (this article), I asked a history merge as I thought we should merge history before renaming this article to prevent further mess. Now that the discrepancy of article name and talk page name is fixed and the edit history is in the single page, moving this page is less complicated than before. --Kusunose 22:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

we should request a formal move back to Yi Sun-sin. Good friend100 01:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Removed paragraphs:

The paragraphs below were removed because they don't conform to Wikipedia policies. Namely, they are not neutral (WP:NPOV), they are not verifiable (WP:V), and they seem to contain original research (WP:NOR). Take, for example, the lead to the second paragraph: "The reason all of Admiral Yi's victories were so spectacular was that he had no choice but to engage his enemies at only the most advantageous time and place." This whole sentence is complete speculation, and would be almost impossible to verify. Much of the three paragraphs seem to follow the same pattern. I'm not entirely sure there's anything worth saving in the paragraphs below that isn't already stated in the article, but if anyone's willing to try, be my guest.

Much of the admiration for Admiral Yi stems from the fact that he performed perfectly under great pressure, the right man for the job at the right time. He is revered as a national hero in Korea, much in the way George Washington is admired in America. While the Japanese had the luxury of replenishing their fleet after their repeated disasterous defeats, Admiral Yi could count on no such support. Much of Korea beyond his naval base were under Japanese control and communications from the King and his central military command were rare. Once the control of the seas were relinquished to the Japanese and their land forces adequately supplied, it was clear that the Japanese march northward would be difficult to stop. Korea was one naval loss away from conquest. Isolated and asked to do so much with so little, Admiral Yi and his men maintained sufficient discipline and grace under fire to defeat the professional Japanese navy time and time again, a testament to his leadership. It wasn't great that he took so little losses in battle, it was absolutely necessary. Always facing a numerically superior enemy, Admiral Yi needed to plan and execute his battles perfectly and did so, every battle risking life and limb and nation, even when asked to defeat 300 enemy ships with 13.

The reason all of Admiral Yi's victories were so spectacular was that he had no choice but to engage his enemies at only the most advantageous time and place. He could have fought more battles and taken more losses, but he chose 23 over 7 years he could win without taking losses. His tactics invariably involved using complex currents between the many islands that dot the western and southern coasts of Korea to line up Japanese war ships in a row and hitting them with artillery. This eventually came to be anticipated as evidenced by the fact that Japanese installed many canon forts on strategic islands in the later years of the war, essentially eliminating these straits as theaters of war. Admiral Yi played high-stakes chess with his enemies throughout the war, always needing to stay one step ahead, patiently waiting for the enemy to give up pieces without giving up any himself. The stress and pressure of always needing to be victorious against very competent Japanese generals adversely affected his health and he writes of many health problems in his journals towards the end of the war.

The most convincing testament to Admiral Yi's greatness comes not from his numerous titles (including ones awarded by the Ming emperor) but from the admiration he enjoyed from latter day Japanese naval commanders. His fight-til-the-last-man spirit, tremendous grace and courage against incredible odds, die-hard patriotism and great love of country is considered the model of military and martial men for centuries after his death.

--Zonath 16:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Pretty funny, since I have never seen this section in the article. It sounds too patriotic, nationalistic, and lionizing. Its like some speech or something. I agree with the deletion, ridiculous from my perspective. Good friend100 17:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Cashie 13:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, can we do away with the bit about Frances Drake at the start?

It's poorly worded and embarrassingly unnecessary.

Liar South Korea

Togo Heihachiro respected Yi Sunshin. This rumor was made in around 1960. Please look to understand this folklore. [2]　--ShinjukuXYZ 07:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't suppose you have an English reference? Thanks. Geeman 08:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I once attempted to remove Heihachiro because I have never heard that Admiral Yi was compared with Heihachiro. It is not like Heihachiro was a master strategist. Japan's naval technology was far superior than Russia and China and he was never outnumbered heavily or anything. Good friend100 14:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, if the reference is true (if Togo Heihachiro actually made that comment about Yi) then I think it's a good thing to include in this article. Heichario is, after all, a pretty famous and prominent figure in naval history, and WP biographical articles are full of such comments because they show the topic's relevance and later influence. The other question, though, is if Heichario did NOT say anything about Yi Sunsin, then how commonly is that quote incorrectly attributed to him? If it happens a lot then this article should acknowledge the error, so people can find out the truth. Geeman 23:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Recollection of Togo heihachiro (東郷平八郎全集) is issued in 1935. To our regret, this book is not being published now. (This book can be inspected at a large-scale library.) There is no record that Togo respected Yi in this book. Togo respected Kusunoki Masashige. Therefore, he is building the monument of Kusunoki Masashige. However, Togo has not left anything for Yi.

This rumor has spread by the novel on Shiba Ryotaro in 1968. (SakanoUenokumo - 坂の上の雲)

「余談だが、この艦隊が鎮海湾を出てゆくとき、水雷艇の一艦長が、「李舜臣提督の霊に祈った」という記録を書いていたものがあったように筆者は記憶していたが、それがどの資料にあったのか容易にみつからなかった。」

who cares about some togo respecting yi sunshin? thats just great. but who cares? it's not like some of the japanese are racists or anything......Odst 18:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia bios are full of references that explain the influence of the person in history/culture. If true, it's a pretty good example of that kind of note. Geeman 07:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

That is not true, good friend. togo was impossibly outnumbered by the russians and outgunned. his victory was not master stratagem, but he must be credited. Togo was undoubtedly a brilliant admiral. (hard to admit for us, because we're korean) Odst 18:12, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I thought that the Russians were behind in technology against Japan... Good friend100 20:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

The current link (http://www.koreanhero.net/en/NationalHeroOfKorea.htm) posted by anonymous user 218.235.213.190 looks pretty credible as a source, but if someone could post something that calls the quote from Togo into question I would be happy to write it up in a more balanced way. Geeman 21:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I was wrong about the outnumbered part, but the Russians had superior technology. But then togo had the sheer numbers, so he won. Odst 00:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

No way. You need to read history before you touch Wikipedia. Russians had more big guns and more heavily armoured battleships. Japanese had more speedy vessels. Russians used aormour piercing rounds but Japanese used shrapnels with high-explosive that produce large amount of heat. Russians were tired by long journey from northern Europe and Japanese wasn't. And above of all, Japanese far out-trained Russians so Russians couldn't hit their opponents. --Ypacaraí 02:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Look again. (I apologize in advance for that.) Thats almost exactly what I wrote. The Russos had the big bulky ships ( dreadnoughts) and the Japanese had fireboats... Odst 01:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm a bit dismayed by the dismissive attitude towards Togo and the Battle of Tsushima Straits: it was a history-making event, the first time since Industrial Revolution began that a non-White people defeated a European power in a clean-cut battle using European technology (and the last battle of the battleship age that one fleet completely annihilated the other.) Let's give credit where it is due.

I've heard the story about Togo and yi Sunshin in various incarnations before--but almost all sources have been Korean and looked a bit propagandistic, though. Nevertheless, the circumstances are there: the Combined Fleet was anchored at Masan, not too far from Hansan Island, before the Battle of Tsushima. Togo would have had opportunities to visit Admiral Yi's shrine before the battle--as some of the accounts allege. Since Togo was a keen student of Japanese naval history--including the mauling it suffered at the hands of Admiral Yi's fleets--it certainly would have been plausible for him to at least make a visit. H27kim 04:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

JAPANESE TRYING TO DISCREDIT KOREA AGAIN?

Look man stop trying to diss Yi Soon Shin off and sorry if im wrong but his name wasn't Yi Sun Shin or Lee Soon Shin IT WAS YI SOON SHIN. Oh yeah the Japanese retreated cause Hideyoshi died? PUH-LEASE! They fell back because Yi Soon Shin beat them all. You really should read history guys... Wakizaka,Dodo,Kato, and Konishi and the other generals got beat by Yi Soon Shin even if he had 12 ships left after Won Kyun's defeat! Wow one death in 'the "great" Japan caused the Japanese forces to retreat? WOW you guys are just pathetic trying to credit the Japanese and diss off Korea's most famous general in history. Cmon guys admit it that the Japanese forces retreated because Yi Soon Shin beat the Japanese badly.Then look again in 1903-1945, in almost 10 biographies about the annexation of Korea by the Japanese the authors discredit Syngman Rhee? Are they holding a grudge against Koreans? Ok i admit that Some Japanese generals WANTED to retreat because they thought since their Takio died they should go back. But then again there are those "great" japanese generals who wanted to kill Yi Soon Shin and failed for 6 years. So i urge you to not discredit Korea or its famous hero again or i may have to discuss this again..-KoreanHistorist

Hey hey we don't need to get emotional. I feel the same way as you but lets try to keep our discussions a little more calmly. Anyways, you are right about Japan. They (in my opinion) discredit Korea a lot. If you want to express your feelings for Korea, then a good place to argue is the discussion page of Liancourt Rocks and start your arguments there

Good friend100 22:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

KoreanHistorist this is not a place to become fired up. Instead of making verbal accusations, help us out on WikiProject Korea. It would be a great help. Oyo321 03:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

although the japanese discredit us a whole whole lot, it is in fact true that the guys pulled back upon the death of mister bald guy. nobody really wanted to have that stupid war, except for him. Big shot dies= Adios!! -odst

I'd suggest you brush up on your history before making accusations. The Japanese retreated likely because of both reasons.

1) The Japanese could not continue the war because of all the losses due to Admiral Yi.

2) Hideyoshi Toyotomi was an ambitious man. He wanted to conquer the greatest empire at that time, Ming China. It was a big dream, but he wanted to persue it. Some Japanese lords, like Konishi Yukinaga, disagreed with him, but who'd argue with the Taiko? When Hideyoshi died in 1598, obviously, no one wanted to fight the ongoing 7 year war anymore. And I'm guessing a decision was made to retreat. ShihoMiyano (talk) 06:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

King Sunjo the grateful one

Recently, while browsing through the Chosun Ilbo, I discovered an article with significant proof implying that King Sunjo, after hearing of Admiral Ii's death, supposedly did not show any reaction whatsoever. According to the books of government recorders, King Sunjo did not seem to care about Admiral Ii Sun Shin untimely death. This is reinforced by his horrible distrust and torture of Admiral Ii. There should be an article on it, and I have inserted it. It is important for us to know that Korean governments in history have always had some loser conspiring and hating those who have accomplished so much. Factional fighting continues today. Oyo321 16:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe that's either because the Western faction(political faction) convinced the king that Yi Soon Shin sought his throne or because the king grew suspicious of Admiral Yi due to his popularity with the common people. Recall that he did leave his palace and his people in order to save his life. ShihoMiyano (talk) 06:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Admiral Yi

Its either Yi or Lee. Li is Chinese. Admiral Yi is not Chinese. He is Korean. Good friend100 01:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Though I'd argue to spell his first name as Soon-shin or Sun-shin, just not Sun-sin. ShihoMiyano (talk) 06:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Admiral?

In the article why is he mentioned as an admiral when he was actually a General? His naval command success wasn't even due to him being an admiral but a general knowing the geography and strategy that could be employed.

Well, don't quote me on this, but I think at that time there was no such thing as a bona-fide "admiral" in Korea's military system. The navy were considered part of the armies, and thus the naval officers were generals instead of admirals. In this light, though, I don't see it as erroneous to call him an admiral, as long as it is clarified that the usage is more descriptive than official. Uly 14:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

In a similar light, the American airforce was considered part or a subsection of the army during WW2. Would we have to call those pilots or captains as somthing other than airmen and resort to something like "army soldiers who fly planes" ? For the purposes of the article, "Admiral" is appropiate. It would look odd and confuse a lot of uninformed casual readers if a sentence read like, "General Yi Sun shin, commander of Cholla province defeated Admiral Wakizaka at the battle of Hansan-do." For all practical purposes, Yi sun shin was an admiral even though he was a land-based general during his past military career. So by 1592, he becomes a sea-based general which in effect = "Admiral". It's really a difference of semantics than military system, IMO.

In the preface to my translation of Nanjung Ilgi (War diary (of Admiral Yi Sun-sin)), translated by Ha Tae-hung (Yonsei University Press), it reads "In the 24th year of the same King he was appointed Commander of Chǒlla Left Naval Station...In the following year, with the outbreak of the Hideyoshi war...was promoted to Commander-in-Chief of the Combined Naval Forces in the Three Provinces..."

And later it reads, "Victim of factional strife and the conspiracy of his enemies in the King's court, and the false accusations of Wǒn Kyun, the Admiral was deprived of his office and imprisoned (4th day of third moon to 1st day of 4th moon, 1597) for insubordination to the royal instructions and the field order of General Kwǒn Yul..."

Finally, we read, "During the war, Admiral Yi was initially in charge of the Chǒlla Left Navy Headquarters, he was promoted to be the Supreme Commander of the Naval Forces of the three provinces of Ch'ungch'ǒng, Kyǒngsang and Chǒlla." Hope this helps. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 04:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The Free Dictionary states that an admiral is the commander-in-chief of a fleet. Just fyi. ShihoMiyano (talk) 07:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The Final Battle And Yi Soon Shin's death

I added another section explaining Admiral Yi's death and the final battle at Noryang Straits because I thought that it should be known why Admiral Yi went into that battle and, of course, how he died. Also to let others know that his 13 ships had grown to 82. There might be things that could be worded better, so if you can, word it better.

Also, I've been correcting grammar, spelling, and other inconsistencies in the article as well. ShihoMiyano (talk) 08:04, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Birth and death dates?

Until we have some solid references for Yi Sun-sin's exact dates of birth and death, let's keep them out of the article. None of the sources I have at hand provide exact dates, although I suspect that if I had better references they would. There is also the small problem of lunar vs. solar dates, which requires some care. We're better off leaving this information out entirely than allowing the article to look like a joke. It's already far too much like a joke. -- Visviva 16:08, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

His death date (at top) conflicts with the month given in the paragraph below (December at top, November in paragraph). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jinnai (talk • contribs).

Maybe it has something to do with the Chinese Lunar Calendar? ShihoMiyano (talk) 00:45, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Consistent naming

I’m not attached to any particular romanization, but the naming should at least be consistent. Reading an article about Yi/Lee Soon/Sun[-][ ]Sin/sin/Shin/shin is confusing. So if you change his transliteration, please change it throughout the article. Thanks.

crism 22:14, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I changed the references to Yi Sun-sin that weren't in quotation marks, or in the title of a book or movie to the spelling suggested by the title, for consistency. It might be a good idea to put a note a the beginning of the article to explain... something like Yi Sun-sin's name has been spelled in a variety of ways, for the purposed of this article, the spelling Yi Sun-sin is used because...--Kewp 05:43, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

...because what? McCune-Reischauer (1939) strongly discourages setting a hyphen between syllables of name, and "Sunsin" is not ambiguous in terms of orthography and pronunciation. – Wikipeditor 00:02, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Google gives “about 32,900 hits” for yi sun( /-)shin, 14,500 for yi sun( /-)sin, 2,470 for yi sunshin, only 529 for yi sunsin and only 109 for i sunsin, each excluding the word halley to reduce the number of Wikipedia clones. While I think this page should be moved away from Yi Sunshin, it would be great if somebody established which is “the spelling most frequently encountered in English” among the eight spellings that together account for the 32,900 and the 14,500 results, namely Yi Sun Shin, Yi Sun-Shin, Yi Sun-shin, Yi Sun shin and the same without h. Have fun.—19:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I think Lee is Chinese pronunciation of Yi. Right? Koreans pronounce the name as Ii Suun Sin , but to fit it into English language, they spelled it Yi Sun Sin.

(Wikimachine 16:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC))

Lee, Rhee, and Yi are Korean and Li is the Chinese equivalent

Good friend100 22:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, by far, Google gives the most hits for "Yi Soon Shin". And that's basically how it's pronounced in english. You really can't make a mistake pronouncing it when it's spelled like that. Except if you say "yee" instead of "ee". ShihoMiyano (talk) 00:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Chinese role

It's instereting to find that in this article there is no mention of China and Chinese navy. Chinese navy fought a lots with Japanese along with Korean navy. For example, in the battle on Nov. 19, 1598, Chinese navy sent out a fleet of 450 battleships, larger than Admiral Yi's fleet. The commander in chief of the China-Korea fleet is Chinese Admiral Chen Lin instead of Admiral Yi. And another Chinese Admiral Deng died too during this battle. But if you read this article, you will find that there is no contribution of Chinese at all!

Well you should check the Battle of Noryang article. Chen Lin, even with all these ships, sailed straight into danger and had to be rescued by Yi Soon Shin's flagship more than once. He even told his soldiers to engage in hand-to-hand combat with the enemy. Personally, I think he's hardly better than Won Gyun, except for the fact that he, argueably, respected Admiral Yi. If you think about it, do you think the Chinese would leave the command of such a big fleet to a smaller state? I doubt they'd follow Admiral Yi's orders even if he was the commander-in-chief.ShihoMiyano (talk) 00:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello everyone. I made a lot of changes for Admiral Yi (check the history). I have just realized that you are right! The reason why I did not write in China's part in his story because I solely wanted to concentrate about him and his victories and his part in the Seven Year War. If you want to read more about China's part of the Seven Year War, I am planning to revise the entire article of the Seven Year War. Check it out in about a week and I will fill in China's part. --Good friend100 18:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

That's right. This is about Admiral Yi. China's role in the war should be under the Seven Year War article. (Wikimachine 18:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)) (edit: I didn't sign in)

Hello. I'm the guy that wrote about "ironclad", further in this discussion. The Chinese were completely indecisive, only to score victory in northern Korea, just because Konishi's troops were having a really bad day. their supply got wrecked, by our hero Yi sun Shin. Also, to remark other chinese embarrassments, an entire division, led by li yuezong,was repelled by the Japanese. another thing is the Chinese made more of a mess than the Japanese did. All they did was screw around, emptying the korean treasury, for wine and prostitutes. The Korean-Chinese allied fleet was in fact under the command of Admiral Yi Sun Shin, because he was the original mind that planned the battles ahead. Chen Lin thought he was in charge, he could have been right. To top it all, The chinese just got in the way.

@ Ironclad... Koreans and Korean Americans often overlook the numerous times that Chinese have come to the rescue when the Japanese attacked throughout history. Such 21st Century Korean nationalism overlooks the extent of Chinese influence in Korean history. It is impossible to know Korean history without reading Korean history books, which were written in Chinese for centuries, up to the 20th Century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanja). Given that Wikipedia is open-source, we often overlook the truth and bottom line in Asian history; and, that bottom line is that China was always the Big Brother of Korea. Koreans often attempt to say that they were completely a isolated race and culture from China. But, China's size in population and military strength was always a last resort when Korea could not fight off the Japanese. Much of the Korean language, family values, work ethic stems directly from the Confucian teachings and principles. Korea would have been taken over by the Japanese much earlier in history if the Chinese were not an active part of defending the mainland.

Can you give me some reference? I mean, the original record or history book about the role of China in the war and the conditions of navy and land forces of the three country. I'm interested in them.

It's better to add some add more references including history books by Chinese and Japanese, especially some english history literatures from the forth country. It seems the role of China was abased. 'The chinese just got in the way.'? I can not agree with this. At least, land forces of China equpped with lots of firearms played an very important role.

I'm not going to refute your arguments because they are all true, no doubt, but your position is too biased. Feel free to write as you wish, but respect others. Oyo321 03:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but not let's not write a special section just for the chinese roles. (Wikimachine 01:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC))

Korea or Joseon?

Could we decide on using either Joseon or Korea in the article? I think it'd be better to use Joseon in terms of accuracy. ShihoMiyano (talk) 00:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I vote for Joseon--except if one wanted to actually say something like "modern day Korea" in reference to a particular place. Geeman (talk) 20:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I tried my best to change it in the first few sections, but some are really hard to exchange, like, when it says "koreans", I don't know how to change it unless "joseonese" works.ShihoMiyano (talk) 06:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Conflict in article, related to the name of Yi's father

In this article, Yi Sun-sin#Early life states that Yi's father's name is Yi Jeong.

In contrast, Yi Sun-sin#Japanese invasions of Korea (1592-1598)#The Final Battle and Admiral Yi's death states that the name of Yi's father is Yi Chong.

Which one is the correct one?

Personally, the first one, Yi Jeong, should be correct one, because in the article, Yi Chong, states that he was born in 1541, just 4 years older that Yi Sunsin.

Nevertheless, I don't know what I guess is right or not.

--Brandy Frisky (talk) 15:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. Someone changed it a little while ago and I just assumed it to be correct. Either that or it was a transliteration mistake.

Another conflict in here would be his title as being the commander of the three provinces. In the beginning of the article, it said "Tri-provincial Naval Commander" and further down, it said "Admiral of the Three Provinces". The first doesn't work so well because it's a little bit off and the other didn't because the title of "Admiral" didn't exist then. (삼도수군통제사) Samdo Sugun Tongjesa can be roughly translated as follows:

Samdo - Three Province

Sugun - Navy

Tongjesa - Commander (at least, I think it's translated like this)

Three Province Navy Commander doesn't exactly fit together and the best I could come up with was "Naval Commander of the Three Provinces". If you can think of anything better, feel free to share. ShihoMiyano (talk) 06:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

�

Ho, I have no idea about that, since I don't know much about Korea's history. Nevertheless, I guess, if we know how to arrange armed forces of Joseon or organisation structure, that maybe useful. For example, how Thai government arranged government structure, was that to pass an order from big cities to small nearby cities. Say, big cities controlled its nearby small cities. Anyway, regardless, how big the city, a governer controlled, his title was just a governer of that city. (but his still had his noble title to state his rank.) Hopefully, this may help you. --Brandy Frisky (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

NPOV for Liancourt Rocks dispute

I have added a sentence at the end of the section mentioning the Liancourt Rocks dispute mentioning the fact that this dispute is ongoing and added a link to the dispute page. I refrained from revising the sentence which caused me to make the revision. If someone with a more experience in Wikipedia politics and wording would like to merge the two sentences into a single NPOV sentence it would be greatly appreciated. Mamechishiki (talk) 04:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Sources please

Uh great article guys. I know you all love the guy and all and he was a genius and all. I'm not trying to descredit him, but since this is Wikipedia do you guys mind providing some sources? We need a lot more. By the way why is his death not mentioned in the article proper but only in the preface/summary?ParallelPain 09:49, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

BTW, in English, isn't Yi and Eee pronouced pretty much the same?

You people do know that you can edit articles, right? Instead of asking for someone else to do the work, why don't you just edit it yourself? Its kind of funny that wikipedia is a place where anyone can edit, but in nearly every article, there are always people asking that something be done about this or that. Perhaps, the elitism here has prevented them from making any move. Good friend100 (talk) 14:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh I simply assumed that it would be much easier for the person who wrote the "biography" to add in the citations, since you know he did already did all the research and knows where he got all the information. If of course any research are done at all, instead of just reproducing what was shown in a TV Drama. Now I don't believe that's the case, but without citation one can never be sure. And we are definately taught in the academic circle to always check sources and try to reproduce the same results and doubt what is asserted unless proven, in this case by trustworthy primary or secondary sources (such as his diary, or the research of a respected academic)

For someone like me who hasn't touched the subject to do it, he's have to go to the university library for academic books and maybe jstor for peer-review articles and read over all the information, which would be a lot slower than having the author of the article come and cite his sources. I don't mind doing it but I'd probably re-write the entire thing based only on informations available, which would obviously make it less entertaining of an article but hey it would be up to academic standards and be based on first or second historical sources and not use a single website as a source. But then most likely someone would come and look at my hard work, which is up to academic standards, and go "this is bullshit" and revert it back.

If "elitism" is asking for as good an article as possible, sure I'm guilty of it. At least I'm not guilty of raising the idle to heaven while stomping all around him into hell. Sure, one side must be all good and the other must be all evil. I'm sure real life is, or has at some point in the past was, like that -_-||ParallelPain (talk) 21:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Someone flag this article for not enough citation

I do believe that's very necessary. A huge long article like this with a total of 11 citations (mostly from two sources). That doesn't speak very much for the article's credibility. I would flag it but I don't know how :( ParallelPain (talk) 20:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Most of the information is common-knowledge stuff that a few Google searches would tell you. The problems lies in the fact that not many people like doing citation work. I suppose I could learn how to do it, but then I'd have to learn. D: ShihoMiyano (talk) 20:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

General Cleanup

Just like in the Turtle Ship article, this is stained with commercial ads. I mean, who cares about the modern depiction of this prominent historical figure in a movie called Chungoon and display the picture?

Let's try to be professional. Look at Japanese historical figure- articles.

They are not stained with games and movies. They pertain to the historical figures themselves.

Anyone interested in this cleanup ought to read what I posted on the discussion for the Turtle Ship article.

Thanks? Don't you all agree? (Wikimachine 22:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC))

=> Agreed. Removed links to commercial sites and outer links to movies & TV dramas, as it is quite "un-encyclopedic". It's quite unnecessary to list every single depiction in popular culture of a historical figure. Nuyos (talk) 08:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yi Equals China name

Um, I don't know how we will edit this if a compromise is settled, but WHAT IS YI??? Thats a totally chinese name. There is no such name in Korean. Why can't we change the names to "Ii" or Lee??? This is very disturbing, and I'm not tolerating the fact that Ii Sun shin is spelled with a chinese character as his surname. Somebody help me work on it or start a poll. Oyo321 21:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Yi is a Korean name while "Li" is the Chinese euqivalent. Yi is fine, but Yi does sound too Chinese and may sound as a Chinese person to a foreigner (which Admiral Yi is not). A poll might be worth it. Good friend100 00:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I didn't like Lee nor Yi. It's Eeeee.

The problem is that the name "Yi" is stuck and it might be comfusing if it was "E Sun-shin". I really don't like Yi because its so chinese. Good friend100 19:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Then we should begin a poll. Its incorrect historically and lingusitically. I propose we change his name to "Ii Sun Shin," or "Lee Sun Shin." If today's Lee is the equivalent to his name, then it should be the same for "Yi" Sun Shin. Oyo321 23:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Polls are irrelevant. Please see the [Wikipedia Korean Naming Conventions]. Komdori 19:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yi(이), according to the korean alphabet, is pronounced the same way as you would say the english letter "E". For whatever reason, it can be spelled "Yi" or "Lee", but the spelling of the name is usually up to the individual. Of course, we can't go and ask the admiral himself, but it is widely accepted that the spelling be "Yi". Yi may sound foreign, but the fact is, many people can't differentiate between asian cultures; their first guess will likely always be Chinese. His first name, however, should be written either as "Soon-shin" or "Sun-shin", not "Sun-sin", for obvious pronunciation reasons. Be reasonable, we can't change someone's name just because someone doesn't like how it's spelled. ShihoMiyano (talk) 06:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow.... Oyo you are so dumb. If you look up Korean last names on Google it will say that Yi is a KOREAN last name.... in fact, there are about 6.8 million Koreans with that last name. So please next time you bring up an issue, do your research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.168.144.140 (talk) 20:28, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Military genius

Apart from being a naval and engineering genius,i also think he was a great miltary leader.He also deserves the credit for building one of the first ever mordern and intergrated ships. the Turtle Ship is a good example of intergrated system,as it had all the things required of a ship.--Jayanthv86 17:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Of course it did, otherwise it wouldn't float! (Haha.) ShihoMiyano (talk) 07:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Seeing that he's such an naval battle genius, it's unfortunate that this article contains almost nothing about his tactics -- the turtle ships are obviously only one aspect of his innovations. Will someone be up to writing about this? Uly 22:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I am not upseting somebody, but there is some rumors about the "suicide". He really was a military geneous but I read a book that the "pan ok sun" where generel gives decree to the soldiers is protected with all sort of armors. You wouldn't expect nothing on the boat that protacts him from bullets,no! they had some kind of bullet proof shield.There for it may be the suicide.--kangk

I don't understand what you mean, Kangk. (Wikimachine 01:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC))

Admiral Yi's death was just an unfortunate one and it was very likely that he would have been shot on the ship, in the lead of the chase, and his armor and size would have presented a target for a Japanese aruebusier.

There has been some speculation amongst my Korean friends that the story of Admiral Yi's death was fabricated by Yi himself. A couple of points 1) the Japanese were retreating, why would Yi chase them? 2) Yi was not popular with the king at the time. Despite his victories, he was unlikely to be welcomed back by the royalty, especially since he appeared to be gaining popularity with the common people (thus being a political threat). Being an obviously intelligent man, why would he 1) chase after an opponent he had already beaten or 2) return back to Korea? The theory is that perhaps he faked his death or otherwise made sure that he was thought to be dead so that he could hold onto his life, rather than hand it over to an ungrateful king. Obviously this is just a theory but I thought it was interesting enough to be discussed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.176.97.151 (talk) 06:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Your opinions are legit, and I do respect your ideas on his death. But, I personally believe he died a glorious death. Yes, I know it might sound dramatic, but you know, it such a coincidence about winning 23 of 23 battles, keeping an extraordinary war diary, and esp. winning the battle of myeongryang with only 12 panokseons. He is compared to many other admirals and even admired by admirals. I don't want to spark any arguments, but Yi was probably the most ideal leader that any country should have--you can't doubt that fact (although some of this arguments are RIDICULOUS and are what I call "Youtube comments."). Yi was a person of "choong" -- a philosophy that many Koreans revere--loyalty, unselfishness. I wish we could have that kind of leader as our president in South Korea (unlike stupid Lee Myungbak, a "puppet" of the US government), AND MAYBE HE COULD ONE DAY HELP UNITE AS ONE KOREA, TO BECOME one of the most POWERFUL COUNTRY that Yi envisioned. PS--why is the Dokdo, Takeshima, and Liancourt Rocks brought here? There is replete evidence that the islands are Korean territory, backed by (overwhelmingly and suprisingly) many Japanese documents and Korean ones as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.93.192 (talk) 04:03, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Admiral Yi was definitely and a powerful genius. He won all of the at least 23 battles fought with the Japanese. He never lost a single ship and suffered only few hundreds of wounded and dead men. Good friend100 02:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

To clear some things up, Admiral Yi was enraged that the Chinese and the king decided to let the Japanese go back after what they had done. Thus, is the reason he chased them. That, I believe, was his biggest fault, but who could blame him? And I think what Kangk is saying is that "Wouldn't the commander's place on the ship be protected from bullets or whatnot?" Like how the soldiers had shields. ShihoMiyano (talk) 06:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

What the Japanese did to Chosun Civilians and Korea

Well in 1592-1598 the Japanese burned down houses and killed men with muskets and butchered children pointlessly, i should know because iam a korean. Also the Japanese kidnapped the women and... well... you know... So this went on for months and civilians were starved and used as target practices with their muskets AND the Japanese captured Potters that made Dawan (which was beatufiul pottery and vases that were worth very much) then shipped them back to Japan only to be treated like slaves and sometimes humble nobles. Also on the battlefield the Japanese were very VERY cheap with their muskets shooting Chosunese soldiers when they were charging towards them AND they threw their swords like spears and killed over 50 Chosunese officers and presumed dead or missing over 1 million soldiers and volunteers. Also when the Chosunese civilians or soldiers were dead, the Japanese cut off their ears or heads and sent them back to the Taiko who was the ruler of Japan called Hideyoshi. Disgusting piles of headless bodies that included children, men and women... THEN Yi Soon Shin got rid of them (thank god), but sadly he was shot by a bullet in his left part of chest and died gasping his last words and last orders... THEN on 1910-1945 The Japanese attacked AGAIN this time they beat Russia and China so they declared Korea a independent country THEN took it over and annexed it. The Japanese tried to get rid of the Korean culture and forbid them to use their language AND never ever to disobey the Japanese even if the order was ridiculous. After months of this rebellions sprang up with guerellias of Korean people fighting to get rid of the dirty Japanese. Unfortunately the rebellions were hopeless... Before the annexation in 1903 Koreans immigrated to Hawaii to work on sugar plantations because a church pastor said so. Then the immigrations stopped because of Japanese rule. So after a while the Koreans sprang up and cried "대한민국만세!!" which meant Victory with Korea!!! At first the Japanese were shocked because the Koreans were waving "illegal" korean flags and insulting the Japanese and holding up signs. So when the Japanese got over the shock, they gunned down the first line of the protestors and moved on to the next. Then years later they began to presecute pastors, and students and teachers and sometimes executed them or forced them into interrogation to "confess" something. The interrogtain methods were brutal. They had sharp bamboo sticks which went under the nails into the skin and hung them upside down and whipped them and did other brutal methods of 72 ways. This was worse than Laos or Cambodia when the officals tortured the innocent. Then Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and one of my friends who hates Japanese said "Italic text my grandmother was asleep on Sunday with other people sleeping too! AND my grandmother was almost killed too!" Bold text This was because Pearl Harbor was in Hawaii. I seriously wonder why Alot of people doesnt hate Japan and Korean hates Japan and China too because they made Korean a prosperous country into a war ravaged country.-Korean Historist

Did you know that Kaiser Wilhelm's real name was "Pookie"? I'm about 50% sure of that because I'm half-German. Anyhow.... what, exactly, do the big, long rants above have to do with Yi Sun-sin? If I didn't know better, I would think you're just spamming the talk pages for the heck of it. Anyhow, welcome to Wikipedia, but please try to keep your talk page contributions at least somewhat concise and to the point. Thanks.

Oh... and you spelled the name of 'your' country wrong... "대하민국" <-- see if you can spot the error. --Zonath 06:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Zonath if you think I was spamming and not contributing then look at my paragraphs which i typed. Also i spelled 대한미국 right and if Im wrong or right this page is called the 'discussion' page where were contribute AND discuss. Also Yi Soon Shin wrote in his diary of the Chosunese civilians being mistreated by the Japanese and the Ming not helping out at all so i MUST be contributing things that Yi Soon Shin saw or wrote. -KoreanHistorist

"대한미국"? "Great Korean America"? Okay, I'll accept that you spelled it right if you insist. Yes, you are right... This is the talk page, but I would say that three long consecutive rants peppered with off-topic comments (such as the whole 1910-1945 thing you wrote above) and netspeak (LOL!) would constitute spam at the very least, and don't really 'contribute' to the article much at all, since little of the information you give is verifiable or reliable (historical fiction TV shows don't really count as reliable sources). Yi Sun-sin's diary would be a good direct source, but in that case, please try to introduce direct quotes to support your arguments. I highly doubt that Admiral Yi used OMG and LOL very much in his diaries. --Zonath 01:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Again i disagree and agree with you. if you think historical "fictions" are not reliable then tell me if all they say on the 'History' channel about the Holocraust or the wars or inventions are all lies and i agree with you that i should contribute things more directly to the point. Even so sometimes t.v. can't be a reliable source even the internet can be a unreliable source like google and anyone can put anything on there. So it is my point to 'discuss' these things and correct them. Yes and I agree that LOL or OMG wasn't written in Yi Soon Shin's diary. But it is meant to capture attention.If you disagree with my opinion do as you wish because I can't stop you from typing in here since this is a 'discussing' page and a contributing page.And yes i will agree to type things more 'directly' to the point, but sometimes the past is connected to the present. -KoreanHistorist

Yes, Japan and Korea did many unspeakable things to Korea during the Seven Year War. And to Zonath...we don't have to be picky about the spellings and lets just compromise better.

Do you know what the Japanese actually did to Korea? There are a lot of things foreigners do not know what really happened... Japanese soldiers raped, looted, pillaged, ransacked, cut off ears, chopped off dog heads, kidnapped scientists, etc etc.

It's amazing (to me) what people can do to other people in violent ways. What's more amazing is how the US government controls the media so well as to not display their "behind the back corruption" acts in East Asia. So many stereotypical americans believe china and russia and imperialists; ironically, their US government is itself imperialist. Why are the US Military employed in so many countries? because their imperial, por supuesto. I know this is random, but i had to put my opinion somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.93.192 (talk) 04:14, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

But i do agree with Zonath, Japan and China's crimes should be placed in the Seven Year war article or the discussion page.

Good friend100 22:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Strongly support. (Wikimachine 22:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC))

I agree with Good Friend100. -KoreanHistorist

rather than headless bodies, more like noseless bodies, man. i guess the japanese were pretty lazy. _odst

I have read this part of the discussion and it amazes me that a Korean advocate incorrectly spelt his/her own country wrong in Korean TWICE. But we shouldnt be criticising the correctness of grammar or spelling too much as substance prevails over form in these types of discussion. As to the substance, I fully agree with KoreanHistorist in all respects but agree with GoodFriend and Zonath that KoreanHistorist should have perhaps wrote some of the content in other forums as the relevance does seem a bit short. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gil1984 (talk • contribs) 13:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I'm pretty sure it's Dae Han Min Guk. And uh, to you up there, KoreanHistorist, "I should know because I am korean"? So you're basically saying every korean knows about this? No, it should be you should know because you 'studied' it, if you did. I understand that you're mad at the Japanese, but most likely, every korean that knows their history, should, in fact, be mad, but your anger is blown out of proportion. We're here to write about Admiral Yi's, for lack of a better word, brilliance during these hard times, not to burn down every Japanese that happens to visit this article.ShihoMiyano (talk) 01:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Spelling and Grammar Issues

I swear, Wikipedia should make users take a simple spelling test before they're allowed to edit pages. Capitalize proper nouns, people's names. Learn the difference between past and present tense and proofread your edit before you submit it. Simple things could do wonders for these kinds of issues in articles. By the way, if you're not sure about something, don't mess with it. Share your views on here and discuss it.ShihoMiyano (talk) 09:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I did a little clean up on the article today. I hope it meets with everyone's approval. It seems that large sections of the text were written, relatively well, by a non-native speaker, or by someone translating from (presumably) Korean. There are a lot of the same grammar and style issues all over the text. --Be gottlieb (talk) 23:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The first name of the general was erratically written; Sun-Shin appears close to his original name.

Revise Page

I think we need to make a simple standard way to transliterate korean into english. The system used currently is confusing and unnecessary. The "oo" sound, for example, needs to be agreed on as to whether it's written as "oo" or "u" and the "uh" sound as "eo" or (if "oo" is written as "oo"), "u".ShihoMiyano (talk) 07:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

"He was praised by the king personally and was given many honors." I deleted this in the "Legacy" part of the page because it is very contradictory to what is known, Correct me if I'm wrong, but King Seonjo did not favor Yi Soon Shin and his titles/honors were awarded after he died. ShihoMiyano (talk) 07:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Whoever screwed with the article around the Battle of Myeongnyang, I hate you.ShihoMiyano (talk) 09:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

there are quite a few unsubstantiated claims made in this article. I tagged one 'citation needed', but there are plenty others.--Be gottlieb (talk) 23:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Archive this discussion page!

Someone please set up archiving for this discussion page, it is way too long, and a lot of discussions ceased years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Be gottlieb (talk • contribs) 14:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Name Change

I know this has been mentioned a few times indirectly, but I'm not sure if you can change the title, but that would be great, because technically his name is Yi Sun-Shin not sin. I don't know who made it Sin, but that is wrong. Also, it would be great to change it as many times as possible throughout the article. Yisoonshin12 (talk) 03:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Yisoonshin12

Some points. and the article is biased in Korea's favor

I am a Korean for clarification. I usually don't do any wiki editing(this is my first time), but Admiral Yi my most admired figure. And upon reading this article, I found how one-sided the article is.

If you happen to come across the initial version of this article written before 2005, it does make you puke over the nationalistic views lurking all over it. At least current version is more fair than the first one.

Anyway, just few points... Please do NOT edit this article if you have no freaking clue of what you are talking about! All you do by over-praising Yi is disgracing his name!

1. 戰方急 愼勿言我死 Yi's last will.

How the hell is is interpreted as "We are about to win the war -- wear my armor and keep beating the war drums. Do not announce my death."?

Who was this smart idiot that came up with his own version of the admiral's will?

It is translated as, "the battle is at its height. do not announce my death.(direct translation: the battle is pressing. be cautious not to announce my death)"

Beat the drum? wear my armor? OTL don't make me laugh.

"今臣戰船尙有十二 出死力拒戰則猶可爲也, 戰船雖寡 微臣不死則不敢侮我矣."

'...I still own thirteen ships, therefore, as long as I am alive, the enemy shall never be safe in the Western Sea'

Hello? Can you read numbers? He says 12. Not 13. And yellow is not mentioned in this context. (If I recall correctly, it's perhaps in other sentence.)

In Korean, it's often quoted as "I still have twelve battleships, and I'm still alive.(or your humble servant still lives.)"

2. In full translation, it should be "I still have twelve battleships. If we fight to death, we will defend the enemy. Although our numbers are small, the enemy will not take us lightly as long as I'm alive."

I suck at English, so someone with proper English please translate it correctly. I will just edit the number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.20.182 (talk) 02:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

3. Battle of Myeonglang is not explained properly.

Admiral Yi's flagship fought the battle ALONE at least for couple of hours against 333 Japanese ships, and other 12 ships just waited in the back, getting ready to run away as soon as Yi was killed. Well, that didn't happen.

Somebody needs to massively revise the battle of Myeonglang.

4. I know it's not in the article anymore, but this story just pops up so often, even in this dicussion board. So i will recite it.

Togo DID NOT praise Yi.

Togo DID NOT admire Yi.

Togo DID NOT study Yi's tactics.

Britain was a important ally of Japan in Russia-Japan war. Togo is not that stupid to talk down on British legendary admiral. He had a heavy mouth as well.

This story came up something like 30 years after Togo's death, from a Korean living in Japan.

And Togo's tactics in Russia-Japan war is completely different from Yi's tactics. Don't compare two timeframe that has 300 years of gap.

Spare me of this nationalistic bull.

At least it's good to know this story has been edited out.

It's most likely that Togo had 'heard' of admiral Yi, nothing more. I saw some Koreans insisting that Napoleon studied Yi's tactics. That's despicable.

5. battle of hansan is not one of 4 naval battles in world history.

where did this even come from?

lastly: sorry for my clumsy English but please don't plague the article with nationalism! I find lot of Korean articles written very one-sided, and such actions will harm Korea-related sources CREDIBILITY to foreigners.

Yi is my most admired figure in Korean history. He is indeed the greatest tactician in thousands of years of Korean history. Just don't start comparing him to other nation's heroes and create disputes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.20.182 (talk) 02:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

" He ate Cheetos". Really?

This aprt of the text is ridiculous and insulting — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.172.67.7 (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Yi Soon-shin's Sword

There it says that Yi Soon-shin's sword lies in a museum with a picture, but it's hard to believe considering forums don't make convincing references. And I remember a rumor about his sword being really long, possibly 5-6 feet.[3] ShihoMiyano (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. I was recently at the National War Memorial Museum (in Seoul) and I do seem to remember several long swords there (several, sorry don't recall whose). They may not be genuine, and if so it seems improbable that they were ever used in actual battle. Koreans are passionate about big things being easily handled by their ancestors. I wish I could remember the tale about a southern King who used a 6 foot dolmen for throwing practice... seems like a Paul Bunyun-like story. Darkpoet (talk) 00:58, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Last I checked, Yi Sun-shin's swords (he used a pair) were said to be larger than normal (maybe not 5-6 feet, but probably something closer to 4.5-5 feet in blade length), but I was also informed that the actual swords had been lost (or stolen). Any exhibit claiming to show Admiral Yi's swords may in fact be displaying replicas. And don't make generalizations about entire nationalities (e.g. "Koreans are this or that"), as it tends to discredit your own perspective (rightfully or wrongfully).Ecthelion83 (talk) 07:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I recently visited the Hyeonchungsa (Yi Sun Shin memorial shrine in Asan, Korea). The museum there had two swords (treasure no. 326), each measuring just a bit over 6' (195cm) according to the museum, which seems about right from eyeballing it. They looked identical to those pictured in the forum post mentioned above. The museum claimed the swords were authentically his, rather than replicas, but went on to speculate "it seems the sword was made for his spiritual training rather than actual use in battles." Anyway, I don't see any reason to mention the swords in the article, but I thought I'd post the info in case anyone was interested in the identity of the mystery museum. (Or at least the museum they're in now.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.204.51.226 (talk) 10:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

"But this was all about to change."

This line in the First Campaign section seems unnecessarily dramatic. --Slowlikemolasses (talk) 00:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 October 2012

Change the link that says Dokdo to Liancourt Rocks to reflect the WP:NPOV about sovereignty dispute in the article title. Smells like kim chee (talk) 00:07, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I resolved it, not by changing it (that would use the same name twice in a single line), but by rewording the sentence in question. "Liancourt Rocks" is now the only term used in this section. Nyttend (talk) 12:58, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 April 2013

That is why he is respected because the unchanging allegiance to the country despite the the situation baekuijong groups.

SHOULD BE

That is why he is respected because the unchanging allegiance to the country despite the situation with the baekuijong groups. 24.214.23.189 (talk) 02:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done: Sentence removed per next edit request. --ElHef (Meep?) 04:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request 2 on 29 April 2013

Additional request, remove "That is why he is respected because the unchanging allegiance to the country despite the the situation baekuijong groups." which is not in correct English, has an undefined word, adds nothing to the article, and doesn't follow the form of the paragraph it ends (sentence is near top). 68.113.126.251 (talk) 02:49, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Done Thanks! --ElHef (Meep?) 04:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

NPOV July 2013

Much of the article at the moment simply does not qualify as neutral. Examples:

1. The first section of Japanese Invasions of Korea (1592–1598) references no sources, yet makes statements such as "In some records, it is stated that he went as far as to personally fulfill some of his soldiers' dying wishes. He demonstrated his loyalty to the people by treating them with respect and fighting amongst them even when endangered. Because of this, Admiral Yi became immensely popular among his soldiers and the Korean people, who often provided him with intelligence reports at great risk to themselves."
2. Later section on turtle ships: "One of Yi's greatest accomplishments was resurrecting and improving the turtle ship (거북선; 龜船). With his creative mind and the support of his subordinates, Yi was able to devise the geobukseon, or Turtle Ship. Contrary to popular belief, the turtle ship was not actually invented by Admiral Yi; rather, he improved upon an older design that had been suggested during the reign of King Taejong." This not only references no sources (who said resurrecting and improving the turtle ship is 'great'?), it also uses the non-neutral phrase, 'with his creative mind and the support of his subordinates ...'. This line is not necessary to the narrative; its inclusion is POV.
3. Here's another example from the section of the Battle of Myeongnyang: "The Japanese assumed that this was a Joseon scouting ship and the pursuing it would lead to the location of Admiral Yi, giving them an opportunity to destroy the courageous admiral and the remnants of the Joseon fleet." The description '... destroy the courageous admiral' is also unnecessary and POV. If the Japanese were headhunting Admiral Yi, then the word 'courageous' can be deleted; if (as common sense implies is more likely) they simply wanted to destroy the rest of the Joseon fleet, then the sentence could be written as '... destroy the remnants of the Joseon fleet'.

I understand that Admiral Yi is a great Korean hero, but articles on such people still have to be neutral, see e.g. the article on the Turkish national hero, Mustafa Kemal Atartuk. Since the wording of the text on this page is not neutral (and not in encyclopedic tone to boot), I'm tagging for NPOV. Banedon (talk) 06:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree that this article could be improved. In fact, everything under Heaven could be improved, not only this article. This depends on people of good will: be bold and contribute by yourself. In other words, stop your reader-POV and consider the writter point of view. Pldx1 (talk) 13:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Usage of "In turn"

Please Change

"...Commander-in-Chief (도원수; 導元帥) of the Joseon military, who in, turn sent the message to King Seonjo. King Seonjo,..."

to

"...Commander-in-Chief (도원수; 導元帥) of the Joseon military, who, in turn, sent the message to King Seonjo. King Seonjo,..."

Source: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/in_turn

165.91.237.107 (talk) 17:30, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

What an article!

This article deserves nomination for the "my dick is bigger than yours" award. Why? The entire article literally reeks of overzealous nationalist sentiment and a strong desire to prove Yi against other, arguably more distinguished generals. For instance the legacy section is peppered with supposed quotes of praise from RN and IJN, but it makes no attempt to verify those claims. For all I care, I could say it here now that Yi invented naval warfare and I'm sure those ferverent Korean nationalists would give me the seal of approval...

It's just so sad that English wikipedia has simply become a playground for the Korean nationalists. I can't visit a single Japanese or Chinese related article without some Korean claiming some absurd "fact". Go to a page about Imjin War and there's some random "facts" about Chinese and Japanese atrocities. Go to Katana and there's some Korean claiming that katanas are Korean technology. Go to an article about Bohai and there are Koreans spewing hatred against China for claiming that Bohai was a vassal (a fact confirmed by Japanese texts). I can go on. My point? When anyone contributes an edit that claims "Japanese looted, raped, cut ears, cut dog heads off, burned villages..." that just seems awfully lopsided. It's the 1500's, people. English were raping, killing, beheading and burning villages, yet strangely claims of such are required to provide proof while this Korean one gets a free pass without sources.

Why isn't Wikipedia doing more to stop these baseless claims? Even more worrisome is why Wikipedia community isn't doing more to counter these aggressive nationalists. NPOV exists here for that exact reason. 24.52.233.220 (talk) 05:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you could try identifying specific problems, citing sources, and drafting improvements instead of going on bizarre xenophobic rants about phantom "Korean nationalists." 174.21.85.231 (talk) 08:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello, i'm not big on nationalism myself but have you ever checked Japanese wiki? Don't say as if Koreans are the only nationalist on wiki pages. All three east-Asian countries have strong nationalism(China- dealing with minor races; they need to emphasize 'one china'. Japan-imperialism in the past, still dominant right wing LDP. Korea- nationalistic education under deeply rooted anti-communism regime) and it's not only restricted to Koreans. If foreigner were half as interested in Korean history as they were in Japanese and Chinese, the article will shift towards more neutral stance.

As I said above I'm not really into nationalism so nationalism Bull-craps like you criticized (korean origin, hansan battle being 4 naval battles in world history, Togo saying he admired Yi, Napoleon and Nelson learning off Yi- I know it sounds insane but I heard this claim)make me frown but let's not mislead these nationalism into Korean-specific dishonesty or anything like that. These articles only need more foreign or objective editors' participation to get better. If you don't believe me and can read Japanese, try Japanese wiki and see it yourself how Nazi-level imperialism is still alive there.

Maybe you can help editing these pages instead of throwing insults to Koreans in general. My apology if it was only directed to partial Korean nationalists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.156.15.224 (talk) 06:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

What in the world is wrong with you people? There is no issue with neutrality, so I will remove the template above the article. Admiral Yi has indeed been compared to Napoleon and Horatio Nelson by Japanese and Western historians as well as Admiral Togo. Read the legacy section please. All claims are cited (aka Samuel Hawley). (Chunbum Park (talk) 06:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC))

Wow, you are an idiot. Period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.196.5.72 (talk) 08:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Deity of the Japanese Imperial Navy

I wrote that Admiral Yi was the deity of the Japanese Imperial Navy. Is something wrong with that? I know that Wikipedia's older version stated that.

Here are my sites:

• http://www.e-paranoids.com/y/yi/yi_sun_sin.html
• http://www.iridis.com/Yi_Sun-shin
• http://www.masterliness.com/a/Yi.Sun.sin.htm
• http://www.free-definition.com/Yi-Sun-shin.html

-Wikimachine-

Those would be 4 Wikpedia mirrors, then? Flowerparty ^talk 00:18, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikimachine, I think you are wrong. I wrote in discussion page of Imperial Japanese Navy. If admiral Yi was the official deity of IJN, IJN ships must had altar or Kamidana of Admiral Yi. But actually all major IJN ships had Kamidana dedicated to Amaterasu. --Ypacaraí 01:31, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

"If admiral Yi was the official deity of IJN, IJN ships must had altar or Kamidana of Admiral Yi" -this is totally your opinion.

"But actually all major IJN ships had Kamidana dedicated to Amaterasu." -that is also totally your opinion.

Show me a site that disproves the fact that Admiral Yi was not the deity of the IJN.

You know what? I forgot what that Japanese general who fought in the Russo-Japanese War was called, but the person who he revered the most of Admiral Yi. It's not my opinion -I can site you the book & send the scanned image of the page that says so.

-Wikimachine

":Show me a site that disproves the fact that Admiral Yi was not the deity of the IJN." Come on, wikimachine, if I said that I'm a deity, and tell you to show me a site that disproves it (you won't find any because i'm not) then does it mean i'm a deity because you can't prove me wrong?

No, the correct way is for you to provide a solid source that IJN deified Yi, not just some admiral's comment on Yi's performance and character. If I said I admire (not deifying, just admiring) Caesar, does he become a deity for koreans since i'm korean? Likewise, Togo's comment on Yi is not an evidence of IJN's deification of Yi. In order for Yi to be deity for IJN, they necessarily have to worship him in some sort of way, at least the way koreans do the je-sa. I am not aware of such an event occuring among IJN, and considering how low Japanese thought of koreans during the early 20th century, I strongly doubt that it could've ever happened. Show me any evidence that you came across that made you believe that IJN deified Yi. Burden of proof lies with you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.148.10.43 (talk) 20:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC).

Well, websites can not be reliable sources except governments' official ones. I know a site that explains how the legends has been developed through novels, memorandums and other readings, but it's written in japanese . I will search for more persuasive sources anyway. --Ypacaraí 01:39, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Need citations. Master 03:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Yes. I remember now. The name of the general, whose most revered historical character was Admiral Yi, is Togo.

Also, since nobody has evidences that actually prove the fact that Admiral Yi was not the deity of the Imperial Japanese Navy, I'll go on and edit it (as you can all see, I posted my sites somewhere above). -Wikimachine

Websites CAN NOT be evidences. You say "this is totally your opinion". But don't you know that websites are very often used as tools for spreading personal oppinions? --Ypacaraí 22:26, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Wikimachine, it looks like you have to study logic before you edit articles on Wikipedia. We don't have to prove that Yi Sunsin was not the deity of the Imperial Japanese Navy. We cannot prove that there are no extraterrestrials, but this doesn't mean extraterrestrials do exist. If you want to keep your claim on the article, you have to prove it. The burden of proof is on you.

Here is an interesting report on urban legends about Yi Sunsin: [4]. The author tries to trace them to their source(s), but he cannot go further than a fiction writtein in 1925. So, to prove your claim, you have to present ultimate sources; otherwise we have no choice but to delete your addition. Good luck! --Nanshu 01:20, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Whether Kawada Isao's book is fictional or not is still not clear. The book also refers to Japanese naval officers' rituals performed in reverence for Admiral Yi, and that is undebatably true. I'd rather say it is the record of author's memories of his experience in the imperial navy though it is told through an imaginary character. In addition, the idea of a Japanese author(an ex-naval officer) trying to make things up to belittle his country's most famed admiral is quite absurd.

Japanese editors, please prove that Kawada's book is a fiction. -- SizzleYou

In clarifying Togo's reference to Yi Sun-Shin, he never referred to the Admiral as a god or anything. He simply said to the defeated Commander of the Russian Fleet after the Battle of the Tsushima Straits:

"You may wish to compare me with Lord Nelson but do not compare me with Korea's Admiral Yi Sun-Sin . . .he is too remarkable for anyone."

Just a little clarification (that will hold up). Personally, I don't think that the Japanese would ever consider any foreigner a deity. It's called national pride - Koreans won't call any Japanese guy a deity, and Japanese won't call any Korean a deity. I may be wrong, but in the nationalist sense that Japan was undergoing in the Meiji restoration, Japan wouldn't consider Yi Sun-Shin as a god - it would be too much a shame... - DaeHanJeiGuk

In addition, I don't care whether Togo said it or not, because it has nothing to do with the greatness of Admiral Yi. Thus, I object to adding Togo's remark in the article. -- SizzleYou

I don't know if it was, but I never put Togo's remark in the article. Furthermore, if it was, why shouldn't it be put in there, as long as it was true and had valid evidence to support it? If it is true, then it shouldn't be edited out. But for the sake of not having a good valid source (I can't remember the book, but a lot of websites have the quote, I am not putting it in the article. And more or less, Togo's remark is more definitive of Togo's character than it is Yi Sun-Shin's character.

And by the way:

"In addition, I don't care whether Togo said it or not, because it has nothing to do with the greatness of Admiral Yi. Thus, I object to adding Togo's remark in the article. -- SizzleYou"

I'm not Japanese, but that was just plain ignorant. ---DaeHanJeiGuk

He was a naval deity of the Japanese Imperial Navy, but abandonned after the Meiji revolution and the annexation of Korea in 1910... Japanese people aren't stupid, you know. They do have the ability to admire great deeds. But they also have a strong national pride. They don't even admit the harm and sheer cruelty they have done on Chinese and Korean people. They have even tried to wipe out the Korean culture, forbidding the use of the language and corrupting (and destroying) historical archives... --- yourstruly

---

Really? I thought so too that he was a deity before 1900s. Could you show me the evidence please? Because without it, the fact that he was the Japanese navy deity would be forgotten.

Plus, remember what one of the Wikipedians said? He said that he visited Admiral Yi's shrine before going to battle with the Russians. Why in the world would the Japanese have a shrine just for Admiral Yi if he wasn't a deity over the navy? (Wikimachine 13:33, 14 October 2005 (UTC))

Err. This discussion seems kind of hopeless. What's up with nobody signing their comments? Anyway. Firstly, in reply to yoursetruly's comment, the IJN was created AFTER the Meiji restoration, so to say that Yi was abandoned as a deity after the restoration is completely illogical. Secondly, there is no such thing as "IJN's official deities", period. IJN worshipped the same deities with the states -- the shinto gods, the emperor, and so on. Well known historical figures, Yi possibly among them, may be honored and their names invoked in rituals, but it's a long stretch to call them deities. Nevertheless, Yi is likely well-revered among the Japanese naval officers, as can be expected of anyone studying naval strategy or history in the region, and I will bet that Tago is not the exception in regarding Yi so highly. Still, no matter what Togo thinks, he does NOT make Yi a deity. Lastly, this is admittedly just my conjecture, but I find it a bit hard to believe that there is an Admiral Yi's shrine in Japan. Japanese shrines dedicated on historical personage are rare to begin with, much less someone who's not only foreign but also an enemy, who isn't even deified in Korea. I think it's much more likely that he was simply one of the many honored in a certain shrine that Togo visited. I'm sure if an Admiral Yi's shrine truely existed, all the Koreans will know everything about it. Uly 23:27, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, puuulleeeeeeeze stop going over board with Yi. He was a great admiral, character, and whole she-bang. But, don't try to put him where he doesn't belong as if Yi's better than every other hero/heroine that the world has ever seen because no one is. That's where admiration stops and nationalism starts. it doesn't belong here. How would you feel if Japanese said korean army worships some japanese general? stop stirring up the mud with heresy because it won't make koreans BSDs. I couldn't agree more with Uly here. -wikitorian

The Koreans have gone too far with their fabrication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Golden Eagle IV (talk • contribs) 18:50, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

poem translation error?

I think in the translated poem, "as I've sit on the watch-tower awhile" should be "as I've sat on the watch-tower awhile". The former is ungrammatical. But I don't want to change it myself without being sure. Oconnor663 (talk) 01:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2015

Under the section "First Campaign," please remove the last sentence of the first paragraph "But this was all about to change." It is unnecessary and compromises the article's encyclopedic tone. Nodrokov (talk) 03:52, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 04:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2015

Yi Sun Shin profile picture is wrong. That profile picture is not Yi Sun Shin.

https://www.google.com/search?q=portrait+of+yi+sun+shin&biw=1536&bih=748&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMI37K8ztjFyAIVCjQ-Ch2V1QI5#tbm=isch&q=Yi+Sun+Shin&imgdii=zOBWIcYhsQrs6M%3A%3BzOBWIcYhsQrs6M%3A%3BERFzaf3aulsk-M%3A&imgrc=zOBWIcYhsQrs6M%3A

You should add this image as a profile.

We can also upload drama image of Yi Sun Shin https://www.google.com/search?q=portrait+of+yi+sun+shin&biw=1536&bih=748&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMI37K8ztjFyAIVCjQ-Ch2V1QI5#tbm=isch&q=%EB%B6%88%EB%A9%B8%EC%9D%98+%EC%9D%B4%EC%88%9C%EC%8B%A0&imgrc=VO-eXw4Y9PMxWM%3A — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klee146 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2015

Please delete the parts of the section on Battle of Myeongnyang as it factualizes certain aspects of the battle that has no proof/is being disputed.

1.

  "Myeongnyang Strait had currents so powerful that ships could only enter safely one by one, of which the Japanese were unaware."

• The strait is 292m across at the narrowest point. The record of the battle itself in the Admiral's journal describes multiple warships engaged in battle and entire Joseon navy making a all out offense near the end of the battle. Unless a evidence can be provided, it appears "ships could only enter safely one by one" is a vast exaggeration by whoever first wrote the article.
• Please refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Myeongnyang#Second_phase_.28south_flowing_current.29

2.

  "The strait was sufficiently narrow that steel defensive chains could be laid across its entire width, which Admiral Yi could use to restrict the Japanese fleet's movements."
  "The steel chains were tightened to restrict movement of the Japanese ships, and the Japanese found themselves unable to fight effectively against the superior Joseon archers and cannoneers."

• The usage of chains across the strait is under much dispute, and as a matter of fact, it is mostly regarded to be a fiction now a days. The earliest records that claim chains were used to trap the Japanese navy against the current are dated 150 years AFTER the battle. In contrast, the records from those who lived through the war (including the journal of Admiral Yi himself which contains very detailed records of the battle) mentions nothing of chains.
• Additionaly, the above claim "The strait was sufficiently narrow" is a vast understatement.

1. The strait is 293m across at the narrowest point - considering the chains had to be installed securely on either ends, the chain would had to be WELL OVER 300m. The chain would have to be not only be 300m+ in length, but also THICK, STRONG chains that would not snap against pressure of a large bulk of Japanese navy being swept against it by strong currents. It is very unlikely that 300m+ of chains of such specification/limited usage would been avaiable for collection on demand in 1500s Korea - and it is equally unlikely Joseon Navy would've been able to collect such a large amount of metal and forge the chains of required specification in time.
2. Not only the chain itself, the either end of the chain also had to be VERY securely fixed to hold against the massive force being applying against it by the Japanese fleet. This is not a small operation, especially if you consider this took place in 1500s. The Admiral Yi's own journal states the decision to make a stand at the strait was made on 15th of September 1597, and he relocated his base from Byeokpa to Jeonra Woosooyeong. This is THE DAY BEFORE THE BATTLE. Which sugguests even if Adrmiral Yi had to prepared the steel chains of sufficient length and durability without even deciding where the battle would be held, he still had to carry out the operation of secreuly installing the chain across the strait, relocating his forces to a new base and preparing for the battle in ONE DAY.

• Please refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Myeongnyang#Chain_or_iron_rope_across_the_strait

3.

  "The unpredictable current immediately wreaked havoc on the Japanese; many of their ships collided with each other or sank outright while sailing through this strait. And the Japanese ships that made it through were met by 13 Joseon warships obscured by the shadows of the surrounding hills, ready with archer and cannon fire."

• According to the Admiral Yi's journal, the above is NOT an accurate description of the battle. He recorded that his flag ship held the strait on its own at the start of the battle as the other ship commanders were scared and stayed as far as 2km away from the strait. Two more ships eventually joined the battle after the Admiral raised the rallying flag, and the three ships help off the Japanese fleet trying to board them. Witnessing the three ships sink multiple Japanese ships, the rest of the Joseon navy picked up the courage and joined the battle.
• In the journal, there are no mentions of "unpredictable current immediately wreaked havoc on the Japanese" at the start of the battle. If anything, Japanese naval tactics were much focused on boarding the enemy ships - and at the start of the battle the currents were towards the Joseon Navy and would've been only helpful for the Japanese.

4.

  "What they did not know was that they were being lured into a masterfully devised trap."

• If you consider the above points, asides from the fact that the Japanese navy got lured into a narrow strait with strong currents where they could not take advantage of their vastly larger navy, it really isn't much of a "masterfully devised trap." Rather, the admiral Yi himself admitted in his journal that the victory was a "miracle". The above sentence sounds to narrative for a Wiki anyway...

(As a matter of fact, its probably the best if the entire heading got replaced with a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Myeongnyang.)

Kjl1009 (talk) 12:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. As this involves a large removal, I'd rather see a discussion first. Mdann52 (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2016

Admiral Yi died after a stray bullet was shot.

70.104.136.241 (talk) 15:43, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:22, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

New cultural/media reference

Hello, new editor here so can't make this change myself.

Yi Sun-sin also appears in the historical strategy game Europa Universalis IV (which has its own Wiki page and is as notable as the Civilization series), as an admiral with the highest possible in-game statistics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Endcrohns (talk • contribs) 14:56, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Also, may as well take the opportunity to learn something, so quick question about this too:

How does one go about establishing verification of a cultural or media listing like the one I mention above? It assuredly has not been written about in any source deemed reliable, but I can't provide original research documenting it like a screenshot or something either? Please advise on how to properly do this if someone could, thanks much. Endcrohns (talk) 18:34, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Request for correcting the spelling

112.216.146.130 (talk) 12:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Mr. or Ms. writer. I'm Min-uk Heo,living in South Korea. I'm interested in English, thereby I'm searching Internet with my friends so as to find errors of Korean history. I'm so grateful of the fact that you are interested in Korean history and described it very well. But while I was reading your writing, I found an error of the spelling. You wrote as 'Yi Sun-Sin', but it's wrong. It should be corrected to 'Yi Sun-Shin'. Maybe you could think it is such a small thing, but I think the small correction will make big effect to many people who wants to learn about Yi Sun-Shin. It'll be my appreciation if you correct this, then please let everybody know the truth! Thank you for reading my letter, and I hope you have a nice day.

Not done: Hello, the article's English spelling comes from the romanization of Korean, that is, the translation from Hangul into the Latin alphabet. I'm not sure which convention was used to arrive at the Sun-sin spelling but I'm sure it is one that is regularly used across Wikipedia. But the proper forum for your request is Wikipedia:Requested moves. Thanks, —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:32, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2018

Citation needed under 'Modern depictions' on 'Video games'. The official site with 'yi sun-shin' is here: https://web.mobilelegends.com/hero/detail-30?country=en Redjenka (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Left and Right Provincial Navies

Could somebody please clarify (either here or in some article section to which we can wikilink, perhaps with the help of a suitable anchor) what is meant by Left and Right Provincial Navies, for the benefit of those of us readers who are not experts on the 16th century Korean Navy. It also seems to confuse some of our editors here (I assume the current wikilinking of 'Left Jeolla Province' is an instance of this). It especially matters at this time, when the Japanese invasion of Korea article is on our front page. Tlhslobus (talk) 02:02, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Actually, no need to worry, as I've now found an explanation online, which I can add as a footnote where needed. Tlhslobus (talk) 02:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

"Lee Soon-shin" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lee Soon-shin. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 07:10, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2019

In this entry, it is stated that Admiral Togo praised Yi Sun-sin. However, the only historic source that exists to back up this claim is a South Korean one. There are no historical Japanese sources that provide concrete proof that Yi Sun-sin was praised by Togo. In Japan, the claim that Togo praised Yi Sun-sin and belittled Admiral Nelson is considered as something that is nothing more than a myth. The Wikipedia entry about Yi Sun-sin is greatly misleading and it contains lots of toxic nationalism and Korean right-winged bias. I would like to request some parts of this Wikipedia article be changed to have more objectivity and less nationalism and speculation. The 2 things that need to be changed immediately are 1.the nationalistic and biased tone of this article and 2.the section that states that Togo praised Yi. Additionally, there is no Japanese evidence to suggest that Yi is looked up to by Japanese people. If Japanese people look up to Yi, then please show a Japanese source that says so, not a South Korean one. Joe Blake1234556 (talk) 01:32, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done We use sources from all around the world. South Korean sources are just as valid as Japaneese ones. Not doing that would make the article biased. See also WP:NOENG.--Snaevar (talk) 16:10, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2020

In the section: "Reactions by Joseon government", there is a spelling error in the second paragraph, last sentence. "Materiel" should be spelled "Material". Atthedropofahat (talk) 23:41, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. See wikt:materiel. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2020

223.62.22.6 (talk) 00:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

He is died in November 19th, 1598

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. GoingBatty (talk) 00:55, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Is it 12 or 13 warships?

During my lecture of this article as old as me, I noticed that in the part "Battle of Myeongnyang" there was a contradiction in the first paragraph:

Admiral Yi located the 13 warships and rallied the 200 surviving sailors. Together with his flagship, Admiral Yi's entire fleet totaled 13 ships, none of which were turtle ships. In the belief that the Joseon fleet would never be restorable, King Seonjo, sent an edict to Admiral Yi to abandon the warships and take his men to join the ground forces under General Gwon Yul. Admiral Yi responded with a letter written "...your servant still doth have twelve warships under his command and he is still alive, that the enemy shall never be safe in the West Sea (the Yellow Sea being the closest body of water to Hanseong)." Does anyone knows which quantity was it, 12 or 13?

Nobody has a clear answer for this. Some say 12 but sone say 13. But it is possible to say 'about 13'

TijuanaHelper22 (talk) 06:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)TijuanaHelper22TijuanaHelper22 (talk) 06:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Caption on Drawing of Admiral

The caption below the drawing of the Admiral gives the text that is on the drawing, but has 8 characters while the drawing has 7. The character 陳 has been added. Could someone explain this?

EinkomischerKauz (talk) 02:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 September 2021

Add Admiral Yi-Sun-Sin's campaign from Empire:Dawn of the Modern World to the video game section Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empires:_Dawn_of_the_Modern_World#:~:text=Admiral%20Yi%20Sun-Sin%27s%20defense%20of%20Korea%20against%20Japanese%20invasion%20in%20the%20early%20modern%20period%3B https://empireearth.fandom.com/wiki/Empires:_Dawn_of_the_Modern_World#:~:text=The%20campaign%20of,Sun-sin%27s%20life.

Blackwatch94 (talk) 05:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Gushing

This article contains completely inappropriate gushing about Yi, among other problems. Many lines either consciously or unconsciously describe him as "great" and explicitly boast about his fame, charisma, and achievements. I've marked it with a cleanup template but can't help right now. IdiosyncraticLawyer (talk) 18:27, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Video Games

Theres one more video game that has yi sun sin as a playable character - Empires Dawn of the Modern World, possibly omitted in the main article 05:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Sources

It has been said at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea that this article is in an horrible state. @User:Toobigtokale. In my opinion the topmost problem is the poor quality of the sourcing. Using a better *set* of sources is a prerequisite for anything else. Please look at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yi_Sun-sin&oldid=1184272416. Best regards, Pldx1 (talk) 11:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

"Duke Chungmu"

Using "duke" to refer to Yi Sun-Sin's posthumous title is incorrect. While the 公(gong) in 忠武公(Chung-mu-gong) does mean duke, attaching the character to a posthumous name would make it have a different meaning. When 公 is attached to a posthumous title, art name, etc., it's just used as an honorific to speak highly of the person given that title (typically either old, high status, or dead). Therefore I think that all references to "Duke Chungmu" should be changed to an alternative, such as "Lord" instead. If no one objects, I will make this change in the next week or so. Eclma01 (talk) 01:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Article needs revision

Lot of poor prose and unsourced writing for a person of this stature. This article needs a thorough rewrite. Fortunately I think there's a good amount of writing on Yi in English, so even non Korean speakers can contribute. 59.5.79.44 (talk) 11:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)