Talk:Freedom of religion in North Korea

US POV

I'm not disputing the lack of religious freedom in the DPRK, however, I think that it is still inappropriate to have the US Government as the sole source for this article (in fact, it appears that most of the article was actually originally authored by the US Government). Comments?? --AD^talk 18:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I would agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.51.239.98 (talk) 23:54, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I also agree, it looks although an assumption has been made that the DPRK has no religious freedom, this looks incorrect and i beleive this is US anti-Korean propoganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.112.218 (talk) 22:58, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe the state atheism article has references and citations for North Korea's state-sanctioned atheism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism#North_Korea Xan81 (talk) 09:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

"This report"?

From the second para:

There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom by the atheist state Government during the period covered by this report

Since this is not a report, it looks as though someone has lifted a block of text verbatim from somewhere. If it's a US Federal work, then copyright is presumably not a problem, but it still needs rewording rather than simply copying in, and still needs citing where appropriate. Loganberry (Talk) 02:35, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Done! :) --Againme (talk) 19:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Lack of citations

I've noticed there is only one citation, which is the only source. Either all of the information was pulled from that one source, in which case other sources should be used to add to the page, or it's missing citations for a lot of the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.222.46 (talk) 05:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:00, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

is reported to see

North Corea is reported to exist.Xx236 (talk) 07:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

POV again

I will reinsert a POV tag. This is a completely unbalanced article. It is all about Christianity, with only one sentence about other religions, even though Christians only make up 1.7% of North Koreans. There is no recognition that Chondoists have a party in the Korean People's Assembly. The sources used are very one-sided, as pointed out above. There are also quite weak. The 2013 South Korean article about people executed for possession of Bibles is dubious, as it is associated with the supposed execution of Hyon Song-wol, who is alive and well. The claim that "North Korea sees organised religious activity as a potential challenge to the leadership" is based on a line in a BBC report about an arrested US citizen.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:49, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Biased

This article is heavily biased and seems to be entirely written by a 12 year old. Please remove this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:A00:4F80:498D:6003:4C02:E808 (talk) 14:20, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

We do not delete articles for those reasons. We improve them up to standard. Can you point out what exactly you think is biased? What exactly makes you think it was "written by a 12-year-old"? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:39, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Globalization and Neutrality

This article, as pointed out in many comments above, and also by the frequent blanking of the page or parts of it, was extremely biased in giving only a Western (mainly US and UK) fundamentalist Christian perspective on this issue. This is why I added the Globalize tag. For example, the only sources for most of the claims are from Christian or US/UK sources, which many times are opinion pieces, or reference only South Korea's government's position, or those of NK defectors, who obviously will be very biased and/or unreliable. There is no information whatsoever about NK's official or unofficial responses, and no primary or North Korean sources at all (I added the reference to the NK constitution). I assume this is why the editor above said it was written by a 12 year old, because it seems to be a sermon that would be preached, not an unbiased encyclopedia article at all. This is a huge problem with almost every article on Wikipedia (at least in English) relating to North Korea. If someone could find a better source than the Youtube video I added as a source of opposing information, that would help alot, since I don't have more time to look for one now. Youtube videos may be the only sources of this info at this time anyways. There were also contradictions in the article I pointed out. Eric Schiefelbein (talk) 06:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Christian POV

Reading this article, one might come away with the impression that Christianity is the only religion in the world. Are other religions persecuted in the same way? 73.247.223.73 (talk) 22:04, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Biased

Please improve the article to get out bias. It seems like this article was fully made to bash north korea Στάλιν και παραλλαγή (talk) 19:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC)