Talk:Goguryeo tombs

Number of tombes

It is true the there are 70 tombs of Koguryo kingdom in present day North Korea, but only 30 of these tombs belong to the world heritage site. Beacuse of this I have fixed the number in the article. 84.229.3.98 (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Possible useful information in duplicate article

A duplicate article which was sent to AfD and eventually redirected here, might contain some useful (albeit unsourced) information that might be merged into this article by an editor with knowledge of the subject. You can find the other article in its page history. The AfD discussion can be found here. --Reinoutr (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 19 March 2018

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

The result of the move request was: moved. See a fairly strong consensus in this debate to maintain the "G", lose the "Complex of" and use lowercase for "tombs, so this article will be renamed Goguryeo tombs. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  00:41, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

---

Complex of Goguryeo Tombs → Complex of Koguryo Tombs Koguryo tombs – UNESCO uses "Complex of Koguryo Tombs". #1

And "Complex of Koguryo Tombs" in Google gets 20,000 results.

• Wikipedia blocked:
  • "Complex of Goguryeo Tombs" -wikipedia: 4,500 results
  • "Complex of Koguryo Tombs" -wikipedia: 20,000 results

Thanks. -- Garam (talk) 13:20, 19 March 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:48, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

(I changed my mind. Please see "Comment" below.) --Garam (talk) 07:24, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Moving this down to the next line prevents it from being relisted by the proposer. See WP:RM#Relisting: "The decision to relist a discussion is best left to uninvolved experienced editors upon considering, but declining, to close the discussion" (emphasis added). Dekimasuよ! 22:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose. Wikipedia uses Goguryeo elsewhere, and this shouldn't be moved unless that is. UNESCO's chosen name doesn't necessarily correlate with what we call sites. UNESCO says this is in "South Phyongan Province, Nampho, South Hwangghae Province," whereas we say it's at Nampo and South Pyongan Province and South Hwanghae Province. Dekimasuよ! 15:42, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

• Well, but this artilce is about a "World Heritage Site" of UNESCO. This means, it is also international and official name. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Nonsense - see below. The UNESCO names are often best ignored, as here. Johnbod (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

• Neutral, but while we are looking at it, the "Complex of" should probably be dropped. It's only there because of UNESCO, who are often a rather bad guide as far as names go, because their material tends never to go through the hands of a native English-speaker. Most archaeological "complexes" do not carry this at the start of their names in this way, in RS or in WP. Johnbod (talk) 16:00, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

• Well, sometimes it clearly has a wrong word, but also it is proper names, like "Democracy Party". So, I think we should respect that names. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 08:25, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

• Hmm. Let's be honest, your English isn't that good, is it? Johnbod (talk) 00:22, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

• I don't understand why you say it to me in this issue. And my point is, "Democracy Party" (not "Democratic Party") is not the common name about democratic parties in English language. --Garam (talk) 12:26, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

• Propose Koguryo Tombs, based on:
• "koguryo Tombs", About 70,800 results, and gbooks about 8,760
• "goguryeo tombs", About 46,100 results, and gbooks about 3,530.

-Both ones without the "complex" get far higher hits. "Complex of Koguryo Tombs" only gets 1,660 on gbooks. Johnbod (talk) 00:27, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

• Koguryo tombs or Goguryeo tombs (without the capped Tomb, as Johnbod's links show) would be OK. If you want a proper name, then the Unesco name makes sense: Complex of Koguryo Tombs; the other "Complex" title is probably just a transliteration of that back to the alternate spelling. Dicklyon (talk) 02:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
• Comment: Umm, I changed my mind after reading other options. So, I think that it's okay to change article name to "Koguryo tombs", as per user Dicklyon's opinion. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 12:26, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

I would support "Goguryeo tombs" or "Goguryeo murals," and still oppose all changes to the spelling of Goguryeo per WP:CONSISTENCY and the titles and contents of articles fundamentally related to this one, including Anak Tomb No. 3, Tomb of the General, Goguryeo art, and Goguryeo, as well as consistency with Three Kingdoms of Korea, Goguryeo language, Goguryeo controversies, etc. There are currently only two articles on Wikipedia that contain "Koguryo": the stub Koguryo Wooden Bridge (a North Korean official title?) and another article dubiously following UNESCO, Capital Cities and Tombs of the Ancient Koguryo Kingdom. Dekimasuよ! 16:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

and "Goguryeo Tombs"? It should be a proper name to my mind. I don't follow Dicklyon's logic. Johnbod (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Your book search link shows that in sources "tombs" is usually lowercase. See ngrams, too. Dicklyon (talk) 18:49, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Loads are things like "Goguryeo tomb murals" and "in Goguryeo tombs". Johnbod (talk) 00:05, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

@Dekimasu: I think it is similar to the relationship between Busan and Battle of Pusan Perimeter. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 13:11, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose the original proposal per User:Dekimasu, i.e. WP:CONSISTENCY, but support a move to Goguryeo tombs. —  AjaxSmack  01:17, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
• Ok, will support Goguryeo tombs. Johnbod (talk) 01:29, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.