Talk:History of South Korea

Untitled

Google search turns up this same text at http://www.sigmainstitute.com/koreanonline/history.shtml and http://www.korea.net/issue/sn/snsummit/snsummit_01-42.html . Both are listed as copyrighted; the first one references the second site as the source ("courtesy of...") --Brion

I've removed the text in question for the time being. 211.34.107.148, please see Wikipedia:Copyrights; we can only use material from outside sources if it's public domain or we have explicit permission from the copyright holder to use it and release it under the GFDL license. (If by chance you are the copyright holder, it's considered polite to make a note of that fact so we don't freak out. ;) --Brion 11:09 Aug 16, 2002 (PDT)

Figure for Gwangju massacre

Most estimates I have seen regarding the number of civillian deaths during the Gwangju massacre range from 150 to about 250... I haven`t seen any sources claiming thousands of deaths. Please cite a source for these figures. I`m not saying that it is impossible that thousands were killed, but I think you should cite a source, as the majority of pages on the internet cite a figure of around 200. --Ce garcon 07:37, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This is senseless. A reference was provided on Talk:Gwangju showing an investigation that concluded 207 deaths. No credible source giving "thousands" exists. Shorne and Ruy Lopez both know this, they've both read that talk page, and they both know the NPOV policy; they are just trolling at this point and should be treated as vandals. VeryVerily 08:04, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I`ve added references to both statistics. We don@t actually have to embrace one figure; we might as well refer to both statistics, and let readers make up their own mind. --Ce garcon 08:31, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is an article about the history of South Korea, not a debate on every minor point. This issue is out of scope, and since there is no credible source which gives a figure of more than a thousand, the inclusion of it here is unwarranted. The use of "official" is also misleading, as it buries the fact that it was an after-the-fact investigation by the civilian government, not the government which carried it out. Or do you want to include the "contemporary" official figure of 30 to 40? This matter is resolved in Korea, the investigations are over, the bodies are buried, and the number of ID'd dead is 207. VeryVerily 09:10, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

OK, i added mention of the fact that the 207 figure is from a post-dictatorship investigation. --Ce garcon 03:18, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I refer you again to my point about no credible source, rather than the one point you did consider. And you are reverting dates in conformity with Wikipedia style, and erasing the segway to the later government. VeryVerily 03:21, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ruy Lopez has cited a BBC article which is the source of the 1000~2000 figure. --Ce garcon 03:27, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

He cited a BBC article which refers to this absurd figure. That's not what I'd call a "source". VeryVerily 03:50, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The figure is still in dispute. The BBC is not the only website which mentions this figure. I see no reason not to include other estimates. --Ce garcon 03:59, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Because this is an article on the history of South Korea, not the Gwangju massacre. If it were the latter listing every Joe's estimate would have it splace, but a broad history article "at least 200" will do, as that is a solid lower bound consistent with the best estimates. VeryVerily 06:17, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Added full range of death toll estimates. --Ce garcon 04:05, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think in this case VerilyVerily`s compromise is actually quite reasonable. --Ce garcon 08:16, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"A few tens" is not idiomatic English. It should be "a few dozen".

Also, the article should mention that the "full investigation" was by the government. I'll accept Ce garçon's version if this change is made. Shorne 08:23, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Everyone satisfied now? --Ce garcon 08:31, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am. Shorne 08:39, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Please restore the page. VeryVerily, as usual, is ruining it. Shorne 10:37, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Collaboration

This article is the July Collaboration of the Month for WP:Korea. Let's make this article shine! Suggestions welcome.

Please sign your comments, when was the above written? Anyhow, added needed references and citations, and images from Wikipedia commons. Would greatly appreciate if someone could refine the writing more. Nuyos (talk) 03:11, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Name change?

The article is exclusively about the political history of S. Korea - should the article's title be changed to reflect this?—Wasabe3543 21:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This article *should* contain information on the social, economic, and cultural aspects of the country's history as well... if you have sourced information on these topics, please do be bold and add it. Cheers, -- Visviva 05:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, it's not my forte, just seemed odd that the article was entirely focused on politics.—Wasabe3543 15:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Just read this article and made the same observation, four years later. There must be someone with a knowledge of South Korea who can help out?! 78.105.207.148 (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

+1. I was going to open a section about this : This article seems is about the political history of South Korea. Economy, health, demographic, technological, societal changes are barely visible, while they are the actual deep changes going on. More important than who preside the country. --Yug (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

History book about South Korea?

Can anyone point me to a good book (in English) about the general history of South Korea?

I have a history degree but I don't know much about South Korea. So a academic introduction would be good, as long as it reads like a book and not a textbook (I heard bad things about George Buzo's book)

I looked at the bibliography in this article, but everything seems to be general histories of Korea as a whole. I wanted to know about how S Korea developed as a society... dictatorship to democracy, but how, why etc? Thanks! Ilikeredirects (talk) 14:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on History of South Korea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023061108/http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/043/66/IMG/NR004366.pdf?OpenElement to http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/043/66/IMG/NR004366.pdf?OpenElement
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205000352/http://asianinfo.org/asianinfo/korea/history.htm to http://www.asianinfo.org/asianinfo/korea/history.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080405061222/http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/kowar/kowar.htm to http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/kowar/kowar.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110828114228/http://www.koreasociety.org/korean_studies/lectures/history_of_korea.html to http://www.koreasociety.org/korean_studies/lectures/history_of_korea.html/

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://100.naver.com/100.nhn?docid=726618
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722214501/http://www.usfk.mil/usfk/Uploads/130/US-ROKStatusofForcesAgreement_1966-67.pdf to http://www.usfk.mil/usfk/Uploads/130/US-ROKStatusofForcesAgreement_1966-67.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100725001227/http://seoulsummit.kr/eng/main.g20?menu_seq=main to http://seoulsummit.kr/eng/main.g20?menu_seq=main

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Lee Hyun-Hee

This sources is cited several times, but does not appear in the list of references. Could somebody please add it? Thanks. Theonemacduff (talk) 05:06, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

File nominated for deletion on commons

The file c:File:Emblem of the Government of the Republic of Korea.svg used in this article has been nominated for deletion on Commons 
Reason: I think time has come to finish the long-forgotten (or ignored) question: Is [Template:M used with invalid code 'tl'. See documentation.]KOGL free?  I doubt its freeness, based on the fact that we do not have definite answer for Template talk:KOGL#Free?. To save your click...  [Template:M used with invalid code 'talkquote'. See documentation.]In case the terms change we (on Wikimedia projects) can still reuse it under the licensing conditions at the time of upload here. But in that case we must stop distributing the file to others because we are not a licensor (only a reuser) and our scope of redistributing entirely relies on the licensing of the source. If the source licensing is not a public license (but a private license contract concluded when the licensee downloads the file from the official source) then it is not free. Its revocable and fails c:Commons:Project scope#Required licensing terms.  We, as of 2018, do not have a final answer for this. And this means, we have to delete these images, including some VIs and FPs. 
Deletion request: link 

Message automatically deposited by a robot - -Harideepan (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Provisional Government

However, these interim bodies lacked any independent authority or de jure sovereignty, which was still held by the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea based in China, but U.S. leaders chose to ignore its legitimacy, partly because of its communist alignment.

OK, this has two citations, but who decided that the Provisional Government had "independent authority or de jure sovereignty"??? And who said the Provisional Government had a "communist alignment"??? Kim Koo certainly didn't.What do the sources actually say?--Jack Upland (talk) 03:17, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

The citations were added in 2010, after the text. Regarding the communist alignment, it appears there is confusion between the Provisional Government and the People's Republic of Korea, which was socialist.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:51, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I have confirmed that the citations were referring to the People's Republic of Korea and its People's Committees, which was a nascent provisional government, not the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea based in China. I will amend the text.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:18, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Seoul Arts Center.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

So what about before 1945?!

Why does the article states that the history of South Korea starts since Japan's surrounder in 1945?! Just because the country's current borders formed in 1945 that doesn't mean its history started at that year! So what about Buyeo, Gogoryeo, Josen, etc empires?! Those empires also were established on the same soil. Aminabzz (talk) 15:44, 18 August 2023 (UTC)