Talk:China–South Korea relations

Diplomatic links

Why isn't the establishment of formal diplomatic links between Seoul and Beijing in the early 1990s mentioned in the article? Michael G. Davis 00:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you can add it? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion: Should historical relations between China and Korea be included?

The dispute is over whether historical background information on relations between China and Korea, such as Ming China's involvement in the Imjin War, and the Korean government-in-exile's activities in China, be included. --PCPP (talk) 13:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I really don't understand why you insist to keep adding that bit. You do understand this page is about South Korea correct? Also, contrary to your edit summary, it's not consistent with other similar articles at all. See Republic of China – South Korea relations and People's Republic of China – North Korea relations. —KaraKamilia (talk) 13:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the historical background information still should be included, as China and Korea had dramatic interactions prior to the 20th century, and the page also mentioned textbook controversies over historical recognitions, providing it context. For example, the article on US-UK relations does mention colonization of the Americas before the US was even founded, not just 20th century relations. While both China and Korea are both currently divided, it doesn't mean that these issues shouldn't be covered.--PCPP (talk) 13:44, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

And I also take offence over your claims that I'm engaging in "nationalistic chest thumping" and "reeks of self-gratification", per WP:NPA--PCPP (talk) 13:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

That is a different political entity. If readers want to know about ancient historical interactions, they could visit the history articles for each of the respective countries. Cheers. —KaraKamilia (talk) 13:49, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with PCPP. Though in a modern context the relations pertain to three countries, China and Korea had long interactions. Background information is helpful to readers as there are historical issues between two countries. But probably more cultural information on ancient times should be added. Oda Mari (talk) 17:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

And readers are free to browse the History of Korea to find out about ancient diplomatic events when Korea was just one country. —KaraKamilia (talk) 17:32, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Of course the historical background information should be included. Attitudes and old habits don't instantly reset with titular regime change; historical information can help illuminate the grievances, good relations, or ambiguous feelings in the present. Quigley (talk) 22:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

(RFC) Background information should be included as long as it is supported by reliable sources and can be verified. However, because the article is about specific sovereign government relations an emphasis must be placed on South Korea and China. Events that are outside of those parameters should be moved to History of Korea or History of China etc. Wikifan12345 (talk) 00:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

China (PRC) and South Korea is modern countries, so only modern historical background should be included, besides there was so many foreign dynasties in China.--KSentry(talk) 00:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I must object to the removal of the background info, which amounts to censorship. There are much relevant background info such as WWII and the Korean War that's not mentioned here. While I agree that the majority of the article should focus on PRC-ROK relations, a little summarized background history can't hurt, particularly since China and Korea had interacted for centuries prior. Why should a reader have to browse through generic articles like History of China and History of Korea to find the relevant info? There is even a mention of controversies over Goguryeo, so I don't see why historical info should be removed.--PCPP (talk) 12:16, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

And some other examples:

• People's Republic of China–Japan relations mentions the Imjin War and conflicts between Qing China and Meiji Japan
• China – United Kingdom relations mentions events such as the Opium Wars and Boxer Rebellion
• People's Republic of China – France relations mentions 17th century French missionaries and the Sino-French War
• Sino-American relations mentions Chinese workers in America and the Open Door Policy

These precedents all mentioned prior history before the PRC was even founded, so why shouldn't this article?--PCPP (talk) 12:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I would strongly support including some brief and carefully curated historical background, but only with the strict proviso that this background info is skillfully selected from and points back to a parent article like History of China or History of Korea. Background information could be important for understanding the topic, but if you do it, do it right. --NickDupree (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Taiwan–North Korea relations

Should a similar article shall be created? However North Korea's relations with Taiwan would be hostile, thus calling the Taiwan as a US-puppet state and prefers relations with PR China. Even North Korea does not recognize nether Taiwan nor South Korea (which North Korea claims as part of it's own) as states. 94.180.84.35 (talk) 10:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Date incorrect?

The article states that diplomatic relations were formally established in June 1986, but it cites a broken NYTimes link and if I look this up online, I get a working NYTimes link that states diplomatic relations were actually re-established in 1992. [1] I'll be fixing that :3 F4U (they/it) 18:07, 17 July 2023 (UTC)