Talk:Joseon Dynasty
|
|
|
| Contents |
Update
This entire article is being rewritten, and will be reposted with new information by May 8th. As well there will be hyperlinks to sub-articles on: Joseon dynasty art, Joseon dynasty politics, Joseon dynasty figures, and Joseon dynasty foreign relations, as well as links to Joseon dynasty Confucianism. Apologies to all for some initial chaos in laying this down. Once the format is laid out, it will be followed in dynasties before and after, and clarity given. --POofYS 15:26, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
Earlier comments
Extensive fact checking has revealed accurate information on Yi Seok from at least 10 magazine/internet sources.
Fact checking of article verified by AFP article collated with Wall Street Journal and Korea Times and Washington Times articles amongst the many.
Fact checking verified by:
A good article. Historically the Joseon Dynasty entry though she be linked to other hyperlinked articles.
This article has no focus. It seems to dwell on Yi Seok and nothing else.
worst article ever
The former article about Joseon Dynasty was one of the worst Wiki article I've ever seen. It contained numerous errors and it was based on Chinese view of the history. Worst of all, Yi Suk's story was over represented though he has almost no importance in Joseon Dynasty. So I deleted the article except the years of exsitence of the dynasty. - 14/02/2005 noury
Request for Noury to indicate academic credentials/expertise in Korean history
Response: Please give your credentials as a historian, or an expert on the history of Korea, especially dynastic Joseon history. Otherwise the article goes back up, you made no note of any historical fallacies or errors, and have no prove of any element being inaccurate. The Cambridge History of Korea is still being completed, and you are invited to add your comments to this, as the man who wrote the Joseon Dynasty article is one of its contributors.
Attempting to Wikify a bit
Guidance needed if somehow I make it look worse! --Aika 15:26, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
Total Revision Requested
Much of the information provided is inaccurate, from the origion of Joseon to the "royal family in 2004." I will just make a few points. First of all, this article is written way too much in sino-centric view. Although Chinese interfered with Joseon in international affairs, Joseon was completely independent kingdom with peculiar culture. Kicking Mongolians out of Korea and founding Joseon were done solely by Koreans. It is also extremely unnecessary and disrespectful to explain things in Joseon in terms of similar events in China. Second of all, Mongols never ruled Korea. Mongols successfully invaded Korea but did not annexed it. Instead, Goryu became "little brother" of Mongol and paid tributes and sent women to Mongol. Korean kings still ruled Korea, and Goryu dynasty never stopped before Joseon. Third of all, due to its corruption during Goryu, buddhism was discouraged during Joseon. Finally, claiming that royal family is in symbolic role (such as in Japan) is a pitifully weak argument. Korean government never formally recognized the existence and validity of Joseon imperial family after Japanese colonial period. Although the descendants still live today, they are not royal and not given any special status. Of course, they do not live in imperial palace. Making such a bold point and providing no more evidence than writings in the meida is just unacceptable. Whoever the writer is, the newspaper cannot be the verification of your argument. Please, if you want to keep the "imperial family in 2004," show evidence from scholarly writing by prominent KOREAN historian or politician, or a sample of writing from Korean governmental documents.
To the writer: The part about Yi-Suk, as another person has already said, is irrelevant with the history of Joseon. The newspaper articles you mentioned are no more than "keeping Korean values that are lost today." It's about a "movement", in which Yi-Suk is a symbolic figure because he is the last blood of Korean imperial family, not "re-establishment" Again, "re-establishment" has much more to do with the government, and Korean government has not said anything about it. And if you meant "movement," you forgot the fact that this is about HISTORY, but not about CURRENT ISSUES ON THE SUBJECT.
Thus, "Yi-Suk has finally regained his dignity and respect in keeping the Korean royal traditions alive in 2004." is serious exaggeration of fact to the point that it is not true anymore.
Is this a copyright violation or viceversa? =
See http://joseon-dynasty.biography.ms/ is nearly word for word
- Looks as if parts of the article here were picked up off the net and put into another article. Wiki is public domain, so this has happened all over - and articles keeping on changing and getting modified - it happens. Nothing can be done about this because of the GNU licence. Thanks for spotting it. With hope as this article is corrected and fact-checked, the duplicates out there will mutate to accuracy as well. --POofYS 15:26, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
Disputed Beginnings section
I removed this note from the article section:
- "Note: This section is historically inaccurate and gramatically problematic. For example, there was no said-alliance with China, the Mongols never really annexed Korea, and the word superlative is used inappropriately. Furthermore, Yi Seongye's coup was not a Chinese backed coup-- in fact, Ming-Joseon relations would be strained until the early 15th Cenutyr. Someone please fix this article. I will when I have time if no one does it. --thevizier 21:07, 5 May 2005 (UTC)"
I am mostly trying to copyedit and improve grammar here, though I am also restating or removing peacocks and weasels. This dispute should continue to be discussed, however. Demi T/C 22:25, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
Additional comments from article
I have removed this comment from the article:
- Note: Half of what is in this section has no direct relevance to the topic at hand. It should be under the Russo-Japanese War if anything. This does not explain the reasons for the decline of the Joseon dynasty at all- --thevizier 21:05, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
It's a pertinent comment, but it belongs here, on the talk page. Demi T/C 23:59, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
The Yi Seok section
I removed this section from the article. This material can be covered in Yi Seok. The following comment really belonged on the talk page, not in the article text, so I preserve it here:
- (Note that there has been debate here on succession issues, as in all monarchy based sites in the 20th century and now; there are still claims of Stuart succession invalidating Queen Elizabeth and her heirs; as well as similar battles fought on other websites; a link will be added on this forthcoming setting forth arguments on succession issues from a variety of historians and legalists.) (The discussion below is extraordinarily unbalanced, and blatantly wrong in a number of places. The Korean Crown Prince and Head of Household is Yi Ku, not his cousin Yi Seok. Yi Ku is the son of the previous Crown Prince, Yi Wu and his wife Yi Pangja. Yi Ku has not named a successor, so as yet there is no heir. While Yi Seok's efforts at cultural preservation are praiseworthy and worthwhile, his claims to be the heir are not really controversial - they're simply wrong. Reference: http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Korea/korea9.htm)
I don't know who made this comment. Some of this section referred to the family, not Yi Seok specifically, so I left it, but have not yet edited or attempted to improve on it. Demi T/C 00:05, 2005 May 6 (UTC)
Demi - the parenthetic note starting "(The discussion below..." is mine. Not sure how to email you, so I'll note here. Without getting into specifics of legitimacy, it appears that Yi Seok has hired an agent or some such, since there's been a recent proliferation of articles around the net, very similar in content as someone noted above, but factually distorted. --Danstr 20:17, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
- Right--I wanted to preserve the commentary for future editors, thus moving it to talk without deleting it. I check my watched pages occasionally, but you can usually get good results leaving a message on my talk page. Demi T/C 00:06, 2005 May 13 (UTC)
A Comment
Joseon rulers did not refer to themselves as Emperors until 1894, after the establishment of the T'ae Han Cheguk. Calling Sejong, Sonjo, Yongjo, etc Emperors is inappropriate and is not practiced in Korean historiography.--68.160.255.149 15:30, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
.
After the Invasion and de facto annexation of Korea by Japanes in 1910, the Princes and Princesses of Imperial Family were forced to leave for Japan to be educated and to be married. The Heir to the Throne, Imperial Crown Prince Uimin, married Princess Yi Bang-ja nee Nashimoto, and had two sons Princes Yi Jin and Yi Gu. His brother, Imperial Prince Ui, actually elder by birth and seniority, had thirteen sons and nine daughters from various wives and concubines.
The Crown Prince lost his status in Japan at the end of the World War II, and returned to Korea in 1963 after an invitation by Republican Government. He suffered stroke as the plane landed in Seoul and was rushed to a hospital. He never recovered and passed away in 1970. His brother, Imperial Prince Ui passed away in 1955. The death of Crown Princess Yi Bang-ja in 1989 marked an effective end to the Imperial Family before 1910.
Today, it is widely acknowledged that Prince Yi Gu is the Head of the Imperial Family as the son of the Crown Prince, though some dissidents point out his Japanese ancestry from his mother's sides. Those people supported the claim of Prince Yi Seok, the son of Imperial Prince Ui and the only male member of the Imperial Family living in Korea, though his position as his father's 11th son makes his claim flimsy. By the rules of Primogeniture, the direct successor of the Imperial legacy, whether bypassing Prince Yi Gu or not, appears to be Prince Yi Chong, the son of Prince Yi Woo, the second son of Imperial Prince Ui. This is because Prince Yi Kun, the elder brother of Prince Yi Woo, took upon a Japanese Citizenship in 1947 and is therefore considered to be unsuitable for the Korean heritage.
- Gojong
- Sunjong
- Ui
- Kun
- Wu
- Chong
- Seok
- Ten other sons
- Nine daughters
- Uimin
- Jin
- Gu
?
This article needs to be wikified.
Proposed move
Joseon seems to have information in it not strictly related to the dynasty but to the use of the term in a more general sense; however, I don't know enough about it to really judge. What is the motivation for the proposed move? Demi T/C 22:49, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
- As of now, the move has not yet been listed on Requested moves; the move proposal was made by 69.212.70.138. Demi T/C 22:58, 2005 May 27 (UTC)