Talk:Korean War: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:05, 30 May 2012 editPeanutbutterjellyTaco (talk \| contribs)1,421 editsm →Kim Il-sung's trip to China on April 1975.← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:05, 7 June 2012 edit undo99.99.250.118 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
			UNLOCK THIS PAGE !!! bad data says that the vietnam country was divided = mixes up the wars !!1

	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|maxarchivesize = 150K		\|maxarchivesize = 150K

Revision as of 01:05, 7 June 2012

UNLOCK THIS PAGE !!! bad data says that the vietnam country was divided = mixes up the wars !!1

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Korean War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Korean War was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 9, 2007	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
September 11, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed

Current status: Former good article nominee

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

China Top‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Korea Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Korean military history task force.

East Asia (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Socialism High‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Soviet Union High‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Russia: History / Military High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / Asian / South Pacific / British / Canadian / Chinese / European / French / Korean / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	Asian military history task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force
	British military history task force
	Canadian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	Korean military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on 10 dates. June 25, 2004, September 15, 2004, June 25, 2005, September 15, 2005, June 25, 2006, July 27, 2006, September 15, 2006, June 25, 2007, June 25, 2010, and June 25, 2011

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Diannaa, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on March 31, 2010.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Archives

Archive 1 (Dec 2006–April 2007)
Archive 2 (April-June 2007)
Archive 3 (June-July 2007)
Archive 4 (August 2007)
Archive 5 (Aug-Sept 2007)
Archive 6 (September 2007-July 2008)
Archive 7 (June 2008-May 2010)
Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Heading montage

File:Korean War Montage.jpg

Clockwise, from top: UN forces reach the 38th parallel; F-86 Sabre fighter aircraft in Korean combat; Incheon harbour, starting point of the Battle of Inchon; Chinese soldiers welcomed home; 1st. Lt. Baldomero Lopez, USMC, over the top of the Incheon seawall.

There are a grand total 0 images representing the Communist forces in the montage... In a war with two clear combatants one side is totally unrepresented. Why? --99.232.170.57 (talk) 02:55, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The main problem is the lack of images. There are many free-use photos available of and by Americans from the war, but we have very few from the Chinese/North Korean side. Here is the former montage with its caption for comparison; it has one image of Chinese soldiers. The images are lower resolution. The three presently available montages are viewable on the Commons: commons:Category:Montages of the Korean War -- Dianna (talk) 05:12, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Soviet War Crimes

The handwritten document in Russian was discovered by the Woodrow Wilson International Center, a U.S. think tank devoted to national security, and translated into English. “The immoral behavior of our servicemen is horrible. Regardless of rank, they indulge in looting, violence and misconduct every day here and there. They continue to do so since few have been punished,” the document said.

Certainly explains why so many “Americans” depicted in DPKR atrocity propaganda posters look decidedly Slavic.

There seems to be much more along these lines and should be added to the article. Ungläubige (talk) 16:31, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

This DongA news article is about Soviet red army's misconducts in 1945, when they occupied northern half of the peninsular. Korean War broke out in 1950, thus it's not their war crimes during the war. PBJT (talk) 22:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Truman's deployment of Troops into Korea

President Truman actually first deployed troops in June 26. This is a very important point, considering the U.N. Security Resolution did not request assistance until June 27. Please add this to the page (it is locked for me).

http://books.google.com/books?id=CwN6RATLAk0C&pg=PA174&lpg=PA174&dq=%22some+american+action,+said+to+be+in+support+of+the+resolution+of+june+27%22&source=bl&ots=ASOSWC5KZj&sig=fggjCTXgT35zhIiucLKppjxgeNE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aGyvT7e-Gqa50AH0h-miDA&ved=0CFMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22some%20american%20action%2C%20said%20to%20be%20in%20support%20of%20the%20resolution%20of%20june%2027%22&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.180.55.228 (talk) 08:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Truman originally sent the troops in, I believe, to assist in the evacuation of US nationals. Their purpose there wasn't to fight an armed conflict until a few days later. —Ed! 17:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Figures presented for UN forces

I'd just like to question the figures supplied for the various UN contingents. Certainly, this isn't my area of expertise but all the ones I have looked into (Belgian, Luxembourg and Greek in particular) are totally out to the tune of several hundred.

The figures that I have for the Belgian contingent is: 3,171 soldiers served in Korea 1951-1955 and 78 Luxembourgers attached to the contingent - quite a long way from the 900 and 44 cited.

Are the figures cited just random guesses or is there some logic to them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.96.12.182 (talk) 16:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

It's a common mistake for people to include just the largest number of troops in the country at one time instead of the total number of troops from that country who served for the duration of the conflict. If you've got better sources than what's provided, by all means include them. —Ed! 17:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

What is the current consensus? A few month ago it was display peak troop strength only, now it is back to total strength? Jim101 (talk) 18:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't think I was a part of that consensus. I tend to believe the total strength is better for the article on the overall war, but if something else has been established, that's fine. —Ed! 19:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

If I may add my opinion to this discussion, it is natural that people question the cited source. This Military History Institute website of South Korea's Ministry of Defense is the single cited source without proper translation of the Korean text. I'm not questioning the reliability of the source. Even in the cited source, it shows that total number of Belgian solders who participated during the course of war was 3,498. Total of 83 Luxembourgers solders participated in the Korean War. These figures (3,498 and 83) are close to the IP user's source (3,171 and 78).

As for the question of "Total participants of the war" vs. "Maximum level of troops", I have no idea which one represent better. But Vietnam War is using "Maximum level of troops", and I think we should be consistent with the practice. --- PBJT (talk) 03:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I modified the peak Chinese strength since that is the consensus we are going... Jim101 (talk) 14:27, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Either way, I think it's definitely important to include something about the total number in the article somewhere, as that's going to be something a lot of people will want to know. —Ed! 14:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, then, let's start a section called something like the "scale of conflict" in the "characteristics" section. Although this may take a bit of collaborative effort. I know for fact that I will add the following statement in the section:

For the People's Republic of China, the conflict has been viewed as a matter of survival for both China and the newly established communist government. As such, about 73 percent of Chinese infantry forces, 67 percent of Chinese artillery forces, 100 percent of Chinese armored forces and 52 percent of Chinese air forces were deployed in Korea at one point or another, alongside 600,000 civilian laborers – in total more than three million civilian and military personnel. China had also consumed 5.6 million tons of war materiel, 399 aircraft and 12,916 vehicles for its war efforts. About a third of the Chinese government's annual budget was spent on the military between 1950–53, totaling 10 billion RMB by the war's end. All in all, the Korean War was the largest foreign war in Chinese military history, despite the fact that no declaration of war ever existed between China and United Nations forces.

If anybody else can provide the same kind of information for at least North Korea, South Korea, United States and the Commonwealth, then I think we can piece together the section quite nicely. Jim101 (talk) 16:03, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Total strength: I would imagine that the article uses "total dead," not dead during a 24-hour period or something, so that needs to be offset by "total strength," IMO. Student7 (talk) 18:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

First Sentence

Since its admitted that this war is still under cease fire, would it be correct to change the firs sentence to:

The Korean War is a war between the Republic of Korea (supported primarily by the United States of America, with contributions from allied nations under the aegis of the United Nations) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (supported by the People's Republic of China, with military and material aid from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.74.9 (talk) 01:30, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

It is a war between the North and South, with U.S. providing support to the South, and the other parties of Korean War like China, Russia (Soviet Union), and United Nations forces are not engaged in the war anymore. So, was is accurate, and we don't need to change the first sentence. --- PBJT (talk) 03:16, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Kim Il-sung's trip to China on April 1975.

A newly reclassified diplomatic cable of East Germany shows that Kim Il-sung asked for China's aid for another military conflict (likely a second Korean War) in the Peninsular. Source: East German Documents on Kim Il Sung’s April 1975 Trip to Beijing, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Could this document included somewhere in the article? North Korea emphasized a peaceful dialogue between North and South during this periods, and they intentionally provoked at the Joint Security Area a year later (Axe murder incident on August 1976). Any suggestions? --- PBJT (talk) 17:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Be bold, but not reckless. Document's itself should not be directly quoted/paraphrased per WP:PSTS, but a summary of Dr. Ria Chae's findings is extremely helpful. Jim101 (talk) 23:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Many Thanks for your advice, Jim101! I'll try to include the contents later. Best, --- PBJT (talk) 05:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Categories: