Help Wikitravel grow by contributing to an article! Learn how.

Difference between revisions of "Talk:North Korea"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
(Jargonistical Posturing)
(why visit NK)
Line 55: Line 55:
  
 
Someone likes to change the "Government Type" periodically.  In some perverse way, their changes may be true.  But the purpose of Wikitravel is to provide useful information to travellers.  A change which obscures the Very Special nature of the North Korean government is not helpful.  "Stalinist dictatorship" works best, I think, because it punches the reader in the face with a clear and unambigous description about what to expect.  While it is more complicated than that, this short phrase gets the reader as close as any short phrase is going to get them to understanding.  And then they can read the text for the petty details. -- [[User:Cjensen|Colin]] 22:16, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
 
Someone likes to change the "Government Type" periodically.  In some perverse way, their changes may be true.  But the purpose of Wikitravel is to provide useful information to travellers.  A change which obscures the Very Special nature of the North Korean government is not helpful.  "Stalinist dictatorship" works best, I think, because it punches the reader in the face with a clear and unambigous description about what to expect.  While it is more complicated than that, this short phrase gets the reader as close as any short phrase is going to get them to understanding.  And then they can read the text for the petty details. -- [[User:Cjensen|Colin]] 22:16, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
 +
 +
== why visit NK ==
 +
 +
This is a messed up place. Who would want to go to North Korea other than spies or journalists? Seriously people...  --[[User:Member|Member]] 15:22, 29 June 2006 (EDT)

Revision as of 19:26, 29 June 2006

For future reference the Wikitravel:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:North Korea/CIA World Factbook 2002 import.

The last update of North Korea was by myself. Computer took it upon itself to log out while I was writing. Professorbiscuit 22:10, 9 Aug 2004 (EDT)

Contents

Respect

The page for North Korea doesn't have a Respect section, while that for the South does. Could a more educated Wikitraveller who is more knowledgeable on North Korea, see whether the things mentioned in the Respect section of South Korea are also valid for the North? Eyeflash 16:58, 17 Nov 2005 (EST)


Israel

Removed 'Israel' from the list of countries whose citizens are generally not allowed to travel into NK. Currently, this rule applies only to US and SK citizens. note: NK does not recognize dual nationality.

This article in the Wall Street Journal disagrees — "North Korea has told travel companies it won't grant visas to journalists, Korean-Americans and Israelis.". What's your source? Jpatokal 20:59, 14 March 2006 (EST)

-- I am a photojournalist travelling to NK tomorrow. I was told that US, SK and japanese nationals cannot apply. I was OK. I am not Israeli but since israel was not mentioned in the correspondance with NK officials, I can conclude that israeli are allowed.

Fairness

I made some changes that were reverted with the motivation that wikitravel is not supposed to be NPOV but just fair and honest. I think this article is very coloured by a specific political point of view. I live in Sweden and here freedom of religion for swedes (immigrants had freedom of religion before that) was instituted in 1951. Would anyone say that the porpose of the state church and other state supported religious groups back then existed to "provide illusion of religious freedom"? Why then should this said about North Korea?

Because it's true about North Korea?
To expand on this, North Korea doesn't have legal religious activity of any kind. There are some show churches and such that foreign visitors are occasionally trotted out to, but the same visitors have confirmed that eg. the "Christian priests" don't know even the basics of their supposed religion. Jpatokal 14:01, 13 June 2006 (EDT)
No, the Wikitravel of 1950 would say about Sweden that Swedes did not have religious freedom and immigrants did. There would be no need to use the word "illusion" because as I understand from you, there wasn't even the illusion of religious freedom then. — Ravikiran 10:12, 13 June 2006 (EDT)
Comparisons only go so far. My only point was that a system that seems fair in a country like Sweden is considered as evil when it occurs in Norh Korea. I am not a supporter of the North Korean government, Juche or communism - but painting them pitch black on all accounts is unnecessary. I think they should be judged the same way any other government is judged. Using inflammatory language against them serves no purpose. 82.99.36.162 06:34, 14 June 2006 (EDT)
I wouldn't consider the system in the Sweden of 1950 fair either. More pertinently, the question is not whether the system is fair or not. The question is whether the statement "Swedes do not have religious freedom" would have been a fair comment in the Wikitravel article of 1950. The answer is, yes, it would have been. — Ravikiran 06:48, 14 June 2006 (EDT)

I believe that the democrats and republicans in the US are essentially the same and that the bi-party system of the US is undemocratic since it effectively excludes all opposition parties. Does that mean that the article about the US should say that there are two political parties to "provide illusion of political freedom"? Well, obviously not.

I really can't see how my edit was not in the spirit of "fairness".

As for the Korean war. How can it be fair to call the actions of the north "overrunning" and the south/US "uniting". North korea winning the war would also have been a uniting, and the US conquering all of Korea would have been an overrunning of the North. Why is the positive word associated with the US and the negative with the north? 82.99.36.46 08:32, 13 June 2006 (EDT)

I'm not accusing you of being "unfair", just pointing out that there was nothing unfair (and therefore nothing inappropriate) about the material you changed. We don't want Wikitravel to read like an encyclopedia (someone's already doing that, next domain over), so editing something for a strictly NPOV is not generally consistent with our goals. Wikitravel is a guide. We're here to give our assessments about places... just honest and fair ones. If what's there now isn't fair – if Kim Jong-il really is doing his best to let people practise whatever they believe – by all means fix it. But don't neuter it just for the sake of NPOV, because that's not one of our goals. - Todd VerBeek 09:32, 13 June 2006 (EDT)
I rewrote the Korean War section, hopefully it's a bit better now. However, I think it's fair to place some blame on the DPRK, as they were the ones who invaded... Jpatokal 14:01, 13 June 2006 (EDT)
O bit off topic: Well, you could also see it as Koreans fighting for their national right of self determination against a foreign aggressor fighting to defend its economic and geopolitical interest. It could also be mentioned that the US could use UN only because the soviets were boycotting it. The american revolution showed the importance of the right to self determination, yet the US has been the greatest enemy of self determination in countries like Korea. 82.99.36.162 06:34, 14 June 2006 (EDT)
Again, this isn't Wikipedia. Let's stick to what happened, which isn't subject to much dispute, and leave the whys and wherefores to historians. Jpatokal 10:09, 14 June 2006 (EDT)


People

Not very much is to say about them, since you are not allowed to talk to them without the permission and supervison of your tour guide. ... okay..

Jargonistical Posturing

Someone likes to change the "Government Type" periodically. In some perverse way, their changes may be true. But the purpose of Wikitravel is to provide useful information to travellers. A change which obscures the Very Special nature of the North Korean government is not helpful. "Stalinist dictatorship" works best, I think, because it punches the reader in the face with a clear and unambigous description about what to expect. While it is more complicated than that, this short phrase gets the reader as close as any short phrase is going to get them to understanding. And then they can read the text for the petty details. -- Colin 22:16, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

why visit NK

This is a messed up place. Who would want to go to North Korea other than spies or journalists? Seriously people... --Member 15:22, 29 June 2006 (EDT)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages