Talk:Pyongyang: Difference between revisions

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia'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. 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 WikiProject North Korea. 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. Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

Template:WP1.0

Why is it written P'yongyang, not Pyongyang or Pyeongyang? Is it according to the official romanization of NK? I guess we need to set some rules about how to name and write korean entries in alphabet. My suggestion is to use the official S. Korean romanization. We can discuss this issue in Wikipedia Talk:Wikipedians/South Korea or should we open a talk page for this. soax

There is a complete lack of logic in using the southern system for the Romanization of northern words. The two Koreas have distinctly different Romanization systems. Using the southern system for northern words is not only inaccurate and sloppy – it’s lazy. They have a system that works, why would it not be used here?

Every Single Map I ahve ever seen Puts P'yongyang so leave it on this page.

I guess it's safe to follow how south korean government write the name. In www.korea.net you can easily find that that name is written as Pyongyang, not P'y^ongyang. P'y^ongyang is the transcription according to the older SK standard, I guess. But the SK standard changed a few years and foreign media haven't had time and energy to changed the false romanization. And for me, a korean, these "^o" is neither comfortable nor clear. It's important for wikipedia to follow the usage of majority, but it's also important to provide new and correct standard to the majority. (And I've written something about this theme in NK map talk page, too.) soax 18:27 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)

Very well if someone explains why its wrong and I myself know that i know nothing really about the subject enough, i wil accept it. - fonzy

The different romanisations used in the two Koreas as well as wikipedia conventions regarding them are explained in the Naming Conventions link above. There is no "true" or "false" romanisation, by the way—there are two official standards at the moment, and no single romanisation scheme could ever be the absolute, true solution. The name is written P'yŏngyang according to the North Korean version of the McCune-Reischauer romanisation, so that is the headline, with the South Korean romanisation (Pyeongyang) in parentheses. The form Pyongyang without the diacritics, which has near universal currency in English, is where the page is located. I find nothing wrong with that. English often simplifies forms that contain diacritical marks, and most of the time it's silly fussing about those. See for example L'viv, for which the most common English name is Lviv (without the apostrophe). --Iceager 11:29, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Pyongchang shouldn't redirect here....Pyongchang is in South Korea, it's a different city. Adam Bishop 23:26 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Pyongyang

n : capital of North Korea and an industrial center; "Pyongyang is Korea's oldest city but little of its history has been preserved"

It's because ㅍ can be romanized as p' if you use the McCune-Reischauer romanization or as p if you use the revised romanization. Today the revised version is recommended. --TonyM ^{ｷﾀ━( °∀° )━ｯ!!} 17:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen map(s?) of Pyongyang that label 樂浪 as "Rangnang": [1] [2]

And two pages that mark its Hangul as 낙랑, not 락랑: [3] [4]

(Sorry in all of the pages you do have to wade through the rest of the place names / the rest of the text a bit to find it)

And surely enough 낙랑 would end up being pronounced as Rangnang after you shift the r/n and nasalise the ㄱ. Do people think that is actually correct and what we have on the page is wrong? We have Rakrang-guyŏk (락랑구역; 樂浪區域) at the moment. - KittySaturn 05:17, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your suggestion or question was. Do you mean the article should say Rangnang instead of Rakrang? I agree that I'd like to see some sources on the Rakrang pronunciation, and for Amrokkang, while we're at it. I have had a look into SEM'S Reference Grammar of Korean, but I haven't yet found any references on Standard North Korean pronunciation of -ㄱㄹ- and -ㅂㄹ-. The Yale romanisation table says -ngn- and -mn-, but I guess the table simply leaves remarks about NK pronunciation to other sections. – Wikipeditor 13:49, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Could it even be Rangrang? Looking at 독립 tongrip, anything seems possible.

Rangrang confirmed. Wikipeditor

I have reworded the section that claimed that there were no private cars... it's simply not true. Go and have a look, or actually, simply look at the picture already in the article. Wikipedia should not confuse propaganda with facts. Metro0 23:30, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hmm... Just because cars can be seen, does that mean they are privately owned? One thing would be to say there WHERE no cars, but how can be substansiate that there are no PRIVATE cars? --Konstantin 15:42, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I would have to agree with Konstantin there...The city is obviously renown for its mass propaganda, and you see a very controlled section of it. Most likely governement officials or a cheap trick to make the city appear less cold and menacing than it already is.

There is definitely private vehicle ownership in N.Korea but they belong to government officials and other people who can pull very very much weight with the Government, also there is cars in ownership of people who are there doing humanitarian work there, a I read once a joke went that once they have to leave the city at the order of the N.Korea government the handful of cars that would go back onto the market would create a saturated market from the expolsion of for sale cars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.59.66.123 (talk) 16:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

is it me, or are the external links totally out of place for an encyclopedia entry? one of them talks about how to get male prostitutes in its "night life" section and another is some lame soccer team's trip pictures...half of which are, well, them playing soccer.

welcome to Wikipedia...so much more than an encyclopedia... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.70.86.163 (talk) 08:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh god thats hilarious...Night life.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.192.228.161 (talk) 09:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God, that image is awful. Even at full resolution, it's hard to see anything. Can anybody find something better? Please? -- Visviva 04:06, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The pyramid is fake in the image, it was never finished and is just cement. --75.72.145.241 (talk) 18:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the DPRK spells it Pyongyang, (as well as being the most common representation I've seen in English), so it should probably be moved back. Also, it looks like this has been discussed before an the consensus was for Pyongyang.

The state-run news agency KCNA always spells it Pyongyang as far as I can see. You can search KCNA archives to verify this. --Alexxx1 ^{(talk/contribs)} 12:39, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can people make up their mind and clean up the mix of Phyŏngyang, Phyongyang and P'yŏngyang? If “P. Directly Governed City” is the name's translation into English, shouldn't it contain the English form (Pyongyang)? Is it spelled “Phyŏngyang Directly Governed City” in an English-language source from North Korea? Wikipeditor 17:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The user who edited the names to be "Phyongyang", saying that it is "in accordance with North Korean standard romanization", is wrong. Pyongyang is never spelt "Phyongyang", as an exception to the ㅍ = Ph rule. All official sources write "Pyongyang" only. There is therefore no reason to use either Phyŏngyang or Phyongyang. -- 203.88.224.196 06:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would anybody oppose a move from (now) P'yŏngyang back to Pyongyang? Wikipeditor 12:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not I. For one thing, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean) specifies that we should use the title without diacritics or apostrophes (although that's something of an anachronism). For another, North Korea itself (or at least KCNA) uses "Pyongyang" and not "P'yŏngyang." -- Visviva 13:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, move it back to Pyongyang. Bsheppard 18:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC) ;)[reply]

Done. Wikipeditor 09:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the Pyongyang Chronicles link from the External Links section since there hardly seems to be any true proof that it's a legitimate news website (it doesn't even cover the recent nuclear test) and it was added by an anonymous contributor who seems to vandalize. I've done some web searching in trying to determine any legitimacy to the site and I haven't come up with much. I've started this discussion in case anyone disagrees. Ando228 21:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's clearly a joke, but a lot of people seem to be taken in by it. It's likely to be added to External Links again in the future, and we should just remove it again. --Reuben 20:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why does Heijo redirect here? The word does not exist in the article except for the notice. --Golbez 09:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's under "historic names": During the Japanese occupation, it was also known as Heijō, which is simply the Japanese reading of the Chinese characters 平壌 the name Pyongyang consists of. --Reuben 19:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Durr, I was searching for "Heijo", not with a macron. Thanks. --Golbez 13:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC

Just wanted to inform you that, according to the German Wikipedia, Pyongyang has 3.871.335 inhabitants as of January 1st, 2007. Source is given on the German article page. I know that all the numbers of inhabitants are only numbers that come directly from the North Korean government which don't have to be the right ones. Though, the value from the year 1993 is neither "confirmed" and very, very outdated.

toben

I'm curious as to why we're using "prelimanary results" from the 2008 census. Have they still not been tallied?Mk5384 (talk) 01:12, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Chinese commandary of Lelang Jun formed after the fall of Gojoseon was not in Pyongyang. First of all, the Chinese relics from Pyongyang are from the Later Han (25 AD - 220 AD) era, not from the Former Han era. I have not heard of a single Chinese relic from the Former Han era from the area of Pyongyang. See my article at http://knol.google.com/k/byeongju-park/gojoseon/2zvfgrgyend5c/5. What was around Pyongyang was Lelang-guk, not Lelang Jun. Lelang originally referred to the names of two rivers around Beijing. Lelang Jun would stretch over 1,000 miles if the capital of the Lelang Commandery was located in Pyongyang, and become as big as ~ 1/2 of the rest of China. This did not happen. The Lelang Commandery was located around the Liaohe river, the location of the last remnant of Gojoseon. Lelang-guk did not stretch to the area around Beijing, either. The territory that a successful expedition of Later Han took from the Koreans was controlled by a vassal state called Lelang-guk. The communication lines between Lelang-guk and China were soon disrupted and history books report that China had difficulty sending their appointee to Lelang (which refers to Lelang-guk in this case). The close tie with China between Lelang-guk and Later Han and its successors introduced many Chinese artifacts into the Pyongyang area, some of which are found as relics in the present day. At any rate, the confusion between Lelang Jun (Lelang Commandery) and Lelang-guk must be avoided. While Lelang Jun lasted around the Liaohe river for some time, Lelang Jun was never present in the Korean peninsula. The old theory that Lelang Jun was placed in the Korean peninsula turned out to be a fabrication when it was discovered that a monument had been carried across the Yellow Sea to be planted near Pyongyang and pottery carrying the seals from the Former Han era turned out to be fakes. What historians did find, however, was plenty of relics showing Later Han influence around Pyongyang. The difference between Later Han period and Former Han period makes a big difference because the lack of relics in the Pyongyang area proves that Wimanjoseon was located outside of the Korean peninsula. Youngbjp (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are no strong evidence about existence of Lelang in Pyongyang, these Chinese relics came from Goguryeo's tombs, these relics were simply trading items. No Chinese religious or ceremonial artifacts and relics were discovered in North Korea, suggesting these Lelang theory is wrong. Japanese historians during occupational period have introduced and manipulated ancient Korean history in order to claimed on Korea. --Korsentry 02:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KoreanSentry (talk • contribs)

Promotion by North Korea alleging that Pyongyang has been the capital of Gojoseon has to be carefully considered. While it is possible that Pyongyang was indeed a capital of Gojoseon (Gojoseon was a confederate system with three large kingdoms), what Gojoseon was not was the capital of Wimanjoseon, the longest-lasting part of Gojoseon that fell to the forces of Former Han. Hwandangogi, a Korean history book, places the capital of Gojoseon around the Liaohe river. Based on recent archeological discovery, which unearthed more relics from the Liaohe river region than from Pyongyang, it is more probable that the most important cultural center of Gojoseon was located around the Lioahe river. Yes, Pyongyang was an important local center of Gojoseon, but that does not guarantee that "the capital" of Gojoseon was in Pyongyang. Youngbjp (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this theory was introduced by Japanese scholars in attempt to reduce the Korean history, by studying distribution of Dolmens and Liaoning bronze dagger culture, we can rough fully suggested that Gojoseon started from Liaodong & Southern Manchuria then spread to Korean peninsula. --Korsentry 02:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KoreanSentry (talk • contribs)

This article contains 2 such links;

These links are coded like this: [[:ko:아사달|신시]] and [[:ko:낙랑|낙랑]]

They appear like this:

신시 and 낙랑

This seems to have caused problems for one user (reported on the help desk); I suspect that this is not a 'standard' way of doing things, but I don't know the conventions used here - if you agree that they should be changed or removed, please make the edits. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  11:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems quite unlikely that the alleged official slogan of Pyongyang would have a foreign loanword like "dainamik" in it. I don't even think this word is part of the North Korean vocabulary. Not only does "dainamik rodong" never appear in North Korean websites like KCNA or Naenara, even the single word dainamik ("다이나믹") is not there. Nor do South Korean sources which write about North Korea (Open Radio, Daily NK, etc.) mention this phrase. I only see it in bulletin boards and other user-generated content sites (like the Korean-language version of Uncyclopedia). cab (talk) 07:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like some vandal inserted this as a joke last week. Then anti-vandal patrollers kept reverting him when he came back to remove his own joke: 121.168.203.167 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) ... cab (talk) 07:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

50,000 and 70,000 capacity are not the biggest stadiums in the world? Who wrote this shit?

On Google Earth 39.062 N and 125.677 E there is a very big rectangular building almost 1/2 kilometer wide. What is this building? Who or what arm of the North Korean government owns it? What is it used for? What adminstrative district is it in? ... A building so large as this, it has got to be a landmark. Mr Accountable (talk) 00:47, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's one of their nuclear weapons factories-- Someone35  18:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The history section has no mention of when the city was besieged and occupied during the Japanese invasion of Korea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Pyongyang_%281592%29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.123.24 (talk) 06:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? 173.228.85.18 (talk) 07:30, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It says that as of today (21 September 2011) that Baghdad, Iraq is one of Pyongyang's sister cities, but I cannot find a source that verifies this. So, can someone clarify this for me?

Rickington (talk) 20:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All pictures about this city are modern/early modern ones (That is, under Japanese and Communist rule). Although most of the city was razed during Korean War, aren't there any surviving paintings and picture about Pyongyang during Joseon Dynasty?

For a city of 4000 years of history, there is a shameful shortage of historical pictures.

(In traditional Korean Paintings) Old maps and/or Panorama paintings of Pyongyang, The paintings of famous people from Pyongyang of Joseon Dynasty/Events happened in Pyongyang during Joseon Dynasty,

(In Postcards and Black&White photos taken by Japanese Adventurers and Western Missionaries) The city walls, the gates, civilian and government houses during Joseon Dynasty, Lives of Yangban ruling class and ordinary civilians.

(In Modern photos) unearthed artifacts in Pyongyang. imaginary painting & models based on historical records.

PhilaSiti (talk) 17:41, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that western people aren't allowed to enter North Korea, aren't they? And North Koreans can't upload it themselves since their internet is heavily censored-- Someone35  18:40, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• North Korea is not closed off to Westerners - media, business travelers and political figures go there all the time. Note the reference to regular rail service to Moscow and Beijing - not all Wikipedians are American. Visitors are tightly controlled and accompanied, which only means the recent images seen in this article are of places the visitors were allowed to see. 68.146.80.110 (talk) 15:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A press release from the Korea Central News Agency dated December 20 2011 (in English) is titled "At Least Five Million Pyongyangites Mourn Demise of Kim Jong Il". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.241.47 (talk) 23:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Given precedent, I'd take any figures coming out at this time with a grain of salt. They could well be counting former residents living elsewhere in NK. Also, it's not uncommon for census numbers and claimed numbers to not jive, even in the west. 68.146.80.110 (talk) 16:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]