View source for Talk:Sea of Japan

{{Controversial}}
{{Notice|image=Laff_alert.svg|1=An entry from '''East Sea of Korea''' appeared on Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars|Lamest edit wars ever]] in the '''[[Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars#Ethnic feuds|Ethnic feuds]]''' column on [[January 19]], [[2007]].}}
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}}
{{DYK talk|18 October|2010|entry=... that according to a legend, the '''[[Kamome Island|Heishi rock]]''' ''(pictured)'' represents the God of the '''[[East Sea of Korea]]'''?}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Oceans|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject East Asia|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Korea|importance=Top|skgeo=yes}}
{{WikiProject Geography|importance=mid}}
}}
{{high-traffic|date=14 February 2008|site=2channel|url=http://society6.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/korea/1201489641/|page=talk}}

{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Sea of Japan/Archive index|mask=Talk:Sea of Japan/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config|archiveheader = {{aan}}|maxarchivesize = 200K|counter = 4|minthreadsleft = 4|minthreadstoarchive = 1|algo = old(30d)|archive = Talk:Sea of Japan/Archive %(counter)d}}
{{Archive box|auto=yes|search=yes|age=30|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}}
__TOC__
<!-- Please type all comments and discussions below this line. Please post new sections at the bottom of the page. -->

== A Closer Look at the East Sea Naming Controversy ==

The preference for the term "East Sea" over "Sea of Japan" is rooted in a complex interplay of historical, cultural, and geopolitical considerations. The term, "East Sea," is advocated since it holds historical and cultural significance predating the colonial era, emphasizing a more inclusive regional perspective. Countries like South Korea view the use of "East Sea" as a means to assert their national identity and diminish the dominance of the "Sea of Japan" name, which is linked to a contentious colonial history. The parallel lies in the potential to evoke historical grievances and sensitivity; just as certain war criminal flags, such as Nazi flag and rising sun flag, may carry a contentious historical legacy, the naming of geographical features can be a source of geopolitical tension, reflecting deep-seated historical issues. Both situations highlights the need for nuanced discussions and diplomatic approaches to navigate complex historical narratives and foster understanding among nations. The choice of terminology is also seen as a way to navigate geopolitical sensitivities in the region, reducing potential tensions associated with historical disputes. Proponents suggest that adopting "East Sea" contributes to a more balanced and neutral international approach to the naming of this body of water, reflecting diverse perspectives and acknowledging the complexity of historical narratives. In essence, the naming debate transcends mere semantics, becoming a symbolic representation of identity, diplomacy, and historical consciousness in East Asia. [[Special:Contributions/73.132.144.47|73.132.144.47]] ([[User talk:73.132.144.47|talk]]) 15:04, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

:It is not the job of Wikipedia to make judgment calls on historical and cultural consciousness and sensitivity. These choices are made by the reliable sources which Wikipedia relies on. Wikipedia's job is to reflect the most common usage among reliable sources. In essence, your argument is with those reliable sources, not with Wikipedia. [[User:Westwind273|Westwind273]] ([[User talk:Westwind273|talk]]) 11:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
::Yup. [[User:Masterhatch|Masterhatch]] ([[User talk:Masterhatch|talk]]) 13:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
::It's not the job of Wikipedia to make judgement calls, but that doesn't mean Wikipedia should turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed by Imperial Japan. I mean, Wikipedia doesn't stand with the ''Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei''(the Nazi Party), nor does it stand with terrorist groups like the Taliban. In fact, Wikipedia articles openly condemn them. 
::When we talk about Imperial Japan, we talk about the sex slave issues, various massacres, human experiments, and other various atrocities that Japan has committed during World War ll. Yes, it's not the job of Wikipedia to make judgement calls, but there's a certain line between keeping it politically neutral and upholding a symbol of violence, crime, and injustice.  [[Special:Contributions/112.165.73.185|112.165.73.185]] ([[User talk:112.165.73.185|talk]]) 14:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
:::The English Wikipedia has its own guidelines ([[WP:COMMONNAME]]) and it is very unlikely the name of this article will change unless the usage of "East Sea" exceeds that of "Sea of Japan" on reliable secondary sources outside of the enwiki. If you truly believe that the name "Sea of Japan" must be banned for its association with Japan's war crimes then arguing on a Wikipedia talk page is a waste of time. Try convincing the US department of state and Encyclopedia Britannica first. [[User:00101984hjw|00101984hjw]] ([[User talk:00101984hjw|talk]]) 00:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2024 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Sea of Japan|answered=yes}}
The East Sea of Korea is a sea that includes Ulleungdo and of course, Dokdo. The real Sea of Japan is a little sea more east from the East Sea of Korea. The real Sea of Japan includes battleship Island and part of Gushu. [[Special:Contributions/117.110.115.27|117.110.115.27]] ([[User talk:117.110.115.27|talk]]) 01:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:McYeee|McYeee]] ([[User talk:McYeee|talk]]) 02:30, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

== About my writing ==

The sea of Japan was widely used before Korea was colonized by japan is a Japan's claims.
Why are you deleting it?
[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PU3lnm8JtfU PU3lnm8JtfU]

And i can't see any korea's claim that east sea was internationally used. [[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 09:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

:The article is not based on conflicting claims, but on the sources currently used in the article. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 09:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::I have no idea what you are saying You should talk about my first talk [[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 10:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I'm done with this [[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 12:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

=== East sea ===
I just want to make sure one thing. I don't know what the basis for using the East Sea internationally before the advent of the Sea of Japan. [[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 11:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:Apologies, but it is difficult for me to understand what point you are trying to make. Please consider refraining from editing the English Wikipedia given your level of English proficiency seems somewhat poor. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 11:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I just want to make sure one thing. Artical says that East Sea internationally used before the Sea of Japan widely use. I can find that east sea used in korea 2000years ago but i cant fine that east sea used internationally do you have any research of it? [[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 11:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:now? [[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 12:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:: Don't edit your comments after others have already replied, either. I've fixed this for you, though. To answer your question: that's not what the article says. The article says that Japan claims both names were in use before the occupation of Korea. It does not state whether the names were actually used during that time, only that Japan says they were. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 12:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Do you have any link? Because i can't found it any were. They says that it was only used in korea
:::And also sorry because im not used to wiki site i dont now the rule accurately [[User:211.213.219.100|211.213.219.100]] ([[User talk:211.213.219.100|talk]]) 12:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::::There are sources in the article. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 13:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::I cant find it [[Special:Contributions/211.213.219.100|211.213.219.100]] ([[User talk:211.213.219.100|talk]]) 13:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::I'm sorry to hear that. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 13:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Stop insisting for writting down evidence-free writings. If there is the only one simple thing you just have to do is just copy and paste it at the talk why cant you do that may i understand that you have no research to prove it?  [[Special:Contributions/211.213.219.100|211.213.219.100]] ([[User talk:211.213.219.100|talk]]) 13:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::::It's in the article. If you actually cared about whether a source exists, you would've located it immediately. Since you're doing this instead, and given you're almost certainly also {{IP|117.110.115.27}}, that makes it abundantly clear you don't care about what was or was not the case historically, or what sources there are or are not—you just want to argue and create more headaches for others. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 13:20, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::No its not.
:::::::::I think you are the one who create more headaches for others.
:::::::::Just give me the link. What you are saying [[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 13:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:::look at the link below and press the pdf at 3rd page 1st sentence it says <Western maps used a variety of names for the sea through the 18th century, including "Sea of Korea," "Oriental Sea" and "Sea of China" in addi-tion Sea of Japan"> there isnt east sea.[https://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/maritime/japan/index.html]https://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/maritime/japan/index.html 

:::  [https://www.mofa.go.jp/a_o/na/page1we_000113.html]https://www.mofa.go.jp/a_o/na/page1we_000113.html this one also this is a Japan's research of data on which names are used in what proportionsand and Esat sea is 0%.[[User:Qwert0617|Qwert0617]] ([[User talk:Qwert0617|talk]]) 07:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

== Why isn't "East Sea" mentioned in the lead? ==

Heads up, I'm not an excessive nationalist; I wrote [[WP:SEAOFJAPAN]] to reaffirm the use of "Sea of Japan" and not "East Sea".

With that out of the way, for this edit comment [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sea_of_Japan&diff=prev&oldid=1270464837] I don't think the given rationale is valid for this article. Why is "East Sea" not mentioned in the lead, given that it's such a significant term? Is there a MOS/guideline reason, or is it just to punish nationalists? [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 19:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:Elmidae|Elmidae]] tagging relevant user [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 19:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:To be blunt, drawing from anecdotal and a bit of library evidence while admitting a possibility that I've fallen to some extent for Japanese propaganda, my understanding is that "East Sea" is simply not used in English save for those fairly directly affected by the ROK government‘s advocacy that they consider doing so. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 19:56, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::[[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#General guidelines]] bullet 2.3 "alternatively" and its children deal with this I think.
::Currently bullet 2.3.1 "{{tq|when there is such a section}}" is what is being applied on this article.
::But bullet 2.3.2 could be applied to include "East Sea" {{tq|As an exception, a local official name different from a widely accepted English name should be both in such separate section and in the lead, in the form "(Foreign language: Local name; known also by several [[#Names|alternative names]])".}}
::And see [[Sea of Japan naming dispute#Other countries]]. I feel like the name "East Sea" is notable enough to merit a mention in the lead, as it's present as an alt name in a number of prominent maps. Yes, that was done via South Korean advocacy, but that doesn't really matter by Wikipedia guidelines. What matters is usage.
::I get a sense that people (understandably) want to punish the annoying nationalists by deemphasizing the name, but it feels like the punishment has extended beyond actual prominence a little here.
::(Side note I hate writing about these topics, feel like if I misplace a word people will write me off as a nationalist when I basically never edit this and the Liancourt Rocks pages otherwise) [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 20:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::2.3.2 does seem like the operative point here, good catch. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 01:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::::A more general reason for the lack is it's not a great lead in general. It says almost no tides but the body spends two long paragraphs talking about tides. The Names (where East Sea would be presumably mentioned under 2.3.2), History, Climate, and Flora and Fauna sections are not even slightly mentioned. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 01:56, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Although on second thought, does {{tq|Foreign language: Local name}} imply that we should be using non-English text there, and not simply an alternate English name? Like we wouldn't be able to write {{tq|Sea of Japan (Korean: East Sea; known also...}}.
::::Alternatively, {{tq|Sea of Japan (Korean: 동해; lit. East Sea; known also...}} would abide by that rule but I'd rather the Korean-language text not appear at all. [[User:seefooddiet|seefooddiet]] ([[User talk:seefooddiet|talk]]) 02:04, 21 January 2025 (UTC)