Talk:Tonghak Peasant Revolution

Request for Japan to invade Korea for help a fabrication

Historically, Japan's invasion of Korea was justified by Japanese historians as a "request" from Korea. In much the same way that Hitler approached his invasions as "assistance". Without getting into the heated current arguments on Japanese historical revisionism in textbooks, or on the internet by apologists or glossers-over, suffice to say that this article will be both corrected and expanded using the latest historical research as many new documents have been released and much work that was played down as inconsequential is now seen as important. Citations will be made of accurate new research. There is anticipated to be great furor as this is done, and the editors of the wiki are advised of this in advance.

Good idea. Be careful on this point. The editors need not be led into controversy needlessly. POofYS Dated 013:12, 19 April 2005.

Untangling

A lot POV cruft in here, plus the merge issue. Any takers? -- Visviva 09:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I completely agree. Plus, a lot of the wording is done far too subjectively (words like mercilessly, cruel, oppressive, etc.). I went ahead and made changes to the wording. -- Johgc 22:25, 2 May 2007 (EST)

Change

Any change necessary?--Seonookim (talk) 01:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Another comment

this was posted by error inside the GA review(1) and got the following comment:

Just so you know, this is the closed review that you're posting in (which closed as "not listed"); I'm not sure that's what you meant to do. The current GA review is elsewhere on the page. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Apologies. Pldx1 (talk) 16:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I have read this article. My comments can be seen at User:Pldx1/Donghak. Before discussing about some semi-colons, we should better discuss about the content. I think that it remains an important work to do concerning the geolocalisations and the references.

• I am not sure that the standard reader of http://en.wikipedia.org has the slightest idea of the localisation of Busan or Incheon. Therefore, we should not suppose that they know where Gobu can be !
• a map is required. May be user Dmthoth can help, we should ask him.
• Technically, the references of the books should be improved (there are missing isbn, even missing authors !)
• Quite all of the references are in Korean. This should be at least indicated clearly, and not masked by tentative traductions of the titles. For several books, the comments by the booksellers doesn't indicate academic books. If you want use 만화, you should present them as such... and indicate why we should trust such source.
• I am surprised by the lack of references written in English (by Koreans or foreigners, this is not the question). For example, the page History of Korea indicates a large number of such books, that could surely be useful here.

The Donghak Peasant Revolution is one of the most important event in the history of Modern Korea. In 1894, facing a menace from their own people, the Joseon ruling classes (from the King to the provincial yangbans) were so prompt to place themselves under the protection and the direction of the Japanese armed forces. And after the massacre, they became so noisy about 'Independence club' or Yeongeunmun or what else. I hope this article will contribute to our duty of memory... and understanding. Pldx1 (talk) 23:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Bibliography

I have rewriten the references related to the books, in order to use the template {{sfn}} inside the text and regroup the detail of the references at the end, where they can be managed more easily. Apart from this technical move, I am now exploring what are saying the references used at History of Korea. Moreover, the subsection Role played by Donghak seems to be a central one, that should be developped and seperated from the 'fringe' controversies about the Daewongun or the Genyosha. On the contrary, the 1994 다시 피는 녹두꽃 was not only a commemoration of 1894, but a part of the movement that resulted in the 5.18 Special Law passed in 1995. I will try to work on that. Pldx1 (talk) 18:14, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Piotrus

And this was also posted by error inside the GA review(1) Pldx1 (talk) 16:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey guys, I am becoming interested in Korean topics (as I moved here), so I am going to try to offer similar comments/support to those topics as I do at WP:POLAND. Thus, this pass by GA review comment. Sadly, I have to say this is far from GA class - I am quickfailing a B-class review due to insufficient inline citations. Please don't submit a GAN for an article where there are unreferenced paragraphs (i.e. a quickfail criteria). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:15, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Not by error, but I have no problem with this being moved here. That said, I'd like to see a reply. The article still has cite needed tags and as such is in no way in the form to pass a GAN in the current state. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:52, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

B-class failed

Whoever passed this as a B-class for milhist: no, the citations are not adequate, there are dozens of uncited paragraphs. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:13, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Donghak Peasant Revolution/GA2

Bizarre citations

This article cites a bunch of authors & books (Donghak Peasant Revolution#Other books) with the name/title "미상" (misang). "Misang" means "unknown" or "unidentified" in Korean. These cannot possibly be valid citations. Citing an "unidentified" book is tantamount to admitting you don't know what book you're trying to cite and you've never seen it.

Some of these might be books that were cited in the Korean version of this article (e.g. "The Founding of Cheondoism" by "John Misang" might be 이돈화, 《천도교 창건사》 (천도교중앙종리원, 1950)). Others I'm not sure. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 14:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

In addition, I'm looking at citations Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim added by Pldx1. Sure are these sources not from the year "9999", so care to explain what's going on here? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:20, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Dear User:Finnusertop. Pldx1 has never added any citations to this article. On August 2013, there have been some attempts to push this article to the GA status. In order to make my opinion about this article, I have reorganized the bibliography, moving everything at the bottom of the paper (and using Harvard refs to link the text to the biblio). Missing names were missing, missing years were missing. My review can be seen at User:Pldx1/Donghak. And now, five years later, we have the same problems than before. Good luck if you want to fix them ! It remains that this Donghak Revolution is a key event in the whole history of Korea. Pldx1 (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Pldx1, in the edit I linked to, you reorganized the bibliography to use harv refs, right? Did you use "9999" as a placeholder for years and "???" for pages? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Casualties of Korea and their soldiers

The lowest estimate for their forces is 3000, but the casualties are 6000? 2A02:1810:251F:EE00:7477:49EC:CD84:BECF (talk) 16:33, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

No picture?

Surprised that even in the Korean article there's no picture for the event in the infobox. Can anyone find or draw anything for it? toobigtokale (talk) 02:03, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Cleanup needed

Hi,

Imo the article is currently pretty hard to understand and needs a significant rewrite in order to be more useful to the average reader. I think the background section needs to be improved; needs more info about the wide geopolitical situation that led to this.

In addition, the details are presented confusingly. A lot of data is presented with extremely sparse context; names of people and places are thrown around with little context and indication of why they are important.

If someone's interested in working on this article, it may just be easier to scrap most of it and write it from scratch using a few good sources as reference. I've improved some stylistic things, but they're band-aids on a more fundamental problem of confusing writing. toobigtokale (talk) 04:12, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

@Koreanidentity10000 did a great job in fixing things up and adding more info.

I think some broad geopolitical context is still needed in the first part of the background section. It's missing the context of what was happening with foreign incursions (particularly Japan) and the monarchy, and their impact on the common people. toobigtokale (talk) 10:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 24 May 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Moved as an uncontested request with minimal participation. If there is any objection within a reasonable time frame, please ask me to reopen the discussion; if I am not available, please ask at the technical requests page. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

---

Donghak Peasant Revolution → Tonghak Peasant RevolutionTonghak Peasant Revolution – WP:COMMONNAME per this ngram. Also aligns with WP:NCKO, which prefers MR for things like this. The vast majority of English-language academic works that mention this topic will use MR. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 18:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 16:10, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.