Talk:Kaesong

KoreaHigh‑importance

	This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Korea,a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related toKorea.All interested editors are invited tojoin the projectand contribute to thediscussion.For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to thedocumentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
High	This article has been rated asHigh-importanceon theproject's importance scale.
	This article is supported byWikiProject North Korea.

Romanization

"kaesong," of course, should be mr, but i thought for korean topics like goryeo, we used rr. & for gyeonggi, a south korean province? in other words, the rr/mr determination, i thought, was made for each term, rather than by article topic, to avoid the same term being romanized differently in different articles withint wikipedia. e.g. "pyongyang" & "choson" (meaning north korea) would be used even in korea and south korea related articles.Appleby 23:20, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i see the mos is unclear on this specific issue.

"The preference is to use Revised Romanization for South Koreanarticlesand for generalarticleson Korean history, culture, etc., and to use McCune-Reischauer for North Koreantopics"
"Koreanwordstransliterated into English should use the Revised Romanization, unless they are used in specifically North Korean context "

was it really decided that the same term would be spelled different ways in different articles? that doesn't really make sense to me.Appleby 23:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking that the rump North Korean province should be named as a North Korean province, but it seems that the remnants of the North Korean "Kyonggi" were actually merged into Hwanghaebuk-do. oops. Sorry for the mixup.--Visviva 00:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but what about in the article body, joseon dynasty, yi seonggye, goryeo, gyeonggi, ganghwa. are these korean topics to be in rr? we can use rr for korea/south korean terms & mr for north korean terms, but whatever spelling is chosen, shouldn't we use the same spelling for the same term throughout wikipedia? i thought this was already the practice.Appleby 00:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Side of the line

Shouldn't this sentence read "Kaesong was on the northern side of the line" instead of - - Kaesong was on the southern side of the line (within the Republic of Korea). Thus Kaesong is the only city to change control after the Korean War.[2]1ragincajun(talk)00:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No airport

Kaesong has no airport as mentioned in the Transportaion section. I will remove it unless proof can be provided, bet there does not seem to be any.— Precedingunsignedcomment added byN40798(talk•contribs)09:13, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gaegyeong

The assertion (History, paragraph 2) about Gaegyeong (개경) is not clearly stated. One can understand that Kaesŏng (개성) was renamed Gaegyeong in 960 and thereafter renamed Gaesong-bu in 995. One can understand that Gaesong-bu was the name of a bigger entity created in 995, while the former city remains called Gaegyeong, etc.

It is usually stated --as in this article-- that "Yi Songgye moved the Korean capital from Kaesŏng to Hanyang (modern-day Seoul) in 1394". Can we infer that Gaegyeong was an obsolete name in 1394?

In any case, it would be great to provide the hangul form of all the names used in this article, since the article is mixing the two kinds of romanizations.Pldx1(talk)16:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it would be great.Pldx1(talk)12:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links onKaesong.Please take a moment to reviewmy edit.If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQfor additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018,"External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot.No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verificationusing the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permissionto delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfCbefore doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them withthis tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)01:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]