This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 10:14, 28 November 2015 (Signing comment by 98.177.168.185 - "→Possible Photos: new section"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 10:14, 28 November 2015 by SineBot (talk | contribs) (Signing comment by 98.177.168.185 - "→Possible Photos: new section")(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Empress Myeongseong article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Empress Myeongseong article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on October 8, 2004 and October 8, 2005. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages'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.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Eulmi Incident grammar and style issues
There are numerous grammatical errors and style issues in the Eulmi Incident section. A bit of it will require familiarity with Misplaced Pages style standards, which I don't have.
Contemporary account of political shennanigans concerning Queen Min
MURDER OF THE COREAN QUEEN. (From The Times.) Our Tokio correspondent, writing on October 18, says... - added 22 August 2012 by User:Eregli bob - but no add date or User listing or IP listing was on this addition. Strange. Anyway, I have slimmed this down as we cannot copy/paster verbatim huge chunks of copyrighted text. Next time add a referring link, please. HammerFilmFan (talk) 14:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Not assassinated?
Korean news reported today that she was not assassinated, but survived the attempt. Has anyone seen anything on that? 71.171.103.178 (talk) 01:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- Have not seen that; do you have a link? Such rumors were spread by the Japanese after her assassination to mitigate the effects of her martyrdom. --Snow (talk) 19:10, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Role of Hoonryeondae
Ignored in the incident is the role of Hoonryeondae Regiment, a 1000 men strong Korean Army unit, trained by the Japanese, but officered by Koreans in the incident. It was this Regiment that had surrounded the Palace without incurring suspicion, opening the gate, and allowing the Ronin to enter and assassinate. Lieutenant Colonel U Beomseon, one of the three Battalion Commanders participated in the burning of the empress' body, and soon escaped to Japan along with other commanders of the unit. King Gojong soon sent assassins to Japan, where Lieutenant Colonel U, who by then had married a Japanese woman and sired a son, was tracked down and assassinated. This significant event is ignored by Koreans as it shows how much of a role Koreans had in the assassination of their own Empress. I added this little bit in the body, fully expecting some Korean nationalist to start an edit war... Let it begin! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.33.238.132 (talk) 08:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- Glad to see edit wars haven't started, as this entire article has improved much over its previous condition. Mr. 124.33.238.132|124.33.238.132, your remark noting that Koreans were involved in the assassination is disingenuous. Whenever a country is occupied, one of the more tragic effects is that there will be those who choose to collaborate with the invaders. It does not reduce the criminality of the occupation. --Snow (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
anachronism
There seems to be some unacknowledged time-travel involved here: "By age 20, the queen consort began to wander outside her apartments at Changgyeong Palace and play an active part in politics in spite of the Daewongun and various high officials who viewed her as becoming meddlesome. The political struggle between the queen consort and Heungseon Daewongun became public when the son she bore died prematurely 4 days after birth. Heungseon Daewongun publicly accused her of being unable to bear a healthy male child, while she suspected her father-in-law of foulplay through the ginseng emetic treatment he had brought her. The Daewongun then directed Gojong to conceive through a concubine, Lee Gwi-in from the Yeongbo Hall (영보당귀인 이씨), and on 16 April 1868, she gave birth to Prince Wanhwa (완화군), whom the Daewongun entitled as crown prince."
When Queen Min was 20, it would have been 1871. The "concieve-an-heir-via-a-concubine" directive must have happened no later than early 1867.
When did QMin give birth to her son? - it could have been no later than early 1867, within two years of the marriage, when she could have been no more than just turned 17. Was father-in-law on her case already at that stage?
Much further down the page, we find: "Her first pregnancy five years after marriage ended in despair and humiliation when her infant son died shortly after birth." This would have been 1871 or 1872. If this is the case, then dad-in-law's directive could not have been in response to the death of Min's first son.
Regent ?
In the desinfobox, Myeongseong is depicted as "Regent". Of her husband ? And this surprising assertion is sustained by nothing, not even by a mention in the body of the article. Like ever, desinfoboxes are the worst part of any article. Pldx1 (talk) 11:33, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Possible Photos
A new section was added in the article for possible photos of Empress Min, however, no picture is actually posted. It would be better if people actually posted the possible photographs described.
Also, I would suggest paying no attention to Lulusuke if he trolls this topic. I speak Chinese and learned Japanese in college, now I read Chinese and Japanese texts on a regular basis. I can say for certain that he is nowhere as fluent in the languages as he claims. The fact that he makes glaring oversights translating the caption beneath one of the photographs brought up in the last thread should clearly demonstrate his level of skill. He also cites an inaccurately labelled website as his primary source and is fanatical that only one proposed photograph could be Queen Min. I think he should be ignored and the other proposed photographs added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.177.168.185 (talk) 10:13, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Categories:- Selected anniversaries (October 2004)
- Selected anniversaries (October 2005)
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Korea-related articles
- High-importance Korea-related articles
- WikiProject Korea articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (royalty) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (royalty) articles
- Royalty work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class Women's History articles
- High-importance Women's History articles
- All WikiProject Women-related pages
- WikiProject Women's History articles