Talk:2024 South Korean martial law crisis: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:45, 3 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2024 South Korean martial law crisis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3

Korea High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / Korean

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Korean military history task force

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of 2024 South Korean martial law crisis be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Request protection

I don't know if it is within Wikipedia policy, but I have noticed that South Korean articles get vandalized more often than others; as such, I recommend that minimum protection be placed on this page to prevent that one guy who spams his insane manifesto. Sir Ross (talk) 15:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't follow articles about South Korea that much, but I concur on the additional stand point that is will be fast and moving and we want to limit any chance of misinformation. Coasterghost (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the sentiment, but the default is that we don't "pre-emptively" (WP:NO-PREEMPT) protect pages until we have evidence there is an issue. There are multiple admins that have eyes on this article, so rest assured it can be protected quite quickly as things progress. You can also use WP:RPP and folks will act quickly. - Fuzheado | Talk 15:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I always like making topics like this if nothing else but to find out policies for myself and others. Sir Ross (talk) 15:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's true? I pretty much only edit SK-related articles and don't see more vandalism on ours; if anything we may see less. seefooddiet (talk) 18:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Shouldn't the infobox be reformatted to emphasize that this has been countermanded by the legislative? Borgenland (talk) 16:32, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think a note should be added to clarify that the legislative vote was technically illegal (afaik) due to the martial law prohibiting political activities. Whether the vote is legitimate or not is for Korean legal experts to determine and time to reveal, so I think it should at least have a caveat. Sir Ross (talk) 16:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was considering the combatant infobox also. But then again other reports suggest that Yoon made shortcuts in declaring ML which could make him the first at fault. Borgenland (talk) 16:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Event should do for the time being methinks, it's pretty broad in what it covers. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article name change?

Am I right in thinking that "2024 South Korean martial law" sounds odd as a title? Surely, something along the lines of "2024 South Korean martial law declaration" sounds better? Feel free to post any other suggestions you may have. SuperGuy212 (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support It makes more sense, especially since now the law itself may not be applied after the National Assembly vote. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 16:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the current events I believe the accurate title would be "2024 attempted declaration of martial law in South Korea" given it's already been annulled before it came into effect. Rambling Rambler (talk) 16:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only similar article was 2022 Russian martial law so that naming convention was followed to make it WP:CONSISTENT. I could see how adding "declaration" at the end might make sense, though let's give it more time. The wordier "2024 attempted declaration of martial law in South Korea" is not WP:CONCISE or WP:CONSISTENT. - Fuzheado | Talk 16:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem though is that in this case the actual "Martial Law" never came into effect. So it was only "attempted". I don't think there's a more concise title that is actually accurate at this present stage than the one I suggested. Rambling Rambler (talk) 17:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the president and the army refuse to comply with the vote lifting martial law, I guess the name change would be something like "2024 South Korean coup" or "Coup d'état of december 3th" (depending on how news outlets choose to name it). So let's wait and see

It's a coup attempt, plain and simple. Change it to something like that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.78.14.9 (talk) 18:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"National Assembly" vs. "Assembly"

Does anyone familiar with the subject know if/when it's acceptable to shorten "National Assembly" to "Assembly"? Does it depend on referring to the building vs. the legislature? Placeholderer (talk) 16:46, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I usually do is use NA once at the beginning and A afterwards to avoid redundancy. Borgenland (talk) 16:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Unanimous" vote of the National Assembly

I'm not sure about the specificities of South Korean politics but 190/300 members seems close to the number of opposition MPs in South Korea (192/300). Maybe this should be clarified, even if the vote was unanimous in terms of members present, who I assume are mainly members of the South Korean opposition. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 16:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been widely-reported that it was present MPs of all parties, including that of the president's party, voted against it. So it is unanimous without need of clarification. Rambling Rambler (talk) 16:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a useful clarification that the vote was indeed across the board, not the result of a party boycotting the vote or being forcibly blocked to vote. 2A01:E0A:1DC:4570:399E:9B09:75E1:FCBE (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Korean military says martial law remains in force until the president lifts it

The BBC reports that the motion passed by parliament did not lift martial law, but required the president to lift it. The Korean military now says that "it will maintain martial law until it is lifted by President Yoon Suk Yeol, despite the nation's parliament voting to block its enforcement." Yoon is obligated to end martial law, but it has not happened yet, so this article should reflect that Adam8410 (talk) 17:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The military sides with Yoon. This is an obvious, outrageous abuse of martial law but the military is clearly siding with him. Yoon's party didn't vote against the measure because any form of political activity has been ruled illegal. Yoon and the military are considering the vote invalid. RomanianObserver41 (talk) 17:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Status of martial law in the Infobox

While martial law has been repealed by the parliament, the military has stated it will continue enforcement of martial law. Given current military and police actions in South Korea, along with allegations Yoon Suk Yeol is acting against democratic policy, I believe martial law should be listed as ongoing instead of included, though this should be discussed before a change. CitrusHemlock 17:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This is basically a (very likely successful) coup in progress. The military has sided with him. RomanianObserver41 (talk) 17:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Language

A number of times users have added the Korean language for the words martial law. However, consensus was not provided for that to be added. Could someone please step in and see what’s going on? IanDBeacon (talk) 17:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line is, people seem to think that martial law needs a Korean translation. Not really sure why, as this is normally used in times where something is transliterated, or otherwise exclusive to its native country. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:46, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:KO-LEAD we ask people not to use the korean translation for cases like these, but we provide korean text so often for korea-related articles that people think it's a universal practice seefooddiet (talk) 18:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it would be helpful as a keyword for non-Korean speakers who want to research Korean-language sources., but I see that it violates MOS. Ca ^{talk to me!} 18:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Military says vote is illegal?

I noticed that statements along the line of "The military has said the vote by the National Assembly is illegal." have been repeatedly added into the article, but do any of the sources actually say this? All I see in the sources is the military not complying with the vote, I haven't seen any sources that say the military has declared the vote itself illegal. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 17:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I haven't seen anything to that effect. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neither I do. It should be removed and stopped. --Cheol (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The military has generally sided with the argument that the National Assembly vote is illegal as any form of political activity is prohibited. Yes. RomanianObserver41 (talk) 17:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't get to say that, as soon as sources state that the military has declared the vote illegal then fair enough. Until then, it should not be re-added. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't read Korean. Could Korean readers (or people able to sufficiently handle auto-translators) please be more specific about which military have which opinion? Joint Chiefs of Staff (South Korea) points to some of the top military leaders. Or was it rather a spokesperson for a particular military leader or office? Boud (talk) 18:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

both of the Korean-language sources refer to unnamed "military authorities". I agree with adding the {{who}} template to encourage our editors to find sources with more concrete information. Presumably there are political reasons why news agencies in Korea don't want to print the names of people right now. NotBartEhrman (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My impression from an auto-translator for the YTN archive snapshot is that it's a spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence who said this - "spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence" would still be more specific than "military authorities". But in principle we're not really supposed to use live timelines as sources ... Boud (talk) 18:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, (at least according to my auto-translator) that article doesn't say anything about the Ministry of Defence specifically declaring the vote illegal, only repeating the martial law declaration that had been given two hours before the vote took place, and saying there was no further official statement. It would be synthesis for us to conclude that an order that preceded a vote by hours explicitly declared that vote invalid, without a source that *specifically* makes this connection. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:25, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. Unless the military really want to participate in a de facto coup, they're likely to avoid saying anything that could be interpreted as illegal. My understanding is that until the President complies with the order from Parliament, technically speaking there's still a a state of martial law, so it's quite likely that the military officials are just being legally conservative - and want to avoid saying anything that could land them in court afterwards. Boud (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And of course whether generic or specific military, it must be reliably sourced, as several people here have said. Boud (talk) 18:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yoon's People's Party in infobox

It is misleading for the infobox to imply that Yoon's People's Party is against the martial law/coup attempt. It is true (like in any attempted situation like this) that some have opposed his actions as authoritarian and undemocratic, but a large majority of the party's members have not declares the martial law illegal in the assembly (they didn't vote) and several have come out in support of the measure. RomanianObserver41 (talk) 18:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sources? 207.96.32.81 (talk) 18:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Until a group of People's Party members come out in support of the coup, the party's leader, the mayor of Seoul, and all members of the party in the assembly have come out against the coup. Scuba 18:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Police jurisdiction

There are police helping the army keep the protesters out of the Assembly. Whose jurisdiction do they fall under? are they local police from Seoul? Scuba 18:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've heard there was a mass-mobilisation calling for all police within the general area of Seoul, I'll see whether there's anything more concrete. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 18:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International reactions section (continued from user talk)

Should the international reactions sub-section be formatted as a country-by-country list (with attendant flags) or as a simple prose paragraph (combining similar statements by different entities, to avoid repetition - ex. here)? 2607:FA49:5543:A300:0:0:0:2D3A (talk) 18:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do we really need to list every government (outside major geopolitical players whose reactions might be relevant in other ways given their longstanding involvement in the frozen conflict between the two bits of Korea) which is "closely monitoring the situation"? That seems almost like routine condolences sent worldwide after mass tragedies... 2607:FA49:5543:A300:0:0:0:2D3A (talk) 18:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A similar conversation happened after the Crocus City Hall attack, with the general consensus being "keep it short and sweet". CommissarDoggo^Talk? 18:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

!CommissarDoggo Ok, cause I've been getting push-back from here... 2607:FA49:5543:A300:0:0:0:2D3A (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reaction sections are utter cancer and clog up pages with useless information. It's typically just a list of states saying "We don't like that bad thing happened."Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

North Korean involvement in info box

There have been some edits and reverts concerning the alleged involvement of North Korea by Yoon as one of the "parties", but I think a mention of the allegations in the background is more than sufficient, especially as the allegations themselves are non-verifiable. BritishMew (talk) 18:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 109: / Line 109: @@
 Reaction sections are utter cancer and clog up pages with useless information. It's typically just a list of states saying "We don't like that bad thing happened."[[User:Harizotoh9|Harizotoh9]] ([[User talk:Harizotoh9|talk]]) 18:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
+== North Korean involvement in info box ==
+There have been some edits and reverts concerning the alleged involvement of North Korea by Yoon as one of the "parties", but I think a mention of the allegations in the background is more than sufficient, especially as the allegations themselves are non-verifiable. [[User:BritishMew|BritishMew]] ([[User talk:BritishMew|talk]]) 18:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)