Jump to content

Talk:Daejeon: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Include in SKGeo working group.
m Testing if replacement template will break things.
Line 1: Line 1:
{{korean|start|high|wg=SKGeo}}
{{WikiProject Korea|start|high|wg=SKGeo}}
----
----



Revision as of 07:22, 26 February 2007

WikiProject iconKorea Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis 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.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Spelling of the name

In English, it seems "Daejeon" is also often spelled "Taejon". Is there a rule or convention that makes one spelling more correct than the other? Should the article not mention both? — SomeHuman 21 Nov2006 05:58 (UTC)

Yes there is. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean), per which we use the Revised Romanization of Korean (at least in non-North-Korean articles). According to that system, the correct spelling is "Daejeon." "Taejon" (or more properly "Taejŏn") is the spelling under the McCune-Reischauer system, which was in use in South Korea from 1987 to 2000. Since that spelling is still widely used, the article should mention it -- but only mention it. Cheers, -- Visviva 06:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. This considered, I assume its mentioning in the 'infobox Korean city' will suffice. — SomeHuman 21 Nov2006 17:12 (UTC)

Population growth

The last sentence in Daejeon#History says that the population growth of Daejeon is the second highest following Seoul. However, sources I've found suggest that population in the city of Seoul is actually decreasing ([1][2][3], all in Korean, unfortunately). Another problem is among what is the growth ranked? Growth is second highest among metropolitan cities, but the rank is lower in the city-province list. The list with narrower administrative boundaries does not list the metropolitan cities by themselves.

I also cannot find sources suggesting that it is the population growth which is fueling construction and the high-tech industry (which is why I didn't just go ahead and edit the statement). I also think the cause and effect relationship is mixed up a bit: high-tech industry probably fuels population growth which stimulates construction (this needs sources, too, and it may not be just the high-tech industry (e.g., government installations)). YooChung 01:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]