Talk:Changdeokgung

corrections
Hello, I made a few corrections in the English:

elements dating the Three --> elements dating from the Three 500,000 square meters. --> 500,000 square meters, including the Biwon (see below).

inscribed poem in the boulder above it. --> inscribed poem on the boulder above it.

and was exception because --> and was exceptional because

Sanshinseon 07:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was moved to Changdeokgung -- Aervanath (talk) 04:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

According to the policy Naming, proposed name should be verified by reliable sources. The official name is Changdeokgung. Jtm71 (talk) 09:41, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Since all of the working English sources call this a Palace (two are broken, but the link text says Palace; one is in Korean), with varying names, the argument for removing the English word for intelligibility seems weak; oppose until evidence is provided. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. English-language signs at the palace use "Changdeokgung" or occasionally the redundant "Changdeokgung Palace."  Lonely Planet uses "Changdeokgung."  Korea Tourism Organization and Seoul Metro Gov't publications both use the "Changdeokgung" or "Changdeokgung Palace."  UNESCO uses "Changdeokgung Palace Complex" for the palace and its surroundings.  Also, cf. the article titles of other four of the Grand Palaces. —   AjaxSmack   22:28, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * use Changdeokgung Palace 76.66.193.69 (talk) 04:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Uhhh, no. No need to move it to a less-used redundant form that doesn't match what is used for Seoul's other palaces. —  AjaxSmack   03:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No it isn't. "gung" is not English and is not known in English to represent palace. Further your own research shows that it's a name that is used in English. And we have lots of articles where "people" is rendered as part of a name of "xxx people" but that portion isn't English. Also for "city", etc. 76.66.193.69 (talk) 06:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "It's a name that is used in English" but it's less common than Changdeokgung. It also matches Deoksugung, Gyeonghuigung, &c. —   AjaxSmack   00:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Changdeokgung Palace mention
Uhh... That's like saying Fujisan Mountain. Why is this even up? I've never seen it listed this way. I move to strike it since the translation of the name is posted and it kinda makes people look stupid...--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 14:59, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Changdeokgung Palace Introduction UPDATE
The introduction to the article about Changdeokgung Palace is in a mess. I think we need to make it more informative and more concise by removing unnessary information and adding in basic informative facts, such as when it was first constructed, signifance and current state.

DoulosCore (talk) 17:28, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Changdeokgung. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060628214753/http://lifeinkorea.com:80/Travel2/seoul/76 to http://www.lifeinkorea.com/Travel2/seoul/76

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:23, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Changdeokgung. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130629135550/http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=2927546 to http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=2927546
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100612140610/http://www.visitseoul.net/en/article/article.do?_method=view&m=0004003002001&p=03&art_id=10817&lang=en to http://www.visitseoul.net/en/article/article.do?_method=view&art_id=10817&lang=en&m=0004003002001&p=03

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:48, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Ask to correction
Firstly, I would like to show my respect for your managing this valuable website. My name is Eunbin LEE. I am a student and a member of the Voluntary Agency Network of Korea (VANK) in Korea. VANK is a non-governmental volunteer organization, composed of students ranging from elementary school to college and adults who wish to tell correct information about Korea to foreign textbooks and publishing companies.

I started doing volunteer work to let other international websites know about VANK website, which contains much information about Korea. As I was searching through websites, I found out that the map that is included in your website material is not fully updated. I was surprised that the map of Korea provided in your institution is missing one of Korea’s island.

Please refer to this link of your website: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changdeokgung

According to the map of South Korea in this website, there is only one island.

I think the missed one might be 'Dokdo' which is Korea's island located next to Ulleungdo.

Dokdo, located in far eastern side of Korea, is the island part of Korea, and the name Dokdo officially exists and is used domestically and internationally.

Dokdo is one of the most loved islands in Korea and is Korea’s one of major fishing grounds. In addition, Ulleungdo near Dokdo is the global tourist site. For instance, in 2010,, world famous travel magazine, announced that Korea’s Ulleungdo is one of the best recreational site chosen by world’s tourists. According to this magazine, Ulleungdo offers spectacular scenery, preserving the nature from ancient times, and has abundant source of water unlike other islands; neighboring waters, with Dokdo, is the biggest fishing ground in the East Sea. On clear days, Dokdo can be seen from Ulleungdo with naked eye. Historically, for 1500 years, Ulleungdo and Dokdo were referred to as the island of mother and son, which indicates its important close relationship.

Therefore, your institution not marking and designating Dokdo, domestically and internationally crucial island of Korea, will confuse many foreigners and ships visiting Ulleungdo and Dokdo. For your reference, all of Korea’s tour guide or geographical guide introduce Ulleungdo and Dokdo as one of Korea’s main tourist site, Therefore, I would appreciate it if you could add the correct designation “Dokdo” to the map published by your institution. Below is the link for you to see the correct designation of Dokdo and related map introduced in Korea’s tour guide book.

http://prkorea.com/tour/img/dokdo.gif

We know that your website is putting much effort in understanding other cultures, countries, and designations in this global, informational 21st century. Particularly, your website is contributing towards many people’s correct understanding of other countries’ geographical names and cultures. We hope you listen to our request kindly.

I hope your consideration, please reflect these facts and correct the map.

Sincerely, Eunbin Lee 01:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

"Heavily damaged" in introduction
Is it fair to say "heavily damaged" in the introduction? My suggestion would be "extensively remodelled", for a number of points:
 * Yes, many buildings were removed, modified and irretrievably lost, and the disregard for Korean customs by Japanese authorities can't be ignored, and that is actual damage. Bad history is still history.
 * However rebuilding in Japanese/Western style of the cloisters of Injeongjeon, Huijeongdang/Daejojeon complex, Nakseonjae etc, while admittedly under Japanese leadership, were actually used by the Korean Imperial family and contained 20th century amenities befitting a head-of-state-level lifestyle. After all, the palace was a residence for the imperial family. So to characterise Japanese actions as entirely "damage" may not paint an accurate picutre.
 * Other actual "damage" or abuse contrary to the wishes of the Korean Imperial family would be more like the creation of the dividing road between Jongmyo and the palaces. Or we can look to Deoksugung and the destruction of Dondeokjeon and other historical buildings, or anything to do with Changgyeonggung.
 * A long private driveway from Danbongmun to Nakseonjae was built after WWII to avoid tourists. (The end of this driveway is accessible to the public today, where the public toilets across from Nakseonjae are.) Is this 20th century innovation "damage"?

101.112.82.114 (talk) 14:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Confucianism at Changdeokgung
Hello,

I would like to update the article in terms of the Confucian concepts used at Changdeokgung. Confucianism was the widespread ideology of the Joseon Dynasty and there are structural elements at the Palace that are meant to reflect Confucian principles. There also aren't any citations for which Confucian elements are present and what they are supposed to mean, so I prepared these two citations in order to give creditability.

HAM, Kwangmin, Mingliang KONG, Toru MITANI, and Junhua ZHANG. "A Comparative Study of Space Characteristics of Chinese Summer Palace and Korean Changdeokgung Palace Garden from the Aspect of Horizontal Tablet." Journal of The Japanese Institute of Landscape Architecture 76.5 (2013): 501-04. Web. Portugmena (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Chung, Edward Y. J. Korean Confucianism: Tradition and Modernity. The Academy of Korean Studies Press, 2015, https://www.aks.ac.kr/ikorea/upload/intl/korean/UserFiles/UKS3_Korean_Confucianism_eng.pdf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Portugmena (talk • contribs) 01:01, 9 December 2023 (UTC)