Talk:Kim Jong Il/Archive 6

Succeeded by:
Should the Succeeded by: TBD in the info box be changed to Kim Jong-un? In the death section of the article, it says: His son, Kim Jong-un was announced as his successor in the same broadcast. Jibbsisme (talk) 05:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm very wary of assuming succession by default; but if we have a source which definitely says that Kim Jong-un is taking the reins (not just one of the many rushed newspaper articles which are using careful wording and assuming that he will take the reins) then articles should certainly be updated to show Kim Jong-un's new job title(s). bobrayner (talk) 05:10, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Alejandro Cao de Benos has stated that the current leader of the country is Kim jong-nam and not Kim jong-un on his facebook. Not sure if I can link the statements directly (it could be marked as spam as it happened to me while citing other social networking sites) but I'm posting them here anyway if anyone is interested.
 * First link "Our President of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly and maximum DPRK representative, Mr. Kim Yong Nam *** Nuestro Presidente del Presidio de la Asamblea Popular Suprema y máximo representante de la RPDC, Sr. Kim Yong Nam", includes an image of Kim Yong-nam.
 * Second link "Nuestro máximo dirigente es ahora Kim Yong Nam, Presidente del Presidium de la Asamblea Popular Suprema. Lo demás es todo especulación." (Our maximum delegate is now Kim Yong Nam, President of the Presidium of Supreme Popular Assembly. Everything else is pure speculation.)
 * The facebook profile is real, he has multiple references about it on this official blog (in spanish).--Kmaster (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Facebook is not a reliable source, regardless of who commented. We need more definitive confirmation, in terms of a real North Korean government statement (e.g. KCNA), and not the comments of a Catalan sympathiser on Facebook. This has not been picked up in any media publications. The threshold for including something is verifiability, and it has not been reached here.  Maxim (talk)  01:22, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

He is not just a "catalan sympathiser", he is an official member of the government of the DPRK (special delegate of committee of cultural relations of the DPRK) who is in charge of communications (as stated by the reporter on the interview below), and also a solider of the KPA. He has also stated the same on television and radio interviews many times. He's asked about the supposed "sucession" of Kim jong-um as the new leader of the DPRK, then, at 03:34 he denies that and states:
 * Interview for the Spanish television
 * "Primero he de decir, que ante el fallecimiento de nuestro lider Kim Jong-il, el máximo responsable es el señor Kim Yong-nam, que es el equivalente al Presidente de la República" (First I want to say that since the death of our leader Kim Jong-il, The maximum representative (of the country) is Mr. Kim Yong-nam, who is the equivalent to a President of the Republic).

Also, you said that "since the political climate in NK, it is impossible to post things like that for being not "official" (not true, since De Benos is a official of the government of the DPRK), but you allow statements made by International media without any kind of "official DPRK" backing", such as Kim yong-un being the new leader of NK. (BBC reports that the korean news agency said this and that, but they never directly link or prove that the KCNA said that. And neither the KCNA or BBC govern the DPRK anyway) Therefore I'm reverting this. --Kmaster (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Why have no international media picked up on this? All of the speculation about Kim Jong-un, Chang Sung-taek, et. al., must be pure nonsense if Kim Yong-nam is the de-facto leader! Extraordinary claims require high quality sources; see WP:REDFLAG.  Maxim (talk)  22:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * My personal opinion is because the bad relationship between Cao de Benos and the international media (he refuses to talk to some agencies), and because his statements still hasn't been made in a very big news news agency like CNN or BBC. But that's just my opinion. I don't know, what else bring here as a proof, do I have to prove that Cao de Benos does work for the DPRK (just google his name) or that his statements are in fact, real?
 * I know the WP rules about extraordinary claims, but what happens when the mainstream media is basing its claims on speculations? (They don't have an official statement about Kim jong-un succeeding his father and I proved at least Cao de Benos was interviewed by the mainstream media at least in Spain, youtube is not the source, is the medium, by the way) This is not the first time it happens, I rather believe a real guy working for the government of the DPRK rather than the same media that in 2008 affirmed that Kim jong-il already died (well we all know by now that he was still alive) and the list goes on.--Kmaster (talk) 23:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Change
Can we change "myocardial infarction" to "heart attack"? Seems unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.19.119.239 (talk) 05:24, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. IMO, calling it "myocardial infraction" is just editors being pretentious.67.1.72.74 (talk) 09:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Wrong word...it's actually being pedantic, which is bad. - M0rphzone (talk) 08:11, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That was the funniest thing I've ever read on Wikipedia...--84.93.66.25 (talk) 17:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

In office
Although I don't doubt the fact that he died on December 17, I would argue that his term in office didn't end until December 19 (when the news of his death was announced publicly), or possibly even later (his dead father is still president). 109.68.255.104 (talk) 13:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * While Kim Il-Sung may be the Eternal Leader of Korea DPR, no such 'eternal' standing was (as of yet) bestowed on Dear Leader. He stop serving when he died unless the Supreme People's Assembly says otherwise. -Achowat (talk) 13:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok then, but surely he served until December 19 when his death was announced? Even though he died on December 17. If you would have asked any north Korean who the leader is on December 18 I'm pretty sure the answer would have been Kim Jong-il. 109.68.255.104 (talk) 14:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That people were ignorant of the death for 2 days, doesn't change the fact that he died. GDallimore (Talk) 14:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * By your logic, he would remain in power in the point of view according to any person until that person has been informed about the death. For example, the announcement came about 12 hours ago (when some people learnt about the news), but I didn't hear about it until about half an hour ago. By your logic, I would list his end of term as being half an hour ago. I think the only sensible date to list is his date of death. Unlike his father, the Dear Leader has never had any eternity clause. The interesting thing, however, is the date when Kim Jŏng-ŭn assumed office. Was he immediately appointed, or was the position vacant for a few days? --Stefan2 (talk) 15:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's an interesting question but I don't think we can second-guess what the North Korean authorities will do. Perhaps the recently-deceased leader will be made "eternal". Perhaps his title will be retired out of respect and his son gets another title. Maybe his son gets immediate promotion or maybe the regime goes through a pretence of having a few weeks of due process to select a new leader, or maybe (fingers crossed) the regime takes a less dynastic path. We just have to sit and wait for new sources. bobrayner (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

This is fascinating. Thank you for permitting me to eavesdrop on how a wikipedia article is pulled together. You guys are great.Theresavalek (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * What you're seeing is what it looks like when people try to write history while it's taking place, and before people really know what has happened. It's fascinating, but it's not pretty.  I feel fairly confident that in a year or two, nobody is going to question the fact that the man left office simultaneous with his death, which is only logical.  And they can call Kim Il Sung "President Eternal" all they want, but he stopped being president when he died.  President Eternal, I guess that's an even better title than "President for Life," but it still doesn't do you much good when you have ceased to be.  Neutron (talk) 01:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Texts on current affairs - and controversial modern history - are like laws and sausages; they're usually fine to consume, but if you go into the factory and look in detail at how they're made, you might lose your appetite. bobrayner (talk) 13:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Weasel Words
Re: "He is widely regarded to have been one of the most infamous and brutal dictators of all time." in the opening paragraph.

This has no citation next to it and is a typical weaselly-worded sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterolson (talk • contribs) 20:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Last sentence of the first paragraph:

"He is widely regarded to have been one of the most infamous and brutal dictators of all time."

Is this any way to speak of someone who has just died? What if hisd family reads this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.108.69 (talk) 20:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Why, instead of removing one act of vandalism which was only in place for an hour, do people just come here and complain? This is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit... GDallimore (Talk) 00:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Because I don't have enough contributions to fix it, since the page is locked to edits from noobs like me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterolson (talk • contribs) 07:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Please take a look at editrequest. GDallimore (Talk) 16:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to use Soviet birth records as de facto source, move N. Korean records to footnote
The North Korean record discredits itself by claiming other nonsense, such as Kim's birth being foretold by a swallow and heralded by a new star in the heavens. This is a proposal to use Soviet records as the de facto source and move N. Korean records to a ref tag and footnote. Shiggity (talk) 21:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't. Rather, cite them both, readers tend to be smart about this kind of thing. Also, there's nothing untowards about citing reliable sources which have something to say about the two dates. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Does someone have an exact textual quotation of any official biographies in which they state that Kim jong-il birth was "at Baekdu Mountain was foretold by a swallow, and heralded by the appearance of a double rainbow over the mountain and a new star in the heavens", because the source cited is not very neutral, so to speak (An American business publication) and this statement has been denied by DPRK Government officials (same goes for the "mood weather control" thing). --Kmaster (talk) 00:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * They should both be cited, especially as the North Korean claim is "official". Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 00:07, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The official DPRK position is reliably published. It is weight worthy as a major claim.  However, as the major claim isn't heavily weighted as accepted in the general scholarly narrative it could be legitimate to move it to a footnote.  It could be legitimate to keep it in the body text.  It seems to be a matter of editorial style. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * If you ask me, the only thing we can site this as is an example of ridiculous propaganda. The most ridiculous 9/11 conspiracy freak nonsense seems rational by comparison. DanTD (talk) 03:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * We don't ask you, we're an encyclopaedia, we ask reliable sources. As an encyclopaedia we also report notable myths. Fifelfoo (talk) 04:46, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I wasn't suggesting that the myth shouldn't be covered. I was suggesting that we shouldn't take the myth as a fact. That would be like saying the legends of King Arthur are genuine British history. DanTD (talk)


 * Since there was no real opposition to making it a footnote, I went ahead and made the change. Feel free to continue to discuss and/or improve upon as necessary.  Shiggity (talk) 03:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you're quite mistaken about there being "no opposition" to putting the DPRK line in a footnote. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The obits i've read (NYT and LAT) say that he was 69 when he died, meaning they use the N. Korea's version. I think the N. Korea version should take precedence, unless more media say he was 70. hbdragon88 (talk) 05:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Although I think he was indeed most likely born across the border in the USSR in 1941, so many sources cite the DPRK tale that I would say, both dates should be shown in the lead. Readers should be made aware of the clashing dates straight off. Gwen Gale (talk) 06:52, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

"Kim Jong-il pardons of Lee and Ling" - appropriate for inclusion in this article?
The "main" is 2009 imprisonment of American journalists by North Korea. Text in this article does not mention K J-i until concludes with what could arguably be only a passing mention: "'In the early morning hours (UTC+9) of 5 August, KCNA announced that Kim Jong-il had issued a pardon to Lee and Ling.'" Should this to be kept in the Kim Jong-il article?--Shirt58 (talk) 12:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it should be kept in the article because, from what I can see, Kim Jong-il didn't issue pardons quite that often. It's even more notable because foreign journalists, especially American journalists, are generally not favored in North Korea. --   Luke      (Talk)   23:46, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Successor?
In the successor section, it says "Kim's three sons and his son-in-law," -- but the reference makes no mention of a son-in-law, and the article on his daughter Kim Sul-song doesn't mention a husband either. 65.92.182.197 (talk) 11:48, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe it refers to his brother-in-law, Chang Sung-taek, who is speculated to be the regent, along with Kim Jong-il's sister Kim Kyong-hui, to heir apparent Kim Jong-un.  Maxim (talk)  17:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Died on train?
According to these articles it is suspected that he did not die on a train journey as his presidential train in Pyongyang did not move all week. Telegraph& Guardian The guardian report states that it is possible that he did die on a train though, so would it be best to add "allegedly died by train", or maybe mention its unconfirmed. 82.153.35.70 (talk) 15:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I would go with the official version for now, as there is uncertainty with regards to the theory he died in bed. It also mentions one train, which I find a bit suspicious. I believe that Kim Jong-il used three (identical) trains, and he would be in one of them; this made it more difficult to assassinate him. It is plausible that they merely observed a decoy train.  Maxim (talk)  18:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC).
 * South Korea says his train was not moving at the time of death and he probably died in bed.--Metallurgist (talk) 00:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Birth date and age
it says he was 69 at death, he's 70. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.112.9 (talk) 03:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Nope. It is already clear from his birth year. --Octra Bond (talk) 03:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * His age might be 69 (western style) and 70 (Korean style) because I think your age in Korea is counted as the year of life you are in which is one more than typical western age counting which is the number of years of life you have completed. I am not an expert on this. See East Asian age reckoning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justapassingnote (talk • contribs) 04:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * A date is a date, regardless of how one reckons age by cultural tradition. &mdash; QuicksilverT @ 17:26, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Why for his age at death do we chose to use the Japanese date rather than the Soviet one? I mean, I have no preference, I'm just wondering why we're using one over the other. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It is North Korean record, not Japanese. Isn't his nation more reliable than another? --Octra Bond (talk) 03:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean the same government that claims Kim regularly gets hole-in-ones while playing golf, has composed 6 operas, and other propaganda? Astronaut (talk) 04:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No matter what, unless there is creditable proof that the date is incorrect, I would say that the date from his record should be used. 204.106.255.122 (talk) 04:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * At the risk of stretching rules such as WP:SPS far beyond their original shape... North Korean media are not independent sources on Kim. Their role is to praise him and say what he wants. Independent sources are foreign sources. bobrayner (talk) 04:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't oppose to any sources. We just hesitate to use which one to compute his age, so I suggest NK because it is his nationality. --Octra Bond (talk) 05:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The Paektusan birth location is heavily suspicious since it is a place seen as culturally important amongst Korean people. On the other hand, some small fishing village at an obscure location somewhere in the Soviet Union is probably seen as culturally unimportant amongst Korean people. I suspect that the North Korean authorities like to claim that their Dear Leader was born at an important place, and so they changed the location. Because of the events during the war and the Great Leader's involvement in it, it is unlikely that his family may have been at Paektusan on 16 February 1941, so the North Korean authorities presumably changed the year to make things look less suspicious. The Soviet records look like a reliable source, but on the other hand, I think that we need to quote both sources in order to follow a neutral point of view. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * But this is about facts rather than opinions, and N. Korean records aren't a reliable source, unless you think it's likely that Kim's birth actually was foretold by a swallow. Shiggity (talk) 21:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer to use the Soviet Russian record for birth date and place of birth. The North Korean record says "... his birth at Baekdu Mountain [in a secret military camp ... in Japanese Korea on 16 February 1942] was foretold by a swallow, and heralded by the appearance of a double rainbow over the mountain and a new star in the heavens."  Seriously?? It's laughable.  Leave the North Korean version as a footnote explanation, just so that the Wikipedia record is complete. &mdash; QuicksilverT @ 17:26, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with the idea of a footnote, it seems an asterisk is what would have been used in a published encyclopedia. Unless we want to be consistent and lend credibility to both versions, the Soviet records should be the de facto source rather than the North Korean propaganda machine.  Shiggity (talk) 21:38, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

The Soviet version is the true one, his father was in a Chinese-Korean Exiles Regiment in USSR 1941. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.198.115 (talk) 13:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Can someone please add (aged 69/70) to his death record because of the other record of his birth from being born in Siberia. Thank You. 70.171.41.112 (talk) 05:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)WikiaFreak

Remove semi-protection
The article currently states semi-protected because it is a biography of a living person. However, due to the recent passing of Kim Jong-il, can someone remove the lock? Kclbm4 (talk) 04:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that would be appropriate just yet. He was a very controversial figure and we can expect considerable gravedancing (and other unwelcome attention) over the next couple of days. bobrayner (talk) 04:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The article should remained locked, in my opinion, to protect against vandalism. 204.106.255.122 (talk) 04:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether he is living or not, he was a controversial politician and unprotecting this page would be an invitation for vandalism. --   Luke      (Talk)   04:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note that I changed the template from pp-semi-blp to pp-semi-indef in response to his death. Safiel (talk) 05:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree w/Bob, Luke, Safiel.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Y=why not just word it 'NK reported his death to be at time x', and leave it at that? You can't really get more objectively accurate when dealing with state propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.180.206 (talk) 06:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I do not think semi protection should be removed, I wanted to change the text through his birth, he is still a controversial figure dead or not, in a few years maybe it can be removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.198.115 (talk) 13:46, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Lack of a criticism section
Nearly every public figure with a Wikipedia page has a Criticism section yet there is only passing mention of the extensive human rights abuses perpetuated by Kim Jong-Il. This information should be included in this article because it is a defining characteristic of Kim Jong-Il's rule and a fairly large component of his job performance as a world leader. --Ambigera 22:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I came here to echo that exact sentiment. This article is a complete and total whitewash. There's no mention of the status of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea as one of the poorest nations in the world, the public executions, the concentration camps, and other issues. Is this the best Wikipedia can do? Viriditas (talk) 09:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * There already is criticism of the DPRK, just go to the country page. Whitewash nothing, you just have to look in the right place. User:n/a (User talk:n/a) 013:29, 30 May 2009 (PST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.155.151 (talk)


 * I agree. This man is responsbile for starving millions of North Koreans to death, he has concentration camps placed around the country that enslave and murder families. This article doesn't say one peep about it. In fact, I'd go so far to say that someone actually FAVORS Kim who wrote it and that is disgusting. Shame on the editors for portraying a murderous dictator this way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.28.14 (talk) 21:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Then change it! Just use RS or they'll shoot ya down real quick. Like, you have to get evidence of SOMEBODY ELSE who criticized the regime. There are plenty of sources for that.67.212.40.244 (talk) 05:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm sry, but this lack of a criticism section makes this article totally ridiculous; Kim Jong-il's crimes against human rights are an epitome character trait of him as a public person, so having critics spreaded between the lines in stead of dedicating this aspect an own section is totally inappropriate. I mean, you wouldn't get the idea to leace out a principal criticism section on a Hitler-article, as well, would you ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.143.59.8 (talk)


 * The whole article looks like criticism. --Kmaster (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah. There's no real point in having such a section; it's like reminding people that Lex Luthor stealing forty cakes was terrible. Sceptre (talk) 23:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I recall reading a New Yorker article some years back describing Kim Jong Il as a sadistic, murdering psychopath. Is the New Yorker considered RS though?  Often the RS has to fit some editors prediliction.  209.77.230.59 (talk) 20:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Spelling
Proper spelling is "Jeong", not "Jong" as per revised romanization rules laid out by the Korean ministry of sports, culture and tourism. "Jong" is pronounced with a long "O" sound, whereas "Jeong" is pronounced like "uh" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.193.155.93 (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You're going to have a tough time with that one. We follow what reliable sources use, which is "Kim Jong-il". Joefromrandb (talk) 18:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think North Korea is going to ignore rules set out by a southern ministry. 64.180.40.75 (talk) 05:12, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Romanization_of_Korean All reliable sources indicate "Jeong" is the proper spelling, not all in the media can read or speak Korean, thus information on Romanization of names is often secondhand. The McCune-Reischauer system is used in both Koreas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCune%E2%80%93Reischauer


 * The North Koreans "romanize" it to Kim Jong Il. Without a hyphen. Full stop. Gwen Gale (talk) 06:48, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Short answer: Kim Jong-il will be moved to any of "Kim Jeong-il", "Kim Jong Il" or "Kim Jeong Il" shortly after there is a consensus to move Seoul to "Sŏul". Even shorter answer: not gonna happen.--Shirt58 (talk) 12:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see the hyphen as a big deal, but given all the big, sprawling news orgs which indeed spell it Kim Jong Il along with the DPRK government, I wouldn't say gathering consensus for a move to the latter title would be nearly as unlikely as consensus for a move from Seoul to Sŏul. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

To make it more consistent with Korean usage, it should of course be changed into either "Kim Jŏng-il" or "Kim Jŏng-ir", depending on what comes after (i.e. "The cult around Kim Jŏng-ir is enormous" vs. "There is an enormous cult around Kim Jŏng-il"). Or we could use "Kin Shōnichi", since he has expressed a very strong opinion on Japanese imperialists. ;-) Let's avoid any revised romanisation as much as possible. The only purpose of that romanisation system is to confuse people and make people pronounce words as wrong as possible (unlike a normal romanisation system which instead has the purpose of helping people to figure out how to pronounce a word as correctly as possible). Besides, the revised romanisation system is never used in North Korea, and as far as I know, the policy is to use the McCune-Reischauer system in all North Korea-related articles. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Mudazumo Naki Kaikaku/Military brat
Unless someone can explain the importance of Mudazumo Naki Kaikaku, to be in the "See also" section but not in the article, I will remove it. He is categorized as a "Military brat", which to me doesnt make any sense. Thats a cultural self identifier, and unless he described himself as that, or commentators somewhere described him as that, I dont think we can categorize him as such. The term may be too Western centric to apply, but if no one called him that except us, thats OR.(previous discussion from feb 2011 now archived) As an alternative, we can apply Category:Children of national leaders. unfortunately, we dont yet have a category for national leaders who are also supreme commanders (are all national leaders the commanders of their military?)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * See also sections usually contain articles that have not been linked in the main article. The reason of why it was there in the first place is because one of the characters in it is Kim Jong-il. Sincerely, He's Gone Mental 12:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

No one has presented any argument that he is considered a military brat by any reliable source. google books gives this list, none of which show a link between him and the term. I will remove the category. Interestingly, the categories discussion page has use him as an example of the problems with the category.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:53, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Youth
I might be mistaken, but I seem to remember at the time he was about to become the leader of the country that there were a lot of reports about his being a "playboy" and liking race cars and Western movies (neither of which I could find mentioned in this Wik article on him). These Google-search results seem to support my memory: "Kim Jong il Biography - North Korea asianhistory.about.com/od/.../p/BioKimJongil.htm - CachedSimilar Not helpful? You can block asianhistory.about.com results when you're signed in to search.asianhistory.about.com Block all asianhistory.about.com results You +1'd this publicly. Undo Kim also enjoyed racing cars, and had a fleet of Mercedes Benz S500 luxury sedans. Reportedly, the dictator also loved roasted donkey meat. Kim Jong Il was a ..."

and

"North Korean ruler Kim dead - Page 2 - Boston.com articles.boston.com/2011-12-19/news/...1...kim-jong/2 - Cached You +1'd this publicly. Undo 19 Dec 2011 – WASHINGTON - Kim Jong Il, the North Korean leader who realized his ... the Kim Jong Il, known for his fascination with Western movies, ..." 202.179.16.67 (talk) 01:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Add category: North Korean generals
KJI should surely be in "Category:North Korean generals" since he was known as the General. 74.248.204.16 (talk) 05:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

"Unconfirmed Reports Suggest...
"Unconfirmed reports suggest that his mother might have been shot and left to bleed to death"

"Unconfirmed reports suggest that five-year-old Kim Jong-il might have caused the accident."

Unconfirmed reports have no place in an encyclopedia. We report facts, not speculation, and in this case both statements serve only to poison the well. If the cites for these statements are deemed reliable, the statements should be edited. If not, the statements should be removed.69.171.176.179 (talk) 15:59, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * These statements are still in the article. Can someone please remove them and combine the paragraphs? Any fool can put out unconfirmed reports, as Chosun Ilbo demonstrates all the time. 74.248.204.16 (talk) 18:06, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

"Birth name"
Once long ago, I added to the article that KJI was known as Yuri Irsenovich while living in Russia. The article now claims that this was his name from birth, which by my recollection the sources did not support. Kim Il-sung was not in Russia to settle there permanently. He was fighting in a partisan army for Korean independence. He would have no reason to name his son in Russian. The claim that Yuri Irsenovich was KJI's original name should be removed from the article and the infobar. 74.248.204.16 (talk) 18:09, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

North Korea worked with Texas Medical Center in Houston on treatment for Kim Jong Il following his stroke:
It has been confirmed that North Korea worked with Texas Medical Center in Houston on treatment for Kim Jong Il following his stroke in August, 2008, according to a report carried by Donga Ilbo this morning. http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?cataId=nk00100&num=8643 AFP also carried the story today. 75.50.59.213 (talk) 16:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Family tree
Is the family tree supposed to be somewhat complete? The Kim Pyong-il lists several more siblings for Kim Jong Il. 76.65.128.198 (talk) 06:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Is there a Kim Il Sung political family article? Seems like a need for one. 76.65.128.198 (talk) 06:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Small notice. There seems to be a hyperlink error. The link at the top of the tree for Kim Bo-hyon takes you to the article for Kim Hyŏng-jik. There appears to be no article for Kim Bo-hyon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexcs123 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Death and funeral of Kim Jong-il should be merged into this page. Do we actually need a separate page on the death, birth, or marriage of a person? Mistakefinder (talk) 17:02, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose; per previous deletion discussion as well as WP:ARTICLESIZE. Merging would make the main article too big. Acps110 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose, i agree with Acps110 reason. Pro66 (talk) 20:28, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose for reasons given above and because this is an important event. Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 23:39, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Support there is far too much detail in this article. Much of it should be cut out and the remainder merged with the main Kim Jong Il article. There isn't anything particularly notable about his death and funeral that warrants this amount of attention. Contaldo80 (talk) 19:20, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support This is a perfect candidate to become a section. Too much detail.  I support merging for ALL the reasons that the above posters oppose.  Why so much detail?  And it's an important EVENT, right now.  It will cease to be so once it's over.  Qnonsense (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I would say, yes, there are other notable funerals, like that of Kim Il-Sung, that actually deserve an article in their own right perhaps more so than Kim Jong-il, but it is still one of the largest public events in the country in the century. Colipon+ (Talk) 07:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Oppose. There should be a link on this page that says Main Article: Death and funeral of so and so. When a subject is too big and the content is too much, we start a new Main Article. This is standard practice on Wikipedia. Pagen HD (talk) 10:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Oppose. As Pagen HD said, when there is much content, and it is important event in North Korean history, we start a new Main Article. Superzohar Talk 14:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Oppose. As per Pagen HD and Acps110. I have nothing original to say. Joyson Prabhu  Holla at me!   19:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Oppose, for the same reasons expressed by Pagen HD and Acps110. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Oppose, Other funerals have articles of their own and this has received attention from media all over the world. Gothbag (talk) 12:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose I can only say that I oppose due to a funeral/death page precedent already set in place. If this article gets merged, then other articles should as well, such as the Funeral of Pope John Paul II. Aspacelot (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I think this should close now, we pretty much know the result. Pro66 (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm going to consider that consensus for Oppose and remove the tag. LukeSurlt c 10:27, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

USA International Business Publications
Why is this not considered a respectable source?

If no reason can be given it should be treated accordingly. --CatholicW (talk) 01:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. Let's say I start a website "thewordofgod.com". Now your job is to show that it is not a " respectable " reliable source. Go.
 * What you need to do is demonstrate that "USA International Business Publications" is a reliable source. Otherwise, any editor can challenge anything you source to it. And by "anything you source to it", I mean that person you like is a Christian or person you don't like is an atheist.) Furthermore, it has been repeatedly explained to you that this is not a reliable source. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 05:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You still fail to show a single reason why we should think it isn't a reliable or respectable source. --CatholicW (talk) 03:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It does not have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 03:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * And this according to you alone or wikipedia? --CatholicW (talk) 03:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have substantial evidence to the contrary, we can discuss it. Otherwise, there is nothing to discuss. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 04:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting you dodged the question. If I didn't know any better I'd suspect you didn't want to answer it. --CatholicW (talk) 07:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As you have presented nothing to indicate it is a reliable source, this discussion is done. If you disagree, feel free to take it to the reliable sources noticeboard. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 21:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * My mistake. I now see you've already submitted it there (and AR/V). You've already been told by several editors that this is not a reliable source and haven't presented any substantial argument to the contrary. Asking the same question and expecting a different answer? - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 21:29, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The responses at the RS noticeboard seems to have been fairly decisive. For future reference, the onus is on someone adding a source to demonstrate that the source is reliable as proving a negative is sometimes impossible (as with my hypothetical example "thewordofgod.com"). Unless you'd care to argue that a Wikipedia article can be a reliable source for itself, this discussion is beyond done. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 12:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

dead link replacement
The link in reference 3, "Sergeyevna Remembers Kim Jong Il", http://nk.chosun.com/english/news/news.html?ACT=detail&res_id=7283, appears to be dead.

However, I found another link to what I assume is the same article: http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2002/08/22/2002082261040.html

Perhaps someone can change that, as I am not allowed to?--87.210.219.0 (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

"Dear Leader"
I don't see the use of such reference right above his name, it seems kind of unnecessary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.152.196.176 (talk) 03:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Team America
If you say "What reminds you of Kim Jong-Il?" to most people, many will say "Team America: World Police". No references at all!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leopheard (talk • contribs) 02:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No, not without references. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 03:20, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Assumed Office
Something is wrong with the "assumed office" listing in the box on the left, which lists yesterday as when he assumed office (it's 2012). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.143.102.50 (talk) 00:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

1994
The Agreed Framework did not involve food aid whatsoever. At the time, the central distribution system was only starting to collapse, and North Korea was not admitting the existence of any food shortages at the time. The agreement involved trading the North Korean-built nuclear program for foreign light water reactors and oil for electricity.  Maxim (talk)  15:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Name convention: Kim Jong-il or Kim Jong Il?
I'm writing this on the talk pages of Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il and Kim Jong Un as there's an issue with the way we're writing his name and it bothers me! North Korean convention would write 김정일 [his name] as "Kim Jong Il" not "Kim Jong-il". A quick check of North Korea's official state media outlet, the KCNA, shows all instances of his name as Kim Jong Il. Writing "Kim Jong-il" fits neither the McCune-Reischauer (Kim Chŏngil) nor Revised Romanization system (Gim Jeong(-)il). Separating the "Jong" from the "Il" with a hyphen and not capitalizing the "Il" is South Korean convention.

The same can be said for Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Un. Is the convention with names not to follow with how the person makes themselves known within their own culture? Especially on such a sensitive article? Indigoloki (talk) 22:54, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Choice of words
"Following his demise, he was succeeded by his third son Kim Jong-un."

Demise is such a strange word here, why not just say death? Right now it reads like the writer wanted to savor his death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.57.108 (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I quite agree, and I'll call for an edit. Please change "demise" to "death" in the lead, per anon 151.213. 98.245.42.127 (talk) 02:30, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. RudolfRed (talk) 02:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. RudolfRed (talk) 02:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Weight?
Why does this guy look so fat in pictures next to other North Koreans??? The other ppl. look like sticks!! 75.253.48.82 (talk) 11:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Birth name?
I am going to remove the references to a russian birth name. Of the 4 references provided, One was dead, 2 didn't even mention the name, and the last referenced it as a folklore kind of tale. I can find no reliable evidence to support that he was born as anything other than Kim Jong-il. Jeancey (talk) 19:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Someone got their math wrong
In February 2012, on what would have been his 70th birthday, Kim Jong-il posthumously was made Dae Wonsu (usually translated as Generalissimo, literally Grand Marshal), the nation's top military rank. He had been named Wonsu, (Marshal) in 1992 when North Korea founder Kim Il-sung was promoted to Dae Wonsu.

He died at 70, it would of been his 71st. Fail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheJoak (talk • contribs) 06:09, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Maybe they were counting Korean style, in which the day of birth is the first year counted. Kdammers (talk) 09:39, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Romanising North Korean names
I've brought this up before, but no-one seems to have rectified it: can we PLEASE change the names of all North Koreans listed on Wikipedia to reflect the correct romanisation of North Korean names?


 * 1) No, I do not mean 'make the names of the Dear Leaders slightly larger or in bold' - don't be ridiculous.
 * 2) The argument last time was that South Korean convention should be used like this: Kim Jong-il.
 * 3) Even under the South Korean Revised Romanisation system, names are exceptions (all the Kims in Korea aren't going to be happy about being called 'Gim' from 'Gorea' are they?). You can effectively romanise your name as you please. Syngman Rhee, for example, follows his own convention.
 * 4) No excuses about 'we don't know how they want their names to be spelled in North Korea'. We know perfectly well. It doesn't take long to read North Korean texts to understand that names spelled out in three parts as follows: Kim Jong Il, and NOT Kim Jong-il.
 * 5) The body of the text, and indeed the title of the article, should therefore reflect this.
 * 6) Again, to emphasise, this is not a politically motivated statement. If anything, using South Korean convention to cite North Korean names is far more politically sensitive.
 * 7) The Economist Style Guide says: "South Koreans have changed their convention from Kim Dae Jung to Kim Dae-jung. But North Koreans, at least pending unification, have stuck to Kim Jong Il. Kim is the family name." We're not using mainlang pinyin to romanise the names of Taiwanese people are we? Why should Korea be any different?
 * 8) NK News, which describes itself as the 'nets premier site on North Korean news' uses North Korean convention for North Korean names, and South Korean convention for South Korean names.
 * 9) Why can't Wikipedia follow suit?

Indigoloki (talk) 15:24, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

The article says that Kim was four years old at the end of WWII (1945) then goes on to say that he may or may not have drowned his brother in 1948 at the age of five. According to his supposed birth date he would have been 7 or 8 at the time of his brother's death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.76.179.199 (talk • contribs)

Correction Needed - Death
The beginning sentence of the last paragraph identifies Feb. 16, 2012 as his 70th birthday; it76.194.209.32 (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC) should read 71st birthday. 76.194.209.32 (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ Martinevans123 (talk) 21:07, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Correction Needed: Position of Eternal General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea (Appellation)
I apologize beforehand if this is inconveniencing you, but Kim-Jong un is the incumbent, not Kim-Jong il. Farfaraway269269 (talk) 18:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Assumed Office..
Kim Jong Il did NOT assume office on 11 April 2012. He was dead already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.81.41.6 (talk) 00:08, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It says that he is the Eternal General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea, like Kim Il-sung is the Eternal President of the Republic. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

"born as Yuri Irsenovich Kim"
Is there a source for this? --Revolución talk 12:44, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Inaccuracy in Article
It says that Kim Jong Il was the Supreme Leader of North Korea from 1994 to 2011 but it also says that the constitution was amended in 2009 to refer to him as the supreme leader. He suceeded his father as general secretary and chairman. So I will edit the article to make it more accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.34.177 (talk) 18:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Moreschi Attire and Cognac
According to a 2000 report, Moreschi was the only designer clothing that Kim Jong-il would wear. In addition, there have been reports that he imported decent size sums of Cognac. Upon reading the article, I believe it may not belong to the "Finance" section, but should this information be added elsewhere? Twillisjr (talk) 17:39, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I normally talk about quantities of Cognac. I see your point, however.

Separate article for the family
I think there should be a separate article for the Kim family. The al-Assad family have their own article and the Kims have been in power for much longer. Charles Essie (talk) 21:51, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: Getting too crowded. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 19:00, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: It deserves a separate article since the Kims have complex familial relations and significant events that directly affect a nation's fate. Egeymi (talk) 18:20, 29 March 2013 (UTC)It is
 * Support: It would help. I have just read several separate articles about family members and am confused. --41.232.150.127 (talk) 07:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: That would help, it's getting too crowded. AmaryllisGardener (talk) 19:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: I went looking for an article about the Kim Family and was disappointed to not find it. Kevinh456 (talk) 02:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Support:- Camyoung54   talk  12:38, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Just want to point out that Kim is the most common surname among Koreans. One would probably need to name the article something like "Family of Kim Il-Sung". KeithH (talk) 01:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: Agreed, could use some explanation as to why the family is considered of a 'royal' or 'divine' line, whatever that reason is. greeksurfer (talk) 01:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Support and suggestion - I also think a template copy would be cool. Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 00:23, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Support An extensive topic. TB randley  (T • C  • B) 00:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support --TIAYN (talk) 07:54, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support --Norden1990 (talk) 23:38, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

What happened?
We voted on this, and what? --TIAYN (talk) 16:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Seeing that we have 10 supports and no opposes, I would say this proposal was successful. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 20:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I get that, but no one has created an article about the "Kim family/dynasty", so this vote has come to nothing... --TIAYN (talk) 09:24, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In fact, Kim family has this section in it, so i have removed it from this article. More development could easily be done on Kim family, though. Cheers, LindsayHello 07:53, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I was going to sort this out, but I am unclear as to what is required. There is an article Kim family. The information in that article is repeated in several articles that have split tags that direct to this talk page, i.e. there is no information to split. Is the intention to have the family tree in Kim family and nowhere else? Op47 (talk) 21:08, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Has anybody noticed the right panel?
Some shithead with personal issues thought it funny to turn it into a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.194.8.73 (talk) 12:56, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Nick Levine (talk) 12:59, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Age of death
Was he really 70 when he died because some sources say he was 69 when he died, so which one is correct? 110.20.130.141 (talk) 23:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * He was in fact 70 years old. Official North Korean sources, and sources based on them, report his age as being a year younger than his actual age. The article talks about this discrepancy in the early life section. Everyking (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Children's author?
Apparently he wrote - or was credited as writing - children's books. Should we add this or is it too WP:TRIVIAL? davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  15:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Name in birth register
His name is officially given as Юрий Ирсенович Ким in the official birth register of his birthplace in Russia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:4905:A154:F89E:6FE:A730:7425 (talk) 09:24, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture
Shouldn't we swap the image in the infobox with his offical posthumous portrait like we do for Kim Il-sung. --76.105.96.92 (talk) 01:17, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Possible copyright problem
This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Mkativerata (talk) 21:45, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

The golf thing
"Also an apparent golfer, North Korean state media reports that Kim routinely shot three or four holes-in-one per round."
 * The cited source is a humor piece.
 * Its reference to "state media" is by way of Twitter posts.
 * NKNews can find no original state media claim, and its in-country contacts cannot find anyone there who remembers hearing it.
 * Officials at the golf course where it supposedly happened have called it a myth.

The claim has no credibility whatsoever and should be removed. 50.185.134.48 (talk) 07:06, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have removed the claim from the article based on the points above. See also Bias in reporting on North Korea. Finnusertop (talk &#124; guestbook &#124; contribs) 02:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2014
On the right side, he was the 2nd supreme leader, not the first.

108.20.233.173 (talk) 23:08, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * ❌: he was the first supreme leader. His father held a different title.  G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 14:24, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2014
Religion: None (Atheism)

TrueEditor12 (talk) 02:32, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 05:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2014
{Distinguish|Kim Yong-il|Kim Jong-pil|Kim Jong-il (athlete)}}

{{Infobox officeholder Pak Pong-ju Kim Yong-il Choe Yong-rim (proclaimed Eternal Party General Secretary after his death) Ri Yong-ho Vyatskoye, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union (Soviet records) {{birth date|1942|2|16|df=y}} Baekdu Mountain, Japanese Korea (North Korean biography) {{Ref label|aaa|a|}} Ko Yong-hui (1977–2004) Kim Ok (2004–2011) Kim Jong-nam Kim Jong-chul Kim Jong-un Kim Yo-jong
 * name        = Kim Jong-il
 * native_name = {{nobold|김정일}}
 * native_name_lang = ko
 * image       = Kim Jong il Portrait.jpg
 * image_size  =
 * caption     = Kim Jong-il's official portrait.
 * office1      = 1st Supreme Leader of North Korea
 * premier1     = Hong Song-nam
 * term_start1 = 8 July 1994
 * term_end1    = 17 December 2011
 * predecessor1 = Kim Il-sung (as President)
 * successor1   = Kim Jong-un
 * office2     = General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea
 * term_start2 = 8 October 1997
 * term_end2   = 17 December 2011
 * predecessor2 = Kim Il-sung
 * successor2  = Position abolished
 * office6= Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the Workers' Party of Korea
 * deputy6     = Kim Jong-un
 * term_start6 = 8 October 1997
 * term_end6   = 17 December 2011
 * predecessor6 = Kim Il-sung
 * successor6  = Kim Jong-un
 * office7     = Head of the Organization and Guidance Department of the Workers' Party of Korea
 * leader7     = Kim Il-sung
 * term_start7 = February 1974
 * term_end7   = 17 December 2011
 * predecessor7 = Kim Yong-ju
 * successor7  = Unknown
 * birth_name=Yuri Irsenovich Kim
 * birth_date  = {{birth date|1941|2|16|df=y}}
 * death_date  = {{death date and age|2011|12|17|1941|2|16|df=y}}
 * death_place = Pyongyang, Democratic People's Republic of Korea
 * resting_place= Kumsusan Palace of the Sun, Pyongyang, Democratic People's Republic of Korea
 * party       = Workers' Party of Korea
 * spouse      = Kim Young-sook (1974–2011)
 * partner     = Song Hye-rim (1968–2002)
 * children    = Kim Sul-song
 * alma_mater  = Mangyongdae Revolutionary School Kim Il-sung University
 * allegiance  = {{flag|North Korea}}
 * religion    = None (atheism)
 * branch      = Korean People's Army
 * serviceyears = 1991–2011
 * rank        =  Generalissimo rank insignia (North Korea).svg Taewonsu (대원수, roughly translated as Grand Marshal or Generalissimo)
 * commands    = Supreme Commander
 * signature   = Kim Jong-il Signature.png
 * footnotes   = {{note|aaa}} North Korean biographies, which claim his birth date as 16 February 1942, are generally not considered to be factually reliable. See below.

TrueEditor12 (talk) 02:38, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * For those wondering, this request adds the "religion" parameter. Stickee (talk) 08:47, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The source appears to be dead - can you fix it please? -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  15:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; {{sup|(e • t • c)}} 16:32, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on Kim Jong-il. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141006080758/http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/biz/200404/kt2004042317263611880.htm to http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/biz/200404/kt2004042317263611880.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150814045012/http://english.kbs.co.kr/news/newsview_sub.php?menu=8&key=2008091021 to http://english.kbs.co.kr/news/newsview_sub.php?menu=8&key=2008091021
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080913235534/http://www.time.com:80/time/world/article/0,8599,1840419,00.html to http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1840419,00.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141007024355/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205287,00.html to http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205287,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Kim Chen Ir was Russian
There is information that Kim Chen Ir was an officer in the Soviet Army with the rank of captain. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBRC9e6pXz0) He also graduated from the Khabarovsk Infantry School. Also considering some categories in the article that he was born in Khabarovsk District, Kim Chen Ir is not Korean expatriate in the Soviet Union, but rather he is Russian national of Korean descent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk • contribs) 05:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Kim Jong-il was Russian in no sense of the word. By ethnicity he was Korean, not Russian, and he could not have held Russian citizenship because at the time of his birth Russia was not an independent country granting citizenship in its own right.  Kim was not a natural-born Soviet citizen either, even if it is true that he was born within the country's borders; the USSR used the principle of jus sanguinus, not jus soli, to determine citizenship by birth.
 * I have to wonder whether this yet another part of your anti-Russian crusade on Wikipedia? If so, it's high time you knocked it off. —Psychonaut (talk) 12:49, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Birth year
I feel it is a bit silly to put the obviously false birth year of 1942 in the intro and infobox alongside the correct one as if there is a serious dispute. NPOV requires us to be fair and neutral, but not stupid. It is simply a fact that he was born in the Soviet Union in 1941, and that shouldn't be presented alongside some hagiographic mythology. By all means, explain the official biography's version of events, but don't clutter the intro and infobox with blatant falsehoods. Everyking (talk) 07:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If there is conclusive evidence for one of the birthdates being fictitious, this needs to be mentioned and cited in the article itself. Until this provided, there is no reason to remove either birthdate from the lede or infobox.  —Psychonaut (talk) 11:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It is already discussed in the article, as it should be. But as Kim's actual date and place of birth is proven by records kept at the time, there is no good reason to have the fake date sitting alongside it in the intro and infobox. Everyking (talk) 12:02, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how this addresses the point I raised. I know that the article already discusses the fact that there are conflicting birthdates.  My question was, what source do we have (whether it's already in the article or yet to be added as a reference) which adjudicates the reliability of the two birthdates? —Psychonaut (talk) 19:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The article already states "Soviet records show..." and includes a footnote stating that reliable sources do not support the 1942 date. Everyking (talk) 22:53, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Capitalization of "supreme leader". Building consensus.
So far, we have not systematically tried to build consensus on whether or not to capitalize "supreme leader", the official title of Kim Jong-il, as well as Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-un (the only discussion on the topic was inconclusive). Consequentially, the capitalization is changed and then reverted frequently. I would like to present some arguments against capitalization.

MOS:JOBTITLES (see also MOS:BIO) says that titles are capitalized: My interpretation is that none of these cases apply here:
 * 1) "When followed by a person's name to form a title, i.e. when they can be considered to have become part of the name: President Nixon, not president Nixon"
 * 2) "When a title is used to refer to a specific and obvious person as a substitute for their name, e.g. the Queen, not the queen, referring to Elizabeth II"
 * 3) "When the correct formal title is treated as a proper name (e.g. King of France; it is correct to write Louis XVI was King of France but Louis XVI was the French king)"
 * 1) "supreme leader", e.g. in an infobox, is not followed by the person's name. The current revisions of any of these articles don't include a case where the title is followed by the person's name.
 * 2) I have not found a case if substitution in any of the articles either (which could be along the lines of: 'The Supreme Leader reportedly enjoyed basketball'). I find it hard to believe such usage would be preferable to the more neutral "Kim Jong-il" or simply "Kim". MOS:SURNAME calls for generally using the surname and not titles.
 * 3) Consider this along with MOS:BIO which says: "Standard or commonly used names of an office are treated as proper nouns (The British Prime Minister is David Cameron; Hirohito was Emperor of Japan; Louis XVI was King of France) [...] exceptions may apply for particular offices." Note that in the the official translation of the DPRK constitution or on KCNA, "supreme leader" is never capitalized. This leads me to conclude that the capitalized "Supreme Leader" is not the "correct formal title" MoS talks about. It may or may not be the "standard or commonly used name" for the office - but just as well it might be the "exception [that] may apply for particular offices".

My conclusion is that two of the three usages that call for capitalization do not apply to "supreme leader" the way it's been employed, but that the third one hangs on whose usage is considered "correct", "standard", or "common" and the tension between those uses. Finnusertop (talk &#124; guestbook &#124; contribs) 16:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think it should be capitalised.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree, the Manual of Style makes it clear enough that the title should not be capitalized in the infobox, nor should there be any need to do so in the article text. —Psychonaut (talk) 07:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I noticed that the position of supreme leader was removed from the infoboxes of both Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il, but remains in the infobox of Kim Jong-un. It gives readers an easy way to navigate between supreme leaders without having to sort through multitudes of various government posts. Mr.Bob.298 (talk) 04:44, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Cult of personality
The citations from Aquariums of Pyongyang are questionable. Regarding the perception that Kim did not urinate or defecate, the source itself describes this as "childish", the personal notion of a child. The perception that Kim could control the weather is similar. These are not claims made by official propaganda. Their inclusion here is misleading.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed, another one of the common citations that surfaces once in a while is the one about the double rainbow which appeared on the day of Kim Jong Il's birth. That very notorious quote could be traced back to a single practically unobtainable book that feeble-mindedly claims it was in one of the Kim Jong Il biographies. Most of these claims also come from the defectors who have been proven multiple times to be unreliable. Ironically, majority of the defectors are among social classes that are the least taught about state propaganda. It would be nice to have a consensus on the explicitly banned magic powers that are not to be written on this article to save time, instead of pruning them once in a while... The whole fetishism on leaders' superhuman powers is really silly anyway, the Al-Assad family had taught their people much of this same crap (I think B.R. Myers has written briefly about this), and it is not cited in every second article about Syria. Ceosad (talk) 18:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC) Edit: I added a link to the book that was possibly the source. Ceosad (talk) 18:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


 * From the North Korea article:
 * Such reports are contested by North Korea researcher Brian R. Myers: "divine powers have never been attributed to either of the two Kims. In fact, the propaganda apparatus in Pyongyang has generally been careful not to make claims that run directly counter to citizens’ experience or common sense." He further explains that the state propaganda painted Kim Jong-il as someone whose expertise lay in military matters and that the famine of the 1990s was partially caused by natural disasters out of Kim Jong-il's control.[References omitted]
 * However, references to the double rainbow can be found in KCNA using the STALIN search engine, including an article, "Wonders of Nature" on 12 July, 1997. Unfortunately the original articles are not accessible at the moment. With regard to Aquariums by Kang Chol-hwan, the reference to Kim Jong Il seems anachronistic. It comes from a chapter entitled "A Happy Childhood in Pyongyang". This refers to a period before 1977 when Jong Il was virtually unheard of. The reference to weather control is not in the source. For all these reasons I'm deleting these references.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, I know that B. R. Myers' view on the propaganda greatly differs from the mainstream viewpoint. By the way, STALIN search engine links do not work because the old KCNA.co.jp page has been geoblocked by North Korea. It only accepts Japanese proxys or IPs. You can reach the original page and old news articles through Internet Archive as they still keep crawling the KCNA.co.jp through their Japanese servers. It is just annoying to copy paste urls by hand from the STALIN search engine. Wonders of Nature Ceosad (talk) 06:06, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It's things like that that make me think that Korean shamanism has more influence on North Korea than Confucianism. On this kind of issue, KCNA is a more reliable source than outside commentators, but of course that's original research. By the way, "defecate" turned up nothing. I don't think we can have a consensus on this issue. Unfortunately mainstream media and publishers will publish almost anything on North Korea (apart from DPRK propaganda, I guess).--Jack Upland (talk) 06:46, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Many of the mainstream media sources have been traced back to Hong Kongese yellow journalism. The claims that Jang Sung-taek was executed with starved dogs was literally said to have originated from the second least reliable tabloid newspaper in the city. Makes me wonder what was the least reliable tabloid... STALIN tends to find some fragmented weather control stories from KCNA archives, but it is not much help in these cases. Not many (if any) of them could be categorized as "claims", but I guess North Korean topics and propaganda are easy targets for WP:CHERRYPICKING. I was too unable to find anything helpful from KCNA this time. Ceosad (talk) 17:38, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Kim Jong-il. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121012002204/http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/17/2900151/nkorea-promotes-kim-jong-un-to.html to http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/17/2900151/nkorea-promotes-kim-jong-un-to.html#storylink=cpy

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2016
footnote 42 leads to a bad link: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/nkorea-leader-sets-world-fashion-trend-pyongyang-claims-1938842.html should be http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/nkorea-leader-sets-world-fashion-trend-pyongyang-claims-5533361.html

CeleriacRustyChicken (talk) 10:50, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thank you for reporting, . – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:00, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 one external links on Kim Jong-il. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/03spring/hodge.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130521080625/http://www.worldtradereview.com/news.asp?pType=N&iType=A&iID=153&siD=6&nID=32681 to http://www.worldtradereview.com/news.asp?pType=N&iType=A&iID=153&siD=6&nID=32681
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.korea-dpr.com/lodestar0605v.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://asia.news.yahoo.com/080915/4/3p21c.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/11/04/nkorea.kim.ap/art.korea.ap.jpg
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-11/05/xin_472110505145550016711.jpg
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501030630/kim_women.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501030630/story.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901094022/http://www.kcna.co.jp:80/item/2006/200608/news08/11.htm to http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2006/200608/news08/11.htm#5
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200406/200406270015.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/opinion/200406/kt2004060817432954140.htm

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) 11:29, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

More care not to make him look as still alive
It took almost ten minutes di get sure he was dead or who's page was and all for that eternal thing, coupled with a younger aged picture, which I also can't understand. The picture should reflect the age reached at power, not propaganda! And about a successor, don't hurry with a Not applicable, you never know what happens next. --Robertiki (talk) 03:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC)


 * The first line gives his date of death. That's always a good sign.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:16, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Is this the first case of an eternal posthumous political title for a non-deity?-- Sıgehelmus  (Talk) &#124;д=)  18:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * No, because Kim Il Sung was also given a title: "Eternal President". But as discussed before, I don't think we should use these honorary titles in the infobox.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:26, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Is it an official political title or just honorary? Many nations did not exactly see Bokassa I's self-created Imperial title as legitimate, but it was still accepted sui generis. Would denying it not violate WP:NPOV?-- Sıgehelmus  (Talk) &#124;д=)  16:17, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We should note these posthumous honorary titles, but putting them in the infobox is confusing (see above). North Korea could bestow on Il Sung and Jong Il a multitude of titles, but we shouldn't put them all in the infobox as if they are actual roles. It is not about neutrality; it is about correct information.--Jack Upland (talk) 20:24, 25 February 2017 (UTC)