Talk:Kim Jong Un/Archive 1

Confirmed as heir
We should probably go update all the other articles about the future of N. Korean politics if this is true:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hikK9x0PcRa4fyH32zVylFwL_KZgD9INE6L80?docId=D9INE6L80

all the other articles are either vague or say its not known yet.

Cs302b (talk) 01:20, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

An article by Kim Myong-chol in the Asia Times on Aug 11, 2011 seems to be confirming Kim Jong-eun as heir 115.188.137.84 (talk) 10:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)gazzaj

Move to Kim Jong-un
According to consistency, popularity and standard hangul romanization, this article should be at "Kim Jong-un". Any objections? Jpatokal (talk) 03:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, the Hanguel spelling of his name's 김정운. When the ㅜ character is used without a preceding consonant, many Koreans will throw in a 'w' to the name to aid in pronounciation.  I agree, based on the rules of McClune, it *should* be -un...  but by that same logic, it *should* be Kim Jeong-il, and Kim Jeong-un.  For example, the generally accepted Romanization of the boys first name 석우 is "Seok-woo", which runs into the same problem we have here.  So, long story short, romanization is not an exact science, and I'd vote that the multiple romanizations remain, because one is equally likely to run into any of them.  PS - I'm going to go ahead and put the Hanguel spelling in there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.182.143.3 (talk) 06:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

-I agree with you. It would be the same for Kim Il-Sung, 김 일성 (Kim Il-Seong). It important to realize that these transliterations are often chosen by the person to whichever way they want it to be. take for example Syngman Rhee, 이승만 (Ee Seungman, or Lee Seungman)
 * The Korean Wikipedia uses 김정은, so I think we should use Kim Jeong-eun. Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 18:23, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

additional sources
Regards, --  李博杰    | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 08:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/5428300/Kim-Jong-un-a-profile-of-North-Koreas-next-leader.html
 * http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8078562.stm

Religion
Is Kim Jong-un not a follower of juche like Kim Jong-il and Kim Il-sung? Also, does anybody else find "Wikipedians from North Korea" a somewhat ridiculous category since there probably is nobody in this category? The alliance (talk) 00:40, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Not really, I've been there a few times, and have taken images. My grandfather is a Korean war veteran of the Chinese People's Volunteer Army, back then a battle medic. It's not impossible. On the other hand, since Kim Jong-un is always in hiding, it would be very rare for even someone in North Korea to nab a photo of him. --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 02:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and changed it. Firstly because atheism isn't a religion in itself, and  secondly because it was unsourced. We don't even know what he looks like, let alone whatHe thinks. I don't know if I would consider juche a religion, though - and the    article never states it is. No comment on the strange category. This article could definetly use some work.


 * Also, I recommend that anyone who feels the overwhelming need to put it back check Biographies of living persons, which clearly states that unsubstantiated or questionable content should be removed immediately. Jimmyjones22 (talk) 03:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Need to focus this article
We need to rework this article so that it focuses on the subject person, rather than the series of reports and rumours. For instance, we say in 3 or 4 different places that he is expected to become leader. This is one idea, with a few supporting reports.Earthlyreason (talk) 10:23, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Birth date
If Kim Jong-chul (Born Sept 1981) and Kim Jong-un (Born Jan 1982 or 83?) have the same birth mother, why is it that you're unsure of Kim Jong-un's birth date? If Kim Jong-chul's birth date is correct, then Kim Jong-un's birth date can't possibly be Jan., 1982, as that would be less than 9 months. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.102.19 (talk) 18:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Assuming they both have the same biological mother (regardless of official record). --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 06:22, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

The source cited says that his birth is Jan. 8, 1983, as do other sources. This should be listed as his birth date, with a note of the "official" dob somewhere in the article. This is how Kim Jong-il's article deals with his similar birthdate manipulation. 70.12.198.216 (talk) 05:16, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Could someone explain to me why birthdate manipulation is such a big deal, that we would actually have people in North Korea going through the trouble of editing and manipulating documents? I don't understand what gain can be achieved by changing a few numbers, unless you were really superstitious (and desperate) and wanted 08/08/1988 because it was lucky, if you wanted to lie about your age because you were either too old for a wife, too young to go nightclubbing, or wanted to dodge taxes, or if you wanted the same birthday as a really important person in the past... what is with all these numerous purported birthdates for these North Korean figures? And I'm sure the DPRK is modern enough to precisely record times of birth even in hours and minutes, let alone days, unlike in ancient times... --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 08:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * From the BBC (28 Sept 2010) and Chosun (11 Dec 09) refs and others, it does seem that officially released birth dates should not be taken as fact.  I've changed the birth to '1983 or early 1984', following that BBC profile.  The Chosun item mentions 8 Jan 83 but doesn't assure it is fact.Earthlyreason (talk) 05:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Photo wanted
Classic. --98.210.252.185 (talk) 07:04, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * "Wikipedians in North Korea may be able to help!" Hmm. There are very few users in that category, and checking their user pages, I rather think they are just playing with userboxes. Jonathunder (talk) 14:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Citation for "presumed heir"
Needs one. I imagine a lot of people will be checking this page out. Let's give 'em a winner. 76.28.169.130 (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Protect this page
Some guy just recently went through and vandalised this page. As much as I hate The Dear Leader, Wikipedia should be factual. 99.174.92.174 (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Semi-protected for 24 hours. --BorgQueen (talk) 21:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Errata

Article says "Some analysts believe that upon Kim Il-Sung's death, Jong-un's uncle Chang Sung-taek will act as regent, as he is presently too inexperienced to immediately lead the country."

Should say "Some analysts believe that upon Kim JONG-IL's death, ..." Since it is Kim Jong-Il (not Kim Il-Sung who is already dead) that Kim Jong-un is presumed to replace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webisteme (talk • contribs) 15:24, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Four Star General
I know much of the Western Media is reporting that he has been made a "four star general" but this is just a slang term used in the American military, not a Korean rank (or even a US rank the actual rank is simply "General"). I have changed the article to use the correct terminology. Here is a article from state run Chinese media that clarifies his rank (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-09/29/c_13535032.htm) as being General (Daejang) a rank above Colonel General and below Vice Marshal. LCpl (talk) 23:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the BBC also states he is a four-star general here. It's not a "slang term"; it is an actual rank. However, I grant you it is unlikely to be the actual rank he holds in the North Korean military. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 05:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

While it is true that there is no official rank named "four star general" in any military I am aware of, I would not consider the phrase "four star general" to be "slang". The reason terms such as "four star general" and "five star general" are used, is because different nations have different names for the various officer rankings. It is true that in the United State a "four star general" is simply titled General, and that a "five star general" is General of the Army. However, in the British Army, the "five star general" ranking is titled Field Marshal, and in China a "five star general" is 一级上将, while a "four star general" is 上将. The rank of General of the Army was created by the United States during World War II, because the equivalent rank Field Marshal existed in the British army. When working with the British army, the United States wanted to make clear that a United States General of the Army was superior in rank to British Generals and equivalent in ranking to a Field Marshal. When two nations work together, an officer with a "five star" rank is superior to an officer with a "four star" rank, even when the officers are from different nations. Therefore, the term "four star general" is typically used to clearly convey the ranking of an officer in a way that is internationally understood. 128.143.100.114 (talk) 19:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)


 * It should use equivalent to a four-star general instead of "four-star general" alone. Or equivalent to an OF-9 rank officer. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 08:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Ancestry tree
Can anybody please tell me why there is ancestry tree here? There is no such tree in the article about George Bush, for example. Is it supposed to hint that Korean government is monarchic? --MathFacts (talk) 01:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Although George Bush can be said to be party of a political family ( his brother is governor of Florida and his father being a former president), the Kim family holds such a huge amount of power in North Korea that its members can be though of as composing a royal family. Also, the political relationships in the Kim family are much more complex. Just my take on it. --Banana (talk) 00:56, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Picture
There is one picture i noticed of him thats on every news station of him if you read the CNN articles about him then you know. We should upload that one if we can Spongie555 (talk) 03:22, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And under what license shall we have it on? You can't just upload any image just like that. FYI, an image was added before, and was eventually met with licensing problems. --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 04:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It could go under this license, Template:PD-DPRKGov, as he is i'n the government now. Spongie555 (talk) 05:45, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That tag is only for works created by the government. And authorship has to be verifiable. --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 06:12, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The image in question is an official government photo. In any case, the image is of enough public interest to be published under fair use. This is permissible when no free equivalent can be obtain, and unless you want to risk twenty years in a North Korean dungeon, I'd say that is the case here. Lampman (talk) 07:45, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Speaking of North Korean images i think the Kim Jong il article needs better pictures of him. Spongie555 (talk) 03:25, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

first confirmed photo
Is the first photo, when he was 11yo, available for use? If it's PD, it would be nice to have another photo of him, showing him from the only other confirmed visual aspect known. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 08:16, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Cyberwarfare allegations
Upon reflection, I agree with the recent edit by Rashers that removed the following: "According to some sources, he oversees a cyberwarfare unit that launched denial of service attacks on South Korean and US government websites in 2009. Although his involvement in these attacks cannot be confirmed". That alleation is speculative, and hence probably best omitted from Wikipedia. But it was not original research. It was a direct summary of what was published in the cited Science article. So it reflected what a reliable secondary source said.--Gautier lebon (talk) 12:57, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a direct quote from the article in question would clarify that such speculation (by whom?) exists. I would suggest though that it shouldn't be tagged on at the lead. RashersTierney (talk) 13:11, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I could have formatted as a direct quote. But, again, upon reflection I think that it is better left out.  The article did not say who the source was of the speculation.  Re where to put it, I didn't see any other obvious place, that is why I put it in the lead.--Gautier lebon (talk) 16:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Recent Cheonan-am(Navy Ship) and Yeonpeong Island Attacks
This should be added to the page, as it is believed Kim-Jung Eun led the attacks. 222.111.114.110 (talk) 07:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Provide a source linking him to the attacks. --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 08:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Signature
The signature seems more than a little dubious considering it doesn't resemble any script and is of unknown origin (no citations). If anyone can correct this, please do so. Lord British (talk) 17:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks suspicious, especially since the uploader has failed to provide any sources. I doubt that Kim's signature would be floating around on the web given that so little information about him is available publicly. (And Google search has yielded nothing.) I suppose the signature looking like a bunch of random scribbles is beside the point. Would anyone else agree with removing it from the page at least until we are able to verify its authenticity? Humorahead01 (talk) 07:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I can't seem to figure a way of putting a tag on a picture, though. It might be worth keeping it until the uploader gives us some info, and I'll notify him that it's under discussion. Lord British (talk) 16:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

computer science
"It has been claimed that he studied computer science privately in Korea."

This sentence is in the lead right now, but it clearly does not belong there. It has a source, but it really doesn't relate to anything else in the article. Does somebody want to suggest a different place to put it, or should it just be removed? Tad Lincoln (talk) 05:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't see where else to put it, but I don't think that it should be deleted since it seems to provide relevant information.--Gautier lebon (talk) 12:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Requesting article be Semi-Protected
I have a feeling that this article might be vandalized due to the news that Kim Jong Il has died and that Kim Jong-un will become the leader of North Korea. (In case anyone want a source on the new leader part: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577107350219610874.html?mod=fox_australian ) 204.106.255.122 (talk) 03:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 December 2011
At the end of the article, Kim Jon Un is described as being "lacking in the phallic department", obvious vandalism.

50.88.11.41 (talk) 03:53, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Should be fixed. Prodego  talk  03:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Kim-Jong-un-006.jpg Nominated for Deletion

 * It was rather foolish to delete this image! It would be quite necessary now that Kim Jong-un is very likely to succeed his late father. Does anyone have another image that could be used? --Krawunsel (talk) 09:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Due to the rarity of images, a fair use exemption could perhaps be claimed on one of the few available pictures. The image when he was 11 years old is commented on in the text, so it'd comply.   Will Beback    talk    09:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There is an other picture of Kim Jong-un: File:Kimjongunofficialphoto.jpg. Unfortunately, this one is also on the nomination to be removed leaving us without recent pictures :-( Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 10:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Please leave the photo in place...it's fair use!

 * I agree with leaving the photo in place as is. It provides a necessary factual piece of documentation that supports the article and I believe it's fair use.Ssybesma (talk) 19:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 December 2011
Please insert the following into the Infobox:


 * image = KIMJONUNN.jpg

BenBrown` (talk) 11:26, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There's no file by that name. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 17:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by User:Nvanparys (moved here from the totally unrelated page Requests for permissions/Confirmed
Another unconfirmed photograph surfaced in 2011 of Kim Jong-un at a party. It was a grainy, profile view released online by a news outlet. (My reasons for adding this are because I can't find the article anymore and I think it shows another important fact about Kim Jong-un he was western educated and has nuclear power.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nvanparys  (talk • contribs)  01:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Moved here from the unrelated page Requests for permissions/Confirmed, dunno how they ended up there :S  Snowolf How can I help? 01:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Infobox
The infobox needs to be updated. Not sure how, since his new position is not yet clear, but he is obviously not still serving under the leadership of Kim Jong-il (unless Jong-il is named "eternal supreme leader" or something). Tad Lincoln (talk) 14:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Kim's Birthday
In the article Public holidays in North Korea, Kim Jong-un's birthday is listed as January 8, citing this. I think it deserves consideration. Rockhead126 (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

The entry states that Kim Jong-un's was likely born 1982 or early 1983, but the reference cited that he was likely born 1983 or early 1984. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enomalas (talk • contribs) 16:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

According to http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong-un his birthday was made a national holiday, which is on 8 January. So we *do* know the day at least. Would someone mind updating the English page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.193.181.143 (talk) 10:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Controversial Birth Date change. Illyukhina talk have edited Kim Jong-un Birth Date without providing edit summary AND valid source. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kim_Jong-un&action=historysubmit&diff=466856537&oldid=466855321 This article Kim Jong-un requests in particular: "Birth date is NOT KNOWN for sure. Please raise birth date issues on discussion page, and consider whether any references you have outweigh those used to date." So, as of now, the article has unverified date of birth. (talk) 16:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Kim_Jong_Un.jpg
I agree with Will Beback, this seems to fall under a fair use exemption, though the size should probably be reduced by about half to mung the commercial useage potential. SaltyBoatr get wet 17:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I put a non-free fair use historical tag on this image, plus the sourcing, which seems to be KyodoNews.jp. SaltyBoatr get wet 18:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Given that Kim Jong-un is alive, and the fact he is now apparently the supreme leader of North Korea, a free image of him can be obtained. We do not have to have a non-free image of him. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Who do you propose to send to Pyongyang to take a snapshot? Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 19:53, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * We have obtained free photos of his father. Why is it so impossible to obtain photos of his son? --Hammersoft (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not sure I follow Hammersoft's logic. Plainly, photos of this person are extremely rare; hence it fair to conclude they are extremely difficult.  I don't believe the impossible is the correct standard to apply.  Extremely difficult is a better standard, and plainly this photo is extremely difficult to replace with a free image.  SaltyBoatr get wet 21:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Why is it plain? Look, the Foundation has set a rigorous standard in regards to non-free images of living people. See for yourself; read #3 of Foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy, where it says "An EDP may not allow material where we can reasonably expect someone to upload a freely licensed file for the same purpose, such as is the case for almost all portraits of living notable individuals." I have seen exceptions for people who are incarcerated for life. I have see exceptions for people who are famed (as supported by secondary sources) recluses. This is not such a case. This man is the leader of one of the nations of the world. As such, he will have many interactions with leaders of many other countries of the world. There will be plenty, plenty of opportunities for people to photograph him. Pumping in his father's name into Google images returns more then three million hits. Do you honestly believe his son isn't going to be photographed? The same search for his son returns more than 600k results. It's not like he's a hermit, in jail, on the run from the law, etc. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, your there will be plenty' hypothetical might prove true someday, and might not. Your posing a hypothetical seen only in your imagination doesn't advance this discussion much. The hard reality today is that this person has proven nearly impossible to photograph.  For that reason, it seems very reasonable to conclude that this person fits within the exception to the "cases for almost all" outlined in the Foundation Licensing policy you point to.  Kim Jong-un is clearly at the very far extreme of photographer inaccessible people, hence would be in accordance with policy here as an extreme exception.  SaltyBoatr get wet 16:10, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If he's so far in the extreme of photographically inaccessible people, why are there thousands of images of him available on the web? There is no wiggle room on this. The image used on this article to depict this BLP must be free. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:29, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The original source of the photos is the Korean Central News Agency. Reuters etc simply re-use them and they can because a) KCNA is a government body and b) North Korea is not a signatory to any copyright conventions, so I don't see the problem with using this image. Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 15:31, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be great if...if...the source were verifiable. As is, the source indicated does not appear to have the image (and it's a Japanese source, no less). --Hammersoft (talk) 15:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Are photos from the Chinese state news agency, Xinhua, considered public domain? If so, we could use the photo from here/ Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 15:57, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Looking at their English version website, there is a copyright notice on the bottom. I would assume their photographic work is not free. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The point is, however, that free images of North Korean politicians are incredibly hard to come by. Therefore I think it is all right to keep the image under the fair rationale policy. Another image of Kim Jong-un was already deleted and I really hope it doesn't happen to this image too. --Krawunsel (talk) 11:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This is false. As I demonstrated previously, there's millions of hits returned for images for his father. There's hundreds of thousands for him. Kim Jong-un met with a number of foreign diplomats today. Such occasions are photo opportunities. Indeed, he was even photographed in public just this past Monday. See for yourself. Then he was on AP video yesterday . Boy, sure is hard to get him on camera, isn't it? --Hammersoft (talk) 14:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, if you wish to prove your point, Mr. Know-it-all, find us an image with no copyright for this page!! As long as you don't my opinion stands - free images of North Korean politicians are hard to come by and your argument is sophistic. And I'm quite sorry to see that the above image has been deleted as well. We should indeed take it a bit easier. --93.204.112.139 (talk) 09:04, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * the above was my comment, I wasn't logged in. --Krawunsel (talk) 09:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking credit. I now direct you to WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. There is no need to describe me as "Mr. Know-it-all". As to your points, there is no requirement to find a free license image in order to remove a non-free image. WP:NFCC #1 is clear on this; "or could be created". One can be created. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You're besides the point! I never said we have to find a free one IN ORDER to remove a non free one. We're discussing how to get an image for this article, if you've forgotten! This article needs an image and since non-free ones keep being deleted despite the possibility of the fair use rationale. Thus, since we have NO image for this article and non-free ones keep being deleted we need to find a free one. And since you pointed out that finding a license-free image of Kim Jong-un is ever so easy, I asked you to find one or create one to prove your point. But you don't seem to be willing. Ah, create one... I think Mr Kim will be so happy when you ring at his door bell and will gladly pose for a number of pictures for you! As for being called a know-it-all, try not to behave like one and you will not be called one! ;) --Krawunsel (talk) 11:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't have to create one to prove any point. The reality is that it IS possible to create a free one. I proved that with the above Google link. If that's not satisfactory for you, I'm sorry, but there won't be any more proof provided to you. I never said it was "ever so easy". I said it can be done, and I proved that. Your smiley faces aside, if you continue to use personal insults you can expect a negative outcome for your efforts. --Hammersoft (talk) 03:48, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hammersoft is entirely correct. Unless we can PROVE that any particular current is copyright free, we cannot use an image simply because a)we want one and b)we can find one. The world doesnt owe us an image of him. And, since he is alive and a public figure, photographers will have many chances, probably any day now, to photograph him. However, if all the photographers choose to maintain copyright, we still wont get a photo. In the meantime, the article will have to limp on without an image of the leader of one of the largest standing armies on earth. Thats the reality of creating a creative commons licensed website. I hope we can get a supportive photographer at a korean political event to send us an image. Maybe someone can write Jong-un and ask for a copyright free photo. seriously, why not? he is free to contribute to WP, isnt he?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:52, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

I took the Initiative
That empty soace was bothering me so I got a photo but its semi protected so could somebody put this thing in there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redundantstudios (talk • contribs) 11:14, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Supreme Leader
Despite my revision (17:46, 22 December 2011) was modified by User:Maxim (18:31, 22 December 2011‎), I think it should be appropriate to list Kim Jong-un as the current supreme leader of North Korea. He is officially lauded as Kim Jong-il's successor and has been seen at the head of NK's senior leaders during their homage to KJI's bier. Moreover, KJI article's infobox already indicates KJU as the next supreme leader. If anything should happen depriving KJU of that title, it would be sufficient to modify accordingly. Greetings. --FedeloKomma (talk) 12:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I removed it from this article because it is not entirely certain whether if he is the Supreme Leader. There has been considerable speculation as to the role of his uncle, Jang Sung-taek, or the military. Kim Jong-un does not hold any office that makes him de-jure supreme leader (Kim Jong-il was chairman of the National Defence Commission). In terms of de-facto power, there are suggestions that he is a figurehead. Unless something definitive emerges, I don't believe it is appropriate for us to speculate as to whether he is the Supreme Leader. (PS: For the Kim Jong-il article, ideally I would've removed it, but I must have missed the addition).   Maxim (talk)  23:25, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I see your point. Nevertheless, in the wake of the vacancies of the post of General Secretary, Kim Jong-un could be seen as the actual party top leader in the capacity of vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission, whose chairman is also general secretary according to the provisions of the WPK Rules, not to mention the praises as great successor and outstanding leader. Anyway, let's see what happens next. --FedeloKomma (talk) 09:43, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * See below. He seems to have at least gained the "office" of Supreme Commander, so I'm adding that in.  Maxim (talk)  16:02, 24 December 2011 (UTC)