Talk:Sinuiju North Korean Leader's Residence

Neutrality Tag
Could the tagger explain why there is a POV issue with the title? Saebvn (talk) 22:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Three issues regarding the title: 1. The first reference in the article refers to the "Central Luxury House", but where did that quote come from?  The Telegraph article does not tell us.  2. Would we call the US "White House" or ROK's "Blue House" a Luxury House or Luxury Residence?  No, but we certainly could in terms of what wonderful amenities they have.  In nK the contrast between what the Great Leader has vs. what others has is striking.  But when we point out this contrast by means of an article we are not neutral.  3. The article name must be recognizable.  This does not mean we name the article so that it will become recognizable. --S. Rich (talk) 23:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Regarding your issues...
 * The naming came from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/7782145/A-birds-eye-view-of-the-prisons-and-palaces-of-Kim-Jong-ils-North-Korea.html?image=1. I also recommend you review this cite: http://www.nkeconwatch.com/north-korea-uncovered-google-earth/.  You will see that many places are referred to as "Central station," "Central Ferry Relics," or "Central Committee Building." as three examples.  The Telegraph article is not a POV piece.  The difficulties faced by the people of the DPRK are well known and the policy of Songun, as a matter of state policy, prioritizes military over other spending.  The name "luxury house" is not to dissociate it from "less luxurious" residences and point out the difference between the Dear Leader's accommodation and all others.  Rather, it is to refer to the name as the place is generally called.
 * As to the name, I believe that this is the name of the place as Koreans refer to it. For example, the Grand People's Study House is called the "Grand People's Study House."  See also: "House of Culture," or similar names.  This is a similar type of naming.
 * As to recognizability, I think you may be reaching here -- this place was just discovered as part of the North Korea Uncovered project. It may not have even been known before to the outside world.
 * I request that these issues be given the opinion of a third editor for another opinion if my arguments are not convincing. Thanks.  Saebvn (talk) 23:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, my points remain valid: Where did this term "Central Luxury" come from? The Telegraph put it in quotes for a reason -- why? (E.g., the article may not be a POV piece but we do not know where they are getting the term.) And to compare, if they had done a Google Earth image of the White House, would they have used quotes? Next, the www.nkeconwatch.com is a great resource, but it does not give us "Central Luxury Residence" as a specific reference. Moving on, the other names for different places appear to be the actual names which nK has given to those places, and they are appropriately titled. True, nK does have a priority on military spending, and the society is run by an elite, but this does not explain or verify if "Central Luxury" is THE term by which THIS house is commonly known. And if the house is not commonly known by this term, then our using the term as our article title is POV. WP:UCN is the policy we must follow. BTW, good points and good find. I am enjoying this discussion.--S. Rich (talk) 00:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks to you, also, for the good conversation. My take on the single quotes in the Telegraph article (captioning the image) was that it was a translation from Korean.  (If you can find the original Korean and translate, that may be a good way to settle this.  I don't know enough to translate well.)  I think I may agree with you, that if the term "Central Luxury" is not how Koreans refer to the location, then the name may be slightly inappropriate, though I don't see it as super-POV, just maybe slight.  We may not be able to discern this fact, however.  In this case, your citation to WP:UCN is correct, in my opinion.  To help me understand your argument better, how do you respond to the naming of certain hospitals, such as Central State Hospital?  I view this naming the same as those.  Finally, this term appears to have floated to the top of Google searches for this particular term.  Does that weigh in the decision that potentially others are using this same nomenclature?  Or is that irrelevant?  WP:GOOGLE indicates that "search engines [may be] helpful...[for or in] disucssing what names to use for different things (including articles)."  Looking forward to more fruitful discussion here.  Saebvn (talk) 15:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Your link to Central State Hospital resulted in several articles -- each of which referred to an institution that was formally or commonly named Central State Hospital. In our case, if we had a WP:RS telling us that "Central Luxury" was the official name or the place, then we could use this name. The Telegraph article is not specific enough in its use of the quotes to verify that they are using the formal or commonly used name. In WP, WP:VERIFY is more important than WP:TRUE. With this in mind, we must keep WP:NEUTRAL in mind and avoid any POV, either slight or super. May I suggest a renaming to something like "North Korean presidential residence"?--S. Rich (talk) 17:21, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

PS: I did a quick scan of articles in "Category:Official residences by country". While some of them (like UK) refer to palaces, they do so because those designations are either the official name or common name.--S. Rich (talk) 17:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

New Proposal
I think I've come to agreement with you that the Telegraph's use of quotations is open to interpretation. I've done some more checking into this. How would you react to an article title that is "Sinuiju North Korean Leader's Residence," or some derivation of that? (I don't think we can say "Presidential Residence," as Kim Jong Il is not the President, but the Chairman of the National Defence Commission.) Also, I think the residence is an "alternate" or otherwise less-than-primary, as it is outside Pyongyang. Also, consider "Executive Residence" or some derivation thereof. This would change the article title. Then, in the first paragraph of the content, we could mention that the building may also be referred to colloquially or informally as the "Central Luxury House" or "Central Luxury Residence." Let me know your thoughts, and thanks. Saebvn (talk) 21:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the Executive Residence works better. I'm letting you take the laboring oar in determining and changing.  Suggestion: look at WP:GOOGLETEST as a tool to find and/or verify the common name. You are quite welcome -- and thank you! --S. Rich (talk) 21:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Great. Probably won't make the change until later this week.  Glad we could reach agreement.  Saebvn (talk) 21:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Still working on getting back on WP to make this change. Perhaps this week...sorry for the delay.  Busy in real life.  Saebvn (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Have renamed the page, corrected crosslinks, and amended the first sentence of the article to refer to colloquial or local references, and re-bolded the article's title. Also removed the title POV tag.  Please let me know if this is up to snuff.  Saebvn (talk) 22:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

All is well -- thanks!--S. Rich (talk) 22:43, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, also. And thanks for the barnstar!!  Have a good week.  Saebvn (talk) 23:05, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

These are 3 different residences
Someone needs to clean this up. The Sinuiju Mountain palace, Central Luxury House (in Pyongyang) and the residence described as having a waterslide (I know this place, but it does not have a name) are 3 different houses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.191.248.18 (talk) 16:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

picture?
Are there no photographs of this building that could be used in this article? Michael Hardy (talk) 03:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)