Talk:Workers' Party of Korea/Archive 3

Unreliable sources
I have spent three hours over the past four days reviewing and shortening the footnotes in this article. A number of the sources cited are unreliable sources: editorials, book reviews, and self-published material (e.g. blogs). I can help replace these problematic sources with more reliable ones in the future, but readers and other editors should be wary of this issue. Yue 🌙 01:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Update: In late June 2022, I replaced the problematic sources that I found and removed the maintenance tag I added. If anyone else believes the sourcing is still problematic or questionable, feel free to re-add the tag. Yue 🌙 00:18, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Is the WPK still Marxist-Leninist
From what it says in this article, WPK rules still uphold Marxism-Leninism. However, I am uncertain whether Marxism-Leninism is still considered its own ideology or part of the larger Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism/Juche. So should Marxism-Leninism be added to the ideology description? Thoughts @Yue ? since you seem to have a good knowledge about this. The Account 2 (talk) 22:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I think the inclusion of Marxism-Leninism in the infobox could be justified with more sources. The Korean Wikipedia's article already has it in the infobox and cites the source you mention. To my understanding though, when the WPK says it "upholds the revolutionary principles of Marxism-Leninism" (...맑스-레닌주의의 혁명적 원칙을 견지한다") it means it upholds the legacy of Marxism-Leninism and its relation to Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism. The WPK describes itself as a Kimilsungist-Kimjongilist party, not a Marxist-Leninist one, and its constitution states that Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism is its only guiding ideology. However, this information (and therefore my understanding) may be outdated as current party general secretary Kim Jong-un has likely made a number of subsequent statements on the party's ideology and workings since 1 June 2021. Adding Marxism-Leninism to the infobox would require new context in the article body (speaking to how the WPK presently upholds Marxism-Leninism) accompanied by multiple primary or reliable secondary sources, something that can be accomplished if such information and sources exist. Yue 🌙 19:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Seems like you're right; I searched through Rodong Sinmun and KCNA Watch for mentions of Marxism-Leninism but all were for foreign parties. Also, should Songun be mentioned anymore? From my understanding, Songun was slowly removed from the WPK constitution under Kim Jong-un. I searched through Rodong Sinmun for that too but the only mentions I could find was for foreign "Songun Study Groups" and so on, although I could find one single reference to Songun not mentioning foreigners. What do you know about the current WPK messaging on Songun? The Account 2 (talk) 10:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Recent Korean scholarly sources argue that Songun has been phased out by Kim Jong-un and that the Songun era of Kim Jong-il ended in 2019, with further symbolic removals of the term from party documents in 2021. Songun is still referenced at times by the WPK and the Day of Songun is still a major celebration in the DPRK. It is certainly less important, but I would not make the argument that it is no longer an element of the party ideology just because it is mentioned less. The term Juche has similarly been used less in official speeches by Kim Jong-un and publications by the WPK, but it is still promoted to foreigners along with Songun. In other words, I think if you ask a member or supporter of the WPK if the party still follows Songun, they would reply affirmatively, although the Korean scholarly consensus is that they wouldn't, and the foreign scholarly consensus (in English or another language) is currently non-existent. Yue 🌙 07:40, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks a lot for answering this questions. I've learned a lot about current WPK ideology thanks to you. Good work improving the WPK and especially Juche articles by the way! I remember the time when they were (especially the Juche article) less organized. Cheers!The Account 2 (talk) 10:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Communism and Songun
Under the tenure of Kim Jong-il, "communism" and "Marxism-Leninism" were steadily removed from party and state material. Beginning in 2021, however, Kim Jong-un began referencing the two once again, although for the latter it was in regard to the party's past, not future. For example, in his closing speech to the 6th Party Conference, Kim Jong-un said:

Regarding Songun as a part of Kimilsungism–Kimjongilism:

I was actually the editor who made the changes to the ideology in the infobox and lead a few months ago in May, but not before consulting official sources from the DPRK / WPK, secondary sources from the ROK government, and waiting five months for comments from other editors if they found recent material to the contrary. Yue 🌙 00:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Ah, ok, then, my bad. But the article kind of contradicts itself in a few places - see the parts that I've cited on Juche and its nature as described by Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il. Ентусиастъ/Entusiast (talk) 05:17, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I am the one who wrote the sentences which you quoted in your edit summaries. You are correct that Juche does not inherently mean communism, and that official sources from North Korea would not make such a claim. Under the tenure of Kim Jong-il, the consensus amongst Western and (South) Korean scholars was that communism had been phased out for Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il's personal philosophies and policies (Juche and Songun primarily). It was Kim Jong-un who began to speak again of the WPK's commitment to communism specifically in 2021 (the party had not abandoned its references to building "socialism"). Thus, there is no change in official belief that Juche is a "unique ideology" separate from all others, only that communism is once again a goal of the party, instead of just self-reliance as advocated by Kim Il-sung's Juche idea. Yue 🌙 06:51, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I get it. My claims were a false dichotomy :D Makes more sense now. Thanks for your explanation :) . Ентусиастъ/Entusiast (talk) 08:54, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

WPK Emblem.svg
WPK Emblem.svg is an SVG render of a physical coin by C records. I asked them on Wikimedia Commons if they could make a flat version of the emblem to comply with WP:LOGO's quality measures. If C records or another editor makes a flat SVG emblem as a separate file, anyone can feel free to replace the current logo with the new file. Yue 🌙 00:21, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep, I wanted to put the original one back, but forgot that I can just check the edit history :D Ентусиастъ/Entusiast (talk) 05:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Party logo
The file is in better resolution than  which some users like  argue that it should be used in the article. Thoughts? (Asking bacause you changed WPK Emblem.svg to WPK symbol.svg not long ago in the article). Ентусиастъ/Entusiast (talk) 13:48, 4 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I challenge Invictus1995 to find an actual photograph or official publication using the circular emblem, which is, to my understanding, a 3D SVG render of a physical coin. The file's creator C records is known for their work creating 3D renders of physical badges and coins. The prominence of the circular emblem is either overstated or assumed, as most party propaganda and decorations feature the symbol only. Some examples include:
 * Backdrop of the party congress + cover of party rules
 * Alternative cover of party rules
 * Every image of a propaganda poster when you Google "Workers' Party of Korea propaganda"
 * Yue 🌙 04:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if one disregards all that, Wikipedia's guidelines regarding logo quality state that the "highest quality" logo should be used. The problem with WPK Emblem.svg is that, as a 3D render of a physical image, its image quality deteriorates drastically in lower resolutions, even though it is a SVG file. WPK symbol.svg does not have this issue as a flat image. Yue 🌙 04:09, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Lack of sources in the third intro paragraph
The third article on this page makes several vague and un-sourced claims about the functioning of the DPRK's state apparatus. The first:

"The highest body of the WPK is formally the party congress; however, before Kim Jong Un's tenure as party leader, a congress rarely occurred."

Where did this information come from regarding the occurrence of congresses? The paragraph also claims that between 1980 and 2016 no congresses were held. I am not trying to dispute this, I just want to know where the information came from.

The second part:

" Although the WPK is organizationally similar to other communist parties, in practice it is far less institutionalized and informal politics plays a larger role than usual. Institutions such as the Central Committee, the Secretariat, the Central Military Commission (CMC), the Politburo and the Politburo's Presidium have much less power than what is formally bestowed on them by the party rules, which is little more than a nominal document."

Again, where is this information coming from regarding the governmental structure of a very isolated state? What is the basis for the assertion that the other Institutions have "much less power" than they officially have?

In another situation I might think this too nitpicky, but reliable information about the DPRK is hard to find and the predominant perception of the DPRK in the west is absurdly negative precisely because of US propaganda efforts and a lack of untainted information flow. Reading the article myself this paragraph stuck out to me since it makes claims I have never heard previously about the inner workings of the DPRK government, without citing a single source. 58.84.227.56 (talk) 09:00, 4 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Person who does not read past the first couple paragraphs: "Where are the sources? Is this propaganda?" Article leads summarise article bodies. If you read the whole article, the information is repeated, with citations. See Workers' Party of Korea and Workers' Party of Korea for the detailed claims and sources you seek. You can critique the choice of sources made by other editors, but this article is not the product of "US propaganda efforts and a lack of untainted information flow." Yue 🌙 20:57, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Lankov sources broken
There's a Lankov 2007a and 2007b source in the article, but some refs point to just "Lankov 2007". Which one are they supposed to point to? Can someone fix? toobigtokale (talk) 09:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Looks like nobody has noticed or cared to fix the footnotes since 2018. I have access to physical copies of both books through my university library, so if this issue isn't resolved by tomorrow, I'll do it myself then. Yue 🌙 20:49, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you, much appreciated :)
 * For future people reading this, I recommend installing some variation of the HarvErrors user script. It prints out a big error message when references have bugs in them like this. See here for a guide on how to install user scripts. toobigtokale (talk) 20:52, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I was able to access an e-book version of each and Lankov 2007b, Crisis in North Korea: The Failure of De-Stalinization, 1956, does not correspond to any of the material being cited, while Lankov 2007a does. I removed the former for now since it isn't being cited. Yue 🌙 21:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)