Talk:Yeonmi Park/Archive 2

Deeply biased article
Yeon-mi Park recognizes that as a defector living under capitalism, this has utility, can be monetized, which she is exploiting, obviously and disturbingly, for self-benefit. She redirected her lies and commentary towards domestic concerns of the United States in apparent service to her paymasters. Yeon-mi Park cannot, in any sense, calling her a "human rights activist" when she can call herself a conservative political commentator. https://www.foxnews.com/us/north-korean-defector-ivy-league-nuts

Is there any evidence Yeon-mi Park's father was not arrested and imprisoned not simply for illegal trading but embezzlement? How did the elder Park acquire the copper, silver, and nickel he sold, the trade of which was the apparent cause of his arrest? https://unchainedpodcast.com/yeonmi-park-on-why-doing-business-with-north-korea-is-like-buying-a-ticket-to-a-concentration-camp/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.1.58 (talk) 22:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)


 * So, since what she's saying is against your personal political belief, then your mission is to slander her and the experience of North Korea dictatorship? It is shameful to write and awful to read. Activism is about human rights, and human rights are neither woke culture nor progressive parties. If universities brainwash people through radical leftist agendas and bully them whenever they do not bend, "human rights activism" stands up. It looks like the biased one here is you.
 * More like, there's a difference between the fight for fundamental human rights and advancing a traditional, class-based political agenda. The next thing conservatives would try to believe is that tax cuts for the wealthy are human rights activism. They're just human rights activists when in the United States, it is precisely the opposite: those who fight for universal healthcare access and living wages are fighting for human rights. 100.36.1.58 (talk) 12:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You're doing politics right now. Those are the words of a North Korean survivor that escaped the regime, wrote a book about her story, and fought for civil rights. Whatever your opinion may be on the matter, these are the facts. Consider the possibility that the Ivy League at Columbia University could be oppressing free thinking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.145.187 (talk) 23:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure. My politics aren't in accord with Miss Park's, or much of the tone of this article, as written, and our Wikipedia community, which intends to combat bias in biography, ought to take this under advisement and recommit ourselves to sticking to the facts. Also, to keep political bias from creeping in under the guise of fact, e.g., reporting precisely on Ms. Park's political comments, word for word, essentially using Wikipedia as a platform for what some would call propaganda. 100.36.1.58 (talk) 01:54, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Online, I see e.g., Some of that is very recent, some of it is older; at first glance, it seems to come from generally reliable sources, and I don't see much of it covered in the article. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Park having a right-leaning political opinion is not a reason for removing her human rights activism. She has worked with Liberty in North Korea and advocating for human rights in places such as North Korea, China, and North Koreans in South Korea. Furthermore, she has made a video addressing the lies she had been accused of in January this year. Some details, such as her father's death, might be different in the book from her speech at her One Young World speech in 2014. It is something she addresses in her Let's Talk about the Lies Livestream. Another simple explanation is that phycological trauma, e.g., rape, famine, public executions, etc., can affect you and make you make those kinds of mistakes and details such as her father's burial.--Los Perros pueden Cocinar (talk) 19:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, I'm not sure an appearance on a political show is enough to state that "political commentator" is her occupation. Can we get a reliable source that labels her and not use original research to force our opinions onto the article? — LOL T/C 19:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree; I’ve also read that the person trying to empathize with the narrative of her being a political commentator also compared her to people like Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens and justified the political commentator narrative by that means. I believe the person wanting to make this page political is just trying to portray her as a liar and discredit her claims because of an article made in The Diplomat. I don’t think that this intention is primarily to smear her reputation because she said something political. Los Perros pueden Cocinar (talk) 12:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

The idea that you can't be right-wing and an "activist" is simply Marxist dribble. She opposes human rights abuses in a left-wing dictatorship for one, campaigns for freedom of expression in the west (another human right) and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.22.86 (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Park has been attacked and robbed by three black women, and the white bystanders prevented her from calling the police yesterday. The question is did the black women attack her for her podcasts that put them in somewhat the negative light, or were they Trump supporters buying into their "China/Wuhan Virus?" -talk, 07 August 2021

In the "Political Views" section, the robbery story begins with "In the summer of 2020, during the George Floyd protests in Chicago". The source link however makes no mention of the protests, and readers may potentially draw a connection between the protests, which were in regard to police treatment of African-Americans, and the three alleged African-American attackers, which would be a correlation that the source link does not support. Dogface07 (talk) 09:32, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Not credible - require general wikipedia advice
I have been thinking about getting into wikipedia editing for awhile. I just finished reading Yeonmi’s book. It is very non-credible, which is unfortunately sometimes a problem among celebrity defectors due to lack of general - and particularly mainstream - knowledge outside North Korea about the country. Although this article includes, some note of her “controversy,” I believe making this more central and definitively phrased would improve the accuracy of this article. I would like to request advice on how to edit this page as I have never edited Wikipedia before. I understand any edits I will hold up on the quality of evidence provided, but I need some general pointers. My questions are as follows:

1) What is a good way to restructure the page to centralize the fact that her story lacks credibility? Should there be more mention in the intro? Separate controversy section? More commentary throughout? Etc? Is there a relevant sample someone could link for me to template around?

2) I gather from a previous thread that this topic is politicized due to her conservatism in America. I don’t really care and want to edit due to being interested in and well read about North Korea. However, reading up on her briefly online, I came across her saying bystanders stopped her from calling the cops on black thieves, since that would be racist. Admittedly I have not read deeply into this, and am more using this as an example, but this story seems suspect, particularly given her seeming propensity to lie. A bit like if an MSNBC host claimed a Trump supporter shouting “Sieg Hiel” jumped out of the bushes and attacked them. I will do more research, as this may be an improbable story that actually happened, but my question is whether adding comments about this or other events in America I may come across will call my future edits about her pre-America autobiographical claims into doubt in the eyes of people who can reverse my edits? Because in that case, I would rather just only talk about her claims about her time in North Korea/China and avoid any American.

3) Better to focus on a few key things in-depth or sort of laundry list a bunch of things? Also, how much should I aim to write to add to a story of this size? Quite a long essay I believe could be added on her falsehoods, but I recognize wikipedia is for summary and I am worried about sections being unbalanced in length. How much should I aim to add to an article of this length/importance?

Sorry if this is extra? I have no idea how any of this works. All help appreciated. Ax94d$ (talk) 05:27, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


 * You'll need reliable sources supporting such accusations, and accusations have to be attributed. Otherwise, it'd be original research, which is not allowed. Even if something seems very obvious to you, it can and often will be challenged and removed by others if you do not bring sources to back it up. Wikipedia policy kind of creates the situation where you cannot add something unless someone else said it already in mainstream media or academia, but the alternative is not having any such rules and having everyone add their own two cents (I think this is true, therefore it is). Centre Left Right  ✉ 05:46, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Since you've read her book, you know that it's her own personal story. She even calls it a memoir near the end of the book (in the acknowledgments section) I believe. And that she's clarified some points in her story where it might have sounded like contradictions. Or if she had buried her father or cremated him. But you do have certain aspects that make her book reliable. For example, Pinguin Publishing made sure that her book was factually correct, they even interviewed the people (when she escaped from China to Mongolia) to see if the story was true. North Korean officials even tried to stop the book's publishing. A lot of the smearing campaigns against Park have been made with clear political bias. Such as one claim was that her dad was also a sex trafficker and there's footage of the victims' mothers crying. Now I have no way to prove that he was not a human smuggler or that he wasn't, but what is true is that the women/mothers in the footage are basically coordinated by the North Korean Government to cry and call out Park and her father for trafficking their children. So NK government news isn't the most reliable source out there. The problem is that you don't really have any other source to compare her with. Like... the North Korean Government and their propaganda isn't the best source either. But in regards to Yeonmi's story, critics have taken a lot of things out of context. For example, the episode of her and her sister starving to death when her mother left for Pyongyang. Well, some people have used a clip of her mother talking about how rich they were, and that she was the Paris Hilton of Haysan/North Korea. All of that aside, the thing that was taken out of context was that the money that she and her sister had after her mom left was all spent on cookies or some sweets. Thus they starved to death. And about the incident of her being called a racist for calling the police after having been mugged, seems to be true. Here is a video that basically sums up basically what happened that night. Now, I'm being a bad Wikipenian right now, since I'm supposed to show you news articles and whatnot, but I think that this will suffice since the guy also mentions/reads a news article in the video. But if you've been a good Wikipedian, you would already have known this, and already know all of the details of the story in order to enlarge your mind. Anyways! Good to have another editor onboard Wikipedia! --Los Perros pueden Cocinar (talk) 05:57, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Criticisms of Park's claims
Regarding this revert I made, there is no reason to readd the paragraph because the point it is making is already covered in the article with reliable sources, and the existing coverage does not contain weasel words. Under the "Activism and critical reception" section:
 * "Mary Ann Jolley of The Diplomat has noted "serious inconsistencies" to contradictory refutations on several occasions. In an online update, Park claimed that many of the discrepancies in her quotations came from her limited English skills at the time, adding that, too, "[her] childhood memories were not perfect."

Centre Left Right ✉ 19:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Promotional material and propaganda
This article is a completely one-sided fluff-piece for an individual who's only source of notability seems to be that she's being propped up by right wing media outlets with questionable reliability. I removed a section on her "political beliefs" which was just repeating Fox News talking points, but this entire article needs to be half this long and less one sided, provided the subject warrants an article at all.

Pinging and  I believe this topic calls for your input. 46.97.170.225 (talk) 13:19, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The onus is on you to prove that this individual fails WP:BIO. Also the reason why the section on her political beliefs seems like it "was just repeating Fox News talking points" is because she is repeating Fox News talking points. The Fox News articles cited are interviews of Park where she states her beliefs, which have grown increasingly more conservative and aligned with the American right over the years. However, as reading more than a few paragraphs of this article will show you, Park was notable before she became prominent in the American right, as she was an outspoken critic of the North Korean government who defected from North Korea at an early age. Centre Left Right  ✉ 01:17, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Anywhere else on the internet, what you describe would be called "grifting". Obviously I don't intend to call her that directly because WP:BLP applies to talk pages. Insicentally, Fox News is not reliable for politics. Incidentally, as others have pointed out, her story about her defection and her criticism of North Korea leaves some to be desired, but that's not relevant to my point. 46.97.170.225 (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, it is your job to show that Fox News is misrepresenting something that it is being cited for. Fox News is not a reliable source for a lot of topics, but it is not blacklisted outright by Wikipedia because it is often used by American conservatives as an outlet for their views. One would not cite Fox News pundit for a claim regarding critical race theory, but it is fine if it is a Fox News piece about another conservative, UNLESS you believe there is a specific claim(s) that Fox News made in their article that was added to this Wikipedia article which you believe to be inappropriate. Centre Left Right  ✉ 19:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The claim isn't about another conservative. The claim is about a story which has been exposed as false by CWBChicago, according to the article itself. So you're basically arguing that Wikipedia can feature false stories by Fox, that Yeonmi Park was robbed by three black women, and BLM protestors defended the perpetrators, as long as it's framed as them describing the views and personal beliefs of Yeonmi Park? Fringe claims are WP:FRINGE claims, no matter how right wing pundits try to frame them. 46.97.170.225 (talk) 10:44, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If your grievance was specifically with the story about her being robbed, why did you remove the whole section which included her expressing her political views? The explanation "The only reliable source cited in this section is an article debunking one of her claims that in itself is not nearly notable enough" is sufficient to begin a discussion on the specific claim made by Park about her being robbed. You should have been specific from the onset on the talk page (as edit summaries are limited in length) and you should not have removed the entire section, just the part you believed was inappropriate. Centre Left Right  ✉ 21:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Biased article
This article is deeply disappointing. A quick Google search will reveal that she has been caught lying about her past on many occasions from credible news sources. https://thediplomat.com/2014/12/the-strange-tale-of-yeonmi-park/

As the article says, "But can the world rely on the memory of a 21 year old who left North Korea when she was thirteen? And what are the consequences if her memory has failed her and the picture she’s presenting of her life in North Korea and her escape to South Korea is not accurate?"

One of the problems with Wikipedia is when you get an enthusiastic minority to vote they can down-vote the truth and undo criticism. Please get some neutral moderators to fix the article and add some criticism of her, and stop undoing criticism. This Encylopedia deserves better than to just publish a liar's tall-tales without addressing a decade of criticism.47.145.115.178 (talk) 18:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)


 * There is literally a section in this article titled "Activism and critical reception" that cites the exact source you gave. One of the problems with people that complain on Wikipedia talk pages is that they do not actually read the article and do not have any genuine suggestions for improvements, which is what talk pages are supposed to be used for. Centre Left Right  ✉ 21:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You've made this argument twice, but it's very biased and flawed. In other Wikipedia articles about people, this would be under it's own section called "criticisms and controversies" not under "critical reception", the latter of which which sounds like people reviewing her book as an entertainment piece, vs the former which sounds like people challenging the contents of what she has had to say.
 * I definitely agree that we need fresh eyes on this, because there is clear bias in this talk page and article, regardless of whether or not the stances expressed herein are accurate or not. 24.53.245.211 (talk) 22:48, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Creating headings named "criticisms and controversies" runs afoul of NPOV and anticipating what the response will bee, just because it was done on some other articles doesn't make it right. OrgoneBox (talk) 02:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Neutrality
This article at times honestly feels as if it was written by Yeonmi Park herself, and there definitely seems to have somewhat of a more biased tone in favor of her. I feel like the "Criticism" category could be expanded upon and her political stances are not revealed until you read a small quote deep into the article where she criticizes "woke culture", just by doing a little bit of research it's obvious that she's a right-wing grifter, which, obviously wouldn't fit the standard for neutrality just by mentioning such, but there are sources which can be used to make it clearer on her beliefs. I feel like being more clear about the tone and uncertainty of her stories can be done or expanded upon. I'm going to link a few general sources that could be used to expand the article incase I feel like using them in the future, but anybody else is free to use them if they wish.

http://jooparkblog.blogspot.com/2014/12/yeonmi-park-defector-who-fooled-world.html

https://dailyorange.com/2023/04/conservative-activist-author-yeonmi-park-speaks-at-shaffer-art-institute/

https://www.nknews.org/2023/02/save-our-country-yeonmi-parks-new-book-compares-woke-america-to-north-korea/

B3251 (talk) 23:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I am I think inclined towards agreeing with you, but it could also be far worse.. I also think personally it is problematic to mostly exclude any criticism of much of what she has said to only the small paragraph. Some of the sources already used would probably be useful also, such as The Strange Tale of Yeonmi Park and I do not know how to add this or where but i think it is also important somewhere to contextualize the role of 'professional speaker' or 'activist' in the right-wing US circuit and 'human rights' circuit that defectors often traditionally have and still do fall in to.  SP00KY  talk  23:49, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree with you @B3251, much of the article detailing her life is described as hard fact despite Yeonmi Park herself being the only source for this information. Coupled with the fact her story has changed over the years, that many of her stories contradict each other, that many fellow defectors have questioned her stories, and the incredible financial and political pressure that many defectors are placed under to embellish their stories, should together be enough for wiki editors to change the language of this article to lean towards scepticism.


 * Personally I do not believe Yeonmi Park's stories, especially the really silly ones about her experiences with black people in Chicago, her claim that North Koreans have never seen a world map and don't know what "Asia" is, and her claim that she rebelled against North Korea after watching the Titanic movie on VHS. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 06:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I'd like to add that I think the "Personal life" section in particular seems a bit slanted. Four of the five sources in the "Political views" subsection are conservative outlets—Fox News, Turning Point USA, Fox Business, and Fox News again—and I'm not convinced that her alleged mugging even warrants its own subsection. — Matthew  / (talk) 13:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree, from what I’ve seen - Park is somewhat of a spokesperson for right-wing media; the only time she really gets press, it’s generally in very positive lights because it’s almost always Fox News or other right-leaning/wing news outlets. Some of the things she says are beyond ridiculous, saying “Even North Korea is not this nuts” in reaction to how “woke” Ivy League University was (https://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-defector-says-even-211100779.html)
 * Presently, from looking up recent articles about Park, she only really gets news coverage from conservative outlets that, unsurprisingly, are biased in her favour for her political views; press she gets from these kinds of outlets probably shouldn’t be taken as verbatim.
 * I think her political views should be more clearer in her introductory paragraph; it depicts her as a human rights activist, which, she likely is or at the very least was, but from looking at recent news about Park it often has to do with “wokeness”. B3251 (talk) 16:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I've added mention of her political views in the lead. I also merged the bit about the mugging into the "Political views" subsection, as the source describes Park citing the incident as a catalyst for her public opposition to "wokeness". — Matthew  / (talk) 17:04, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi,
 * I believe for having seen few fours of various interview, that she has a bit of struggle to construct her life again, and is influenced quite by the people she's interviewed from.
 * It is like she has the personality fragile and inclined to the public she's with.
 * I believe this Wikipedia article should have not much from controversy and very truthful related to he life, because i believe her story's absolutely backed by facts.
 * Jean-François Jfsimon1981 (talk) 22:54, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Jfsimon1981, did we watch the same interviews? I watched Yeonmi Park claim that North Korea only has a single train, that it only runs once a month, and that the passengers have to get out and push the train by hand. She has also claimed that Korea has no word for "love" (which a quick google search disproves), and she also claims people are executed for watching foreign movies, a claim that was laughed at by fellow defectors, experts in Korean studies, and is disproved by a quick google search for Pyongyang International Film Festival.
 * My favourite story by Yeonmi Park is the one where she claimed she was mugged by a gang of black people during a Black Lives Matter demonstration in 2020 in the same city that George Floyd was killed, and that when she tried to call the police for help she was surrounded by a group of white people who called her racist. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 09:07, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable we look the same stories.
 * Check others, you'll find coherence. But that depends on factors such as location in country and class people are from, it's not equal for everyone.
 * Keep in mind she was 13 when leaving and hadn't experience others might have, take in account this is her particular point of view.
 * Jean-François Jfsimon1981 (talk) 13:29, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Thats a pile of S***.
 * It literally says she “claimed” she was robbed and attacked…AND ONE OF THE PEOPLE WAS CAUGHT AND PLEAD GUILTY. Thats the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. She is a snake but F wikipedia liberals 2601:248:517E:B5D0:7821:FCE3:FB19:17DF (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * There's video footage of the perpetrators made by Park and there's security footage. Even there, when an actual crime took place, Park still lies about the story. - Void kom talk  12:13, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

sources and the text body
@Jfsimon1981 I'm glad you're trying to contribute to the page but by changing so many details in the Veracity of claims without checking to see if they were backed by the sources cited, you have ruined hours of work.

For example, look at this version: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yeonmi_Park&diff=prev&oldid=1157606638

The source cited says 17 to 18 years in prison, yet you changed it to 9 to 10 years, despite that not being reflected in the source citing that paragraph. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 03:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry i'll revert this one. Misunderstood. Indeed there are many interpretations of what YM said, some are not aligned. This article has to be aligned and right.
 * I'll fix according to your comment.
 * Regards,
 * Jean-Frnaçois Jfsimon1981 (talk) 11:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Her outlandish stories, like the the one station train pushing or the rats eating children eating rats and the rat eating dog and the dog raped the boy and shot the police... Those stories by her on Joe Rogan should be published alongside these other equally unverifyable stories on North Korea.  Both are claimed by her being interviewed on Joe Rogan, it shouldn't matter which of her stories seems logical to Wikieditors' minds when it comes to her words or what age she was, she's saying these recently and claiming they're true.  This article is disingenuous. 42.3.112.96 (talk) 19:22, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @42.3.112.96 if you scroll down to the section that says "veracity of claims" you can see that a massive portion of the wiki already deals with people's reactions to stories Yeonmi Park has either changed, have been proven to be untrue, or are unverifiable. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 23:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

"Crossing the entire Goby desert"
I deleted the "Crossing the entire Goby desert" allegation from the article. The author of the allegation clearly didn't read the book. There is nothing in the book about "entire Goby desert". The book describes the distance people had to walk with enough precision to show that it would, in fact, take one night of walking to get to the border. No need to include things in the article that are clearly false. 24.193.207.32 (talk) 19:14, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Joe Rogan screencaptures
User @Psalm84 is deleting large sections of the wiki critical of Yeonmi Park's stories, particularly her prominence as an internet meme following her interview with Joe Rogan. I would like to ask fellow editors for their opinions. Looking at Psalm84's profile it says they are a pro-life creationist, and their username and talk page suggests they are using Wikipedia to soapbox their religious faith, so I'm inclined to remove their changes to the Park wiki. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 03:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @The History Wizard of Cambridge: you've repeatedly reverted edits and edit warred, from my first recent edit here making false accusations and character attacks against me, without a shred of evidence, rather than discussing the substance of the edits in question. Since you want to make personal attacks, I'll add to what's in my profile here that I have exceptional intelligence and earned a bachelor's degree from a very well-regarded secular university. I have also not "delet(ed) large sections of the wiki critical of Yeonmi Park's stories..." Psalm84 (talk) 22:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * After a little digging it seems this user has a history of deleting information which casts doubt on NK defector stories, especially on the Lee Soon-ok wiki. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 03:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have a pro-truth-seeking viewpoint. Evidence as fairly evaluated as possible. It really is against Wiki guidelines, especially Assume Good Faith, to baselessly and automatically and so quickly try to impugn someone's motives. People have P.O.V.s. But since you invoked personal viewpoints, do you have a pro-communist one, so much so that that trumps facts and truth. Wikipedia isn't available like this in communist dictatorships. Psalm84 (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Going back to editing, the proper topic, KnowYourMeme and the other two sources, aside from Indy100, are not RS. Dazed is about style. One source can't even spell "bizarre" correctly! Psalm84 (talk) 20:48, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I see you're just going to edit war for all eternity so you can abuse wikipedia to soapbox your Christian belief :/ The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 12:57, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * In this instance you're just straight up deleting information you find uncomfortable, like how you removed all mention of the fellow North Korean defectors who questioned Park's story in line 130. I'd like to call on the opinions of editors @W1tchkr4ft 00 and @MatthewHoobin who looking above were very helpful in the April dispute on the neutral tone of the article. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 13:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with the Dazed source—it's a style magazine primarily, yes, but the topic of the Dazed article in question was published in their Life & Culture section, and fits within that scope. I think it should be included. I'm torn on the MSN piece—its content seems to have been provided by Sakshi Rakshale, an associate editor for KnowYourMeme. KnowYourMeme is not considered reliable, but that's due to its user-generated content; there doesn't seem to be consensus on the reliability of content by its staff. Per WP:BLP, we should probably err on the side of caution and not include it as a source. I'm also inclined to say that PKB News shouldn't be included. Dazed and Indy100 are fine though. — Matthew  / (talk) 13:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @ Matthew , I also said that Indy100 is fine as a source, but it doesn't support that edit's text. The article doesn't mention Joe Rogan memes, though it does display a picture of Park on the Rogan show with a caption saying as much. While it could be used in some way, to use it to support that edit would invoke issues of WP:OR and WP:synth (hope my wikilinks are correct, from memory). On Dazed, given the seriousness of this article's subject, a North Korean defector, and that it's a BLP, there are a number of reasons why it shouldn't be included. Neither the writer nor the publication deals with global affairs. It would be fine if the article was a lifestyle/cultural issue that calls for less expertise, but the writer's expertise is elsewhere. The piece's tone isn't sufficiently neutral, as per WP:BLP guidelines. And, on the whole, the two edits in question really don't meet Wikipedia BLP standards. Not everything even in a RS belongs in an article, especially a BLP. Is it noteworthy that a Joe Rogan appearance generated memes? And that was put in the lede. Also, that the writers for Dazed "mocked" Park. That really isn't NPOV language. While there aren't tabloids, so to speak, online, it's a tabloidish, sensationalistic article. But again, if something can be made of the Indy100 source, that would be different. Psalm84 (talk) 22:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Line 130? What are you referring to? Psalm84 (talk) 23:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Dang fighting and arguing on Wikipedia is crazy. Y all need to touch some grass — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.78.94 (talk) 22:38, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

“ A North Korean defector captivated U.S. media. Some question her story.”
Doug Weller talk 19:41, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Additionally maybe more info can be added from this https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/22/us/politics/yeonmi-park-north-korea-republicans.html Justanotherguy54 (talk) 14:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * These are both great sources. I'm currently in the process of making some very radical changes to this article in preparation to submit Yeonmi Park as a GA Article nomination. These articles will certainly help. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 02:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

I have attempted some cleanup (flow, organization, extreme redundancy and repetition, many instances of original research and source-to-text integrity issues, but stopped because there is too much close paraphrasing from the Washington Post Sommers report, and the Diplomat 2014 report; we may as well just have plopped those entire articles in here, and it's more than I can fix. The entire Veracity of claims section needs review for too-close paraphrasing, verbosity, and redundancy. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  03:03, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Prison sentence length
Re her father's prison sentence, Park self-corrected to 11 years, her mother said 10, but we described it as "vastly" different. Puffery needs to be checked throughout, and besides the redundant and repetitive writing, there are differences in word choices when describing the recollections of a child compared to others (eg, Park always claims, but North Korean records showed ... what makes them more credible? Let the facts speak for themselves-- Park says one thing, her mother says another.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  15:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Rampant plagiarism
There is too-close paraphrasing and outright copy-paste WP:COPYVIO everywhere in this article; it all needs to be checked. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  09:44, 27 August 2023 (UTC)