User talk:Geoarchive

Disambiguation link notification for January 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jungang line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bujeon station. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of SR (South Korea)


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on SR (South Korea) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jenyire2 (talk) 18:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of SR (South Korea)


A tag has been placed on SR (South Korea) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Jenyire2 (talk) 19:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SR Corporate Identity.png
Thanks for uploading File:SR Corporate Identity.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pukguksong-2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anju.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

General Missile Bureau of the KPA
The 미싸일총국 (referred to the General Missile Bureau on the KCNA website in English ) is a missiles development organization inside the KPA, not the operator of any armaments, which is similar to the BAAINBw inside the Bundeswehr of Germany and the PVTUTKL inside the FDF of Finland won't be the operator of any armaments in their armed forces. The appearance of the missile models together with military personnel wearing the uniform of the General Missile Bureau only confirms that these models of the missile are under development or it was undergoing tests related to the model of the missile. Maritime guy (talk) 14:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Response to Maritime guy
Thank you for your opinion. Maritime guy.

Before the start, the Hwasong-18 launch KCNA mentioned the name as Missile General Bureau(MGB), but the Korean word 미싸일총국 was exactly same, so the terminology 'Missile General Bureau' and 'General Missile Bureau' would not be that important in this disscussion.

Here is my opinion -- Firstly, there is no such evidence that Missile General Bureau is only just R&D department of KPA according to the cited KCNA report. There's also no evidence that it has similarity with European organizations you mentioned.

Secondly, your argument cannot explain the fact that subdivision(s) of MGB.
 * On February 18, 2023, KCNA announced that the First Red Flag Hero Company of Missile General Bureau guided drill of Hwasong-15 launch. The exact sentence from the KCNA report was that 'The Missile General Bureau guided the drill, and involved in it was the First Red Flag Hero Company which has rich launching experience among the units operating ICBMs.' and 'Comrade Kim Jong Un were the contents that the First Red Flag Hero Company of the Missile General Bureau should be mobilized in a drill using ICBM Hwasongpho-15 ' KCNA explicitly mentioned that 'the First Red Flag Hero Company' is a operator of the ICBM missile, not just R&D development unit. Even the KCNA states that the First Red Flag Hero Company has rich experience. And as you know, KCNA mentioned 'the second red flag company under the General Missile Bureau' for Hwasong-18
 * As you can see on the video of 2023-02-08 North Korean military parade, and the excerpt image from the parade one soldier with MGB patch and uniform held flag named '조선인민군제640미싸일병려단' in front of KN-23 TEL. The Korean word '조선인민군제640미싸일병려단' -- which is '조선인민군 제640 미사일 병 여단' in South Korean notation -- means "KPA the 640th missile-soldier Brigade", there is no such word relates to R&D in this name. Also, KPA strategic force guy did not hold the flag. Geoarchive (talk) 15:29, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * However, there is nothing to conclusively support your opinion that the General Missile Bureau (or Missile General Bureau) is the operator of any missiles and, as I said above, the appearance of the missile models together with military personnel wearing the uniform of the General Missile Bureau only confirms that these models of the missile are under development or it was undergoing tests related to the model of the missile. But now it has been reported by The Dong-a Ilbo, a major daily newspapers from South Korea on their English websites that the bureau is overseeing missile development and no mention of them are the operator of these missiles. Maritime guy (talk) 16:02, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

2nd Response to Maritime guy
Again, as you mentioned The Dong-a Ilbo is a major newspaper company of S.Korea, but it is not the North Korean news agency. The Dong-a Ilbo's report cannot refute the wording of 'missile-operating function of Missile General Bureau that clearly stated by Korean Central News Agency(KCNA). Secondly, there is no source of information on that given Dong-a' report and Dong-a is a private company owned by South Korean civilians. While KCNA is public news agency operated by North Korean government. All the official announcement and Kim Jong Un's activities are all announced through KCNA in North Korea. In other word, KCNA report is a conclusive support and it confirms!

Well, there is still possibility for MGB has missile developing function like BAAINBw that you mentioned. But that possibility is from unkwon source of information of South Korean journals, and that possibility cannot refute the exact announcement from official North Korea. Maybe someone can argue that MGU has both R&D and operating function, but there is no way to refute the public statement announced by KCNA at this time.

Otherwise, is there any evidence that KPA strategic force operates Hwasong-18 missile? I mean proofs such as photos KPA strategic force soldiers using this missile, document that Hwasong-18 is operated by KPA strategic force or Kim Jong Un's dialogue on KPA strategic force. I cannot see any proofs -- your argmuent that 'Hwasong-18 is operated by KPA strategic force' would be more ill-founded. Geoarchive (talk) 16:25, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

For more information this Yonhap News Agency report in Korean states that operator of missile has been changed.The second title of this reports says <전문가들 군사위성 준비 관측…'미사일총국 지휘관 참관' 운용주체 변화 시사>, and '미사일총국 지휘관 참관' means 'MGB commander has visited, '운용주체 변화 시사' means 'implying change of the operating agent. Your Dong-A report was outdated from this Yonhap report -- that Dong-A report is just after flag was shown, while this Yonhap report includes details after Hwasong-17 launch operated by MGB. If you are not sure on my translation, you may use dictionary or Papago or Google translator.

This Yonhap report cites two North Korean experts, Dong-Yup Kim(김동엽) and Yang Moo-jin(양무진). Right now I cannot find Kim's English profile, but I can find that he has interviewed with Seoul Foreign Correspondents’ Club Yang Moo-Jin is professor of University of NK studies, Here is his profile. Geoarchive (talk) 16:46, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So is there any report from KCNA that clearly mentions that the bureau is the operator and not just overseeing the development or testing of missiles, and if so could you please ref this report from KCNA here? As for your report from the Yonhap, which stated only that there are observations that...It may be that the main body for the operation of ballistic missiles that are capable of carrying nuclear warheads, such as intercontinental missiles, has been transferred to the Missile General Bureau. Maritime guy (talk) 15:30, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

3rd response to Marintime guy
As mentioned above, the KCNA report was that 'The Missile General Bureau guided the drill, and involved in it was the First Red Flag Hero Company which has rich launching experience among the units operating ICBMs.' and 'Comrade Kim Jong Un were the contents that the First Red Flag Hero Company of the Missile General Bureau should be mobilized in a drill using ICBM Hwasongpho-15 '

If you want continuously repeat this procedure, how about Dispute_resolution? Even though I am not familiar with these systems on English wikipedia, we would find other way to make somewhat conclusion. Geoarchive (talk) 17:32, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So you don't have any clearly stated from the KCNA to support your opinion? Of course, it doesn't means that you absolutely can't add these contents to the articles on the enwp, you also can utilize the (it cannot be in the words of affirmation), with full refs, to show what you want to within the section Notes in the article until they are fully confirmed. Maritime guy (talk) 16:18, 23 April 2023 (UTC)


 * OK I would clearly show that clearly-stated-KNCA using efn method. Geoarchive (talk) 18:21, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you sure you fully understand what I'm saying here??? Maritime guy (talk) 19:18, 23 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Is there anything wrong on that contribution except for grammar issues? Then please let me know, based on wikipedia rules.
 * By the way, citation is still needed for your personal opinion on Korean People's Army Strategic Force uses this missile. Please make some reference or note. Geoarchive (talk) 20:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC)


 * If there is no evidence that Korean People's Army Strategic Force uses this missile, then it should be unknown. Isn't it? Geoarchive (talk) 20:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Hwasong-18 seems to be in development status and thus it is not yet used by the Strategic Army of the KPA so far, and the Strategic Army would be the only operator of all strategic missiles of the KPA until there is conclusive support to confirm that the Missile General Bureau is the operator of the land-based ballistic missiles that are capable of carrying nuclear warheads inside the KPA. Maritime guy (talk) 17:27, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh! You presume that Hwasong-18 would be used by KPA strategic force since other North Korean missiles are used by KPA strategic force? You haven't given a evidence. You are doing Inductive reasoning. You are just pretending that next other North Korean missiles would go for KPA strategic force. Would you check Neutral_point_of_view? It says "Avoid stating opinions as facts." I think you are stating your personal reasoning as facts. Geoarchive (talk) 17:55, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The sources, which are provided by you, to support that you wanted to be put in the articles on enwp that the operator of the Hwasong-18 is the Missile General Bureau, are all just speculated to the missiles and their operator, and none of these conclusively confirmed your opinions when I have one definitive report mentioned that the bureau is only overseeing missiles development. Thus the one to "state opinions as facts" on WP:VOICE says is you, not me. Maritime guy (talk) 21:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)