Talk:Korean pottery
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea.
|
 |
This entry is mistakenly redirected from KOREAN CERAMICS which includes a general history of ceramics, within which later on the subject of pottery or materials turned on a potter's wheel is introduced. Please do not hack this article before you have read the divisions introduced. It is being written by someone who knows a good deal about the subject. And once the framework is laid out, will be edited by Seoul University professors.
:Ceramics includes pottery, but pottery does not include ceramics. POofYS Dated 06:35, 20 March 2005.
- It's a good idea to start an article with a reasonable amount of detail, rather than with one (plain text)sentence — especially as you don't have a user name. Editors on the look out for the many spoof, vandal, or substub articles added by anon users to Wikipedia every day are likely to assume that yours is one of them, as I did.
- Ah, I see that you have — except that you're not logged in. I'm not sure what's going on. Is more than one person using this account?
- If you open a Wikipedia user account (free, easy, and very useful), you can develop an article in your own User-space, adding it to the encyclopædia when it's ready.
- Please look at other Wikipedia articles, and see how they're presented (the names given to standard sections, such as 'External links' rather than 'Webography', for example), and try to present your article in the same way.
- Aleways sign your comments on pages like this one with four tildes (~~~~), even if you don't have an account; it makes it possible for others to contact you, as well as to find out something of your editing history. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:46, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Don't Panic over Semantics!
Moved the following sentence from article for discussion - and hopefully, eventual concensus.
Specific references to pottery which falls within the purvey of the larger genre ceramics will be attended later in this article.
-
- Before we go further in restructuring the clay world in Wiki -- please read my lengthy response to the original author, ( 65.94.158.92) who left a message on Pottery's talk page. We are seemingly dealing with semantics which vary from his clay culture -Korean, apparently- and the English/American clay culture. For in America, our point of view is very different -- Pottery includes ceramics, but ceramics does not necessarily include pottery or art. About the only time American clay people use ceramics is in course titles at university or when discussing technical processes. To many clay people, ceramics is becoming an American "dirty" word. So -- in a Korean Wiki (does one exist?) his clay article structure might be best, but such an organization would be very confusing and perhaps annoying in the English Wiki.
And, please - 65.94.158.92-, don't try and pull rank, I too know what I'm talking about - for the last 25 years. WBardwin 13:36, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] A question of accuracy, ceramics ... not semantics
Once again, the articles are redirected mistakenly.
With hope this shall be corrected.
The point is simple.
In the USA, ceramic roof tiles, ceramic architectural elements, ceramic walls, ceramic friezes, votive items, ceramic stoves, etc. ARE NOT the majority part of the culture, in Korea they are, and always have been. Pottery is a late invention, unlike within the Americas were it was the central invention.
A similar history occurs for example in Germany and Sweden and Spain, where ceramic architectural and domestic elements, especially tiling, and huge ceramic stoves, represent the significant historical and aesthetic items of the culture. One cannot talk about Spanish tiles under the genre of "pottery" - and where does one put Gaudi and his studios ... as potters?
That would lead to utter nonsense and inaccuracy.
In terms of the Wikipedia, I assume the wikipedia is global and not forced into American categorical thinking. Is that a fair question? In terms of demanding that all foreign countries and their culture fit into American models, the danger is that the wikipedia will lose both accuracy, and readership, and collapse into mirroring American society and thinking. And form a kind of censorship that eliminates other countries by fiat. This would be of use in American subjects, but not, for example, in dealing with the wide variety of contributors outside the USA who equally have a great deal of material to contribute that has an accuracy that comes from regional expertise and know the local terrain. With a template of only American models, ultimately the wikipedia would only become an American encylopaedia - kind of defeats the open model doesn't it?
In terms of ghettoizing Korean articles outside of the English wikipedia, which the reader above suggests, denying world readers the ability to read about Korean cultural history in English, I should think that such a thing suggests an attempt at censorship; and wikipedia only reflecting individual rather than global kinds of experiences. Restricting than expanding global knowledge.
Comments?
POofYS Dated 06:35, 20 March 2005.
- Wiki articles are not produced for authors or experts but for our English speaking audience. The headlines/titles of the articles are the only way they can find the information. I'm not suggesting we not use your information -- only that we find a tree - a structure - that will direct the audience to the right information. While you are writing the articles, they will probably be redirected into the current structure (I did not write that structure and I am not moving articles. But system administrators will probably stick to the current system until we offer a better one.)
- Once the articles are written, however, we can together come up with a tree under "Clay" or "Clay Products" or even "Ceramics," if you want to use a word of Greek/Latin origin, which can redirect and educate our reader. Please read the current Ceramics article to note how science/tech oriented the word is generally used here. Also read my previous note on the POofYS talk page. Please, don't let your authors become upset at the redirects -- but get things completed. As far as I know, I am one of the few active clay people on the Wiki at the moment. I will consult with clay people not on Wiki, get their ideas, and your people and I can work out a better structure - perhaps on a special user sandbox page. I and the system admin have been writing each other, trying to understand your purpose here, the points you are making, and the best way we can help you. Please read these scattered notes (on several related pages) in date order. I will monitor your articles and try to learn from them. Best wishes. WBardwin 06:04, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] New Material!
Author(s): Thank you for the new information on this article and others. "Mel Etitis" is doing a little copy editing on your material to make it less formal for English readers. I'm looking over the pottery information, and learning what I can. This should turn into a great article. Looking forward to more. WBardwin 10:08, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Redirect Problem
I don't want to stir up the ceramics/pottery/clay waters, but asthe article currently stands it is called "KP" and has a Wik link to KC. But this link simply circles back to KP under a re-direct. Would some-one please change this with-out destroying any appropriate re-directs?Kdammers 06:00, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] giving wrong impression?
sorry to intrude, but I think the first couple of sentences in this article are alarmingly misleading. The oldest pottery in the Korean Peninsula is among the oldest in Northeast Asia (or the WORLD for that matter) and dates to the Incipient Jeulmun pottery period (c. 9000-8000 B.C.). In the 1990s the Jeju University Museum and the National Institute for Cultural Heritage Research excavated a site in Jeju-do called Gosan-ni in wich they found the earliest example of Yunggimun (융기문토기) pottery. The article on Korean pottery gives the impression that the earliest pottery dates to the historic period!! I advise you to correct this.Cheers,Mumun 23:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] White Porcelain
Because of the creation of a new article, Joseon White Porcelain, the link "white porcelain" may need to be renamed so that the reader of this article knows that the link does not go to a "general white porcelain" article but a "Joseon white porcelain" article. Just a thought.
[edit] Maksabal막사발
I think Maksabal, which is transferred to Japan, should be added to the article.
