Talk:East Sea/Archive 1

Ed Poor,

East Sea is a local name both in South Korea and Vietnam. It is not an internationally accepted geographic name.
Geographic explanation for the Sea of Japan is obviously needless for this page, but your explanation is inaccurate. The sea is bounded by the Japanese archipelago, Sakhalin and the Asian Continent, not only the Korean peninsula.

--Nanshu 00:37, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)

East Sea is an internationally accepted geographic name. See: Talk:South_Korea#Notice. Kokiri 12:16, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I want to have a discussion at a single page, so go to Talk:Dispute over the name Sea of Japan. --Nanshu 00:47, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I have changed this into a redirect to the Sea of Japan. This, because that's the only use of East Sea on Wikipedia so far. I have checked for the other mentioned East Seas, but failed to get results. Sure, places such as Ostsee when translated word by word into English give East Sea – rather than Baltic Sea – but that's not an internationally used term. This is the case for the East Sea/Sea of Japan. Kokiri 16:40, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I'm still in no mood for getting involved in this issue, but I have to do before Kinori makes the situation worse.

The Vietnamese certainly use "East Sea" for "Bien Dong". If you can't find an example, it is only because the Vietnamese are inactive in Wikipedia. Here is an official example of using "East Sea" by them: http://www.mofa.gov.vn/English/Vietnam/geograph.htm --Nanshu 00:47, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I changed it back to disambiguation. The Vietnamese exclusively use East Sea for the South China Sea. DHN 20:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Sea, from the Holy Bible

In the Holy Bible, look up Ezekiel 47:18. Depending on the translation, Dead Sea is called East Sea or Eastern Sea [1] [2]. This is the last call. If nobody objects within the next 24 hours, I will add Dead Sea to both the East Sea and Eastern Sea disambiguation pages.--Endroit 00:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to 2002?

i've reverted to the version originally created by 23:12, August 14, 2002 Stephen Gilbert, since there has been no "consensus" since then. Appleby 16:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is thoroughly disingenuous. The very next edit, in early 2003, added the Vietnamese usage, and it had always been a disambiguation page since then until your unilateral moves. --Nlu (talk) 17:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it is obvious that it has not always been a disambiguation page, it has been a redirect back & forth. i'm the one who created a new page called East Sea (disambiguation) so that both versions can coexist. there has never been a "consensus" although i'm pretty sure i've provided the proper citations & wikipedia policies & wikipedia article examples. but we will revert to the original version until consensus/mediation/arbitration. Appleby 17:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Primary meaning

Merriam-Webster Online believes that the primary meaning of East Sea is East China Sea. So there. --Nlu (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

actually it has no entry for "East Sea", it just searches for "east" & "sea" separately, & Wikipedia:Disambiguation specifically says this should not be done, as disambiguation pages are not search indexes. same thing endroit tried. Appleby 04:12, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but why are you reverting cited accurate info?

Appleby asked "but why are you reverting cited accurate info?" in his last edit.

Here's my answer: The disambiguation page is not a place to list details and citations like Appleby did, hence the reversions.--Endroit 05:49, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

then delete the citation links, but don't delete accurate content supportable by citations to reputable publications. thanks. Appleby 05:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's way too long and redundant. There's no need for the details. The other version was shorter and to the point. ... And it seemed like you were trying to insert your particular POV, on how one was more important than the others (according to your POV).--Endroit 06:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biblical reference to the Dead Sea

The Hebrew interpretation of the word Dead Sea can be East Sea, but "East Sea" isn't an alternative name for the "Dead Sea". There are extremeley few cases where the Dead Sea is actually referred as East Sea, and even if they are used, they are used in a sense that the Hebrew word can be sometimes interpretated as "Eastern Sea". I'm of Christian faith, and I've never heard Christians and Christian publications refer Dead Sea as East Sea. Deiaemeth 11:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The King James Bible is an English Bible originally written in 1611. (The original Hebrew usage is not important here.) The Biblical passages Ezekiel 47:18 and Joel 2:20 use East Sea to mean Dead Sea. Other Bibles (written in English) use either East Sea or Eastern Sea for the same passages. The WebBible Encyclopedia entry for East Sea says that East Sea means Dead Sea.--Endroit 17:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

East Sea diambiguation page

I think the differneces between Usage of name of East Sea along with Sea of Japan and Chinese and Vietnamese usage of the term "East Sea" for South China Sea and East China Sea is that "East Sea (Sea of Japan) receives international recognition, but the other two terms don't. Right now, as many people know, there is a dispute over naming of Sea of Japan/East Sea, and many interntationally recognized publications use both terms to name the region. That's why in most publications, Sea of Japan is termed as Sea of Japan (East Sea), Sea of Japan/East Sea. (in Some cases only one term is used, example: google earth uses the term East Sea).

The usage of the term "East Sea" for East China Sea and South China Sea is strictly refined to local use (I don't think the Chinese people have much problem with that, as East Sea and East China Sea is very similar), and the name "East Sea" for "South China Sea" is not recognized at all by international publications and is strictly local and is only used by Vietnamese government/authorities (you don't find South China Sea/East Sea, South China Sea (East Sea) in ANY of internationally recognized and reputable publications. A Search done on "east sea" on google finds the first 100 searches strictly pertains to "East Sea (Sea of Japan)".

The other definitions for East Sea, including the biblical definition and local terms for East China Sea and South China Sea is very rarely used. Since the most populous definition for "East Sea" pertains to "Sea of Japan", East Sea should work like CD disambiguation page, where CD redirects to Compact Disc article but has a subtitle on the top that that links to the CD (disambiguation) page. CD has multiple meanings (around 30), but a search done on CD directs to the most common usage. Since "East Sea (meaning Sea of Japan)" is the most common usage for the name "East Sea", East Sea should redirect to "Sea oF Japan". Deiaemeth 11:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my response on Talk:Sea of Japan. --Nlu (talk) 17:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my response @ Talk:Sea of Japan also.--Endroit 18:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected

No activity here at all for ages and ages and ages. --Tony Sidaway 01:55, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

added dispute tag, pending mediation. Appleby 02:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't you find something a bit more important to quibble about? --Tony Sidaway 02:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woohookitty restored protection, but has since said that he's bowing out of the page protection business for now. I've applied on WP:RFPP for unprotection again. --Tony Sidaway 12:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I still cannot imagine what could possess someone to edit war on this disambiguation page, I'm now going to give this wacky idea of letting people edit our website another go. Maybe it'll come to nothing, but who knows? --Tony Sidaway 05:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your interest, it's been tough to get some unbiased sanity here. it all comes down to whether "East Sea" is an english term, & what its primary meaning is.

as you can see, major english reference works recognize it as an english term, and its primary, if not sole, meaning is as the alternative term for the Sea of Japan. there are other, pretty obscure/rare uses, & especially the foreign language uses are not generally recognized in english usage. anyways, since it is a recognized english term, it should say so, rather than put it on the same level as other far more obscure uses. second, since the primary, overwhelmingly dominant usage is as an alternate name for "sea of japan," East Sea should simply redirect to Sea of Japan. the latter article should have a hatnote referring to this disambiguation page. this is the logical format followed by CD, Chicago, Stanford, and countless other examples. it seems simple, but you can take a look at Talk:Sea of Japan for the gory details. thanks, we desperately need some outside help, & mediation's just not happening.

Encyclopedia Britannica: East Sea: see Japan, Sea of [3]
Encarta: East Sea: Japan, Sea of, [4]; Encarta Dictionary: East Sea: see Japan, Sea of [5]
Columbia Encyclopedia: Japan, Sea of, or East Sea [6] [7]; East Sea: See Japan, Sea of [8] [9]
American Heritage Dictionary: Japan, Sea of (East Sea) [10]; East Sea: See Sea of Japan [11]
National Geographic: Sea of Japan (East Sea) [12]
Rand McNally: Sea of Japan (East Sea) since 1997
World Atlas: Sea of Japan (East Sea) [13]
Search engines, "East Sea" without Wikipedia: Google [14] Yahoo [15]
Search engines, "East Sea" in English, without Wikipedia or partial names "South East Sea" and "North East Sea": Google [16] Yahoo [17]Appleby 05:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]