This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and contribute to the
discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article was created after a discussion at the Singapore Summit article. It is basically a cut-and-paste job from a number of articles, and hence needs a lot of copy-editing.--
Jack Upland (
talk)
09:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)reply
This article should be moved back to
2018–19 Korean peace process. It was moved to 2020 because the year changed, not because sources said that there still was an ongoing peace process, which is
WP:OR. Right now 2020 is discussed in a section called "Breakdown of relations" and its contents do not suggest that the process is ongoing, but quite the contrary. –Â
Finnusertop (
talk â‹…
contribs)
06:58, 5 August 2020 (UTC)reply
I agree: move it back. And maybe we could come up with a better phrase than "peace process".--
Jack Upland (
talk) 21:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC) I take back my agreement, because on reflection the situation isn't clear, either way you look at it. Trump is still talking about another summit,
[1] and Moon continues to pursue the Sunshine Policy.
[2][3] North Korea continues to observe a moratorium on tests of atomic bombs and ICBMs. North Korea walked out of talks in Sweden — just as the US walked out of talks in Hanoi. It has employed some strident rhetoric — nothing new about that. And it blew up the liaison office, which was basically a stunt. I don't see a strong argument for saying the peace process ended in 2019. Just yesterday, the US government reiterated its readiness to negotiate.
[4]--
Jack Upland (
talk)
05:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)reply
 Disagree Article
just updated to confirm what I suspected - peace process is indeed ongoing. There will always be quiet periods, but this has been going on for years and years so no reason to think it would stop now... Thanks.
Crep171166 (
talk)
09:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Given subsequent events, I have changed my mind again and agree with the proposal. We can include an "Aftermath" section in the article, but the fact is there have been no major events since 2019. This is supposed to be about summits etc. As discussed above, this was never intended to be an open-ended article. This is not about the peace process in general. We have several general articles, including
Korean reunification,
North Korea–South Korea relations,
North Korea–United States relations,
Korean conflict,
Sunshine Policy etc. Trump is no longer President, and while North-South dialogue is continuing, this could be covered in
North Korea–South Korea relations. The tempo of events in recent times is such that the information could easily be incorporated into those general articles. If the tempo increases, a new article could be created. It is pointless to extend the article into 2020 and 2021.--
Jack Upland (
talk)
09:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)reply
The section now entitled "Deterioration of relations" began with the following:
Two years after President Donald Trump's 2018 meeting in Singapore with Kim Jong-Un, U.S. experts both within and outside the government estimated that North Korea's stockpile of fissile material had grown considerably larger. Various assessments concluded that the North by then had produced enough fuel to build about 20 nuclear weapons.
I have removed this. Firstly, it's just an estimate. Secondly, stockpiling fissile material is not a violation of any agreement made. Thirdly, it sounds like the stockpile (if it exists) has been added to continuously and so doesn't amount to a breakdown in relations. Fourthly, the article says, under "Background", that in 2017 North Korea might have had as many as 60 nuclear weapons. So does this mean: North Korea's nuclear arsenal (could) = 60 + any nukes built since 2017 + 20 potential nukes? I think this is too vague to include.--
Jack Upland (
talk)
22:41, 5 August 2020 (UTC)reply
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: