Talk:North Korea

Marijuana
http://www.nknews.org/2013/01/struggle-is-the-enemy-weed-is-the-remedy-the-truth-about-marijuana-in-north-korea/ -- A l i c e ✉ 06:51, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Is this really significant to the traveller? --Inas (talk) 07:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * For some it will be. I don't smoke myself - or drink coffee or tea, but I know some travellers can't do without a fix of their recreational drug of choice. It's now included very briefly with this edit.
 * I included this section on this discussion page because we don't use references here at WV and I thought some future editors might be sceptical. -- A l i c e ✉ 08:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Warning Box
I believe that a warning box ought to be included, mentioning that North Korean officials are likely to be significantly more skeptical of visitors amidst the rising tensions that these past months have entailed. 86.148.179.236 09:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I added one. Pashley (talk) 23:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * According to a usually reliable Hong Kong newspaper all tours have been cancelled. Pashley (talk) 00:39, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It is difficult to cover this. There isn't an official source of information that would list the state of tours. Also a tour today could easily be cancelled for good tomorrow --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:10, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Tours seem to be running again. Reworded caution boxes accordingly Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:43, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Should Juche be listed as a religion?
Wikipedia states: "Political scientist Han S. Park in his book Juche: The Politics of Unconventional Wisdom (2002) and theologian Thomas J. Belke in Juche: A Christian Study of North Korea's State Religion (1999) have both likened Juche to a religious movement.[29]". I believe it is relevant to list that Juche is religion is North Korea. Please discuss here if you believe otherwise.--Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * No

--The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 11:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, but do you have any objection to the current phrasing in the article, and if so, what? Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:47, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

disagree! that's like including pancasila or baathism as religion. personally, i do agree that some will say that juche is like a cult and they will include it in to religion. however, you can't say that someone is leaving, for example, islamism or chritianity or hinduism or buddhism to adhere pancasila or juche. you can stay as a believer judaism religious system and still can be agree or disagree with pancasila or juche. plenty of north koreans are buddhists or practicing and beliefing korean local religion. cc @ikan Kekek: @The History Wizard of Cambridge: @Andrewssi2: - Ustad abu gosok (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Do we need a warning headline?
Every once in a while, someone thinks that the North Korea article needs a massive warning as the first thing people see.

My understanding is that this should only happen when there is a clear and present danger when traveling to a country. Occasionally we need this for North Korea whenever it looks like hostilities may break out, however currently it appears that tour groups are running fine with only an incident involving a elderly ex-service American being briefly detained a couple of weeks ago. (and of course the long running Kenneth Bae case)

So the question is whether a prominent warning needs to be at the top of the page rather than in 'Stay safe' where I believe it belongs in 'normal' times? Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * No objections. There isn't any war there and traveler's will probably be very safe if they just "behave". ϒpsilon (talk) 05:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Obviously visiting North Korea is not a typical travel experience, however the article does address this in quite some depth. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It does, but really, don't we want to immediately ward off the kind of person from visiting North Korea who would need to read this article in the first place to know not to misbehave? What if they didn't take the time to read the whole thing? "Stay safe? I'll be fine I'm awesome, I've been to Thailand already and this will be something to brag about that none of my friends have done!" Those kind of people. Maybe just a one or two sentence thing? 173.17.92.242 17:21, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe we could expand the Tourist travel to North Korea is only possible as part of a guided tour. Independent travel is not permitted. If you are not prepared to accept limitations on your movements and behaviour then you should not travel to the DPRK at the present time. part. The article already has five warning boxes. There are other countries where you also could get yourself a ticket to prison by just saying something "wrong" (Turkmenistan, Eritrea, Belarus, Iran, Cuba et al) and their article don't have a ton of warnings. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Plus, you will need a visa which is relatively hard to get (BTW true for most of the above countries as well), move around with a guide everywhere you go, and I would imagine that anyone who is following the world news should basically know "what kind of place" NK is. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:09, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I understand not wanting to clutter the article with warning notices everywhere. Another sentence in that part seems appropriate since "limitations on movements and behavior" just doesn't really convey the gravity of the situation. North Korea is kind of an extreme example. 173.17.92.242 20:37, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll try to capsulize it in one or two more sentences there. You're of course welcome to improve it. ϒpsilon (talk) 21:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thailand is a good example actually.. it has a high violent crime rate and is currently undergoing serious civil strife. There are however no significant warnings in the article itself. ϒpsilon's expanded text in the title for North Korea seems to make clear the issue up front. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:14, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Has Thailand a high violent crime rate? That would be compared to other Asian countries, right? When I think of places where the local pistol & Kalashnikov club is roaming the streets collecting donations some Eastern European and African countries and most of Latin America comes to my mind... ϒpsilon (talk) 12:21, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Certainly any war zone article, especially a dangerous place like Walt Disney World, is going to have the big red warning. Technically, North Korea is legally still at war — even if it's often a cold war — and bad things can happen. The only reason I can see to change the existing warnings is if two say the same thing (like the "United States advises its citizens against travel" bit) they could be combined as one. K7L (talk) 02:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * There is probably something to be said in keeping the warnings separate. The State Department warning to American citizens is actually specific to the situation between North Korea and the United States (i.e. the lack of diplomatic relations). Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Tourism to NK has taken off (with 4k-6k Western visitors per year according to WP), with very few incidents recorded. Hence, I propose the warning box to be removed, since that suggests the risks related to a NK visit are not greater than a visit to most other countries. ArticCynda (talk) 11:08, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * 4k-6k? I'm sure there are many fine European cathedrals which get that number of voyagers or more in a day. That's hardly having "taken off"... and even one incident of the sort which are being reported for DPRK is one too many. K7L (talk) 16:36, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that every incident is one too many, but my point is that it's not unsafe enough &mdash; in my opinion &mdash; to justify a warning box if thousands of travelers visit the place without issues at all. 4k-6k is indeed less than the number of visitors that visit the Eiffel Tower each day, but would one incident there suddenly cause the Eiffel Tower to deserve a warning box? And what about the Alps, where 300 people day per year in winter sport related accidents? Virtually every Austrian mountain town needs a warning box if you consider zero incidents as the treshold for a dangerous destination.
 * A visit to NK is not 100% safe, but there is no such thing as a 100% safe destination. That doesn't mean each and every country needs a warning box though. Some people will manage to break the local laws and get arrested in just about any country, not only in NK. ArticCynda (talk) 21:29, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Have we already forgotten the Warmbier incident? I think we should make it clear that while crime is the last of the worries of the Western visitor to North Korea, the regime making an "example" of you for supposed or actual misdeeds or saying the wrong thing is a serious risk. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:36, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Again, that is one (overhyped) incident on a total of 4k-6k people visiting the country annually without any incidents whatsoever. ArticCynda (talk) 08:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * It is one of multiple incidents. Our duty is to the voyager, not to the DPRK administration. If there's a danger, we say so. K7L (talk) 13:20, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Agreed. It's important to keep in mind that an "incident" in Paris might mean your wallet gets stolen, whereas an incident in North Korea might mean torture and hard labor in a prison camp (or even death). —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:33, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that travelers should be adequately warned about risks, but in this case it seems that such risk is exaggerated. No tourists were killed in the DPRK (please state your source for that, Granger), and according to Wikipedia, only 2 tourists got into trouble (excluding South Koreans, who are obviously met with hostility, and Americans, who tend to get themselves into trouble wherever they go, and are also met with hostility due to their/their government aggressive nature).
 * It also causes inconsistencies:
 * There is a far greater risk of injury when touring through Algeria (particularly close to borders with Libya and Mali) or Colombia than going on a guided tour through the DPRK, yet neither Algeria nor Colombia has a warning headline on WV.
 * There is indeed a risk of being detained for political reasons in the DPRK, but there is a much greater risk of ending up in a prison or labor camp in Belarus or USA, where opponents are routinely locked behind bars without a trial. Neither of those countries has a warning headline on WV either, though.
 * It appears to me that, based on the facts, the risk associated with a guided tour in the DPRK is very low as long as you stick to local laws (which you should in every guest country). ArticCynda (talk) 09:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Tourists have been killed in the DPRK. See Kumgangsan for one. Otto Warmbier is a more recent example (though strictly speaking he died in the US, having been released from North Korea in a coma). I also don't think it makes sense to arbitrarily exclude Americans and South Koreans from consideration the way you seem to be suggesting. Travellers are travellers, even if they come from a country the North Korean government doesn't like—if they're going to be met with such severe hostility, it's essential that we highlight that in the article. As for the relative risk of being locked up in different countries, I would be very interested to see estimates of what fraction of tourists are imprisoned without trial in Belarus, in the US, and in North Korea. —Granger (talk · contribs) 09:49, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * That said, I'm not sure the warning needs to be at the top of the page. The advice for American, South Korean, Malaysian, and Canadian citizens in the "Get in" section, together with a good "Stay safe" section, might be enough. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:03, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

"Difficulties regarding Japanese citizens"
I'll say! Some were kidnapped decades ago and remain captive. Should that be mentioned in the article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:00, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, they were typically kidnapped from Japan itself (or from Europe whilst visiting there). To my knowledge North Korea has not kidnapped any visitors to North Korea who come for tourism, and hasn't engaged in kidnapping South Koreans or Japanese since the 1980's.
 * A lesser known problem are Japanese citizens of Korean decent who were encouraged to settle in North Korea. Once there they found themselves completely unable to leave again. It isn't so straightforward as a 'normal' kidnap since those people made a conscious decision to go live in North Korea in the first instance.
 * I guess your reference to the kidnapped Japanese citizens might be relevant in the history section, but probably less so for today's immigration purposes. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * That sounds reasonable. It probably should be mentioned, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * those people made a conscious decision to go live in North Korea? No. Those people made a conscious decision to go live in Korea. They weren't informed by the Japanese that they were being shipped to the North (instead of repatriated to some other part of Korea) until after it was too late. K7L (talk) 04:57, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Maybe you are thinking about the repatriation of Korean workers by Japan directly after the war? This is different.
 * Many Japanese of Korean descent identify with North Korea, even to this day (Known as 'Chongryon'). From the 1950's many were encouraged by their communities and the North Korean government to move to North Korea and join the socialist paradise there as part of the homecoming movement. They were certainly aware that they were going to North Korea.
 * Needless to say most regretted that decision.
 * Zainichi_Korean Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:28, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Of general interest is also the policy of repatriation of Koreans to North Korea by Japan itself. Zainichi_Korean
 * It should be noted that also in this case the people who agreed to go knew they were going to North Korea, which made sense at the time since it was more prosperous than South Korea was. Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:37, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Hundreds of high quality North Korean images available for use
Uri Tours has released several hundred high quality images from North Korea under CC-BY-SA, and these are now available for usage on our project. I encourage Wikivoyage editors to take advantage of these fantastic images as many could be put into use on this project. Russavia (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Great! Decent pictures of North Korea are rather hard to get hold of (for obvious reasons) and the CC requirement makes it again harder still.
 * Of particular interest are the pictures of the new Masik ski resort near Wonsan. I'll try and add some of those later today. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:41, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for spotting these and bringing them to our attention, Russavia. -- A l i c <font color="#00EEFF">e <font color="#FF3333">✉ 01:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

The North Korean Won and its curious exchange rate
So apparently not even the internet can agree as to the "official" exchange rate of North Korean Won... Compare this to that - This difference is anything but trivial and if it were possible to exchange any currencies at two different rates, people would get stinkingly rich off of arbitrage... Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Given that regular visitors can't actually get hold of North Korean Won at all, this isn't really an issue. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * So maybe we should not mention any rates at all? Official or otherwise? There really is no general rule on this, anyway...Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:46, 13 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm only seeing the 'Currency in North Korea' infobox and 'Buy'. I'm interested as a visitor to know how North Koreans use money, even if I myself have no real prospect of using the local currency. As a side note, you can very likely get hold of this currency in China, specifically around Dandong. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:34, 13 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Have a look at the very first paragraph of the "buy" section... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:41, 13 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I did... and? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:49, 13 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The North Korean Won is described both ₩130=$1 and ₩1315=€1. Given that euros and US dollars are about of equal value, either of the values has to be wrong. Looking at six different currency sites (w:North_Korean_won, scroll down a bit), there are in general two different values you get; either about ₩140 or ₩990 for €1. Confusing. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Sure it is confusing because the exchange rate for North Korean ₩ is inherently confusing :)
 * The article should emphasis that A) exchange rates are of little or no practical use to the traveler and B) if you really want to unofficially get hold of North Korean currency then all sorts of exchange rates are available, none of which can be easily predicted. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:59, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Spelling
Should the default spelling for North Korea be American or British English? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * British. They hate Americans. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)


 * This was discussed before by user Alice that concluded 'British', but I can't find reference to this on the archive Talk:North_Korea/Archive_2003-2012.
 * I believe that like China, the North Koreans have a preference for 'International English' but defining in stone which minor variant of English they use probably isn't that high on their agenda right now. Alice claimed that British English spelling was used on official documentation, although it wouldn't surprise me a great deal to see American spellings used in the country as well. Wikivoyage seems to care more about this issue than most countries themselves :) --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:54, 14 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Well nor for nothing, but spelling can be Serious Business... I personally only want it to be resolved in a clear way that avoids edit wars. Even though I personally prefer Websterian spellings as they are marginally more phonetic and hence logical. Hobbitschuster (talk) 02:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Interesting travelogue
Sorry for touting, but I think this might be interesting reading (and watching). Normally foreigners are not allowed to take one step on North Korean soil without being accompanied by a guide. Also, virtually everyone can enter only by plane flying to Pyongyang, or coming in from Beijing to Pyongyang on a nonstop train. This is of course also the reason why much of the country is made up of Next-to-impossible destinations (in other words places where they don't bring tourists to).

However, some Austrians managed to enter the country "through the backdoor" on the railway from Russia into the extreme northeast of the country and onwards to Pyongyang (and traveling without a guide). Here is a half-hour video of their trip and here's the very interesting reading. As a curious side note, the North Korea article at WT is also linked to (however, the travelogue is from 2008 when we still were at WT).

Ps. if you are a train fan you likely will find that Youtube channel very interesting. For example our Moscow to Urumqi can be seen on video, with the difference that the guys travel all the way to Tibet... ϒpsilon (talk) 18:03, 29 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Probably worth mentioning that there is a distinction between Chinese nationals and other foreigners (i.e. Chinese citizens have some access to visas and non-guided travel that other foreigners do not)
 * I often wondered about getting into North Korea from the Russian side. The border city of Rason is a free trade zone that encourages Chinese gamblers, but I wasn't able to find much about it. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:51, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Typo in the map?
Is there an error in the map? The dark green northwestern region seems to be labeled "Pyongyang", but the link in the "Regions" section makes it look like it should be labeled "Pyongan". —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)


 * A typo I guess :) (Although the name Pyongyang is partially derived from Pyongan‎ province). I can fix later when I have access to software that can edit SVG files. You can also fix yourself if you like. Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:31, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Read section
There are a few first hand books about life in North Korea ('Nothing to Envy' that is listed is a collection of stories from people who left the country).

That said, most books listed here are about the infamous concentration camps that are still operated there. Although an important subject, it isn't something any traveler is going to get exposed to. Should we replace some of these books with subjects more around general life in this country? Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I think that's a good idea. I would suggest replacing one of them (maybe The Aquariums of Pyongyang, which I read and found less interesting than Escape from Camp 14) with Suki Kim's Without You There Is No Us, a fascinating piece of investigative journalism about teaching English as a foreigner in Pyongyang. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:54, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I've gone ahead and made the change I suggested. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:53, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Great! --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:40, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Time and spelling conventions
Below is a proposed infobox to let readers know which formatting conventions to use in Wikivoyage articles. Do you agree with these proposals? If you have direct knowledge of what is most commonly used in the country, please let us know. Ground Zero (talk) 18:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't think any of us know the answers, and it may be hard to figure out. Given the difficult of getting any reliable information about North Korea, I'd be fine with either picking a standard (which we can change it later if it turns out to be wrong) or simply not bothering to try to standardize time formats and spelling right now.
 * For currency, I'd include the usual warnings for each one, something like this:
 * Please show prices in the currency in which they appear, e.g. US$100 and not $100, 100 dollars, or USD 100; ¥100 and not CN¥100 or 100 yuan; ₩100 and not NK₩100 or 100 won.
 * That said, which formats should we use? If we're okay assuming ₩ means North Korean won and not South Korean won, and ¥ means Chinese yuan and not Japanese yen, can we not also assume $ means US dollars and not any other dollars? Or perhaps we do need to be more explicit and use "CN¥" or something. --Bigpeteb (talk) 18:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Godd suggestions. I've revised the proposal. I think it is safe to assume that S Korean won would not be accepted in DPRK. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 18:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Moved to the top of this page. Ground Zero (talk) 04:38, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

"And independent travel" vs. "As independent travel"
In this edit, someone changed a word based on grammar. However, I'm not so sure about the edit, especially as that user has since been globally locked. The words carry somewhat different meanings and perhaps this could be addressed. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 18:51, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Assuming this information is still accurate, in my interpretation these both amount to the same thing:
 * "Tourists may only travel to North Korea as part of a guided tour. Independent travel is not permitted." (The meaning with "and" joining the two clauses.)
 * "Tourists may only travel to North Korea as part of a guided tour because independent travel is not permitted." (The meaning with "as" joining the two clauses.)
 * The change to "as" does perhaps imply a cause-and-effect relationship more than using "and", but I don't think the particulars of that detail are worth quibbling over. The important information that travellers care about is still there and still (presumably) correct. --Bigpeteb (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Protection
mentioned on Talk:United States of America that the protection here should be lifted, since there was no consensus for the indef protection. I however, in my opinion, would oppose that because of the high media attention NK gets, but may we now have a formal consensus now? <font face="BlinkMacSystemFont">SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose indef protection. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose protection Tai123.123 (talk) 02:12, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

I would add a recommendation of some kind to not travel
Besides the obvious issues of propaganda and the sheer danger of going to North Korea I'd like to talk about something else: Money. Not only does tourism make up a solid amount of state income, no it is a legal and easy way for NK to launder it's money and get western currency which is VITAL for NK. I think people should be made aware of that. I sell eggs (talk) 16:11, 20 February 2023 (UTC)


 * And because of the propaganda that you've been fed, I suggest reading Be fair, because the DPRK is not alone in relying on tourism for a stable state income. SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 20:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The income alone wasn't my point. My point is that tourism is a legal way for NK to get hands on western currency I sell eggs (talk) 20:51, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There are lots of things that the U.S. government does that I am opposed to. Should we discourage travellers from visiting the U.S. then? As a travel guide, it is not up to us to discourage travellers from travelling to a place on political grounds. The only time we discourage travellers form visiting any place is if there are serious safety issues with regard to doing so. Otherwise, we just provide the facts and let travellers make up their own minds. The dog2 (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with you guys. The point I sell eggs brings up is addressed in a general way in Responsible travel. We could probably edit it to make the point that not only authoritarian countries but countries with governments that engage in behavior that is offensive to a traveler could be reasons to avoid traveling to the countries in question, but naming names goes beyond the purview of this site and could give rise to unnecessary arguments. Each country should be described fairly, and then it is up to each reader to decide whether to travel there. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Are flights actually available? - Feb 2024
I saw some updates by @ Jpatokal suggesting that flights have resumed. It is really hard to find any current flight data in and out of FNJ airport, with the official Air Koryo website not showing current information. Vladivostok airport however is showing a scheduled flight today, but Beijing (BJS) airport doesn't seem to have anything. Do we have a reliable source of current flights?

Additionally, the text doesn't make temporal sense: "depart at 11:30 every Tuesday and Saturday, and return from Pyongyang at 09:00 on the same days" - that can't be correct. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:18, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I updated the section claiming Air China is flying, since AFAICT they are not, but didn't touch the Air Koryo bits, which all appear to be pre-COVID.
 * Air Koryo's website claims to offer flights but I'm not seeing them on the usual suspects like Google Flights, Flightconnections or Flightaware. It's all a bit of moot point since tourism doesn't "really" appear to have resumed yet. Jpatokal (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, although I suspect there are scheduled flights. I think that perhaps you can't book Air Koryo tickets directly (only through an approved travel agency), and hence it is hard to look this info up online. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Page banner
The current page banner is really weak for a country article.

Banner 1: Here is a better one that represents the propaganda side of what people travel to DPRK for: It is already in use on the Baekdu Mountains article, so we would have to find a new banner for that. Ground Zero (talk) 12:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I prefer the new banner or a potential banner of the unopened, as the latter symbolically represents the country on a micro-scale. -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 12:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The problem is fitting a picture of a very tall building into a 7:1 format. We'd need a picture taken from very, very far away. Ground Zero (talk) 12:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Banner 2: Here is one that I made from a picture of the Pyongyang War Museum: Ground Zero (talk) 12:26, 1 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I think the Pyongyang War Museum is better than the original banner but I still favour banner 1. -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 12:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Banner 2 seems most interesting to me. I guess my order of preference is 2, 1, 0. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ – banner replaced with banner 2 (as 1 is already used on Baekdu Mountains). -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 09:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)