Google doesn’t want to choose sides, either. I’ve never even heard of the “West Sea” before (Yellow Sea). It does the same thing with the Persian Gulf / Arabian Gulf.
The fight over Dokdo is a bit more relevant considering its actual territory, especially if one considers the fisheries and other marine resources present in the area. Not to mention you don’t see the Germans whining about East Prussia or Silesia despite those areas being German for centuries unlike Dokdo.
As noted below it was used in most maps until well into the 19th Century. And one can argue the terms “North Sea” in Europe is equally vague. Once the term “East Sea” become familiar, this will be no problem.
In the chart if one scrolls down, a clear majority of maps did not use “Sea of Japan” until the 19th Century when Japan became influential thanks to the Meiji Restoration. In a
Well, that’s probably because the Germans have a pretty good idea that people are not going to look very favorably on their claims to Polish territory after the last time. I agree that the Dodko thing isn’t as silly as it looks at first blush, though. It’s not necessarily the islands themselves that are in contention, it’s the extended territorial water claims that come with them.
This sort of thing is a big deal among digital map makers (I work in the industry). There are many places where the name of some geographic entity is disputed, and you can get into big trouble if you give it the “wrong” name.
The silly thing about the Liancourt Rocks is not that they’re disputed. It’s that so many Koreans are obsessed with the issue even though they’re the ones in control of the islands. They’ve already won!
If you read the article, it looks like the switch to “Sea of Japan” happened before the Meiji Restoration, at the beginning of the 19th century. From the article:
Almost all maps written in English have always referred to it as “Sea of Japan,” and according to the very survey you’re referring to the term “East Sea” has never been popular. I see no reason for Anglophones to change now. “Sea of Japan” is a perfectly logical and descriptive name.
Keep whining and we’ll change it to, “Greater Sea of Vladivostok.”
I don’t know if it’s relevant here, but it’s still a big problem for those of us trying to maintain a worldwide database of map data, to be used by people in all countries speaking all languages. Then we must consider the feelings of more than Anglophones.
China claims them as well. The Diaoyutai Islands.
(Then again, China claims a lot of places based on pretty dubious historic evidence.)
I think you’re confusing your specks of land. Dokdo/Takeshima are the specks of land between Ulleung and Oki in the Sea of Japan, not the specks of land between Okinawa and Taiwan (the Diaoyutai/Senkaku)
Let’s just throw a scare into a lot of Asians and call it the Western Sea of America’s Future.
Yeah, but only because of the US. Maybe you should call it the “Sea Next to The Country That the US Defeated and Liberated Us and Then Stuck Around So that We Weren’t Fucking Communists With No Food”.
Shit, I better send a memo. I’m sure a Chinese traveler sometime, most like when the Mongols ruled the earth, left some kind of obscure reference to maybe having been in the same ocean, and ipso facto it’s claimed by China. Get cracking you slackers in Beijing
You do know we only liberated half the country, right?
The Korean dude just told us it’s two different countries.
After the Korean War it was two different countries, yes.
NM, not worth it.
And before the war too.
Or maybe we would call it “Sea that is east of the country that was split in two and fucked over by the West.” It would make more sense grammatically, anyway.
Not that we don’t appreciate being freed from the threat of Communism. xoxo