www.fgks.org   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Jump to content

Talk:Nanjing Massacre

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Renamed user 1oj3saabam (talk | contribs) at 13:35, 2 March 2024 (→‎Japanese Wikipedia: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeNanjing Massacre was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 14, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 13, 2004, December 13, 2005, December 13, 2008, December 13, 2011, December 13, 2012, and December 13, 2014.

Japanese Wikipedia

The Japanese Wikipedia version of this article is undergoing a significant upheaval right now. It has leaned (according to non Japanese scholars) fringe and excessively denialist for around 10+ years now. A few weeks ago, a few users managed to make a significant rewrite more in line with the international consensus that managed to stay up for a week or two. It's since been reverted and they've been defending their version ever since, but they're a minority.

I encourage you to keep watching how they change the article in future. This has been one of the most significant pushes ever to fix the article. It'd be a shame if it doesn't stick. toobigtokale (talk) 12:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good news: it appears they've successfully defended their revision. However, we'll need to be consistently vigilant. Very plausible that the article will creep back to revisionism. toobigtokale (talk) 22:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's down to one person opposing the change now; they've been desperately trying to push back against it. They just tagged everyone who edited the article since 2020 to stir up discontent lol... toobigtokale (talk) 13:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second paragraph

P2, "The speed of the army's advance was likely due to commanders allowing looting and rape along the way." imho requires either a citation or removal. The event itself is truly horrific, but I don't know how a link could be established between rape and the speed of a military's advance.

Looting is perhaps a different story as a reasonable link can be made between that and not needing a supply chain. But still a reference is preferable to a bald assertion. Born-in-nude (talk) 17:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]