Talk:Senkaku Islands dispute

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Senkaku Islands dispute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100929190448/http://www.asahi.com:80/english/TKY201009220480.html to http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201009220480.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:40, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Senkaku Islands dispute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101010165613/http://akebonokikaku.hp.infoseek.co.jp:80/page092.html to http://akebonokikaku.hp.infoseek.co.jp/page092.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Lead sentence

It seems pretty clear that most English news sources refer to this dispute as the Senkaku Islands Dispute (see for example http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27089658 http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/12/economist-explains-1 while making clear reference to the fact that China/Taiwan refer to these as the Diaoyu Island Dispute which is supported by Benlisquare has pointed out (although not explicitly saying Diaoyu Island Dispute the overall meaning is reflected in his literal translation. I think that it should be noted that the English speaking world generally refers to the conflict as the Senkaku Islands Dispute while Taiwan and the PRC refer to it as the Diaoyu Island Dispute (again, I think this accurately captures the meaning of Benlisquare's literal translation). As such, I think this should be reflected in the description as this describes the situation while remaining neutral and clarifying the two sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LEDominator (talk • contribs) 06:08, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Per the 1RR notice above, now that the addition in China has been reverted, we should be working towards a consensus on this Talk page, rather than making changes to the article directly. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 07:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

There's no need to say Senkaku Islands dispute is translated from Japanese or Diaoyu Islands dispute is translated from Chinese. Just keep it simple. STSC (talk) 10:41, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

New Source

Tadayoshi Murata, The Origins of Japanese-Chinese Territorial Dispute (Tokyo: World Scientific, 2016). I noticed this hasn't been used yet, it supports the Chinese position but it uses a lot of evidence. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 10:46, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Warning about possible problems in this article

I have found two major problems in this article today, one being a sentence about the position of the US State Department and one about the attitude of Japanese government in the 1970's. From these two examples, I infer that this page may also have other problematic areas and I recommend that the article be thoroughly reviewed and checked by multiple experts at the earliest possible date, including the edits I made. I am not an expert in the specifics of this dispute, but the fact that I have seemingly discovered two major problems after a brief glance at the article is not a good sign. Thanks for any help. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:17, 20 October 2019 (UTC)