Talk:Second Sino-Japanese War

One of these is wrong

"the media in Japan often paraphrase with other expressions like The Japan-China Incident (日華事變 [Nikka Jihen], 中日事變 [Nisshi Jihen],"

You can't have the "Ni" character (sun) first in the first example, and second in the second example.Eregli bob (talk) 04:35, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

san.beck.org is not a reliable source

I don't see any indication that san.beck.org is a reliable source. Self-published websites are generally a concern, and while there is a book, the publisher looks like a vanity press. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 17:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

"Notable figures" section

What does and doesn't constitute notability for inclusion? Currently we have NRA leaders, KMT-affiliated warlords, the Ma clique, the Chinese Communists, IJA leaders, collaborators, and foreign supporters. If we are going for an exhaustive list of all major/significant military leaders that participated, then the following are all possible candidates to be added as well:

• Leaders of the various Anti-Japanese Volunteer Armies (e.g. Jilin Self-Defence Army, Heilungkiang National Salvation Army, Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army)
• Korean independence movement-affiliated fighters that included ethnic Koreans who participated in actions in Manchuria in the early 1930s during the Invasion of Manchuria, and later in other places in China and Burma during the later stages of the war. Such figures include Kim Chaek, Chu Chin, Choe Hyon, Yi Hak Man, Choe Yong Gun and Kim Il Sung.
• Other notable leaders involved in the Soviet Red Army invasion of Manchuria in 1945, if there are any that are particularly notable.
• Tibetan leaders that opposed/fought against the KMT and Ma clique, and other belligerents of the Xinjiang Wars that involved the Ma clique. First thing that comes to mind would be the Dalai Lama, although this might bring more controversy to an already controversial article. (this might be more related to the Chinese Civil War than the SSJW perhaps, however Chiang Kai-shek did suspect that the Tibetans were collaborating with the Japanese. CCW tends to overlap with SSJW, so I'm not sure whether this qualifies for inclusion)

Any ideas or comments? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 02:03, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

More sources needed for numbers

As far as I'm concerned, the section Casualties assessment is a touchy topic easily infiltrated with the Chinese and Japanese ultra-nationalism sentiments and often led into a war crime denial issue.

Some problems can be seen here:

• "Communist Chinese sources report that their forces were responsible for the deaths of 1,704,117 Japanese soldiers."

I can't see any search results in Chinese, Japanese and English sources except a few from wikipedia clone.[1][2]

• "Such astronomical claims... was ridiculed by Nationalist authorities as propaganda.... "

1. The figure, which is not accepted by Western or Japanese historians,

NPOV issue.

• "Such astronomical claims... was ridiculed by Nationalist authorities as propaganda.... "

1. The figure, which is not accepted by Western or Japanese historians,

no references to confirm it.

--Winstonlighter (talk) 13:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

• "Communist Chinese sources report that their forces were responsible for the deaths of 1,704,117 Japanese soldiers."

It's listed in page 296 of Alvin Coox's article, "Recourse to Arms: The Sino-Japanese Conflict, 1937-1945," in China and Japan: A Search for Balance Since World War I. According to another contributor on wikipedia, the casualties also can be found on pg 565 of Chung Wu's History of the Sino-Japanese war (1937-1945).

• "Such astronomical claims... was ridiculed by Nationalist authorities as propaganda.... "

It's also listed in page 296 OF Coox's article. He quotes: The senior Nationalist general Ho Ying-ch'in derides the astronomic claims of the Chinese Communists, whose forces he calls 'untrained, undisciplined, poorly equipped,' and without 'an efficient organ of command.' How could the Communists, Ho asks, have killed 1,704,117 enemy soldiers, since the guerillas were outnumbered by about 3 to 1, were 'always on the run,' and were widely scattered? Ho Ying-chi'n was War Minister of China during much of WW2.

• "As far as I'm concerned, the section Casualties assessment is a touchy topic easily infiltrated with the Chinese and Japanese ultra-nationalism sentiments and often led into a war crime denial issue."

That's a huge accusation you're making. Casualties assessment is not a "war crimes denial" or "ultra-nationalism" issue (whatever that means). No Japanese sources are even present; the article is supported by sources from leading American scholars.

For your information, Alvin Coox was Professor at the University of Pennsylvania, specializing in Japanese history. He contributed the WW2 section of the Cambridge History of Japan, so his credentials are very strong in this regard. John W. Dower, Professor of MIT, also specializes in Japanese history. --169.232.190.64 (talk) 23:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with WinstonLighter. "Astronomical claims" <--- If there is any prime example of NPOV issue, this would be one example.Phead128 (talk) 04:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

To the anon ip whos messing with japanese casualty figures

apparently you either think i lack a brain or that i'm not going to bother check your edits. either way, you're wrong

You used the source from Taipei, which is located in TAIWAN, which is currently under nationalist control, and you outright vandalized the article by claiming that it is a communist source.

Its strange that you cherry pick the quote where the Nationalist authorities ridicule the communists, yet when the Nationalists report over 1.77 million Japanese dead, suddenly you are forced to B.S. outright, and claim that the nationalist claim is from a communist source.Дунгане (talk) 05:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Stop white-washing history. Even Chinese officials secretly ridiculed the 1.77 million figure. You need to be able to discern state propaganda from fact. Please provide reliable sources to your arguments. I'll take John Dower (MIT) and Alvin Coox (UPenn) anytime over some historian in Taiwan. --149.142.75.107 (talk) 19:23, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Nationalist authorities ridiculed the COMMUNIST claim that they singlehandedly killed 1.77 million figure but on their own, THEY CLAIMED that 1.77 million japanese were killed. Speaking of which, you have not even read the book from taiwan, nor know who Wu is, so you are not qualified to make judgements on the source.Дунгане (talk) 23:03, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

User:ScorchingPheonix

User:ScorchingPheonix, you think that if you can register an account, that you can't hide the fact that your the same anon ip whom i was talking to above?

whatever, anyway, if you try a stunt like that again and claim the source doesnt say what it says, im calling in the admin, it says right in the source (source continued) That the japanese exagerated chinese casualties and falsely minimized japanese casulaties, to deliberately cheat the Japanese people of reliable information as the National Herald said.

Japanese reports were ridiculed by Chinese military authorities. The chinese military authorities in 1940 were nationalist, not communist, the source was published in 1940. the source is american, and at that time america only regarded nationalists as military authorities in China.Дунгане (talk) 23:11, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

These are snippet views, and don't show anything. All I can see from your link is that Nationalist authorities ridiculed one report by the Japanese, and it doesn't even show what report. You could have used the sentence out of context, and when presented by somebody with a history of plagiarism (you), I'm not sure I have much faith in your interpretation. It's also from The China Weekly Review, not the National Herald.

The wiki article doesn't present Japanese wartime records of Japanese casualties or Chinese casualties. What is your point here? Are you trying to contest that 396,000 Japanese soldiers were killed in China? Do you want the number to be higher so that it's closer to Nationalist deaths? Do you really believe that 1.7 million Japanese soldiers were killed in China? Or do you not trust the research of some of America's most talented historians?

Anyways, I like how you typed "The Japanese attempt on the part of china to minimize the number of casualties in Japan was, stated the National Herald" into the search engine to go fishing for sources that try to discredit the Japanese death toll. You did not present the source in a scholarly manner (it doesn't list which particular statistics the Nationalist government ridiculed) and I doubt you even read the whole article since you couldn't get the name of the newspaper right. I will revert your edits.--ScorchingPheonix (talk) 04:39, 19 September 2010 (UTC)