Talk:Soviet–Japanese border conflicts
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Following the war naming conventions that the agressor is listed first, shouldn't it be the Japanese-Soviet Border Wars? Could somebody comment on this or change the name of the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs)
Hmm, I wasn't aware of this convention, and wars like Iran-Iraq war, Chadian-Libyan conflict, Phillipine-American War, Spanish-American War would seem to be examples that defy it. Eleland 19:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
On the contrary, most of the wars you named follow the formality: Spanish American = Spanish blew up Maine (supposedly) Phillipine - American = Phillipine insurgency against americans Chadian - Libyan = Chadian civil war spills over into Libya. Not sure about Iran Iraq Yarilo2 22:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Well... Franco-Prussian, Spanish-American, Russo-Japanese, Sino-Japanese, Greco-Italian, Iran-Iraq: aggressor placed second. Anglo-Spanish, Anglo-Dutch, Greco-Turkish, Anglo-Boer: aggressor placed first.
Scope and references
This article lacks references. I searched some books and they scope the war as being between 1938 to 1939, see the table in here. Adding the 1945 clash seems to be synthesis. --Martintg (talk) 02:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- Absolutely support. BTW, I believe I was able to provide the sources supporting the Martintg's statement on the Pacific war talk page.--Paul Siebert (talk) 16:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Two battles or more?
The article mentions big two battles, one in 1938 and one in 1939. But my questions is: Was there more violent clashes? Many border conflicts are typified by an endless exchange of small arms fire over hundreds of kilometers, stretching over years. Also in many such conflicts are full of raids into enemy territory. Or even smaller battles. Was there any such incidents between Soviet-Union and Japan in the 1938-39 war or was the two battles all there was?
Casualties and Strengths
Where, exactly, do these numbers come from for the Soviets and Japanese? While the casualties and strengths for the individual battles (Khasan, Khalkin Gol) and skirmishes (Tauran, Halhamiao, Kanchazu) are sourced, these overall numbers aren't. Anyone want to chime in, or offer a reason why the unsourced numbers should stay? They don't seem very plausible at a glance anyway (e.g. it claims 38,324 Japanese casualties, when Khasan and Khalkin Gol only add up to ~20,000), unless there were way, way more skirmishes just like the mentioned three that this article doesn't mention.--Nihlus1 (talk) 02:31, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- I didn't revert my own estimate, I reverted the inaccurate Soviet-era figures (displayed here ) that in any regard were originally intended to represent only a single battle (Khalkhin-Gol). My first revision (to which you have placed a link) was a personal estimate based on the strengths and losses of all sides present in all battles, but it was later replaced by similar Soviet propaganda which was then itself taken down altogether by User 220.127.116.11. I agree with the motive of that user's decision, as in the absence of concrete figures for the entire series of battles (instead of unprofessional 'guesstimates'), it would be best to omit any numbers from the infobox completely in favor of simply letting users look at the articles for the respective engagements.