Wikipedia:Peer review/Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle[edit]


* Further information

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this is the first time I have done an order of battle article, thus I need a few pointers on where to go from B class. Thanks for all comments in advance. Jim101 (talk) 02:12, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

  • You need a detailed justification, beyond the single sentence you've got now at FN 2, about why you chose to use 'corps' [ie 38th Army Corps] as opposed to army [ie 38th Field Army]. I've read many descriptions either way. Whichever way you chose to do it, it needs to be clearly justified and sourced, beyond the boilerplate you've got there right now. Cheers and best wishes Buckshot06 (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
There is currently a lack of a consensus among English sources on how to translate Chinese unit titles given the word "corps" does not exist in Chinese language. I have added a explanation along with a source in official Chinese document on the matter, although I don't know if you believe such explanation should go beyond a footnote. Let me know if it is adequate. Jim101 (talk) 16:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
I would put what you've just written - that the word 'corps' does not exist as such - right up front in the intro, not buried in a footnote. That makes the translation dilemma now in FN 2 much easier to understand. Also, have you got any sources for the 15th Army in Korea? Be good to be able to add some pre-1953 info to the Airborne Corps article. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:42, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Done, I put the info into the intro. As for 15th Airborne corps, I don't have a source on it, but I do have bits of information per its battle records in Korea. I'll see what I can add to that article. Jim101 (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. Jim101 (talk) 16:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the links you've put in. Would you mind please redlinking all the divisional articles? Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 04:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Done. Jim101 (talk) 21:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I would like to see a table of the total casualities of the PVA including Dead, Wounded and POW. In this case it would be good if you mention the fate of the POWs as there was dispute about if the allies allow the prisoners that want to to be brought to Taiwan. Second is it possible to note at every unit in the last Phase the date they left Korea? Maybe it should be said why no chinese forces stayed in Korea as the americans did. --Bomzibar (talk) 10:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Interesting points, I'll try to answer/address this one by one:
  • The total number of dead, wounded, POW and non-battle casualties is already mentioned in the lead, did you mean you want another table besides that, or do you want a phase by phase breakdown (which is somewhat impossible IMO after viewing all the available sources on the topic).
  • As for the fate of Chinese POWs, did you meant you want a separate number for POWs defected per the first point?
  • As for the timetable of Chinese withdrawal from Korea, it is impossible to account for every Chinese unit given the ad hoc nature of some of the Chinese units, nor did this issue received any scholar attention aside from the fact the Chinese official history mentioned that the 1st Corps was the last Chinese unit stationed in Korea before its withdraw on October 1958. My own personal hypothesis is that the massive Chinese military effort in Korea had put an incredible strain on both Chinese and Soviet economies to force a total Chinese withdraw when compared with US, but without a source to back it up, it is still an original theory.
Let my know what you think. Jim101 (talk) 13:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah ok, I missed the numbers in the introduction.
  • With the POW I mean the fact that not all of them wanted to go back into the People's Republic but go to Taiwan. Mao from Jung Chang and John Halliday states that 21,374 didn't wanted to return and most went to Taiwan. I further remember that in Generalissimo, a biography about Chiang Kai-shek by Jay Taylor and a german book about the war it is further discussed as Mao wanted all the POW back, Chiang wanted as many of them for his forces in Taiwan and the US/UN wanted a free choice for every single one. In my opinion this should be mentioned at the end of the article.
Separated the POW number between captured and defected in the intro. Jim101 (talk) 15:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually, Mao doesn't really cared about the POWs from my research, he just wanted an excuse to drag the war for as along as possible, believing that attrition warfare with Soviet support would eventually wear UN forces down to capitulation, until Stalin's death pulled the carpet from under his plan. Anyway, since this is an order of battle article, I believe such extended debate about background politic is out of article scope. Jim101 (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I don't think that economic strains were a reason for Mao to cut his military at any point of his reign. I will have a look into a few books if I find something about the reason for the chinese withdrawl. --Bomzibar (talk) 14:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
That is still open for debate. My point is that you just can't maintain 40%~50% of government budget on military spending indefinitely (which is why China decided to end the Korean War in 1953 with Stalin died and Soviet withdrew their support per Stueck, William W. (1995), The Korean War: An International History, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ISBN 0691037671 ). In fact it is confirmed in Chen, Jian (1996), China's Road to the Korean War: The Making of the Sino-American Confrontation, New York, NY: Columbia University Press, ISBN 9780231100250  that Mao was in the process of demobilization the bulk of the PLA when Korean War broke out in order to reduce the economic strain to the country. Mao did want to challenge US in every way possible per his theory of revolution struggle in "Third World intermediate zone" between Soviet Union and United States, but the foundation to Mao's theory is Soviet Union actually paying the bills and holding US attention in Europe. Jim101 (talk) 15:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Well it seems as if the historians have differing opinions about the reason and motivation of the war. Chang and Taylor both claim, Chang more than Taylor that Mao began the war and fought it because of the aid he got from the Soviet Union with the ultimate goal of getting the techniques to build nuclear weapons. But this are discussions that would have to be made about the main Korean War article.
I have found the number of captures PVA soldiers that defected to Taiwan. Jay Taylor: The Generalissimo - Chiang Kai-Shek and the Struggle for Modern China. 1. Edition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge 2009, ISBN 978-0-674-03338-2. says on page 462 that of the about 21,000 captured soldiers that wouldn't return to the PRC, 14,000 defected to Taiwan. --Bomzibar (talk) 17:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
I added the number in the intro. Jim101 (talk) 17:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)