Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japanese expansion in mainland Asia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was No consensus to delete. The article should be merged to Japanese nationalism. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:42, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese_expansion_in_mainland_Asia

Article is very poorly written and is more a nationalistic justification than historical facts. Another similar article is much better written and sufficient. UnHoly 01:27, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Merge and redirect both to Japanese nationalism. Both articles are messy and POV. — Gwalla | Talk 01:41, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Japanese nationalism; honestly, I don't see what there is to merge. Geogre 01:46, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge both to Japanese nationalism. JamesBurns 07:21, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Japanese nationalism. Nothing worth keeping here that isn't far more authoritatively discussed in that article. However, I would Keep Japanese strategic planning for mainland Asia (1905-1940), which is not about ideology per se but about military strategy. carmeld1 20:06, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, or at the very least redirect to Japanese nationalism. Very unlikely someone would search for something this specific anyway. Ridethefire3211 21:38, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not written in the English language. -EDM 23:06, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete...reluctantly. I've been involved in cleaning up this contributor's articles in the past. This contributor is a spanish speaker translating Japanese text into bad english. That process, coupled with additional "translation" involved in the english cleanup calls into serious question the integrity of the information. Single-step translation is hard enough. I believe this person is contributing in good faith, but that the integrity of the final content is highly questionable. This contributor is highly prolific and we'll continue to see his articles here at VfD, I fear. Tobycat 05:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. One of the worst written articles that I have seen recently. -Willmcw 09:26, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

SirTobycat ,and some others i stay agreed much for understand my real intentions,still my some english grammar difficult.over present article,yours can to decided,if liked,deleted this...

for certain i no encounter why when your realizing the profounds cleanups at information why sended,this are non losses of the real escence of these dates,at contrary these escence if mantain intact,(i can to comparing with original sources) and i liked to read and understand perfect your reedition,and i appareing more interests and easy to understand.for me stay more well..

If certain i in my limits treated to send somes dates and first hand informations of previous wartimes about Japan for see in japanese position and you think manners in these moment,and additional somes dates of japanese side in pacific war.

Reiterally i no poses any imagination or great capacity to inventive for created all type of cyphers or social and military details,more less inside of japanese side or from these times.

i reconoited why if certain why poses more limits in english,but i observed why always in all parts,if one require obtain any really and very detail information,always stay in english, the Universal Lingua Franca.these information stay more limited or never exist in any other languages always stay more detail in english. for other part the most important experts in any theme or topic,or the mosts important analisis of any topics...for suppose stayed in english,one situation no encountered in another languages,for this certain themes can t understand in other languages,all in english.

in personally i sende more hate for statisticts or numbers or any cyphers groups,or all great mass of dates,but in particulary respect at Japanese side before and ww2, i sense particulary more simpathy and over my personal hate,disagree or disdain respect at statistics or dates i having decide to sended these first hand and ancient dates of ancient japanese times,more oftheirs are forgetting or some remembered for persons why living in these times only.

other special interest stay in why i in past years one old parent sayed at my,over one acient parent why at final result no chinese,without one Japanese Nikkei why are little merchant,one thing why causing in me more prided,and remember somes japanese friends why stayed for work reasons in my land and poses some personal friendship.

other personal reason if i entered why between the Japanese Plans against Panama Canal(I-400 Mission), ones parents knowed ones suppose Japanese fishers, but results why theirs poses short wave radios and stay in comunication with Japanese Navy officer Jakuji Oshi and the submarine I-9 poses orders to patrol Panama Gulf waters for reconoited areas.

this if my principal founts of my incredible and highly questionable or dudous information over General Japanese civil andMilitary comments:

General sources:(oldest editions of 40s to 60s)

  • Cressey,G.B.Peoples and lands of Asia
  • Scion,Jules. Asie des Moussons(english edition)
  • Behr,Edward.The Last Emperor
  • Book Asia,the great Continent
  • Newman, Joseph. "Goodbye Japan"
  • Whitney Hall, John."Japanese Empire"
  • Gonzales-Hontoria,M.African and Asian States(Estados Asiaticos y Africanos)

over Chinese japanese War comments if my sources:

  • Max,Alphonse.Southwest Asia,Reality and Destiny.
  • American First-hand and Chinese side relate "China In Weapons" or "China in Arms" about chinese-japanese conflict. unsigned comment (vote?) by 200.46.215.181 (talk · contribs)


Hi,200.46.215.181
The grammar is not the main reason I posted this article on the votes for deletion. I appreciate that people from all around the world want, and should, continue to collaborate to wikipedia. I myself am french-speaking, and you are right, it is difficult to stay on the frech wikipedia when almost all articles are more complete in english.
However, the problem with this particular article is that it is a justification of japanese nationalism and not a neutral description of events. I do not think this is justified in an encyclopedia.
For example, you say "this if motif for Russian-Japanese War of 1904-05,for why obtain some concessions socalled "Treated Rigths" in South Manchuria.in 1910,Korea having formally annexed,during first decades of century the territorial security are principal military motif." The way I read this, you imply that Japan had all rights to gain concessions in South Manchuria. This is a one-sided analysis.
If you want to try to re-write this article, you should at least cite sources, and put your sentences in the form "according to xxx, ...". But even then, it should be included in Japanese nationalism, which is where it belongs. We do not need separate articles for different opinions on the same subject.
I hope I have the chance to read more of your work in the future,
UnHoly 19:19, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)


  • -if one interested and logic point,but in particular i treated

to present the japanese point of seeing,for comparing and analized your think at respect,with historical pourposes.

respect at much reading of my work,i am readed the material analized and writing the importants parts,(exist much informations) and still my grammar deficiences i understand your english writing form with correct gramar in clear form.

respect at another sides of question,for all exist the respectives analizes why present your respective side.i am no treated to enter in conflict with any side,i only treated to present the japanese viewpoint for knowed the respective ideas in these times,more diffrent at present days.

reiterally if your desired deleted,i no poses any problem for this. if part of the sistem and understand more well.

200.46.215.181 (talk · contribs)


This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.