Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Hengyang: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎About YouTube ref: whatever you concerns are, please stop effectively blanking the entire article
Line 11: Line 11:
--[[Special:Contributions/207.216.86.67|207.216.86.67]] ([[User talk:207.216.86.67|talk]]) 05:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)Canadaman1--[[Special:Contributions/207.216.86.67|207.216.86.67]] ([[User talk:207.216.86.67|talk]]) 05:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
--[[Special:Contributions/207.216.86.67|207.216.86.67]] ([[User talk:207.216.86.67|talk]]) 05:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)Canadaman1--[[Special:Contributions/207.216.86.67|207.216.86.67]] ([[User talk:207.216.86.67|talk]]) 05:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)


===I agree. One year has passed and I see no discussion about cleanup. Some specifics about issues:
===I agree. One year has passed and I see no discussion about cleanup. Some specifics about issues:


“Defense of Hengyang” --> Chinese perspective
“Defense of Hengyang” --> Chinese perspective
Line 23: Line 23:
An overall tone of “brave yet overwhelmed Chinese with high morale” vs. “evil Japanese humiliated by the brave Chinese (despite the fact it was a Japanese victory)”. It appears to have been translated more or less wholesale from a biased Chinese source.
An overall tone of “brave yet overwhelmed Chinese with high morale” vs. “evil Japanese humiliated by the brave Chinese (despite the fact it was a Japanese victory)”. It appears to have been translated more or less wholesale from a biased Chinese source.


I hasten to add that I deplore the Japanese actions in China in the 1930s and 1940s. They were the undoubted, unprovoked aggressors and there is absolutely no excuse for their war crimes or brutality. Let's just tell it straight. Not only is NPOV a Wikipedia policy and requirement, it's also a much stronger and more credible story.
I hasten to add that I deplore the Japanese actions in China in the 1930s and 1940s. They were the undoubted, unprovoked aggressors and there is absolutely no excuse for their war crimes or brutality. Let's just tell it straight. Not only is NPOV a Wikipedia policy and requirement, it's also a much stronger and more credible story.
===Update===
===Update===
Based on the discussions from 2013 to 2014, I decided to delete all the parts that were not referenced. This problem has existed for too long.--[[User:Witotiwo|Witotiwo]] ([[User talk:Witotiwo|talk]]) 11:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Based on the discussions from 2013 to 2014, I decided to delete all the parts that were not referenced. This problem has existed for too long.--[[User:Witotiwo|Witotiwo]] ([[User talk:Witotiwo|talk]]) 11:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:00, 5 August 2021

Entry Needs Considerable Clean Up

This articles lacks serious references for most of its main points. Most points cited have no reference sources cited. It is also written in a fairly jingoistic way ( which would be cleaned up if reference sources were cited). Numbers given are completely wrong... "15 Elite Divisions given to Stillwell?" The numbers are also wrong. Chinese strength was much more than that cited here and the Japanese forces cited are not completely accurate. I do not know if I have the time to pull together the Japanese sources to cite the forces involved from their side, but someone needs to clean this up. The Battle of Hengyang is an important historical event that the world should know... and that the Chinese should know. It should not be left for self-serving cartoonish accounts as this entry. --207.216.86.67 (talk) 05:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)Canadaman1--207.216.86.67 (talk) 05:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. One year has passed and I see no discussion about cleanup. Some specifics about issues:

“Defense of Hengyang” --> Chinese perspective

“Yokoyama…did not expect his approach on Hengyang to turn out to be such a humiliation to the Japanese empire.” --> unsourced, subjective

“the only thing Stilwell did inside China was the destruction of Guilin's airfield and removal of its outer bridge…ignoring the spirit and morale of the Chinese people and giving up Guilin early on. However, during this time, the Chinese army staged a tenacious resistance against the invading Japanese army. Completely outnumbered and outgunned and with supplies almost used up, the Chinese soldiers were at the brink of complete disaster. But in spite of these extremely grim conditions, they continued to carry on the fight. This was the Defense of Hengyang….” --> Jingoistic, nationalistic

“In the middle of July, the Japanese troops no longer used ladders to climb up the cliffs. Instead, they used the piles of their corpses as ramps to scale the cliffs. According to an NRA veteran, the bodies had piled up so much that he could not see through the firing port of his bunker. He had to shoot the corpses to pieces in order to see through….” --> Unsourced, appears to be propaganda

An overall tone of “brave yet overwhelmed Chinese with high morale” vs. “evil Japanese humiliated by the brave Chinese (despite the fact it was a Japanese victory)”. It appears to have been translated more or less wholesale from a biased Chinese source.

I hasten to add that I deplore the Japanese actions in China in the 1930s and 1940s. They were the undoubted, unprovoked aggressors and there is absolutely no excuse for their war crimes or brutality. Let's just tell it straight. Not only is NPOV a Wikipedia policy and requirement, it's also a much stronger and more credible story. NuclearWinner (talk) 00:00, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Based on the discussions from 2013 to 2014, I decided to delete all the parts that were not referenced. This problem has existed for too long.--Witotiwo (talk) 11:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About YouTube ref

The youtube video is not a trusted reference. A lot of the content in this article is written according to the YouTube video. This should not happen because there will be serious verification and copyright issues. There are even suspicions for publicity of specific programs.--117.19.194.75 (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What YouTube video? There is no reference to any YouTube videos. Please stop removing masses of content from the article without providing evidence to what the issue is. And you would need to explain it on this page before removing large chunks of text. S. Salim (talk) 15:24, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

《国殇1937—1945年中日战争正面战场纪实》 第三十七集:鬼哭神号守衡阳 www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVCdhYzszoM --117.19.194.75 (talk) 15:27, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you concerns are, please stop effectively blanking the entire article. El_C 15:36, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]