This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I request for Category:World War II crimes to be removed from the External Links and replaced with Category:Second Sino-Japanese War crimes instead, given the fact that the Nanking Massacre took place in the Second Sino-Japanese War and not World War II. 95.151.194.20 (talk) 21:25, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Partly done: Added Category:Second Sino-Japanese War crimes.
Did not remove Category:World War II because per World_War_II#Start_and_end_dates: Dates for the beginning of the Pacific War include the start of the Second Sino-Japanese War on 7 July 1937,[3][4] or the earlier Japanese invasion of Manchuria, on 19 September 1931.[5][6] Others follow the British historian A. J. P. Taylor, who held that the Sino-Japanese War and war in Europe and its colonies occurred simultaneously, and the two wars became World War II in 1941.[7]
The statements in that article are not cited and the author of that blog (Bruce Harris) does not have credibility as a known historian or otherwise trustworthy source. In fact, in the about page the author writes:
Although every care has been taken to provide links to suitable material from this site, the nature of the internet prevents any guarantee of the suitability, completeness or accuracy of any of the material that this site may be linked to.
Consequently, this site can accept no responsibility for unsuitable or inaccurate material that may be encountered. Also, there is no guarantee that any of the sites listed will be available at any particular time.
All of the material published on this site is for global distribution. However, the site cannot guarantee that the material is complete or correct. The site therefore takes no responsibility for outcomes that may arise from the use, quotation or reference to the facts, comments and opinions contained within..
I request for the Category:Genocidal massacres to be added to the External Links, since I do think the Nanjing Massacre fits the definition of a Genocidal massacre. 186.96.212.124 (talk) 11:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
In the lede, readers will find "The massacre has remained a wedge issue between modern China and Japan. Historical revisionists and nationalists in Japan have been accused of minimizing or denying the massacre." and "This accusation has even been made towards the Japanese version of this Wikipedia article (南京事件), which has for several years been described as lacking pictures and expressing skepticism in the first paragraph of the introduction."
"This accusation has even been made towards the Japanese version of this Wikipedia article (南京事件), which has for several years been described as lacking pictures and expressing skepticism in the first paragraph of the introduction." should be removed from the lede, as info is not broad and can be found in body.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by LilAhok (talk • contribs) 21:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2023
Latest comment: 9 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request to Nanjing Massacre has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
I request for Category:Human rights abuses in Japan to be removed and replaced with Category:Terrorist incidents in China in the External Links, since the event took place in China and not Japan. Also I request for the Category:Genocidal massacres to be added to the External Links. 186.96.212.9 (talk) 17:51, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Done Replaced Category:Human rights abuses in Japan with Category:Human rights abuses in China, since "terrorist incidents" didn't seem appropriate. Added other requested category. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:38, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
"one Japanese textbook"
Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments1 person in discussion
The seventh paragraph in the Nanjing Massacre#Japan section contains a translated excerpt from a Japanese textbook describing the event. However, it lacks identification of the specific textbook being quoted (both in the paragraph and in the source), and there is an identical paragraph in the cited The Straits Times article, suggesting that it's a direct copy-paste without much effort put into it. The quoted account of the event itself is reasonably neutral/accurate, not particularly controversial, and the paragraph seems to have little encyclopedic value to merit inclusion here. First Comet (talk) 10:11, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
In addition, the fourth and fifth paragraphs of the section ("According to a brief reference" ... "do not mention sexual assaults") are also plagiarism of the same Straits Times article, and the context is completely lost because an irrelevant sixth paragraph discussing Nanjing Massacre conspiracy theories (which is itself entirely WP:OR) is inserted in the middle, making it all the more obvious that the editor did not put much effort into revising the section. First Comet (talk) 10:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
I request for the Category:World War II crimes to be removed because the massacre happened two years before World War II started and also the Category:Second Sino-Japanese War is now under the Category:World War II crimes. 95.147.63.116 (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Latest comment: 6 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
For native or near speakers of Japanese, who well understand Japan's situation on this topic. I am making suggestions for improving notorious Japanese Wikipedia, so I would like your cooperation in the discussion at ja:ノート:南京事件. If you could, I would like you to have a calm discussion instead of getting angry and labeling them as historical revisionism.
--Xefon (talk) 18:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2023
Latest comment: 6 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request to Nanjing Massacre has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Under "Debate in Japan", hyperlink the wikipedia article for Akira Suzuki (writer) when he is mentioned to avoid confusion with the famous chemist Akira Suzuki. Spungebubby (talk) 00:50, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
I request for the World War II template in the External Links to be removed and replaced with a Second Sino-Japanese War template because World War II started in 1939 and the Nanjing Massacre happened in 1937. 95.151.245.1 (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
I request for the Category:Prisoner of war massacres to be added to External Links. 31.124.97.149 (talk) 22:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Not done:. Because first, we never add categories to external links, as WP:LINKSTOAVOID says. And second, next time, please post only one edit request with all your changes. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 13:31, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2024
Latest comment: 4 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request to Nanjing Massacre has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —Sirdog(talk) 07:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Second paragraph
Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
P2, "The speed of the army's advance was likely due to commanders allowing looting and rape along the way." imho requires either a citation or removal. The event itself is truly horrific, but I don't know how a link could be established between rape and the speed of a military's advance.
Looting is perhaps a different story as a reasonable link can be made between that and not needing a supply chain. But still a reference is preferable to a bald assertion. Born-in-nude (talk) 17:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
I've removed it. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Japanese Wikipedia
Latest comment: 2 months ago5 comments1 person in discussion
The Japanese Wikipedia version of this article is undergoing a significant upheaval right now. It has leaned (according to non Japanese scholars) fringe and excessively denialist for around 10+ years now. A few weeks ago, a few users managed to make a significant rewrite more in line with the international consensus that managed to stay up for a week or two. It's since been reverted and they've been defending their version ever since, but they're a minority.
I encourage you to keep watching how they change the article in future. This has been one of the most significant pushes ever to fix the article. It'd be a shame if it doesn't stick. toobigtokale (talk) 12:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Good news: it appears they've successfully defended their revision. However, we'll need to be consistently vigilant. Very plausible that the article will creep back to revisionism. toobigtokale (talk) 22:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
It's down to one person opposing the change now; they've been desperately trying to push back against it. They just tagged everyone who edited the article since 2020 to stir up discontent lol... toobigtokale (talk) 13:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Now they tagged everyone all the way back to the beginning of the article. This yielded one more commenter in support of reverting the article. toobigtokale (talk) 08:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
It's been a week or so and nothing. I think we're good. Finally the Japanese version of this article is no longer revisionist. Millions of people have read the previous version of the article and probably believed a chunk of it; no more. Now I can sleep better at night. toobigtokale (talk) 09:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Relocation of the capital to where?
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The article says the capital was relocated several times, but not to where. Elcalebo (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
The Nationalist government moved to Chungking. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:30, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2024
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request to Nanjing Massacre has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In the section called 'Matsui's reaction to the massacre', I request for where it says "On December 1937, as General Iwane Matsui began to comprehend the full extent of the rape, murder, and looting in the city, he grew increasingly dismayed" to "On December 1937, as General Iwane Matsui began to comprehend the full extent of the rape, torture, murder, and looting in the city, he grew increasingly dismayed" please. 95.147.145.134 (talk) 13:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I request for where It says "Rape and looting was widespread" to "Rape, torture, and looting was widespread". 95.147.145.134 (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Is there a source that states that torture was widespread? I see sources for widespread rape and looting in the article but not torture. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --Ferien (talk) 22:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Image of person stabed in their genitals
Latest comment: 1 month ago17 comments3 people in discussion
Hi there everyone! I want to argue that the image of the person stabed in their genitals is unnecessary and does not enough for the article to warrent such an extreme image.
I guess its purpose is to depict the extremes of the massacre. As much as I get that I though want to ask if that is necessary? (similarly with some other close images of single corpses, mostly children) Nsae Comp (talk) 22:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Per WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:PROFANE, no they should not be removed. The images have captions which tie them into the article in an encyclopaedic fashion. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I am not disputing that thei caption is encyclopaedic. I am questioning if they are necessary. As above WP:PROFANE and WP:Manual of Style/Images states:"Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, [...]" ... so once again: is it a necessary image to warrent the offensive- and disrepectfulness of the image? Is the article less informative if only the caption remains as normal text or does the reader get more knowledgable by seeing this image? Nsae Comp (talk) 23:14, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
The captions make little sense without the image itself, furthermore without images it's easy to say 'okay X wrote about but is there proof'. Traumnovelle (talk) 23:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia doesnt need to proove anything, it has to only reference the proof. So I really dont see the necessity of the image. It is not adding to the informativeness of the article. Well at least if you dont find it informative to see how stabed genitals look like. Also, why are we censoring other such images from the massacre? Why this one? Why is it so informative? Nsae Comp (talk) 00:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
All images of a massacre will be obscene or vulgar, massacres are brutal things. It's odd to talk about John Magee and the images he captured without including them. They're of value to the reader which is why they've been in the article for so long. They're included with tertiary sources talking about the event as well. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
I am not disputeing anything you said. But I am still asking why is this one included, why is it so important to warrent the degree of imagery. My argument is, that the following image of the old lady at the site is more than enough. Nsae Comp (talk) 05:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
The only valid reason to argue for it's removal is that the photo does not actually relate to the Nanking Massacre. Arguments about offensive aren't valid. Other articles like the Manila massacre also have an offensive image in the article. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Well the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images says otherwise, as cited above. Nsae Comp (talk) 05:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
(and no the Manila massacre does not feature anything like this image, there is only one image of a person lying dead in some rubble without anything like the image here) Nsae Comp (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
How is (left) significantly different to (right)? Traumnovelle (talk) 06:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Thats not the Nanjing Massacre image that this discussion is about. Nsae Comp (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
I think the pictures should be included in the article.
According to WP:PROFANE, "Material that could be considered vulgar, obscene, or offensive should not be included unless it is treated in an encyclopedic manner."
Furthermore, WP:PROFANE also provides an example to clarify the rule, "Similarly, editors of articles such as Car do not include images of vehicles with naked women posing near them, even though such images exist and "Wikipedia is not censored", due to concerns about relevance. Wikipedia is not censored, but Wikipedia also does not favor offensive images over non-offensive images."
So why should it be included?
According to this source [1],"John G. Magee witnessed the Japanese invasion of Nanking (Nanjing) in December of 1937 and the subsequent Nanking Massacre. At great risk to his own well-being and safety, Magee filmed and photographed atrocities perpetrated by the Japanese soldiers against the citizens of Nanking, He was later able to smuggle these films out of Nanking, providing evidence and witness to the war crimes that had taken place."
The inclusion of such pictures would be considered encyclopedic because it provides evidence of the massacre, and illustrate the heinous nature of the crimes. There are no alternative images.
Images containing nudity and genitalia are not against Wikipedia's rules. For example, despite descibing the atrocity in the text, there are nude pictures of Phan as a child with her injuries. I can't see any notable distinction between that situation and the current one.[2]LilAhok (talk) 06:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Ok finally an argument about its necessity:"illustrate the heinous nature of the crimes"
Ok, but is it really not clear that it was heinous? Do we have to repeat and amplify the display of the rape?
Do we have to show every cruelty, isnt a text enough? Nsae Comp (talk) 12:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! Nsae Comp (talk) 12:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
The answer to your question has already been answered in the last paragraph of my previous reponse.
There are two parts to the "necessity" of the pictures: evidence for war crimes and the heinous nature of the crimes. John risked his life because the japanese were trying to prevent footage of the massacre from leaving China. John had to smuggle the footage out of China. It's evidence. It is encyclopedic, especially considering that there is a section in the article that mentions denialist and revisionist narratives about the massacre.
Despite the atrocities and injuries stated in the text, this article about a living person features a photo of a naked child with injuries from a napalm strike.[3]LilAhok (talk) 00:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
So to end this, I guess you trying to say that this image, because it is an image of such extreme cruelty that it is necessary, showing the extend and countering any lingering doubt about the references (not proof, thats the job of the references). Nsae Comp (talk) 06:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Partly done: Added Category:Second Sino-Japanese War crimes.
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the 
Done Replaced Category:Human rights abuses in Japan with Category:Human rights abuses in China, since "terrorist incidents" didn't seem appropriate. Added other requested category. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:38, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
