Talk:List of former comfort women
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Toobigtokale in topic What's the point of this list?
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
See also edit
User Phoenix7777 insisted to add the 'See also' wikilink to "Diary of a Japanese Military Brothel Manager" which is not similar to the topic of this article about a list of victims/human rights activists. He still cannot give his reason. STSC (talk) 20:50, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- Are you sure? Both articles are about comfort women. Diary of a Japanese Military Brothel Manager is about the life of comfort women. Are you claiming both articles are not relevant? Please note that WP:SEEALSO says the link should be relevant, not similar. Please provide a guideline which says "A link in See also section of WP:Stand-alone lists should not include articles other than WP:List article". Please stop pushing POV.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 21:22, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- Who's actually pushing POV here? I can see you're very keen to use the 'See also' to publicise your favourite book. We use common sense here, I don't think any reader with rational mind would also want to see you book when they come to this article to find out the victims of Japanese war crimes. STSC (talk) 03:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Leave it to readers' decision whether they want to read the article or not instead of hiding the article from them like censorship by the Chinese government. No one care your common sense. The link is legitimate per WP:SEEALSO.―― Phoenix7777 (talk)
- "Whether a link belongs in the 'See also' section is ultimately a matter of editorial judgement and common sense" as in WP:SEEALSO. Our common sense is to reject your attempt to use Wikipedia to spread your Japanese revisionist POV. STSC (talk) 10:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
- Again, the link is legitimate per WP:SEEALSO. Our common sense is to reject your attempt to use Wikipedia to spread your Communist Chinese POV.―― Phoenix7777 (talk)
- "Whether a link belongs in the 'See also' section is ultimately a matter of editorial judgement and common sense" as in WP:SEEALSO. Our common sense is to reject your attempt to use Wikipedia to spread your Japanese revisionist POV. STSC (talk) 10:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
- Leave it to readers' decision whether they want to read the article or not instead of hiding the article from them like censorship by the Chinese government. No one care your common sense. The link is legitimate per WP:SEEALSO.―― Phoenix7777 (talk)
- Who's actually pushing POV here? I can see you're very keen to use the 'See also' to publicise your favourite book. We use common sense here, I don't think any reader with rational mind would also want to see you book when they come to this article to find out the victims of Japanese war crimes. STSC (talk) 03:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
What's the point of this list? edit
What's the point of this list - everyone listed is already covered in Comfort women. Batternut (talk) 11:19, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
- The comfort women article at time of writing is massive. I think having this list be separate would be useful/informative if more people contributed to it. toobigtokale (talk) 03:35, 31 July 2023 (UTC)