Talk:Kantō Massacre

Latest comment: 1 month ago by Seefooddiet in topic Upheaval on Jawiki

Suggestions for improvement

edit

Hi, given the large depth and breadth of high quality scholarship that exists on this incident, I agree with the current assessment that this is "Start" class.

It needs a good bit of work. I did some myself, but recommend people bring in more scholarly sources. Fewer news sources unless they're about a current event or something uncontroversial. toobigtokale (talk) 03:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Upheaval on Jawiki

edit

Currently, there's a large debate and edit dispute on the Japanese version of this article: ja:ノート:関東大震災朝鮮人虐殺事件. The article has been locked because of the edit dispute. There is a debate over whether the event can be considered a genocide, whether estimated deaths from the event should be displayed in the lead, and some are disputing the authenticity of alleged photos of the incident. Note: I do not have opinions on these topics; I only have opinions on whether Wikipedia standards are being upheld.

Historiography is complicated and I don't pretend to know the details. It's not in my immediate wheelhouse to read into this topic unless the Japanese or English articles begin to read significantly revisionist. But this topic is so contentious, and there's a consistent pattern on the Japanese Wikipedia with netto-uyoku, that I'm concerned.

I encourage you to keep watching what happens with that version of the article. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 16:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

At least one of the editors involved in the dispute, AIMOF, has edited the English version of the page along the same vein as they have done on the Japanese article, by deleting images (per ja:ノート:関東大震災朝鮮人虐殺事件#出典付きの記述を含む画像ファイルの削除について). These images were, at least on the Japanese Wikipedia (I added the pic on En and didn't do a good job with sourcing), cited to reliable sources, but AIMOF has claimed without evidence that the reliable sources are incorrect and filled with South Korean propaganda.
I'm highly skeptical of their edit on the Japanese Wiki and possibly on here; that's a strong accusation to make without evidence. They were recently reported to the administrator's notice board. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
The image can be attributed to "画報日本近代の歴史 9" by Sanseidō, and no reliable source I'm aware of disputes its legitimacy. Does it seem appropriate to restore the image to the article? Kaze757 (talk) 19:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think so. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 19:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Restored. The image is adequately sourced, relevant to the subject of the article, and the only comment received was in favor of restoring it. Kaze757 (talk) 17:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
AIMOF is continuing to, seemingly without providing a single source, dispute claims made in the article. Worse, they're promoting revisionist tropes that (surprise) downplay the incident.
If only there wasn't a language barrier, more people would be able to see what's going on. seefooddiet (talk) 18:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
KappaPapa is engaging in walls and walls of WP:Wikilawyering, all the while providing extremely few bits of evidence themselves. What undermines their points is when you look at the broad strokes of their argument, the points are generally counter to the international consensus, meaning the burden of proof really should be on them to prove things.
Furthermore, their and AIMOF's narratives are suspiciously uniformly downplaying of information that is unflattering to Japan. If there was a give and a take it'd be more convincing; history is sometimes just messy. But when it's there's consistent sidling to one specific direction, it's hard to suspend disbelief.
I'm also noticing the use of salami slicing tactics from both users; they make dozens of claims against the international consensus, and when some of them go unchallenged, they try to push them through to the article. They're trying to exhaust other users with walls of texts. seefooddiet (talk) 01:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
The two dissenters are possibly sockpuppets of a user who previously disrupted the Nanjing Massacre article using sockpuppets. Unbelievable. seefooddiet (talk) 18:17, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
The upheaval has resumed and has intensified. seefooddiet (talk) 07:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Now nearly 50% of the lead is denialist. seefooddiet (talk) 19:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)Reply