Talk:Mongol invasions of Japan

message: Anyone else think that the last paragraph of the first invasion section is oddly phrased. I would change it, but I simply do not know what was even intended. The anecdote mentioned sounds almost apocryphal and its source should probably be confirmed. Finally, shouldn't the rise of Zen Buddhism actually be in the significance section and not that of the first invasion which should more properly cover the actual military events? Fryslan0109 (talk) 00:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Japanese edition of Wikipedia has articles on all three priests who likely influenced Tokimune but I don't know who is Bukko. Perhaps Bukko is from one of Korean dramas or something. Please remove whole the paragraph. --Ypacaraí (talk) 08:25, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd phrasing + seemingly apocryphal anecdotes 

message: Sorry to remove your image. I'm not trying to be obnoxious. If you can find a way to put it back in so that it fits nicely on the page and formats properly, please go ahead. I don't know what sort of problem I was having. LordAmeth 00:21, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought most Chinese ocean-going vessels didn't have a keel either but a flat bottom instead. Is that wrong? (82.135.66.208 18:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: See the Invasions of Japan section at Kublai Khan. Some of that information can update what's in the current article. Adraeus 23:40, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I thought that looked strange. Thanks for reminding me. I'll go change it. LordAmeth 11:42, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, another very important point that I somehow missed. I shall look into this tomorrow. Thank you for pointing it out. LordAmeth 23:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invasions of Japan 

message: "... due to their role in setting a limit on Mongol expansion, are arguably crucial events to world history as a whole."
Mongol Expansion had failed in other regions of the world before the invasion of Japan.
For example, in the Mongol invasions of Vietnam, first attempt failed in 1258, the 2 others later also failed too. The limit of Monggol expansion in the south direction, therefore, had been set at Vietnam-China border, indepedently and before Japan attacks. In fact, one attack to Japan was cancelled because of Mongol's resource redirected to Vietnam attempt (which were all failed). In this particular case, the failure in Japan is not a major cause ("their role in setting a limit") but rather a result from other Mongol activities in other regions (explicitly, Vietnam).
I think the introduction should be changed to reflect a more global view of the "world history". It is writing about "world history" viewed in the Japan eye.134.157.170.125 11:07, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know how Vietnam fought against Chinese expansion, not only against Mongolian dinasty.  Actually I respect this.  The best way for you is to create and enhance the acticle of Mongol invasions of Vietnam.  After that, we can review these articles and modify them adequately.  --Corruptresearcher 13:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Hi. I don't normally like to nitpick, and I apologize. But the phrase referring to World War II as a "possible exception" was quite intentionally phrased that way. Operations Olympic and Coronet were never undertaken, and the Home Islands were never invaded, unless one counts the Occupation. Thus, whether it counts as an exception or not is not decided. LordAmeth 02:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And you got your facts from...? I'm assuming you believe the holocaust never occured either?
Someone has changed part of the article...when it talks about the second invasion and mentions starships and stuff.  I don't know about what really happened, or I'd change it.  220.62.102.69 12:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for pointing that out. I've reverted the vandals' changes. LordAmeth 13:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible exceptions 

message: In this Discovery Channel documentary some fragments of the Mongol ships, as retrieved by Japanese archaeologists, are examined. It turns out that, in his haste to launch the invasion, Khubilai used a great number of shabby river boats that could not survive a taifun. They called the ensuing catastrophe the greatest in the history of naval warfare, claiming the lives of ca. 70,000 people. Perhaps the article should be updated accordingly. --Ghirla-трёп- 19:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What is a mystery to me is why Kublai Khan should have made a second attempt like that in exactly the same manner with the same equipment in the same lousy weather, after his first attempt had been so unspeakably disastrous.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.81.0 (talk) 00:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Khubilai Khan: Fall of the Mongol Hordes" 

message: What about Ryoko the pirate who chased off the Mongols during the Mongol invasions of Japan and became a heroine? Chris 19:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ? Huh? LordAmeth 20:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know much, I've only heard about a historical character connected to the events. I am sorry I don't have better information than that.  Apparently she had been a prostitute, and through her deeds gained back her honor and won the respect of the Japanese culture at the time. Only little snippets I have heard. Chris 21:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. I haven't heard of her... thought you were making a joke, making fun of the kinds of things people tend to add to articles with no references to back it up. Never mind. LordAmeth 07:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ryoko the pirate

message: Shouldn't the part about the second invasion mention how many were reported to be involved?  The Mongols would've kept records on how many soldiers they lost.
I am also curious about how the Japanese fought back.  Did they actually run around with katanas, hoping to get close enough to their enemy to slice off a head, before being shot to death by bows and catapulted explosives?  How did the Mongol arrows stand up to Japanese shields and body armor?  Did the Japanese have phalanx shield formations to protect them?  Did the use formations of pikemen to intercept arrows, as they charged forward to their enemy?  Did the ruling elite send vast numbers of peasant farmers forward to wear out the enemy, before rushing in with a proper military force to fight?  Or did the Japanese fight mainly with bows of their own, which even if not as good as the Mongol's bows(I haven't googled around for a comparison chart yet) would've given them an advantage with their superior numbers.  I believe with their culture, they could rally a lot of people to fight at a moment's notice easily enough.
Dream Focus 05:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The second invasion bit doesn't tell of numbers.  Also, what weapons were used by both sides? 

message: Kublai Khan's letter to Japan in 1266 never says something like "as king of Japan under the Mongol Khan" or "Goryeo render thanks for my rule". Instead, it stated "let's enter into friendly relations with each other; nobody would with to resort to arms" and "Goryeo, as my eastern tributary, renders thanks for my ceasefire and restoring their land and people when I ascended the throne".--209.90.146.162 (talk) 03:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kublai's letter in 1266 

message: I have removed a couple of sentences that are such bad English that I'm not even sure what they're trying to say: " And Goryeo built ships on her own type. According to Goryeosa, Southern Song type ships are too cost and too late for due date, so build on my own type. --> Goryeosa 『高麗史』列伝巻十七 「若依蛮様則工費多将不及期」「用本國船様督造」http://kindai.ndl.go.jp/BIImgFrame.php?JP_NUM=50001638&VOL_NUM=00003&KOMA=125&ITYPE=0  Cerowyn (talk) 01:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Invasion 

message: In addition, with the exception of the Occupation of Japan at the end of World War II, these failed invasion attempts are the closest Japan has come to being invasion within the last 1500 years.
I have changed the second "invasion" in the sentence to conquered. Invasion being closest to Japan being invaded? It doesn't make sense. Japan was invaded by the Mongols twice, just not conquered.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miyashita (talk • contribs) 06:02, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invasion vs conquest 

message: The invasion(s) was famously described in Marco Polo's book... AnonMoos (talk) 01:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Marco Polo

message: I downgraded the assessment for WP: Japan as well as WP: Military History. I found References lacking at several points. Coverage was also deficient, but a short section should fix it. The Mongol invasions of Japan were costly, and none of the samurai rulers wanted to bear the costs alone. Between the first and second invasions, the shogunate helped finance defensive coastal outposts in Kyushu, and helped pay the men who kept watch. The warriors of the Tohoku region were favored for this duty, and they earned respect for their vigilance. However, all these costs weakened the shogunate and contributed to its eventual downfall. If I can find sources, I'll be happy to include this in the text, because coverage won't be complete until this is mentioned. Boneyard90 (talk) 16:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP: Japan Re-Assessment Commentary 

message: 500 troops invasion in 1274?!? (23000 headed to Japan, 22500 lost to the sea). Seems like an easy victory for Japan and hardly could be called as 'invasion' by numbers. 213.221.17.130 (talk) 13:24, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers 

message: This article is way out of spec with the Wiki guidelines and appears to have been for a long time.  This is the English Wikipedia, and we need English sources unless a unique piece of information can only be found in another RS that is not in English.  This is for verification purposes, etc., etc.  The Mongol Invasions of Japan are very well documented in a number of English sources and this needs to be addressed.  HammerFilmFan (talk) 13:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  article is sorely needing English translations of sources, copyrights, page numbers ...... 

message: The opening paragraph of this article is rather unclear, I think. It states that this invasion was one of only three instances, but it's not completely clear what it was an instance of. I think it's trying to say that it was one of three wars between Japanese samurai and foreign forces, but I'm not absolutely sure. If someone can confirm this, I'd like to reword it slightly. It also might be better to refer to them as two of four rather than one of three, since they are separate invasions (albeit strongly linked) or simply leave out mention of later invasions altogether, since they don't seem relevant as they occurred centuries later. If they are being mentioned, for what reason are conflicts from the 1900s excluded? And if they are being mentioned, why not a raid in 1019 by Jurchen Pirates? Is the fact that these four conflicts occurred during the era when Japan's military was based around the samurai particularly important? It kinda comes across as fluff.--Mr Bucket (talk) 02:16, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military Significance Section 

message: The Japanese Wikipedia page has a lot more information available on the battles, so I would assume there's a lot that could added here beyond leader names and troop counts. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 12:05, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  More detail in Battles sections 

message: In 1266, the emperor of Japan sent a letter to Kublai Khan as a gesture of good faith prior to the upcoming invasion. In the letter, the emperor of Japan referred to himself as "The King of Japan", subordinating himself from the "Great Mongol emperor":
Cherished by the Mandate of Heaven, may the Great Mongol emperor accept this letter. I, the King of Japan, am merely the lord of a small country. The sovereigns of small countries, sharing borders with each other, have for a long time been concerned to communicate with each other and become friendly.
11:51, 10 June 2019‎ Ecthelion83 talk contribs‎ m  49,248 bytes +96‎  the second part of that quote seems like it's addressed from the Mongols to Japan, not from Japan's initial message to Genghis Khan 
09:59, 14 May 2019‎ Ez7b4q talk contribs‎ m  49,146 bytes +4‎  Added link to Goryeo
09:57, 14 May 2019‎ Ez7b4q talk contribs‎  49,142 bytes -18‎  →‎Contact 
09:54, 14 May 2019‎ Ez7b4q talk contribs‎ m  49,160 bytes +247‎  →‎Contact 
The editor is Korean..220.104.45.64 (talk) 15:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  .False information was added.  

message: I realize that all the primary sources are in non-English sources, but there is enough information on the events in English now for the article to not have to rely on secondary or tertiary non-English sources. The majority of sources in this article are now in English. If you do choose to add non-English sources please try to keep them to primary or secondary sources and provide English translations of the relevant material. Qiushufang (talk) 14:30, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you really confirming the source? You say there are a lot of English sources about this war, do you correctly quote them? The information you edited about Takezaki and the main battlefield Akasaka and Torikaizaka is clearly wrong. Also, the date of the Mongolian invasion on this page is different from the date commonly known in Japan. Japanese sources should not be excluded. And the wrong description should be deleted.--SLIMHANNYA (talk) 20:57, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, they are included in the references. Japanese sources should be included, but this is the English wikipedia, not the Japanese wikipedia. So when available English sources should be used, and when using Japanese sources or any other non-English sources, translations should be made available. Also please do not erase material without first reaching consensus. Qiushufang (talk) 21:06, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Please try to keep the majority of sources to English

message: thase it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:F390:2A00:F836:2B80:AA20:5441 (talk) 17:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  they died in a tornado 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:25, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion