Talk:Hirohito/Archive 3

message: Hello everyone, this is Steven from J-Revolution.com.  In this article, my website is sourced as the source listing Hirohito's death.  I DO know that he died of duodenal cancer, but, and this is only as good as I can remember, I am almost positive that I sourced Wikipedia for the "traditional" hiding of the cancer.  Unfortunately, now my article has been sourced as the site with the fact, when in reality the line has no source.
I think it would be best to remove this line until someone can find another source.  I apoligize for this happening, but I also want it taken care of as soon as possible!
Steven 15:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Death

message: :I would have to agree with many of the observations put forth here. Although I am not equipped to suggest or write what specific changes should be implemented, it is safe to say that a detailed entry about Hitler without specific details provided about the effect his reign had on German Jews and the unique nature of their treatment would be miss-leading. There is certainly a very unique personality given to the way Japanese soldiers behaved in Manchuria, and I feel it would be extremely informative for Hirohito's reign to be linked to this. Whether he was personally responsible or not, since it is up for debate, can be included as information and left up to the discretion of the reader. Nevertheless, attrocities committed at the hands of Japanese soldiers should most certainly be linked to the leadership of that nation.
:Currently, this article presents Hirohito as a wartime ruler and little else. Much of the detail about his reign and the specifics of internal politics are almost unnecessary according to me. If someone capable is able to create an additional paragraph about Manchuria and the unique nature of the war crimes committed there, it would provide much additional justification for the question of Japanese leadership being tried for war crimes. Right now, it is not clear why that was considered. 19:21, 2007 Mar 14 (UTC) SirDecius
We can argue as much as we like about Hirohito's private polical beliefs, whether he approved/disapproved of Japanese aggression in the 1930s and 1940s and the atrocitities committed in his name, or whether he had any real influence that could have been brought to bear on the policies followed by Japans leaders. 
But the fact remains, for tens of thousands of people around the world, Hirohito's name is primarily (or even mainly) associated with the most appalling crimes - crimes which were committed in Hirohito's name and for which a number of other members of Japan's ruling elite were tried, convicted, and executed for War Crimes.
THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT REFLECT THIS FACT ADEQUATELY. 
By confining the association between Hirohito and Japanese War Crimes to the middle paragraphs of the article in a kind of Ideas Ghetto called "Hirohito and the Second World War" we are marginalising the sufferings of thousands of people and distorting the way that twentieth century history is seen by many, many people.
YES, there are many interesting things to learn about Hirohito that have little to do with the Second World War, Pearl Harbour, etc and it is good to read them in the article - but for large numbers of people the main significance of Hirohito is his role as the figurehead of Japanese Imperialism in the 1930s and 1940s. 
I don't think that the article needs to paint Hirohito as some sort of Antichrist - or even as a Hitler - but it needs to make a more prominent acknowledgement of the shameful side of Hirohito's reign. 
(TS - 26th February 2006)
I haven't seen any reputable recent historical work not argue that Hirohito was very reluctant to begin the war, or that he did not play the key role in ending it. Am I just reading the wrong books, or is the entry here badly out of date? (I'm not going to change it right away, first I'll wait and see if anyone can bring any current and reputable evidence that H was one of the warmongers.) Tannin
:: See Herbert P. Bix - Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan.  Roadrunner
:: Ditto.  People have presented rational arguments and well-researched documentary evidence both for the emperor's innocence and for his guilt (Bix has done the most recent and most thorough job arguing for the emperor's guilt).  In the spirit of Wikipedia, we have to leave culpability as an open question and acknowledge both sides of the debate in this article, however obvious his innocence might have seemed to people in Japan and to others (such as General MacArthur), and however obvious his guilt might have seemed to people in Korea and Manchuria and to others (such as President Truman).  David 23:14, 2005 Apr 19 (UTC)
:It is a true story hirohito and then the government both are unwilling to wage the war and wanted diplomatic resolution. -- Taku 16:23 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)
:: Yes, those nasty Americans forced them at gun-point to mount a massive, surprise, attack on the US Pacific fleet. Oh, wait, I forgot, it wasn't any part of the Japanese government that decided to do that, it was a unilateral action of a confused lieutenant.
:: Please forgive my lapsing into sarcasm, but this attempt to whitewash the past offends me. I don't blame the current generation of Japanese in any way for anything their ancestors did (people who weren't born yet can have no possible responsibility for actions taken prior to their birth) - but if contemporary people do attempt to act like the past didn't happen, that's a separate failing for which I do hold them responsible. Noel (talk) 17:29, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  there can be no doubt that Hirohito approved and encouraged the military strategy of establishing a far eastern empire. After all, pre-1945 he was considered a divinity and they would not have done this had he not approved. The war led to millions of deaths for which he is responsible. He should be listed in the mass murderers section along with Hitler and Stalin. --Marcel1975 20:31, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh geez. Read up on your history. Had Hirohito not gone along with the military's desires, he would have been overthrown or perhaps assassinated. There was talk of replacing him with Prince Chichibu, who was more sympathetic to the military's causes. Hirohito strongly pressed for diplomatic resolutions; even Bix concedes this in his recently published book (a thorough 600+ pager detailing Hirohito's involvement in the War).. specifically on the Mukden Incident and the establishment of the state of Manchukuo. During this time, Hirohito experienced severe insomnia (Edwin Hoyt writes this), and during the course of Second World War, he recited to his advisers a poem his grandfather, Emperor Meiji had written about peace. I know that last sentence was one big run-on, but this is just the discussion section. Tlaktan 04:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias in this article

message: The article states in the 'Last days of the war' section that "the broadcast ordered the Japanese to 'accept the unacceptable' in surrender".
I have just watched The History Channel documentary series Hell In The Pacific and it states that Hirohito's words were "endure the unendurable", not "accept the unacceptable".
There are many links to suggest this is also the case, for example http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b3hirohito.htm.
Worthy of an edit? 
Reuptake 00:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Endure the unendurable"? 

message: This article needs some major tune ups, it is biased in the point of view in giving light to the Emperor's motives during the Invasion of Manchuria to the Axis Alliance. It positions the reader to perceive Hirohito as the victim. Neutrality please! Thk Dailly Rubbings 11:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: I know use of a Japanese emperor's personal name is Just Not Done, but was surprised to read in the article lead that it's considered "blasphemous". Does Shinto have a concept of blasphemy? This needs to be verified. --Meyer 16:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just wrote it was "derogatory". Someone else changed the word "derogatory" to "blasphemous" witout any reason... Švitrigaila 21:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll strike the phrase, then. --Meyer 08:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tahnks... and the next question is of course: when will we have a serious discussion to rename the article? Švitrigaila 10:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why rename the article? The purpose of Wikipedia is to provide information even if that information is offensive some people. If they are offended by the current name of this article (and others have explained why it's appropriate), then Wikipedia is simply not for them. If we bow down to cultural sensitivities and various definitions of derogatory content, we will soon be left without a credible online encyclopedia. WorldWide Update 21:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Simply because Hirohito is not the name by which the article must be named. The Emperor Meiji article is not named Mutsuhito, and the Elvis Presley article is not named Elvis, nor The King. It's not a matter of sensitivity, it's a matter of calling people by their official name (or by a pseudonym if they have taken one), but not by a nickname or just a first name. Švitrigaila 21:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Though both choices are controversial, Hirohito is the correct article title. The Manual of Style of Japan-related articles indicates that for names of modern figures like Emperor Showa general usage in English sources trumps Japan-official forms. If you can think of a better rule, discuss and gain a new consensus on WP:MJ before worrying about changing this article's name. --Meyer 03:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I already did it here. Although most of the answers to my proposition were rather positive, I was told that the proposal must be discuted on the Hirohito talk page and not on WP:MJ! Švitrigaila 11:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blasphemy! 

message: Sorry, Švitrigaila, I know the issue means a lot to you, and your arguments have some merit, but Wikipedia is not a forum for editors to launch personal crusades against the unenlightened masses. Regardless of your feelings, the fact is the previous emperor of Japan was called Hirohito outside of Japan during his life and today. You are free to try to change people's habits, but Wikipedia is a forum for documenting what verifiably is, not for trying to convince people how things ought to be. --Meyer 18:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry too, Meyer, but an encyclopedia is by definition an instrument made to enlighten "unenlightened masses". It's not a democracy where a fact can be aproved or rejected by a vote. The facts that "hara-kiri" is a more commonly used term than "seppuku", or that "Fujiyama" is more commonly used than "Mount Fuji", or that "East Germany" is more commonly used than "German Democratic Republic" don't make that "hara-kiri", "Fujiyama" or "East Germany" better titles for those articles. Švitrigaila 20:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye, I agree. Just because many people use grammar incorrectly in German (use of "wegen" with dative is prevalent in commong speech) doesn't mean we suddenly change the correct way of doing it to the wrong way only because the majority does it incorrectly. Information is not subject to democratic approval -- what's right is right, no matter how many people know it. —Nightstallion (?) 09:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert "Emperor Shōwa, not Hirohito" changes 

message: How do you think about adding this article to :Category:Marine biologists? (See the last paragraph of 'Post-war reign' section of the article.) --Acepectif 10:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Marine biologists 

message: This article has been at Hirohito for a long time, and moves have been discussed in the past.  As such, it is completely inappropriate to move it without any discussion.  I've moved it back.  Discussion of a move should be had here before any move is carried out. john k 18:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Location

message: The entire section on the Coup in the Surrender of Japan article makes no mention of the Emperor having anything to do with the failure of the "coup".  Instead it goes on and on about how they spent the night searching for the audio recording, trying to convince others to support them and failing, and in the end "quitting" because they realized no-one supported them and upon hearing that an army unit might be marching on them.  CraigWyllie 23:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "and the coup was quickly crushed on the emperor's order" 

message: In 1975, the emperor and the empress were honored guests at Colonial Williamsburg in Virginia, the first such visit by Japanese royalty.
Is this particularly notable? Above all the other places he visited? -- Blorg 22:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign visits 

message: The early life section lacks any details about Hirohito's role during the regency period. It would be useful to have someone with knowledge add some facts about this period.Vontrotta (talk) 20:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Regency

message: I thought Hirohito's coronation was held in 1928? GoodDay (talk) 01:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Coronation date

message: Well, why not? Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that would not be NPOV. John Smith's (talk) 18:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bloody butcher of  Manchuria and foster father of the Bataan Death March? 

message: This article is currently substantially below par for a GA and I am thus giving it a week from today to come up to standard or I shall delist it. I am aware from extensive discussions above that there is substantial debate about the article's name. This is however irrelevant to GA as what ever the artile is called, it lacks important parts of the GA criteria.
#Citation. Vast swathes of the article are uncited, which is bad in a regular article at GA but for an article as controversial as this, is a serious problem. As a rule, every paragraph should have at least one citation and further, citations should be provided for anything which is likely to be challenged (i.e. controversial), any direct quotes, and any statistics. At the moment, many paragraphs are totally uncited, as are numerous statements which may be potentially controversial. There are  tags in the article and there are several improperly formated weblinks amongst the citations.
#I'm concerned about comprehensiveness because although his life during World War II is well covered, the first forty years are not. Substantially more detail could be provided about this period.
#Some of the lower sections seem uneccessary, especially the "In popular culture". This shoudl be expanded to a proper section, intergrated with the other text, or removed. Also, why is there a link to rotten.com? Is this a reliable source?
#The lead is much too short and should be expanded to provide a proper summary of the major events of this man's life.
#The article does not appear to be stable at all. Please can a summary be provided here explaining why and whether there is a solution to this problem. I have found that the better cited an article is, the less controversial it becomes.
That is enough for now. The images are good and much of the prose is well written, the problems above are severe enough however to result in delisting if nothing is done within a week. If work is progressing, I will give an extension to this time limit and I will be happy to reassess the article at a future time. At a reassessment I will provide another list of problems, probably smaller and easier to fix, which should see this article on its way to passing GA.--Jackyd101 (talk) 11:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I accept Flying Tiger's comments above, but all my other points remain and there has been no effort to deal with them during the last week. As a result, I am removing this article from the Good Articles list. When it reaches good article standard once more please renominate it at WP:GAN. I am happy to respond to any queries about this in the future, but any attempt to reinstate this article as it is must go through WP:GAR. I am sorry to have to do this, but the article is nowhere near GA status at the moment.--Jackyd101 (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA assessment

message: I was trying to find an  article on the attempted coup d'état to preempt the emporer's speech announcing the surrender. I could not find one.
Perhaps a new article is in order, unless one is already out there. Piercetp (talk) 17:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should a seperate coup d'état article exist?