Talk:Jinan incident

Complete change

I note that there have been controversies over this article in the past, and the version that was on line frankly did not seem very good to me - argumentative and undocumented as well as missing a lot of the key points about this very important and tragic affair. I've completely rewritten it, based on the source I cite, Akira Iriye's After Imperialism. This is a fairly old book by now and I am not an expert on this period of Chinese history, so there may be some additons or emendations that could be made. But Iriye's book remains highly respected as an outstanding example of multiarchival research and I would want to be convinced that any changes reflect real scholarship and not the input of some ill-informed propagandist. (Note that Iriye is an extremely prominent American diplomatic historian of Japanese orign and highly respected in the profession for his meticulous research as well as scrupulous objectivity.)

Will O'Neil 04:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Naming this article

I wonder if Tsinan should be more appropriate than Jinan for this historical event.--Jusjih 00:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Abab

PLEASE stop adding incorrect information. The other 17 were not killed. I have already fixed your flub twice, but you seem dead set on it, so I suppose for today another editor needs to fix it if you continue, and hopefully you'll respect the 3RR for the next day. You keep doing this to articles--reverting them without providing good reason, and are removing valuable content. As noted repeatedly, you must discuss your changes. Not only are you adding a POV slant, but you are adding plain incorrect information, as well as violating various guidelines. I like to have good faith in your edits, but it's tough if you continue to ignore pleas to discuss things. LactoseTI 20:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I already took note of the 17 issue, but it seems you just like to lump that with all other edits and accuse me of reverting. Abab 21:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I happened to catch this exchange on this page, but it is a bit hard when it's out of the way articles like this. I'm glad to see that you finally wrote something here, Abab, but please discuss before re-introducing sections which are largely speculation, or before changing articles to seem to give them a particular "POV slant," as LactoseTI puts it. Komdori 22:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Civilian casualties

How come there is absolutely no mention of the Chinese civilian casualties? According to official Chinese records (and the Chinese Wikipedia) tens of thousands of Chinese civilians were injured or killed, following the occupation of Jinan by the Japanese forces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whipster (talk • contribs) 09:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jinan incident. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120724101408/https://www.jinan.gov.cn/art/2005/9/1/art_40_8702.html to http://www.jinan.gov.cn/art/2005/9/1/art_40_8702.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160311010252/http://orbat.com/site/history/volume5/534/1928%20northern%20campaign%20part%20ii.pdf to http://orbat.com/site/history/volume5/534/1928%20Northern%20Campaign%20Part%20II.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:02, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Wrong Photo(?)

Isn't this image:

Autopsy of a Japanese victim killed in the Jinan Incident (Japanese source).

the same image as [1] and isn't the person doing that autopsy Shirō_Ishii at Unit 731?

Daily Mail also says that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diaozhadelaowai (talk • contribs) 09:30 8 May 2019 (UTC)

I've added a new section related to this matter. There is a Japanese paper which indicates these photographs are of the Japanese victims of the Jinan incident, but have been misused by various parties, particularly Chinese sources, as depicting the Unit 731 atrocities. The paper seems credible to me, and has been cited and confirmed in other seemingly reliable Japanese sources, but there is also evidence of other more questionable Japanese sources using the 'misuse' of the photographs as evidence that the Unit 731 atrocities did not exist at all, so it's a difficult matter. No English sources seem to be available on the matter. RGloucester — ☎ 17:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I've done a bit of digging, and found the relevant photos at the Japan Centre for Asian Historical Records, listed under the title "Jinan Incident–Photos of Massacred Japanese". This is a Japanese government source, and seems to be one suggested by Hara in the relevant article. I think we can be sure that the photos are not of Unit 731 experiments, but it's a sad thing that no English secondary sources have taken up the matter. RGloucester — ☎ 18:42, 30 September 2019 (UTC)