Talk:Hukbalahap rebellion

English grammar and usage

I've started editing for grammar and usage. Most of the issues I've seen so far are probably non-native errors, mostly use of the present or perfect tense instead of the past: e.g., "is" or "has been" instead of "was". I'm partway through the Origins section, but have to quit for the night. To be resumed. (diff) --Thnidu (talk) 03:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Finished at last. It ain't perfect, but nothing ever is. (diff) --Thnidu (talk) 08:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

W:NPOV and other issues

The article is currently bias to leftist views. Leftist subjective analysis is presented as facts such as Manuel Roxas allegedly erroneous reasoning for fighting against the Huk rebellion. Overall the whole article leans towards leftist views. Plus the current layout of the article including citation style looks like an essay. The article needs some work.--203.215.121.157 (talk) 06:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

This article remains a PR for the Hukbalahap. These were Stalinists. The Philippines probably would have been no worse of than under Marcos but no better either. This badly needs alternative sources to give some balance.Dejvid (talk) 14:47, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Scope

Reading the article, it seems that it encompasses the entirety of the Hukbalahap's activities from 1942-1954. However, should we include the Second World War as part of the Huk Rebellion? Most sources I've read on the subject (Agoncillo, Saulo, Lanzona, and even Kerkvliet, which seems to be the primary source of this article) differentiate between the Hukbalahap of the Second World War vs. the Huk Insurrection.

One can also argue that the actions of the Hukbalahap during the Second World War aren't the same as its actions during the Third Republic. During the war it was a force created as a united front against the invading Japanese; not necessarily as a rebel army. It was only after the events of the 1946 election, coupled with mounting unrest in Central Luzon that the Huks rose again, this time as an armed body with the intention of rebelling against the Philippine government.

My proposal, therefore, is to split the article. Move the information about the Huk's activities during the Second World War to the Hukbalahap page, or, more appropriately, Philippine resistance against Japan, and keep this article as exclusively about the Huk insurrection proper, from 1946-1954. Would greatly appreciate everyone's opinion on this though. NyanThousand (talk) 07:11, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Very strong support for focusing on post-WW2 conflict. I wasn't aware of the 1946–49 war until just now; but the inclusion of the 1942–45 hostilities (in the battlebox) instantly struck me as odd and wrong. By way of analogy, it would be akin to the article on the Greek Civil War or the Malayan Emergency (both of which have some of parallels with this war) including the operations by communist partisans against WW2 Axis occupation forces. Grant | Talk 01:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)