Talk:Japanese occupation of the Philippines
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Movie production
editIt's noteworthy that a movie Liwayway ng kalayaan (1944) was made during the Japanese occupation. Armored vehicle buffs would find this movie interesting because it gives viewers a rare glimpse of captured American M3 light tanks and captured Universal Carriers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.57.89.34 (talk) 12:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
"Recognized guerrillas"
editThis article, and quite a number of others, use the term recognized guerrilla.
What is the exact meaning? "Recognized", as opposed as to bandit groups?
Varlaam (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- Good question. In the context of this article and other related ones, it probably means "guerrilla forces duly recognized by the Army of the United States", which is wording that I lifted from Republic Act No. 897. Also see Executive Order No. 21 (October 28, 1944), which says, in part, "A recognized military force, as used herein, is defined as a force under a commander who has been appointed, designated or recognized by the Commander-in-Chief Southwest Pacific Area." I don't know where a list of such recognized forces might be found, but also see this. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
"Contributions of the Philippine resistance forces"
editPlease do not revert my latest edit.Because it is very essential and important to give them credit for their efforts in the Allied campaign in the liberation of the Philippines.And as I go researching about Philippines during World War II,the resistance forces efforts are mostly overlooked. Thank you.Mabuhay Philippines!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.55.93.68 (talk) 14:19, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, your addition lacks specific references to a, or multiple, reliable source(s). May I suggest that you look for references to support your addition, and rather than adding it here, where the End of the occupation is for the large part a summary of the main article listed, that you find specific references to specific contributions to the sub-articles whose contributions were made.
- One such book I found useful was the following:
- Rottman, Gordon L. (2002). World War 2 Pacific island guide. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 477. ISBN 9780313313950. Retrieved 7 May 2011.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help)
- Rottman, Gordon L. (2002). World War 2 Pacific island guide. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 477. ISBN 9780313313950. Retrieved 7 May 2011.
- If you do a search in that book for the term "guerrilla", you will find multiple references to Filipino and American Guerrilla contributions during that part of the war. I am sure that other books are out there, and wish you the best of luck in improving articles in the future. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
New Content 9AUG11
editAn IP editor has recently added content that was supported by references that were not verifiable online. Although it is not required to have a source be available online, it is necessary for a source to be verifiable, in order to verify content in question. I have removed content that appears to be WP:OR, and tagged the remaining questionable reference source, and tagged the section.
I propose removing the content all together if the content cannot be independently verified by a third party registered user. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Per WP:CANVASS#appropriate notification I have notified WP:PINOY & WP:MILHIST of this discussion. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- If the added material is confirmed to be verifiable, it still seems questionable on due weight grounds. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- If found to be verifiable, perhaps it can be summarized into sometype of evenly weighted content?
- Otherwise, it should be deleted. No?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:30, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- To clarify, I don't question the addition of this material with an assertion on my part that it that it lacks evenness. As I understand WP:DUE thar would not be a valid ground upon which to seek to suppress material. The significance of the material, even if verifiable, in relation to the topic of the article seems questionable to me. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:07, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- As stated above the content is questionable, and the weight of the content is questionable. Unless additional sources of verification can be found that can be verified by a second party (as in one not the adding editor) the content and source will be removed by myself no sooner than 25AUG11. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- To clarify, I don't question the addition of this material with an assertion on my part that it that it lacks evenness. As I understand WP:DUE thar would not be a valid ground upon which to seek to suppress material. The significance of the material, even if verifiable, in relation to the topic of the article seems questionable to me. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:07, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Removing Disputed-section tag added in August 2011
editI've removed a {{disputed-section}} template added in this August 2011 edit. Per the template docs, there should be a talk page section here explaining what is disputed. The edit which placed the template removed content from the article, so I presume that the article no longer contains the content which was disputed. See the links in the foregoing for more info. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- The disputed content, which remains is as follows:
Among the signal units of Col Peralta were the 61 Signal Company manned by 2Lt Ludovico Arroyo Bañas, which was attached to forces of the 6th Military Division, stationed in Passi, Iloilo, under the command of Capt. Eliseo Espia; and the 64th Signal Company of the same Military Division, under the Command of Lt. Col. Cesar Hechanova, to which 2Lt. Bañas was given the responsibility sometime later.
- It is referenced to an affidavit that allegedly exists in Quezon City. As reliable source states that a source need not be online for it to be used, and as I live in California, I am seeking that someone who can see if this document actually exist.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- I've placed a {{disputed-inline}} tag after the disputed text and the {{verify credibility}} tag which followed the ref of its supporting source. I've removed that tag inside the ref since it concerns the source cited and not the ref. I've preserved the August 2011 date from the {{disputed-section}} tag which I had removed, and I've specified this talk page section for discussion about the dispute. This dispute has been active for nearly a year and a half now; some action ught to be taken to resolve it. Please discuss further here. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- I've added a {{undue-inline}} tag for the disputed content, specifying this talk page section for discussion. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- It's been more than a year, and there has not been any editors who are defending this content; therefore, I will boldly remove it. The actions of this unit is more relevant in the article Philippine resistance against Japan, which could be argued to be a sub-article of this article.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Guerilla currency during the occupation
editThe financial situation of anti-Japanese guerilla fighters.
Moro resistance on Mindanao and Borneo
edithttp://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/11/06/2003386494
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/11/06/2003386494/2
http://www.bt.com.bn/focus/2007/10/31/a_life_haunted_by_wwii_surgical_killings
http://www.forties.net/japconfession.html
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ht5P8U54dLa7dH9mqjKyurq0zQMw?hl=en
http://books.google.com/books?id=glVxAAAAMAAJ
http://books.google.com/books?id=glVxAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=butcher
http://books.google.com/books?id=glVxAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=tortured
http://books.google.com/books?id=glVxAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=beheaded
http://books.google.com/books?id=5Qf39DpguysC&pg=PA125#v=onepage&q&f=false
Page 1702
Page 69
Page 1702
Page 56
Page 111
Page 111
PARRANG SABBIL: RITUAL SUICIDE AMONG THE TAUSUG OF JOLO by THOMAS M. KIEFER Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde Deel 129, 1ste Afl., ANTHROPOLOGICA XV (1973) , pp. 108-123 Published by: KITLV, Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27861310
http://books.google.com/books?id=6T39iCmUzMkC&pg=PA2#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6T39iCmUzMkC&pg=PA47#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6T39iCmUzMkC&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6T39iCmUzMkC&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=tm8tSwyTa7AC&pg=PA178#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://cryptome.org/2014/04/spy-muslim.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20110813095846/http://www.ndic.edu/press/pdf/5160.pdf http://ni-u.edu/ni_press/pdf/A_Muslim_Archipelago.pdf http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/utils/getdownloaditem/collection/p4013coll11/id/695/filename/696.pdf/mapsto/pdf http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm/ref/collection/p4013coll11/id/695 http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/005679120
http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar/assessment.asp?groupId=84003
http://nointervention.com/archive/pubs/CWIS/imnr.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20070203183239/http://www.cwis.org/fwj/21/imnr.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=KkO-DHcRVMoC&pg=PA124#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/196504/kris.and.crescent.htm
http://www.fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/sword.htm
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,802183,00.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZgWnN4hyjoQC&pg=PA271#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rajmaan (talk) 22:59, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Rajmaan (talk) 01:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Japanese occupation of British Borneo
Chinese and Suluk Tausug launched joint uprising in 10/10/1943 against the Japanese on Borneo. The Japanese then nearly exterminated the Suluks, massacring nearly all their men, and women and children at a mosque.
http://books.google.com/books?id=7PuvyKPz5f4C&pg=RA1-PA469#v=onepage&q&f=false
Suluks were led by Panglima Ali, Chinese were led by Alberk Kwok (I. N. Kwok)(Guo Yi Nan)(Guo Hengnan) Teochew
Imam Marajukim, from Sulu, coordinated cooperation among the Suluks in the Philippines and Suluks in Borneo, to procure supplies for the resistance against the Japanese.
Rajmaan (talk) 19:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not clear what your point is here. --Yaush (talk) 19:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
- Create an article on the Mindanao theater of the war, with detailed and referenced material about the Moro resistance against Japan and the war crimes which were said to have taken place. Akira Makino admitted that Japanese committed war crimes against the Moros. Also we need to add Moro resistance groups to the infobox and write a section on them here. There were both Moros fighting alongside the Americans abd Filipinos, and other Moros fighting both Japanese and American forces.Rajmaan (talk) 04:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Rajmaan (talk) 17:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
18:09, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
4th column is needed in infobox for Moros
editWe need a 4th column for Moro Muslims who fought both Japanese and the Americans. The pro-American Moros can go on the American column, but the unaffiliated Moros who fought both sides need their own column.Rajmaan (talk) 03:43, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Duplicated content
editThe content regarding the Moro's actions during the occupation, as part of the resistance appears to be duplicated in the article Philippine resistance against Japan. Perhaps it should be summarized here, or removed all together?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
- I will be notifying appropriate WikiProjects of this concern.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:28, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Japanese occupation of the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080916174000/http://www.oldgoldandblack.com/o_article/last_of_cavalrymen_a_true_hero/ to http://www.oldgoldandblack.com/o_article/last_of_cavalrymen_a_true_hero/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:14, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Infobox formatting re placement of Hukbalahap
editRightCowLeftCoast (RCLC) placed a message on my user talk page today, saying
- Please see this reversion of a reversion done by an IP contributor at Japanese occupation of the Philippines. This is not in keeping with WP:BRD and can be seen as instigating an edit war.
Yes. I see that. The other editor involved is an unregistered user, 112.200.103.239. (239) who has been editing from that IP address since March 20 and who, from his edit history appears to have a serious interest in this topical area.
RCLC, I agree re BRD and EW, but I'm not going to take admin action at this point. Since 239, being an anon, has no watchlist, I will place a message on that anon's talk page asking that he join discussion here.
239, I suggest that you establish a Wikipedia account (see Wikipedia:Why create an account?), that you read WP:EW and WP:BRD, and that you engage in discussion here.
I am not going to edit the article re the infobox formatting at this point but, after looking at the two versions of the article wikilinked from the message which RCLC left me, I do have some comments and a suggestion.
IMO, this version of the article after the reversion by RCLC is unsightly. The infobox is too wide, unduly restricting lead section prose to a narrow strip alongside it.
Today is a travel day for me and I don't have the time right now to work this out myself, but I suggest that the combatant parameters of the infobox be reworked to name something like Allied forces as combatant1 and to use the combatant1a/combatant1b/combatant1c parameters of {{Infobox military conflict}} to present U.S. forces, Hukbalahap forces, and Unaffiliated Moro Muslim insurgents as subcomponents of combatant1.
Also, it occurs to me as an afterthought not well thought out that, since the article is titled Japanese occupation of the Philippines, perhaps the Japanese forces ought to be presented as combatant1. Perhaps not, but it's a thought. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:16, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
- While all forces were opposed to the Japanese in the territories of the Commonwealth the Philippine Islands, the Huk were also in combat with Allied forces and the Japanese, and the Moros were in combat with the Allied forces and the Japanese. Therefore, simplifying it that all were opposed to the Japanese and thus were on the same side is not keeping with what reliable sources have verified. I understand that it is unsightly having all that clear space, but it does better represent the historical facts.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- This article, though, is about the Japanese occupation, and the focus should be on that. "All were opposed to the Japanese" does not necessarily imply that "all thus were on the same side" [and there were no differences between them]. Perhaps differences, even clashes, between the several entities opposed to the Japanese occupation should be mentioned in a summary style article section here which has links to other detail articles with more information about that. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Please provide information or battle that occurred between Huk Forces or the Moro Jurdamentados against the Commonwealth or the United States during WW2. Even if you go to a WW2 museum in the Philippines, they even now recognize the HUK Forces as a Guerrilla opposed to the Japanese and therefore did not encounter clashes during the Occupation. HeneralVicente23 (talk) 00:35, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- WORLD WAR II AND HUK EXPANSION
- Edwin Price Ramsey "It happened that there had been a fight between the Huks and some of my troops on the outskirts of Manila the day before and some of my people had been murdered."
- Men of Destiny: The American and Filipino Guerillas During the Japanese Occupation of the Philippines "Another group that served to complicate the efforts of the guerrillas on Luzon was the Hukblajaps or Huks for short. These communist guerrillas fought against both the Japanese and other guerrilla bands. The Huks posed a significant threat to the guerrilla groups as that they would attempt to deliberately interfere with operations or prey upon guerrilla units after they came into contact with Japanese forces. 117"
- --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- Kent Holmes. Wendell Fertig and His Guerrilla Forces in the Philippines: Fighting the Japanese Occupation, 1942-1945. Jefferson: McFarland & Company, 2015. 244 pp. $39.95 (paper), ISBN 978-0-7864-9825-3. Reviewed by Oliver Charbonneau "Various groups of Moros thus responded in a number of ways to the coming of the Japanese—some saw it as an opportunity to reverse increasing Christian dominance in the southern Philippines, others remained loyal to the Americans in hopes of better results after the war, and many simply recused themselves entirely from the conflict."
- --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
What if we change the Infobox rather than a Military Conflict to a Former Country? just like Malaya and Dutch East Indies? where they use a Former Country type. Just a suggestion BTW. HeneralVicente23 (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- I think not. During the Japanese occupation, while the Philippine Commonwealth government maintained an ongoing government in exile, the Philippines was governed from January 1942 to October of 1943 by the Philippine Executive Commission, a provisional caretaker government, and then by the Second Philippine Republic (2RP) government as a Japanese puppet state until the WW-II defeat of the Japanese. Both of those articles are wikilinked from this article. The article on the 2RP has an {{infobox former country}} template. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Japanese occupation of the Philippines. 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/20100323170920/http://www.defencejournal.com/2002/june/guerrillas.htm to http://www.defencejournal.com/2002/june/guerrillas.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629063534/http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_23/saviors.htm to http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_23/saviors.htm
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 12:14, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Japanese occupation of the Philippines. 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/20100727232925/http://www.maranao.com/bangsamoro/0506-japan_invasion.htm to http://www.maranao.com/bangsamoro/0506-japan_invasion.htm
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 11:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)