Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japanese imperialism

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP, unanimously apart from nominator. I have not moved the page as suggested in some votes since 1) there is no consensus to do so, and it only requires someone to be bold in future anyway and 2)it already has a merge tag on it. -Splash 20:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

=[[Japanese imperialism]]=

This was never listed here. --Dmcdevit·t 05:56, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

'''What he meant is the VfD proposal was not properly done (tagged on July 8) and he is just listing it here for discussion. SYSS Mouse 22:49, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep Why delete? The deletion seems politically motivated. Japan was formerly an empire, and has annexed foreign territory through out its history. Why is this not significant? There is a similar list for US, British and other European imperialism. Should Wikipedia have double standards????

:: Keep Nationalism is a different concept than imperialism. I don't think nationalism shold be a catch all for everyting.

  • Keep'; terrible article but no reason to delete. -- Taku 21:06, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - Exactly, "why delete"? Not even a reason given with this, I say it should be kept but expanded heavily to be useful. 84.137.0.178 07:56, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect until someone decides to actually write an article about the concept of imperialism by Japan....listing countries having experienced it won't do. -- Natalinasmpf 06:02, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand/clean-up. Needs significant work but Japanese imperialism is different from Empire of Japan as there are some imperialists still active in the far right in Japan. It is consistent with treatment of imperialism in other countries. Having said this, Empire of Japan is the most logical merge proposal. Capitalistroadster 07:17, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep The type of person who'd advocate removal of this article is the same who'd rather suppress images of Nazi Germany, or Japanese internment camps in the US for that matter. There's no benefit to concealing the mistakes of the past, regardless of your native country's involvement.
  • Keep legitimate article athough it could be improved. Exactly what we mean by Imperialism is of course controversial, but I think a lot of people would accept that it means more than just nationalism, or the ruler assuming the title of emperor. Actually, I would say Japan is the one non-white imperialist power, which is POV, but as this is a significant school of thought it deserves mention. Whether Japanese imperialism has some specific features not found in European or US imperialism could make an interesting article. PatGallacher 11:46, 2005 July 17 (UTC)
  • Cleanup and rename to history of Japanese imperalism, per Lowellian and PatGallacher. Dcarrano 17:57, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, cleanup and rename to history of Japanese imperalism. Jeltz talk 20:32, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. To clarify, the VfD tag was added 8 May by User:Amerinese, who also tagged Chinese imperialism on the same day; and hasn't subsequently contributed. Frivolous nomination, really. Charles Matthews 21:14, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Amerinese has long since been blocked for deceptive sockpuppetry. The VfD tag was probably part of whatever crusade he was on at the time. --MarkSweep 05:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, cleanup and rename to history of Japanese imperalism. Ravedave 21:20, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep of course. Gee, you'd think this might have had an impact on Asia. Could be renamed history of Japanese imperalism. 142.66.50.69 22:54, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Oops, forgot to log in. The last vote was mine. CanadianCaesar 22:55, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and cleanup - important topic, but a list is not adequate. - Mustafaa 23:32, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep encyclopedic and notable topic. JamesBurns 08:12, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep Very encyclopedic; there's plenty of useful information here!--GrandCru 03:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Cleanup. SYSS Mouse 22:49, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep/source. Important topic, appears to be "internally sourced" from other Wikipedia articles.-Willmcw 23:28, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.