This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 06:33, November 29, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
While the article appears to have reasonably good sources, I found its organization confusing. The sections up to and including "Content" are fine. After that, on the one hand, we have a section saying the note wasn't an ultimatum (and this section is outside "Interpretations," lending it an air of objectivity); on the other, we have several sources describing it as such. The same section also claims that Japan had alternatives to war, but a later (unsourced?) sentence describes the view that war could have been avoided as a "fringe" belief. It would be helpful if someone with better knowledge of the topic could clarify whether there are points of scholarly disagreement here and, if so, to present them in a way that makes this clear to the reader; or, if there isn't serious disagreement, to clean up the apparent contradictions and state the consensus view. Layzner (Talk) 08:06, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
