Talk:Surrender of Japan

Were the atom bombs the main reason for surrender?

According to these Stanford and MIT professors , later released docs show that it was known that it was well-known that the main condition the Japanese wanted was that no harm would come to the emperor and that Truman finally signaled he would abide by this only after the two bombs were dropped.

References

Jewel Voice Broadcast ➡ Hirohito surrender broadcast

Please change "Jewel Voice Broadcast" to Hirohito surrender broadcast, per the revent move of that page (because Jewel Voice Broadcast is, it turns out, a 2006 Wikipedia user-spawned neologism).

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2023

Simple spelling mistake/typo. "the Emperor's will that Japan surrender."

Change "Afterward, Tōgō told Suzuki that there was no hope of getting better terms, and Kido conveyed the Emperor's will that Japan surrender.".

To

"Afterward, Tōgō told Suzuki that there was no hope of getting better terms, and Kido conveyed the Emperor's will that Japan surrenders."

Or rewrite this part entirely. 109.235.37.171 (talk) 13:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. The existing grammar is fine. Binksternet (talk) 16:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Not entirely. 'afterward' (as opposed to 'afterwards') suggests the use of English American grammar and the use of the plural form for 'Japan surrender' suggests the use of British American grammar. In any case, I can agree it's probably fine as is; at most a minor confusion on the use of grammar

. Thank you for looking at it. 89.205.135.89 (talk) 15:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

FAR needed

A 2009 FA with notable issues:

• Countless sentences and paragraphs without refs.
• The article overuses quotes and blockquotes, of which many are lengthy.
• Some large paragraphs only supported by one citation at the end.
• Many webpages referenced when they're better covered by high-quality academic books and journals.
• More than a third (73/185) of all citations rely only on Frank 1999 and Hasegawa 2005 as of now.
• Thousands of new, quality texts on this vital topic exist in TWL. Some are definitely due for inclusion.
• Citations and explanatory notes are mixed, but the problem is that different refstyles are used for each note.

Pinging FAC nominators Wwoods and Raul654. Wretchskull (talk) 10:43, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

@Wretchskull: Do you still have these concerns with the article? If so, do you want to take this to FAR? Z1720 (talk) 02:07, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

the intro is too long

I hope it's not too unhelpful to give general feedback? the introduction is too long but I'm not sure how I'd summarise it. So just leaving it as a general suggestion. FourPi (talk) 06:52, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Unverifiable Anami Quote

While the quote, "not be wondrous for this whole nation to be destroyed like a beautiful flower", attributed to Anami Korechika is sourced using Thomas M. Coffey's Imperial Tragedy, there is no verifiable record of Anami ever having said such a metaphor in Japanese.

Jeffrey J. Hall, lecturer on Japanese Studies at Kanda University of International Studies, mentions this in a Twitter thread[1].

I believe it would be better to use another quote with a similar intent which would have a source in Japanese, such as citing Sadao (1998), which states (in regards to Anami):

He admitted that "given the atomic bomb and the Soviet entry, there is no chance of winning on the basis of mathematical calculation," but he nevertheless declared that "there will be some chance as long as we keep on fighting for the honor of the Yamato race.... If we go on like this and surrender, the Yamato race would be as good as dead spiritually."

Sadao (1998) differs from Imperial Tragedy in that his work was published under an academic journal (Pacific Historical Review, published by the University of California) as opposed to Coffey's book, and uses Japanese sources (as opposed to Coffey, who uses sources that have already been translated into English). Xylo-xt (talk) 15:11, 27 July 2024 (UTC)