This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Douglas MacArthur was NOT the youngest Major General in the Army, since he attained that rank in 1925 at the age of 44 or 45. Ulysses S. Grant attained the rank of Major General shortly after the Battle of Fort Donelson in February of 1862. At the time, Grant was 39 years old, though he may have passed his 40th birthday in April of that year, he was still several years younger than MacArthur.
Should the infobox have the succession of his positions or not? -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 04:21, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Hawkeye7: Would you please clarify this edit? I am not challenging it at all, but I would like to have clarification on why it was removed, as this is a lot of material. Thank you. -- 1990'sguy ( talk) 22:44, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A link underneath the photo of MacArthur Memorial is incorrectly taking users to Norfolk City Hall. The link should take users to the MacArthur Memorial page ( /info/en/?search=MacArthur_Memorial) Taprobana ( talk) 17:53, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:04, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
This needs to stop.
As difficult as it may be to empathize or relate, the Emperor of Japan was to hundreds of millions of Chinese and Koreans what Hitler was to the Jews.
The Chinese will forever want the justice from Japan denied to them by this man's unfortunate judgement. A one man international tribunal - 'Emperor' was a fitting title for McArthur at the time, truly.
I think the least we could do is stop 'protecting' war criminals and admit things for what they are.. the Chinese deserve their justice and the Japanese deserve to know they've been done wrong by their Emperor just like the Germans have by Hitler. Yet, 'officially', 'east-asian hitler' 'did nothing wrong'; that's rubbish, and shame on those who keep up this nonsense - you'd be morally similar to a Nazi sympathizer; and worse, that you contribute to prolonging ignorance, and pointless prejudiced nationalistic sentiments in that region. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.156.242.160 ( talk) 10:43, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
As this article is about an American general, the date format used should be mm-dd-yyyy. SMP0328. ( talk) 04:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:59, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as unreferenced : A Douglas MacArthur State Technical College operated in Opp, Alabama from 1965 until 2003, when it merged with Lurleen B. Wallace Community College.
In case anybody wants to take the time to find a reference. deisenbe ( talk) 13:16, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Fourth paragraph says air fleet was destroyed on December 8th. That's absolutely wrong. Pearl Harbor was on December 7th. 24.184.129.241 ( talk) 19:47, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "Bataan surrendered on 9 April,[153] and Corregidor on 6 May" to "After six months of stubborn defense and had finally ran out of supplies and food, Bataan surrendered on 9 April,[153] and Corregidor on 6 May." 170.37.244.37 ( talk) 21:52, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. --
DannyS712 (
talk)
22:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
I added more to this section because it lacked the details that Gen. Marshall ordered the award, authored the citation himself, and bypassed Congress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxtrot5151 ( talk • contribs) 03:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Which section I can add my cite in? My cite is "...in late 1950, General Douglas MacArthur’s forces crossed the thirty-eighth parallel and approached the Chinese border" The Two Koreas and the Great Powers, Cambridge University Press, 2006, page 43. Shahanshah5 ( talk) 10:29, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1hqd7x/why_did_douglas_macarthur_retain_his_command_and/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.5.89.217 ( talk) 16:33, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
I notice his honorary GCB (Knight Grand Cross Order of the Bath) is described as being from Australia. The Australian government may have presented it (imaginably while he was on their territory) but this order is a British (UK) honour which would be awardable in the British Commonwealth Dominions (like Australia). Australia did not yet have its present independent honours system. I will rephrase the references accordingly to reflect this. Cloptonson ( talk) 19:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
There has been much discussion in this talk page but none about the photo. /info/en/?search=File:MacArthur_Manila.jpg Maybe it is genuine but to me it looks like some bizarre photoshopping. Is there any way to 'citation needed' or suchlike for a photo?
I take that back. It seems that he really was known for using a eccentric pipe. Probably worth mentioning this in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpaley ( talk • contribs) 21:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
@ Scope creep and Lqqhh: instead of arguing the toss at ANEW, this is the place to be. In general, I'd support saying in the body of the article that it was a "famous speech"; after all, a number of sources refer to it as such (e.g. [2], [3]). But I would argue the language is overly florid for the lead. Likewise, there are another three references to a "famous X": "the famous picture", "famous Article 9" and "The relief of the famous general". The last two are particularly out of place. It is wholly bizarre to assume that our audience is going to have a clue as to what Article 9 is, and the last comes across as pure hagiography.
Discuss. —— SerialNumber 54129 12:06, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
At the same time, MacArthur undermined the imperial mystique when his staff released the famous picture of his first meeting with the Emperor, the impact of which on the Japanese public was electric as the Japanese people for the first time saw the Emperor as a mere man overshadowed by the much taller MacArthur instead of the living god he had always been portrayed as.
If something’s famous, you don’t need to tell people; if you need to tell people something’s famous, it isn’t.
“Famously” is typically used to mean one of two things:
I know everyone knows this, but I can’t think of an original way to start so I am going to say it anyway.
Harold Macmillan, asked what the biggest challenge is for any leader, famously replied: “Events, my dear boy, events.”
You don’t know this? I do. That shows I am clever and know lots of stuff you don’t.
Reich famously declined to continue in academia, preferring to support himself via a series of blue-collar jobs.
I think it needs to be done on a case-by-case basis. I agree that "famous" should be removed before "article 9", but I would want it preserved for "relief of the famous general", as it is telling the reader something they may not know. Back in 1951, the reputation of generals was at a high point, World War II having ended just six years before and every adult could remember it clearly. Back in 1942, MacArthur had become a symbol of a nation's determination to stand up to what was seen as the overwhelming might of an enemy. Whereas Harry Truman was liked, not respected, and not trusted. Today the image of the military has tarnished, and Harry Truman looks better by contrast with some of his successors. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 09:07, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
There seems to be confusion with the editing of the title so discussions are now on here as advised. I believe the title should be changed to "Escape from the Philippines" as opposed to "Escape from australia". Should any Australian's wish to have a seperate account of the General's time in that country then it'd be great to see a whole paragraph of as there is quite a large enough account of his stay in Australia which can be another added topic. I intend to include other changes in this section by adding several historical references from the US congressional archives detailing his escape from the PI, which is important to our history and also important to his story of leaving the PI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabararmon ( talk • contribs) 12:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Bataan surrendered on 9 April, and Corregidor on 6 May.The rest of the section, a half-dozen paragraphs long, isn't about his escape, but his Medal of Honor. I suggest this all be given a new section, simply titled Medal of Honor.
Done Split the section into "Escape from the Philippines" (matching the main article) and "Medal of Honor". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:40, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change
United States in the 1964 Summer Olympics
to
United States at the 1964 Summer Olympics
208.95.49.53 ( talk) 14:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
The article barely even talks about how Douglas granted immunity to the perpetrators of some of the most horrendous crimes in history. Sources point out that some of these expertiments were also done on Americans, so even from an ultra-patriotic point of view his decision would have been contentious. It was covered up and is barely discussed today, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be more prominent in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A45A:6C9A:1:3CD4:884B:22D3:D93F ( talk) 18:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
MacArthur certainly fumbled the ball on 8 December 1941, allowing precious hours to slip away, soon losing his best bombers. I wanted to point out some details to Nimuda who is currently expanding the article.
The narrative here of the B-17s makes it sound like they were sitting around all morning doing nothing when they were surprised and destroyed by Japanese air attack. This is not quite correct: they had been patrolling the seas looking for Japanese ships, and were back at Clark Field refueling when they were hit. But it wasn't MacArthur who had assigned patrol duties, it was Brereton itching to implement war plan Rainbow 5. MacArthur ordered him to stand down on that. The sequence of events is described on page 163 in Bloody Shambles ISBN 0-948817-50-X.
American submarines in the Philippines were not poorly trained, they were poorly equipped with the shockingly untested and unreliable weapon, the Mark 14 torpedo, and not even enough of those because of a Japanese air raid of 10 December that destroyed 233 torpedos at Cavite Navy Yard. The submariners fired plenty of torpedoes at the enemy but the torpedoes failed almost every time. The bigger torpedo picture is a story filled with criminally negligent officers of the Bureau of Ordnance at Newport Torpedo Station in Rhode Island, but I'm not asking for it to be told in MacArthur's biography. All I wanted to say is that we should not be blaming the actual fighting men in the submarines. Binksternet ( talk) 05:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Nimuda ( talk) 23:40, 22 April 2021 (UTC)Nimuda
I absolutely do not blame the sailors, soldiers, or airmen. MacArthur (yes, MacArthur failed terribly with the Clark Field disaster along with Brereton even though I blame it mostly on very bad timing because the B-17s were all in the air for 2 hours during the early morning but then had to land to refuel and arm with bombs because they were not properly fully fueled and armed and in 24 hour alert mode which they should have been in by Brereton), Brereton, and the Asiatic Fleet (which MacArthur had no control over, btw, but that very biased Navy-written article for the 1941-42 campaign keeps acting like MacArthur was in charge of everything including the Navy) all screwed up astronomically. But what really hurt them moreso was the terrible 1922 Washington Naval Treaty that made it impossible to expand or modernize or even build new army, air, and naval bases and also FDR's refusal to send money and proper equipment to MacArthur and the Asiatic Fleet until late 1941. However, the sailors were not prepared by their officers and doctrine (this was NOT the fighting men and women's fault) because the doctrine in 1941 to early 1942 was for the submarines to be supporting vessels of surface vessels and not to form wolfpacks like they did to an incredible degree later on starting in late 1942. With the Asiatic Fleet there can be no excuse for the modern submarines to fail other than doctrine and the torpedoes which were terrible. While so much focus is on the failures of MacArthur and Brereton the Navy absolutely screwed up also. That Navy account which is used as the source for the 1941-42 Philippines campaign in MacArthur's Wikipedia page that tried to blame everything on MacArthur for some reason didn't point out how the Asiatic Fleet's submarines completely failed and it was a sad disaster like MacArthur and Brereton with Clark Field and the supply situation. It is interesting, though, how the USN and USMC's literature and PR always act like they never failed in the Philippines 1941-42 campaign and they try to blame every defeat or failure on MacArthur, the Army and the Army Air Force. In fact I didn't even know about the failure of the two dozen modern submarines and the disastrous Mark 14 torpedoes until I had to search for it deeper recently. We never hear about the Mark 14 failures in most articles about the 1941-42 Philippines campaign.
There should be a Wikipedia article related to the failure of the submarine campaign against the Japanese fleet in December 1941 tagged to the 1941-42 Philippines campaign. That was the worst performance by the USN in U.S. history. The U.S. surface fleet getting destroyed pretty much in the Dutch East Indies was expected with old WWI relics so that was not a shocking issue. But not the modern submarines from Manila failing to sink a single Japanese ship. And yes that article would be very good to educate how the Navy fighting men and women were failed due to "saving money" by Congress, the President, the bureaucrats in the War and Navy Departments, and so forth. That Mark 14 disaster makes it known how scary and dire the situation was in 1941-42.
MacArthur "standing down" is one of the biggest mysteries in history and I think it is very strange and foolish that he stood down. But, I like the theory that since he was also accountable to the President of the Philippines and the Filipino people he was ordered to wait for the Japanese to strike first because the Philippines President believed the Japanese would respect Filipino neutrality which was officially signed and agreed to recently between Manila and Tokyo. Not everything is so easy to understand. Quezon even asked FDR to give the Philippines independence so they could declare neutrality and withdraw from the war and hopefully the Japanese would treat it like they did to Thailand during WWII.
https://www.historynet.com/why-did-macarthur-wait-for-the-enemy-to-strike-first.htm
That's a great idea. You should start a draft version of the article in your User space, and pitch it for Draft review. You clearly have a lot to say, and have the research to quickly populate a well-cited article. — sbb ( talk) 00:24, 23 April 2021 (UTC)There should be a Wikipedia article related to the failure of the submarine campaign against the Japanese fleet in December 1941 tagged to the 1941-42 Philippines campaign. That was the worst performance by the USN in U.S. history.
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "He died in Washington D.C. on April 5, 1964 at the age of 84." to "He died in Washington D.C. on 5 April 1964 at the age of 84." This is to follow the correct grammatical convention first used in this article for date formats. M95au ( talk) 19:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Stephen flry.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 19:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The article, in the section concerning MacArthur's dismissal, states that the dismissal caused a constitutional crisis. The controversy that followed the dismissal should not be called a constitutional crisis because it does not meet the definition. This claim is supported by a single source which merely states that an unnamed "observer of the national scene" called it a constitutional crisis. This is not a sufficient source to make this claim in the article. A constitutional crisis is a problem that a polity's constitution is unable to resolve. [1] There is no evidence that this event meets that criterion. As the relevant paragraph in this article states, the dismissal was well within the constitutional powers of the President. [2] No evidence given in the source says otherwise or suggests any particular constitutional problem that arose from MacArthur's dismissal. Editor1205 ( talk) 23:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
References
Please change it to mdy. -- 2603:7000:2143:8500:EC64:FB79:7C07:7BDE ( talk) 07:22, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect General McArthur and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 24#General McArthur until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 09:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Although this article mentions his reputation as a revered war hero in the United States, shouldn't it also cover his similar reputation in the Philippines as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vortex3427 ( talk • contribs) 03:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Should this article be split? At 235 Kb it's well past the size limit for it, and seems to take an age to load up when editing. Any thoughts? Xyl 54 ( talk) 15:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
The article says that "At 03:30 local time on 8 December 1941 (about 09:00 on 7 December in Hawaii), Sutherland learned of the attack on Pearl Harbor, and informed MacArthur." It then says "At 12:30, nine hours after the attack on Pearl Harbor, aircraft of Japan's 11th Air Fleet achieved complete tactical surprise...". The attack on Pearl Harbor began at 7:48 a.m. Hawaiian Time (6:18 p.m. GMT). This means that the surprise attack on the Philippines happened ten hours, not nine hours, after the attack on Pearl Harbor. This would seem to be supported by this source, which says "Ten hours had elapsed since the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor." However, the first quoted sentence above is only cited to a college thesis, so I'm not sure of its reliability. Can anyone verify these times with strong reliable sources and either correct the first sentence or the second (whichever is wrong)? Nosferattus ( talk) 16:32, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change X Native American codetalkers to Y Navajo codetalkers. 2603:B010:FFFD:53:49B5:BD2D:D0CC:200A ( talk) 16:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add General of the Army hyperlink above Douglas MacArthur's name on the right profile side, similarly to George C. Marshall and Omar Bradley's pages. Historygeek64 ( talk) 07:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
"MacArthur gave immunity to Shiro Ishii and other members of Unit 731 in exchange for germ warfare data based on human experimentation. This was similar to Operation Paperclip,"
This is not the same, because it can reasonably be argued that production of armaments is a normal part of war, whereas inhuman experimentation on civilians and others is a war-crime, and the shameful failure to prosecute war criminals could even be considered a crime. This needs to be rewritten to make clear the nature of the choice that MacArthur made which is against all morality. The lengths that they went to to cover it up demonstrates their guilt. Muchado ( talk) 15:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting someone add {{
anchor|Dugout Doug}} at The troops on Bataan knew that they had been written off
, and point
Dugout Doug and
Dugout doug to it. I don't think there's an NPOV problem as it's a nickname troops under his command applied. Redirecting to the anchor gives the context.
47.155.41.201 (
talk)
22:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Not that I'm too knowledgeable on it but I noticed his appearance in the videogame Hearts of Iron IV is not mentioned. For those who dont know he is a general for the United States who can also come to power for any political party except the Communist States of America. ImSpook'd ( talk) 00:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
At over 18k words of readable prose, this article is too long to read comfortably. It would be beneficial to condense and/or migrate content to subarticles to make this one more readable. See WP:TOOBIG. @ Dr. Grampinator: At the time of the last discussion that I could identify, the length was "only" 12k words of readable prose, which is still quite long but at a lower tier according to TOOBIG. Nikkimaria ( talk) 19:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change “joint session” to “joint meeting” 73.200.216.62 ( talk) 15:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
References
These hearings were important in revealing Macarther's true character at the time. 98.121.86.196 ( talk) 20:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Between the Wars section, there is a typo, instead of MONTH it is spelled MONTB Me153970 ( talk) 19:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
The author seems to attribute much of Japan's labor movement to MacArthur, however it has been proven time and time again that Burati was the major actor, and MacArthur actively promoted anti-labor practices, such as the removal of the right to strike by public sector employees. MacArthur was largely detrimental to the labor movement, laying off hundreds of thousands of workers, yet the language in this article suggests that he was a positive force. 73.24.178.100 ( talk) 22:45, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
There is a spelling error on this page
It is in the category of Between the Wars 2A00:23C5:DAE5:4C01:C8C8:285:8EF1:31AC ( talk) 21:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The original: "A series of disasters followed, starting with the destruction of much his air forces on 8 December 1941"
Should be: "A series of disasters followed, starting with the destruction of many of his air forces on 8 December 1941"
-- Newboy674 ( talk) 22:07, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
In the official Bahasa Melayu wiki for Datu Mustapha, it mentions General Macarthur aiding him in fighting the Japanese and some other crazy stuff. But in the English version, it mentions absolutely nothing about it. The Bahasa Melayu one also has 0 citations about Mustapha's past during WW2. Can an official editor look into this? Never again pls ( talk) 12:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
The syntax of the opening of the early life section is confusing in that it makes it sound as though Arthur MacArthur Jr. received his Medal of Honor after Douglas' birth, not before.
"A military brat, Douglas MacArthur was born 26 January 1880, at Little Rock Barracks in Arkansas, to Arthur MacArthur Jr., a U.S. Army captain, and his wife, Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur (nicknamed "Pinky"). Arthur Jr. was a son of Scottish-born jurist and politician Arthur MacArthur Sr. Arthur Jr. would later receive the Medal of Honor for his actions with the Union Army in the Battle of Missionary Ridge during the American Civil War, and be promoted to the rank of lieutenant general."
This should read:
"A military brat, Douglas MacArthur was born 26 January 1880, at Little Rock Barracks in Arkansas, to Arthur MacArthur Jr., a U.S. Army captain, and his wife, Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur (nicknamed "Pinky"). Arthur Jr. was a son of Scottish-born jurist and politician Arthur MacArthur Sr. Arthur Jr., had received the Medal of Honor for his actions with the Union Army in the Battle of Missionary Ridge during the American Civil War, and later be promoted to the rank of lieutenant general." Faction123 ( talk) 22:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
I stumbled on this article to consider it for WP:OTD, but rejected it because of the length banner at the top. I read through the discussion from July and agree with Nikkimaria that the length is a problem for several reasons:
I know that specialists like more information, but Wikipedia is written for a general audience, of which there are more of then people with a specialist interest. Specialists are also more likely to seek out additional sources (like biographies) while general readers will look at the length of this article and not read anything, defeating the purpose of writing an article.
A couple of suggestions for text that might be summarised or moved to other articles:
I also have some other concerns:
Sorry for the long post. Pinging previous participants @ Nikkimaria, Hawkeye7, and Srnec: Other commentators are also welcome. Z1720 ( talk) 01:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Douglas MacArthur was NOT the youngest Major General in the Army, since he attained that rank in 1925 at the age of 44 or 45. Ulysses S. Grant attained the rank of Major General shortly after the Battle of Fort Donelson in February of 1862. At the time, Grant was 39 years old, though he may have passed his 40th birthday in April of that year, he was still several years younger than MacArthur.
Should the infobox have the succession of his positions or not? -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 04:21, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Hawkeye7: Would you please clarify this edit? I am not challenging it at all, but I would like to have clarification on why it was removed, as this is a lot of material. Thank you. -- 1990'sguy ( talk) 22:44, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A link underneath the photo of MacArthur Memorial is incorrectly taking users to Norfolk City Hall. The link should take users to the MacArthur Memorial page ( /info/en/?search=MacArthur_Memorial) Taprobana ( talk) 17:53, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:04, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
This needs to stop.
As difficult as it may be to empathize or relate, the Emperor of Japan was to hundreds of millions of Chinese and Koreans what Hitler was to the Jews.
The Chinese will forever want the justice from Japan denied to them by this man's unfortunate judgement. A one man international tribunal - 'Emperor' was a fitting title for McArthur at the time, truly.
I think the least we could do is stop 'protecting' war criminals and admit things for what they are.. the Chinese deserve their justice and the Japanese deserve to know they've been done wrong by their Emperor just like the Germans have by Hitler. Yet, 'officially', 'east-asian hitler' 'did nothing wrong'; that's rubbish, and shame on those who keep up this nonsense - you'd be morally similar to a Nazi sympathizer; and worse, that you contribute to prolonging ignorance, and pointless prejudiced nationalistic sentiments in that region. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.156.242.160 ( talk) 10:43, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
As this article is about an American general, the date format used should be mm-dd-yyyy. SMP0328. ( talk) 04:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:59, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Douglas MacArthur. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as unreferenced : A Douglas MacArthur State Technical College operated in Opp, Alabama from 1965 until 2003, when it merged with Lurleen B. Wallace Community College.
In case anybody wants to take the time to find a reference. deisenbe ( talk) 13:16, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Fourth paragraph says air fleet was destroyed on December 8th. That's absolutely wrong. Pearl Harbor was on December 7th. 24.184.129.241 ( talk) 19:47, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "Bataan surrendered on 9 April,[153] and Corregidor on 6 May" to "After six months of stubborn defense and had finally ran out of supplies and food, Bataan surrendered on 9 April,[153] and Corregidor on 6 May." 170.37.244.37 ( talk) 21:52, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. --
DannyS712 (
talk)
22:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
I added more to this section because it lacked the details that Gen. Marshall ordered the award, authored the citation himself, and bypassed Congress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxtrot5151 ( talk • contribs) 03:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Which section I can add my cite in? My cite is "...in late 1950, General Douglas MacArthur’s forces crossed the thirty-eighth parallel and approached the Chinese border" The Two Koreas and the Great Powers, Cambridge University Press, 2006, page 43. Shahanshah5 ( talk) 10:29, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1hqd7x/why_did_douglas_macarthur_retain_his_command_and/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.5.89.217 ( talk) 16:33, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
I notice his honorary GCB (Knight Grand Cross Order of the Bath) is described as being from Australia. The Australian government may have presented it (imaginably while he was on their territory) but this order is a British (UK) honour which would be awardable in the British Commonwealth Dominions (like Australia). Australia did not yet have its present independent honours system. I will rephrase the references accordingly to reflect this. Cloptonson ( talk) 19:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
There has been much discussion in this talk page but none about the photo. /info/en/?search=File:MacArthur_Manila.jpg Maybe it is genuine but to me it looks like some bizarre photoshopping. Is there any way to 'citation needed' or suchlike for a photo?
I take that back. It seems that he really was known for using a eccentric pipe. Probably worth mentioning this in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpaley ( talk • contribs) 21:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
@ Scope creep and Lqqhh: instead of arguing the toss at ANEW, this is the place to be. In general, I'd support saying in the body of the article that it was a "famous speech"; after all, a number of sources refer to it as such (e.g. [2], [3]). But I would argue the language is overly florid for the lead. Likewise, there are another three references to a "famous X": "the famous picture", "famous Article 9" and "The relief of the famous general". The last two are particularly out of place. It is wholly bizarre to assume that our audience is going to have a clue as to what Article 9 is, and the last comes across as pure hagiography.
Discuss. —— SerialNumber 54129 12:06, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
At the same time, MacArthur undermined the imperial mystique when his staff released the famous picture of his first meeting with the Emperor, the impact of which on the Japanese public was electric as the Japanese people for the first time saw the Emperor as a mere man overshadowed by the much taller MacArthur instead of the living god he had always been portrayed as.
If something’s famous, you don’t need to tell people; if you need to tell people something’s famous, it isn’t.
“Famously” is typically used to mean one of two things:
I know everyone knows this, but I can’t think of an original way to start so I am going to say it anyway.
Harold Macmillan, asked what the biggest challenge is for any leader, famously replied: “Events, my dear boy, events.”
You don’t know this? I do. That shows I am clever and know lots of stuff you don’t.
Reich famously declined to continue in academia, preferring to support himself via a series of blue-collar jobs.
I think it needs to be done on a case-by-case basis. I agree that "famous" should be removed before "article 9", but I would want it preserved for "relief of the famous general", as it is telling the reader something they may not know. Back in 1951, the reputation of generals was at a high point, World War II having ended just six years before and every adult could remember it clearly. Back in 1942, MacArthur had become a symbol of a nation's determination to stand up to what was seen as the overwhelming might of an enemy. Whereas Harry Truman was liked, not respected, and not trusted. Today the image of the military has tarnished, and Harry Truman looks better by contrast with some of his successors. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 09:07, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
There seems to be confusion with the editing of the title so discussions are now on here as advised. I believe the title should be changed to "Escape from the Philippines" as opposed to "Escape from australia". Should any Australian's wish to have a seperate account of the General's time in that country then it'd be great to see a whole paragraph of as there is quite a large enough account of his stay in Australia which can be another added topic. I intend to include other changes in this section by adding several historical references from the US congressional archives detailing his escape from the PI, which is important to our history and also important to his story of leaving the PI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabararmon ( talk • contribs) 12:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Bataan surrendered on 9 April, and Corregidor on 6 May.The rest of the section, a half-dozen paragraphs long, isn't about his escape, but his Medal of Honor. I suggest this all be given a new section, simply titled Medal of Honor.
Done Split the section into "Escape from the Philippines" (matching the main article) and "Medal of Honor". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:40, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change
United States in the 1964 Summer Olympics
to
United States at the 1964 Summer Olympics
208.95.49.53 ( talk) 14:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
The article barely even talks about how Douglas granted immunity to the perpetrators of some of the most horrendous crimes in history. Sources point out that some of these expertiments were also done on Americans, so even from an ultra-patriotic point of view his decision would have been contentious. It was covered up and is barely discussed today, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be more prominent in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A45A:6C9A:1:3CD4:884B:22D3:D93F ( talk) 18:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
MacArthur certainly fumbled the ball on 8 December 1941, allowing precious hours to slip away, soon losing his best bombers. I wanted to point out some details to Nimuda who is currently expanding the article.
The narrative here of the B-17s makes it sound like they were sitting around all morning doing nothing when they were surprised and destroyed by Japanese air attack. This is not quite correct: they had been patrolling the seas looking for Japanese ships, and were back at Clark Field refueling when they were hit. But it wasn't MacArthur who had assigned patrol duties, it was Brereton itching to implement war plan Rainbow 5. MacArthur ordered him to stand down on that. The sequence of events is described on page 163 in Bloody Shambles ISBN 0-948817-50-X.
American submarines in the Philippines were not poorly trained, they were poorly equipped with the shockingly untested and unreliable weapon, the Mark 14 torpedo, and not even enough of those because of a Japanese air raid of 10 December that destroyed 233 torpedos at Cavite Navy Yard. The submariners fired plenty of torpedoes at the enemy but the torpedoes failed almost every time. The bigger torpedo picture is a story filled with criminally negligent officers of the Bureau of Ordnance at Newport Torpedo Station in Rhode Island, but I'm not asking for it to be told in MacArthur's biography. All I wanted to say is that we should not be blaming the actual fighting men in the submarines. Binksternet ( talk) 05:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Nimuda ( talk) 23:40, 22 April 2021 (UTC)Nimuda
I absolutely do not blame the sailors, soldiers, or airmen. MacArthur (yes, MacArthur failed terribly with the Clark Field disaster along with Brereton even though I blame it mostly on very bad timing because the B-17s were all in the air for 2 hours during the early morning but then had to land to refuel and arm with bombs because they were not properly fully fueled and armed and in 24 hour alert mode which they should have been in by Brereton), Brereton, and the Asiatic Fleet (which MacArthur had no control over, btw, but that very biased Navy-written article for the 1941-42 campaign keeps acting like MacArthur was in charge of everything including the Navy) all screwed up astronomically. But what really hurt them moreso was the terrible 1922 Washington Naval Treaty that made it impossible to expand or modernize or even build new army, air, and naval bases and also FDR's refusal to send money and proper equipment to MacArthur and the Asiatic Fleet until late 1941. However, the sailors were not prepared by their officers and doctrine (this was NOT the fighting men and women's fault) because the doctrine in 1941 to early 1942 was for the submarines to be supporting vessels of surface vessels and not to form wolfpacks like they did to an incredible degree later on starting in late 1942. With the Asiatic Fleet there can be no excuse for the modern submarines to fail other than doctrine and the torpedoes which were terrible. While so much focus is on the failures of MacArthur and Brereton the Navy absolutely screwed up also. That Navy account which is used as the source for the 1941-42 Philippines campaign in MacArthur's Wikipedia page that tried to blame everything on MacArthur for some reason didn't point out how the Asiatic Fleet's submarines completely failed and it was a sad disaster like MacArthur and Brereton with Clark Field and the supply situation. It is interesting, though, how the USN and USMC's literature and PR always act like they never failed in the Philippines 1941-42 campaign and they try to blame every defeat or failure on MacArthur, the Army and the Army Air Force. In fact I didn't even know about the failure of the two dozen modern submarines and the disastrous Mark 14 torpedoes until I had to search for it deeper recently. We never hear about the Mark 14 failures in most articles about the 1941-42 Philippines campaign.
There should be a Wikipedia article related to the failure of the submarine campaign against the Japanese fleet in December 1941 tagged to the 1941-42 Philippines campaign. That was the worst performance by the USN in U.S. history. The U.S. surface fleet getting destroyed pretty much in the Dutch East Indies was expected with old WWI relics so that was not a shocking issue. But not the modern submarines from Manila failing to sink a single Japanese ship. And yes that article would be very good to educate how the Navy fighting men and women were failed due to "saving money" by Congress, the President, the bureaucrats in the War and Navy Departments, and so forth. That Mark 14 disaster makes it known how scary and dire the situation was in 1941-42.
MacArthur "standing down" is one of the biggest mysteries in history and I think it is very strange and foolish that he stood down. But, I like the theory that since he was also accountable to the President of the Philippines and the Filipino people he was ordered to wait for the Japanese to strike first because the Philippines President believed the Japanese would respect Filipino neutrality which was officially signed and agreed to recently between Manila and Tokyo. Not everything is so easy to understand. Quezon even asked FDR to give the Philippines independence so they could declare neutrality and withdraw from the war and hopefully the Japanese would treat it like they did to Thailand during WWII.
https://www.historynet.com/why-did-macarthur-wait-for-the-enemy-to-strike-first.htm
That's a great idea. You should start a draft version of the article in your User space, and pitch it for Draft review. You clearly have a lot to say, and have the research to quickly populate a well-cited article. — sbb ( talk) 00:24, 23 April 2021 (UTC)There should be a Wikipedia article related to the failure of the submarine campaign against the Japanese fleet in December 1941 tagged to the 1941-42 Philippines campaign. That was the worst performance by the USN in U.S. history.
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "He died in Washington D.C. on April 5, 1964 at the age of 84." to "He died in Washington D.C. on 5 April 1964 at the age of 84." This is to follow the correct grammatical convention first used in this article for date formats. M95au ( talk) 19:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Stephen flry.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 19:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The article, in the section concerning MacArthur's dismissal, states that the dismissal caused a constitutional crisis. The controversy that followed the dismissal should not be called a constitutional crisis because it does not meet the definition. This claim is supported by a single source which merely states that an unnamed "observer of the national scene" called it a constitutional crisis. This is not a sufficient source to make this claim in the article. A constitutional crisis is a problem that a polity's constitution is unable to resolve. [1] There is no evidence that this event meets that criterion. As the relevant paragraph in this article states, the dismissal was well within the constitutional powers of the President. [2] No evidence given in the source says otherwise or suggests any particular constitutional problem that arose from MacArthur's dismissal. Editor1205 ( talk) 23:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
References
Please change it to mdy. -- 2603:7000:2143:8500:EC64:FB79:7C07:7BDE ( talk) 07:22, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect General McArthur and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 24#General McArthur until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 09:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Although this article mentions his reputation as a revered war hero in the United States, shouldn't it also cover his similar reputation in the Philippines as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vortex3427 ( talk • contribs) 03:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Should this article be split? At 235 Kb it's well past the size limit for it, and seems to take an age to load up when editing. Any thoughts? Xyl 54 ( talk) 15:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
The article says that "At 03:30 local time on 8 December 1941 (about 09:00 on 7 December in Hawaii), Sutherland learned of the attack on Pearl Harbor, and informed MacArthur." It then says "At 12:30, nine hours after the attack on Pearl Harbor, aircraft of Japan's 11th Air Fleet achieved complete tactical surprise...". The attack on Pearl Harbor began at 7:48 a.m. Hawaiian Time (6:18 p.m. GMT). This means that the surprise attack on the Philippines happened ten hours, not nine hours, after the attack on Pearl Harbor. This would seem to be supported by this source, which says "Ten hours had elapsed since the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor." However, the first quoted sentence above is only cited to a college thesis, so I'm not sure of its reliability. Can anyone verify these times with strong reliable sources and either correct the first sentence or the second (whichever is wrong)? Nosferattus ( talk) 16:32, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change X Native American codetalkers to Y Navajo codetalkers. 2603:B010:FFFD:53:49B5:BD2D:D0CC:200A ( talk) 16:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add General of the Army hyperlink above Douglas MacArthur's name on the right profile side, similarly to George C. Marshall and Omar Bradley's pages. Historygeek64 ( talk) 07:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
"MacArthur gave immunity to Shiro Ishii and other members of Unit 731 in exchange for germ warfare data based on human experimentation. This was similar to Operation Paperclip,"
This is not the same, because it can reasonably be argued that production of armaments is a normal part of war, whereas inhuman experimentation on civilians and others is a war-crime, and the shameful failure to prosecute war criminals could even be considered a crime. This needs to be rewritten to make clear the nature of the choice that MacArthur made which is against all morality. The lengths that they went to to cover it up demonstrates their guilt. Muchado ( talk) 15:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting someone add {{
anchor|Dugout Doug}} at The troops on Bataan knew that they had been written off
, and point
Dugout Doug and
Dugout doug to it. I don't think there's an NPOV problem as it's a nickname troops under his command applied. Redirecting to the anchor gives the context.
47.155.41.201 (
talk)
22:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Not that I'm too knowledgeable on it but I noticed his appearance in the videogame Hearts of Iron IV is not mentioned. For those who dont know he is a general for the United States who can also come to power for any political party except the Communist States of America. ImSpook'd ( talk) 00:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
At over 18k words of readable prose, this article is too long to read comfortably. It would be beneficial to condense and/or migrate content to subarticles to make this one more readable. See WP:TOOBIG. @ Dr. Grampinator: At the time of the last discussion that I could identify, the length was "only" 12k words of readable prose, which is still quite long but at a lower tier according to TOOBIG. Nikkimaria ( talk) 19:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change “joint session” to “joint meeting” 73.200.216.62 ( talk) 15:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
References
These hearings were important in revealing Macarther's true character at the time. 98.121.86.196 ( talk) 20:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Between the Wars section, there is a typo, instead of MONTH it is spelled MONTB Me153970 ( talk) 19:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
The author seems to attribute much of Japan's labor movement to MacArthur, however it has been proven time and time again that Burati was the major actor, and MacArthur actively promoted anti-labor practices, such as the removal of the right to strike by public sector employees. MacArthur was largely detrimental to the labor movement, laying off hundreds of thousands of workers, yet the language in this article suggests that he was a positive force. 73.24.178.100 ( talk) 22:45, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
There is a spelling error on this page
It is in the category of Between the Wars 2A00:23C5:DAE5:4C01:C8C8:285:8EF1:31AC ( talk) 21:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Douglas MacArthur has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The original: "A series of disasters followed, starting with the destruction of much his air forces on 8 December 1941"
Should be: "A series of disasters followed, starting with the destruction of many of his air forces on 8 December 1941"
-- Newboy674 ( talk) 22:07, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
In the official Bahasa Melayu wiki for Datu Mustapha, it mentions General Macarthur aiding him in fighting the Japanese and some other crazy stuff. But in the English version, it mentions absolutely nothing about it. The Bahasa Melayu one also has 0 citations about Mustapha's past during WW2. Can an official editor look into this? Never again pls ( talk) 12:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
The syntax of the opening of the early life section is confusing in that it makes it sound as though Arthur MacArthur Jr. received his Medal of Honor after Douglas' birth, not before.
"A military brat, Douglas MacArthur was born 26 January 1880, at Little Rock Barracks in Arkansas, to Arthur MacArthur Jr., a U.S. Army captain, and his wife, Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur (nicknamed "Pinky"). Arthur Jr. was a son of Scottish-born jurist and politician Arthur MacArthur Sr. Arthur Jr. would later receive the Medal of Honor for his actions with the Union Army in the Battle of Missionary Ridge during the American Civil War, and be promoted to the rank of lieutenant general."
This should read:
"A military brat, Douglas MacArthur was born 26 January 1880, at Little Rock Barracks in Arkansas, to Arthur MacArthur Jr., a U.S. Army captain, and his wife, Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur (nicknamed "Pinky"). Arthur Jr. was a son of Scottish-born jurist and politician Arthur MacArthur Sr. Arthur Jr., had received the Medal of Honor for his actions with the Union Army in the Battle of Missionary Ridge during the American Civil War, and later be promoted to the rank of lieutenant general." Faction123 ( talk) 22:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
I stumbled on this article to consider it for WP:OTD, but rejected it because of the length banner at the top. I read through the discussion from July and agree with Nikkimaria that the length is a problem for several reasons:
I know that specialists like more information, but Wikipedia is written for a general audience, of which there are more of then people with a specialist interest. Specialists are also more likely to seek out additional sources (like biographies) while general readers will look at the length of this article and not read anything, defeating the purpose of writing an article.
A couple of suggestions for text that might be summarised or moved to other articles:
I also have some other concerns:
Sorry for the long post. Pinging previous participants @ Nikkimaria, Hawkeye7, and Srnec: Other commentators are also welcome. Z1720 ( talk) 01:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)