This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Internment of Japanese Americans article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
![]() | This talk page is for
discussion on how to improve the
Internment of Japanese Americans article. If you would like to ask questions about the subject, please address them to the Reference desk. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 19, 2010, February 19, 2013, February 19, 2016, and February 19, 2017. |
![]() | On 24 February 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Japanese American Incarceration. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
![]() | On 1 April 2014, it was proposed that this article be moved from Japanese American internment to Internment of Japanese Americans. The result of the discussion was moved. |
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) The Night Watch (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Internment of Japanese Americans → Japanese American Incarceration – For all of the reasons listed here and others: /info/en/?search=Internment_of_Japanese_Americans#Misuse_of_the_term_%22internment%22
Using the term "internment" is incorrect and not at all appropriate given that it is not the language used by those affected by it and entities including the Associated Press have now stated as much (as noted in the article). Wikipedia should align with other sources in utilizing the correct nomenclature to describe the historical incarceration of Japanese Americans in concentration camps. DCsansei ( talk) 13:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. Incarceration is just a synonym for imprisonment, and the term does not accurately describe the abuse.
The term "concentration camp" does not evoke the Boer War or Cuba; it evokes Auschwitz. Mackerm ( talk) 09:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
I understand that there was no consensus for this move at this time, however, I continue to believe that the page should be moved. For those opposed, I encourage review of the following:
These sources are all in addition to the discussion within the article itself describing how terminology of this topic has moved past using the anachronistic term "internment" to the more accurate and contemporary WP:COMMONNAME -- incarceration. DCsansei ( talk) 09:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
I've worked to rewrite the lead section- I noticed that it was very long and not particularly organized with a lot of overly detailed information that's repeated in the body of the article. Feedback would be appreciated! /info/en/?search=User:Anniewink328/Internment_of_Japanese_Americans Anniewink328 ( talk) 17:46, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Anniewink328
Despite the consensus seeming to be in favour of keeping "internment" as the article's title, the article's text now solely uses the term "incarceration". Consistency between the two would be preferred, especially since the change to the article's text seems to have been made recently without discussion. Eldomtom2 ( talk) 19:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I suggest that the most relevant element of this definition is detainment without trial.The action or practice of confining a person or thing within the limits of a country or place; (now esp.) detention without trial for political or military reasons; the fact or condition of being detained in this way.
— [1]
academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources.And as WP:HISTRS states,
Historical articles on Wikipedia should use scholarly works where possible. Per the essay, scholarly historical sources include books from university presses like the University of Illinois Press and the University of North Carolina Press and articles from peer-reviewed academic periodicals. As that is an essay which can be persuasive but not necessarily comprehensive, universal, or binding, I'd point out that positively-reviewed publications from major, reputed publishers can also be reliable sources.
all have some degree of partisan slantthat makes them unreliable for the subject and for this claim that "incarceration" is the better word to use would require a much more detailed analysis of the sources and awareness of the historiography of WWII-era Japanese American incarceration in the United States than merely
scanning the titles. It's hard to escape the impression that your reason for considering these sources "partisan" is merely because they imply that the detention of citizens without intent to conduct a trial may be objectionable.
‘incarceree’ or ‘prisoner’ to refer to confined individualsand state that
The term ‘internment’ did not, and still does not, apply to mass incarceration of a country’s own citizens, or incarceration of immigrants who are not suspected of wanting to aid the enemy.The Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage is published by Taylor & Francis, a well-reputed academic publisher, and Frantz-Burton works for the National Park Service at the Manzanar National Historic Site.
"internment" or "evacuated"as
euphemistic termsand elaborate that
two-thirds of Japanese Americans who were incarcerated were American born citizens. The Public Historian journal is published by University of California Press, an academic university press, and Wakatsuki works for the National Park Service.
While the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II has historically been referred to as "internment", we use the terms "incarceration", "imprisonment", and "detainment" throughout this article in recognition of the fact that the majority of Japanese American people forcibly relocated and imprisoned during this period were US citizens and thus could not be "interns".This article from a high-quality, reputed peer-reviewed academic periodical (the Journal of Politics) strengthens the case for favoring the word incarceration
the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans(3)
The disfranchise- ment inherent in the massive incarceration euphemized as “relocation” markedly affected adults and children(48).
can be used but care should be exercised. It is probably best to prefer and prioritize published scholarship.
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field)
may have an advanced degree in a related[...]
domain specific field)
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field)
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field or a domain specific field)
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field or a domain specific field)
Taking a quick look at a publications search, I have found:
The point is that it is very easy to find use of "internment" by academic historians, lawyers and educators. I only took a few moments to search whilst my breakfast was cooking. There is plenty more out there. ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 09:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
For most scholars (Okamura 1982; Hirabayashi 1994), "internment" is considered to be one of the many inaccurate euphemisms the U.S. government employed to downplay the imprisonment of innocent Japanese American citizens. With the exception of camps that fit the legal definition of "internment camp," the term "internment" will thus be replaced with "incarceration camp" for the remainder of this article.(170, bolding added)
The results of the scholarly process appear in numerous forms, such as
Research articles by historians in scholarly peer-reviewed journals.)
most scholarsconsider "internment" an unsuitable euphemism. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 18:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
For most scholars[...]
"internment" is considered to be one of the many inaccurate euphemisms the U.S. government employed(Camp 2016, p. 170). Using a term most scholars consider inaccurate doesn't seem more verifiable or more neutral. Accuracy is different from calling the detention "evil" or "unjust". Accuracy can be neutral. Terms like "incarceration" and "detention" aren't partisan, or at the very least aren't more partisan than "internment" (as a wide range of scholars report that internment is a euphemism the U. S. government used to downplay the program—hardly a neutral point of view). Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 21:06, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Relating to this are the changes an IP editor are making to change "concentration" to "internment". I reverted based on the existing comment indicating it should not be changed without consensus but the IP editor changed it back. I don't believe IP editors can be pinged? @ 73.160.81.230:? —DIYeditor ( talk) 17:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Pretty basic question, I was going through some of the article specific into the lead up to internment and i was interested in a quote and the source provided was unhelpful. My specific question for the quote specifically under the support and opposition title "White American farmers admitted that their self-interest required the removal of the Japanese." I am looking for the source as the provided on does not link to anything rather simply names a source and when I tried to find the quote i was unable to.
Thanks to whoever can help me, doing some research for a paper and want to be able to fully source this quote if accurate Wintuck2556 ( talk) 02:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
I am now trying to understand the right term for this article. It seems to me that incarceration is commonly used for criminal punishment which, as far as I know, is not the right term. There isn't the suggestion that most, or even many, of the Japanese had committed any crimes. Now, I completely agree that it was both unconstitutional and un-American to do what the US government did. Well, the real reason I am asking is that I want the right term for Farm Hall where German scientists were held after WW2. Again, there wasn't an intention, as far as I know, that they were being penalized for any crime, though I don't actually know that no crimes were committed. The reason was that that the US wanted to know the state of German nuclear research. I do note that this article uses incarceration and internment about 135 times each. I didn't count concentration, though that sounds funny as a verb. There is also detainment. I don't want to whitewash, or otherwise use euphemisms, but also don't want to do the opposite. (I don't know if blackwash is an actual term.) Gah4 ( talk) 07:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Internment of Japanese Americans article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
![]() | This talk page is for
discussion on how to improve the
Internment of Japanese Americans article. If you would like to ask questions about the subject, please address them to the Reference desk. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 19, 2010, February 19, 2013, February 19, 2016, and February 19, 2017. |
![]() | On 24 February 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Japanese American Incarceration. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
![]() | On 1 April 2014, it was proposed that this article be moved from Japanese American internment to Internment of Japanese Americans. The result of the discussion was moved. |
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) The Night Watch (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Internment of Japanese Americans → Japanese American Incarceration – For all of the reasons listed here and others: /info/en/?search=Internment_of_Japanese_Americans#Misuse_of_the_term_%22internment%22
Using the term "internment" is incorrect and not at all appropriate given that it is not the language used by those affected by it and entities including the Associated Press have now stated as much (as noted in the article). Wikipedia should align with other sources in utilizing the correct nomenclature to describe the historical incarceration of Japanese Americans in concentration camps. DCsansei ( talk) 13:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. Incarceration is just a synonym for imprisonment, and the term does not accurately describe the abuse.
The term "concentration camp" does not evoke the Boer War or Cuba; it evokes Auschwitz. Mackerm ( talk) 09:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
I understand that there was no consensus for this move at this time, however, I continue to believe that the page should be moved. For those opposed, I encourage review of the following:
These sources are all in addition to the discussion within the article itself describing how terminology of this topic has moved past using the anachronistic term "internment" to the more accurate and contemporary WP:COMMONNAME -- incarceration. DCsansei ( talk) 09:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
I've worked to rewrite the lead section- I noticed that it was very long and not particularly organized with a lot of overly detailed information that's repeated in the body of the article. Feedback would be appreciated! /info/en/?search=User:Anniewink328/Internment_of_Japanese_Americans Anniewink328 ( talk) 17:46, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Anniewink328
Despite the consensus seeming to be in favour of keeping "internment" as the article's title, the article's text now solely uses the term "incarceration". Consistency between the two would be preferred, especially since the change to the article's text seems to have been made recently without discussion. Eldomtom2 ( talk) 19:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I suggest that the most relevant element of this definition is detainment without trial.The action or practice of confining a person or thing within the limits of a country or place; (now esp.) detention without trial for political or military reasons; the fact or condition of being detained in this way.
— [1]
academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources.And as WP:HISTRS states,
Historical articles on Wikipedia should use scholarly works where possible. Per the essay, scholarly historical sources include books from university presses like the University of Illinois Press and the University of North Carolina Press and articles from peer-reviewed academic periodicals. As that is an essay which can be persuasive but not necessarily comprehensive, universal, or binding, I'd point out that positively-reviewed publications from major, reputed publishers can also be reliable sources.
all have some degree of partisan slantthat makes them unreliable for the subject and for this claim that "incarceration" is the better word to use would require a much more detailed analysis of the sources and awareness of the historiography of WWII-era Japanese American incarceration in the United States than merely
scanning the titles. It's hard to escape the impression that your reason for considering these sources "partisan" is merely because they imply that the detention of citizens without intent to conduct a trial may be objectionable.
‘incarceree’ or ‘prisoner’ to refer to confined individualsand state that
The term ‘internment’ did not, and still does not, apply to mass incarceration of a country’s own citizens, or incarceration of immigrants who are not suspected of wanting to aid the enemy.The Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage is published by Taylor & Francis, a well-reputed academic publisher, and Frantz-Burton works for the National Park Service at the Manzanar National Historic Site.
"internment" or "evacuated"as
euphemistic termsand elaborate that
two-thirds of Japanese Americans who were incarcerated were American born citizens. The Public Historian journal is published by University of California Press, an academic university press, and Wakatsuki works for the National Park Service.
While the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II has historically been referred to as "internment", we use the terms "incarceration", "imprisonment", and "detainment" throughout this article in recognition of the fact that the majority of Japanese American people forcibly relocated and imprisoned during this period were US citizens and thus could not be "interns".This article from a high-quality, reputed peer-reviewed academic periodical (the Journal of Politics) strengthens the case for favoring the word incarceration
the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans(3)
The disfranchise- ment inherent in the massive incarceration euphemized as “relocation” markedly affected adults and children(48).
can be used but care should be exercised. It is probably best to prefer and prioritize published scholarship.
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field)
may have an advanced degree in a related[...]
domain specific field)
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field)
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field or a domain specific field)
may have an advanced degree in a related social science field or a domain specific field)
Taking a quick look at a publications search, I have found:
The point is that it is very easy to find use of "internment" by academic historians, lawyers and educators. I only took a few moments to search whilst my breakfast was cooking. There is plenty more out there. ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 09:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
For most scholars (Okamura 1982; Hirabayashi 1994), "internment" is considered to be one of the many inaccurate euphemisms the U.S. government employed to downplay the imprisonment of innocent Japanese American citizens. With the exception of camps that fit the legal definition of "internment camp," the term "internment" will thus be replaced with "incarceration camp" for the remainder of this article.(170, bolding added)
The results of the scholarly process appear in numerous forms, such as
Research articles by historians in scholarly peer-reviewed journals.)
most scholarsconsider "internment" an unsuitable euphemism. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 18:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
For most scholars[...]
"internment" is considered to be one of the many inaccurate euphemisms the U.S. government employed(Camp 2016, p. 170). Using a term most scholars consider inaccurate doesn't seem more verifiable or more neutral. Accuracy is different from calling the detention "evil" or "unjust". Accuracy can be neutral. Terms like "incarceration" and "detention" aren't partisan, or at the very least aren't more partisan than "internment" (as a wide range of scholars report that internment is a euphemism the U. S. government used to downplay the program—hardly a neutral point of view). Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 21:06, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Relating to this are the changes an IP editor are making to change "concentration" to "internment". I reverted based on the existing comment indicating it should not be changed without consensus but the IP editor changed it back. I don't believe IP editors can be pinged? @ 73.160.81.230:? —DIYeditor ( talk) 17:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Pretty basic question, I was going through some of the article specific into the lead up to internment and i was interested in a quote and the source provided was unhelpful. My specific question for the quote specifically under the support and opposition title "White American farmers admitted that their self-interest required the removal of the Japanese." I am looking for the source as the provided on does not link to anything rather simply names a source and when I tried to find the quote i was unable to.
Thanks to whoever can help me, doing some research for a paper and want to be able to fully source this quote if accurate Wintuck2556 ( talk) 02:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
I am now trying to understand the right term for this article. It seems to me that incarceration is commonly used for criminal punishment which, as far as I know, is not the right term. There isn't the suggestion that most, or even many, of the Japanese had committed any crimes. Now, I completely agree that it was both unconstitutional and un-American to do what the US government did. Well, the real reason I am asking is that I want the right term for Farm Hall where German scientists were held after WW2. Again, there wasn't an intention, as far as I know, that they were being penalized for any crime, though I don't actually know that no crimes were committed. The reason was that that the US wanted to know the state of German nuclear research. I do note that this article uses incarceration and internment about 135 times each. I didn't count concentration, though that sounds funny as a verb. There is also detainment. I don't want to whitewash, or otherwise use euphemisms, but also don't want to do the opposite. (I don't know if blackwash is an actual term.) Gah4 ( talk) 07:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)