![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
.
One has to say this is the only positive thing to occur due the Protocols. - Sparky 02:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
The words “denies these claim, stating that there is no evidence to suggest that,” seem way to strong in light of the quote I inserted from Ben-Ami Shillony's book; therefore I replaced that phrase with the word "questions." -- Daneck ( talk) 08:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED to Jewish settlement in Imperial Japan, per discussion below. - GTBacchus( talk) 07:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Fugu Plan → Jewish settlement in Manchukuo — harej ( talk) 03:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
See above discussion. — harej ( talk) 03:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I am struggling for the correct taxomony. What about
Fugu Plan → Jewish settlement in Showa Japan or Fugu Plan → Showa Japan's relationship with Zionism?
I am not sure how suitable for the Wikipedia the latter idea is. Of course, we are not talking about only 'Japan' either but Japanese occupied territories. What would be the acceptable term for them.
The problem as I see it is that there was no such thing as "The Fugu Plan" and that the book called The Fugu Plan has gone too far in creating a popular myth in the public's consciousness. I think that is well established now. The article, certainly in its original form, only reinforced the popular myth.
My feeling is that either we document that popular myth, e.g. the Tokayer book, why it was written, what it acheived etc; or we document the nature and events surrounding both Jewish settlement in the Far East under Japan and/or Showa Japan's relationship with the Zionist project - which is really what the book was pointing towards but not quite addressing the complexity of the issue.
I offer this as 'concept in progress' if you understand what I mean. Thank you -- Aho-ono ( talk) 10:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC).
The following para. was removed from the article on February 4th, 2011, by user:178.22.35.13 as an uncited O.R. violation. The material is being parked here pending verification/citation sourcing. I do not know if any of it is covered by the Maruyama citation in the next paragraph. Interestingly, shortly after this IP user removed this material, the IP was permanently banned from WP for sockpuppetry. 03:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC) HarryZilber ( talk) 13:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
User:Tizizano, who is also involved in the preceding item above, has objected to the inclusion of Levine, Hillel. (1996). "In Search of Sugihara", and removed it as well as another citation from the bibliography of this article a few days ago, with a blank Edit Summary. I reverted its deletion and am now including this reference to a lengthy Reliable Source Notice Board discussion on the topic of this book which is highly relevant to the article: Is Hillel Levine's Biography of Chiune Sugihara a reliable source?.
A quick skimming of the notice board discussion did not reveal any consensus that the book could not be considered a reliable source. In the notice board discussion User:Tizizano was counseled a number of times that if other reliable sources contradict Levine's, those sources can be included and the article could be edited to reflect contrary information; however as far as I can see there was no consensus that Levine's book was unreliable. Best: HarryZilber ( talk) 19:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
1) In 1938, the Foreign Minister Konoe has set a telegraph which is as following :「猶太避難民ノ入國ニ関する件」というもので、「我盟邦ノ排斥二因リ外国ニ避難セントスル者ヲ我國ニ於テ許容スルコトハ大局上面白カラサルノミナラス現在事変下ニ在ル我國ノ実情ハ外國避難民ヲ収容スルノ余地ナキヲ以テ此種避難民(外部二対対シテハ単ニ『避難民』ノ名義トスルコト、実際ハ猶太人避難民ヲ意味ス)ノ本邦内地並ニ各種植民地ヘノ入国ハ好マシカラス」(7th October)。This telegraph orders all the ambassadors and consuls to limit severly Jewish refugees to enter Japan. The Japanese government NEVER supported the Zionism between two World Wars. Japanese are well aware of the double-dealing tactics made by Japanese Foreign Minister.2) 20,000 Jewish refugees NEVER rushed to the frontier between Soviet Union and Manturia. Please read this book :早坂隆『指揮官の決断 満州とアッツの将軍 樋口季一郎』文春新書、2010年 ISBN 978-4-16-660758-7. The number of 20,000 is the false one fabricated by an editor when the memoir of General Kiichiro Higuchi was published in 1971. Exist no witness, no documents all over the world. All the Japanes scholars and journalists don’t believe it. The indication by Asahi Shinbun is NOT true AT ALL. And I have already indicated it by fax to Asahi Shinbun. Tizizano ( talk) 21:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
I’m a little surprised those who cannot read Japanese write such kind of article : Jewish settlement in Imperial JAPAN. Japanese language has already been used in the notes 16 & 17 as you see below :
Note 16 ^ "Question 戦前の日本における対ユダヤ人政策の基本をなしたと言われる「ユダヤ人対策要綱」に関する史料はありますか。また、同要綱に関する説明文はありますか。". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/annai/honsho/shiryo/qa/senzen_03.html. Retrieved 2010-10-02. Note 17 ^ "猶太人対策要綱". Five ministers council. Japan Center for Asian Histrical Record. 1938-12-06. p. 36/42. http://www.jacar.go.jp/DAS/meta/listPhoto?IS_STYLE=default&ID=M2006092115064531921. Retrieved 2010-10-02.
Bibliography Inuzuka Kiyoko, "Kaigun Inuzuka kikan no kiroku: Yudaya mondai to Nippon no kōsaku" (Tokyo: Nihon kōgyō shimbunsha, 1982). Kase Hideaki, "Nihon no naka no Yudayajin".
Sugita Rokuichi, Higashi Ajia e kita Yudayajin".
Concerning the Levine’s book, the reference books should not be decided exclusively because of the paucity of English resources, I think. Tizizano ( talk) 00:40, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
The lead is completely disassociated from the article. It says the whole thing is a fiction, but that is not supported by the text, except for the ambiguous 'as interpreted by' in the opening line of the first section. I'm removing all mention in the lead of this being fictionalized unless the text is modified to support it. — kwami ( talk) 09:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually, it looks like the lead is a separate article. It was a book report of The Fugu Plan. The text of the article is an account of the historical events. These are two different topics. The lead should be a final section, "Popular accounts" or some such.
Also, the article (and now the final section) started with a doozy of a non sequitur. Do they actually claim that it was called the "Fugu Plan" in Japanese, or was that just a label they invented for it in English, to better sell their book? Do they actually claim there was a Japanese plan for a Jewish state? Also, there are other popular accounts, which do not make such a claim.
— kwami ( talk) 09:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jewish settlement in the Japanese Empire. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jewish settlement in the Japanese Empire. 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) 05:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
.
One has to say this is the only positive thing to occur due the Protocols. - Sparky 02:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
The words “denies these claim, stating that there is no evidence to suggest that,” seem way to strong in light of the quote I inserted from Ben-Ami Shillony's book; therefore I replaced that phrase with the word "questions." -- Daneck ( talk) 08:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED to Jewish settlement in Imperial Japan, per discussion below. - GTBacchus( talk) 07:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Fugu Plan → Jewish settlement in Manchukuo — harej ( talk) 03:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
See above discussion. — harej ( talk) 03:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I am struggling for the correct taxomony. What about
Fugu Plan → Jewish settlement in Showa Japan or Fugu Plan → Showa Japan's relationship with Zionism?
I am not sure how suitable for the Wikipedia the latter idea is. Of course, we are not talking about only 'Japan' either but Japanese occupied territories. What would be the acceptable term for them.
The problem as I see it is that there was no such thing as "The Fugu Plan" and that the book called The Fugu Plan has gone too far in creating a popular myth in the public's consciousness. I think that is well established now. The article, certainly in its original form, only reinforced the popular myth.
My feeling is that either we document that popular myth, e.g. the Tokayer book, why it was written, what it acheived etc; or we document the nature and events surrounding both Jewish settlement in the Far East under Japan and/or Showa Japan's relationship with the Zionist project - which is really what the book was pointing towards but not quite addressing the complexity of the issue.
I offer this as 'concept in progress' if you understand what I mean. Thank you -- Aho-ono ( talk) 10:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC).
The following para. was removed from the article on February 4th, 2011, by user:178.22.35.13 as an uncited O.R. violation. The material is being parked here pending verification/citation sourcing. I do not know if any of it is covered by the Maruyama citation in the next paragraph. Interestingly, shortly after this IP user removed this material, the IP was permanently banned from WP for sockpuppetry. 03:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC) HarryZilber ( talk) 13:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
User:Tizizano, who is also involved in the preceding item above, has objected to the inclusion of Levine, Hillel. (1996). "In Search of Sugihara", and removed it as well as another citation from the bibliography of this article a few days ago, with a blank Edit Summary. I reverted its deletion and am now including this reference to a lengthy Reliable Source Notice Board discussion on the topic of this book which is highly relevant to the article: Is Hillel Levine's Biography of Chiune Sugihara a reliable source?.
A quick skimming of the notice board discussion did not reveal any consensus that the book could not be considered a reliable source. In the notice board discussion User:Tizizano was counseled a number of times that if other reliable sources contradict Levine's, those sources can be included and the article could be edited to reflect contrary information; however as far as I can see there was no consensus that Levine's book was unreliable. Best: HarryZilber ( talk) 19:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
1) In 1938, the Foreign Minister Konoe has set a telegraph which is as following :「猶太避難民ノ入國ニ関する件」というもので、「我盟邦ノ排斥二因リ外国ニ避難セントスル者ヲ我國ニ於テ許容スルコトハ大局上面白カラサルノミナラス現在事変下ニ在ル我國ノ実情ハ外國避難民ヲ収容スルノ余地ナキヲ以テ此種避難民(外部二対対シテハ単ニ『避難民』ノ名義トスルコト、実際ハ猶太人避難民ヲ意味ス)ノ本邦内地並ニ各種植民地ヘノ入国ハ好マシカラス」(7th October)。This telegraph orders all the ambassadors and consuls to limit severly Jewish refugees to enter Japan. The Japanese government NEVER supported the Zionism between two World Wars. Japanese are well aware of the double-dealing tactics made by Japanese Foreign Minister.2) 20,000 Jewish refugees NEVER rushed to the frontier between Soviet Union and Manturia. Please read this book :早坂隆『指揮官の決断 満州とアッツの将軍 樋口季一郎』文春新書、2010年 ISBN 978-4-16-660758-7. The number of 20,000 is the false one fabricated by an editor when the memoir of General Kiichiro Higuchi was published in 1971. Exist no witness, no documents all over the world. All the Japanes scholars and journalists don’t believe it. The indication by Asahi Shinbun is NOT true AT ALL. And I have already indicated it by fax to Asahi Shinbun. Tizizano ( talk) 21:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
I’m a little surprised those who cannot read Japanese write such kind of article : Jewish settlement in Imperial JAPAN. Japanese language has already been used in the notes 16 & 17 as you see below :
Note 16 ^ "Question 戦前の日本における対ユダヤ人政策の基本をなしたと言われる「ユダヤ人対策要綱」に関する史料はありますか。また、同要綱に関する説明文はありますか。". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/annai/honsho/shiryo/qa/senzen_03.html. Retrieved 2010-10-02. Note 17 ^ "猶太人対策要綱". Five ministers council. Japan Center for Asian Histrical Record. 1938-12-06. p. 36/42. http://www.jacar.go.jp/DAS/meta/listPhoto?IS_STYLE=default&ID=M2006092115064531921. Retrieved 2010-10-02.
Bibliography Inuzuka Kiyoko, "Kaigun Inuzuka kikan no kiroku: Yudaya mondai to Nippon no kōsaku" (Tokyo: Nihon kōgyō shimbunsha, 1982). Kase Hideaki, "Nihon no naka no Yudayajin".
Sugita Rokuichi, Higashi Ajia e kita Yudayajin".
Concerning the Levine’s book, the reference books should not be decided exclusively because of the paucity of English resources, I think. Tizizano ( talk) 00:40, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
The lead is completely disassociated from the article. It says the whole thing is a fiction, but that is not supported by the text, except for the ambiguous 'as interpreted by' in the opening line of the first section. I'm removing all mention in the lead of this being fictionalized unless the text is modified to support it. — kwami ( talk) 09:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually, it looks like the lead is a separate article. It was a book report of The Fugu Plan. The text of the article is an account of the historical events. These are two different topics. The lead should be a final section, "Popular accounts" or some such.
Also, the article (and now the final section) started with a doozy of a non sequitur. Do they actually claim that it was called the "Fugu Plan" in Japanese, or was that just a label they invented for it in English, to better sell their book? Do they actually claim there was a Japanese plan for a Jewish state? Also, there are other popular accounts, which do not make such a claim.
— kwami ( talk) 09:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jewish settlement in the Japanese Empire. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jewish settlement in the Japanese Empire. 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) 05:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)