Talk:Imperial Japanese Army during the Pacific War

Imperial Japanese Army during the Pacific War was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (February 26, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Military history: Asian / Japanese / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force
	World War II task force

Aviation

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Nothing whatsoever?[edit]

The IJA operated its own aircraft carriers and submarines, as well as having a substantial world-class air force that not only ordered the development of aircraft and engines specifically for its own use, it operated its own factories that developed aircraft (Tachikawa). These forces had a major part to play in all of the IJA's operations during WW2 - far more than the common soldiers (and their crimes), and of vastly greater importance than their uniforms. - NiD.29 (talk) 08:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, in its current state, this article is just a bite-sized version of the one about Japanese war crimes, the picture of the tank and two infantry weapons aren't even related to the content of the article. Going to see what I can do to make the content of the article beyond the lead more in line with the title. Loafiewa (talk) 02:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is Showa's role part of the IJA?[edit]

"Only in rare moments of special importance were decisions made in Imperial council" is what makes it seem like it might not be needed in particular, while Showa had some influence, that's already shown by him being supreme commander (and readers can look to his article if they want to know more about him specifically), and he did very little compared to Hitler, Churchill, etc. I'm not entirely sure if the point about fanticism is really appropriate either, I would not be opposed to reformatting that section to just describe the typical behaviour of the IJA (i.e. tactics, national spirit and how they informed each other), and giving the war crimes a sentence or two, rather than an entire section.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Imperial Japanese Army during the Pacific War/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Buidhe (talk · contribs) 01:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After reading this article, it's hard to see how it's sufficiently broad to meet good article status. A lot of aspects, such as conscription (did soldiers enlist more or less voluntarily or did they have to be dragged in chains to the battlefield?), training, ideology, tactics, how the army interacted with society, are not dealt with in much depth. A comparable article on the Wehrmacht is more than three times longer than this one. PS "disease" is mentioned in the lead and not the body; in a good article, anything mentioned in the lead should be elaborated in the body. (t · c) buidhe 01:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]