Jump to content

User talk:MtulliusC

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The table of some estimates of different scholars for the death toll of Nanking Massacre=[edit]

Hello,

I have roughly constructed a table listing estimates of different scholars in response to your demand of finding "reliable sources or evidence that indicates support for the figure of 200,000+". However, User:Banzaiblitz keeps removing this table from the discussion page of Nanking Massacre. I do not know why I cannot post this table on the discussion page of Nanking Massacre for discussion. I invite you to visit the table here before I can post it on the discussion page without any bothering. If you have any question or any demand for translation please contact my talk page. I will try reply as soon as possible. --Snorri (talk) 21:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the new discussion about Nanking Massacre[edit]

(Sorry to post it again. I do not know if you can see my comment in your old talk page so I post it here as well. Just in case.)

I saw your remark on the talk page. I am very glad that you affirm my effort on the table and that we are agree that the upper limit of death toll should be pushed up. However, I still want to say a few things about the subject. I hope this would not bother you too much. First I think 200,000+ is not an over-estimating figure. Maybe 300,000+ would be a little over but given what I listed in the table, I think 200,000+ is well accepted among worldwide scholars as the result of IMFTE. I have many side proofs on this specific point if you would like to acquaint more. Second, Ikuhiko Hata's estimate has been strongly doubted by different scholars. For example Lee En-Han criticized that Hata used a quasi-quibbling method to cut down the number by using "illegal kill", "quasi-fight-to-death" and "legal kill" to classify the massacred Chinese citizens and only admit the 38000 to 42000 "illegal killed number". Hata's estimate is not that widely accepted.

But after all, I think we are on the way to solve the problem. I do not know how to deal with Banzaiblitz given his wild behavior on the talk page so I choose to leave my comment here. Hope you don't mind. --Snorri (talk) 11:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]