Talk:1938 Yellow River flood

Questionable Material
I removed the 2nd paragraph from 'the flood' section, which read:


 * This was one of the three major disasters of the war that had been contrived by the Chinese. The other two were the Changsha conflagration and the Chongqing air-raid shelter suffocation.

Theres no link to the Changsha conflagration, and the Chongqing air-raid shelter suffocation article claims it was a bombing campaign by the Japanese (and makes no mention of any "contriveness" by the Chinese gov't). Might be worth it to source it, too.

If I'm wrong on this, just tell me I'm stupid and re-add it :) --Curious brain 17:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * There is an article on the Chinese Wikipedia about the Changsha conflagration. _dk 23:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. All I can get is a very rough translation via Google/Babelfish. If you know the language I certainly wouldn't mind working with you (although, I don't speak Chinese [simple/traditional] so I don't know what help I would be) to generate an English copy. In any event, most of the stuff I can dig up mentions no Chinese complicity in the air-raid shelter suffocation. --Curious brain 01:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I would like to work on it, but I don't know much about Sino-Japanese War, and I don't feel comfortable using a straight translation from the Chinese article because it lists no sources... If you are interested, maybe you can ask the people over at WikiProject China? _dk 02:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Very good, sir/ma'am - I will do that. Appreciate your correspondence on this issue; I'll post any new developments under a new section here (or your talk page) if I get anywhere based on the suggested link. Thanks again.--Curious brain 03:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

"The flood" section
The second half of the section "The flood" consists of commentary that is essentially devoted to qualifying or undermining the claim, made in the first half, that the flood killed 500,000 people. If the commentary came from a reliable source, then the source needs to be attributed and the content perhaps should be moved to a footnote (see Footnotes). If it is essentially primary research, then it should be removed per the "No original research" policy. –B LACK F ALCON  (T ALK ) 04:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

What is this supposed to mean: "This claim of 500,000 Chinese and Japanese lives is very vague and the issue of the actions of the locals like kumaraswami asar[kumaran] near the Yellow River in relation to the flooding cycles of the 1930's is uncertain." It's not meant to be there, right? ROB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.150.139.154 (talk) 11:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Fixed that (removed), after checking article edit history. ROB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.150.139.154 (talk) 11:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Replaced unapologetic and unsourced information with sourced information. It seems like the last edits tried to minimize the numbers of people killed and shroud it with uncertainty, when scientific studies of the flood's damage were actually conducted after the war. This should resolve the dispute.--ScorchingPheonix (talk) 19:49, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Origin
The origin section has the same content twice 82.46.49.45 (talk) 19:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

New Source
I rewrote the section using the analysis and figures from Jay Taylor's biography of Chiang. Taylor is generally sympathetic to Chiang, so we would not expect him to exaggerate, and uses recent Chinese research, as well as Lary's China's Republic (2007). I removed general references about the river which didn't have referenced sources about these floods. ch (talk) 05:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

maps?
Do any maps exist showing the extent of the flood? They would be a huge boost to the article. If such maps exist, are any available with licensing that would allow them to be used in the article? — Steve98052 (talk) 07:05, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I have a map from the Drowned Earth article that has already been referenced which I copied out of the article. But I do not know how to A) embbed it into the article and B) if it is the map that was already removed.User:RyanMullan

North or South?
Were the floods just to the south of the then river channel (which, according to the article is the same as the current channel)? Or was land to the north of the river also flooded? Bluap (talk) 09:43, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

The Chinese name

 * The Chinese name of this flood is given as 花园口决堤事件. Google translated this as "1938 Yellow River flood":: OK. But with commas inserted (花,园,口,决,堤,事,件), Google translated it as "Flowers, garden, mouth, never, embankment, thing, pieces". "Flower garden mouth" is the placename Huayuankou (Huāyúankǒu); the name likely means 花园口 决堤 事件 = "Huayuankou embankment-breach events". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)