Talk:Collaboration with Imperial Japan

Do you think it might be helpful to create a Collaboration, etc., Wikiproject ?
[copied from a User's Talk Page]

Hi, Elin, I was just thinking that with all the overlap and cross-referencing, it might be helpful to create a Wikiproject or Wikigroup for something like "Invasion, Collaboration, Occupation and Resistance during World War II" (a more logical order would be IOCR, but this arrangement could be more euphonisouly acronymised to ICOR) to gather together all those articles like German occupation of Byelorussia during World War II, Collaboration with Imperial Japan, Collaboration with the Axis powers, Vichy France, Chetniks, Partisans, List of World War II puppet states, Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, Azad Hind, Slovak Republic (1939-1945). White Rose, Manchukuo, Vidkun Quisling, Vel' d'Hiv Roundup, Einsatzgruppen. Otto Abetz. etc. (There may already be a Wiki Project on the various resistance movements.)

On the one hand, this might help with overlap and cross-checking; on the other, it might either pretend to become some Universal Law-Giver or else sit around empty, unvisited and unused. There's also a more-distant danger of just coalescing onto one project page all those angry ArbCom-worthy debates on topics such as Jewish collaboration or Comfort women. @Mathglot, @User:Piotrus @User:Marcelus, @User:Scope creep. @User:Volunteer Marek

—— Shakescene (talk) 02:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Morning That is a interesting idea. It would certainly something that could focus the group efforts and we could have a participants lists. Morning  I've been doing research on collaboration and found a book on collaboration, the meaning of Nazi collaboration and the many forms its took depending on the particular country or region, the demographics, the people that were there, economy and so it. It seems to be the defintive book, but is probably one amongst many, but it excellent at describing the various aspects of it and why each country/group decided to go with, particularly the early ones, their motivations and so on.  I found a review and it pointed me to a Italian academic who held the last conference on nazi collaboration for researchers on the subject. I'm going to contact him and see what he says in terms of the lastest sources and see if we can get any pointers. I'm still on the Lister article at the moment, so this is on the back, but I have some direction for the collaboration article.    scope_creep Talk  07:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll probably be low-activity for the next month or so, but I'll watch with interest, and contribute when I can. Mathglot (talk) 09:04, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it's a good idea. I had been wondering if everyone got run off by the current Arb case, and was.thinking of making a post about that. Certainly it would improve the visibility of the effort. As for.attracting the angry, that may be inevitable, whether we start a formal project or not. If it gets too bad we can maybe ask for discretionary sanctions, which this article currently only falls under with respect to Poland. I think that holding fast to verifiability will help a lot with creating something useful that neither blames nor praises. Elinruby (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As I suspected there is already some Resistance stuff falling within the WW2 MilHistory projects.
 * There's also this collapsible category guide (or whatever you call it)
 * P.S. I looked at the Collaboration with Imperial Japan article that I created by splitting off 16 k from Collaboration with the Axis Powers earlier this year, and it's now nearly doubled to 28 k, which is exactly what I was seeking. Most of us know something about Vichy France or Eastern Europe, but nearly nothing (except what we've found in Wikipedia) about modern Asian history — far better to attract those who have a greater interest in and knowledge of modern Asia than to stumble our own way through darkly (and perhaps wrongly).
 * —— Shakescene (talk) 17:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * New projects, even ones you'd think have broad interest, frequently go dark. A subtask of WP:MILHIST may be a good route to consider. MILHIST is a huge project with many task forces for subtopics, and is not going to become inactive. If a new "collaboration" subtask is created and has little input for some time, it won't disappear as long as MILHIST exists. Plus, it may attract crossover interest from members of other MILHIST task forces that wouldn't have noticed it as a standalone project. So that's one thing to consider. Mathglot (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * New projects, even ones you'd think have broad interest, frequently go dark. A subtask of WP:MILHIST may be a good route to consider. MILHIST is a huge project with many task forces for subtopics, and is not going to become inactive. If a new "collaboration" subtask is created and has little input for some time, it won't disappear as long as MILHIST exists. Plus, it may attract crossover interest from members of other MILHIST task forces that wouldn't have noticed it as a standalone project. So that's one thing to consider. Mathglot (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Except we've been removing military history. Just saying Elinruby (talk) 19:05, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; maybe another project then; WP:POLITICS? Mathglot (talk) 19:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

—— Shakescene (talk) 20:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

List of individuals
I spent some time finding references for the names in their bios. A couple of thoughts: I chose the refereferences that stated they were found guilty usually, but in some cases there were no inline citations so I added an cn tag. This was a bulk operation so I did not crank up Jstor but I am sure the references are out there. In two cases I added a dubious tag because their convictions were overturned; if there are otherwise good references for collaboration well and good, but their home judicial system had some doubts so perhaps this should be pondered. I made some comments in edit summaries: some of those people are really interesting and perhaps deserve a little more space. One question, though. Quite a few were spies and while the guy passing information in the midst of the Battle of Singapore was definitely a collaborator, some of these people were cooperating with the Japanese in the 20s, and while they apparently helped them, was Japan even an enemy state of any of those countries at the time? Just asking, something to ponder. If the information was sensitive enough it might not matter in terms of it not being just consulting, but does collaboration require an enemy? Elinruby (talk) 11:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)