This talk page is only for discussion of the dispute over ownership of the islands; any discussion of the islands—outside of material directly relating to the dispute—should be discussed at Talk:Senkaku Islands. Thank you for your cooperation.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
A news item involving Senkaku Islands dispute was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 19 August 2012.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 14:30, April 24, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
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:
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.
Lead sentence
It seems pretty clear that most English news sources refer to this dispute as the Senkaku Islands Dispute (see for example http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27089658http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/12/economist-explains-1 while making clear reference to the fact that China/Taiwan refer to these as the Diaoyu Island Dispute which is supported by Benlisquare has pointed out (although not explicitly saying Diaoyu Island Dispute the overall meaning is reflected in his literal translation. I think that it should be noted that the English speaking world generally refers to the conflict as the Senkaku Islands Dispute while Taiwan and the PRC refer to it as the Diaoyu Island Dispute (again, I think this accurately captures the meaning of Benlisquare's literal translation). As such, I think this should be reflected in the description as this describes the situation while remaining neutral and clarifying the two sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LEDominator (talk • contribs) 06:08, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Per the 1RR notice above, now that the addition in China has been reverted, we should be working towards a consensus on this Talk page, rather than making changes to the article directly. - Ryk72'c.s.n.s.' 07:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need to say Senkaku Islands dispute is translated from Japanese or Diaoyu Islands dispute is translated from Chinese. Just keep it simple. STSC (talk) 10:41, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
New Source
Tadayoshi Murata, The Origins of Japanese-Chinese Territorial Dispute (Tokyo: World Scientific, 2016). I noticed this hasn't been used yet, it supports the Chinese position but it uses a lot of evidence. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 10:46, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Warning about possible problems in this article
I have found two major problems in this article today, one being a sentence about the position of the US State Department and one about the attitude of Japanese government in the 1970's. From these two examples, I infer that this page may also have other problematic areas and I recommend that the article be thoroughly reviewed and checked by multiple experts at the earliest possible date, including the edits I made. I am not an expert in the specifics of this dispute, but the fact that I have seemingly discovered two major problems after a brief glance at the article is not a good sign. Thanks for any help. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:17, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Removed scare quotes used in the lead section around the words 'private owner'. Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:14, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the US position on the dispute, it does seem that several officials have stated that the US takes what they call a neutral position on the underlying sovereignty question. However, I think there needs to be some kind of official State Department statement, not a collection of quotations, to sustain the sentences I was reading here. There may be a better wording for those sentences. Again, I am no expert in this area but I think there should be very very clear wording about who said what when and who they represented. A WikiLeaks document says " the State Department asserted that the United States took a neutral position with regard to the competing Japanese and Chinese claims to the islands," I read this sentence (especially the word 'asserted') as a partial proof that the sentences I hid on these pages may be a little bit of an overstatement. Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:27, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It leans heavily in favor of the Japanese side. We need it to be more balanced. Cioppino123 (talk) 21:33, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
These sorts of comments are more helpful if you can suggest a specific edit or raise a specific statement from a specific source you'd like to see incorporated. JArthur1984 (talk) 22:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
::It refers to the islands as Senkaku almost exclusively. This means Wikipedia endorses Japan's claims. Cioppino123 (talk) 18:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
