Jump to content

Talk:Harry S. Truman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleHarry S. Truman is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 19, 2007.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 11, 2006Good article nomineeListed
August 13, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 12, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 30, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
May 11, 2010Featured article reviewDemoted
September 11, 2012Peer reviewNot reviewed
October 16, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
November 18, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 8, 2020.
Current status: Featured article

The section on the atomic bomb gives undue weight to the views of U.S. and its supporters.

[edit]

Add this topic per User:Wehwalt. ——🦝 The Interaccoonale Will be the raccoon race (talk・contribs) 01:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give examples of this? Wehwalt (talk) 01:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This biography is the exact place for giving context to Truman's decision to drop the bombs, or at least his decision not to call off the dropping of the bombs. A global viewpoint would be more appropriate at the article about the bombs. Binksternet (talk) 02:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If so, William Shockley's opinion and U.S. Army's document should not be included.
It is reasonable to focus on Truman's views in his own article, but the section also includes the views of his many colleagues and supporters, but very few views of his opponents. I would suggest organize this section like this: the history should appears first, followed by Truman's own views, because this is his own article, so it can have a relatively higher weight. Finally, give the views of his supporters and opponents, and this part should be in a reasonable weight. ——🦝 The Interaccoonale Will be the raccoon race (talk・contribs) 02:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I see it, we give Truman's views, and a brief summary of the arguments of the supporters and opposers. Are there specific sources/quotations you think should be in there? Wehwalt (talk) 12:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
William Shockley's opinion and U.S. Army's document are given in detail in the article. It is not "a brief summary". But the opposing opinion only took up one sentence. ——🦝 The Interaccoonale Will be the raccoon race (talk・contribs) 13:49, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any particular sources in mind for the opposing view? Wehwalt (talk) 14:31, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unsupported claims of Truman guilt

[edit]

I dropped these text added by Maurnxiao that lacks reliable sources. The one source he provides never mentions Truman in any w and it makes no mention of 1,500,000 dead civilians. Now Maurnxiao has restored his claims and makes his personal opinion that " He personally authorised the vast bombing campaign that slaughtered possibly more than a million civilians and had ultimate authority ov er the actions of America's military in 1st ROK, so the Bodo League massacre belongs here." The source he cites says the opposite--it says that the South Koreans were sovereign in their own country and made the decisions. The source does not claim evidence of approval by the US military and no evidence that Truman ever knew about them. Rjensen (talk) 02:13, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

False. The 1st ROK was was American puppet state carved up after the division of Korea with the Soviets. Eventually the two were meant to unify but the lunacy of Rhee SyngMan, underscored by the massacres perpetrated during his rule, made the process more difficult. And I providedsources showing American authorization of some of the executions. The story was buried by the Korean US-backed military dictatorships that ruled the country basically until 1992. I provided a source that showed Truman authorizing bombing of North Korea, and a historian describing the campaign as a genocide. Maurnxiao (talk) 03:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that Maurnxiao does not provide reliable sources, and he misreads what he does have. For US guilt he depends on the daughter of an executed civilians: his source states: "the 57-year-old woman believes South Koreans alone are not to blame. "Although we can't present concrete evidence, we bereaved families believe the United States has some responsibility for this," she told the AP" He does not mention that in the same BBC source we have a much better authority: "Frank Winslow, a military adviser at Daejeon .... "The Koreans were sovereign. To me, there was never any question that the Koreans were in charge," he said in a telephone interview." The US treated Rhee as the final decision maker. Rhee repeatedly rejected US advice during the war--he was not a puppet. For example the US ambassador Muccio insisted that Rhee stay in Seoul early in war (June 25) and he refused. Ambassador Mussio told Rhee NOT to massacre pro-North Korean civilians and Rhee ignored it. Truman and UN did indeed authorize bombing of North Korea--Maurnxiao decides that bombing is "genocide" and invents the notion of 1,5 million civilians killed by US--which reliable source states that? Rjensen (talk) 03:39, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an outrageous bit of historical revisionism that pretends US military officers are impartial sources and that claims I made up the genocide claim – I specifically cited a historian. The death toll in North Korea is freely available information which you are choosing to ignore. Your own articles bring up American sources estimating the North Korean death toll at around a million and a half. The notion that I made it up is appalling. Maurnxiao (talk) 03:52, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First of all--the lead section summarizes the text and does not att new ideas. The changes have to be made first in the section on Korea (section 6.3.2 below). New changes have to be based on scholarship on Truman which is extensive on Korean war. Maurnxiao should read up on Truman if he wants to contribute to the main Wikipedia article on Truman. A good review of the scholarship by Matray appears in https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118300718.ch26 Rjensen (talk) 07:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sayings

[edit]

HST was known for his witty (and sometimes coarse) sayings. There should be a section in this article about them. See, e.g., https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/get-out-of-the-kitchen.html and https://www.azquotes.com/author/14817-Harry_S_Truman, The Wit & Wisdom of Harry Truman Ralph Keyes for sources. Kdammers (talk) 18:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Change article title from "Harry S. Truman" to "Harry S Truman"?

[edit]

Should the period after S be dropped since S is not an abbreviation? LemonPumpkin (talk) 20:02, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the first three topics in "General Concerns and Questions" at the top of this page. Wehwalt (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I missed that section. LemonPumpkin (talk) 17:47, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2024

[edit]
Griffpatch14 (talk) 00:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC) Harry Siddle Truman[reply]
Not clear what you are saying here. We're not going to call him Siddle, if that is what you are saying.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harry_S._Truman&oldid=1250652711"