Talk:Japanese occupation of Malaya
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Malaysia
Move this page to
Japanese occupation of Malaysia? 69.234.180.76 (talk) 22:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
]
- Nope. Malaysia didn't exist in the 1940s, plain and simple. - Two hundred percent (talk) 04:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- Then what do you think about Japanese occupation of Indonesia, Indonesia also didn't exist until 1945 when it declared independence. 71.107.74.39 (talk) 04:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)]
- The formation of Indonesia was the direct result of the occupation, so that's barely a good example. Present day Malaysia and Singapore remained fragmented up until the formation of Malaysia in 1963. - 60.53.43.143 (talk) 12:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Note: Japanese occupation of Malaysia redirects to this page. I concur with Two hundred percent.Muthu raama —Preceding undated comment added 13:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)]
- Note:
- The formation of Indonesia was the direct result of the occupation, so that's barely a good example. Present day Malaysia and Singapore remained fragmented up until the formation of Malaysia in 1963. - 60.53.43.143 (talk) 12:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Then what do you think about
Translated from http://ms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendudukan_Jepun_di_Tanah_Melayu,_Borneo_Utara_dan_Sarawak
This article contains a translation of Pendudukan Jepun di Tanah Melayu, Borneo Utara dan Sarawak from ms.wikipedia. |
Not any more -
talk) 04:26, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
]
Discussion about splitting the article
I am seeking comment on splitting and renaming this article at
talk) 03:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
]
The reason for the article being split is because it is now >50 kilobytes in size and growing, also there are two distinct subject areas. See
talk) 00:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
]
- How about naming the latter Japanese occupation of British North Borneo? As far as I am aware (though I may well be wrong), North Borneo's official name was simply North Borneo, not British North Borneo - BNB was the term used at the time to refer to all the British territories on the island of Borneo (NB, Sarawak, Labuan and Brunei), so would be the appropriate term here. Jasper33 (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC) Or alternatively, Japanese occupation of British Borneo? (Gen Wootten used the term in his 18 Aug 1945 pamphlet dropped to POWs and Internees at Batu Lintang). After all, Dutch Borneo was a recognised term at the time, so why not British Borneo for the rest of the island? Jasper33 (talk) 14:17, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
- A split as proposed seems sensible. From memory, the Japanese had different occupation governments in Malaya and Borneo. Nick-D (talk) 12:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestions about naming. The Japanese referred to the area encompassing Sabah, Brunei, Labuan, and Sarawak as Kita Boruneo. The term talk) 00:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)]
- Thanks for the suggestions about naming. The Japanese referred to the area encompassing Sabah, Brunei, Labuan, and Sarawak as Kita Boruneo. The term
- A split as proposed seems sensible. From memory, the Japanese had different occupation governments in Malaya and Borneo. Nick-D (talk) 12:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hardships sentence makes no sense
This sentence makes no sense and needs fixing:
"Because Malaya produced more rubber and tin than Japan was able to utilize Malaya lost its export income."
--23.119.204.117 (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
- G'day, I made an attempt to clarify the sentence with this edit: [1]. I don't have access to the source, though, so please feel free to revert if I got it wrong. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)