Talk:Imperial Way Faction

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Imperial Way Faction article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Japan: History / Military history / Politics Mid‑importance

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: 18:06, April 25, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the History task force.

This article is supported by the joint Japanese military history task force.

This article is supported by the Politics task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: Kako River (Japan)
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Pure Japanese, Vinland Saga (TV series), Japanese destroyer Ume (1944), Mai Fujisawa, Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Military history: Asian / Japanese

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:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Difference?[edit]

What's the distinction between Kodoha, Kodo Ha, and Koda Ha?

Kodoha and Kodo Ha would be the same in Japanese (no upper case, no spaces in written language). Charles Matthews 18:28, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

The article British diplomatic movement also political struggle between Toho Kai and Kodoha groups in 1942 has been merged into this one: the original article is preserved at Talk:Imperial Way Faction/Merge archive. Physchim62 (talk) 13:19, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to move[edit]

this page to kodoha. "Imperial Way Faction" is the direct translation of Kodoha(皇道派), which is a proper noun. - Ideru 00:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revision[edit]

The article has been considerbly revised and is now referenced. It is now specific to the Kodoha army political faction and its disagreement with the Toseiha, and extraneous paragraphs on Hideki Tojo and his conduct of the Second World War have been removed as irrelevant. Tojo was a member of the former Toseiha, not the Kodoha. Also, the Kodoha ceased to exist after the February 26 Incident, and discussions on politics and conduct within the Army post-1936 belong elsewhere--MChew (talk) 08:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]