Jump to content

Talk:World War II: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Cairo9o9 (talk | contribs)
Cairo9o9 (talk | contribs)
Line 169: Line 169:
The war did not start until 1939-1945.It could also be the holocaust. THe instability created in Europe by the first world war (1914-18)set a stage for another war.Adolf hitler was the one who began world war 2.we was a <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.126.99.58|24.126.99.58]] ([[User talk:24.126.99.58|talk]]) 00:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
The war did not start until 1939-1945.It could also be the holocaust. THe instability created in Europe by the first world war (1914-18)set a stage for another war.Adolf hitler was the one who began world war 2.we was a <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.126.99.58|24.126.99.58]] ([[User talk:24.126.99.58|talk]]) 00:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Why is Chiang Kai-Shek listed as a 'Main Allied Leader' yet Mackenzie King of Canada or Menzies & Fadden of Australia are not? ==
== Why is Chiang Kai-Shek listed as a 'Main Allied Leader' yet Mackenzie King of Canada or Menzies & Curtin of Australia are not? ==


Seriously, maybe not Australia but at least Canada should be up there. Not saying Chiang Kai-Shek shouldn't be, but it seems ridiculous that he is OVER some others.
Seriously, maybe not Australia but at least Canada should be up there. Not saying Chiang Kai-Shek shouldn't be, but it seems ridiculous that he is OVER some others.

Revision as of 07:51, 6 April 2015

Good articleWorld War II has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 18, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 22, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 20, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
January 26, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 13, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
May 18, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 25, 2006Good article nomineeListed
February 17, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 23, 2007WikiProject A-class reviewNot approved
April 14, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
October 8, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
May 10, 2008WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
March 6, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of December 18, 2005.
Current status: Good article

Template:Vital article

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage Template:Medcabbox

British English

Why is article British English? Takes place in Europe and England was primary until United States entered war but still curious as to why. 68.198.20.98 (talk) 23:46, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because Britain went into the war voluntarily in 1939 to help Poland whereas the other 'Allies' waited on the sidelines until they were either attacked or had war declared against them.
... and because without the British, Hitler would have won. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.221.72 (talk) 11:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's for none of those reasons -- just WP:ENGVAR. This started in British English, and there's simply no reason to change it. --A D Monroe III (talk) 21:11, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WW2InfoBox has been nominated to be merged into this article

The discussion is at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 February 22#Template:WW2InfoBox Nick-D (talk) 09:39, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - The result of the discussion was merge/redirect ..talk page moved to Talk:World War II/Infobox -- Moxy (talk) 01:31, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WW2 Verse WW1 ... This article is about WW2 not WW1 Either remove or tell the truth about USA in WW1

I feel that if this article is going to talk about WW1 aswell as WW2, Then the article should highlight the fact that the USA was not allied with the western forces of the U.K, Australia, New Zealand & Canada during WW1.

During WW1 While the Allies ( Not the USA ) fought the Germans & the Ottoman Empire in Europe & Africa, the USA was Fighting Mexico over corn & land. ( in what is now New Mexico )

& when the USA did enter World war 1 ... The USA allied itself with the Muslim's Ottoman empire & the Nazi German forces' Against the British, Australian, New Zealand & Canadian forces. ( which is why the USA received none of the spoils of war from world war one. As the USA was on the losing side of the war )

I think if this article is going to get into world war one, Then i think it should reflect the fact the USA was allied with the Nazi Germans & the Muslim Ottoman empire. Cut the U.S Lies & Propaganda for once.

If Wikipedia could tell the truth for once it would be nice.

Either that or just keep the article on WW2.

Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.40.200 (talk) 22:29, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

world war 2

The war did not start until 1939-1945.It could also be the holocaust. THe instability created in Europe by the first world war (1914-18)set a stage for another war.Adolf hitler was the one who began world war 2.we was a — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.126.99.58 (talk) 00:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Chiang Kai-Shek listed as a 'Main Allied Leader' yet Mackenzie King of Canada or Menzies & Curtin of Australia are not?

Seriously, maybe not Australia but at least Canada should be up there. Not saying Chiang Kai-Shek shouldn't be, but it seems ridiculous that he is OVER some others.