Talk:Axis powers

Wikipedia requires that all content be verifiable, for this reason no country will be listed in the infobox as an Axis power unless independent, reliable sources on the topic of WW2 can be presented explicitly describing them as an Axis power. If you want a country to be included in the infobox, please find sources to support this before opening a discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 March 2025

Finland should be removed as an axis power from the list of lesser powers OR its role should be fully explained in the article.

Finland was indeed NOT an axis power, it did not sign the triparty agreement or was in alliance with them. However, it did sign the Antikomintern treaty. It is legitimate to discuss the position of Finland during WW2 but the fact that one or even some historians "consider it to be an axis power" does not make it so. Alternatively, the text should be edited so that it clearly states that Finland was not officially an axis power but some historians "consider" it to be. Then the community can elaborate on this and find other historians with opposing view (there are many). Now this is very misleading, as Finland is listed as an axis power but is not even mentioned in the actual article and the article does not discuss the facts, i.e. that Finland refused to sign the triparty pact, did not follow the common goals of the axis, did not give up its jews and for example refused to participate in the siege of Leningrad. It also ignores the fact that Hitler DID pressure Finland to a closer alliance with Germany in summer of 1944 by stopping the food and weapons deliveries to Finland, which lead to president Ryti to personally promise that Finland will stand by Germany, only to renege on this promise two months later by resigning and stating that his personal promise did not bind Finland.

By omitting all these nuances, the article is misleading. So either add this discussion or delete Finland from the list. For example the German version has most of these details about the Finnish-German relationship. The importance of making these changes is demonstrated by the fact that this English Wikipedia article is shared by Russia sympathizers as a proof that Finns were indeed Nazis during the WW2. Like I said, discussion is good but then it needs to be based on the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Thank you for considering this. I am happy to propose some simple changes as a starting point, although I do not consider myself an expert on ww2. Kuriver (talk) 01:32, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I appreciate the distinction over whether or not Finland could be called an "Axis power". But Finland does not appear in the article until the "Anti-Comintern Pact signatories" section, and it looks like at least some of your points are already made in the Finland section (except your assertion that Finland didn't attack Leningrad; that might be true and could deserve an edit). I feel that the article adequately distinguishes between "major Axis powers" and other participatory nations. - Brian Kendig (talk) 22:48, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding refusing to participate in the Siege of Leningrad, see Naval Detachment K. --illythr (talk) 19:53, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Finland did participate in the siege of Leningrad. (HerbGowan (talk) 13:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Kuriver - "Finland was indeed NOT an axis power - As the article explains, the overwhelming majority of *FINNISH* historians disagree with this assessment. Instead they state (as the treaty of Paris that Finland also signed states) that Finland was an ally of axis Germany. This is the case even if (as the article also states) Finland only signed some, but not all of the major axis agreements. FOARP (talk) 15:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For example, this article says: "After Germany attacked against the Soviet Union, Finland reoccupied the territories lost in the Winter War. The Finnish forces did not stop at the old border but attacked to the Eastern (Soviet) Karelia and occupied it with a wish eventually to annex it. By that measure, Finland joined as Germany’s ally in its war of aggression against the Soviet Union..." (p. 38). Mellk (talk) 15:26, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Right, much is made of Finland not signing the Tripartite pact, but the Tripartite pact is not one-for-one synonymous with the Axis powers (otherwise this article wouldn't exist, since we already have a separate article about the Tripartite pact). Yugoslavia signed it but is not considered one of the Axis powers by historians. Finland did not sign it but is considered part of the Axis.
To state that only some historians think Finland was an Axis country is incorrect: the overwhelming majority of those surveyed by Helsingin Sanomat expressing a view thought it was (28 were surveyed, 16 thought it was, only 6 said it wasn't, 6 stated no view). The Finnish government signed a treaty in 1947 saying it was. The Germans during the war said it was. Many WW2 histories reflect the view that it was.
Every single point mentioned in the proposed edit is already present in the article. The article, however, also contains plentiful detail of why Finland is considered to have been an Axis power despite this.
If anything it is the German version that is deficient since it defines the Axis as Germany-Japan-Italy and all other countries that signed the Tripartite treaty as "allies of the Axis" (a distinction they have invented). It also states, incorrectly and in editorial fashion, that "The Finns do not like to describe themselves as former allies of the German Reich" ("Die Finnen bezeichnen sich ungern als ehemalige Verbündete des Deutschen Reichs") - firstly it does not matter whether they "don't like" ("ungern") to be called this or not, and secondly it is clear that many Finns (including the Finnish government in 1947 and the majority of historians surveyed) have called Finland an ally of the German Reich. FOARP (talk) 09:36, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 July 2025

you should put Italian fascism between Nazism and Kokkashugi 2601:902:C180:5800:1D71:D8CB:E473:6593 (talk) 05:16, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done added category — 🪫Volatile 📲T | ⌨️C 06:20, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 July 2025 (2)

Put category of fascism behind of category of Axis powers (I.e. fascism as the first category Axis powers second) 2601:902:C180:5800:C0BA:DF54:56CC:9611 (talk) 08:28, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not all of the Axis countries were fascists, though most were. Slatersteven (talk) 09:29, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Japan was never a member of either the Pact of Steel nor non-existent Axis Pact. If it had been, Japan and USSR would have been at war while Germany and Italy were. In fact even after Stalin betrayed the Japanese/Soviet Trade and Friendship Pact, undermining efforts of USSR invaders and the Allie’s blockade, Japan did NOT declare war on the USSR in return.
the Tripartite Pact, a mutual defense pact against the USSR, Japanese Prime Minister Fuminaru Konoye and Givt considered nullified betrayed by Hitler’s Nazi-Soviet Pact with Stalin.
When despite forced to attack Pearl Harbour, FDR still couldn’t get Congress and the American people 90-96% against war with Hitler even if Britain fell,
Hitler betrayed everyone he knew declaring war on America in hopes Japan would feel obligated to declare war on the USSR, forcing its unconditional surrender and Germany freed from 2 front war and ignore Allied blockade and bombing campaigns.
Japan did NOT.
sadly this proves the Anglo-Americans the worst proponents of propaganda to this day. ~2025-36476-07 (talk) 05:52, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What? Slatersteven (talk) 10:47, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should antisemitism be mentioned as a motivation for invading the USSR?

Roughly the fifth paragraph down in the Major Powers/justifications for war section, motivations for Germany's attack on the USSR are mentioned. Includes "living space", anti communism, etc. Maybe this could be lumped into the latter, but given what Germany ended up doing it seems worth calling out explicitly. They weren't just anti communist, they viewed communism in the ussr as part of a Jewish conspiracy against the world and Germany specifically.

In the Poland section it might be worth calling out too, given that Hitler & co. hated Poland and wanted to wipe it out, and it had a high percent of Jews in its population prior to the war. Their general nastiness really doesn't come through in this section. ~2025-41653-87 (talk) 06:55, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Anti-semitism was a minor reason for both invasions. Slatersteven (talk) 11:30, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was certainly used in propaganda justifying Barbarossa (see the citations to Jewish Bolshevism#Nazi Germany) but doubtful how much of a part it actually played. DeCausa (talk) 13:19, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that that was on my mind as I read that article recently. Fair enough, thanks ~2025-41653-87 (talk) 17:55, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit requnest

Shouldn't the infobox include the Italian Social Republic separately of fascist Italy, given it was a Nazi puppet state? ~2026-92832-1 (talk) 04:51, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does sourcing exist listing the Italian Social Republic as a member of the Axis distinct to pre-1943 Italy? FOARP (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so, but as I said, is it really approaote to lump a legitimate ally and Nazi puppet together? ~2026-92832-1 (talk) 18:15, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes?
Or put another way, do sources distinguish between "legitimate allies" and "illegitimate allies"? From my perspective (and for that matter, that of the allies) the whole axis was a criminal band, so the idea of some of them being "legitimate" and others being "illegitimate" seems less than an entirely obvious one, so it would need sourcing to demonstrate that it is something we should say on this page.
At present the Peace of Cassibile and the existence of the Salo Republic is already covered in a footnote, why do we need to add to that? Since the Hungarians also attempted to defect from the Axis and had a puppet government imposed on them by Germany in Operation Panzerfaust, should they also have a separate listings for Hungary pre-and-post-Panzerfaust?
This article can certainly be improved on, even (especially?) the infobox, but what is needed is grounding in reliable sources. FOARP (talk) 08:50, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Axis_powers