Battle of Huế has been listed as one of the Warfare 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on February 24, 2021, February 24, 2022, and February 24, 2023. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Altered result in the infobox to conform with Template:Infobox military conflict. The bullet points should go too. Regards Keith-264 ( talk) 15:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Mztourist: What kind of reason for violating MOS:NOTUSA is "passed GA review as drafted"? An article can never be modified, even if parts are against global community consensus, once it becomes a GA? — MarkH21 talk 07:15, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
If you’d preferWhen the United States is mentioned with one or more other countries in the same sentence, U.S. or US may be too informal, especially at the first mention or as a noun instead of an adjective (France and the United States, not France and the U.S.).
United States ___over
American ___where an adjective is needed, then we can use that as well. — MarkH21 talk 07:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
US and South Vietnamese victory(which isn’t even consistent with the
U.S.used in the rest of the article, as required by MOS:NOTUSA) is informal, but it is, and that’s the point of that part of MOS:NOTUSA.Pinging GA reviewer Gog the Mild. — MarkH21 talk 07:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
if you really have nothing better to dowas a silly attempt at a put-down though. — MarkH21 talk 07:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
You haven’t even give a reason for reverting to your preferred version, besides unnecessary changes
. You said that you don’t even think this is important. If you have no articulated reason against the changes, and you don’t think it’s important, then what are you doing? This is literally
WP:OWNERSHIP behavior.
The noticeboard post is a general question, not a post to direct users to this particular issue. — MarkH21 talk 08:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
The first sentence of the lead paragraph doesn’t really define much about the battle or give much context, while the second sentence of the lead is a confusing mess of blue links with a comma-separated list following two comma-separated subordinate clauses:
The Battle of Huế – also called the Siege of Huế – was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Between 31 January and 2 March 1968, in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, Thừa Thiên Province, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
It seems pertinent to mention the Tết Offensive in the first paragraph and the countries involved before listing the military branches involved and number of battalions. The dates & location were also cluttering the list sentence, and could easily be moved to another part of the first paragraph.
Since it’s a major edit, I’d propose the following lead paragraph:
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Taking place in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, it was a major engagement in North Vietnam's Tết Offensive against United States and South Vietnam. Over the course of two months, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The dates could also be moved to Taking place in the
South Vietnamese city of
Huế between 31 January and 2 March 1968, [...]
instead of the parenthetical.
@ Mztourist and Gog the Mild: let me know your thoughts. — MarkH21 talk 08:07, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Should the MOS:NOTUSA clause:
When the United States is mentioned with one or more other countries in the same sentence, U.S. or US may be too informal, especially at the first mention or as a noun instead of an adjective (France and the United States, not France and the U.S.).
be applied to the article? In other words, should instances of U.S.
and US
be replaced with United States
or American
where another country's full name (e.g. South Vietnam
or South Vietnamese
) is mentioned in the same sentence?
Please respond with Yes or No, with justifications. Thanks. 07:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
U.S.in the same sentence as other country names is informal, and there's no real reason against implementing such changes. The grammatical mismatch when
U.S.is used as a noun adjunct while the other country names are in full adjectival form is slightly awkward too, e.g. the old version's
US and South Vietnamese victoryinstead of
American and South Vietnamese victory.There are still several instances of
U.S.in the same sentence as mentions of other countries. For instance, the article currently says:
U.S. forces had been committed to combat operations on Vietnamese soil
the South Vietnamese and U.S. forces in the city were unprepared
the oppressed South Vietnamese population would then spontaneously rise up and overthrow the Thiệu-Kỳ government and that this would force the U.S. to withdraw
according to South Vietnamese law, no U.S. flag was permitted to be flown without an accompanying South Vietnamese flag
US and South Vietnamesebe even more acceptable than
US and South Vietnam? In the latter, at least they’re both just nouns. In the former, it’s a mix of a noun adjunct (
US) with a full adjectival form (
South Vietnamese). — MarkH21 talk 05:19, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
U.S.as a noun adjunct is grammatically wrong. I’m just saying that it shouldn’t be preferred if
United Statesor
Americanare available.Also, MOS:NOTUSA says
especiallyin that cases. That’s not an exclusion of other cases. — MarkH21 talk 07:16, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Which of the following versions of the first lead paragraph should be implemented?
Please indicate your preferred option by number. Suggested modifications are also welcome. Thanks. 07:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
The Battle of Huế – also called the Siege of Huế – was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Between 31 January and 2 March 1968, in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, Thừa Thiên Province, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế, also called the Siege of Huế, was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Taking place between 31 January and 2 March 1968 in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, the battle was a major engagement in North Vietnam's Tết Offensive against South Vietnam and the United States. Over the course of two months, eleven battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Taking place in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, the battle was a major engagement in North Vietnam's Tết Offensive against South Vietnam and the United States. Over the course of two months, eleven battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was a major military engagement in the Tết Offensive launched by North Vietnam and the Việt Cộng during the Vietnam War. After two months of fighting in the South Vietnamese city of Huế and its surroundings, eleven battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế, also called the Siege of Huế, during the Tet Offensive was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Between 31 January and 2 March 1968, in and around the South Vietnamese city of Huế, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions and three United States Marine Corps battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was a major military engagement in the Tết Offensive launched by North Vietnam and the Việt Cộng during the Vietnam War. After initially losing control of most of Huế and its surroundings, the combined South Vietnamese and American forces gradually recaptured the city over two months of intense urban fighting. The battle was one of the longest and bloodiest of the war, and the heavy losses negatively affected American public perception of the war.
added Option 4, 08:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC); added Option 5, 09:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC); added Option 6, 09:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC); deprecating Options 2 & 3, 09:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
11 battalionsvs.
four battalions).
, during the Tet Offensive was [...]is slightly awkward. I agree though, that the
totaling 18 battalionsfrom the first four options is unnecessary.
An RfC is just an RfC. Deb ( talk) 11:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
What do you mean the link to urban warfare is trivial? It’s something so basic that the readers should never be linked there?Also, if it’s incorrect, then what does thethe linked urban fighting is trivial and incorrect as the US Army fought in the countryside west of the city
intense house-to-house fightingcurrently in the lead refer to? Or the “Recapture of southern Huế“ section describing:
Similarly, the “Analysis“ section states:Many of the Marines of Task Force X-Ray had little or no urban combat experience and the U.S. troops were not trained for urban close-quarters combat, so this battle was especially tough for them.
and quotes[...] has been compared to the Battle of Huế. Both battles were fought in close quarters in an urban setting where the enemy ensconced itself in the midst of civilians
Was this battle not a significant example of urban warfare? — MarkH21 talk 05:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)The Marine Corps' military operations in urban terrain doctrine recognizes that tactical success does not necessarily translate to strategic victory... the Battle of Huế in the Vietnam War, when Marines defeated an enemy that sought to put up a good fight but never expected to win.
urban, although it’s not technically incorrect in that the actual recapture of the city (in the narrow sense) was urban by definition. But it would still be nice to mention it as a major element of the battle in some way. Also, the minor change can be made to replace
two monthswith
one month. — MarkH21 talk 05:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
the heavy losses negatively affected American public perception of the war, we can remove the word
heavy. Otherwise, the sentence (in reference to the “Impact on American public opinion” section) isn’t specific to Option 6 since it’s already in the third paragraph of the lead right now. — MarkH21 talk 05:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
battleinstead of
heavy losses.
MarkH21 you have to define all the links that you deleted in the lede. Mztourist ( talk) 09:00, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
The text, Ho Chi Minh, Phạm Văn Đồng, Võ Nguyên Giáp and Ngô Đình Diệm had all attended the lycée in the city
, cannot be found in the reference of Bowden (2017), pages of 42–44. The citation is therefore moved to the preceding sentences that are extensively cited in the source. I will support the quoted claim with other reliable sources though.
Ltncanada (
talk) 21:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Battle of Huế has been listed as one of the Warfare 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on February 24, 2021, February 24, 2022, and February 24, 2023. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Altered result in the infobox to conform with Template:Infobox military conflict. The bullet points should go too. Regards Keith-264 ( talk) 15:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Mztourist: What kind of reason for violating MOS:NOTUSA is "passed GA review as drafted"? An article can never be modified, even if parts are against global community consensus, once it becomes a GA? — MarkH21 talk 07:15, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
If you’d preferWhen the United States is mentioned with one or more other countries in the same sentence, U.S. or US may be too informal, especially at the first mention or as a noun instead of an adjective (France and the United States, not France and the U.S.).
United States ___over
American ___where an adjective is needed, then we can use that as well. — MarkH21 talk 07:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
US and South Vietnamese victory(which isn’t even consistent with the
U.S.used in the rest of the article, as required by MOS:NOTUSA) is informal, but it is, and that’s the point of that part of MOS:NOTUSA.Pinging GA reviewer Gog the Mild. — MarkH21 talk 07:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
if you really have nothing better to dowas a silly attempt at a put-down though. — MarkH21 talk 07:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
You haven’t even give a reason for reverting to your preferred version, besides unnecessary changes
. You said that you don’t even think this is important. If you have no articulated reason against the changes, and you don’t think it’s important, then what are you doing? This is literally
WP:OWNERSHIP behavior.
The noticeboard post is a general question, not a post to direct users to this particular issue. — MarkH21 talk 08:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
The first sentence of the lead paragraph doesn’t really define much about the battle or give much context, while the second sentence of the lead is a confusing mess of blue links with a comma-separated list following two comma-separated subordinate clauses:
The Battle of Huế – also called the Siege of Huế – was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Between 31 January and 2 March 1968, in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, Thừa Thiên Province, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
It seems pertinent to mention the Tết Offensive in the first paragraph and the countries involved before listing the military branches involved and number of battalions. The dates & location were also cluttering the list sentence, and could easily be moved to another part of the first paragraph.
Since it’s a major edit, I’d propose the following lead paragraph:
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Taking place in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, it was a major engagement in North Vietnam's Tết Offensive against United States and South Vietnam. Over the course of two months, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The dates could also be moved to Taking place in the
South Vietnamese city of
Huế between 31 January and 2 March 1968, [...]
instead of the parenthetical.
@ Mztourist and Gog the Mild: let me know your thoughts. — MarkH21 talk 08:07, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Should the MOS:NOTUSA clause:
When the United States is mentioned with one or more other countries in the same sentence, U.S. or US may be too informal, especially at the first mention or as a noun instead of an adjective (France and the United States, not France and the U.S.).
be applied to the article? In other words, should instances of U.S.
and US
be replaced with United States
or American
where another country's full name (e.g. South Vietnam
or South Vietnamese
) is mentioned in the same sentence?
Please respond with Yes or No, with justifications. Thanks. 07:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
U.S.in the same sentence as other country names is informal, and there's no real reason against implementing such changes. The grammatical mismatch when
U.S.is used as a noun adjunct while the other country names are in full adjectival form is slightly awkward too, e.g. the old version's
US and South Vietnamese victoryinstead of
American and South Vietnamese victory.There are still several instances of
U.S.in the same sentence as mentions of other countries. For instance, the article currently says:
U.S. forces had been committed to combat operations on Vietnamese soil
the South Vietnamese and U.S. forces in the city were unprepared
the oppressed South Vietnamese population would then spontaneously rise up and overthrow the Thiệu-Kỳ government and that this would force the U.S. to withdraw
according to South Vietnamese law, no U.S. flag was permitted to be flown without an accompanying South Vietnamese flag
US and South Vietnamesebe even more acceptable than
US and South Vietnam? In the latter, at least they’re both just nouns. In the former, it’s a mix of a noun adjunct (
US) with a full adjectival form (
South Vietnamese). — MarkH21 talk 05:19, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
U.S.as a noun adjunct is grammatically wrong. I’m just saying that it shouldn’t be preferred if
United Statesor
Americanare available.Also, MOS:NOTUSA says
especiallyin that cases. That’s not an exclusion of other cases. — MarkH21 talk 07:16, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Which of the following versions of the first lead paragraph should be implemented?
Please indicate your preferred option by number. Suggested modifications are also welcome. Thanks. 07:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
The Battle of Huế – also called the Siege of Huế – was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Between 31 January and 2 March 1968, in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, Thừa Thiên Province, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế, also called the Siege of Huế, was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Taking place between 31 January and 2 March 1968 in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, the battle was a major engagement in North Vietnam's Tết Offensive against South Vietnam and the United States. Over the course of two months, eleven battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Taking place in the South Vietnamese city of Huế, the battle was a major engagement in North Vietnam's Tết Offensive against South Vietnam and the United States. Over the course of two months, eleven battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was a major military engagement in the Tết Offensive launched by North Vietnam and the Việt Cộng during the Vietnam War. After two months of fighting in the South Vietnamese city of Huế and its surroundings, eleven battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions, and three United States Marine Corps battalions, totaling 18 battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế, also called the Siege of Huế, during the Tet Offensive was one of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. Between 31 January and 2 March 1968, in and around the South Vietnamese city of Huế, 11 battalions of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), four United States Army battalions and three United States Marine Corps battalions, defeated 10 battalions of the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the Viet Cong (VC).
The Battle of Huế (31 January 1968 – 2 March 1968), also called the Siege of Huế, was a major military engagement in the Tết Offensive launched by North Vietnam and the Việt Cộng during the Vietnam War. After initially losing control of most of Huế and its surroundings, the combined South Vietnamese and American forces gradually recaptured the city over two months of intense urban fighting. The battle was one of the longest and bloodiest of the war, and the heavy losses negatively affected American public perception of the war.
added Option 4, 08:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC); added Option 5, 09:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC); added Option 6, 09:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC); deprecating Options 2 & 3, 09:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
11 battalionsvs.
four battalions).
, during the Tet Offensive was [...]is slightly awkward. I agree though, that the
totaling 18 battalionsfrom the first four options is unnecessary.
An RfC is just an RfC. Deb ( talk) 11:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
What do you mean the link to urban warfare is trivial? It’s something so basic that the readers should never be linked there?Also, if it’s incorrect, then what does thethe linked urban fighting is trivial and incorrect as the US Army fought in the countryside west of the city
intense house-to-house fightingcurrently in the lead refer to? Or the “Recapture of southern Huế“ section describing:
Similarly, the “Analysis“ section states:Many of the Marines of Task Force X-Ray had little or no urban combat experience and the U.S. troops were not trained for urban close-quarters combat, so this battle was especially tough for them.
and quotes[...] has been compared to the Battle of Huế. Both battles were fought in close quarters in an urban setting where the enemy ensconced itself in the midst of civilians
Was this battle not a significant example of urban warfare? — MarkH21 talk 05:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)The Marine Corps' military operations in urban terrain doctrine recognizes that tactical success does not necessarily translate to strategic victory... the Battle of Huế in the Vietnam War, when Marines defeated an enemy that sought to put up a good fight but never expected to win.
urban, although it’s not technically incorrect in that the actual recapture of the city (in the narrow sense) was urban by definition. But it would still be nice to mention it as a major element of the battle in some way. Also, the minor change can be made to replace
two monthswith
one month. — MarkH21 talk 05:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
the heavy losses negatively affected American public perception of the war, we can remove the word
heavy. Otherwise, the sentence (in reference to the “Impact on American public opinion” section) isn’t specific to Option 6 since it’s already in the third paragraph of the lead right now. — MarkH21 talk 05:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
battleinstead of
heavy losses.
MarkH21 you have to define all the links that you deleted in the lede. Mztourist ( talk) 09:00, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
The text, Ho Chi Minh, Phạm Văn Đồng, Võ Nguyên Giáp and Ngô Đình Diệm had all attended the lycée in the city
, cannot be found in the reference of Bowden (2017), pages of 42–44. The citation is therefore moved to the preceding sentences that are extensively cited in the source. I will support the quoted claim with other reliable sources though.
Ltncanada (
talk) 21:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)