Contents

Talk:Battle of Lang Vei

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Lang Vei 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

	Battle of Lang Vei 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 reassessit.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 5, 2011 Good article nominee Listed

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Asian / North America / Southeast Asia / United States 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 Associated task forces: /  Asian military history task force North American military history task force Southeast Asian military history task force United States military history task force Vietnam Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Pritzker Military Library Low‑importance This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[M1 carbine#Carbine, Cal .30, M2|M2]] Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Hi, good work with this so far. I made a couple of minor tweaks for grammar and style and have a couple of minor suggestions for this article:

• currently there is a mixture of date format. For instance the lead has "6–7 February", but elsewhere "February 6", etc. The format should be consistent, although either way is fine;
• both "armoured" and "armored" are used (and their variations) - it should probably just be "armored" given it is mainly using US spelling;
• Note # 14 should probably have details like title, publisher, accessdate etc. added to it;
• Notes # 29 and 30 "Cash (1985), p. 131" appear to be the same and could be consolidated per WP:NAMEDREFS as this has been done with the others;
• ISBNs and OCLC numbers could be added to the References. They can be found at http://www.worldcat.org/. This helps readers locate the books in their local library systems.

Anyway, keep up the good work. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the ISBNs and OCLC numbers to the references. TeriEmbrey (talk) 16:47, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Lang Vei/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 19:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: Two found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Linkrot: I am getting "Server Application Unavailable " on the links to http://tinhdoanquangtri.gov.vn This may be a temporary problem. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• That website is working fine in my part of the world, so I have no idea what is happening there.Canpark (talk) 13:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, I guess that it just isn't accessible from the UK. I shall assume good faith. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a(prose): b(MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   ''To accomplish those tasks, Willoughby had at his disposal one Montagnard, four South Vietnamese rifle companies, and three combat reconnaissance platoons. One Montagnard waht? Company, platoon? Done

   Hre tribesmen, ?? What are these? Montagnard? Needs explanation, I feel. Done

   Otherwise prose fine, accords with MoS

• I have clarified the first part by adding 'company', and added a link to the article on the Hre people of Vietnam because they were different to the Montagnards.Canpark (talk) 13:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a(references): b(citations to reliable sources): c(OR):

   References appear OK, assume good faith for off-line.

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects): b(focused):

   Through and focussed

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a(images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b(appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Licensed and captioned

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Just a couple of issues, noted above, on hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

   OK, thanks for the fixes, passing as GA

• Thank you very much.Canpark (talk) 14:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Battle of Lang Vei. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101119220905/http://baodongnai.com.vn/default.aspx?tabid=573tohttp://www.baodongnai.com.vn/default.aspx?tabid=573&ItemID=45238
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091020195136/http://www.doisongphapluat.com.vn:80/Story.aspx?lang=vn&zoneparent=0&zone=9&ID=1888tohttp://www.doisongphapluat.com.vn/Story.aspx?lang=vn&zoneparent=0&zone=9&ID=1888
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.doisongphapluat.com.vn/Story.aspx?lang=vn&zoneparent=0&zone=9&ID=1888
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101119220905/http://baodongnai.com.vn/default.aspx?tabid=573tohttp://www.baodongnai.com.vn/default.aspx?tabid=573&ItemID=45238

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:12, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Lang Vei. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140706021028/http://www.vva.org/veteran/0807/khesanh.htmltohttp://www.vva.org/veteran/0807/khesanh.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140706021028/http://www.vva.org/veteran/0807/khesanh.htmltohttp://www.vva.org/veteran/0807/khesanh.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:39, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The introduction is horribly written. Its basically an entire history of the battle from one narrow perspective frontloaded into the article. An all too common trend these days. 2600:1700:CA01:F20:AD0D:A506:2931:45AD (talk) 06:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Provide specific comments rather than just a general criticism. Mztourist (talk) 08:30, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]