Talk:Agent Orange/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 13:24, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Comments
There seems to be very little wrong with this carefully written and well cited article. I note that the article has recently been through a rigorous copyright check, which found and removed longstanding violations; it easily passes such a check today.


 * I have marked 5 places where citations seem to be needed, or uncited text needs to be removed.


 * The lead image has no date, nor does it mention the Vietnam War (1961-71). It should do one or the other, and wikilink as necessary.


 * Chemical composition: please spell out the chemical names in the image captions, and wikilink them. You may give the abbreviations after these if desired, in parentheses.


 * Development: "during WWII": please spell out and wikilink.


 * Early Use: please use sentence case (Early use). Please also give dates of the Malayan Emergency.


 * Early use image: please remove mention of later Vietnam War from image caption.


 * Use in the Vietnam War: "Spraying was usually done " is inelegant. Suggest "Agent Orange was usually sprayed".


 * "including Arthur Galston": Please gloss him (e.g. "the botanist and bioethicist Arthur Galston)" at first mention.


 * "A weapon, by definition, is any device used to injure, defeat, or destroy living beings, structures, or systems, and Agent Orange did not qualify under that definition." This isn't true as it stands, as Agent Orange evidently destroys living plants, so we must not make the statement in Wikipedia's voice. Please attribute it appropriately, e.g. "The U.S. delegation argued that ...".


 * " if they (the VC) " - if this is an editorial gloss, then please format it with square brackets as [the Vietcong]; if not, then please gloss it with "(sic)" as it's a non-standard format.


 * "Rural-to-urban migration rates dramatically increased ........ Saigon slums." Does Luong 2003 specifically attribute this flow to Agent Orange, or simply to the war? We need an actual quotation here, either in the text or in the citation, to cover this. If it's simply to the war, the paragraph is WP:OR.
 * You've altered the paragraph without addressing the issue here. If Luong 2003 specifically attributes the population flow to Agent Orange, please supply a quotation (can be |quote=..... inside the citation); if not, the paragraph must be removed. [done]
 * Removing that paragraph fixes the question of whether it was OR, but the sociopolitical effects are now not adequately covered (i.e. the article is more unbalanced, and it was already very heavy on the health effects, just as it is very heavy on Vietnam despite efforts at balance with "Use outside Vietnam"). What we need to do is find some reliable sources on the sociopolitical effects, including rural depopulation and migration to the big cities; Luong is certainly reliable but we ought to know what it actually says. The article Effects of Agent Orange on the Vietnamese people should be linked somewhere (probably a link; it may offer useful sources on the sociopolitical effects.
 * I've had a look for sources, and can't find anything usable. There certainly was rural depopulation, but that was attributed in the sources I found to fighting, including artillery and bombing. I've therefore removed the section. If anyone finds reliable sources in future, they are welcome to reinsert a section on this topic. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:42, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Sociopolitical impact
https://books.google.com/books?id=PeFK5dkYZsEC&pg=PT95&lpg=PT95&dq=agent+orange,+crops,+people+abandoned+countryside&source=bl&ots=F-WA-MM2FS&sig=PPABL_fQsYcWTDgKVJ7R9mCR2lU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiLrIShq_7SAhWFTCYKHVifD0kQ6AEITDAH#v=onepage&q=agent%20orange%2C%20crops%2C%20people%20abandoned%20countryside&f=false

Hi, I think this link could help. Uptoniga (talk) 13:48, 30 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes it could, along with the RAND quote and citation, and Luong 2003, so you are authorised to restore the old material and to extend it. Please be careful to say that bombing and artillery, bulldozing, and Agent Orange spraying, including deliberate spraying of rice paddies, all contributed to forcing the depopulation of rural Vietnam, and the resulting surge of people into the cities. It is essentially impossible to separate the effects of these, given that they were essentially all simultaneous, widespread, and of long duration, and Turse wisely discusses them together.


 * Here is the Turse citation, formatted:


 * Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:00, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Lead

 * The lead section currently spends 2 of its 3 paragraphs on law, and says nothing about many of the sections of the article (e.g. Use outside Vietnam, legal and diplomatic proceedings) and almost nothing about Health effects, Ecological and Sociopolitical impact. Please move the 2 law paragraphs into the body of the article (a new section, International law, perhaps), and create 2 or 3 new paragraphs in the lead to summarize the contents of the article.