Talk:Battle of An Lộc

Fair use rationale for Image:Soldier on M-41.jpg
Image:Soldier on M-41.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 09:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:An Loc wounded.jpg
Image:An Loc wounded.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

order of battle of ARVN needs added to
got some other ongoing improvements i'm putting into this page at the minute as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZubenelgenubiA2L (talk • contribs) 18:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I added to the ARVN order of battle. DanielCar67 (talk) 05:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

"Strength" category in sidebar
Could somebody more knowledgeable than myself take a look at the strength section in the sidebar giving the battle overview? Specifically, it states the the ARVN and US strength was only 7,500, but one of the sub-categories lists 52,500 combatants. Also, the casualties are listed as 8,000, which is 500 more than the strength column total even lists participated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.147.119 (talk) 17:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The box clearly mentions that of the 8,000 casualties, 2,300 were in An Loc. The number of combatants includes those in the relief forces. DanielCar67 (talk) 02:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Casualties and De-Escalation
Maybe somebody can enter some published information with regard to the political support or lack of support from Congress, and the Nixon Administration's position, with regard to An Loc. If Im understanding the stats in the article correctly, 10,000 casualties were American casualties, is that not correct? So its shocking that in 1972, so late in the war, that the U.S. would suffer 20% of its total casualty figure of the entire war, considering that Nixon's campaign in 1968 was based largely on a platform of reducing troop levels, and retreating from Vietnam. From 1968 campaign promises of troops coming home, to a position in 1975 whereby Nixon became power-hungry, and he was infuriated by Kissinger's peace deal. An Loc was a slap in the face to anybody who hoped in 1972 of a de-escalation. When Vietcong and the NVC fought to capture An Loc, that should have been the catalyst for a peace-agreement and pullout. So maybe somebody can add to the article some information of the offical positions of both Elected offcials and Military leaders on the An Loc situation. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 19:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

At An Loc: 7,500 5th ARVN Division:[1] 7th Regiment, 850 8th Regiment, 2,100 9th Regiment, 200 3rd Ranger Group, 1,300 Task Force 52, 500 Binh Long Provincial Forces, 2,000 Miscellaneous units, 300 Reinforcements: 1st Airborne Brigade 81st Airborne Commando Group
 * where the US troops are here???????????????????Firepower by US Air Force and US Navy, is a support for the ground troops ARVN
 * subscribed MiZi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.20.45.17 (talk) 17:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Belligerents
Instead of calling the U.S. and South Vietnamese Belligerents, can we have a separate box, and label them "responders?" Its an unfair, inaccurate label to call both sides Belligerents, when the whole war was the cause of North Vietnamese aggressions. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 12:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Generally, what I've seen in sources is that regardless of which side is the aggressor, once it is general conflict (certainly after the years that the Viet Nam War had been going on up to this point), both sides are referred to as belligerants. 192.88.94.1 (talk) 20:14, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Why are you replying to a 9 year old comment? Mztourist (talk) 03:41, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of An Lộc. 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/20070609183306/http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/willbanks/willbanks.asp to http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/willbanks/willbanks.asp
 * Added tag to http://anloc.org/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:45, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Nguyễn Thanh Tiên is one of battle of An Loc leader
Base on what He told he is the one that the Vietnamese BBC News want him to talk about the battle. He is Lieutenant Colonel in that time. And please remember what happen in 1972, America recall all the military back. In that time who staying for the last is Him and His teammate. May I ask why his name not the leader broad? 173.0.25.91 (talk) 13:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Because we require WP:RS to support all claims. If you can provide properly referenced RS then you can add him.

Mztourist (talk) 13:11, 12 November 2022 (UTC) I'm telling the truth. Vietnamese BBC should have His record voice after the battle and Vietnamese war jail should has His document why He in the jail so long. Do you doubt that you should be the one to prove the untrue?
 * WP:BURDEN. Mztourist (talk) 06:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)