Talk:Cao Văn Viên

Versions of the meeting
This in reference to this change. I don't get it. The section at present reads: "Although he had long believed such a move was necessary, Viên did not speak up in support of any such plan until this meeting. Yet, he also did not voice his belief that the war was unwinnable if the Central Highlands were abandoned. Accounts of this meeting do differ, however. Some versions of the meeting have Viên remaining silent at Thieu's decision. Whichever version is correct ..." So Viên did not speak up in support of the plan, but did not oppose it ("voice his belief ...") either. In this case the natural conclusion would be that he remained silent. If there are accounts of the meeting that differ from this, they would imply that Viên either supported or opposed the plan, and said so; however the text just says that Viên remained silent. I don't understand the sentence. Someone please explain it. Banedon (talk) 03:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Ping . Banedon (talk) 06:06, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Viên stayed silent until the meeting. Two accounts of the meeting exist: In one, he voiced his belief the war was unwinnable if the Central Highlands were abandoned.  In another, he continued to remain silent during the meeting. I'll revise the sentences, but it seems clear to me. - Tim1965 (talk) 16:09, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Is it just me or is the revised version that you wrote contradictory with what you wrote above? Banedon (talk) 01:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

How many four-star generals?
The Dawson citation in the lead clearly says there were two four-star generals in South Vietnam. Adding two others and changing this to four four-star generals is inappropriate. If there are other sources which claim there are more than two four-star generals, then add the information with inline citations and discuss the discrepancy with Dawson in a footnote. Otherwise, this is a clear violation of WP:ORIGINAL. - Tim1965 (talk) 18:39, 28 April 2017 (UTC)