User talk:Gracereed16

Adding to this page
Hey everyone. I've been working on this page throughout the course of a semester. I've added context to the truce as well as the consequences of the truce in 1968. Would love to collaborate.

Tet truce
Hello there! I saw that you created The Tet Truce recently, and just wanted to let you know that we have an existing article on the topic at Tet Truce (since 2005). I have moved your article back to a user subpage at User:Gracereed16/sandbox. I'd encourage you text to our existing page, but having it at a separate page creates unnecessary duplication. I also had some general comments on your article. For help writing articles, feel free to reach out to me or any editor (the teahouse is full of people happy to help). You may be interested in reading Help:Your first article and Contributing to Wikipedia for information on how to write articles. Consider reading articles on similar truces (like Christmas truce) to better understand what the article should look like. Hopefully this is helpful; it's clear you put a lot of work into the article and hopefully that information can be incorporated into our existing article. Feel free to reply to me here or on my talk page if you have any questions, I'd be more than happy to help you write the content! Best wishes, Eddie891 Talk Work 00:04, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) It seems to read like an Essay. On Wikipedia, we try and write articles from a neutral point of view, meaning we present the facts is as plain a light as possible, leaving conclusions to the readers and other sources. For instance, headers like What were the aims of the Tet Truce would be better phrased as Aims.
 * 2) You write a lot about the Tet offensive and impacts of the Vietnam War, but that isn't really necessary in an article only on a truce. It could probably be condensed into a paragraph or two.
 * 3) On Wikipedia, we have a high threshold for the quality of sourcing (see policies like verifiability, reliable sources, and identifying reliable sources). Sources like thehistoryplace.com, alphahistory.com, www.asiahighlights.com, and even Wikipedia itself don't have any claim to reliability, because anybody can write anything on the web. We prefer sources like books that have reputable publishers and newspapers with robust fact checking processes so the information is verifiably true.