Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Xuân Lộc/archive1

Battle of Xuân Lộc

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for February 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for February 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because. I am not sure what more I could do to really improve it. One problem I see right off is that it uses only one source for information on the battle of Xuan Loc. But there aren't a ton of websites that are RS that any wikipedian could verify with a click. There are books listed but how often does anyone check out what they actually say? There is the personal, and tragic sounding account of the photographer from whom, with permission, I found a very good Image  So other than "find more sources". What else could be done to improve this article. I did not write most of the text by the way. Just did a bit of editing and found pictures.

Thanks, Hfarmer (talk) 22:29, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting read, here are some suggestions for improvement. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You identified the biggest problem yourself - the article needs more references from reliable sources. What makes a model airplane website a reliable source on the Vietnam War? Use the books. Cite them properly with cite book. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase with no spaces, so fix things like Xuân Lộc was a small town that occupied the key roads into the capital, Saigon. [1]
 * Article needs a copyedit - much of it seems to violate WP:NPOV, such as But for the men of the 18th Infantry Division and other units, inside a larger defeat they could find a personal victory, as they proved for the last time during this decade-long conflict that they could stand and fight.[1] Other places just need to be cleaned up, such as Following their victories in the Central Highlands at Battle of Ban Me Thuot and as part of the communist Ho Chi Minh Campaign. (this is a sentence fragment)
 * The photo is grainy from being blownup beyond its original size. It also does not identify who is pictured (which army were these soldiers in?) See WP:PCR
 * There are many short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections that should be combined with others or perhaps expanded.
 * The Prelude could be expanded.
 * The article seems contadictory in places - after the battle we are told The only thing [that] stood [in] on their way were small pockets of desperate ARVN defenders.[1] but we are also told of units withdrawing seemingly intact On April 20, all resistance were ended with the 1st ARVN Airborne Brigade withdrawing towards Ba Ria in Phuoc Tuy where it continued to fight.[1] Which is it?
 * Thanks. The only thing I take issue with is the photo and ID'ing who's army the soldiers were in.  I do beleive you can still make out the 18 on their shoulder patch.  These were ARVN soldiers.   The Communist soldiers uniforms were distinctively different. --Hfarmer (talk) 03:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, you know that. The average reader does not. Please provide context for the reader in the caption "Soldiers of the 18th Division of the AVRN" or whatever. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

llywrch comment: One idea that leaps out at me: How was this battle covered in the contemporary media? I remember reading about the fall of South Vietnam as it happened, & the impression that I had was that there were no significant victories by the ARVN like this one. An account of the coverage (or lack thereof) would offer an interesting counterpoint -- & especially to emphasize the importance of a need for even a moral victory by the ARVN. (I know the NY Times has their newspaper morgue online; that would be a place to start.) -- llywrch (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Great Idea. I will look for news reports.--Hfarmer (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)