Talk:Role of United States in the Vietnam War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vietnam Portal

This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

Start

This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: `<!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. -->` `\|B-Class-1=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. -->` `\|B-Class-2=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->` `\|B-Class-3=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->` `\|B-Class-4=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->` `\|B-Class-5=yes/no`
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	Southeast Asian military history task force
	United States military history task force

I just split this off from the Vietnam War article because it was getting too long. If you have time, please make an introduction and copy over sources, to help round out this article. Thanks! Ahudson 16:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

This will definitely not do as an article name. Cripipper 00:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's what the name of the section was in the main article, so... If you have a better idea, please fix it. Or tell me and I'll do it. Thanks for the comment though, amd please tell me if there are any other problems! Ahudson 16:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why did you Merge?

I don't know exactly what happened and why, but somehow several other articles got merged into this one. This caused this article to become too long, which defeats the purpose of sectioning it off in the first place. I'm not very familiar with the more abstract protocols of Wikipedia, so if I did something wrong tell me. But whoever did this, please respond to this message. Otherwise I'm just going to put it back how it was, albeit maybe with better titles and linkage. Ahudson 18:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The title 'Americanization' was neither historiographically accurate, nor a particularly useful search term. Likewise the article 'Foreign Involvement in the Vietnam War'. Several other articles have not been merged into this one. The only content on this page comes from Vietnam War, in an effort to reduce the size of that article by bringing American-focused sections over here. Unfortunately there are just some articles that are going to be long - and a popular and complex historical topic like America and the Vietnam War is going to be one of those. Cripipper 10:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

If 'Americanization' isn't accurate, then why was it the title of the section in the main article? Besides, as far as I could tell, this was a time period, not a themed article. Articles dont have to be too long; wars can be broken up by time period and summarized. Which is what I am doing currently with the Vietnam War article. Ahudson 16:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It was fine as a subsection within a larger article - it was the period of the Americanization of the war, but as a stand-alone article it doesn't really make much sense. Cripipper 01:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Cripipper, you might want to review some of the material you've merged into the article, because some of it has to do with the Vietnam war in general during the time period that Americans were involved, but is not specifically related to the United States and the Vietnam War.

Also, as you mentioned a lot of the material is from the Vietnam war article. Moving it here to reduce the size of the Vietnam article would be fine, however currently the same exact text is in two places. We need to figure out a way to not have the same content in two articles, either by deleting or drastically reducing the sections on these topics in the Vietnam war article or by removing them from this article. Heavy Metal Cellist^talk_contribs

I agree with your sentiment, and agree that it needs more work, but I think you are being unrealistically ambitious if you think you can have articles on the Vietnam War and The United States and the Vietnam War without significant degree of overlap. E.g. there is a significant amount of overlap between articles on WWII and the U.S. and WWII, or the UK and WWII, etc. The U.S.A. was one of the main protagonists in this conflict - clearly much of the text in the main article is going to concern it. Cripipper 01:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

What he means, I think, is that the text is word-for-word exactly the same, meaning that you should be able to "drastically reduce" the vietnam war article. I don't know if I'd go that far, but some of it at least can be summarized if a link to this article is added as well. Ahudson 16:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The text is not word for word the same: there are several sections in this article that do not exist in the main Vietnam War article, and almost every section in this article is longer and more detailed than the main article text. Cripipper 11:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

If not, it should be; neither article has received any re-writing edits (other that the Vietnam war intro), just moving stuff around. All of this text, with the exception of a few links and an odd sentence or two, were in the main article when I moved it out in the first place; what happened to it in between is anyone's guess, although it a ppears that for some reason you didn't move some of it back in (i.e. the My Lai Massacre and Operation Linebacker II). Ahudson 00:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I actually continued to try and cut down on the U.S. military history focused stuff in the main article to reduce it further: my goal was roughly two paragraphs per section as it currently stands. Stuff like the Pentagon Papers and My Lai are not particularly relevant to the bigger story of the war, though of course of intense interest to Americans, which is why I kept them here and not over there. I think we are basically working towards the same end; my main concern is that you are going to unnecessarily over-simplify the main article. Cripipper 01:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Nguyen.jpg

Image:Nguyen.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 Wikipedia: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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)