Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Hoa Da – Song Mao

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. → Call me Hahc21 16:30, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Hoa Da – Song Mao[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I tagged this page for POV and RS in October 2011 and nothing has been done to improve it since that date. While researching to create Song Mao Base Camp today I was unable to find any reference to the attack on Song Mao that supposedly took place on 24/5 November 1968, which surprised me given the claimed 900 South Vietnamese and 100 U.S. killed, which would have been impossible to conceal. Similarly I was unable to find any RS for an attack on Hoa Da on 23 August 1968, although apparently there was an attack on the Hoa Da District Headquarters on 18 September 1968. As the sole source for this page is articles published by the People's Army of Vietnam 22 years after the supposed events and there is no other supporting information I believe that the entire page should be deleted Mztourist (talk) 09:02, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:14, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. It's notable that all the references are to what appears to be a Vietnamese Army newspaper, which is unlikely to be a reliable source, even if it does back up the material in the article. The claimed casualties are obviously rubbish: the North Vietnamese forces generally took much heavier casualties in prolonged battles as they lacked the support weapons on the US/South Vietnamese side Nick-D (talk) 09:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as propaganda. Bearian (talk) 01:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.