Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing

This article is about two South Vietnamese Air Force officers who decided to rebel and drop bombs on the Presidential Palace. It is a rather small event, since only two of them were involved and and there was not a lot of planning - instead of carrying out an air raid against the Vietcong they decided instead to bomb the Palace. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose for now~~ Some further copyediting is needed, especially for the lead section. Some of the tiny details should be moved to the sections below. OTH, the first paragraph at the 'aftermath' section has to be moved somewhere up. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 17:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have copyedited the article and moved the first part of the aftermath, which was actually the result of the attack. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 09:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fayssal posted this on my talk page. I hope he didn't forget to check back in here. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to keep my 'oppose' stance as i believe the issues discussed at this page have been dealt with. Thanks Blnguyen. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Comment Agree with FayssalF's analysis. Cla68 (talk) 00:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC) Cla68 (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not sure whether this is under-cited or not. Do people think it needs more citations, as there are good historical sources listed at the bottom? Buckshot06 (talk) 01:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Citations seem ok to me. Cla68 (talk) 01:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Citations seem appropriate to me. It does need a quick copyedit though, and a bit of rearranging. Good work so far, (as always). Woody (talk) 16:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. this does it for me. Good work Woody (talk) 10:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a member of the Project, but I support per Woody's comments. The copyedits by Blnguyen are simply excellent. — Rudget _{Contributions} 19:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.