Talk:Bình Hòa massacre

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Vietnam Mid‑importance

	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.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is this correct?

I never knew that South Korea was even involved with the Vietnam Conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.154.124 (talk) 14:52, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. And any article referencing Al Jezzera is about as factual as aliens in space or the Onion News Network. Considering Al Jezzera and other right wing Arab informational sources claim that American soldiers eat babies, this article has about as much stock as saying the moon's made out of green cheese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moo Strength (talk • contribs) 10:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ref improve

Refs largely from Vietnamese POV and body of article almost entirely based upon Aljazeera interview with 1 Vietnamese survivor.Mztourist (talk) 18:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Refs all drawn from Vietnamese Government sources and so are inherently POV. A wider range of sources are needed to verify the event and ensure NPOV. Mztourist (talk) 13:09, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Racist (yes, Vietnamese vs. Korean can be racist) and hearsay allegations of massacres by non-communist forces, given the ABUNDANT coverage of US Incidents like My Lai, ought to be summarily removed until they can find supporting documentation. There would be records available from the US Government under FOIA if our allies were involved. Let the researchers obtain those and prove the truth of the matter. There's no need to fight about anything. Wiki should just not allow this any more than they'd allow the Nazis to claim the death camps were really done by the Americans...173.57.39.152 (talk) 02:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old POV template with a dormant discussion, per the instructions on that template's page:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

If editors are continuing to work toward resolution of any issue and I missed it, however, please feel free to restore. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted as the issue of POV remains unresolved, sources are almost entirely Vietnamese or 2nd hand reports from Vietnamese sources and so are POV Mztourist (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mztourist, since you still haven't made any edits to address the problem, I've again removed the tag. You're welcome to edit this yourself to remove unreliable information, add sources you feel are more reliable, or nominate it for deletion, but please remember that leaving the tag on the article indefinitely is against policy. Why not take a swing at fixing it to your satisfaction? There don't appear to be any other editors active on the article, so please improve the article as you see fit. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bình Hòa massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110430045002/http://www.quangngai.gov.vn:80/quangngai/tiengviet/chuyennganh/sovhtt/1341721_2903/ to http://www.quangngai.gov.vn/quangngai/tiengviet/chuyennganh/sovhtt/1341721_2903/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:06, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bình Hòa massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110808080044/http://www.quangngai.gov.vn:80/quangngai/english/homepage/20128761658_1995/ to http://www.quangngai.gov.vn/quangngai/english/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:05, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an INVALID article and should be labelled that way, as an "INVALID STUB"

Until it presents the view from the South Korean military unit -- preferably including leaders and officers -- and the eyewitness accounts from the South Korean veterans, then this article is just an allegation and a poor attempt at slander. Balance and objectivity require the eyewitness, personal accounts from both sides.Starhistory22 (talk) 21:46, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

agree.