Talk:Second Phase Offensive

Korea High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea.

Military history: Asian / British / Chinese / European / Korean / North America / United States / Cold War

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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	British military history task force
	Chinese military history task force
	European military history task force
	Korean military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Convert from Dab to Article

The title Second Phase Campaign might potentially be a Dab page for navigation to campaigns besides the Second Phase Campaign of the Korean War. However, creation of Second Phase Campaign (Korean War) as a Dab page between the two battles (neither called either "Second Phase Campaign (Korean War)" or "Second Phase Campaign") of the Korean War's Second Phase Campaign was ill-conceived. The accompanying stub Second Phase Campaign deserves to be fleshed out as an article covering the campaign as a whole, including such information about the two battles (and other aspects) of the campaign as is needed to help readers grasp the overall topic of the campaign, especially as to the relationship between the two battles. Presumably the respective articles on the battles each carries much information that is not needed to get an overview of the campaign.
--Jerzy•t 08:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously the miles should be added in

all good historians on this topic know the deets. That the Chinese had pushed the UN forces on retreat down 200 miles approximate. Yet on this article, I noticed that there is not a single mention on how far the UN troops retreated. Not a single mention. There is no reason to not add that in especially to an encyclopedia that is meant to document all significant info. Lastly the second phase also captured Seoul, and is the second the time in the war it fell. Nowhere is that mentioned too despite it's not even disputable fact. It Happened and no reason to remove it because you dislike that historical fact. 49.179.183.11 (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source you have provided is just once source, there are numerous reliable sources available about the war that do not confirm this figure. You say "all good historians on this topic know the deets" if that is indeed the case then you should have no trouble providing other reliable sources confirming this. Also you should read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, which states that the lead is a summary of the page and so if you want to add such detail you should put it in the body of the page and then summarize it in the lead. Mztourist (talk) 03:38, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hidden edits

Hi! I'm not too sure if this is the place to ask, but I was looking at the recent history of this article, and there are a number of edits that are crossed out, and can't be checked. I've never seen that in a Wiki article before, and I was wondering why that was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ConfusedAndAfraid (talk • contribs) 02:42, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ConfusedAndAfraid, and welcome to Wikipedia. These crossed-out revisions contained a lot of libellous content, and was vandalism. As it was offensive, that particular revision of the article has been deleted. Kpddg ^(talk) 02:45, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If that's so why isn't there any mention of that fact in the talk page discussion that followed those edits? Was this something personally libellous against another user? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ConfusedAndAfraid (talk • contribs) 02:48, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely, it was. Such offensive content removal need not be discussed on the talk page, and can be deleted by administrators. Als remember to sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ). I have left a welcome message on your talk pag as well. Thank you. Kpddg ^(talk) 02:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]