Talk:Ho Chi Minh trail

message: In the introductory paragraph's explanation of what the HCM Trail is called in Vietnam, I think Đường Trường Sơn (in Vietnamese, and with the English translation "Duong Truong Road") is more appropriate than "Truong Son Strategic Supply Route". Perhaps the latter term was used by Viet Cong bureaucrats forty years ago, but coloquially, in present-day Vietnam, and in the Vietnamese Wikipedia, [], it's Đường Trường Sơn. -- Paul Richter 01:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Truong Son Strategic Supply Route"

message: Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings):
* Headings must be in sentence case; in other words, words after the first must not be capitalized unless they're proper nouns.
* Headings should omit initial articles ("a", "the", etc.).
The dates, I think, look much neater in parentheses than following a trailing comma; but this may be more a matter of personal preference. Kirill Lokshin 04:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headings 

message: If you made additions to this article after 29 April 2007, your edits have been deleted by reversion. Sorry about that, but some no-name editor (24.149.147.219) deleted the entire first section of the article with no explination (as if there was one) as to why. Once again, sorry for the inconvenience. Just type it up to more mindless vandalism by those that can think of nothing other than stroking their miniscule egos. RM Gillespie 06:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversion

message: "In early February 1971, 16,000 (later 20,000) South Vietnamese troops rolled across the Laotian border along Route 9 and headed for the PAVN logistical center at Tchepone. Operation Lam Son 719, the long-sought assault on the Ho Chi Minh trail itself and the ultimate test of the American policy of Vietnamization, had begun.[56] Unfortunately, U.S. forces (with the exception of air support, artillery fire, and helicopter aviation units) were prohibited by law from participation in the invasion.[57]"
"Unfortunately" for who? - Francis Tyers · 18:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unfortunately?

message: There have never been nations with the official titles of North and South Vietnam. This is an international encyclopedia and as such should strive for historical accuracy and not cater to an American (or anyone elses) POV. RVN and DRV are only mentioned in the opening line of the intro (followed by N & S Vietnam to make the distinction). PAVN and NLF are the official titles of the organizations for which men and women fought, bled, killed, and died - and I'm wiling to go the extra length to identify them with their distinct units. The term Viet Cong was, is, and always will be a derogatory term cooked up by USAID for President Ngo Dinh Diem early in the advisory period. This was done to distinguish the guerrillas (who were then commonly called the Vietminh by the people) from the old nationalists. The US accepted and adopted this practice and, in turn, renamed PAVN the NVA, hoping to deligitimize both (not wanting the term People's Army to confuse the issue).(talk) 20:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the NLF's own-place article is at "Viet Cong," and that editors there voted strongly in favor of that name, I don't think it makes much sense to use your own preferred terminology on this page. It makes it seem like you have a political axe to grind. 65.213.77.129 (talk) 15:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical Accuracy

message: please change: "The area through which the system meandered was among the most rugged in Southeast Asia: a sparsely-populated region of rugged mountains (1,500–8,000 feet), triple-canopy jungle and dense primeval rainforest." to "The area through which the system meandered was among the most challenging in Southeast Asia: a sparsely-populated region of rugged mountains (1,500–8,000 feet), triple-canopy jungle and dense primeval rainforest." because the use of 'rugged' twice almost back to back reads poorly.
86.159.30.126 (talk) 12:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Thanks, Stickee (talk) 22:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 86.159.30.126, 19 October 2010 

message: http://www.flickr.com/photos/13476480@N07/sets/72157623953891370/
Takima (talk) 21:58, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images of the Truong Son Trail 

message: I'm used to seeing external links, but supposing there is a reason why this article has none, I'll settle for proposing one here—note the odd punctuation. --Pawyilee (talk) 15:18, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links? 

message: Is anyone interested in knowing the current status of the Trail? Should a section be added for the post 1975 history? User:tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 01:12, 5 Aug 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears to be a popular motorcycling tour, but is apparently littered with unexploded bombs. Frustratingly I can't find a good single source. It has been largely obliterated by jungle and the Ho Chi Minh Highway. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Trail today? 

message: Personally I doubt this article is close to the A-class status, especially lacking on A1 and A2. Beyond the citation needed issues flagged in the article, an excessive number of the cited sources are close to the US government. This would be excusable if there were no other sources to cite, but a quick Google Scholar search shows that's not the case. (t · c) buidhe 04:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-class status 

message: I have noticed well-meant edits by British editors. Without being churlish, I would like to point out that American usage is indicated for this article. Please do not resent the corrections.Georgejdorner (talk) 01:18, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: please see if this issue has been addressed and, if not, be more specific. The copy edit tag has been removed. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Tonnes" instead of"tons" used throughout.Georgejdorner (talk) 22:30, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Briticisms need to be corrected.