Talk:Battle of Hòa Bình

Vietnam Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / European / French / Southeast Asia

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not 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
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	Southeast Asian military history task force

houston we have a problem...

french union: 436 killed viet minh: 3,455 killed

viet minh victory? there's a math problem here isn't?? :) Paris By Night 22:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My guess would be because French forces retreated from the area following the battle. Technically, the Battle of Kursk was a Russian victory, despite the Russians taking significantly heavier casualties than the Germans. So it's a Tactical French Victory, Strategic Viet Minh Victory Cam (Chat) 05:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tactically it's a french victory: all the viet minh assaults were crushed. Strategic point of view: yes the french retreated but they suffered no loss during this retreat so it is not totally a strategic victory for viet minh.clems78

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Ensured that the article is: within project scope, tagged for task forces, and assessed for class. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Belligerents

Legion is part of the French army, no need to separate it from France. I deleted Legion icon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.190.97.85 (talk) 12:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From the beginning, French Union forces sought to draw the Việt Minh out to fight on French terms; however, they subsequently went on the defensive as General Võ Nguyên Giáp continued to put heavy pressure on French positions. French loss Hoa binh, this is Vietminh's victoryThandieu123 (talk) 15:51, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First of all the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle needs to be followed per WP:BRD so pls do not add this material until a consensus is established. Secondly, and I'll be quite frank, given the history of sock puppetry on this article I'm suspicious of whether good faith is being shown here. What accessible reliable sources, that can be verified by other users, are there that support your opinion about this (see WP:RS and WP:V)? The one you provided I can't read and given the history here far more evidence is req'd to WP:PROVEIT in my opinion at least. Anotherclown (talk) 22:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Further to this. I have now added something on the assessment of French and Viet Minh losses from both Tucker and Davidson (once I was able to actually access it) as they fit both seem to the bill as reliable sources and I was able to verify via Google Books. Re your statement above I've requested a citation and given that it appears to be in dispute, discussion and consensus will still be required before any changes are implemented per my last. Anotherclown (talk) 00:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Claims made in Battle of Nà Sản about this battle

The article for the Battle of Nà Sản claims that the French were winning when General Salan decided to withdraw the French army. This claim doesn't appear to square with this article. It'd be appreciated if a knowledgeable editor can check the description of the battle on that page. Thanks! Banedon (talk) 04:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Hòa Bình. 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:

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) 17:13, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]