Talk:Battle of Vĩnh Yên

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

order of battle edit

can anyone do it? alright, we know the 1st Muong Batlalion (1er Bataillon Muong) was there sharpshooter (tirailleur), it's a good starting point ^^. Paris By Night 14:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

French Losses - Correct Numbers? edit

The article states that GM3 lost a full batallion during the retreat to Vinh Yen in the early fightings. The information box, however, tells that total French casualties were ca. 60 killed and 600 wounded. Is this a contradiction or did the French losses mainly occur at that very situation? Regards, A. Horn --84.149.233.253 (talk) 16:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Vĩnh Yên. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:15, 28 October 2016 (UTC)Reply