Talk:Operation Dewey Canyon

NPOV?

The article states: Dewey Canyon was considered a very successful operation in that the Marines accounted for 1,617 enemy dead, discovered over 500 tons of communist arms and munitions, and denied the NVA use of the valley as a staging area.

• Arms and ammunition are typically ideology-free.
• Is it true that the NVA planned to use the valley (as opposed to the VC/VM)?
• Can we uncritically accept the number and "enemy" state of the killed Vietnamese?

--Stephan Schulz 11:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• Believe I fixed the first point, I think it is safe to say that yes that the NVA used the valley based on historic traffic on the Ho Chi Minh trail and the stiff resistance encountered by the Marines during the operation. As for the last one...it is a number I got from a USMC related site. If there are better numbers available then by all means use them but it is all I had at the time. Any battlefield numbers can be chopped up so I went with what was available.--Looper5920 11:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I'm a bit sceptical about any one-sided numbers, especially in such a messy conflict as Vietnam ("if its yellow and dead, it's a VC" and all that). The current text does state that this is a USMC claim, so its not to bad. Maybe we should make this a bit more obvious for the casual reader. --Stephan Schulz 12:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

If you think it is needed than have a chop. I am not exactly sure what kind of disclaimer you are talking about but make the edit and we'll see how it goes.--Looper5920 12:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, done. --Stephan Schulz 12:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. I just touched up the tense in the last sentence. --Looper5920 12:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Image attribution?

Why the "courtesy of www.popasmoke.com" when the image is public domain? It would seem to be publicity for the website to me, but perhaps there's something I don't understand. Perhaps the site should be linked if relevant at the bottom of the page, but I don't see how it is at first glance. Gabe 15:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Laos ops

Why is there no mention about Hotel Co 2/9 actually going into Laos not once but twice? I think this is an important part of the story since up to that point there had not been an actual operation into Laos.

• Nothing intentional. It did not come up in the research. If you can add to the article with referenced research then please add the info.--Looper5920 03:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I will gather some info regarding the LAOS part of the operation. I think it is key to the story of DEWEY CANYON considering Colonel Barrows made a command decision in the field that was totally against the official policy of not going into the neighboring countries. My reference is an authorized book written for the USMC. I'll get it together in the next couple of weeks and add.Robsantiago 20:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Looper I am wanting to cite directly from the reference book I've provided. I have been reading some of the copyright rules how do I go about using the text from the book and still meet the criteria for copyright here on wikipedia? I think that getting it from the book gives us a better look can you suggest a course of action?Robsantiago 03:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I would try to not quote directly. Rather paraphrase what the author has written as you would with any research. If you must use substantial direct quotes then I would place them in quotes and mention the book.--Looper5920 03:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Operation Dewey Canyon

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Operation Dewey Canyon's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Smith":

• From Firebase Henderson: Smith, Charles (1988). US Marines in Vietnam High Mobility and Standdown 1969. History and Museums Division Headquarters United States Marine Corps. p. 30.
• From Firebase Cunningham: Smith, Charles (1988). U.S. Marines in Vietnam: High Mobility and Standdown 1969. History and Museums Division, Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps. p. 31. ISBN 978-1494287627.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)