Talk:Fall of Phnom Penh: Difference between revisions

By /

 

Line 77: Line 77:

:”’Support #1”’ reads more neutral and per Daniel Case 2 seems to violate MOS. [[User:IndrasBet|IndrasBet]] ([[User talk:IndrasBet|talk]]) 10:12, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

:”’Support #1”’ reads more neutral and per Daniel Case 2 seems to violate MOS. [[User:IndrasBet|IndrasBet]] ([[User talk:IndrasBet|talk]]) 10:12, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

:”’Support #2”’ as major contributor to this GA. [[User:Mztourist|Mztourist]] ([[User talk:Mztourist|talk]]) 03:42, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Fall of Phnom Penh has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
January 8, 2020 Good article nominee Listed
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia’s Main Page in the “On this day…“ column on April 17, 2020, and April 17, 2025.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fall of Phnom Penh/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 07:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Another for me. Gog the Mild (talk) 07:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Hi, just a friendly ping as this one doesn’t appear to have moved for a couple of weeks. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:30, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi From Hill To Shore. Apologies for that. On it now. Mztourist, apologies for the delay. I have done a little copy editing, which you will want to check. Flag any issues up here.
  • The photograph’s source seems to be a dead link. Any chance that you could fix it?
Excellent. I have changed the source to that in commons.
  • “Lt. General Sak Sutsakhan” Could you give Lieutenant in full, and link lieutenant general.
  • “of the city for 3 days”; “Thai border arriving 4 days later”: Numbers up to nine should be spelt out.
  • There is an almost complete absence of Khmer Rouge PoV. Did they not at least make official statements or issue proclamations?
You don’t say. I wondered if there was some triumphalist propaganda. Ah well, if there isn’t, there isn’t.
  • “Lacking the numbers necessary to openly control Cambodia, emptying Phnom Penh of those of its population who were indifferent or openly hostile to them was essential for securing Khmer Rouge control.” That’s a bit PoV. Possibly insert ‘they felt that’ or similar – assuming that the source supports this?
Nice attribution.
  • The lead seems brief. Perhaps you could expand the last sentence a little and add a new paragraph based on the last paragraphs of “17 April” and on “Aftermath”?
Am I missing something?
That’s fine. For some reason it wasn’t showing before.
  • “Aftermath”: “18 April” twice in two sentences doesn’t flow well. Could one of them be tweaked?
  • “Also evicted were Princess Mam Manivan Phanivong, one of Sihanouk’s wives, Khy-Taing Lim, the Minister of Finance, and Loeung Nal, the Minister of Health.” Some semi colons to separate out the individuals would help this to flow.
  • “Aftermath”: There are three single sentence paragraphs. Would it be possible to run at least some of them together?

Gog the Mild (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cites 3 and 9 need either ISBNs or OCLCs.
  • Cite 2: I think there should be a colon in the title.
  • Cite 7: the title should be in title case.
  • The infobox states “Start of the Cambodian Genocide”, but this isn’t covered in the main article.
    • While its not explicitly stated, the execution of captured FANK forces and captured Government officials as well as emptying the city, including those who wouldn’t survive the trek to the countryside, was the start of the genocide. Mztourist (talk) 06:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See my comments above re the lead and the infobox, and the three points on cites. I think that’s all. A cracking article. Gog the Mild (talk) 04:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I did expand the lead, not sure what else there is to say there. Mztourist (talk) 06:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. See my comment above. It’s fine.
  • Genocide. It is normal in an aftermath section to explicitly mention any long term consequences of what is described in the article. This aftermath effectively ends on 30 April. But the fall of Phnom Penh has a number of further consequences, which I think could do with mentioning, even if briefly. The start of the genocide is one, which I think would merit at least a short sentence. (Otherwise the article looks good to go to me.) Gog the Mild (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Spot on. A nice, focused, well referenced, readable article. Well done. More than happy to promote it. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:09, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Gog the Mild much appreciated, all relatively painless! Best regards Mztourist (talk) 11:38, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mztourist:
Hi! About this edit I reverted it as there seems to be confusion about my edit. This is a navigational template that lists the major topics about Phnom Penh, something that is expected about a major historical event regarding the city.

I did not foresee opposition to the inclusion of a city-wide navigational template.
WhisperToMe (talk) 07:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mztourist:. I strongly disagree that this template is irrelevant and am confused at the rationale. As per WP:BRD I can revert once, especially when I believe there is confusion with the previous edit summary. Anyhow I would like to use Wikipedia:Request for comment. I really am confused about why this would be irrelevant and would like clarity. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:11, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly it doesn’t work and secondly I have never seen such a navigational template added to a battle page before. What is the policy based reason why it should be included? Happy for you to open an RFC. regards Mztourist (talk) 07:14, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mztourist:, please review this revision. Does it work here? What browser are you using? I am using Mozilla Firefox on Windows 10 and it works on my end. Now, second: this is not just “a battle” but a traumatic event for the city of Phnom Penh that led to its emptying out. By any definition it’s a major part of the city’s history and relevant to the city. Thirdly, there’s more than just policies, but also practice. Great Chicago Fire includes Template:Chicago, and Great Fire of London includes Template:London history (from a featured article I must add). I’m not sure a policy reason is necessary at this point. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I’m still not seeing what it actually does to this page or anywhere else, so I’m confused as to what purpose you think it serves. I certainly agree that it was a major event in the city’s history and have linked this page onto the history of Phnom Penh, while its already linked on pages about the Khmer Rouge etc. What more does adding this template do? Mztourist (talk) 07:35, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To link to other major topics about the same city for those who have an interest in learning more about Phnom Penh. I created such templates about other cities: Template:Asmara, Template:Dili, Template:Kigali, etc. If/when the area gets so many articles, sections can be split off into their own, such as Template:History of London. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:49, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I really don’t see the point, but have had enough of arguments lately. You can drop the RFC and add it in if you think its an improvement. Mztourist (talk) 07:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


===RFC: Citywide navigational template===
Should a navigational template about the city in general ([[:Template:Phnom Penh]]) be included in this article about a historical battle that took place in the city?
[[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] ([[User talk:WhisperToMe|talk]]) 07:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

As per the above. Thank you!WhisperToMe (talk) 12:46, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The two articles compliment each other and one article to cover all aspects of the topic would suffice to satisfy the needs of a reader looking for information on the Fall of Phnom Penh. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:46, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. Two separate events separated by 4 years with different combatants. Fall of Phnom Penh (1979) is an unnecessary fork of Cambodian–Vietnamese War with minimal detail of the actual capture of Phnom Penh. Mztourist (talk) 02:57, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The content that wasn’t copied unattributed from Cambodian–Vietnamese War was a copyvio of web sources. I’ve tagged for speedy deletion. —Paul_012 (talk) 00:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Mztourist re this request: What would the difference be between “the fall of a city” and “its capture”? How is this phrasing different from the examples at the MOS page? Daniel Case (talk) 06:41, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“Fall of Phnom Penh” is what this event is commonly known as. The wording just clarifies that Fall of Phnom Penh was its capture by the Khmer Rouge. Mztourist (talk) 06:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How would anybody assume that “Fall of Phnom Penh” meant anything else? “Use the first sentence of the article to provide relevant information that is not already given by the title of the article.“
WP:COMMONNAME is about what we call the article. It is by no means a mandate for inclusion of the title in the lede. Daniel Case (talk) 20:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you open an RFC then. Mztourist (talk) 02:58, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think 3O would be sufficient. Are you OK with that? Daniel Case (talk) 17:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, RFC is binding consensus, 3O isn’t. Mztourist (talk) 08:34, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright then … Daniel Case (talk) 05:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How should the lede be worded?

  1. “Phnom Penh, capital of the Khmer Republic (in present-day Cambodia), was captured by the Khmer Rouge on 17 April 1975, effectively ending the Cambodian Civil War“.
  2. “The Fall of Phnom Penh was the capture of Phnom Penh, capital of the Khmer Republic (in present-day Cambodia), by the Khmer Rouge on 17 April 1975, effectively ending the Cambodian Civil War.

Daniel Case (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See the talk page section above. Number 1 was what I changed it to a couple of weeks ago, since I believed number 2 goes against MOS:REDUNDANCY. When it was changed back as “reason not sufficient”, I was told that WP:COMMONNAME was the governing policy here; when I pointed out that that applies to article titles, not lede language, I was told to open this RfC in order to get “binding consensus”. So here we are. Daniel Case (talk) 21:04, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it “Fall” with a capital F or “fall”? If the former, then 2; if the latter, then 1. Some1 (talk) 01:22, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t think it’s commonly capitalized. I also don’t think that whether it’s capitalized has anything to do with how we word a lede. What matters is that when a word in the title is self-explanatory, we don’t devote the lede to reinventing the wheel for the reader’s purported benefit.
    We have a fair amount of articles about, for instance, buildings or houses where the latter word is capitalized in the title. None of them do (or should say) something like “The X House is a historic house in …“
    For a more direct parallel here, see the more recent Fall of the Assad regime, which begins: “On 8 December 2024, the Assad regime collapsed during a major offensive by opposition forces. I don’t see any difference here. Daniel Case (talk) 02:08, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support #1 reads more neutral and per Daniel Case 2 seems to violate MOS. IndrasBet (talk) 10:12, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support #2 as major contributor to this GA. Mztourist (talk) 03:42, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Exit mobile version