Talk:Operation Bushmaster II

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Operation Bushmaster II article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Asian / North America / Southeast Asia / United States

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 articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	North American military history task force
	Southeast Asian military history task force
	United States military history task force

U.S. victory?[edit]

The source doesn't say anything about a U.S. victory. According to the template:Infobox Military Conflict, "The choice of term should reflect what the sources say. In cases where the standard terms do not accurately describe the outcome, a link to the section of the article where the result is discussed in detail (such as "See the 'Aftermath' section") should be used". So according to the spirit of the RfC on talk:Operation Léa, "see 'Aftermath'" would be a more appropriate choice. Dino nam (talk) 07:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This could equally be called the Battle of Ap Nha Mat, so victory is appropriate, I will locate more refs but the victory is WP:BLUE. Mztourist (talk) 08:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mztourist: I can't see what is relevant about whether this was an op or battle. You must follow the template:Infobox Military Conflict; find an RS to prove it's either side victory, otherwise it would be OR. Victory or defeat is a complicated issue to be analyzed, so there's nothing WP:BLUE here; you're contradicting to your own viewpont in talk:Operation Léa. Dino nam (talk) 10:38, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dino nam to quote Cinderella's useful dictionary definition on Operation Lea Victory': "1. the ultimate and decisive superiority in a battle or any contest. 2. a success or triumph won over the enemy in battle or war, or an engagement ending in such a triumph: naval victories. 3.any success or successful performance achieved over an adversary or opponent, opposition, difficulties, etc.' The statistics clearly show that the US achieved victory by any objective measure, so its WP:BLUE, but as I know that you never accept that the Viet Cong/PAVN were defeated I will locate more WP:RS to support this. Mztourist (talk) 03:29, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mztourist: The method you use (Carland's source + dictionary) to reach the conclusion can be considered a WP:SYNTH, so it's no way WP:BLUE. Personally, I'd like a more flexible approach on WP:BLUE and template:Infobox Military Conflict, but it's you and some other editors who have reached the consensus with the RfC on talk:Operation Léa before I have time to have any further counter-argument, so I have no other choice but to follow the principle. Dino nam (talk) 07:32, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]