Talk:History of Vietnam

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

Southeast Asia High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Prehistoric Period run-on sentence + vague language.

"While the true original inhabitants of Vietnam were the Hoabinhians, they had of course been replaced and absorbed by the East Eurasian-looking populace and the expansion of preliminary Austroasiatic and Austronesian languages, although linguistic is not totally interrelated with genetic." So, obviously, this is a run on, and I would just fix it, probably poorly, if part of the run-on didn't require a rework. The use of "of course" in the sentence is incredibly vague language. It also feels antithetical to the intent of providing contextualized knowledge. The related article on "Hoabinhians" provides no context that would imply that this was common knowledge, and to be honest I had never heard the term "Hoabinhians" before this article. Spicygarbage (talk) 06:54, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reducing lead section

Am planning to thin out the overweight intro. If anyone has specific requests or guidance to offer, please put it here. Rollo (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Begun. TBC. Rollo (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you please simplify the modern history part (1945-present) of this article? I mean the points of this part should be retained but presented in a more concise manner because this part is rambling. 14.162.204.75 (talk) 14:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I'm doing it bit by bit. PS: this is about the lead section. If you mean the main section of the article, perhaps suggest it in another comment. The whole article needs pruning and rewriting IMO. Rollo (talk) 20:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this entire article needs a major edit, however I would like to remind you that this is a very important article and you should keep all of its points, just make it shorter and more readable. Regards! 14.231.202.51 (talk) 21:39, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Done. Rollo (talk) 22:34, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is a mistake at the beginning of the article. As the article presented, France granted full independence to Vietnam (State of Vietnam) of the anti-communists on 4 June 1954, this was not related to the Geneva Conference that led to the communists taking power in the North in July. The information and link you wrote can easily mislead readers. By the way, you forgot link about the Vietnam War. 14.231.202.51 (talk) 23:48, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted. Have rewritten to clarify. Rollo (talk) 10:55, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should use the link about the Fall of Saigon to mention the defeat of South Vietnam. 14.231.202.51 (talk) 23:56, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The fall of Saigon was symbolic but it was the whole offensive that put an end to the state. Can discuss if disagreement. Rollo (talk) 10:58, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. But as I said, since Vietnam's complete independence from France in June 1954 had nothing to do with the Geneva Conference, you should move the link about the Conference from the independence section to the division section, since the Geneva Accords signed at the Conference in July only left Vietnam divided and the communists in power in the North. Furthermore, you should add "later" or "in July" to avoid confusing the reader that Vietnam gained complete independence and was divided at the same time. 14.231.202.51 (talk) 11:26, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]