Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Citadel of Saigon

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Citadel of Saigon

Fortress that stood from 1790 to 1859. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment for a wierd moment there I thought this article was for a building in the game StarCraft. It certainly sounds like something the Protoss would warp in :) TomStar81 (Talk) 07:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't played Starcraft for 8 years and don't remember any of the things apart from the names of the three tribes? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One protoss structe was named the "Citadel of Adun", and if I recall correctly was a prerequist for some of the advanced Protoss technologies. That was what initially came to mind. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support on condition that the measurements be made to include both metric and standard measurements. Otherwise it was a great article. Weel done! TomStar81 (Talk) 07:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Did some minor syntax edits. It needs a "See Also" section linking it to a few other articles. Good job otherwise.Enriquecardova (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Some copy-edits though found it in good shape generally. There is an awful lot of detail about the general history of the area - is all of it necessary or does it repeat material on other pages? Bigger is not always better. Dean B (talk) 05:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but it's important to show the historical context of the citadel to know why it was built and why it was so important. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:46, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — Would it be possible to find an image (a painting or drawing or something) of the fortress for the infobox? It would greatly add to the aesthetic quality of the article. Cam (Chat) 06:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the Vietnamese history records of the Nguyen Dynasty decided to whitewash this citadel, so there is nothing left. The two Westerners who visited as part of trade missions did not draw a picture but simply used words in their books. The raw architectural plan is in the archive of the Society of Foreign Missions in France, and isn't in any secondary sources. I'm not a researcher so I can't get into the archive. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:46, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't appear to have been any picture of the citadel, only the original architect's plan, AFAIK. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map added Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Spectacular Article (yet again). Cam (Chat) 04:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (mostly style stuff)

See MoS (ellipses) for usage.

Spaced emdashes should be replaced by unspaced emdashes.

For consistency with the rest of article, which is metric/(imperial), the acreage should be hectares/(acres).

Spelling consistency (WP:ENGVAR): mixes Commonwealth (realising) and US (self-defense) spellings. Needs a run-through for this.

Saltpeter and sulfur > "saltpetre" and "sulphur"?

The image of Nguyen Anh would probably look better ranged left, starring into the text.

A word or two explaining who each of the quoted visitors were?

Cash > "cash".

Incidentally, does His grip on the south was enhanced by a group of Frenchmen and equipment that Pigneau had recruited, although the magnitude of the aid has been the source of dispute.[11][5][12][13][14][15][16][17] really need eight refs? Can it be compressed?

--ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.