Talk:Huaihai campaign

China: History Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history (assessed as Mid-importance).

Military history: Asian / Chinese

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 not 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
	Chinese military history task force

Untitled[edit]

Ignore my last edit where i recomend to add a info box (as there already is one :) ).calaka 14:51, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Wang Dan asserted the communist forces applied civilians as human shield"[edit]

Why is this man's claim even worth mentioning? In his article, the only reference he listed was his "friend at Yale", "some old people in the country", and a playwright. He is not a serious historian, neither are his sources; in fact, there is no account of "human shield" tactics being used besides Nationalist claims and other unreliable sources like above. Why leave this piece of valueless and utterly irrelevant information in the article? 202.171.163.5 (talk) 01:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The addition of Wang Dan is irrelevant and random. It does not tie in with the preceeding points made, nor does his assertion carry any serious weight. Obviously Wang Dan himself has not personally experienced this, nor does the article cited seem like an original or well-researched scholarly piece. The addition of Wang Dang seems to carry political connotations without contributing to our overall understanding of the Huaihai Campaign. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.27.219.41 (talk) 04:36, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Huaihai Campaign. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326011824/http://cgsc.leavenworth.army.mil/carl/download/csipubs/bjorge_huai.pdf to http://cgsc.leavenworth.army.mil/carl/download/csipubs/bjorge_huai.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:08, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]