Jump to content

Talk:Vietnam People's Air Force/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Improvement tagged

Why was this article tagged?

First part of article history: here (started by Pibwl ←«)

Um... let's see. No references, doubtlessly multiple inaccuracies, and in need of a general overhaul. The overall goal of any article, especially one as important as this in history, is to achieve at least a class C rating. I would not give this a class D. Although I was not the person who tagged this, I agree with doing so. If anyone has background in this area of history, please feel free to look it over. 71.82.138.19 (talk) 07:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

The title

Is it better just choose "Vietnam People's Air force", we already havethe word "People's", why must change to "Vietnamese People's Air Force"? (Ng2minh (talk) 07:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC))

American Equipment

Shouldn't some of the American leftovers still be in service in the VPAF not just the C-130 or UH-1 like the F-5 and T-37 they aren't obsolete so why aren't they using them.--Coffeekid (talk) 19:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Um, perhaps lack of training manuals, spares, and tools? Buckshot06(prof) 12:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Well mostly lacked of spare parts, and they're doesn't have any necessary of using them (basically, why should you using a C-130 for transport, when you're having 10 Tu-150 that can do better?)Zeraful —Preceding undated comment added 08:33, 14 July 2011 (UTC).

Mig-23 in Vietnam

In this article it is stated that the VPAF have 36 Mig-23.

In the Wikipedia article about Mig-23, Vietnam is not listed as current operator of Mig-23. Why???

Miguel, 200.55.142.140 (talk) 21:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)17:28 May 19,2010 (GMT-5)

Can we please lock this?

There are some people out there, who leave only a bare IP address, who are reverting info in this article to unreferenced material, and it's not right. Is there a way to lock this article so only people with an account can write into it? Openskye (talk) 04:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

File:HuanchuongHochiminh.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:HuanchuongHochiminh.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Radar of S-300 missile system in Vietnamese Air Force.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Radar of S-300 missile system in Vietnamese Air Force.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:37, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:SA-3 anti-aircraft missile in Vietnam.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:SA-3 anti-aircraft missile in Vietnam.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:37, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Flying Pilots Aces in Vietnam People's Air Force 2.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Flying Pilots Aces in Vietnam People's Air Force 2.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:The 1975 Spring Offensive attack Tan Son Nhat airport.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:The 1975 Spring Offensive attack Tan Son Nhat airport.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Flying Pilots Aces in Vietnam People's Air Force.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Flying Pilots Aces in Vietnam People's Air Force.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Vietnam People's Air Force.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Vietnam People's Air Force.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 03:02, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Vietnamese paratroops.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Vietnamese paratroops.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 03:34, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Monument of Wrecked Bombers in Hanoi.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Monument of Wrecked Bombers in Hanoi.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Monument of Wrecked Bombers in Hanoi.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

First aerial victory dubious

Although there was excellent reason to believe the C-123 fired upon on the night of 14/15 February 1964 was downed, it actually survived and recovered at Nakhon Phanom Royal Thai Navy Base. The C-123 was hit in the left engine, and rolled down out of the attacking T-28's view. However, the Nationalist Chinese regained control at a lower altitude. Details may be found on pages 158-161 of Spies and commandos: how America lost the secret war in North Vietnam, Kenneth J. Conboy, Dale Andradé, University Press of Kansas, 2000. ISBN 0700610022, 9780700610020.

Georgejdorner (talk) 06:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

counting to five

hey folks. in the box on the right they say they have five branches. but there are only 4 bullets in this list!

i guess that has to do with the paratroopers, but don't think i'm compentent enough to change that on my own. could someone check?

CU and thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.49.229.220 (talk) 11:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2

Last use of biplanes in combat?

With reference to Battle of Lima Site 85...

It can be seen that the VPAF used AN-2 Colts in an air raid on the secret radar station in Laos. Shouldn't this be added to the History section?

Georgejdorner (talk) 06:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2015

36 Sukhoi Su-30MKK.Can I Edit Back

I Don't Trust FOX 52

You have to provide a reliable source to challenge sourced material, we can't do it cause you say so that's original research, which is not permitted. Also trying use Wikipedia as a source, is not allowed per WP:CIRCULAR- For help please see the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources -Regards FOX 52 (talk) 06:44, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You Were Wrong FOX 52.Stop Saying About The Sources.The Truth Is The Orther Did Not Know Vietnam WAS ACTUALLY YOU STOP SAYING SOURCES AGAIN.I TOLD YOU AREADY,36 SU-30MKK AND 12 SU-27.12 ON ORDER. THAT IT!.PLEASE DON'T REPERT AGAIN.See The History Of Vietnam Air Forces On 2014 Or 2013.OK!.Kornet GSR (talk) 07:06, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2015

36 Sukhoi Su-30MK2 And MK2V

Can You assapted 175.141.22.214 (talk) 06:08, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2015

To dear FOX 52, 36 SU-30MKK AND 12 SU-27, PLS DO NOT SAYING RELIABLE SOURCES AGAIN, what I can tell you is your belief and source is definitely wrong. PLS DO NOT use "reliable SOURCE" stuff to protect your wrong belief. DO SOME RESEARCH and check out the wiki page for SU27 & SU30 operators. You can not ignore other's opinions and fight against truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Victor668 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

An editor may challenge any un-sourced material at any time per -WP:PROVEIT, if you want your entries to stay than you MUST provide a reliable source – further you can not use Wikipedia as a source per WP:CIRCULAR, those are the rules of Wikipedia! –Cheers FOX 52 (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Sourcing

McDonnell Douglas F-4 "Phantom II". This languid double two-engine car (normal take-off weight of more than 20 tons), made in 1958, initially intended to provide air defense of U.S. aircraft carrier connections. Top 19b0's "Phantom II", which won a number of global high scores in speed, was perhaps the most popular on-site South American combat aircraft. From a widely used source in this article

This isn't even English, never mind authoritative. Anmccaff (talk) 06:34, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Denied change of ScrapIronIV

I want to say this: +Frist: About Phuc Yen Air Base, now is Noi Bai International Airport (Noi Bai International Airport, formerly an air force base of the Vietnam People's Army during the Vietnam War, was renovated to serve both civilian and military purposes. - Have been translated from Wikipedia Vietnam - http://vi.wiki.x.io/wiki/S%C3%A2n_bay_qu%E1%BB%91c_t%E1%BA%BF_N%E1%BB%99i_B%C3%A0i) +Second: Base on Vietnamese military newspaper (I'm an user from Vietnam), I knew Vietnamese is built about 3000 missiles KCT-15 (A variant of Kh-35E anti-ship missilesis built by Vietnam) for Air Force (Uesd on Su-30) and Navy used — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiếu Lê Ngọc (talk • contribs) 14:59, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I have no issue including this information, if you include a reliable source. English Wikipedia has different rules from other Wikipedia projects, and inline citations are required for material which has been challenged. Please read how to properly cite sources for English Wikipedia. Thank you! Scr★pIronIV 15:11, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
I concur with ScrapIronIV please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources for further help –Thank you FOX 52 (talk) 16:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

list of aircraft

I just noticed that list of aircraft on this article and List of equipment of the Vietnam People's Air Force are the same/redundant. So, I propose to remove the list on this article and just put link to 'List of equipment of the Vietnam People's Air Force' page. Ckfasdf (talk) 07:25, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Abbreviation

In the emblem shown in the infobox has the initials Q.D.N.D.V.N which doesnt align with the vietnamese text Không Quân Nhân Dân Việt Nam, anybody know why they are different ? MilborneOne (talk) 08:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

That emblem isn't even accurate, the texture and colour are incorrect. STAIDCONTEXT (talk) 19:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Bias and Odd Grammar

In the 'North Vietnam' section the grammar is odd and incorrect in places. Further, it also has a bias, almost to the point of propaganda, towards the North Vietnamese. Some the information is also not necessary or relevant. This section almost reads like propaganda distributed in Vietnam to this day about the 'American War.' Wikipedia should be neutral.

There seems to be no place on this discussion to bring up the many uses of ACIG data as a valid source. ACIG was penetrated by hackers in early 2000s and their database was vastly altered. The pages that are used as “sources” are archived copies of those alterations. Their forum was subject to attack as well. I was a member there at the time. Their pages and database are all suspect at best. I strongly suggest alternative sources be found to substantiate the claims made there as they do not coincide with admitted losses by either side. CAG0001 (talk) 09:55, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Changing title from "Air Force" to "Air Defense - Air Force"

In fact, it is the entire "Air Defense - Air Force" is a service of PAVN but not only the Air Force. In Vietnam, it is officially referred as "Quân chủng Phòng không - Không quân, Quân đội Nhân dân Việt Nam" (Air Defense - Air Force service, PAVN). I believe that changing everything to the Air Defense - Air Force is a better choice. In fact, the Air Force is considered as a part of the Air Defense - Air Force, and in Vietnamese Wikipedia, they are two different pages.

To make everything accurate, I recommend changing the title from the "Vietnam People's Air Force" to "Vietnam People's Army Air Defence and Air Force", "Vietnam People's Air Defence and Air Force" or simply "Air Defence - Air Force (Vietnam)". Splitting the Vietnam People's Air Force and Air Defence - Air Force pages is also a good choice.

Vietnamese Ministry of National Defence mentioning Air Defence - Air Force:

Services | PAVN

Air Defence - Air Force | PAVN

--Hwi.padam (talk) 05:07, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Hwipadam

Emblem

So, I was attaching this file as the emblem of VPAF:

This file

However, my editing was reverted because "my source only discusses Army uniforms no specifics given to the authenticity of an Air Force emblem"
I just want to create this thread to provide some more pieces of evidence for the dispute and to furthermore discuss the emblem issue:

  • It is the emblem that appeared on the 'standard issued K-20 (Type-20) uniforms (a variant for the Air Defence - Air Force service) [1]
  • It is mentioned on the People's Army Newspaper (the official press of PAVN) that it is the approved "logo" for the army's services, including the AD-AF [2] (image [3])
  • The current emblem that is used for the page...it does not have any citation nor evidence of authenticity which are provided. In other words, it is also as unproven as my suggestion, and objectively speaking, if it is indeed an official one then perhaps it was recently replaced in 2017 by the emblem that I attached, with full evidence from the VPA's newspaper mentioning that it is the new approved emblem.
  • This artwork is made as replication to the published image that VPA/AD-AF never released the original SVG/PNG file, however, it is not any different with the File:Vietnam People's Air Force emblem.svg

And those are the reasons why I believe that my choice was not wrong and should be approved. Please friendly discuss. --Hwi.padam (talk) 07:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

The only discussion regarding the uniform appears to be about the camouflage. please provide something from the Government, and or official VAF website- FOX 52 talk! 00:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
So...is there any source claiming that yours is the official one? Anything from the gov, VPAF site (which is non-existent?!).

And I have quoted the qdnd.vn site, which is the official press of PAVN, how can't it be approved?!
[4]: Currently, we have attached logos for military uniforms for performances, ceremonies, military control forces, coast guard...; has been researching logos for military court forces, border guards... The attaching of logos, colors, and designs of military uniforms is to clearly distinguish troops and units, creating a distinct feature for the forces. quantity. Example: Army sleeve logo, the top is a 5-pointed gold star, below the star are two lines of text; the first line is: "People's Army", the second line "Vietnam" is yellow on an olive green background; Below the text is a cross-shaped, yellow gun icon. The bottom of the details are the rice paddies radiating from the bottom up, in the middle is the historical wheel embracing the sword and gun symbol, yellow on an olive green background; Surrounding the details is a yellow border shaped like the logo, the outside is a red border. The border guard's sleeve logo has a five-pointed golden star at the top, two lines of text below the star, the first line: "Vietnam Border Guard", the second line: "VIETNAM BORDERGUARD" in yellow on a red background; below the text is a yellow circle icon; inside is a picture of a soldier wearing a blue cloak, riding a brown horse, surrounded by a yellow circle, outside the yellow border with an olive green dashed border representing the border; the bottom of the details are radiating from the bottom to the bottom center is the historic wheel embracing the yellow circle icon on an olive green background; Surrounding the details is a yellow border shaped like the logo, the outside is a red border... Thus, it is easy to recognize and distinguish the units and forces from each other.. . --Hwi.padam (talk) 02:35, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

There are plenty pictures in the internet that shown VPAF personnel wear camouflage with File:Insignia of the Vietnam People's Army Air Defence - Air Force.png such as 1, 2 and 3. Vietnam air force academy also use emblem that is similar (or based on the emblem above). And if you look up on vietnam air force pages, you can also find that emblem (although it's not on the top left).
On the other hand, I couldn't find File:Vietnam People's Air Force emblem.svg is being used. and If I try to search this emblem, the result is back to Wikipedia (WP:CIRCULAR?). Ckfasdf (talk) 04:42, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Pictures are still not a reliable source as there's not specific mention of the patch and their relations to the branch - FOX 52 talk! 05:23, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Eventhough, it was shown on vietnam air force page? Wow... Anyway, File:Vietnam People's Air Force emblem.svg is also unsourced... I guess, we have to removed it as well. Ckfasdf (talk) 06:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
NOTE: like you wouldn't see a US Airmen wearing this as a patch on their uniform, the same could hold true from the VAF/- FOX 52 talk! 05:29, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
I dont understand what are you trying to say here.Ckfasdf (talk) 06:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
So...how about your File:Vietnam People's Air Force emblem.svg, is there any source claimed that it is the insignia? NOTE: your emblem is also potentially based on the past's patches according to its shape, color schemes and "designing language", so it is not any better or more sensical. What you have commented about my suggestion...I can definitely say the same things about yours :D --Hwi.padam (talk) 17:27, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Honestly not sure what is the correct one, so I will reinstate yours, just try to clean up the line on the image - cheers FOX 52 talk! 23:27, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
I replaced the SVG file by the PNG version of the file, as the QĐNDVN's line is somehow not correctly in the middle of the SVG file. If it is possible, please help me to adjust and fix the SVG file, as my knowledge about SVG and vector stuffs is pretty limited. Thank you!--Hwi.padam (talk) 21:06, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:37, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vietnam_People%27s_Air_Force/Archive_1&oldid=1138339459"