Talk:Cuban Missile Crisis

This article used to be a very good article. It was promoted on 25 September 2007 and demoted on 5 May 2009. This means the community feels this article was written very well, but is not now. You may see the vote that promoted the article here. You may see the vote that demoted the article here.

New article

I'd like to know if I could do anything to improve this article. There is a seperate page for the Bay of Pigs, should I cut my bit out of this article and paste it into that page for reference or leave it like it is?
Also, some words might be too complicated, but again I'm not sure.
Thanks
Gwib 08:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks ok, have done some spelling corrections. Perhaps simply pointing in that section to the bay of pigs article?--Hazel 08:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

And it is viewed from the USA side factual but the fact that one has Reasons for the war and just bellow it fidel castro does not seem impartial

Also no real explanation on the turkey missiles is given, when where they put in there? Why?

The article seems to be based on the movie

I do not have any answers but some questions

Why where the missiles placed in cuba

what cities could they attack

how long was the blocade

how many ships did it stop

also

Castro was already a comunist actually he revolution was held by Che has a number two man so the russians did not have to convince castro to comunism

Why did the USSR lost the suport of china and how?

Did the crisis in corea have importance in cuba?

What were the missiles?

Did the UN interviene in any way?

I think this article needs to be reviwed to encompass this questions

Things I think that need to be fixed to retain VGA status

• Words or phrases that need to be linked or simplified:
  • battleground (and I'm not sure that's even the right word in this context)
  • "new revolutionary government "
  • missile
  • "...USSR lost China's support over it"
  • "support of the Eisenhower Administration"
  • Communist state
  • American security
  • overthrow
  • chronic
  • insufficiency
  • Addison's disease
  • cortisone
  • air support

Formatting issues:

• "U. S. " (plus sometimes it's referred to as U.S. or US and sometimes United States - be consistent).
• Do we really need to format dates like January 1, 1959, i.e. link each individual part of it?
• nationlise or nationalize? At least be consistent with the same words within a single article, even if we can't be consistent for different words.

Poor grammar:

• "sites off of .."

An overdependency of explaining terms in parentheses after using them rather than simplification or linking to suitable articles or Wiktionary:

• "confiscated (took over)" (not even convinced this is a correct simplification)
• "goods (things to sell) "
• "When Castro came to power in Cuba, he nationalised American companies in Cuba, meaning he took the private property from those companies and made it the property of Cuba, to use as Castro decided" (hardly a simple sentence either)
• "A timeline (chronology) released ..."
• "...to topple (to take power from)..."

Other issues:

• A serious lack of citations for a VGA.
• "any important American city" what defines "important" here?
• "This led to the Bay of Pigs being a complete failure" POV.
• "Kennedy was humiliated in the United States and also the USSR" POV.
• "United States was outraged" POV, OR or provide a citation.
• "(this is where the movie and book, 13 Days, get their name)." needs rewriting, perhaps as a footnote.
• The Options/Good side/bad side reads like complete original research without citation at the moment.
• Who won the Cuban Missile Crisis? - how does one "win" a crisis? Needs work.
• Should not have links in section headings.

Unless these are fixed in the next two weeks, I propose this article be demoted to a regular article. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I didn't address all of these problems, but I made several improvements. It's getting very late, though, and I'm losing interest, so good night. ;-) Wilhelm meis (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

More TODOs

Hello all. I have started to work on this article. For this, I have copied certain sections from the EnWP article, and started to simplify them. A few more general notes:

• I don't know if we really need the Political Situation in Cuba before the crisis - it may not be relevant to this article (I added it beforehand to provide a little background); most of it is copy paste from enwp, with a little simplification here and there.
• It looks like there are really big holes in our history coverage, we do not have an article on the Monroe Doctrine, for example.
• I mainly focused on the intro (which now also explains the crisis as a whole. Certainly needs simplifying/linking, may be worth splitting it into a section of its own (that explains the crisis as a whole)

For this reason, I added a complex tag, remove once you feel the complexity is handled adequately. --Eptalon (talk) 12:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Political sit in Cuba before crisis removed (unneeded for the understanding of the crisis) --Eptalon (talk) 12:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

• There are indeed holes in the coverage. For example, the article jumps from America being worried about missiles to "In October 1962, American ships blocked Soviet ships carrying missiles from going into Cuba" without mentioning that reconnaissance aircraft had actually photographed missiles and sites under construction. Aside: This is the first I've heard of the simple-English Wiki; strikes me as redundant. But in any case simple English is not tantamount to simplified historical accounts.  :-) CousinJohn (talk) 14:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Maintenance of GA and VGA lists

As part of maintenance efforts for the list of VGAs and GAs, the article's promotion and demotion details were updated and the following noted for general information:

• At the time of this article's demotion, there was no process for the demotion of VGAs to GAs. As such, this article was demoted directly from a VGA to a regular article. Chenzw  Talk  07:53, 15 June 2020 (UTC)