1964 Brinks Hotel bombing is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 15, 2011, and on December 24, 2024.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 18, 2009 Good article nominee Listed March 4, 2009 WikiProject A-class review Approved April 18, 2009 Featured article candidate Promoted A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 23, 2007. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Lyndon Johnson declined to respond to the Vietcong's Christmas Eve 1964 Brinks Hotel bombing, fearing that fighting during the holiday season would damage morale? Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 24, 2009, December 24, 2010, December 24, 2014, December 24, 2017, and December 24, 2020. Current status: Featured article

This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Military history: Asian / North America / Southeast Asia / United States / Cold War 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 Associated task forces: /  Asian military history task force North American military history task force Southeast Asian military history task force United States military history task force Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989) Additional information: /  This article has passed an A-Class review. United States: Military history Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force. Vietnam Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Cold War Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War 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.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is the image being used for this article really show the result of the bombing? There is no 6 story building in that image. I found this image: http://www.1stmob.com/op24.htm of what appears to be the actual hotel post bombing. You can clearly see the first story is completely destroyed. If the image in the article can not be proven to be of the actual bombing, it should be removed as it implies a greater level of destruction than what occurred. Imbcmdth (talk) 17:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An E-6 is not an officer in the United States Army (or its equivalent an officer in any other country's military). It is an enlisted personnel. I'm not going to change it, or quibble over the term "non-commissioned officer", but it's a mistake, clear and simple, in a featured article.--Reedmalloy (talk) 05:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, the primary editor has gone (maybe forever). So if you don't fix error(s), I think noone else can.--AM ^(talk) 17:46, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look why this article use mdy dates when dmy is in use for Vietnamese articles. I have found that the article's author, YellowMonkey, first used a date with this edit (mdy format) in February 2009. At that time, the Vietnam article still used mdy dates; hence at the time, that was the correct thing to do. Things have moved on in the intervening 15 years, but the date format for this article hasn't changed. I shall update it to dmy dates now. Schwede66 01:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What leads you to say that dmy is correct for Vietnamese articles? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And don't tell me that Wikipedia isn't a reliable source. Schwede66 02:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a reliable source for Wikipedia's own style guidelines. The problem is that the relevant guideline doesn't seem to support the proposed change. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:26, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(watching) That guideline supports the status quo of the beginning, which often is a rushed unsophisticated version (so not a good guideline in my book). It is a guideline, no more. I'd also go for the change in the name of consistency within a topic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:DATETIES seems to be a relevant guideline, as MOS:DATERET says "unless there are reasons for changing it based on the topic's strong ties to a particular English-speaking country, or consensus on the article's talk page."

If someone (likely non-Venezuelan) started a Venezuelan article using mdy, for example, that would be against DATETIES, as dmy is used in Venezuela, and DATETIES would hopefully prevail over DATERET as the article evolved. That's how I read the two guidelines; perhaps the guidelines need better clarification. (I'm a bit embarrassed for not noticing this when I promoted the Featured article, but perhaps back then all the Vietnam articles were using mdy ... can't recall.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The English-speaking country tie in this case would seem to be the US, which uses mdy. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So perhaps that only changed after I promoted it FA years ago, and I'm off the hook! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:43, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(drive-by comment after this was linked from elsewhere) Back in December 2007 when those MOS statements were originally added, the one that eventually became WP:DATETIES already said "English-speaking country", while the one that eventually became WP:DATERET was directly after it in the same section and pretty clearly referred back to it but didn't explicitly repeat "English-speaking country". Discussion at the time around non-English-speaking countries didn't result in a change to that language. More recently Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 193#MOS on date format by country resulted in "English-speaking" being explicitly added to WP:DATERET, and subsequent discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers/Archive 162#DATETIES vs. DATEVAR/DATERET resulted in consensus to keep that change. Anomie⚔ 20:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:MILFORMAt: "In topics where a date format that differs from the usual national one is in customary usage, that format should be used for related articles: for example, articles on the modern US military, including biographical articles related to the modern US military, should use day-before-month, in accordance with US military usage". This article is heavily related to the US. military. Apart from that, the statue in the article reads "24/12/1964" using the date format, which is what is used in the place the event took place. Should change to dmy format. Marginataen (talk) 17:40, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]