Hi
From Hill To Shore. Apologies for that. On it now.
Mztourist, apologies for the delay. I have done a little copy editing, which you will want to check. Flag any issues up here.
The photograph's source seems to be a dead link. Any chance that you could fix it?
You don't say. I wondered if there was some triumphalist propaganda. Ah well, if there isn't, there isn't.
"Lacking the numbers necessary to openly control Cambodia, emptying Phnom Penh of those of its population who were indifferent or openly hostile to them was essential for securing Khmer Rouge control." That's a bit PoV. Possibly insert 'they felt that' or similar - assuming that the source supports this?
The lead seems brief. Perhaps you could expand the last sentence a little and add a new paragraph based on the last paragraphs of "17 April" and on "Aftermath"?
"Also evicted were Princess
Mam Manivan Phanivong, one of Sihanouk's wives, Khy-Taing Lim, the Minister of Finance, and Loeung Nal, the Minister of Health." Some semi colons to separate out the individuals would help this to flow.
The infobox states "Start of the Cambodian Genocide", but this isn't covered in the main article.
While its not explicitly stated, the execution of captured FANK forces and captured Government officials as well as emptying the city, including those who wouldn't survive the trek to the countryside, was the start of the genocide.
Mztourist (
talk)
06:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Genocide. It is normal in an aftermath section to explicitly mention any long term consequences of what is described in the article. This aftermath effectively ends on 30 April. But the fall of Phnom Penh has a number of further consequences, which I think could do with mentioning, even if briefly. The start of the genocide is one, which I think would merit at least a short sentence. (Otherwise the article looks good to go to me.)
Gog the Mild (
talk)
17:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)reply