Jump to content

Talk:Nguyễn Văn Thiệu

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

Untitled

[edit]

His surname is Nguyen istead of Thieu. — Instantnood 05:18, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Vietnamese are known by their last given name, not their family name. Cripipper 17:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

was this person a US citizen (Vietnamese American) or not (a refugee or expatriate in the US)? Article and categories should show this. Thanks Hmains 02:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IPA, Chinese

[edit]

Also please add the Chinese characters of his name. Jidanni 01:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found zh:阮文紹. OK. Jidanni 23:01, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Religion?

[edit]

"This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion..."

This is the biography of a political figure! How did it wind up in a religion section and how do we fix that? Rasp (talk) 22:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 11:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Nguyễn Văn Thiệu

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Nguyễn Văn Thiệu's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "j118":

Reference named "l":

Reference named "nyt":

  • From Duong Van Minh: Butterfield, Fox (2001-08-08). "Duong Van Minh, 85, Saigon Plotter, Dies". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-07-14.
  • From Nguyen Chanh Thi: Martin, Douglas (2007-06-26). "Obituaries: Nguyen Chanh Thi, 84, was ousted as general in South Vietnam". The New York Times. Retrieved 2009-10-11.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Nguyễn Văn Thiệu

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Nguyễn Văn Thiệu's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "mo757":

Reference named "m344":

Reference named "kh498":

Reference named "versus":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 07:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ngô Bảo Châu which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 11:31, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Family

[edit]

The article is incorrect. This man had twin daughters who attended Mt. Holyoke College and one son who attended Amherst College (which is how he came to live in Mass.). And immediately following the fall of Saigon, the US govt relocated him (paid about $150,000 - which was a ton of money in 1975 - for a house in Hawaii. I went to college with his daughters so I know a few things about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.163.60.15 (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Vietnamese diacritics

[edit]

RfC: Should the spelling of Vietnamese names follow the general usage of English-language reliable sources? Examples: Ngo Dinh Diem, Ho Chi Minh, and Saigon, or Ngô Đình Diệm, Hồ Chí Minh, and Sài Gòn. The RfC is here. Kauffner (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged reclusiveness

[edit]

This article's assertion that Thieu in exile shunned the media is not completely correct. Throughout the 1980s that was the case, but I recall a number of interviews he gave in the 1990s. He also wrote articles for TIME magazine once or twice, calling for a return to democracy in Vietnam, and made some clandestine attempts to bring dissidents together in exile (but found that many of them wanted to keep their distance from him). I will try to find a few sources. David Cannon (talk)

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Tran Van Tra which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:29, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RM closer @BD2412: being part re-opend below @AjaxSmack:, @Ohconfucius:,@Timmyshin: In ictu oculi (talk) 12:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Nguyễn Văn Thiệu. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 07:54, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:33, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 August 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page not moved. There was not consensus for the move. Consensus among the opposers was that the Vietnamese spelling (with diacritics) is appropriate and follows the English Wikipedia norms for the title. It was also noted that the existing redirects currently handle this situation well. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane talk 17:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


– Move of Vietnamese biographies to their more popular anglicised titles as per WP:UCN and WP:UE: The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage. See the following Google Ngrams for evidence:

I mean, WP:UE is pretty clear in exactly when diacritics/non-English characters should be used: when the majority of sources use them, which isn't the case here as already demonstrated. As I've mentioned in your other comment against this policy at Vo Nguyen Giap, you can always go forward and try and form an RfC to change it, but existing exceptions like common sense and ignore all rules don't really apply. In fact, I'd like to think that common sense is to use the most common name... ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 12:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why stop here? There are over 1 million articles with full fonts on en.wp. These correctly spelled articles have been built up over 20 years. @Rreagan007: are you volunteering to go through every article in the corpus and remove diacritics, not just in titles but in texts? If not what are you supporting here? WP:USEENGLISH evidently doesn't say "strip fonts", but leaving that aside. Are you volunteering to clean the accents and diacritics from the entire project? In ictu oculi (talk) 13:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think this is a Reductio ad absurdum argument. But yes, I think that all* articles on the English Wikipedia should be at their most common English name, which includes spelling and diacritics. I highly doubt there are over one million articles not currently at their most common English name, but if there are, then yes they should all be moved to their most common English name (*with certain exceptions, of course) in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Rreagan007 (talk) 14:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Peacemaker67, Necrothesp, and SnowFire: pinging possibly interested editors from the recent move discussion at Talk:Viet Minh, excluding those who have already replied here. ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 12:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And Roman Spinner from Vo Nguyen Giap - all other editors there have also been involved here :) ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 12:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My "support" vote is already posted above (17:31, 13 August). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so dumb, sorry! ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 10:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As mentioned in the other discussion, most older sources had typographical limitations. See for example this ngram for a generic name with diacritics which clearly shows how pretty much everything before 2010 was still largely constrained by the inability to write such marks. Now, as your ngrams show, this is no longer the case, and publications that can include diacritics, do include them, and Wikipedia should follow suit. Neodop (talk) 22:40, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Linking to another cherry picked source hardly counts as evidence - that source isn't even Vietnamese and has only one diacritic in the non-anglicise term. And all the Google Ngrams I've provided show, as per actual policy, that the significant majority of sources use the anglicised version. Even in recent years when such (alleged) technical limitations wouldn't a problem, Google Ngrams still shows that the anglicised versions are very substantially more prominent than the "native" ones. ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 01:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of bytes above, responding to those arguing for following low-MOS English sources:
1. There is nothing absurd about consistency, that is why we have MOS.
2. The current number of articles in the English Wikipedia is 6,136,347. Of these around 10-20% touch on subjects in Latin America, Europe, so will have accents and other diacritics in article texts and where required in titles. Anyone can test this with Special:Random/Namespace.
3. "in accordance with Wikipedia reality" is article reality : since all articles have full fonts in title and name space and are therefore every article which could have diacritics does have so, then the article corpus en toto cannot be "contrary with Wikipedia policy", simply policy is being misread (as here).
4. The main point I am making here is that to be on a RM lobbying for a change in article corpus reality, status quo is WP:DISRUPTIVE and why several of the anti-diacritic editors 10 years ago ended up with Topic-bans, blocks and even C-bans.
5. It is however encouraging that no one yet has said "yes but these are Asia articles, East European bios are Europe articles." In ictu oculi (talk) 10:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
1. Yep, and the MOS in this situtation says to use the non-diacritic version (WP:UE)
3. There's literally nothing saying that just because something can be technically done, it must be. In fact, saying so is a direct divergence from relevant policy
2. and 4. The existing wiki-wide consensus supports using the non-diacritic version, so I think it's actually more disruptive for you to continue to base your attacks against this RM and me on a discussion that occurred ten years ago and for you to continue to protest that this therefore changes up to a million articles - literally just lunacy
Also, please stop bringing up the fact that other editors got blocked or c-banned ten years ago. I've said this over and over: if you think I'm being a serious issue (other than just disagreeing with you), then report me to the ANI - otherwise it's just obvious you're trying to taint my character ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 00:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't WP:NCUE (specifically, WP:DIACRITICS) support using the non-diacritic name since they're used in the significant majority of reliable, English-language sources? ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 00:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose WP has for a long time embraced the diacritics set contained in any latin script in order to respect native pronunciations. It would be retrograde to move these back to non-diacritics style. -- Ohc ¡digame! 20:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP uses the diactrictics (or lack thereof) from the majority of reliable, English-language sources, so... ItsPugle (please use {{ping|ItsPugle}} on reply) 00:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really think predicting how someone (many of whom are dead) is going to feel about their Wikipedia page using anglicised characters is a great reason here. Especially when it goes against policy. ItsPugle (please use {{reply|ItsPugle}}) 04:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Kudos to the author(s) of the article

[edit]

Hi,

Kudos to the author(s) of the article.

The article is very detailed. Of course, one or the other does not like the article. It does not matter. In german wikipedia a similar article was edited. But it is more or less an abstract!

Nonetheless, the article shows that Thieu was a through and through anti-communist. Until his death. Unlike his "comrades-in-arms", e.g. Nguyễn Cao Kỳ (or Nguyen Cao Ky), Trần Thiện Khiêm (or Tran Thien Khiem). They become opportunists over the years.

Many thanks again. Best wishes for continued sucess!!!! --Beautiful Bavaria (talk) 15:19, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nguyễn_Văn_Thiệu&oldid=1194490713"