Talk:Ngo Dinh Diem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
 This article is supported by the Southeast Asia WikiProject.

This project provides a central approach to Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Sufficiency of information / NPOV

I believed, you need to doing more research into Ngo Dinh Diem regime in 1945. Your sources are incorrect. I only read a partial of your article and your article did not make any sense to me. Seemlike, you're leaning too much in one side of the story? Such as, you said Ngo Dinh Diem, "He rejected the Geneva accord calling for unification and elections in 1956, using a 1955 referendum he abolished the monarchy and declared himself President of South Vietnam."

A statement above have two sentences that miss-leading to the public:

1- Ngo Dinh Diem and Ho Chi Minh would like the idea about unification and elections, but Ho Chi Minh is a man changed his mind and rejected the unification and elections in 1956 from Geneva. You want to know the reason why Ho Chi Minh reject this idea? You need to reseach more about it. I can not give it to you.

2- Ngo Dinh Diem did NOT declared himself for a President of South Viet-Nam? I let you to find this out by yourself.

I hope you will write this article more closely correct...

Best Regards,

David

Be bold. Feel free to fix any mistakes yourself. LuckyWizard 02:52, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Vietnamese text added to article

Someone added the following Vietnamese text to the article:

ngo dinh diem la mot con nguoi toi vo cung kham phuc,tuy toi la nguoi sinh ra sua chien tranh nhung qua cac tai lieu tham khao toi thay ong la mot nguoi dang kham phuc

Does anyone know what it means? LuckyWizard 02:52, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This text is pseudo-Vietnamese since doesn't contain diacritics and thus any translation is largely guesswork. The author is merely expressing his personal opinion about the subject. Roughly translated, the text says:
Ngo Dinh Diem is a person I revere very much, although I was born after(?) the war but through reference documents I feel that he is a person who should be respected.

[edit] Unsupported attribution

U.S. President Lyndon Johnson declared Diem the "Churchill of Asia." In truth, Johnson held Diem and his regime in contempt.

I agree with David partly, a statement like the one above is not backed by anything. How do you know he held Diem and his regime in contempt? Don't get me wrong I am not saying he did not, I am only saying we don't kow or is there backing for this in the Pentagon Papers or something similar?


It should also maybe be pointed out that Bao Dai himself was nothing but a puppet of the French in their attempt to recolonize Vietnam.

the imprisonment and execution of hundreds of Buddhists I have never heard of that, tell me I am worng but honestly i very much doubt he executed hundreds of Buddhists and if he did, he did most likely not do it because they were Buddhists, by which I am not trying to defend his politics nor policies towards Buddhism especially during the Monk Uprising but especially criticism should be justified and backed by facts.

the American ambassador in Saigon, refused to meet with Diem and encouraged military officers to overthrow him true of course, but it should also be pointed out that these officers had contacted the Kennedy Administration before with the question of how Vietnam would be treated if they overthrew Diem's government, also Cabot did not form a decision like that on his own, but ultimately it was Kennedy's

J-Dub 8 April 11:23

'U.S. President Lyndon Johnson declared Diem the "Churchill of Asia." In truth, Johnson held Diem and his regime in contempt.'
As it stands, the statement must be wrong, since Diem was killed at the beginning of November 1963, while Johnson did not become President of the USA until some three weeks later. John G Walker 13:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Johnson was the VICE-President of the United States until then, so it stands to reason that he could have said something while still Vice President, your logic is weak in that just because he is referred to as President Johnson does not necessarily mean that he was president at the time he said it.

[edit] date of death

Can someone confirm if Ngo Dinh Diem died on November 1st or 2nd in 1963, please ? Thanks. -- PFHLai 13:08, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)

On the Vietnam War page it says that he left office on the 1st and was killed on the 2nd. Hope that helps.Murdochious 16:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Â216.160.22.82 22:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)== various NPOV changes ==

I edited the "U.S. ties" section broadly, to remove patent bias in some areas and to revise nbnvhgfffffffffgfhhfhfhf

[edit] Last name

Which is the last name (family name, surname) of this guy? Diem and Ngo? — Instantnood 03:04, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

His last name is "Ngo." In many languages, Vietnamese included, the surname is generally listed first. "Dinh Diem" is his given name.

--Ryanaxp 16:35, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

But then in the article (in fact in many articles about Vietnamese people) Ngo Dinh Diem is referred to by Diem instead of Ngo. -- 14:56, January 25, 2005, UTC

No only so on Wikipedia. Even on American publications about the Vietnamese War (interestingly its literally called United States War in Vietnam) Vietnamese people are referred to by the last word of their names. — Instantn
Well, you wouldn't quite expect the Vietnamese to call it "the Vietnam War," any more than you would expect Caesar to have referred to the invasion of Gaul as "the Rome war," no? :)

In any event, the phrase most commonly used among Vietnamese translates more aptly to the "American war," not particularly the "United States war" (although the distinction is ambiguous at times, in Vietnamese as in English).

--Ryanaxp 14:31, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

ood 15:01, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

This article on BBC, and this article on the websste of Vietnamese embassy in US call Phan Van Khai, the current Vietnamese PM, "Mr Khai". — Instantnood 10:14, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
Vietnamese people are usually referred to by their given names instead of their family names. Thus NGÔ Đình Diệm is usually referred to as Diệm, VÕ Nguyên Giáp is referred to as Giáp, NGUYỄN Cao Kỳ is referred to as Kỳ, PHAN Văn Khải is referred to as Khải, etc. However, there are certain exceptions, as in the case of HỒ Chí Minh, who is referred to as Hồ, but that is a rare case (it's an alias, not a real name). If everyone is referred to by their family names, half of the country would be called Mr./Ms./Mrs. Nguyễn and another quarter Mr./Ms./Mrs. Trần. DHN 06:04, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

According to the Chinese Wikipedia version of this article, the surname is Ngo Dinh, and the given name is Diem. This is due to the fact that the daughter of Diem's brother is called Ngo Dinh Le Thuy. If only Ngo is the surname, then the daughter in question would have been named Ngo Le Thuy.

Make sure you read this!!! Arbiteroftruth 01:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

You mean Ngo Le Thuy ? -- PFHLai 15:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
See also: #Ngo or Ngo Dinh?

[edit] Title of article in English wikipedia

This morning, a wikipedian moved this page to a version including the full Vietnamese diacritics. I just moved it back to the version without diacritics, for the following reasons:

  • this is the English-language article about Ngo; and the great majority of English text written about Ngo (and other Vietnamese generally) do not include diacritics. In English, in fact, inclusion of the diacritics is of no effect (at best) or even confusing because they have no effect on pronunciation in standard English orthography. (Please note I am by no means an English-language bigot: I am a student of the Vietnamese language, and understand the fundamental role diacritic marks fulfill in correctly differentiating phonemes in Vietnamese. However, it is clear that in English, the diacritics play no role in pronunciation.)
  • The Wikipedia guidelines on naming conventions asserts that the most commonly used spelling in English is the form that should be used.

--Ryanaxp 15:20, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ngo or Ngo Dinh?

According to the Chinese version of Wikipedia, Diem's surname is supposed to be Ngo Dinh, instead of Ngo, as it would be perceived. That is because the name of the Diem's niece was Ngo Dinh (name here, but I do not know Vietnamese, so I won't type it).

So is Diem's surname just Ngo? Or is it Ngo Dinh? --Arbiteroftruth 07:17, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

It appears that you might be correct. Some people have compound surnames composed of their parents' surnames if they both come from prominent families. Both Ngô and Đình are legitimate surnames. A Google search for "họ Ngô Đình" (the surname Ngô Đình) yielded some references to scholarly works referring to such a clan. DHN 07:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
  • The surname is simply Ngô. In the Vietnamese culture (speaking of my own), the given name is divided into a few parts. Đình may have been a courtesy name that is inherited continuously down the generation line. Diem is his given name. For example, the last dynasty is Nguyễn Dynasty. However, all of the emperors have the surname of Nguyễn and courtesy name of Phúc. Hope this clears up some confusions. --68.239.204.87 02:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Have you, who came to be interested in this topic, ever been in the time ruling of this man over south Vietnam or known him directly through contact? History has spoken for itself, now if he was good or bad would not be a matter anymore because he was dead, he was murdered!!! The point is please be more precise when speaking about him because he could not speak for himself. He just wanted to defend south Vietnam from falling into communism, infact we have already seen what it was. Don.

  • For those of you who keeps on deleting the fact that Diem's surname is Ngo Ding, and not Ngo, please read this translated section from the Chinese Wikipedia

Original Text 吳廷琰的弟弟吳廷瑈與其妻陳麗春（一般稱之為吳廷瑈夫人或瑈夫人）育有二女二子，長女為吳廷麗水，由此看來此家族似乎為複姓吳廷，而非吳姓。此外，由於吳廷琰終身未婚，他在擔任總統期間，亦由弟婦陳麗春擔當第一夫人的角色。 　　

Translation Ngo Dinh Diem's brother, Ngô Ðình Nhu, and his wife, Trần Lệ Xuân (known as Madame Ngô Ðình Nhu), have two sons and daughters. The eldest daughter's name is Ngô Ðình Lệ Thuy. This means the family's surname appears to be the compound surname Ngô Ðình. Due to the fact Diem was a lifelong bachelor, Madame Ngô Ðình Nhu was effectively the first lady of South Vietnam during Diem's Presidency.

This is proof that Diem's surname is Ngô Ðình, and not just Ngô.

Please, for the love of all things holy, stop changing it. -Arbiteroftruth 01:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

  • I am very sure his last name is "Ngo" - a lot of people like to propagate their middle names within their family, I do not see how this implies that their last name is their "surname" + "middle" name. For example, George Bush (43) is George Walker Bush and his father (41) is George Herbert Walker Bush. I don't think we can infer that because people propagate their middle names that the surname then becomes "Ngo Dinh". The fact that the chinese wikipedia uses this, I feel does not mean that it is correct - although the article is about an extremely prominent politician, none of it is sourced and it is basically all speculation. All of the males on my mother's side of the family have the format "SURNAME MIDDLENAME" with the same middle name, and they call themselves the "PHI" family, and this is the case for all purposes, official and unofficial, even in Anglophonic format "MIDDLENAME SURNAME" .Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of people like to propagate their middle names within their family. Do this enough times, it may become "official" and the simple surname becomes a compound surname (unless the original gets displaced.) Blnguyen's family may be going through this process. Whether the Nguyen family of Bl becomes PHI is up to them. According to Chinese Wikipedia here, the surname of the royal family in the Nguyễn Dynasty changed from Nguyễn (阮) to Nguyễn Phúc (阮福) in their third generation, citing some redlinked ancient text. Do we know for sure Ngo Dinh Diem's surname is Ngô Ðình or Ngô ? Was an official change from Ngô to Ngô Ðình made earlier in history ? If the change was made by Diem's ancestors, the proper surname should be Ngô Ðình. Same goes for Ngô Ðình Lệ Thuy. (However, Lệ (麗) is repeated from her mother's name. Something is up, here.) What is the origin of the surname Ngô Ðình / Ngô? Anyway, just want to say that if we are not sure if Ngo Dinh Diem's surname is Ngô Ðình or Ngô, it should not appear so definite on the top of the article. -- PFHLai 15:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Devoutly Catholic vs Anti-Buddhist

I kept the reference to him being anti-Buddhist because of his raiding of Buddhist temples. I also kept the reference to him being devoutly Catholic, so hopefully the anonymous editors will leave it alone for now. If I'm wrong about this, please tell me and maybe we can resolve this. Primetime 11:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Prove that Buddhists are communists
    • Nothing in the article is proven. Unless we intend to delete all unsourced material in the article, we should keep everything except that which is proven to be untrue. Your reversion seems to be somewhat biased because you have kept the remaining information in the article. There is no double standard vis-à-vis the remaining information. --Primetime 03:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. / Democracy

I removed the line saying that the U.S. "realized that the Republic of South Viet Nam was by far the most democratic government the people of Viet Nam has ever experienced". This is irrelevant. Whether it was the most 'democratic' government Vietnam had experienced or not, the U.S. was still denying the Vietnamese the right to elect their own government.


I don't object to the deletion; it seems an unnecessary aside. However, I seriously question the reason for it. At what point would you think democratic elections would be possible? How can you "deny" someone something that they would never have had?

Hoya1 23:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unreliability of Information

Simply put, I would imagine most of the articles regarding any aspect of the Vietnam war to be mostly speculation. Between the U.S. government releasing nothing (or damn near close to nothing ) with regards to their internal planning sessions during the war and the Vietnamese government releasing certifiably nothing with regards to their actions, most everyone can claim a lack of credentials to arbitrate the truth of this matter, or anything surrounding the Vietnam war. That said, this isn't really about anything in the article that hasn't been said already, save that most of it (especially around the end) drifts off into questionably ambiguous and unsupported grounds, -- Walk0nwalls 18:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that most information may be subject to people's personal opinions, but the fact of the matter is that most things are. It is difficult to establish what is fact from what is someone's perception of something. There is plenty of source material on Vietnam available, the Pentagon Papers, the White House recordings, Foreign Relations of the United States, the State Department Bulletins, CIA and the Vietnam Policymakers, and the list goes on, the problem is that one must interpret these documents in the correct light. The Pentagon Papers were produced at the order of Robert McNamara, in an attempt to create a record of the U.S. role in Vietnam. It stands to reason that there was a lot at stake for the individuals involved, namely careers, and that the conclusions of such documents shed light on this fact, what people thought at the time, not necessarily what REALLY happened. The same would be true of the secret documents that you speak of.

I have added link to Avro Manhattan's book on Vietnam War.Bharatveer 05:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use?

The photo of the Times it's said to be for fair use. Here, it says: "Here are a few examples of uses that would almost certainly not be acceptable as fair use: 7. An image of a magazine cover, used only to illustrate the article on the person whose photograph is on the cover. However, if that magazine issue itself is notable enough to be a topic within the article, then fair use may apply." I think this photo shoud be removed from the article. --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 14:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

If it stays, it should give the date of the issue. It should be left in the article, but in a manner consistent with Fair Use. This would be easy, because the cover nicely illustrates the dramatic change in Diem's standing in America: how he went from a popular figure with the official support of the US government, to a target of assassination. But first this requires the addition of a date for the cover, followed by some text to this effect. 66.188.6.131 22:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
It's okay to put the magazine cover next to the relevant text. To use the cover as the portrait of the subject, that's not fair use. I've removed it for the time being. --PFHLai 22:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
You are wrong on this, but I am not going to get into an edit war over it. Fair Use tags state that

"This image is a scan of a cover of an issue of TIME magazine, and the copyright for it is held by Time Warner, the parent company of TIME. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of TIME magazine covers used...

* to illustrate an article, or part of an article, which specifically describes the issue in question or its cover

Not only does the article quote directly from the Time issue in question, but it also mentions how the US tried to build Diem up as a leader in the 1950s (as illustrated by the Time cover), before agreeing to his removal in a coup in 1963. You have made this an inferior article. Cripipper 10:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Cripipper, use it. I repeat: "It's okay to put the magazine cover next to the relevant text." That's to "illustrate an article, or part of an article, which specifically describes the issue in question or its cover", but do not place the image in the infobox where the subject's portrait goes (See Wikipedia:Fair_use#Counterexamples, #7.) Use it in the article ! Beef up the text. Even explain what the lotus, the torn flag and the sickle mean in the image caption.
Just don't use it as Diem's portrait in the infobox. By doing that, you have abused "fair use". -- PFHLai 13:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
And, don't forget to include a detailed fair use rationale, as per Wikipedia:Image description page#Fair use rationale, in the image description page. (The last sentence in the fair use tag.) Thanks. --PFHLai 13:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • No, it is fine to use it in the infobox, if it is within the terms of Fair Use. You may not use it to illustrate a biography if it is only being used for that purpose (as it clearly says in the counterexamples). It does not say you cannot use it in the Infobox, if such a usage is within the terms of Fair Use, and using this picture in this article is. But that is by the by, I have long since given up trying to persuade people who adopt an over-zealously literal interpretation of guidelines. Cripipper 13:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, then, I won't try to persuade you to stop the liberal interpretation of the same guidelines. Please feel free to put the magazine cover in the article next to the relevant text, Cripipper, before another admin comes along and deletes this "fairuse but not used" image. --PFHLai 14:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ghosts?

In the Coup and Assassination section there is talk of Ngo's ghost avenging his death. Where did this idea come from? Since it has no source at all it seems difficult to leave such superstition in an encyclopedia. Any sources anyone? --Hydraton31 19:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


Being vietnamese, i have heard of this supertition before from many people. however i am not sure where i can find a definitive source to support this idea.--Dvdlm

[edit] Neutrality (and also clarity) issues

Among the many who know of the political situations surrounding his death (1963), Ngô Đình Diệm's assassination was considered as the decisive political moment that, according to some, led gradually to the Vietnam War ''loss'''' 12 years later (1975), but, according to others, prevented South Vietnam from being lost 12 years earlier because Diệm had already decided to get rid of American influence and yield to Ho Chi Minh's invasive ambitions

The above quoted text is not strictly neutral e.g. war 'loss' - this depends on whose side you consider 'winning' etc. It is also very unclear, especially when it talks about '12 years' earlier/later.--ToyotaPanasonic 13:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] exiled to china

why would he be exiled to china if hes openly anti communist? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.139.62.233 (talk) 00:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] diem was a good leader

it is more and more evident to me that diem was embraced by most south vietnamese as a good leader, whereas in american history texts, diem is often portrayed as a corrupt leader who alienated many of his countrymen. my discussions with my father (police officer, numerous talk with elder vietnamese and some books (such as nixons: no more vietnams, moyars: triumph forsaken) strengthen this view. i suggest we give him an article worthy of the way he led our country. Tridungvo 18:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ngo Dinh Diem

From User talk:Blnguyen

Hello, Binguyen.

I liked a lot of your changes on the Buddhist issue. It makes sense to put the events of May-August, 1963 under the section regarding the coup. However, on the question of Diem's general treatment of Buddhists (under "Rule"), you are presenting one (albeit majority) POV as fact, and excluding the other. The revisionists make a good case, and their views deserved to be aired. If you would like to discuss this further, please contact me on my talk page.

I would also point out that although you have added some much-needed citations, they are not presented in a form that can be checked. Specifically, one cannot tell what books by "Tucker," "Gettleman" and "Buttinger" you are attempting to cite. I'm not sure who Tucker and Gettleman are, and Joseph Buttinger wrote at least two books on Vietnam.

--VnTruth 18:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

In regards to the general discussion about where NDD was anti-Buddhist, I did not conclude that he was an anti-Buddhist, but simply stated that the majority of scholars felt that he was anti-Buddhist. Hence the word regarded.
“ As a member of the Catholic Vietnamese minority, he is regarded by a majority of historians as having pursued pro-Catholic policies that antagonized many Buddhists. Specifically, the government was regarded as being biased towards Catholics in public servant and military promotions, as well as allocation of land, business favours and tax concessions. ”
I then pointed out some instances cited by the scholarly majority in their arguments that he was biased. The other thing to note is the WP:NPOV "Neutral Point of View policy" that requires that the proportion of space given to the evidence of various theories needs to be in proportion with the scholarly consensus of reputable historians. As a result, I trimmed and condensed the Moyar things, because as he notes in his own writing, he is very much in the minority "very few" and is attempting to change academic consensus. In the preface of his book he states
“ The revisionist school,...has published much less, primarily because it has few adherents in the academic world. ”
As such I removed his 27% figure because the Buddhist % is almost universally put at 70-90% in the overwhelming number of sources, rather than have a separate line for a very much miniscule minority estimate, and simply stated that almost all believe that there is a majority, and estimate it in the 70-90 range. Otherwise we would need maybe 20 sentences quoting many many people saying that Buddhists are the majority, to keep things in proportion. I also removed the religious composition of his cabinet, since I found one other mainstream book which has 3/18 cabinet ministers as Buddhist. Although people can interpret things in different ways, it is difficult when one minority group has a large disparity in the statistics that they use. It may not be particularly relevant anyway, since NDD's brothers were not cabinet ministers yet controlled the secret police, services, special forces, etc, and most power lay with the these bodies as well as the army generals. Regards, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
As regards to the citations, I will fix them up! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed the claim that Thich Tri Quang asked for all Buddhists to be above the law. The other books do not say that this was part of the agreement what was asked for in June 1963. I am disputing this fact. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/g/o/Talk%7ENgo_Dinh_Diem_a5e3.html"