Talk:Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Third Party References 2 what?? 3 Republican Party "Honors" 4 Awards to Prince Buu Chanh 5 So Outrageous as to be Funny 6 International Monarchist League 7 Oh please... 8 Research 9 Request for Comment 10 Answer for Request for Comment 11 so, now it's a 'holy war'... 12 Lets research together 13 Are you listening?! 14 Confirmation 15 Stop making false statements 16 Questions from User:Hawstom 17 Answer to USER Hawstom questions 18 Evidence 19 party baubles 20 Request from Dunc and Tom 21 Double Talk 22 Load of Garbage 23 POW-MIA 24 For a start... 25 Tom's edits 26 false minor edits and plagarism 27 Let's Get One Thing Clear 28 banned from editing "Vietnamese Monarchs and history of Vietnam" 29 Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom

Third Party References

Below are Third party references (Neutral Sources) as to establish that the title "Prince" and the Vietnamese Imperial Family Council that assigned the Title Regent.

Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is by birth a Prince of the Nguyen Dynasty.

1. Here is a Third Party that states he is a Prince please look under listed HONORARY MEMBER on this website

Link 1: http://www.almanach.be/about/

2. Also Here is a Official Royal Letter that Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh of Vietnam recieved a Third Party Official Royal Letter from King Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia in February 17, 2004.

Note- "Prince-Regent" Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh,

Link 2: http://www.prweb.com/prfiles/2004/07/07/139622/SecondFormalLetterofKingSihanouk.JPG

3. If you goto The International Monarchist League on Monarchy.net a Third Party organization please scroll down to VIETNAM and you will see that Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is listed as well as Prince Buu Phuc who assigned Prince Buu Chanh as the Regent of the Nguyen Dynasty.

Link 3: http://www.monarchy.net/directory.htm#

Jimmyvanthach 15:35, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

what??

If he is an 'HONORARY MEMBER' of the almanach group, how on earth could that be considered as a "neutral" source as to the legality of his claim to royal status?

The other information given is all from associated groups, or include disclaimers saying that do not vouch for any of the content listed. Try again.

---

Prince Buu Chanh became a Honorary Member after he was researched and and included in the book. --Jimmyvanthach 15:04, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Republican Party "Honors"

The "prestige" of the medal and 'name on the wall' honors this Buu Chanh supposedly received from the Republican Party can be seen at the Party's own website. All of these so-called honors are readily available to anyone in return for a sufficient donation to the GOP.

http://www.nrsc.org/nrscweb/e-activists/platinum.shtml

http://www.nrsc.org/memberprograms/taskforce/benefits.shtml

NguyenHue

Awards to Prince Buu Chanh

I contacted the Imperial Office and I was notified that the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom that Prince Buu Chanh was awarded was not due to a donation.

Also Princee Buu Chanh was awarded him the Eternal Flame of Freedom Brass Medallion and he was nominated to have his name engraved on the Ronald Reagan Eternal Flame of Freedom monument in Washington D.C.

Here is a complete list of awards that Prince Buu Chanh has been given.

I have emailed the organizations at it has been confirmed, anyone can contact them for confirmation too.

Honors Presented to H.I.H. Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh

Jimmyvanthach 18:21, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

So Outrageous as to be Funny

Really, there should be no place on an encyclopedia for anything that cannot be concretely verified, certainly no place for Vietnamese Americans who go around calling themselves "princes". Most Vietnamese anywhere are related to a king somewhere back in their ancestry. This phony has been going around for years trying to get people to take him seriously and believe his outrageous claims of which, so far, he is the only source of information.

There is no evidence for, actually, anything in this article, it is all simply what he tells people and what he wants people to believe. Sadly, the Vietnamese exile community is full of people like this (most don't claim to be princes - even they're not that ridiculous) who start some "freedom" party in the effort to part honest, patriotic Vietnamese from their hard-earned cash.

all very pathetic really.

---

It seems like you have your own opinion, if you feel that Prince Buu Chanh is attempting "effort to part honest, patriotic Vietnamese from their hard-earned cash" (Your above words NGUYENHUE)

Please provide a court docket number? or news article pertaining to this?

If you do not then you owe a apology, that is a very negative comment to make and no place on wikipedia community for your statement without any references. --Jimmyvanthach 17:36, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

International Monarchist League

Concerning The Dr. My-Van Tran, I have contacted her and she confirmed the documents that are provided to her about Nguyen Dynasty document of Emperor Bao Dai.

I have researched this issue of the biography with *Dr. My-Van Tran an Asian Vietnamese Professor and confirmed the information please read her Scholar papers

You can also contact Tran Van Ba the former Colonel in Chief of Emeperor Bao Dai and also the late Emperor's mother Dowager Empress Doan Huy Hoang Thi Hau Tu Cung.

His email is Tran_Van_Ba@hotmail.com

Here is his site as Chancellor of Order of Dragon of Annam.

Tran Van Ba

I have wrote him email and he is confirmed the information since he was Emperor Bao Dai Colonel-in-Chief and was present at Imperial Audience Emperor Bao Dai held and establish Vietnamese Imperial Family Council and assign him advisor.

Please look over information concerning the Association de l'Imperiale Familie du Vietnam and it also names Prince Buu Chanh.

VIETNAM

• Association de l'Imperiale Familie du Vietnam Arc-En-Ciel-Bellatrix, rue du Colonel Gassin, F-0600 Nice, France. Tel: +33 4 93851289 Contact: Prince Buu-Phuc

• The Vietnamese Imperial Family Overseas Council & South East Asia Imperial & Royal League c/o P.O. Box 6621 Aurora, Illinois 60598-0621, USA.

Tel & Fax: +1 630 499 7964

Contact: HIH Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh of Vietnam

The link is: International Monarchist League Directory

The International Monarchist League's aim is, quite simply, to support the principle of monarchy. It is independent of any political party or group, and its subscribers are drawn from many countries and all walks of life. As well as receiving the quarterly journal, Monarchy, subscribers have the opportunity to take part in the activities arranged by Headquarters.

All statements I have collected and researched myself and anyone can do this by simply writing or emailing them for confirmation, I have provided the refrences, and recieved the information form them providing the bao dai history

If you have anyting that has been documented please provide the link here or site so that I may also research it, I would like to find out more information myself it would be great to knowJimmyvanthach 21:55, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Oh please...

Nothing here but more empty claims from unknown sources. All this proves is that you continue to expect other people to disprove what you yourself cannot prove. You are the one making these ridiculous claims, so it is your responsibility to prove them, not anyone else here.

---

http://www.almanach.be/about/ Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is listed in the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES as a Prince.

After his induction he was named a Honorary Member of ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES.

The first ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was published in 1818 as the Nouvel Almanach de Poche de Bruxelles pour 1818, by M.E. Rampelbergh, Imprimeur-Libraire in Brussels.--Jimmyvanthach 15:09, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Research

I have not made any claims, the information is easily can be obtained by anyone, from contacting or emailing to confirm.

I have provided the references that confirm the information, I have been researching the information that you provided about Prince George Vinh San, statement, and have not found anything, regarding a newspaper article, or third party article concerning his statement of not supporting Prince Buu Chanh.

If you can find it, please provide it here, I would more than gladly agree with you on that issue, that is not a problem, lets just work together to make this biography work best.

I am providing a link that I researched from * Third Party the Apostolate for Holy Relics.

This organization is widely known thoughout the world in Catholic Relics and regards Prince Buu Chanh in high regards, for his work for all religions in Vietnam.

If there is other confirming statements or articles you may have or articles pertain to other Vietnamese Prince please, 216.183.37.158 or NguyenHue just provide it here in the discussion and I will converse with you on the issue and agree with you and work with you to consoldiate it within the biography.Jimmyvanthach 15:44, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Request for Comment

This article does seem to need something more. It currently reads like an honorary citation, rather than an encyclopedia article. As such, it is biased and needs work. I would like to see the following here:

• Some idea of the size of the group that calls him Prince.
• Why he is notable and included here (other than a list of accomplishments/commendations).
• Any contestants to his claim of Prince.

Tom - Talk 21:55, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Answer for Request for Comment

Tom, here is the information you requested about Prince Buu Chanh of Vietnam. These are news articles that the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty released concerning their movement to help the people of Vietnam.

This is recent news of exiled Vietnamese Prince Buu Chanh of the Nguyen Dynasty living in the United States with photos, please click on photos and they will appear larger.

Link 1: WTO must ensure Vietnam Must Bring Closure to the MIA/POW and Human Rights Before Being Admitted

Link 2: 2004 New Year Message From The Imperial Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam

Link 3: The Imperial Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam opposes the Communist Government of Vietnam’s effort to suspend the Transnational Radical Party concerning Mr. Ksor a member general of the council and the President of The Montagnard Foundation

Link 4: A Royal Solution for a Nationalist Vietnam

The above documents, if you look through them, and also view the photos you will see support that Prince Buu Chanh has support of Vietnamese as well as Americans to help the people of Vietnam.

The Nguyen Dynasty is not interested in the throne, only the improvement of social programs (Human Rights, Freedom of Speech, Religion) for the people of Vietnam.

If the people chose to have a Constitutional Monarchy it is up to them, and the Crown Prince Bao Long would be the obvious choice if he accepts.

As Prince Buu Chanh is role is in the capacity of only a Regent working on behalf of the Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam, for his people.

Also here is support that Prince Buu Chanh has of Vietnamese Cao Dai Temple in California.

Link 5: Cao Dai religious leaders in California and Vietnamese Americans supporters

Furthermore, here is the Leadership Structure of the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam Jimmyvanthach 18:07, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

so, now it's a 'holy war'...

First of all, you certainly are making claims, you're claiming that some Vietnamese American is a "prince" in a republic that does not allow such airs and that he is "regent" of a monarchy that was legally abolished in 1945. I have no need or desire to email anyone to confirm any of this, it is all historical fact. Your lack of evidence is proof enough.

You have provided no sources whatsoever. Since you are so keen on having others email people to backup what you say, why not email Claude Vinh San yourself and ask him what he thinks of this guy who decided to declare himself "boss" of his entire extended family. The Vinh San simply accept reality, which you seem unable to do, and Claude does not even use the title of prince, even though, unlike this quack you keep pushing, he is the son of an emperor.

The link you provided is nothing more than a club "authorized" by the Catholic archdiocese of Los Angelas, whose leader was given a medal (which was a French colonial order by the way, abolished decades ago by the President of France). Exactly how are they experts in Asian royal family succession? You might also point out exactly what all this "work" is this Buu Chanh has done for the Catholic Church, seems odd for someone who claims to be the great-greatgrandson of an Emperor who massacred Christians by the thousands.

Again, it is not up to me to prove your ridiculous impossible claims for you. If this guy is such the big shot you claim, you should have no problem contacting any of the senior members of the family yourself.

NguyenHue

Lets research together

Nguyen Hue, I have contacted senior member of the Royal Family of Vietnam Prince Nguyen Buu Phuc, and researched his contact information from The International Monarchist League,

VIETNAM

• Association de l'Imperiale Familie du Vietnam Arc-En-Ciel-Bellatrix, rue du Colonel Gassin, F-0600 Nice, France. Tel: +33 4 93851289 Contact: Prince Buu-Phuc

The link is: International Monarchist League Directory

Concerning Prince George Vinh San, can you provide me with his email address, or does he have a official statement online, or contact information, I would like to do some research on this and converse.

There is no holy war, only trying to get information for the biography, of Prince Buu Chanh and the Vientamese Imperial Family.

I just contacted Asian Scholar concerning Prince Buu Chanh and have researched I have researched this issue of the biography with *Dr. My-Van Tran an Asian Vietnamese Professor and confirmed the information please read her Scholar papers

I understand you have conflicting information, please provide some references you have to show that he is not a Prince, or he is Sir Buu Chanh ? Jimmyvanthach 23:02, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Are you listening?!

blah, blah, blah, his name is on a web directory, blah, blah, blah, scholars have proof (which we don't see) blah, blah, blah, great, venerable Tran Van Ba "assured" me we're not all a bunch of liars, blah, blah, blah.

Research comes BEFORE posting information as "fact". I have no desire to do any of your little hair-brained projects for you. Alot of research is not required for this, only the ability to accept and deal with reality, which quality you are clearly and painfully lacking.

NguyenHue

Confirmation

If you do not want to help, then it is fine just say no thank you, or good luck, there is no need to make negative comments as above. Research is never done, and I am researching a book, that details Prince Buu Chanh concerning that he is also a Prince Duke of Kien Hoa. As User HOB suggested to use Newspapers and Books and I am taking the advice and once it is provided, the facts will come to light. Thank you Jimmyvanthach 03:36, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Stop making false statements

You are continueing to make statements that Crown Prince Bao Long does not support Prince Buu Chanh and Prince George Vinh San, will you please provide some official documentation in a Book or newspaper? Well, if you do not then stop it. As User Hob has stated references need to be stated in a book or newspaper.

That is true, until then I have only left information that is objective and not in dispute, of Prince Buu Chanh's University degrees, birth, wife, children, and awards he has recieved.

Now, once I have the references down on books, concerning his title, and also his role as Regent, then the book or books will be written here in the discussion page here.Jimmyvanthach 21:39, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't like your aggressive tone. If necessary, cite the book, title year author and ISBN, even if it is in Vietnamese. Then it has a chance of being verified, but there is a reason you have been refferred to the arb com... Dunc|☺ 21:55, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Duncharris:

Please state your reference for this statement you continue to input in the article

Boa Die died in 1997, and afterwards Buu Chanh took various titles of Sir, "Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chan", "H.I.H. Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh" and "H.I.H. Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh, Duke of Kien Hoa". The basis of his claims to these titles is dubious since according to Vietnamese traditions, the title of prince is not hereditary beyond the first generation (the sons of the Emperor). Beyond that, titles have to be conferred by the Emperor, indeed there would be several other princes of similar rank were it conferred in this way. Titles were also conferred on his wife and children, which also violates tradition.--Jimmyvanthach 13:00, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Questions from User:Hawstom

• Are there other claimants to the throne?
• Who are they?
• Are they listed on Wikipedia? Tom - Talk 03:56, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Tom, here is the information you requested about Prince Buu Chanh of Vietnam. These are news articles that the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty released concerning their movement to help the people of Vietnam.

This is recent news of exiled Vietnamese Prince Buu Chanh of the Nguyen Dynasty living in the United States with photos, please click on photos and they will appear larger.

Link 1: WTO must ensure Vietnam Must Bring Closure to the MIA/POW and Human Rights Before Being Admitted

Link 2: 2004 New Year Message From The Imperial Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam

Link 3: The Imperial Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam opposes the Communist Government of Vietnam’s effort to suspend the Transnational Radical Party concerning Mr. Ksor a member general of the council and the President of The Montagnard Foundation

Link 4: A Royal Solution for a Nationalist Vietnam

The above documents, if you look through them, and also view the photos you will see support that Prince Buu Chanh has support of Vietnamese as well as Americans to help the people of Vietnam.

The Nguyen Dynasty is not interested in the throne, only the improvement of social programs (Human Rights, Freedom of Speech, Religion) for the people of Vietnam.

If the people chose to have a Constitutional Monarchy it is up to them, and the Crown Prince Bao Long would be the obvious choice if he accepts.

As Prince Buu Chanh is role is in the capacity of only a Regent working on behalf of the Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam, for his people.

Also here is support that Prince Buu Chanh has of Vietnamese Cao Dai Temple in California.

Link 5: Cao Dai religious leaders in California and Vietnamese Americans supporters

Link 6: Furthermore, here is the Leadership Structure of the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam

Jimmyvanthach 18:03, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You didn't answer the above questions at all. I don't remember what article this is about, but all this should be said on the talk page for that article, and not on user talk pages. Please keep article-specific information on the article talk page. If you will kindly paste the article link at my talk page, I will move this talk to that page. Tom - Talk 19:01, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I provided you the material in the websites that answered your questions.

There are no wikipedia articles concerning disputes or other Crown Prince.

Emperor Bao Dai son, Crown Prince Bao Long is the heir to the throne of Vietnam.

Prince Buu Chanh is only acting in the capacity as a Regent that was given to him with the authority of a 1982 Edict signed by Emperor Bao Dai to Prince Buu Phuc.

I presented you a article A Royal Solution for a Nationalist Vietnam that explained this issue very clearly. Jimmyvanthach 21:25, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Are there other claimants to the throne? Yes or no, please.
• Who are they? List, please.
• Are they listed on Wikipedia? If I understand correctly, your answer is no.

Please don't put any more article-specific information on my talk page. If you desire assistance with this page, please answer my questions by providing additional information in the article. Tom - Talk 22:38, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Answer below

Answer to USER Hawstom questions

Other Claimaints to the throne: No

Emperor Bao Dai eldest son Crown Prince Bao Long he is the heir to the throne.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bao_Long

Concerning User NguyenHue, can you help me, he is continueing to but references about Nguyen Phuc Buu Chnah that is negative without references, please see his comments: 18:26, 30 Oct 2004 NguyenHue

I have removed and not put anything concerning his Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh's title "Prince" due to I am researching certain books that I can cite from, first and then present his title "Prince" back to his biography.

User HOb stated that is the proper references to cite as a fact, not internet or contact from people that know Nguyen Phu Buu Chanh.

I have now only listed general information, of his birth, education, family life and his awards he has recieved and I removed the external link, concerning The Nguyen Dynasty because it is I do not have a reference that shows Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is the official Regent of the Imperial House of VietnamJimmyvanthach 18:40, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Your recent actions give me hope. Now I recommend that you encourage User:NguyenHue to also refrain from putting any "explanatory" information in the article until the two of you reach a consensus on this page. Again, I thank you sincerely for moving your talk to this page from all user talk pages and for keeping this article boring for the moment. Tom - Talk 17:05, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Duncharris and Hawstom the new biography is fine, very plain and just basic facts on his biography. But concerning the claim to the throne, Prince Buu Chanh is not claiming the throne of Vietnam, he is only wants the people of Vietnam to have freedom of rights, liberty, Human Rights, and the Right to Vote what kind of Government they chose, if it is a Constitutional Monarchy it is up to Crown Prince Bao Long to accept. The terms Crown prince is incorrect pertaining to Prince Buu Chanh is incorrect. Concerning his title "Prince" I am researching a couple of books that talk about this issue of his birthline, and when I complete it, I will cite the book and reference page so that would be a basis for the title "Prince" and his lineage to be a fact, in a book as User Hob had suggestedJimmyvanthach 22:25, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Duncharris and Hawstom removing the photo of Prince Buu Chanh (also as a gesture of goodwill with NguyenHue) is acceptable I do not have an issue about it, as long as I contact the reference book and have proper cite of Lineage and title of Prince a new photo can then be instituted.Jimmyvanthach 23:27, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your cooperative responses. Tom - Talk 02:49, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

User Tom, NguyenHue had re-instated statements that are non-neutral and not documented, and he uses no references of newspaper articles or books that shows the supporting document. What can be done to retify this situation, only to concern a biography that is referenced with books and newspapers and not with personal feelings or opinions of NguyenHue.Jimmyvanthach 12:25, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Evidence

Is there even any proof of what is written here? Without all of his self-glorifying claims to 'imperial-regent' status, why should he be listed at all? Where are the independent varifications that this information is correct? I have already listed the links to the official website of the Republican Party showing that these "high honors" are available to anyone who makes the required donation. http://www.nrsc.org/nrscweb/e-activists/platinum.shtml and http://www.nrsc.org/memberprograms/taskforce/benefits.shtml Listing them as though they are some sort of accomplishment, particularly when one is so similar in name to the extremely prestigious Presidential Medal of Freedom, is, in my opinion, mis-leading to the point of dishonesty. NguyenHue

It is true that we have not yet any explanation of why this fellow is notable. And perhaps the citations mentioned don't really belong in an encyclopedia. I am afraid with all this trimming it is beginning to look like we have an article for a rather commonplace fellow. And I confess I am still unclear on exactly why he merits an encyclopedia article when my great-great-great-great grandfather Gilberth Haws doesn't. Tom - Talk 02:54, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Prince Buu Chanh was awarded the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom. The discription you are listing is incorrect, concerning Prince Buu Chanh from his biography he did not make a donation, he was awarded it.

The Presidential Medal of Freedom are the Republican Sentorial Medal of Freedom are two different medals. In the biography I specifically wrote Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom.

When a person Clicks on the link it,Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom it will bring them to the medal to notify them it is again the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom and shows, that other people were awarded it.

President Ronald Reagan , General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr, Margaret Thatcher, Prince Buu Chanh and countless other people that are listed that have made significant sacrifices in the course of work or ideals and inspiration.

Even in the link, that Duncharris place list Prince Buu Chanh as a member of the Royal Family but with reservations of the Webmaster of the page on his right to be the Regent, becuase he has not seen the document concerning it nor does he personally does not feel that he nor the Vietnamese Imperial Family Council has the authority.

Prince Buu Chanh was selected by the Vietnamese Imperial Family Council Chairman Prince Buu Phuc, I listed this when the Regent document was shown online, and you NguyenHue took it down, and I replaced it. I am not going to go back and forth, so until it is published in a book, or referenced in a book, so all can see, then it will be put aside for now as USER HOB as suggested.Jimmyvanthach 03:25, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

party baubles

I could care less how Buu Chanh or anyone else recieved any of these "awards", but it is dishonest to try and make it seem as though a medal that can be purchased for $50 is a very prestigious or exclusive award. Further, it is extremely dishonest to try and make the association that this Republican Party merit badge puts the pretender on equal footing with a four-star general, U.S. President and a former British Prime Minister.

I am aware you said "Senatorial" rather than "Presidential" but I hardly think the similarity in name is coincidental on the part of the Republican Party. The listing of a medal which can be purchased by anyone as though it were some kind of grand honor reserved to generals and heads of state is clearly an attempt at subtle deception to further glorify someone who seems to have some desperate need to make himself seem "better" than everyone else and can't live with being a regular, common American citizen. NguyenHue

BTW, I hardly think listing your own Wikipedia page on the medal constitutes hard evidence of the "prestige" of this party bauble.

Jimmy, you need to go to Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom and fix the article so that it is factually accurate and unbiased. It is important that you do this yourself so we won't be haveing any disputes about it. First, you need to make it clear that it is awarded "as a token of appreciation to donors to the Republican National Senatorial Committee." Second, you need to removed the list of recipients, since it appears that it is not notable to receive the award. There are, I am guesssing, thousands of recipients of the award. Let me know when you are finished so we can all look at the result. Tom - Talk 22:31, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

President Ronald Reagan - Former President of the United States General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. - Retired General of the United States Army The Baroness Thatcher - Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom were awarded the Republican Medal of Freedom. They did not recieve it because of a Donation.

Any person or organization can bestow any "honor" on any notable figure. I can bestow Tom's Presidential Medal of Valourous Conduct to Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. But doing so does not make that award notable. If you want to show that the award is notable, please tell us (on the article page) the total number of people who have received it, and show us the full list so we can judge how rare an honor it is.

The notable recipients I researched did not make donations, as NguyenHue as suggested, I have confirmed this and recieved confirmation.--Jimmyvanthach 12:53, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have personal historic knowledge that the National Republican Senatorial Committee is the group that, among other things, works to elect Republicans to the United States Senate. It is clearly an arm of the Republican political party. It appears from the Google research I did that the main references to "The Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom" on the web are the one Jimmy has made at Wikipedia and other places. This Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh seems to be the only person who is holding up his Medal as a notable award. I consider this an embarrassment to Wikipedia that needs to be corrected. In short, I am quite sure that the receipt of the Medal, irrespective of notable others who may have received it, is not a notable honor for a Wikipedia article. Tom - Talk

Jimmy,

• Are you willing to work for the good of Wikipedia?
• Do you see that Dunch and Tom have no other interest here than the good name of Wikipedia?

---

Yes, and I have found my reference that Prince Buu Chanh is a Prince with ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES

(The first ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was published in 1818 as the Nouvel Almanach de Poche de Bruxelles pour 1818, by M.E. Rampelbergh, Imprimeur-Libraire in Brussels.

I have posted the reference that states Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is a Prince http://www.almanach.be/about/

After when Prince Buu Chanh was listed in the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES he was then made a HONORARY MEMBER.

Tom, I dont mind working with you, but USER Dunc as you can see below and used language concerning Prince Buu Chanh and the restoration of the Monarchy of Vietnam as Silliness and ridiculous.

"He seems knowledgeable and what he has said fits in with the general picture that I have of this silliness." Duncharris

ridiculous idea that the Crown Prince could return to Vietnam and all will be well is wrong, as is chronicling the advocacy groups. These should be deleted. In fact, very shortly we will have power to do this from the arbcom. Dunc|☺

Wikipedia is not Usenet. Please refrain from posting monotonous angry monologues in appalling prose. This page is full of Jimmybullshit. Dunc|☺

The above statements is not fair and I do not believe he is neutral in this biography--Jimmyvanthach 16:13, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Request from Dunc and Tom

Please leave the page in the current version by Dunc until you can agree on changes. If reverts continue much longer, we will need to protect the page. Dunc's edits are fine except that the "Emperor thingy" needs to be expanded by one of you with agreement by both of you. It is close enough to accurate and unbiased for the moment. Tom - Talk 22:12, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The first topic of the page is incorrect, there is NO CLAIM to the throne of Vietnam. Prince Buu Chanh has stated and it is known that the Crown Prince is Bao Long.

I myself wrote the biography of Crown Prince Bao Long and he is the Crown Prince.

What is the contention? why is Dunc's stating unfounded references with no documented or books or articles in newspapers? Then if that is the case, I can present the issue that he is the Regent without mentioning the fact references too ?

"H.I.H. Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh, Duke of Kien Hoa". The basis of his claims to these titles is dubious since according to Vietnamese traditions, the title of prince is not hereditary beyond the first generation (the sons of the Emperor). Beyond that, titles have to be conferred by the Emperor, indeed there would be several other princes of similar rank were it conferred in this way. Titles were also conferred on his wife and children, which also violates tradition.

The above statement that Dunc wrote is fact ? Please proved a book or reference concerning this issue? why didnt you do, this when you edited it. I stated he was Regent, but it was removed once it was told to me, that it must be referenced in a book or article newspapers.

If he can provide References, I agree with his statements, and show that a book or article has refereced Prince Buu Chanh is claims the throne of Vietnam.

I came across the official statement of the Nguyen Dynasty and it states by Prince Buu Chanh is up for the people to chose if they want a monarchy and the Emperor should be able to return. The heir is Crown Prince Bao Long if he choses to return to Vietnam. A Royalist Solution for VietnamJimmyvanthach 22:24, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Double Talk

A simple look at the history of edits done to the page will show that the "Buu Chanh is not claiming the throne" message is simply double talk. The posts of his own group say that he has been conferring hereditary titles, bestowing orders of knighthood, claiming to speak on behalf of the "Imperial Family" (which hasn't been 'imperial' since 1945) and has continuously tried to portray Buu Chanh as somehow the equal of the past Emperor Khai Dinh. There website also displays a page of a Buddhist monk giving Buu Chanh a ring which was traditionally given to new emperors. What conclusion would any rational person draw from this? Since Bao Dai abdicated in 1945, giving up for himself and all of his dynasty any rank or special privelages (which they admit he did) there is no basis for any of them to be doing any of this. It contradicts their claim to recognize Bao Long as Crown Prince, if they admit Bao Dai abdicated Bao Long could not be Crown Prince. However, their claim to that Bao Long is Crown Prince also contradicts their own actions by putting Buu Chanh forward as leader of the dynasty and doing all of these things that only the emperor could traditionally do.

Any way you look at it, this ridiculous bunch of claims does not add up. Furthermore, once again, I think it is a little late to be claiming points for doing research after claims have already been made. The time to "do research" before stating something as fact -not after. NguyenHue 07:35, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

Prince Buu Chanh was assigned Regent on behalf of the Nguyen Dynasty by Prince Buu Phuc the Chairman which was established by Emeperor Bao Dai 1982 Edict. Prince Buu Phuc assigned him as Regent becuase of his position and authority.

Prince Buu Chanh is is only trying to bring freedom to his people, and the return of the Nguyen Dynasty if the people chose, a Constitutional Monarchy, and it would be up to Crown Prince Bao Long to assume his active position to return to Vietnam to unify his people and all political parties.

Emperor Bao Dai never gave up his Imperial dynastic powers, only the right of the Monarch of Vientam when he abidicated, he still continued to be the Head of the Nguyen Dynasty. He continued to be a active in religious gatherings such as Cao Dai, Hoa Hao, Buddhist, eventhough he was a Catholic.

The Vietnamese Imperial Family Council recognized Crown Prince Bao Long, and the Council is conducting its duty as Emperor Bao Dai has established in his 1982 Edict that Prince Buu Phuc is the Chairman of the Nguyen Phuoc and all family members must organize and follow the Imperial Council concerning unity and worship and advancement of the Nguyen Phuoc family.

Emperor Bao Dai continued to be a leader for his people outside of Vietnam:

• Emperor Bao Dai and Cao Dai Religious Leaders and congregation for Religious ceremony

A Royalist Solution for Vietnam

Prince Buu Chanh is only a representative of the Nguyen Dynaty a Regent. He is the Crown Prince, that is your words that you had written on his biography. He is not interested in the throne of Vietnam, read his biography, news releases, and Television and radio appearance in the Vietnamese Community.

• The Nguyen Dynasty and Other Nationalist Parties Working Together for a Free Viet-Nam

He is a spokesperson for the return of the Traditions, Cultural, and basic human rights for the Vietnamese people so that they may have the opportunity to chose a government of their right.

• [Prince Buu Chanh with Cao Dai Religious leaders and congregation for Religious ceremony and for solidarity for freedom for Vietnam http://www.thienlybuutoa.org/Uni/SinhHoat/10-2003B.htm]

It has been stated, that Prince Buu Chanh works in the capacity as a leader but always respects the wished of the Crown Prince Bao Long.--Jimmyvanthach 12:35, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have email correspondance with a trustworthy source ( http://www.4dw.net/royalark/ )(Jimmyvanthach btw is inherently untrustworthy) that is as follows (sorry for getting the facts wrong in the first place). He claims to be descended from the 71st son of some old Emperor, but this is in doubt. Even if he was, the claims of the title of "Prince" are dubious. He claims to be a self-appointed spokesperson and head of the family, yet the Crown Prince who is living quietly in Paris has it seems not recognised this guy as his spokesman. All this also seems to have happened since the last Emperor's death in 1997.

If this is true, there is trong doubt over his notability (the republican medal of honor needs to be verified too). As Wikipedia, we should be reporting the facts as they stand. The history of the crown that should be the priority, we should hae a list of emporers. POV-pushing the honestly ridiculous idea that the Crown Prince could return to Vietnam and all will be well is wrong, as is chronicling the advocacy groups. These should be deleted. In fact, very shortly we will have power to do this from the arbcom. Dunc|☺ 12:51, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

Your trusted source has attacked Prince Buu Chanh.

Prince Buu Chanh has written an official letter condeming your "trusted reliable website" and he has written an express letter concerning their actions against him.

I emailed the Colonel Tran Van Ba and he sent me this link: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Vietnam&hl=en&lr=&group=alt.talk.royalty&selm=2eb80cd5.0408292349.32c3c781%40posting.google.com&rnum=3

--Jimmyvanthach 19:40, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

Your Source http://www.4dw.net/royalark/ is not a viable, because it is not published book or newspaper article as USER HOB has suggested only book or articles.

I have posted a website also that states Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is a Prince http://www.almanach.be/about/

The http://www.4dw.net/royalark/ is not a published book it is just website.

(The first ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was published in 1818 as the Nouvel Almanach de Poche de Bruxelles pour 1818, by M.E. Rampelbergh, Imprimeur-Libraire in Brussels.

The ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was a considerable success expanding from 80 pages in 1818, to 540 pages in 1900, the last year of publication. It was considered to be the most comprehensive after the better known Almanach de Gotha.

It is worth noting that one of the branches of the Saxe Coburg Gotha family settled in Brussels in 1831 and is today Belgium’s ruling family.

The ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES published also information on dynasties out of Europe: in the 1849 edition, for instance, the Emperor of China, the Emperor of Morocco and the Emperor of Turkey were included in the first section of the almanach.

In 1918, the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was published by Editions Mansi & Co in Paris, presented by Jean de Bonnefon "to take the place of the Almanach de Gotha, a German publication": this was just after the first World War.

OUR AIM The aim of this website is to publish the present situation of the dynasties out of Europe, and not to rewrite history.

Between 1789 (the French Revolution) and 1989 (the end of the Communist era), many countries have changed their form of government and their national boundaries: during these 200 years, the most represented form of government has been monarchical.

Present and former monarchies are an indissociable part of any country’s history and traditions: that is why we are undertaking this unique compilation of dynasties out of Europe.

Since 1970, some countries reverted to their former monarchical status along with the resumption of democracy (Cambodia, Spain, Uganda) while others on gaining full independance maintained their Crowns. These monarchs may have become the Head of the State (such as the Commonwealth States of Lesotho, Swaziland, Tonga, Samoa and others) or been granted constitutional representation in the State’s representative assemblies (as in Botswana, Gambia, Ghana, Malawi, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda, Zimbabwe).

Most modern countries acknowledge the historical status of their former ruling families, at least informally, as an indissociable part of their identity.)

So, if your trustworthy correspondance is good, why not ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES ?

Please provide the references Christopher Buyers and the books or news articles that have been written about him.

USER HOB has stated that you must provide books or references, and you have done neither.

After when Prince Buu Chanh was listed in the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES he was then made a HONORARY MEMBER.

The above book has alot of history and his been involved in research of Royal Families for over 100 years. You can email the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES that has been in existance since 1818.

And it clearly states he is a Prince and shows his lineage.

Christopher Buyers has never published a book concerning the lineage of Vietnamese History so I think you need to do some more research Sir.

Christopher Buyers has not seen the documentation concerning Emperor Bao Dai Edict of 1982 and claims that he does not exist, but when other historians have seen it, i.e. Dr. My-Van Tran.

Why do you think that the return of the Crown Prince Bao Long is ridiculous idea?

Why are you attacking this?

Did the Crown Prince of Italy return to Italy? http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-14-2003-37305.asp

Did the Crown Prince of Bulgaria return to his country? http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/jun_2001/simeon_monarchists_21601.htm

Did the Crown Prince of Serbia return to his country? http://www.royalpalace.ws/

Did the King and Crown Prince of Greece return to Greece? http://www6.dw-world.de/en/1837.php

Did King Michael return to Romania? http://truthnews.net/world/2001_05_romania_michael.html

Did the Prince of Korea just return back to his country this year 2004? http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200408/kt2004082618115611990.htm

Sir you need to do some more research before you make a Comment like that which alot of Vietnamese would like a return of the monarchy of Vietnam as a Constitutional Monarchy, such as the return of the Royal Family of Cambodia under a Constitutional Monarchy: http://www.cambodia.gov.kh/unisql1/egov/english/home.view.html --Jimmyvanthach 17:52, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Right, okay. Forget the criticism about it being a silly idea. Perhaps one day HIH Emporer will return to Vietnam and there will be parades in the street and everyone will live happily ever after. Anything has to be better than the American way of electing a head of state.

This is a matter of trust. I do not trust you. You are a liar. You try to get round the community here to push your cranky POV. My correspondant on the other hand does not promote any views, he only records the geneaology. He seems knowledgeable and what he has said fits in with the general picture that I have of this silliness. Given it all, I think we should just delete this page, and if the Emperor does return then we can record it after the event.

The arbcom will take about another week we think. Then you will be banned from editing articles relating to the vietnamese royal family. We'll check your contributions and have a report done afterwards. I think this is in for deletion. Dunc|☺ 20:24, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

"He seems knowledgeable and what he has said fits in with the general picture that I have of this silliness." Duncharris

Again you use negative language concerning the Prince Buu Chanh role in bring freedom to his people so that they may have the opportunity to vote and chose what government they want, such as a Constitutional Monarchy, as Cambodia.

Why do we have to wait for the Monarchy to return, then we can put a article about Prince Buu Chanh?

Well, there isn't a Palestine State as of Yet, can we remove his wikipedia biography of President Arafat, because Palestine is not a country yet, until the a Palestine is a Country ?

Since Aung San Suu Kyi, is not the President of Burma because she is under house arrest, should we remove her biography from Wikipedia until she is able to be the President?

Since the Crown Prince of Soulivong Savang is not in power in Laos should we remove his wikipedia biography until he returns ?

Since the Crown Prince of Vietnam Bao Long is not in power in Vietnam should we remove his wikipedia biography until he returns?

Your suggestion is wrong to remove this article and I will present my case if this goes to deletion with your recommendation.

I will not tolerate this, because what you are doing is not fair and it is not right.

"Please don't paste drivel onto my talk page. I'm just going to ignore you. I have better things to do. You're a aggressive pov-pushing crank. I'll make it easy for you, bugger off and don't come back." Duncharris 10:30, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

If those are your words above, then it seems you have made decision prior to making a neutral suggestions concerning this article.

You should then excuse yourself from this talk page and let a third party person that does not have their own opinion made up already.

"My correspondant on the other hand does not promote any views, he only records the geneaology."Duncharris

Your Correspondent is not so innocent his name is Christopher Buyers and if you did some research concerning your Internet reference, that has never published a book concerning genealogy of any royal family, you would see that he is biased concerning Prince Buu Chanh and other Asian Royals, that he has his own personal opinion about even when evidence is presented and references are given for him to confirm it, and he refuses.

Please try again.

I have posted a website also that states Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is a Prince http://www.almanach.be/about/

(The first ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was published in 1818 as the Nouvel Almanach de Poche de Bruxelles pour 1818, by M.E. Rampelbergh, Imprimeur-Libraire in Brussels.

After when Prince Buu Chanh was listed in the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES he was then made a HONORARY MEMBER.

There is your reference, concerning that Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is a Prince, and I have made contact, and you can vist the website and and also make an inquiry about them and their history. --Jimmyvanthach 12:29, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Load of Garbage

I hardly know where to begin

Prince Buu Chanh was assigned Regent on behalf of the Nguyen Dynasty by Prince Buu Phuc the Chairman which was established by Emeperor Bao Dai 1982 Edict. Prince Buu Phuc assigned him as Regent becuase of his position and authority. Any by what authority did Buu Phuc do this? What gives a FORMER Emperor the right to assign anyone any position of power? Buu Phuc has no power to give anyone anything because Bao Dai had no authority to give any to him, nor have you produced this evidence you keep claiming to have, which these *scholars* have seen.

Prince Buu Chanh is is only trying to bring freedom to his people, and the return of the Nguyen Dynasty if the people chose, a Constitutional Monarchy, and it would be up to Crown Prince Bao Long to assume his active position to return to Vietnam to unify his people and all political parties. Doing this does not require being a "prince" or "regent" or "imperial highness" or handing out bogus orders and titles to every Tom, Dick and Harry that comes along.

Emperor Bao Dai never gave up his Imperial dynastic powers, only the right of the Monarch of Vientam when he abidicated, he still continued to be the Head of the Nguyen Dynasty. He continued to be a active in religious gatherings such as Cao Dai, Hoa Hao, Buddhist, eventhough he was a Catholic. You obviously have no knowledge of history, nor of the simple meaning of the word "abdication". After 1945 there is no 'imperial dynastic powers' because the dynasty is not imperial anymore. Bao Dai was a common citizen, and said he was relieved to be such and he clearly renounced ALL his powers for himself and all his descendants for all time.

The Vietnamese Imperial Family Council recognized Crown Prince Bao Long, and the Council is conducting its duty as Emperor Bao Dai has established in his 1982 Edict that Prince Buu Phuc is the Chairman of the Nguyen Phuoc and all family members must organize and follow the Imperial Council concerning unity and worship and advancement of the Nguyen Phuoc family. Again, Bao Dai had no more power to do this than you or I, nor have you produced any evidence of this at all. Having trouble making a decent forgery?

Emperor Bao Dai continued to be a leader for his people outside of Vietnam: And how did this happen considering he was no longer emperor? Did some Vietnamese exile "government" the world is unaware of elect him? (snip)

(snip ton of POV crap)

It has been stated, that Prince Buu Chanh works in the capacity as a leader but always respects the wished of the Crown Prince Bao Long.--Jimmyvanthach 12:35, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC) And when Bao Long refuses to meet or speak with him, how does this qualify as cooperation?

Your Source http://www.4dw.net/royalark/ is not a viable, because it is not published book or newspaper article as USER HOB has suggested only book or articles. This little point has not stopped you from posting anything so far, strange how you are only now becoming so concerned about following the rules. At least this website does list a sizeable number of published sources to corroborate its information.

(snip irrelevant dribble)

Why do you think that the return of the Crown Prince Bao Long is ridiculous idea? Maybe because the Nguyen Dynasty was never popular in Vietnam, even when they were still in nominal power? Maybe because they have had a few decades of Communist Party indoctrination under their belts? Maybe because the last Emperor himself was dismissed as a corrupt playboy and sentanced to death in absentia by the People's court? Maybe because he has lived most of his life in FRANCE, fought in the FRENCH army and that after over a century of colonial control the French are not too damn popular in Vietnam, even less so their puppets?

Did the Crown Prince of Italy return to Italy? Yes -after they recognized the republic, the authority of the president and promised to make no effort to reclaim their privelaged status.

Did the Crown Prince of Bulgaria return to his country? Only because he was elected to office as Prime Minister by democratic vote, he certainly did not return as royalty.

Similar conditions apply to the others. It does not conceal the fact that Bao Dai was not forced from the throne against his will, he was not deposed or exiled by the government. He legally, validly and of his own free will abdicated the throne.

which alot of Vietnamese would like a return of the monarchy of Vietnam as a Constitutional Monarchy, such as the return of the Royal Family of Cambodia under a Constitutional Monarchy --Jimmyvanthach 17:52, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC) That is completely absurd. The Cambodian monarchy was POPULAR, the Vietnamese monarchy was not and had never been since the start of the Nguyen reign. Just in the time of Emperor Tu Duc there were more than 500 rebellions against the Nguyen Emperor -and that was even before they sold out to the French to save their own skins. If the monarchy was so damn popular the people would not have supported the democratic republic of Ho Chi Minh. If they were popular they would still be in Vietnam, not living in France. NguyenHue 02:01, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

--

You are not worth replying to, you have your own opinion which is evident by your posting above.

I have posted a website also that states Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is a Prince http://www.almanach.be/about/

(The first ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was published in 1818 as the Nouvel Almanach de Poche de Bruxelles pour 1818, by M.E. Rampelbergh, Imprimeur-Libraire in Brussels.

After when Prince Buu Chanh was listed in the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES he was then made a HONORARY MEMBER.

I on the other hand have presented my facts above of a book reference, and you have only provided your hearsay statements which is not relevant.

And when Bao Long refuses to meet or speak with him, how does this qualify as cooperation?

"If the monarchy was so damn popular the people would not have supported the democratic republic of Ho Chi Minh. If they were popular they would still be in Vietnam, not living in France" NguyenHue

Well maybe because of what you just stated ?

Do you read what you wrote?

"last Emperor himself was dismissed as a corrupt playboy and sentanced to death in absentia by the People's court? Maybe because he has lived most of his life in FRANCE, fought in the FRENCH army and that after over a century of colonial control the French are not too damn popular in Vietnam, even less so their puppets?"NguyenHue

Please take your opinions without any facts or references to a Forum, Mr. Nguyen Trung De --Jimmyvanthach 12:35, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not Usenet. Please refrain from posting monotonous angry monologues in appalling prose. This page is full of Jimmybullshit. Dunc|☺ 15:12, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

"Jimmybullshit"

excuse me? I was explaining the issue that NguyenHue had alot of opinions concerning the Royal Family. He did not give one reference on the conversations that was expressed between the Royals or a Official Statement from any Crown Prince Bao Long.

I welcome his statements if he can provide references if he does not then he is welcome to to converse his statements that he heard from who ? and his opinions to a Forum I am not interested in hearsay.

There is no need for negative language like above Duncharris --Jimmyvanthach 22:24, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

POW-MIA

Refernce Prince Buu Chanh working on MIA-POW Americans to return to the United States

http://www.rolling-thunder-nh1.org/Newsletters/rt-times-august-2004.pdf

Here is the article I found of their press release

• Nguyen Dynasty challenges the WTO to ensure Vietnam Must Bring Closure to the MIA/POW--Jimmyvanthach 16:04, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

For a start...

"On August 24, Rene Pleven, the Minister of Colonies, observed to de Gaulle that the Emperor had been generally "very much discredited" among his people and had attempted a "belated rehabilitation" by looking first to the Japanese and then to the Americans...Bao Dai and his Court were too closely linked to the memory of the French colonial administration, which even "realistic" Frenchmen now considered to dead and buried. Any attempt to bring back the monarchy would harden Viet Minh extremist tendancies while alienating those more moderate elements whose nationalism was potentially less hostile...a restoration of the monarchy as such had been specifically rejected by the French and by most Vietnamese...To a certain degree, of course, Bao Dai's abdication may be viewed as an historical inevitability given the success of the Viet Minh's own brand of activist, anti-colonial nationalism. Certainly Bao Dai himself proved much less capable of providing dynamic leadership than his Cambodian "counterpart", Prince Sihanouk...Bao Dai himself suffered from his own weaknesses and from the legacy of six decades of the protectorate regime...Ultimately neither he nor the Nguyen Dynasty survived the colonial regime whose creatures they had become." From "The End of the Vietnamese Monarchy" By Bruce McFarland Lockhart, Yale Center for International and Area Studies, 1993.

"Nor did the French, despite their "solemn pledges", yield more than a thin veneer of independence to Bao Dai's government...Not that granting power to Bao Dai at this stage mattered. He spent most of his time at his lodge in Dalat, having delegated his nominal power to a new prime minister, Tran Van Huu, a rich landowner and naturalized French citizen...Indeed, the French and Bao Dai seemed at that stage to have reached a tacit understanding: he played the puppet and they indulged his pleasures...Bao Dai was still residing at his chateaux near Cannes with his wife and five children. He kept a Vietnamese mistress in Paris, and aides supplemented his sexual diet with elegant French courtesans. He also spent his evenings at the roulette wheels of Monte Carlo, squandering extravagant sums." From "Vietnam: A History" By Stanley Karnow, Penguin Books, New York 1997.

"The "State of Vietnam" had been the name the French gave the nominally independent government it installed in 1949. The titular head of the State of Vietnam was the Emperor Bao Dai, who had served the French, the Japanese and then again the French. Always more comfortable in France than in Vietnam (his chateau outside Cannes was his favorite residence), Bao Dai's lack of popular appeal had worried the United States throughout the war...But while Bao Dai seemed willing enough to visit Vietnam on occasion, he firmly resisted living there. As a political rival to Ho Chi Minh, the emperor remained rather ephemeral." From "The Vietnam Wars: 1945-1990" By Marilyn B. Young, HarperPerennial Publishing, 1991.

Should I go on, or do you still insist on following your delusion that the monarchy was beloved and popular? (By the way, can't find a single book that mentions little Buu Chanh anywhere at all.) NguyenHue 03:38, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

-As for the Rolling Thunder guys, I think their letter speaks for itself, they seem to have no knowledge of even English spelling (Mountainyard?!) so I seriously doubt they are experts in Vietnamese imperial succession. The letter itself states they only first met Buu Chanh when he invited them to his little love fest in D.C.-

May I remind you, NguyenHue, that Civility and Wikiquette are required here. I am still debating page protection. Tom - Talk 05:57, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It was demanded of me to provide documented sources for my comments; that's exactly what I did. The reputation of Wikipedia would be better served if it were not allowed to be used as a source of "legitimacy" for every nut with a PC and enough time on his hands to peddle their own self-worship. Would it be acceptable if I were to to post a bunch of grand claims for myself or my boss and then expect everyone else to accept it until they can prove me wrong? 216.183.37.4 06:25, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

Do you believe it would be acceptable? I don't. I do believe incivility is counter to our purposes. I am willing to protect the page (yes, it may eventually be deleted), if you can just come up with a version that you can live with. Tom - Talk 06:36, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I was asked to provide documented sources as to the popularity of the Nguyen Dynasty, which is what I did: I don't see how this is being un-civil. However, if there is one thing I can be pushed too far on it is dealing with liars. I have already stated, numerous times, how and why this man could not possibly be a prince, it should not require any piles of books to understand, when one emperor has more than a hundred children, it is only common sense that titles could not be inherited endlessly, otherwise every Vietnamese on the planet would be royalty by now. User Jimmyvanthach has proven himself a liar on numerous occasions, he's not even very good at it, yet this seems to be ignored.

When asked for third party research into this subject, he repeatedly referred to a Vietnamese scholar in Australia, Dr Tran My Van, as a neutral source who has researched and vouched for this man. Yet, in the same collection of self-written PRWeb sites he keeps posting, this same Tran My Van is pictured and listed as a "Baroness" with this Buu Chanh (see photo http://www.prweb.com/prfiles/2004/07/07/139622/baronessDrTranMyVan-2.JPG ), considering her age, and that the monarchy ended in 1945, she could not possibly have been made a baroness by the Emperor, so she undoubtedly was one of those given a fake title by this Buu Chanh and would therefore be the last one to objectively look into the case as to his ability to bestow such airs. Further, Jimmyvanthach has repeatedly insisted that he is simply doing research and has contacted certain people etc, he claimed to have no connection with any of this but was just "interested" (see talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hob#work_for_.3F ) and yet, in another link he himself posted, ( http://users.panola.com/vietnam/structure.html ) he is listed as a leading member of this "organization", so we have yet another attempt at deception. And, this is all after a series of extreme NN-POV posts, user name swapping, 'identity theft' accusations etc. How much does it take for someone to lose credibility around here? What is the point: to be polite or to be accurate? NguyenHue 07:23, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

Tom's edits

I made some edits. Could you all (without a lot of words) tell me if the article as it stands now is accurate and fair. Tom - Talk 06:36, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

My only doubt of accuracy at this point is the Bob Dole sentence. Is there anything available that would indicate the true level of prestige and accuracy in that sentence? Tom - Talk 06:36, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I would still like to see (for best bias removal and accuracy) an indication in the article of how big this Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchy movement is. Any indicator would do: what's their budget, how many registered members, how many contributors? If you could add that, Jimmy, so as not to be pretentious, I personally would think NH and Dunch would be a lot happier. Tom - Talk 06:36, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

Thanks for the help, I am glad to work with you to improving this biography.

Here is some information about the medal that Prince Buu Chanh was awarded Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom Medal of Freedom: March 18, 1994.

He was awarded the the ETERNAL FLAME OF FREEDOM BRASS MEDALLION: June 16, 1995.

Looks good. Now what we need to know is the true significance of this award. Unfortunately, as is the case with the other award that was listed, this Bob Dole award shows up in a Google search mainly in references to Buu Chanh. What we need is something like Dunch found for the Senatorial medal that shows us just what it takes to get the ETERNAL FLAME OF FREEDOM BRASS MEDALLION. Can you provide that?

The staff Members of the Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League is the political wing of the Nguyen Dynasty.

Here is their Structure of Staff http://users.panola.com/vietnam/structure.html

Looks good. And you are a technical employee of the League. OK. Now, do you have an estimate of how many people support the league? How many have donated money or how many come to public events or something like that? It would be good to present some idea of the significance of the League. Tom - Talk 15:48, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

Vietnamese names are few and alot have similar names, I saw that there was a simialar name. I have been in contact with the Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League finding out more about them and researching.

I do not know the exact numbers of supporters, I am aware there is strong support in Hue the former Imperial Capital and in Saigon, from sources from the League and members that attend.

Concerning dontated money, I have been told they have a non-profit, I will contact their email Col. Tran Van Ba and ask him.--Jimmyvanthach 12:27, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Point concerning any big claims about supporters in Viet Nam: Since there is absolutely no opposition to the Communist Party allowed in Vietnam, any adherents to other groups would have to be kept far underground and any claim as to their number would be entirely speculative. Personally, I would add that after decades of purely Communist education, I find it extremely hard to believe that there could be any supporters for a monarchist movement. Likewise overseas, most Viet Kieu live in either America or France, neither of which tend to produce populations that look favorable on monarchies. NguyenHue 03:15, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

---

Your Point is a Opinion Where did you get your research from, did you conduct a poll.

Please refrain from opinions and just contact the Organization or even email the Embassy of Vietnam in Washinton D.C. and ask them what is their official position of the organization.

• "Viet Kieu==Vietnamese American" Supporters for the Nguyen Dynasty and Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh

I think those are points that definitly will help in a conclusion of what are the facts and the how strong or how weak the Nguyen Dynasty and their political wing the Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League holds towards the current regime of Vietnam.--Jimmyvanthach 13:02, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

false minor edits and plagarism

For all concerned: if you go through the list of emperors at the page on the Nguyen dynasty, which I have tried to flesh out, telling the good as well as the bad, you will see that user:jimmyvanthach has gone through each one, making major changes, listing them as minor, and adding numerous pictures. He has also struck out anything negative in the articles, particularly phrases about certain of the collaborationist emperors being unpopular, and replaced it, in cases with plagarized material. One such page is that on Duy Tan which, if you will check his last edit, is a direct copy from this website http://www.geocities.com/imperialvietnam/duytan.html What is more, most of the pictures he has posted seem to come from this French website, http://nguyentl.free.fr/autrefois/famille-royale/photo_famille_royale_1_fr.htm and not the Buu Chanh website from which he claims to have recieved permission. Does he think one relative holds copyright for every photo ever taken of the entire family? This is totally out of hand and I certainly won't be making any more additions until something is done. NguyenHue 07:58, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

I will support efforts to keep Jimmyvanthach in line, including blocking him myself if approved and necessary. Tom - Talk 04:15, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

---

Well, I contact Colonel Tran Van Ba, and he sent me the photos via email.

If you look at my comments from each photo I showed the website where it was confirmed as fair use. Also the photos belong to the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty and they are fair use, that is why the other websites have them.

I contacted Colonel Tran Van Ba he told me that the website

http://www.geocities.com/imperialvietnam/duytan.html

The webmaster of the site a Joseph Crisp II use to be a former member of the Prince Buu Chanh organization, and the photos he recieved from Prince Buu Chanh and the biography from Prince Buu Chanh Imperial Family research organization.

There are many photos of the Nguyen Dynasty that is available in their Family library and the photos have been available online.

If you had just taken the time to look throught the website you would have seen them or just use the contact information I provided with each photo and it would have been confirmed by Colonel Tran Van Ba and he would have sent anyone photos of the Imperial Family with no problem, as he has sent them to me and other people, including the websites that currently also have them posted because of the Nguyen Dynasty policy on History of the Nguyen Dynasty throught education and distribution of photographs and biographies.

The photos are also now available on the NGuyen Dynasty Official Statement: http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/7/emw139622.htm

Also other old photos of the Nguyen Dynasty.

It would have been good for you to check the references and make some contacts before you make negative comments.--Jimmyvanthach 12:38, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Jimmy, I am bound to support the arbitration committee in their decisions. Other than that, I am not aware of anything negative. HueNguyen asserted several things about the images you mentioned to me. And you have asserted an opposing conclusion. I don't know how to tell what needs to be changed. But I think it would help if we could keep all the factual and issue talk on the article talk pages. I am going to move your comments. Tom - Talk 15:16, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Please, both of you be patient and kind enough to avoid pasting your comments onto multiple pages. Let's keep this all here on the appropriate talk page. HueNguyen, is it possible Jimmy has abided by copyright law? Jimmy, are you absolutely sure that the copyright owners for the material in question are permitting the use in question? HueNguyen, is there an underlying issue behind the copyright allegations that we should also be addressing? Tom - Talk 15:23, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

---

Tom, I contacted the website address, http://users.panola.com/vietnam/ and I asked if there were any photos that the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty Library had any photos they would like to distribute. They told me they have given some out to various websites, and that they would not have a problem with it.

I was sent photographs and the Nguyen Dynasty that I was going to use them for Wikipedia biographies and they said it was alright for Fair Use and the photos were not copyright.

http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/7/emw139622.htm

That is why I stated when I uploaded the photos that they were Fair Use confirmed and I gave the website were I recieved them via email.--Jimmyvanthach 22:01, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Would it clarify things if instead of Fair Use (which raises eyebrows at Wikipedia), you said "Used by permission of the copyright owner, XXXXX"? Tom - Talk 22:32, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

What I am trying to say is if you are going to say Fair Use, you probably should be very good at discerning what it does and doesn't mean (you better be an authority). I am not. And there are Wikipedians who don't like hearing that everything is copied by "Fair Use". But if you really do have permission, then you don't even get into that trouble. So stating your permission is safer. Tom - Talk 22:34, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

If you will notice above, he admits that the website he copied for his alteration of the article on Duy Tan does not come from his organization at all but from the Crisp fellow, so regardless of the pictures (most of which are quite more recent than 100 years and taken from the French website I listed) there has clearly been text copying from work done by others. NguyenHue 00:57, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

---

I admit what you fail to admit that is was a plagarism.

The website you state, was a former member of Prince Buu Chanh's organization, and he is no longer. The information that was on his website, was the COPYRIGHT of the Nguyen Dynasty and Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League.

The photos yes, some are over 100 years old or more, and they are belong to the Nguyen Dynasty Library and they are copyright and were given out to use with the express language with permission. It is very easy to obtain, just email the website and you will recieve a reply.

Please do not mistake my facts Mr. Nguyen Trung De, I have contacted Colonel Tran Van Ba, and he told me you also use to be a member of the Vietnamese Monarchist League. So are you neutral or not?

I think now the truth comes out? That you were a member of the Vietnamese Monarchist League--Jimmyvanthach 15:25, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Let's Get One Thing Clear

My name is not Nguyen Trung De, and I have never been a member of anything so absurd as a party to "restore" the Nguyen Dynasty. Nor would I add do I put much stock in more assurances of what this "Tran Van Ba" has to say. You are clearly using copied, plagarized materials as the website in question, where you got all this from, www.geocities.com/imperialvietnam/ clearly states in several places that they are not and have never been involved with your group and that you have apparently been stealing material from them for some time. Where are all your scholarly experts if you have to stoop to copying websites in a vain attempt to give yourselves credence? NguyenHue 21:25, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

---

This is not my group, I am an outsider that has been researching my history of the Nguyen Dynasty and culture and protection of traditions. I have contacted Tran Van Ba, and I have wrote letters to him concerning Vietnamese history and he has sent me information about his history with Emperor Bao Dai.

"This Tran Van Ba", was the last Colonel-in-Chief of Emperor Bao Dai's Imperial Guard and I have researched him, for my University project on the Nguyen Dynasty.

His biography: http://www.orderofthedragon.homestead.com/biographiesB.html

I asked him questions concerning the organization and he told me that they was a two indiviuals that left the organization, named Nguyen Trung De, and Joseph Crisp II these two gentlemen are from Texas and are friends.

Please see link Nguyen Trung De left for Joseph Crisp on his website: http://us.z.webhosting.yahoo.com/gb/view?member=vietmonarchy&.start=6

First Name : De

E-Mail : nguyentrungde@yahoo.com

Comments : Good pages, dont be discouraged by the stealing of other people, this is only since they have not the good words that you do!

You point out that on the website "www.geocities.com/imperialvietnam/ clearly states in several places that they are not and have never been involved with your group and that you have apparently been stealing material from them for some time."

That is misleading, if you goto his or YOURS website it states that he was apart of the organization:

"I first wrote to Buu Chanh offering him my support after reading a brief article on the subject in the journal of the International Monarchist League. That was in 1999, not long after joining that group. I was 18-years-old at the time, and the enthusiastic response I received showed me that there were not exactly very strict requirements for becoming a "Member of Great Honor of the Nguyen Imperial Dynasty".

See Link for whole story: http://www.geocities.com/josephcrisp/VietResponse.html

Listen, I am just looking in this from the outside, I am not a member of the organization, I am a Republican and just hope that President Bush would take the same initative against Cuba concerning Freedom for there people and do the same for MY PEOPLE IN VIETNAM.

See link for Reference: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1512&ncid=1512&e=5&u=/afp/20041031/wl_afp/us_vote_bush_041031194438

I dont see what all the issue is about, I know for sure, that the Nguyen Dynasty is going to return one day, and that Crown Prince Bao Long will break through the illegal activities that the Communist Regime has put before my nation, and I see that Prince Buu Chanh is the only member of the Royal Family that is activily poltical to make it possible for Crown Prince Bao Long to have leverage to return to Vietnam and help my country. A Constitutional Monarchy has worked in Cambodia and I feel it can in Vietnam. --Jimmyvanthach 19:18, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I see absolutely no relevance to any of this nor any reason behind bringing any of this up other than to drag in the names of other individuals to draw attention off of yourself and your own actions. I don't give a damn who was a member of what group or who is friends with who or who has any connection to any reactionary political party. I certainly do not see the relevance of posting your own group's dirty laundry or of news articles about Fidel Castro (though I'll bet good money he stays in power longer than "W"). However you certainly are making a, to be polite mistatement by saying you are not a member of any organization. Your name is listed on a link you provided of officers of this group, you stated that you posted the images for this group on the PRwebsite, and generally you have tried to push them, their claims and their POV at every opportunity and attacked anyone who called you on the carpet about it. That much is clear to everyone, as is the fact, earlier established, that for some time you were claiming to be this "Tran Van Ba" you keep using as a defense. NguyenHue 22:12, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

---

1. I provided articles that I reserched concerning the Nguyen Dynasty that I had completed for my class, Colonel Tran Van Ba he had asked about my work concerning Asian history.

2. If you are Vietnamese you are aware that Vietnamese names tend to be very common, yes, my name is similar by last name but I am not the person listed in the structure.

Might I add there are a Nguyen there located, are you the former member also listed, but name is not been removed as of yet?

3. The reason I listed the names Joseph Crisp and Nguyen Trung De, is because Colonel Tran Van Ba wrote me an email, and told me that these are former members of their organization that have left due to bad terms. Since they left and are no longer members they are now spreading spreading hateful material about him, in talk pages and also to various Websites, and that Prince Buu Chanh is considering legal action against them for slander and defamation of character.

4.Yes, I posted the images about the Nguyen Dynasty through the Nguyen Dynasty OFFICIAL NEWS RELEASES.

IF you just email the site and ask persmission to use the photographs anyone can get persmission.

It is very simple, here is a one of their news releases, just goto the right hand screen and see Email us Here here is the link:

• A Royal Solution for a Nationalist Vietnam

If you also read the article, Prince Buu Chanh has political motives to bring freedom to the people of Vietnam, all people Montagnards, Khmer Krom Vietnamese.

When I read the article he also states, "to provide a focus for unity, an Emperor that is above all parties and political disputes, who can maintain the noble traditions of Vietnamese culture"

This is the opportunity that Prince Buu Chanh is making for Crown Prince Bao Long to return to Vietnam.

5. I never pushed any POV, you stated that Prince Buu Chanh is the Crown Prince and Pretender to the throne of Vietnam.

I have researched and never saw any internet site, or news article that states he is the Crown Prince or claims to be.

That is clearly your statement and I defended my position, you were making mis-statements which was not true.

I asked you to provide your references and you failed to.

You then accused Prince Buu Chanh of taking hard earned money from Vietnamese here in America, I asked you to provide a court docket number or a reference and again you failed to do so.

6. The Communist in Vietnam have realized their mistake and many Communists have left the party and protested against them, to name a few Colonel Bui Tin, Communist official Tran Bach Dang, Communist Party's official journal Nguyen Vu Binh worked for almost 10 years on their paper, and Mr. Tran Dung Tien, HO CHI MINH's own personal bodyguard to name a few.

Castro's communism with fall and also the Socialist Republic of Vietnam's government with the help of True Nationalist Vietnamese and minorites that live in Vietnam.--Jimmyvanthach 13:25, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Gentlemen. These discussions are highly peripheral. The article looks fine to me now with the exception of the Republican Senatorial Medal and the Eternal Flame of Freedom Brass Medallion. Hue and Jimmy, would you be willing to remove those citations and reomve the dispute from the article? Please consider this so you both can move on. Tom - Talk 14:15, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

---

Tom, I was told to list the dates of the awards, these awards are signficant, Ducharris, ask for the dates of the awards, as a reference of confirmation. These awards are sigficant to the work that Prince Buu Chanh has been doing for his people to bring freedom and human rights to Vietnam and to establish a Constitutional Monarchy in Vietnam for Crown Prince Bao Long to return. I feel that the biograhy is good, and it does not make any reference to "PRINCE" so there is no dispute between me and NguyenHUE.

I am just conversing here on the discussion page with NGUYENHUE the significance of the movement to bring back the monarchy back to Vietnam under the protection of the Nguyen Dynasty.--Jimmyvanthach 14:26, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

OK. I will get out of the way and let you keep talking (though maybe you could do it via e-mail or on your user talk pages.) As for the article, I appreciate that we are clear now about who is claiming royalty. But it is clear to me that the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom is not the kind of award that an encyclopedia finds notable enough to list as an acievement. I don't know about the other. Maybe we should ask for comment. In any case, the notice needs to be removed from the article, so the two of you should agree on how to do it. HN, what is your position on the two awards mentioned? Tom - Talk 17:34, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

I think I have made my views on this subject quite clear and so far, despite all the irrelevant dribble being posted here, I have yet to see any real evidence of the legitimacy of this group or justification for all of the love posts being plastered all over Wikipedia. Any party bauble which can be obtained by a donation, or as part of a membership package, can hardly be considered a prestigious award, even if they have handed it out to famous people. As far as I'm concerned, repeated claims in this direction are simply a dishonest effort to mislead people into thinking this self-styled "royal" is worthy of note, part of some desperate effort to make someone seem to be "elite" or better than us poor little 'commoners'. I still see no reason why this man, or even the well-known republic exile parties for that matter, are worthy of note. 216.183.37.66 18:08, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

I am sorry I don't completely understand all your concerns or all your language. So if there is anything in what you said that I don't address properly, please ask it again.

• I am not satisfied this group is illegitimate. Therefore I must assume good faith and leave the articles up for the moment.
• I don't know what love posts are, but it may have something to do with our key policy of wikilove that all Wikipedians are required to pursue diligently.
• I am satisfied that the Republican Medal is not prestigious. I will remove it from the article.
• I am not satisfied yet that the other Medal is not prestigious, but I have a hunch it may not be. Can I see some evidence one way or another?

Tom - Talk 20:26, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

Explanation By legitimacy I mean that this guy is claiming to be a prince, claiming to have powers delegated by a non-reigning emperor and other details which are impossible no matter how you look at it. I referred to the fact that Jimmyvanthach or some of his alter-egos have saturated this entire website on any page vaguely related to Vietnam etc with POV posts about their group and members. This was obviously far from neutral as they always took it as a horrible insult to be called anything less than "royalty" (and based on what is posted above they even attempt to sue people over, apparently being equal to the rest of humanity is considered slanderous). As for the other medal, I have never heard of it before, but based on the fact that he has tried to claim this man to be a prince, have powers of an emperor, and blown out of proportion his "elite" status and the other medal, I would seriously doubt that it is any different to the other one. The whole thing reeks of a ploy to make gullible people think this pretender is someone far more "exalted" and important than he actually is. NguyenHue 02:32, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

---

In my opinion the biography has not been changed the main questions was the Royalty, that is the only issue that was in question, but it is now backed up by support from

• Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh listed in the ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES
• ALMANACH DE BRUXELLES was published in 1818 as the Nouvel Almanach de Poche de Bruxelles pour 1818, by M.E. Rampelbergh, Imprimeur-Libraire in Brussels

I personally have emailed the agency concerning the award and it was confirmed to me the dates.

Also you should be aware that President Ronald Reagan - Former President of the United States General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. - Retired General of the United States Army The Baroness Thatcher - Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Charlton Heston - Film actor and president of the National Rifle Association (NRA)

have received the The United States Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom.

That is very prestigious but note that it also states on the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom "Medals are given for contributions to the Republican Party either through statesmanship and/or economic contributions (Medals are distinguished by designs)" --Jimmyvanthach 00:42, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am satisfied the medal is not prestigious. I will remove it from the article. Tom - Talk 20:26, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

---

so bases on your own opinion without any research you have come to the conclusion that it is not prestigious?

I think it would be reasonable to assume that if President Reagan was awarded the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom it is very esteemed.

Wouldn't you say ?

But if you have a book that states that this is a not a worthy medal not prestigious please cite it and I will agree with you.

The medal states for Prince Buu Chanh it was awarded for his social contribution with the Republican Party and it also stated the date of award, it did not say he was awarded if for contribution to the party:

then it would NOT BE prestigious to be noted in his biography and I would agree with you.--Jimmyvanthach 01:54, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

banned from editing "Vietnamese Monarchs and history of Vietnam"

May I gently and lovingly remind you, Jimmy, that you were banned on November 6 from editing all these articles. This is a binding resolution by the arbiration committee. Please do not edit any of the articles in the subject area lest you be banned as the arbitration committee required on your user talk page. Tom - Talk 20:32, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

---

I did not edit nor make corrections at all.

I did not make any changes to no ones work that made an edit.

All I did was add a category.

I did add anything only to category I did not alter the biography, the Category Asian American was outside of the biography edit.

If that is still considered EDIT, then it is my mistake and I stand corrected.

Also I see that user Hawstom removed that Prince Buu Chanh was awarded the Republican

Senatorial Medal of Freedom, and he just gave a anwser "The Republican medal is not notable"

Is he aware that:

• President Ronald Reagan - Former President of the United States

• General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. - Retired General of the United States Army The Baroness

• Thatcher - Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

• Charlton Heston - Film actor and president of the National Rifle Association (NRA)

Were awarded the Medal, If it is such a Not Notable then Why were they awarded it ?

Where did he get the information that that it was not Notable?

--Jimmyvanthach 22:14, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom

I saw that you removed that Prince Buu Chanh was awarded the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom, and you just gave a anwser "The Republican medal is not notable"

Please explain or reason you camee to the conclusion

20:27, 12 Nov 2004 Hawstom (The Republican medal is not notable.)

If someone earned if for their work and social life contributions to the Republican party then it should be listed, but if they gave a donation of course and I agree with you. --[[User:Jimmyvanthach|Jimmyvanthach]] 22:19, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I visited the Republican Senatorial Committee web site and discovered that the medal can indeed be procured by donating to the Republican Senatorial Committee. Since the medal itself is easy to earn, it is not of itself notable. If this gentleman has done "work and social life contributions" to the Republican Party, that may be marginally notable. I am a registered Republican, and I come from a family of Republicans. But I have never heard of anybody notable because of what they have done for the Republican Party.

• Can you describe this gentleman's contributions in a way that explains better why they are notable, or at least pertinent to his role as founder of the Constitutional Monarchy Party?
• Is this man not the founder of the Constitutional Marchy Party? Why does the article not say that? That is the only basis on which the Wikipedia community might grant that he is notable. Otherwise his page is considered non-encyclopedic. Tom - Talk 07:30, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps it's just that so many different tales have been told it is easy for even the author to get confused. In the page he wrote Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League he said that their goal was to restore the Nguyen monarchy and that Emperor Bao Dai was the last legitimate ruler they recognized. Now, on this very page, he has said they are just a human rights group, not a monarchy restoration group and that they do in fact recognize the legitimacy of the current Vietnamese government. No doubt in response to this, the story will change yet again. NguyenHue 05:57, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

It seems all too common in dealing with this article and area to find that things that initially seemed to indicate (or calculated to indicate) notability, such as links, citations, or awards, turn out on closer examination to be nothing more than vanity prizes. This medal of freedom is one example. The almanach bruxelle link seems to be another. Who among us has not received multiple invitations to be listed in Who's Who books? Tom - Talk 14:54, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

It might interest you to know that I wrote to the above "Almanach de Bruxelles" to enquire about their listing and how this man could have been made a prince by the Emperor before 1945 when he was only born in 1942 etc. Well, the response I got back was that (surprise, surprise) their only source for Buu Chanh's claim to royal status was Buu Chanh himself. The information given was a verbatim copy of what he puts out about himself on his website (all the family rank nonsense I explained above). If you take a look at his website, there is a whole page devoted to his "honors" most of which (like 'Honorary Kentucky Colonel') anyone can get if they simply take the time. The whole thing smells of someone desperately trying to convince others they are "better" or "more important" than the rest of us poor common folk. I would say scrap the article along with all the other myriad of refrences they have littered Wikipedia with about this Rev Moon wannabe. Who knows, what with all the identity disputes and obvious dissention within this group, maybe Jimmyvanthach is really Buu Chanh himself? NguyenHue 09:11, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

Listen please refrain from making personal attacks on me, I have not made edited any articles regarding Vietnamese Royalty or Notable South Vietnamese Generals, as the Admin here on wikipedia instructed.

I do not apprectiate your words you stated above:

1. "maybe Jimmyvanthach is really Buu Chanh himself"

2. "The whole thing smells of someone"

3. "about this Rev Moon wannabe"

NguyenHue if you continue this behavoir as indicated here I will report you to the Administration authorities on Wikipedia. I hope not to take this avenue of approach with the authorities and hope that you will realize your actions are not positive to our community here.--Jimmyvanthach 15:04, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

NguyenHue, I understand that you may be frustrated with Jimmy's persistence in what appears to be propping the vanity of a non-notable group. But please remember to practice Wikiquette. Jimmy, please be a little slower to take offense and pull out the big guns. The Wikipedia community detests the possibility that you may be abusing the Wikipedia as a place to establish the credibility of a non-credible group. This is a very serious breach of our esprit de corps. To a disinterested observer, it seems very odd that you are listing worthless commendations and citations. Instead, what we usually talk about for people is their acts and their influence. I suggest that you try to keep the interests of Wikipedia foremost in your mind as you think about this. After all, you (as all of us) are a guest here. This is not your personal Wikipedia; it belongs to the Wikimedia Foundation. Try to subordinate the interests of the League to the interests of the 'pedia. The Wikipedia wants to be respectable and credible.

Would the Encyclopedia Brittanica mention that a person had received the Republican Senatorial Medal of Freedom? Would they mention his listing in "Almanach de Bruxelles"? Have mercy on us, Jimmy! Tom - Talk 15:36, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)