Talk:Vietnam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
[edit] Disputed island
I wonder what do you guys thinks about that on the Chinese wiki page, there's an amateur version of 'Map' of China which includes the disputed islands? see [[1]] Is it kind of Chinese government's act of messing up facts? Sontung007 (talk) 23:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Military of Vietnam
I have changed the text of this section, as it was misleading and the links were inaccurate. Now the text is taken from the main VPA article, and the relationship between the various branches etc is make clear. Frank Walsh (1962) 15:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Terrorist" Definition in Vietnamese Constitution
Opposition to the communist party in Vietnam is defined in the Vietnamese constitution as "terrorism." This results in former enemy combatants of the government, such as mountain tribespeople (Dega Montagnards, etc.) being dubiously misclassified under international law as 'terrorists'. This warrants mention and posting Vietnam, and Laos too. Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 18:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Could you specify which section of the constitution defined that? DHN (talk) 18:30, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wildlife
Sorry to bring up the topic again, but it would be interesting, given that in the 1990s alone, 3 new mammals discovred in VietNam: saola, giant and Truong Son muntjac, . Not only that, there are very spectacular species like the critically endangered Javan rhino, the gaur:
http://www.arkive.org/species/GES/mammals/Bos_frontalis/Bos_frontalis_00.html
http://vietnamnews.vnanet.vn/2004-06/23/Stories/23.htm
and wild water buffalo, which apart from VietNam, can only be found in India
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KG7tgRN2UNc
And most recently, the discovery of giant wild buffalo in VietNam:
http://www.laodong.com.vn/Home/khoahoc/2007/1/20926.laodong
All that makes VietNam the biggest hotspot for wildlife in the world for the last decade. So I think it's a chracteristics worthwhile mentioning.
[edit] Religion
sorry but I just gotta bring up the religion topic again (and yes, I've read the last discussion) but it still doesn't seem to have been resolved. from what I understand, there could be 2 reasons for that govmt figure with such a high rate for "athiests". 1 is some ppl claim the govmt considers all who identify as practicers of more than 1 religion (that is that triple religion thing) to be aethiests. the other possibility is that a lot of vietnamese have historically considered themselves to be buddhist, but they dont practice all of the strict rites and stuff that's required - and only visit the temple/pagoda like once or twice a year <--and so maybe the govmt only considers strict purveyors of buddhism to be "buddhist". the reason i doubt the govmt figures so much is simply growing up i always thought it was obvious vietnam was a historically buddhist country????? how could the catholic and buddhist figures be that close to each other? Justakemeout 18:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Communist ("socialist") countries favor atheism, since that is mandated by Marxism-Leninism and (as in this case) Maoism. Although such governments usually make a show of religious tolerance, in practice religions are generally discouraged. The numbers are probably "massaged" to favor atheism, or else many religious people have gone underground...64.61.81.231 17:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- An independent Western social scientist, Phil Zuckerman of Pitzer College, gives the proportion of the "Nonbelievers in God" in Vietnam as %81. There are two points to make. First, all nonbelievers are not atheists. Second, atheism is not just an instrument of the communist countries to suppress their people but it is a well documented tendency of the societies of the advanced neighboring countries like Netherlands, Belgium, France and etc. Deliogul (talk) 17:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Doi Moi Statements (in History Section)
- Originally, this section contained these statements...
- "It is now one of the fastest growing economies in the world. However, this growth does little for the development of the country[citation needed], and Vietnam still ranks as one of the poorest nations in the world. This is due primarily to the fact that much of the money gained from the growth does not trickle down to the people. Politically, reforms have not occurred. The Communist Party of Vietnam retains control over all organs of government."
- Before I begin my comments, I would like to mention that I am Vietnamese-American and do have my own biases when it comes to how Vietnam is portrayed. However, I will try to remain as impartial as possible.
- I hope I am not stepping over anyone's toes, but I believe that these opinions about the current economic situation in Vietnam are not necessary. Not only do they contradict what is written down in the Economy section of Vietnam, they contain clear bias that is not necessary in Wikipedia.
- Though the Economy section itself is not as adequately cited as I would prefer (I will try to fix that in the future), it does contain facts that can be easily reserached and reference. Being Vietnamese, I read a lot about my home country and I have come across most of the facts mentioned in the Economy section during my readings.
- However, I am fairly certain that it will be very difficult to find SCHOLARLY REFERNCES to verify the above quote that was made. Of course, everybody is free to have their own opinions. I am not a fan of the Communist Party in Vietnam. However, Wikipedia is not the place to voice your concerns about how the Communist Party is running Vietnam.
- Furthermore, despite the Communist Party's repression of many political liberties that we in the U.S. take as given, it is fairly undeniable that they have led Vietnam to large growth figures over the past 20 years (since 1986, when doi moi was enacted).
- WARNING - THIS CONTAINS MY BIAS ... South Korea itself when through violent political repression to achieve their amazing 40 years of economic growth. Vietnam is following a similar path. It may not be perfect ... in fact, it is nowhere near perfect. However, the economy is growing, the people are getting richer (relatively), and living standards are improving. Vietnam is not the United States, and it has a long way to go before it does. However, to attempt to belittle Vietnam's economic growth by voicing personal distates for the Communist Party is not necessary.
+Therefore, for the sake of NPOV for this article, I will remove these statements and in the next couple of days, attempt to integrate more neutral statemnts (with sources), if the Wikipedia community feels this is necessary. BNgo 05:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] I hate the word "costume"
... especially when it's being used to describe another nation's garment:
One of the most popular Vietnamese traditional costumes is the "Áo Dài"
It serves only to further estrange a cultural aspect of the country. So I changed it to the appropriate word "garment."
- I agree, good call. Sir Vicious 08:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
The Vietnamese history section of the article reflects the Vietnamese government's interpretation of history that does not reflect historical fact. The Vietnamese were historically a small group of Viet-Muong tribes along the Red River that includes the area of Ha Noi, today. Over the 2,000 years from the first conquest by the Han Chinese in 206 B.C.E. to modern times, the country actually expanded as an empire, conquering several small kingdoms and liquidating their populations, and even seeking to expand into China (under Ly Thuong Kiet in the 12th century). The policy of imperial expansion into the south, "nam tien", has been a recurrent historical theme and such expansion led to the conquest of the Cham empire (now considered the area of "Central Vietnam" but at times extending close to the Red River, and the area of "South Vietnam" that was land taken from the Khmer Angkorian empire. Land was also taken from kingdoms to the west (some from Lao) and north, such as from the 11th century Tay Nung empire of Dai Nung. This expansion and the underlying cultural differences need to be understood as part of the context of the Vietnam-American war and of the geopolitical expansion of Vietnam into much of what now remains of Cambodia and Laos, in the 19th century. 81.183.152.79 12:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC) June 5, 2007
- Hi, I recognized only a few events that you list since I'm not at all knowledgeable about the topic. If you feel like it please contribute, but do cite sources so people can check up on. Thanks. Sir Vicious 10:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "The extent of the U.S. bombing of Cambodia ..."
This paragraph seems a bit odd and out of place. drh 16:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] neutrality against communist monovision
I've recently corrected the article with facts about the colonial era and cold war's early years as there was an obvious non-NPOV.
now there is the vietnam war episode: The communist-held North Vietnam was opposed by the United States is such a phrase neutral? as I saw in the preceding section earlier there was not a single mention about the anti-communist vietnamese people, state and army that actually existed. reads like every single vietnamese were communist but this is untrue. what about operation Passage to Freedom that no one here seems to have heard of? what about the ARVN army (the new VNA)? so were the U.S. the only to oppose North Vietnam or were they some vietnamese people as well? Paris By Night 19:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] General Secretary of the Communist Party?
Shouldn't the Government part of the country template list General Secretary Nông Đức Mạnh's name under the names of the President and the Prime Minister? I had thought that in a communist state, the General Secretary of the Party is the real ruler of the country.Inkan1969 23:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
- A section on the actual government structure in Vietnam would be great. There is little to no information about Vietnam's governmental structure in the article. What's up with that? Rag-time4 20:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- I don't think so. He's as powerful as them, but isn't the head of state nor the head of government, nor does he act in place of one of the others. Therequiembellishere (talk) 02:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Geography
Among all the changes that have taken place recently, the area of the Red River Delta has been changed from 15,000 km^2 to 3,000 km^2. On checking an atlas the former looks more plausible, and is the figure given in the Red River Delta article. (Have other errors escaped reversion?) I am also skeptical that the delta advances by 100m per annum. Lavateraguy 00:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
"Mountains account for 40% of the area, with smaller hills accounting for 40% and tropical forests 42%" These don't quite add up... do smaller hills and tropical forests add up to form 82% of the mountains? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.18.1.36 (talk) 10:52, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Population
I think that someone should put up the July 2007 estimate.
Answer: I just did. I got it from the CIA World Facts Book, placing it at just over 85 million, not 87 as previously stated on this site. The Vietnam General Office of Statistics gives a 2006 estimated figure at 84.1 million so the 85 million figure for 2007 seems more in line that the 87 million figure. Tom3605 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom3605 (talk • contribs) 07:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Transportation
This sentence was in the transportation section:
"Transportation is the most popular form of transportation in the country"
Looking at the history, it used to say "The road system is..." -I've switched it back to this, it looks like the change may have been accidental. Nick McClellan 21:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion discussion
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Vietnamese Americans (2nd nomination). Badagnani 00:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Flag
Although the flag in the Info Box is the official flag of Vietnam, whether I like it or not, there is another flag which is red with 3 yellow stripes across the top, leaving the area of red below it above a quater of the whole flag. Do you think it is we should add it as a reference, as this flag is only used by the original Southern Vietnam, as a flag of freedom to oppose Ho Chi Minh. Efansay---T/C/Sign Here Please 07:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- No, this flag is not used officially in the entity now known as Vietnam. Wikipedia already has an article on the flag of the Republic of Vietnam. DHN 07:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the "No" answer. One must not confuse one's own political preferences with the reality on the ground. Like it or not, the red flag with the gold star is recognized internationally as the flag of Vietnam. Tom3605
[edit] Commentary
"Đổi Mới (New Age)" = Oops! sorry we screwed up, we were wrong. Crreg
[edit] Provinces
Provinces Now Vietnam has 64 provinces :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.129.44.22 (talk) 19:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- You are, in fact, incorrect. Vietnam is divided into 59 provinces and 5 centrally-controlled municipalities existing at the same level as provinces. Rarelibra (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Liberal perspective of the article
The article has a strong feeling of liberalist point of view in it. I mean, if parameters say good things, it is because of the market economy and when they are bad, it is only because of the socialist rule in the country. I also didn't understand why we use capitalist measures (see "International rankings") to determine the degree of development in a socialist country. "Bretton Woods system is the best and everybody should be in accordance with it because US won the WWII"? Deliogul (talk) 17:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- The period of socialist rule in the country is generally agreed in Vietnam itself to be a failure. Recently, an exhibit at the Vietnam Museum of Ethnology called "Hanoi Life Under the Subsidy Economy (1975-1986)" showed the horrible living conditions during this period. Likewise, doi moi is officially commemorated as a rousing success. With Vietnam joining the WTO earlier this year, it's safe to say that it's only "socialist" politically and not economically. DHN (talk) 17:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Again, what do we understand from failure? Do those "horrible living conditions" were caused because of the socialist system or the ongoing Western intervention to the country (France, US)? I’m mean, if you colonize the capital and labor in a country for years and then use your napalm bombs to destroy its agriculture, what can socialism do? The helicopter scene in the Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket is one of my popular ways to explain the case of Vietnam. A crazy gunman kills peasants without a reason. This is the Western subjectivity and paranoia about Vietnam.
-
- When there is a collective structure and not many chances to become rich or to express yourself, the conditions are "horrible" and when there is an individualistic market economy where people are not equal in merit (the main argument of liberals to explain why some people are rich and others are starving), it is the heaven on earth.
-
- I'm refusing to look at the case from the eyes of an American teenager who just watched Rambo 2. It is just too much Ronald Reagan. Vietnam can change its policies and become a part of the global capitalist system. Actually their current approach is one of the two main sectors of the Dependency Theory, “Possibility of Dependent Development”. Therefore, I’m not opposing to that. I just think that the article is sided. Deliogul (talk) 22:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
In vietnam today and in the past the 'Veitnam War' as the Americans and the world dubbed it was actually known as the 'American War'. I feel that maybe this title should have precedence in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.43.212 (talk) 09:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Too much economy in the intro section
I believe the intro section of the article has too much about economy. I suggest we remove:
"The country is listed among the "Next Eleven" economies; according to government figures, GDP growth was 8.17% in 2006, the second fastest growth rate among countries in East Asia and the fastest in Southeast Asia."
We already have estimates of the 2007 gdp growth and thus should remove the 2006 figues. I don't think the "next eleven" economies is so important that it should be included. And all in all, the economy section is too long, and takes up too large a percentage of the intro. It gives the wrong impression of Vietnam being a rich country. Vietnam is a developing country with a strong economic growth and that's how the intro should introduce Vietnam. We could add that instead of the sentences above. Tridungvo (talk) 08:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Dai Viet
Why does Dai Viet redirect here, yet is not mentioned at all in the article? This should be corrected. Badagnani (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] vietnam motto
someone changed the motto of vietnam to "we love dong". unfortunately, i can't change it back to the correct motto as this page is "semi-protected". 24.143.85.56 (talk) 00:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
This is soooooooooo awsome!!!!!...........................NOT IT IS SO STUPID!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.113.185.158 (talk) 18:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Vietnam or Viet Nam
Why is "Vietnam" written as one word? On the list of UN members it's "Viet Nam". I'm not going to change anything, since there are so many references and we should have a consensus on style, but it appears that the government of Viet Nam prefers the two word form. Randall Bart Talk 21:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- In English media Vietnam. In Vietnamese language, everything is monosyllabic: Ha Noi, Sai Gon, Viet Nam and so forth. But in English itis uiniversally written in one word. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 03:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sino-Vietname War of 1979?
Perhaps the history section should include a brief paragraph detailing the Sino-Vietname War, or at least link to the larger article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.206.210.55 (talk) 21:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC) 58.186.12.159 (talk) 12:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Coat of arms
1)Official coat of arms [2] [3] uses gold and red only like the .svg version, while the .png version uses black outlines
2).svg version if much clearer and technically superior to .png version. Compare on 500px versions svg to png
--Avala (talk) 19:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Nam Viet, Viet Nam, Dai Viet
In this article, it says that
"Then, in 1804, King Gia Long planned to use the name of Nam Việt for Vietnam but the Qing dynasty of China disagreed and changed it to Việt Nam."
Okay.. Very interesting. But.. Could this elaborate any further (note sarcasm)?
Please don't let me leave hanging. The suspense is killing me.
So why did the Qing disagree with the name, Nam Viet? Didn't you think that people would want to know why? An explanation as to why the name Nam Viet was refused by China would be helpful. Thanks. Vlag (talk) 12:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Vlag
There was once an ancient kingdom named Nam Việt, part of which is now located deep inside China. So the short and simple answer is that Chinese don't want another state making claim to the former border of Nam Việt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.54.49 (talk) 00:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Vietnam in the Dutch Empire
Hello everyone! There is a discussion at Talk:Dutch Empire#Request For Comment: Map, because user Red4tribe has made a map of the Dutch Empire (Image:Dutch Empire 4.png) that includes significative parts of Vietnam. Would you like to comment? Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 15:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
New Map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dutch_Empire_new.PNG http://www.colonialvoyage.com/ square=tradingpost (Red4tribe (talk) 16:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC))
- Still OR, POV and unsourced (yours is not not a credible source). Please discuss stuff at Talk:Dutch Empire#Request For Comment: Map. This was just a request for comment, not a discussion. Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 16:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sports
What happened to the Sports section right under the Culture sections? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omfgitsalex92 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] History of Vietnam
Why should the main Vietnam article not use the name Second Indochina War instead of the "common name" Vietnam War? That's its well-known name in Vietnamese and most other languages. The earlier war with the French is given due credit as "First Indochina War", so it seems that the Second should be in the list as well. SteveStrummer (talk) 05:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Where did you get the idea that it's known as "Second Indochina War" in Vietnamese? DHN (talk) 05:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, I did fail to express that correctly, but I think the issue is plain enough: the fact that the Vietnamese refer to it as "The American War", and that Americans refer to it as "The Vietnam War", means that "Second Indochina War", a neutral descriptive term used commonly in academics worldwide, is the most suitable choice for a NPOV encyclopedia. SteveStrummer (talk) 13:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think only the Americans call it the "Vietnam War"; virtually everyone else does. Also, in Vietnamese academic circles, it's beginning to be called that as well. DHN (talk) 15:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
I disagree but I also cannot offer any hard evidence in support of my own position: I'll concede if you or another contributor wishes to edit the name. (However, I still feel it's really odd to leave "First Indochina War" alone in the list... but hey, c'est la guerre, eh?) SteveStrummer (talk) 19:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)