Wikipedia

NguyenHue

Joined 16 October 2004

My Contributions

edit

signing comments

edit

Hello - thanks for participating. One suggestion: when you're commenting on talk pages, you can sign and date your comments by typing ~~~~. That makes it easier to see who's talking without having to check the edit history. Let me know if you have any other questions. ←Hob 07:57, 2004 Oct 21 (UTC)

More thanks for participating

edit

Hello and all that. Good to see you're doing okay. Don't worry about User:Jimmyvanthach being aggressive and getting into edit wars with him. Those who know him know he's a POV-pushing liar and I'm trying to get him banned through the arbitration committee, but that'll take a little time. Dunc|☺ 12:22, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

distorting history

edit

I love history, that is what I do. What I find both infuriating, and a bit confusing, is the efforts of some charlatan to tack himself onto the coat tails of a past dynasty to further his own political agenda. What's confusing is that the Nguyen Dynasty was never that popular to begin with. Public uprising in favor of the VietMinh forced the last nominal monarch to abdicate and then, as well as in 1955, when the Nguyen were ousted, no one was upset about it. They were almost always tied to the efforts of the French to rule the country. It seems to me they could have picked a more popular dynasty to try and ape.

I've been trying to add some more articles on the history of Vietnam, with more details, but from a neutral point of view. I honor and respect the memory of the emperors, but I think it is sheer ridiculousness to try and advocate turning the clock back. Asian monarchies as a rule don't have "restorations", once the Mandate of Heaven is lost, you can't get it back again, it goes to someone else. Personally, it doesn't seem to me that any of these people have the first clue of the actual history and traditions they are talking about. They certainly don't seem to know anything about research or credible sources for information.

User:NguyenHue


This is absurd

edit

When will you get it through your head that having someone repeat false information does not make it true? The International Monarchist League Directory you keep citing says specifically that it does not endorse every group listed on its website. If you're so well-connected with all these "princes" why do you need me to give you Vinh San's address? Look it up on his website. As for all of Buu Chanh's name changes, why don't you try reading his book, or perhaps even he is confused on what he is at this point?

You cannot prove something that is impossible, nor does it help to keep claiming that there are alleged professors who "confirm" any of this; no one can confirm anything because it is an absolute impossibility. Why don't you provide proof of Bao Long's endorsement if you have it? Not that such a thing would matter either. You seem incapable of accepting reality, so let me try again to lay it out for you:

In Vietnamese tradition, the only way a relative could become a prince was for the Emperor to make him one (i.e. a patent of nobility).

The monarchy ended in 1945 when the last Emperor, of his own free will, abdicated in favor of Ho Chi Minh. According to Buu Chanh, he was born only a few years before this happened, so there is NO way that he could have been made a prince, nor is it possible for Bao Dai to give anyone any position whatsoever after that time because he was not emperor anymore, he was a common citizen with no more power or privelage than you or I.

Did you ever stop to think, with all of your illustrious education, that maybe the time to do reasearch would be before spamming the web with flattering claims of this guy being "Imperial Highness Prince-Regent"? The record of you and your group here has not exactly been exemplary at following the rules and reasoned, objective discourse.

NguyenHue

Bao Long addition

edit

Nguyen Hue, I have initiated a biography for Crown Prince Bao Long, it is nuetral, would you please look it over and make any additional facts that you know of. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bao_Long Jimmyvanthach 15:25, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Mate, just ignore him. He's a first class crank. Dunc|☺ 16:39, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I am aware

edit

Most of the past bio's and pictures they have been posting here are copied material. My neighbor actually wrote the bio of Bao Long for the Tran Dinh website they keep passing around (I helped him with the English). From all I have seen, they have done nothing themself, simply copy work done by others, even from the "Royal Ark" website, whose author they have denounced as a "communist". They're a joke, insulting to the actual families of the kings, all of whom I have contacted are very reasonable, realistic and humble individuals, quite content to be regular people and not 'insulted' by the fact that no one is kotowing to them anymore. NguyenHue

I was just trying to encourage you not to get wound up by his aggressive actions. Well it seems that the arbitration committee are voting on this; see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jimmyvanthach/Proposed decision so it looks like he's in for a ban on editing articles relating to Vietnamese royalty, real or otherwise, but we are going to have to sort out the mess he's made. The likelihood is that most of it, including the copyvios will be deleted. Dunc|☺ 17:36, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
By the way, you can sign your name on talk pages with four tildes, like this; ~~~~

Request from User:Hawstom (Tom)

edit

I wonder if you would be willing to move your latest explanatory edits at Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh to the talk page at leave the "boring version" the way it was previous to your edits unto you and Jimmy can agreed on additions. This would be the most appropriate way to proceed with a controversial subject according to our Wikipedia policy. I am hoping that the two of you can do this on you own peaceably. I do not think amy material should be added or should have been added until there is a consensus at the talk page. Tom - Talk 17:02, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

and more...

edit

Can you please elaborate on what you understand is going on with Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh and generally what has happened to the claimants of the Imperial Crown since the fall of South Vietnam to the communists? There is a bit of a cultural divide between us Westerners and you, so I'd like to learn but I may ask some silly questions.

How is the throne inherited - eldest son, eldest child, chosen son, other way? i.e. is there anyone who takes preference over Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh. Is Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh a legitimate descendent of the last emperor? Is there a story behind him Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh; and what about these orders that he dishes out? I think I'm almost there in my understanding but not quite... Dunc|☺ 20:22, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm getting on top of this now. Can you work out who the real claimant to the throne is (the eldest son of the Emperor, or his sons if he is dead)? I've seen him mentioned, but I would like a name. Dunc|☺ 12:20, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for all that. We're going to have to create a report on this chap to see what's legitimate and what's not and then watch him like a hawk, and if he steps out of line block him. It doesn't exactly help that he can't write coherent English. Anyway, what do you know about Vietnamese War generals? Dunc|☺ 21:26, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That depends; which Vietnamese war and which generals? NguyenHue

/admin enforcement requested

edit

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jimmyvanthach/Proposed decision has almost come up with the following (I think it needs two more arbitrator votes to close the motion).

User Jimmyvanthach, User Celindgrenand and User Tran Van Ba are banned from editing articles which relate to the royal family of Vietnam and articles which relate to the recent history and politics of Vietnam.
Edits by User Jimmyvanthach, User Celindgrenand and User Tran Van Ba to articles which relate to the former royal family of Vietnam or to the recent history and politics of Vietnam may be removed by any user. In the event the banned users attempt to restore removed edits they may be banned by any administrator for a brief period (a day or less but up to a week in the event of repeat offenses).

I take it you broadly know the procedures? List image copyright violations on WP:CP, and chunks of text too. Dunc|☺ 12:19, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Oh no I see, /admin enforcement requested. Images that are over a hundred years old or so are public domain, but text found on the Internet isn't. Dunc|☺ 12:33, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
      Most of the images are considerably more recent than 1904 (if 100 years is the limit). As long as he doesn't try to repost them, I won't bother with the listing. Considering how long it takes for anything like this to be handled it seems easier to just do reversions myself. I would think though that after a while things like this would begin to add up. Frankly, I'm amazed the impersonations were not reason enough to have him banned long ago. NguyenHue 06:52, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

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

Shwebomin

edit

I've moved to vfd Shwebomin (is that how you spell it?) Dunc|☺ 13:02, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It seems that you are concerned that if the page exists, it would serve to somehow validate the claim. One way would be rewrite it to state how baseless the claim actually is. - Skysmith 08:45, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If you were aware of the history of the original poster of this article you would know how futile that is. He did the same thing with a Vietnamese pretender (that man's website even linked to the Wikipedia article as "proof" of his standing). He was banned from editing articles on Vietnamese royalty, so is now inserting his name & links on other articles. The only reason Shwebomin article is here is because he is partners with the Vietnamese pretender, both of whom seem to be hoping to gain "legitimacy by association" by having their pictures taken with notable people and cozying up with the Lao royals (who unlike these phonies actually have at least a little popular support among the Laotians). NguyenHue 03:46, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

Southeast Asia Imperial & Royal League

edit

If you'd like to justify your claims, go ahead on Talk:Southeast Asia Imperial & Royal League. But that revert war wasn't getting anyone anywhere. As the protection notice says: "Protection is not an endorsement of the current version." You may want to try being a little less heavy-handed with the statements that the "League" and those involved are pretenders.

As far as potential identity theft goes, I'm afraid I can't help you. All I can say that Wikipedia does not hand out personal information it is not explicitly made public. -- Cyrius|✎ 06:07, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

email

edit

We understand you're having trouble. Can we have an email chat please mate? I think there are evil eyes watching your talk page. You haven't provided an email address, so can you send me one please, or change your preferences; if you do email me including an appropriate return address. Cheers, Dunc|☺ 21:21, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Discussing?

edit

I am not taking the side of the people claiming to be royalty in this. There was an edit war in progress, and it needed to be stopped. If you wish to "detail the problems with the claims of these people, showing exactly how and why they cannot be what they claim", then do so on Talk:Southeast Asia Imperial & Royal League, that's what it's for.

As to your "inappropriate to discuss anyone or anyone's background" comment, I don't know what you're talking about. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:44, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Look, I'm going to be blunt. Take it to Talk:Southeast Asia Imperial & Royal League. -- Cyrius|✎ 06:35, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

reply

edit

I have a history degree, and contacted the Nguyen Dynasty for research that I was conducting about the Royal Family of Vietnam. Chancellor Tran Van Ba replied to me, and asked me to research some Nguyen Dynasty Historical paperwork sent me in an email. I was very grateful that I was given the chance to view Nguyen Dynasty documents, that I then translated in English and sent it back to him, for his website, and I also used it for my History chapter of the Royal Family of Vietnam, particular the Nguyen Dynasty.

  • And to do this, you felt it necessary to post a ton of unsubstantiated articles on Wikipedia impersonating Tran Van Ba and C E Lindgren? You just happened to start beating the same drum when these two usernames were banned? unlikely.

Van Thach is not be, and I stated it is not me, not ever Nguyen, Pham, Le, Quach, Tran, Duong, Phan, Ngo or Thach with the same last name are not related.

  • says you

I have no accusations against Joseph Crisp, Nguyen Thi Linh, Nguyen Trung De, or their associates in Texas. I read their websites and then informed and questions Chancellor Tran Van Ba, of the accusations they have made against the Nguyen Dynasty and Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh. I have come to the conclusion that I believe Chancellor Tran Van Ba, because of his long service to Emperor Bao Dai, and the Nguyen Dynasty, he told me that you were expelled from the Nguyen Dynasty.

  • Was this before or after YOU were calling yourself Tran Van Ba, just curious?

Also that there was removal of Nguyen Dynasty material that was taken without authorization, from their library. From my own conclusion, I felt it was important to bring this to light to the wikipedia community.

  • And the problems of your pathetic group are of interest to Wikipedia because...

I have never used any vulgar language, negative comments against you, or your group. On the other hand, you have used negative terms, "Rev. Moon", "absurb", "fringe group", to name a few, which is totally not acceptable.

  • The only difference between "Rev" Moon and Buu Chanh is one decided to name himself king and the other decided to name himself prince.

I have not violated the ARBCOM ruling and I have contacted not only BNguyen of your bias but other members on wikipedia.

  • You responded to comments directed at Bnguyen as an attack on YOU. This revealed your little charade and has not gone unnoticed by the Arb committee. Perhaps you can explain why claiming you are another person is an attack, yet when you claim I am another person, you seem to find that completely acceptable. Those personal attacks were made by you, not any of your aliases.

I am not a member but just conducting research on the Nguyen Dynasty does not mean I am member but I do have alot of respect and reverance for the Imperial Family of Vietnam that has been working for the goodness of the people.

  • Funny how the only "research" you've been able to present here comes from these people you revere so intensely. You just admitted your own bias right there.

As well, as I am a republican and feel that President Bush in his determination to lead this country in this time of war.--Jimmyvanthach 14:39, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Most republicans I know do not go around kowtowing to every self-proclaimed prince. If you believe in republicanism you should devote your energies to supporting the equality of all people instead of those who insist on grand-sounding titles to put themselves above everyone else. But, then again, if you think George Bush is such a great president, you obviously have alot of problems. Bush likes to think he's a king too.

NguyenHue 20:29, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

Nguyen dynasty

edit

Hi mate,

I think you'll just have to go ahead and revert them. The community here can't deal with idiots like him unfortunately. You could try to find someone with an interest in Vietnamese history and so on, but as I understand it most of them were puppets of the Frech and it is difficult to be nice about them.

And it's not just the Nyugen pages either, there is a whole infestation of bloody creationists that tick me off too. It's more than my life's worth to fight it though. Dunc|☺ 21:02, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NguyenHue&oldid=84195845"