Talk:Vietnam/Archive 6

Alphabetic order

I see the article is up for GAN. All the lists of sources need to be sorted into alphabetic order. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

What's "GAN"? DavidMCEddy (talk) 15:55, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@DavidMCEddy: Good article nominations.

Thanks. I've added that to Wikipedia:Good article nominations (disambiguation). — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMCEddy (talk • contribs)

@Chiswick Chap: Thanks for the suggestion Mr. Chiswick Chap. Any experienced user are welcomed to help me in the reference formatting. Night Lantern (talk) 01:02, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vietnam/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 09:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Happy to take the review. I will need some time though, as it is a long article. Will add comments as I go. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 09:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

While skimming over it, I noticed that the following sentences still need a reference, could you provide one?

• Vietnam has two World Natural Heritage Sites, the Hạ Long Bay and Phong Nha-Kẻ Bàng National Park together with six biosphere reserves including Cần Giờ Mangrove Forest, Cát Tiên, Cát Bà, Kiên Giang, the Red River Delta and Western Nghệ An.  Done
• Many ethnic minorities such as the Muong who are closely related to the Kinh dwell in the highlands which cover two-thirds of Vietnam's territory.  Done
• Traditional headwear includes the standard conical nón lá and the "lampshade-like" nón quai thao. In tourism, a number of popular cultural tourist destinations include the former imperial capital of Hué, the World Heritage Sites of Phong Nha-Kẻ Bàng National Park, Hội An and Mỹ Sơn, coastal regions such as Nha Trang, the caves of Hạ Long Bay and the Marble Mountains.  Done
• Traditional Vietnamese weddings remain widely popular and are often celebrated by expatriate Vietnamese in Western countries.  Done

Lead

• the lead should summarize the whole of the article. Currently, it only summarizes geography and history.
• as the nation expanded geographically and politically into Southeast Asia – why "into Southeast Asia"? Vietnam already is in Southeast Asia.
• On 2 September 1945, President Hồ Chí Minh declared Vietnam's independence from France under the new name of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. – But the land remained under French occupation, which should be stated, otherwise its confusing.
• In 1954, the Vietnamese declared victory in the battle of Điện Biên Phủ which took place between March and May 1954 and culminated in a major French defeat. – Somewhat repetitive (declared victory, culminated in defeat). Why not simply "In 1954, the French were defeated in the battle of Điện Biên Phủ", or similar?

Etymology

I am a bit at a loss here, I found it quite hard to follow, as context is often lacking. I would suggest to reduce complexity and explain all new words/terms in their context. Details:

• a variation of Nam Việt (Chinese: 南越; pinyin: Nányuè; literally "Southern Việt") – Is Nam Việt from the Vietnamese language? (you didn't state that anywhere). If so, I'm not sure why Chinese and pinyin are needed here; its a bit confusing, as I was not sure if "Southern Việt" is the translation of the Chinese word. If the Chinese translation is not central for this article, maybe just remove to keep it as simple as possible.
• You link "Nam Việt" to Nanyue, without explanation. So is it originally the name for that ancient kingdom?
• a name that can be traced back to the Triệu dynasty of the 2nd century BC – this is a bit imprecise. Is it because the Triệu dynasty named their kingdom Nam Việt? If so, this could be stated.
• If you mention the Triệu dynasty, you sould maybe also introduce the Nanyue kingdom?
• later become Emperor Gia Long – suggest "the later Emperor Gia Long"
• after seizing Annam's ruling power but the latter refused – Looking up "Annam", it seems to be a Geographic name and not a person?
• In 1802, Nguyễn Phúc Ánh (later become Emperor Gia Long) established the Nguyễn dynasty, and in the second year, he asked the Jiaqing Emperor of the Qing dynasty to confer him the title 'King of Nam Viet/Nanyue' (南越 in Chinese) after seizing Annam's ruling power but the latter refused since the name was related to Zhao Tuo's Nanyue which includes the regions of Guangxi and Guangdong in southern China by which the Qing Emperor decide to call the area as "Viet Nam" instead. – Too long, too detailed, and too convoluted. If I understood correctly, he asked the Qing emperor for a title, but the Qing emperor gave a name to the area; the last part of the sentence thus does not fit the first part.
• You could introduce the name "Annam" as well (an old word for Vietnam?), and also give a brief etymology here.
• Between 1804 and 1813, the name Vietnam was used officially by Emperor Gia Long. – Remember that this is a very fundamental article, and that it will be read by many people without any understanding of Asian history. Here, I would repeat that Gia Long is not a Vietnamese Emperor, but a Chinese one. Even earlier, I would also make clear why the Qing dynasty is important and deserves mention (I guess because it was the leading power of eastern Asia, but I would mention this).

@Jens Lallensack: Hello Mr. Jens Lallensack. Thank you for taking your time to reviewing this. Please give me additional time to fix those issues since I just found out today this reviewing had started a week ago. Night Lantern (talk) 00:56, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Sure, we have time. I see that in general the article still has some way to go before it meets Good Article criterion 1 ("well written"). I'm happy to work with you through that. We now have two options: We could continue the detailed review, working through the article section by section. Or we could fail the nomination for now, and I give general advice for the remaining sections, and you just resubmit when you are done. The second option would have the advantage that you can take as much time as you need, and that you can request a copy edit for prose and grammar before resubmitting. I am myself not a native speaker, so my language skills here are limited. But if you prefer to continue the nomination to keep you motivated, that's totally fine also! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 15:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Jens Lallensack: Sorry for the late reply Mr. Jens Lallensack. For the advice in the remaining section, that will be really help me alot! Thanks! I agree we could fail it now before working it thoroughly since there is still many that need to be improved. Night Lantern (talk) 07:12, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@Night Lantern:, all right. A take a more detailed look at those sections where I know a little bit about below:

• The section "Vietnam war" is well written. However, the first of the three paragraphs is almost exclusively about numbers of deaths resulting from North Vietnamese land reforms. On the other hand, the war itself is barely discussed; the section is therefore very imbalanced. I would suggest to reduce the land reform death count discussion to one sentence and expand the war section, which leaves out a lot.
• In recent years, a number of sign languages have developed in the major cities. – needs source.
• The official national language of the country is Vietnamese (Tiếng Việt), a tonal Austroasiatic languages (Mon–Khmer) which is spoken by the majority of the population. – how many? Maybe give percentages for the languages?
• In its early history, Vietnamese writing used Chinese characters before a different meaning set of Chinese characters known as Chữ nôm developed between the 7th–13th century. – What does "different meaning set" mean? Furthermore, this sentence remains unclear to me; is this purely a historic fact, or is it still used today (and if yes, to what extend?).
• The folk epic Truyện Kiều ("The Tale of Kieu", originally known as Đoạn trường tân thanh) by Nguyễn Du was written in Chữ nôm – What has this to do with the languages now? How does it relate to the rest of the paragraph? What is the significance? Please explain.
• Vietnam's minority groups speak a variety of languages, – how many languages are there (and how many endemic ones), are there numbers?
• The "Prehistory" section is a bit poor, there is currently a lot of highly interesting archaeological work going on, and much more to say about those early cultures than just listing when what appeared first.
• I suggest to make the "Administrative divisions" map and list expandable on click.

Closing comment: The quality of many sections is good, and the article has potential. Some sections however still require significant work and do not meet GA criterium 1 ("well written"). For the "Dynastic Vietnam" section, I would propose to reduce the amount of names, and provide more background. Just listing the dynastic successions does not give the reader a deeper understanding of the history. Try more to explain what was going on, help him to make connections, focus on the most important "turning points" of history. For other sections, I suggest to have a look at balance. Do all aspects of the subject get the focus they deserve? This may require shortening of excessive sections and expansion of others. When done, I suggest to re-read the text with as much distance as possible, checking if the flow of information is logical, information is connected to each other, and if the info can be understood without previous knowledge. Last, I propose to request a copy edit, and resubmit to GAN! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Current reference style

The current reference style is really unconventional and makes the article heavier in size. Given that geography articles like this one should be comprehensive and succinct, I personally don't support the current reference style. But I want to hear comments from the contributor. Looking forward to that — HĐ (talk) 13:13, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Night Lantern: I believe user Night Lantern is the contributor of this reference style. Do you have any comment regarding my opinion? — HĐ (talk) 05:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

@HĐ: Hello Mr. HĐ. Regarding the reference style.. I'm using the same style like what has been used in the Hong Kong article. As of 18 January 2019, the Hong Kong article has a total page length of 157,481 bytes as compared to Vietnam with 298,085 bytes. As what has been stated and set by MediaWiki, the current maximum limit for Wikipedia article size is 2048 kilobytes = 2,098,175 bytes. I have conducted several tests from both my personal computer and smartphone before using such reference style with the article seems to be fine in both gadgets with no crash or any sudden exits from the internet browsers. The United States article which has a good article status (as of today) and using the normal and several other similar references style (as also been used in the Vietnam article) are much more heavier with 415,933 bytes. If you wish to design the reference much better, there is no problem to me since "any work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone per the Wikipedia policy" but please make sure it is also accessible from other gadgets without any crash. Night Lantern (talk) 08:18, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

@Night Lantern: Thank you for addressing my concern. With the data of articles' size, I would argue that the difference in size is due to the content rather than reference style. That said, I am completely OK with any preferable style, but I want to know if there is any significant advantage of the current reference style to the previous one. The change you made indicated the article's size increased by 104,998 bytes, which is very considerable because the content is merely the same. I personally prefer the current reference style for academic journals or books, but not for online websites. — HĐ (talk) 08:36, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

@HĐ: You're welcome, thank you also for pointing this issue. That's right, generally it is only "article tidiness issues" since at the time before starting to rewriting it..I feel the latter style seems to be more tidy than the basic reference style, taking Rwanda (with current featured status) as another example using the style other than Hong Kong with only 161,289 bytes. Regarding to its current size that have been increasing, it is not the work of me alone since the article have been expanded and divided into several more sections by three different users as you can see on the history ("[1], [2], [3]"). At first, I wish the article to be less divided but somehow other editors seems to think otherwise. Night Lantern (talk) 08:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

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

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

• Amit Offir's Book - 24-8 (Vietnamese Edition).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:07, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Telecommunication Infrastructure

One should add a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_in_Vietnam

Chrisblog (talk) 09:53, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Chrisblog: Ah yes, thanks for the suggestion Mr. Chris! I almost forgetting about that. :) Night Lantern^halo? 10:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done Night Lantern^halo? 03:45, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

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

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

• RMIT Vietnam Saigon campus.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2019

The map in the infobox shows/uses Location Vietnam ASEAN.svg, but the Legend-link points to Vietnam on the globe (Vietnam centered).svg. They should be the same.

Either

| image_map = Location Vietnam ASEAN.svg

or

| map_caption = {{map caption |location_color=green |region=[[ASEAN]]|legend=Vietnam on the globe (Vietnam centered).svg}}

needs to be changed. 184.101.64.90 (talk) 04:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done Roadguy2 (talk) 05:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

• Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan 2012.jpg
• Parade Unification.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2019

2402:800:6312:AC29:F8C8:476E:A5DC:8239 (talk) 15:06, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Zingarese talk · contribs 18:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

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

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

• Vietnamese Book Store in District 1, HCMC.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:21, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Official Language

So is there an official language or not? The bulk of the article implies that Vietnamese is the official language, but the infobox says no, and cites an article saying that Vietnamese isn't the official language --Dramartistic (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Depends on whether you interpret "national language" as "official language" or not. Vietnamese is specified as the "national language" in the constitution. In practice, all interactions a person has with the government would also be in this language. DHN (talk) 01:44, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Vietnam War?

What exactly is the Vietnam War? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.113.187.97 (talk) 18:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

srsly? Bainst (talk) 04:15, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Preliminary result of Vietnam population and housing census 2019

As of 00:00 01 April 2019 Vietnam population is 96.208.984 persons. Could some one please update it? I don't know how to edit the templates. Source from Vietnam GSO: https://www.gso.gov.vn/default_en.aspx?tabid=515&idmid=5&ItemID=19281 Thanks Mrfly911|talk 05:06, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Vietnam anthem rude words

Someone edited vietnam anthem so it contains rude words in english caption. For example the text should be "for the nation" and it is "for the D*cks" I can´t edit the page. please fix it asap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladislav Cajhan (talk • contribs) 10:14, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for informing us about this issue. I have accordingly reverted the vandalism ;) HĐ (talk) 10:20, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

To the author and admin

i am a vietnamese .This page is wrong officially in vietnamese is "Cộng hòa Xã hội Chủ nghĩa Việt Nam" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Havodich (talk • contribs) 11:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2019

change the year in the text about transportation "Vietnam will have another seven international airports by 2015" to "Vietnam will have another seven international airports by 2025" - it is an obvious mistake as can be seen from the context - all other references in that paragraph are about 2025 sarma (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Done; probably a glitch, but that was an easy fix. Thanks, HĐ (talk) 06:44, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

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

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

• Parade Unification.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:07, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

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

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

• Portrait of Nguyen Phu Trong.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:41, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Catholicism hyperlink

I've noticed that the hyperlinks in the "Religion" section link to the general Catholic Church page and I thought it might be more useful and relevant to have at least one of them link to the more specific Catholic Church in Vietnam page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.231.32 (talk) 11:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done --MarioGom (talk) 12:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2020

Change any dates written with BC or AD to be written with BCE or CE. 174.63.196.239 (talk) 17:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Not done: Per the simplified manual of style AD and BC, or CE and BCE can be used. Since AD and BC is already in use in this article, there is no need for a change. {{replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 17:03, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Government Section

I think this article needs some clarification but I'm not qualified enough to know how to fix it.

When discussing the parliament, the article states that it is open to all parties, but later on in the human rights section, it says that all other parties other than the Communist Party are illegal. Is this a contradiction or am I missing something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryce66 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Open to "all parties", as long as they're approved by the Vietnamese Fatherland Front. In practice, about >90% of National Assembly members are Communists, while about <10% are nonaffiliated. DHN (talk) 22:22, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

DHN: So both claims in the article are wrong, right? The legislature is open to all parties. and [...]the operation of all other political parties being outlawed. This would need clarification in both sections. --MarioGom (talk) 09:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

MarioGom I'm not sure what the "all parties" means - they probably don't mean political parties, as all other political parties are banned since 1988 (before that, other parties were allowed, such as the Democratic Party of Vietnam, but they had to exist under the auspices of the VFF). All the non-Communist members of the NA are independent - they don't belong to any political party. DHN (talk) 19:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2020

The island of Phú Quốc (or in Cambodian "Koh Tral") is currently under administration of Vietnam (as a district of Kiên Giang) and most people living on the island are Vietnamese. Historically, it has been colonised from the old Khmer Empire territory by a Chinese-Vietnamese man called "Mạc Cửu" who lived in Đàng Trong (a region which covers whole Southern part of the kingdom of Đại Việt) and supported Nguyễn Lords (the de facto rulers of the region back then). Despite being a disputed territory, the second image of both Vietnam and Cambodia articles shows that the island is a territory of Cambodia. However, the article Phú Quốc on the other hand states that the island is Vietnamese territory (there isn't even the Cambodian name "Koh Tral"!). As a Vietnamese wikipedia user, I find this insulting and unprofessional and request for an update for the articles. NhatMinh1701 (talk) 14:24, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Not done: See my response to your identical comment at Talk:Cambodia. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Info box

Since Hongbang is a legendary, Vietnam's first formation of Imperial dynasty is in 204 BCE (Zhao dynasty) and vanished in 30 August, 1945 (Bao Dai), not 1802! ~anonymous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.255.223.72 (talk) 17:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

The source does not suggest eating dog meat is an 'irresistible habit'

...yet that is used in single quote marks in the article, instead the source (BBC) 353 provides a comment from a journalist as follows:

"but it still remains "very much a deep-rooted habit", according to Linh Nguyen, a journalist with the BBC's Vietnamese service."

Please update. 'Irresistible' is not substantiated and also paints a very different - and misleading - picture to 'deep-rooted'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LiamWard1985 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Late, but I have changed the sentence to "though some noted that the consumption of dog meat will remain an ingrained habit among many people". Seloloving (talk) 23:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• United States Navy Band - Tiến Quân Ca.ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:38, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Sources for areas and population

Just a note (more about Vietnam articles in general than this article, but WikiProject Vietnam seems for all intents and purposes dead)

When fixing Provinces of Vietnam, I found that the area and the population data in most of articles are unsourced.

Best original source for areas per province I found is this one -; (as a cheat for better copy-paste than PDF inside RAR, you can use this link, but strictly speaking not original source - https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/bat-dong-san/Quyet-dinh-2908-QD-BTNMT-2019-phe-duyet-va-cong-bo-ket-qua-thong-ke-dien-tich-dat-dai-428327.aspx ) - and for population this one -

I plan to go through province pages and add those there, but so far did only in Hanoi. :D --- Running 10:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

References

Vietnam/Chapter First Indochina War

I am sorry. This chapter is unfortunately a full propaganda for the communist Viet Minh.

1) It gives the impression, that only and only Viet Minh ist the unique resistance movement against the french colonialists, what it is not true. At this time the communist Viet Minh was fully supported with weapons by the commununist Russia and China. The other vietnamese resistance movements, e.g. vietnamese Kuo Ming Tang, were systematically eliminated and destroyed by the communist Viet Minh. The Geneva Accords of 1954 was more or less an agreement between the french colonialists and the communist Viet Minh. No more. Neither the french colonialists nor the communist Viet Minh has represented South Vietnam. That ist the main reason, why South Vietnam never recognizes the Geneva Accords of 1954.

2) Remark to the map showing the "Situation of the First Indochina War at the end of 1954": Question: Where does the map come from? From which source of information? From the french colonialists? From the communist Viet Minh? NEITHER THE SOURCE COMING THE FRENCH COLONIALISTS NOR FROM THE COMMUNIST VIET MINH IS TRUSTWORTHY.

3) Remaek to "... The defeat of French colonialists and Vietnamese loyalists in the 1954 battle of Điện Biên Phủ allowed Hồ Chí Minh to negotiate a ceasefire from a favourable position at the subsequent Geneva Conference..": The usage of the wording LOYALIST is an INSULT to the Vietnamese National Army.

By the way: The article is mainly based on the source of information coming either from the former french colonialists or from the USA or from the communist Hanoi Regime.

Source of information coming from the Republic of Viet Nam is fully missed.This information lack gives doubt to the objectivity of the article. Beautiful Bavaria (talk) 16:39, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome to add information regarding other resistance movements that took part in the war for Vietnamese independence, there appears to be relevant information at Việt Nam Quốc Dân Đảng, which seems to be the "vietnamese Kuo Ming Tang" that you reference. If you follow the sourcing on the map it appears to be created based on two German language books, so neither French nor Vietnamese sources. As for your final complaint you're also welcome to change this wording from "loyalists" to simply a reference to the Vietnamese National Army. Hope that helps. 68.42.73.202 (talk) 09:28, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2020

In the section "Culture": "Despite this, there is are Chinatowns in the south" 80.3.103.8 (talk) 13:01, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2020: Please remove picture of New York, New York. I was in Country of Vietnam and not in New York.

99.36.168.92 (talk) 12:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. © Tbhotch^™ 16:32, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

In the formation table there is a misleading Term at 1887

To use the term french protectorate is misleading. To call it protection was a colonial tactic to make it look better. Let's keep it honest and change it to: came under french occupation in 1887 Open first (talk) 08:13, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Edits at the map and list of provinces

Somebody did a lot of editing to the list of provinces by that map of the provinces. I had recently done some substantial editing myself. Some of the new edits I don't have a problem with. Unfortunately, the ones that are problematic are also the ones that need by far the most work to change individually. So I'm going to revert the whole thing, and if it's decided that some of the newest edits should be there, it's not difficult to put them in. Let me run through things.

• The biggest problem is, someone removed the numbers I had added to each province and municipality in the list. I had matched the provinces on the list to those on the map--where the provinces are numbered; they are a key to the map, and I really think they should stay.
• I had rearranged the list from four columns to three columns. On my screen, at least, with three columns the list lines up alongside the map. Someone changed it back to four columns. Now the map sits on the left and the list sits on the right, but since they don't fit side by side, the list goes awkwardly underneath the map (and the page requires more scrolling than it needs to).
• A small detail: I had slightly reordered the regions to begin with Northwest, Northeast, Red River. I thought it made a logical sequence from the top left down to the bottom (it also, VERY approximately, runs from low-numbered to higher-numbered provinces). Someone reversed that. But I'm not so in love with the way I did it that I'm going to dispute it. My revert will necessarily put it back the way I had it, but I won't make an issue if someone to change it back.
• A trivial one: Within the lists of regions, I moved the five Centrally Controlled Municipalities from the bottom of each list to the top. I'm not sure why I did that, except that the five of them had numbers 1 through 5 on the map, and I guess I thought it looked more sensible with those numbers given first. Someone moved them back. But again, that's a detail I won't quibble over.
• A tricky one! I had moved two provinces, Lào Cai and Yên Bái from the Northeast Region to the Northwest. Someone moved them back. I moved them because I'd thought that they were incorrectly listed in Northeast. Since then, I've gathered that these two provinces belong to one region but are often considered as being in the other. I thought of annotating that detail, but the only source I've been able to find about that (I don't know Vietnamese) is Wikipedia itself. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Just a note. I got that map from Vietnamese wikipedia and I am not totally sure where the numbers are even from. I can find out later. - Running 03:52, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

I _think_ the original authors on the VN wiki just made the numbers up. They are _not_ ISO 3166-2:VN numbers. - Running 03:59, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

We can use the ISO numbers and be done with it, but those skip some numbers because of how the provinces changed (there is no vn-08, and the municipalities have no numbers but just letters). When the government lists the provinces, in census data for example, they use a different ordering. But I guess we can use ISO. - Running 04:37, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I pretty much PRESUMED the numbers were assigned by whatever individual created the map. I don't think it occurred to me to think otherwise--in fact I've contemplated reorganizing them a bit in the northwest area. But still, the map is here, the list is here--the numbers on the map, by themselves, don't help the reader much, without them following links. So I put matching numbers on the list of provinces. Uporządnicki (talk) 11:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Running I just reread what you wrote, and I think I need to clarify something. The problem isn't the numbers on the map. The problem is that after I put the numbers on the list to match the ones on the map, someone undertook to take the numbers off the list. I don't know why. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:00, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah I know; still, if we use numbers, they should not be completely arbitrary :) I asked the original map author here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thanhdien8421 --- Running 04:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2020

Request for an update on "human rights and freedom" in Viet Nam, considering that the country enjoys considerable amounts of freedom-of-press judging by Vietnamese news outlets such as Zing (https://zingnews.vn/) and Lao Dong Online (https://laodong.vn/). It seems that is primarily anti-state media that is banned within Viet Nam. 124.168.91.91 (talk) 08:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

If you could point to reliable secondary sources making that point, that would be good. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I understand that what I'm about to say will raise eyebrows. I hope that what is written here will not come off as arrogant, but more of a reflection of worldwide inequality. I personally cannot rely on many sources of information anymore since their world views belong primarily within the Christian Anglo-Western Sphere - which is what the article's tone of voice is mostly in. However, as a astute student of the Vietnamese language (and having visited the country several times to visit family), I have gained an enhanced understanding of Vietnamese culture as a result and it is getting more and more difficult to trust outside outlets looking into Vietnam's internal affairs, or to trust published academic sources judging other nations/peoples/groups in general. Western propaganda specifically has forced countries such as South Korea to swallow false narratives, which creates an overt environment of bullying neighbouring Asian cultures (like China, Vietnam, Southeast Asia continent). South Korea benefits from being "part of the club" with countries such as the US in such a way that the judgement piled on the rest of the Asian countries lies with how much of a US ally those Asian countries are. Negative judgement of particular countries has in turn created cultures where having to "chịu khó" or "suffer" from negative judgement is developing at a very high rate. I guess what I wish to say is that this Wikipedia article is incredibly biased towards a tarnishing point of view of Vietnam as a ""poor country"" with ""poor human rights"", when in reality it is a middle-income country where its citizens have achieved incredible educational success. Provision of basic services has improved significantly and access to households and infrastructure services has increased dramatically. 124.168.91.91 (talk) 08:40, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Strange edit to the list of provinces

Someone has made a very strange edit to the list of provinces and municipalities that sits next to the map of the same. It's now very scrunched up, and awkward to read. I did notice that that individual made several attempts before getting it the way it is, which suggests that it wasn't meant simply as mischief.
I went to the User's Talk Page to ask him about it (he does say that he is a he). But on the way, I noticed that 1) he almost never adds an edit summary, and 2) he's been involved in a number of contentious exchanges in which he denies that he is edit warring.
Anybody have any comments on what this guy has done? It does occur to me that it might have something to do with reading the page on different sorts of devices; I ONLY ever open Wikipedia on desktop computers. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

It appears fine on my screen, but it does seem like the kind of formatting that could easily lead to access issues. Did the previous colwidth work better on your screen? CMD (talk) 15:56, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

It worked very nicely. It was all just about the width of the body of the article. The captions and place names mostly fit each into one line. There was comfortable space between the columns. And it didn't all stretch way above and way below the map. The way it was set up before was largely my editing. But in doing things like that, I'm always looking things up and finding examples to imitate--so I'd have to go back to find out how I did it. And I don't want an edit war, if there is a good reason for this new way (easier for handheld devices?). Uporządnicki (talk) 19:05, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

For me the spaces between the columns are the same, just the column's position on the page is different. Checking on mobile, the columns appear below the image. CMD (talk) 01:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I just reorganized it a few minutes ago. I don't know if you tried it before or after I did that. Before that, for me, the columns with the province names were so narrow that all the Region headings and most of the province names had line breaks. Uporządnicki (talk) 03:16, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tien-Quan-Ca.ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2021

Change "Vietnam is predominantly a source country for trafficked persons who are exploited for labour.[251] A number of citizens, primarily women and girls, from all ethnic groups in Vietnam and foreigners have been victims of sex trafficking in Vietnam.[252][253]. " to "Vietnam is predominantly a source country for trafficked persons who are exploited for labour.[251] A number of citizens, primarily women and girls, from all ethnic groups in Vietnam and foreigners have been victims of sex trafficking in Vietnam.[252][253]. This has prompted the need for stronger border security between neighbouring countries, especially between China and Vietnam. Introductionneeded (talk) 09:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: The second and third source are the same. The second only talks about smuggling of goods, and illegal immigration. The first says "According to Professor Thayer, although smuggling might not be the main reason behind China's recent border reinforcement measures, illegal cross-border activity has been a major headache for both China and Vietnam since 1979, when the war between the two countries ceased. The persistent criminal network of smugglers on both sides, with the help of local officials and security forces, led to a series of issues, including the illicit trafficking of Vietnamese women to China, Professor Thayer said." It seems like the main reasons for the border walls/border security – at least according to those sources – is the smuggling of goods, and curbing illegal migration between the two countries. Feel free to re-open the request if you can find sources substantiating the view that human trafficking is what prompted the increased border security. Volteer1 (talk) 13:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2021

Mr. Vương Đình Huệ has just taken office Chairman of National Assembly of Vietnam. Please change Chairman of National Assembly of Vietnam in Wikipedia page Vietnam Quang Nhật Lê (talk) 04:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2021 (2)

Vương Đình Huệ is chairwoman? Image? Quang Nhật Lê (talk) 09:46, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

It's unclear what edit you would like made. Please explain the exact edit you would like made and provide sources. If you would like an image added please provide an image with no copyright issues. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I fixed the mistake. Thanks for pointing that out. Ltn12345 (talk) 11:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2021 (3)

Change image of chairman in Government and politics part Quang Nhật Lê (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Terasail^[✉] 23:05, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 May 2021

In the introduction, the last paragraph, the sentence starting with "Perceptions of Vietnamese urban citizens rated Viet Nam's corruption transparency poorly..." Change "Viet Nam" to "Vietnam." This is the only location in the entire article in which this spelling ("Viet Nam") is used. Unless there is some reason that it is spelled this way in this sentence that I'm unaware of, it should be changed to match the spelling which is used everywhere else in the article. Mlb96 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 18:07, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2021

Vietnam was listed as a developing country up until 2019 by the UN, until the US delisted Vietnam as a developing nation in 2020.[13] This is misleading. By many metrics, Vietnam is still considered a developing country (cue IMF). The fact that the US delisted Vietnam as a developing country has no meaning--it is used only for US domestic purposes of economic aids. The current phrasing is misleading. I suggest removing the whole US stuff, and retaining Vietnam is a developing economy only.

One more thing, Vietnam is a regional power,[10] can be WP:UNDUE. Citing a recent research paper from the University of California may be credible, but I don't think that one paper makes it objective to state that Vietnam is a regional power, at least too soon. Ippantekina (talk) 04:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Run n Fly (talk) 14:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Run n Fly:

• How do I get a consensus?
• The source for the US removal of Vietnam as a developing country explains itself: On February 10, the U.S. removed Vietnam [...] from its internal list of developing countries enjoying special trade preferences regarding countervailing duties (CVD)." Ippantekina (talk) 02:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 July 2021

HDI is 0.704 Not 0.708 The Mark-7032 (talk) 12:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Melmann 23:07, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Five-year economic plans were never "replaced"

In the "Economy" section, the article states that "the five-year economic plans [were] replaced by the socialist-oriented market mechanism." However, Vietnam's government has continuously issued five year plans from 1961 to the present, as detailed in Five-Year Plans of Vietnam.

The sentence should be removed or reworded to avoid misleading the reader.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:5521:4070:f1f4:9b39:bcab:6dd7 (talk) 01:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 July 2021

Vietnam is the fifthteenth-most populous country in the world, not the sixteenth-most like the Wikipedia page attests. 2600:1002:B00E:E5C7:7581:7DD4:FECC:D736 (talk) 05:14, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done, as per List of countries and dependencies by population. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 23:54, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 July 2021

change the english version of the anthem to either Army Marching Song or Song of Advancing Soldiers Noob251 (talk) 03:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 June 2021

This casualty estimate "A 1974 US Senate subcommittee estimated nearly 1.4 million Vietnamese civilians were killed or wounded between 1965 and 1974—over half as the result of US and South Vietnamese military actions" should be move because it is chronologically in the wrong place. It is placed in between mention of the 1968 Tet offensive and Vietnamization which started in 1969. There's no reason it should be here. The source says it is a 1975 US Senate subcommittee estimate and not a 1974 one and doesn't mention "over half as the result of US and South Vietnamese military actions" either. The source also states that of those 1.4 million casualties, 415,000 were killed, which might make the figure easier to understand if included. Anyway, this estimate should be incorporated with the other casualty estimates here " The war left Vietnam devastated, with the total death toll between 966,000 and 3.8 million".92.26.3.125 (talk) 13:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm requesting this sentence "A 1974 US Senate subcommittee estimated nearly 1.4 million Vietnamese civilians were killed or wounded between 1965 and 1974—over half as the result of US and South Vietnamese military actions.[148]" be moved to chronologically correct place and corrected per the source. It should be moved to the next section and incorporated with other Vietnam War casualty estimates like this "The war left Vietnam devastated, with the total death toll between 966,000 and 3.8 million.[154][155][156] A 1975 US Senate subcommittee estimated nearly 1.4 million Vietnamese civilian casualties between 1965 and 1974 including 415,000 killed.[148]". 92.26.17.140 (talk) 18:13, 30 June 2021 (UT

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲^(talk) 07:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

The line "A 1974 US Senate subcommittee estimated nearly 1.4 million Vietnamese civilians were killed or wounded between 1965 and 1974—over half as the result of US and South Vietnamese military actions.[148]" should be moved to the following section and with alongside other Vietnam War casualties and read "The war left Vietnam devastated, with the total death toll between 966,000 and 3.8 million.[154][155][156] A 1975 US Senate subcommittee estimated nearly 1.4 million Vietnamese civilian casualties between 1965 and 1974 including 415,000 killed.[148]". It's very very clear what I'm asking for. I have already explained clearly by saying "change x to y". Currently the line I'm asking to change is in a confusing place and misrepresented according to the existing reliable source.92.26.3.125 (talk) 09:11, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: The section Vietnam War seems relevant enough for a sentence about the results of US and South Vietnamese military actions. The time period it refers to is the same time period the section is talking about. Of course the Senate investigation was done after the fact–they're not going to be investigating it while it's happening.

Note: Here is a verifying source for the requested new text "including 415,000 killed." ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 08:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

I'll explain a final time to clarify because there seems to be some confusion, the text is certainly relevant to the section but it should be integrated with the other casualty figures and it's not currently in the correct place chronologically. It's a 1975 figure placed in between mention of the 1968 Tet offensive and withdrawal of troops beginning in 1970 which is very confusing and out of place. In addition the current wording misrepresents the source as made clear by the verifying source you linked, with the citation not actually estimating who caused what percentage of casualties.92.26.3.125 (talk) 12:18, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done I agree that the source is misrepresented. And it appears to be a figure more relevantly included in the Reunification and reforms section due it coming from the period after which the ceasefire agreement happened. I'm also adding this additional source: nytimes.com/1975/01/26/archives/vietnam-refugees-put-at-14-million. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 17:16, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Improve formatting in Etymology section

The etymology section is a wall of text right now. Could someone add a few paragraph breaks? I'm thinking before "In the early 8th century BC", before "By the 17th and 18th centuries AD", before "In 1802", and before "Between 1804 and 1813" at the very least. Justin Kunimune (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 August 2021

Add the audio file for the song "File:National Anthem Of Vietnam.ogg" to the page under the anthem section. 70.119.103.237 (talk) 20:43, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done — xaosflux ^Talk 13:27, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Emblem of Vietnam.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:15, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 September 2021

To include:

As of 2016, 99 percent of the population uses electricity as their main source of lighting, up from just 14 percent in 1993

Source:https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/vietnam/overview Changeanew (talk) 16:37, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: This is a direct copy/paste from the source. Also, where would corrected prose be added? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Maybe something like: "Vietnam was an impoverished state after experiencing myriads of conflicts, including the Chinese and Cambodian wars which left Vietnam in a devastated condition that was left politically and economically isolated for decades. By the time Vietnam achieved some modicum of peace, economic reform, as well as reestablishing and establishing diplomatic ties, only 14 percent of the population had electrical lighting in 1993, which then went up to 99% of the population having access to electrical lighting following rapid industrialization in a span of 23 years." Changeanew (talk) 13:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 October 2021

Vietnam is 331,292 km² according to a few sources. Change the area of Vietnam in the article please, thank you. TroubleDouble VN (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 15:38, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Necessity of the "Corruption and Human rights" section?!

In the fourth paragraph it has mentioned: "It has assumed a seat on the United Nations Security Council twice. Contemporary issues in Vietnam include corruption and a poor human rights record."

I believe that this section lacks of neutrality, or at least it needed a precise citation as I doubt that it is considered as a "common knowledge".

P/s: I am not denying that Vietnam actually has issues about those things, BUT I doubt that it is suitable for the opening section.

--Hwi.padam (talk) 16:39, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 December 2021

In the ethnic group, it is stated that "85.32% Vietnamese", actually the citation mentioned about 85.32% Kinh. The previous editor is misunderstanding ethnic group and nationality when translating the original document. Randevas (talk) 18:50, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done However, I invited others to revert my edit in the edit description if it proves controversial. Alduin2000 (talk) 15:16, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Religion in Vietnam

@Bbx118: I don't think you understand what I wanted to say. I think we can use 2 sources for the religion section.

The first one is "2019 Report on International Religious Freedom: Vietnam" by U.S. Department of State, using the estimation from Government Committee for Religious Affairs (GCRA). "According to January 2018 statistics released by the Government Committee for Religious Affairs (GCRA), 26.4 percent of the population is categorized as religious believers participating in registered activities: 14.9 percent Buddhist, 7.4 percent Roman Catholic, 1.5 percent Hoa Hao Buddhist, 1.2 percent Cao Dai, and 1.1 percent Protestant." The report also said that "others have no religious affiliation or practice animism or the veneration of ancestors, tutelary and protective saints, national heroes, or local, respected persons." This is the source currently used in the infobox.

The second one is 2019 Vietnamese census, conducted by the General Statistics Office of Vietnam. According to the census, around 86% of the population are classified as Tôn giáo không (lit. no religion). You can see the statistics in the pie chart.

Religion in Vietnam (2019)

  Không theo tôn giáo or Tôn giáo không (No religion) (86.32%)

  Công giáo (Catholicism) (6.1%)

  Phật giáo (Buddhism) (4.79%)

  Hòa Hảo (1.02%)

  Tin Lành (Protestantism) (1%)

  Others (0.78%)

Let me give a little bit of background here, the majority of Vietnamese people (including me) do not follow any organized religion. For example, I practice ancestor worship and go to pagoda/temple a dozen times a year as a tradition but I don't consider myself as a Buddhist and I don't know anything about Buddhism. I registered as Tôn giáo không. Vietnamese folk religion is not really an organized religion, I believe, but a set of local worship traditions. Everyone seems to observe some form of folk religion, some practices/customs/traditions...Many also blend traditional practices with religious teachings, like Buddhism. Sometimes, there is no clear boundary between local folk religious practice and some religions. I usually call Vietnamese folk religion "tín ngưỡng dân gian" (which can be roughly translated as folk beliefs) not "tôn giáo" (lit. religion) and think of it more as custom or tradition than religion. I also think the term used in the 2019 census is a catch-all term that can refer to anyone who do not follow any organized religion, including atheist, or those did not believe in any sort of spirit or life force, or "spiritual but not affiliated".

The source you mention is a survey by Pew Research Center published in 2012. According to the survey, they estimated that 45.3% of the population belonging to folk religions. The source did not mention the percentage of "No religion" (which you claimed to be 28.4%), nor the percentage of adherents of other religions. You can't use the number from DoS & Pew Research Center and simply subtract it like that. You can't "combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source". That is Synthesis of published material

References

Ltn12345 (talk) 13:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Understood. Thank you for your explanation! BBX118 18:36, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2018 and 22 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tiennguyenhotel.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 March 2022

Vietnamese is actually the official language. 70.71.87.75 (talk) 22:00, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:15, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Vietnam

As of March 15, 2007, Vietnam is no longer considered a country by the United States of America. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesearefacts5968 (talk • contribs) 02:46, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• National Anthem Of Vietnam.ogg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Agriculture is the Result of Land Reform?

The "Agriculture" subsection opens by saying that Vietnam's excessive agricultural production is a result of its communist land reform, but this original statement has no citations backing it up. Their agricultural output seems to just line up with their population pretty closely, so I don't think any explanation is needed. OECD notes that Vietnam improved its production over the 90s and 00s but also that government land laws are holding back scaling up production. An academic paper on the subject states, "These divisions and accumulations of land have created a great deal of disturbance in the way of organizing agricultural production and rural economy. The central planning mechanism, in particular, the model of agricultural cooperatives, a popular mode of farming production before Doi Moi, has not worked effectively" I think the stated text should be removed or perhaps changed to "Despite the constraints of several land reform measures, Vietnam…" Jumper4677 (talk) 14:37, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

References

History

Vietnam Why did the USA become involved in the civil war in Vietnam during the 1960s? 102.249.0.184 (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

-> WP:Reference desk. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 May 2022

I request to edit this article because I want to extend the human rights section. I feel like it does not go over specifics, and pretty much says that the situation in bad, and that it's a one party state. I would like to include more details like the situation of press and other freedoms. Vietnam is rated as a "very bad" situation according to RSF, and the government has developed "Force 47" and is a team of more than 10k personnel cracking down of dissidence. would also like to add more points on the section, like education indoctrination. Marxism-Leninism is a required class in Vietnamese schools. Thanks! I hope you understand. ZKevinTheCat (talk) 23:59, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 June 2022

In the Infobox, Vietnamese is actually de facto the official language. 70.71.87.75 (talk) 17:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 June 2022

Can someone add to the human rights section that homosexuality is legal in Vietnam. Thanks. CaoNgo (talk) 19:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Can't it just be linked to LGBT rights in Vietnam? The sources are there. CaoNgo (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 June 2022 (2)

As above, with sources. https://thediplomat.com/2020/02/the-fight-for-lgbt-rights-in-vietnam-still-has-a-long-way-to-go/ https://www.thevietnamese.org/2021/06/overview-of-lgbtq-rights-in-vietnam/ https://www.utopia-asia.com/vietlaw.htm CaoNgo (talk) 20:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Really guys? CaoNgo (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Will need to expand on the idea.....as simply saying it's legal is not the whole picture is it. Moxy- 03:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 July 2022

Include a credible assessment of post-reform Vietnam at the bottom of the "Reunification and reforms" section:

The World Bank considers Vietnam to be a development success story:

Economic reforms since the launch of Đổi Mới in 1986, coupled with beneficial global trends, have helped propel Vietnam from being one of the world’s poorest nations to a middle-income economy in one generation. Between 2002 and 2021, GDP per capita increased 3.6 times, reaching almost US$3,700. Poverty rates (US$1.90/day) declined sharply from over 32 percent in 2011 to below 2 percent.

T3hJ3hu (talk) 04:23, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

References

 Not done: That would be a copyright violation. We can't copy text wholesale from sources. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:38, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

“One of the fastest growing economies” change?

Vietnam isn’t one of the fastest growing economies. It’s in the bottom 35% I believe. Should I change this? FinnSoThin (talk) 04:34, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Adding Viet_Nam alongside Vietnam?

In recent years, the Vietnamese state has preferred the spelling of "Viet Nam" (2 seperate words with a space in between) instead of "Vietnam" as a single word. Cases that "Viet Nam" is found is in the new passport, the new ID card, in the official Government's site, and in recent national events' branding such as ASEAN Viet Nam 2020 or the 2021 Southeast Asian Games. As the Government of Vietnam is doing a movement that is somehow similar to Turkey with Turkiye (note that Vietnam's designation in the United Nations is also "Viet Nam" since the beginning), we should recognize the name "Viet Nam" in someway corresponding to the recent policies.

I would suggest "Viet Nam (___), also commonly recognized as Vietnam, officially the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, is a country..." Hwi.padam (talk) 09:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Government of Vietnam not do somthing to try changing Vietnam to Viet Nam in other languages, by rules or regulations to make it like Turkey, Cote d'Ivore or Timor-Leste. They still use three ways Vietnam - Viet Nam - Việt Nam. All of the above names are official. Eg: CPV's English home page https://en.dangcongsan.vn/

Further more, they still use adjective Vietnamese, not Viet Namese. 183.80.234.183 (talk) 13:18, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 October 2022

In the introductory paragraph, the English describing the borders is confusingly wrong. Change the verb usage of "borders" to "is bordered by". Dwvisser (talk) 15:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: See wikt:border#Verb, definition 3 and its example. I do see that there was a lack of parallel structure, which I have fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• National Anthem of Vietnam.ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:52, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 November 2022

I would like to add that information to the article it is also well sourced information GenZenny💖 (talk) 03:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. CMD (talk) 03:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 December 2022

I want to transfer this code from
| capital = [[Hanoi]]
to
| capital =[[File:Emblem of Hanoi.svg|23px]] [[Hanoi]]
Thanks! —Vp08122010 (talk) 14:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: MOS:INFOBOXFLAG. Colonestarrice (talk) 07:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 December 2022

Fix run-on sentence in header.

Beginning shortly thereafter was the Vietnam War, the conflict between communist North supported by the Soviet Union and China, and anti-communist South supported by the United States. Quangson306 (talk) 05:37, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done I have fixed that sentence and tidied up the text following it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2023

At the infobox,Presidential section,Edit:Võ Thị Ánh Xuân(Temporarily acting) becomes Võ Văn Thưởng Duongw ad (talk) 03:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 16:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 March 2023

Total area of the country was reduced without any source to back this reduced figure up. Therefore, that edit should be reverted until the appropriate source can be provided.  Latin Beau  03:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

 Already done by Greenknight dv. M.Bitton (talk) 19:05, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

To Add to tourism

Hạ Long Bay

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.129.55 (talk) 20:27, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• Vietnam People's Armed Forces.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

New emblem

Emblem of Vietnam (fixed for revision).svg Lee Gok Da (talk) 16:20, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 April 2023

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. The cited source is reasonable for what this article says today. Please establish a consensus for your requested edit. Izno (talk) 17:56, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 April 2023

To update towards the 2023 estimates for economic figures.

• List of countries by GDP (PPP)
• List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita
• List of countries by GDP (nominal)
• List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita

211.217.193.170 (talk) 07:31, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Lightoil (talk) 07:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Language use

Some of the language choices used on this page are very bizarre. Public schools are described as "state-controlled" and political posters are described as "propaganda". I've never seen these language choices used in wiki pages for American/Canadian pages. It feels like these terms are more acceptable on wiki pages featuring non-white and non-English speaking countries. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 04:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@The History Wizard of Cambridge I see nothing wrong with calling the posters "propaganda". That's what they're officially called by their creators (áp phích cổ động, áp phích tuyên truyền), for example [4][5]. As you're no doubt aware, "propaganda" has a different connotation in socialist countries than in capitalist countries. DHN (talk) 04:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

The wiki pages for Democratic Party (United States) and Republican Party (United States) do not use the word "propaganda" outside of quotations. Seems like one standard for political parties in white majority countries and another standard for Asians. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@The History Wizard of Cambridge Sounds like you're using this talkpage as a soapbox. I don't think those parties call their posters "propaganda". DHN (talk) 05:06, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Wrong year

Vietnam regained independence from China in 1427, not 1428; so someone needs to fix the information in the introduction table. 2401:D800:5F70:E4C7:94CC:DC07:976A:C9C1 (talk) 17:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Vietnam regained independence from China before its Later Lê dynasty was established. 2401:D800:5F70:E4C7:94CC:DC07:976A:C9C1 (talk) 17:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

As I understand, Le Loi drove out the Ming army in 1427, but established the Later Le dynasty and regained independence in 1428.Roy Bateman (talk) 10:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

No, in 1427. 2402:800:F986:93E1:440F:45CB:A2C9:108E (talk) 17:56, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

The Ming Dynasty recognized Vietnam as independent in 1427, but Vietnam only had a new dynasty 1 year later. 2401:D800:F191:9C67:BD85:F3D9:A880:91CA (talk) 06:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

typo

In the intro it says Vietnam “share” a border. Shouldn’t it be shares? Despressso (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah it should DedicatedVI (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Fixed, before noticing this conversation. I've also made some other edits, particularly to the climate section. Graham87 10:40, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Staged Photo

"Vietnamese science students working on an experiment in their university lab" --Very much looks like a staged photo meant for a university website. Is this really appropriate for Wikipedia? 108.4.212.116 (talk) 17:22, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Government

Vietnam’s governmental and political system is a "Unitary Marxist-Lenist One-Party Socialist Republic 2400:4050:8841:EE00:9D4F:BE47:C63F:5E67 (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a source to support this? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Another typo

Another typo that I cannot fix, because the page is locked (Extended confirmed protection) is in the Government and Politics section, Foreign relations sub section. The sentence in the second paragraph about Bill Clinton's visit should read "made a historic visit to Vietnam . . ." The "a" is missing. Packzap (talk) 20:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Typo

Typo: the percentage of Buddhists in the country is wrongly stated to be merely "4.79%" when it should be 14.79%, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Vietnam and the cited report to UN. 152.37.225.17 (talk) 14:10, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 January 2024

{{subst:trim|1= Goverment: "Socialist state" to Unitary One-Party Marxist-Leninist socialist republic within [[Ho Chi Minh Thought]

}} Tag Korp United (talk) 14:51, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 15:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

There are three edit requests below; hope you could help, thank you. Laitydegas (talk) 08:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 January 2024

Considering the damage caused to various cultures, facilitating slavery - for one example, it seems right to remove the "Honourable" from "Honourable East India Company". It is known by both names. 118.210.71.207 (talk) 10:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done Goldsztajn (talk) 09:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Page protection reduction

Should this page protection be reduced? 183.80.18.189 (talk) 15:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

You can message the admin who protected this page to see. TheRichCapitalist (talk) 04:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 January 2024

I saw an account that changed the year of Vietnam's independence from China from 939 to 938 in the infobox: I think this is wrong information because 938 was only the year the Vietnamese defeated the Chinese army in Bạch Đằng, Vietnam became independent from China in 939 when this year they declared a new dynasty (the Ngô dynasty) to replace Chinese rule legally, even in the link it mentions "Ngô dynasty" but not Bạch Đằng battle. 171.224.177.62 (talk) 11:31, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 16:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I want to change the year 938 to 939 when displaying the year Vietnam gained independence from China in the infobox. 2403:E200:96E:502C:83C:B7:D53C:7AB3 (talk) 08:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Vietnam gained independence from China when the Ngô dynasty was founded in 939, not 938. See Vietnam under Chinese rule. Even at the beginning of this article, it mentions: "The Han dynasty annexed Northern and Central Vietnam under Chinese rule from 111 BC, until the first dynasty emerged in 939". 2403:E200:96E:502C:83C:B7:D53C:7AB3 (talk) 09:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

This reliable source supports my point: https://www.britannica.com/place/Vietnam/Vietnam-under-Chinese-rule 2403:E200:96E:502C:83C:B7:D53C:7AB3 (talk) 09:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC)