Talk:Ngo Dinh Diem

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ngo Dinh Diem article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

Ngo Dinh Diem has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 31, 2023	Good article nominee	Listed

Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 26, 2004, October 26, 2005, October 26, 2006, and February 22, 2018.

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Religion: Interfaith High‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Cold War Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vietnam High‑importance

	Vietnam portal This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Southeast Asia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Buddhism Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Biography / Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Article name

A search of Google Books and Scholar seem to show that Ngo Dinh Diem is overwhelmingly more common than Ngô Đình Diệm (BOOKS 1259 on Ngo-Dinh-Diem -Ngô-Đình-Diệm, 70 on Ngô-Đình-Diệm -Ngo-Dinh-Diem. SCHOLAR 3,170 for Ngo-Dinh-Diem -Ngô-Đình-Diệm, 3 for -Ngo-Dinh-Diem Ngô-Đình-Diệm). On that evidence unless someone can show that it is faulty the article Ngô Đình Diệm should be moved to Ngo Dinh Diem following the WP:NC policy and the WP:UE guideline. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 08:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article back to the name it had before the move on the 8 June. I have altered the name used in the article to Diem in line with WP:MOS#Foreign terms "Within an article, spell a name that appears in the article title". In some cases where I have evidence that Diem was used in references I have altered those as well but where I could not find any evidence I left the name as it was.

Someone needs to go through the references and check which version of the name is used in the titles given because it looks to me if the third party article names have been systematically altered from Ngo Dinh Diem to Ngô Đình Diệm just because some Wikipedia editor thinks it looks correct. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And other alterations to modified letters have been made, unsystematically. We should follow the usage of English sources. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note I just ran into this and have moved the article back again since it was moved to other title. If this continues without discussions, then we probably need to move protect the article. If that is necessary, drop a note on my talk page. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we change the article name to Ngô Đình Điệm to correspond with other articles. 2601:182:501:6780:EC84:9D17:AC33:1452 (talk) 16:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hau-bo school, Hue

In this article, it's said that His Excellency President Ngo-dinh-Diem was enrolled at the prestigious School of Public Administration and Law in Hanoi (which is called as "Hau Bo School, Hanoi" in the infobox).

First, the school which Mr Diem was enrolled should be Hau-bo School of Hue. Please refer to this Vietnamese article introducing the school: http://tapchisonghuong.com.vn/tin-tuc/p2/c15/n22190/Truong-Hau-Bo-o-Co-do-Hue.html. The Hau-bo School in Hanoi was renamed before Mr Diem enrolled, and a school of the same name was established in the Imperial capital Hue.
Here is a biography of Mr Diem published in a Vietnamese newspaper in 1933 (https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k4543884g/f1), in which it's written that he entered the "Hau-bo school"in 1918. I think it is a reliable source for revising and refining his biography of his early years as an official.

源義信 (talk) 13:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: What photo should we use for the Ngo Dinh Diem?

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list:

Biographies

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

Should the photo in the infobox be changed? TansoShoshen (talk) 05:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cast your !vote

Option A (currently used)
Option B
Option C
Option D
Option E
Option F
Option G (if cropped)
Option H
Option I
Option J
Option K (if cropped)
Option L (if cropped)

TansoShoshen (talk) 05:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Personally, I like H because the others, including A aren't the best when in terms of MOS:IMAGEQUALITY. TansoShoshen (talk) 05:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This RFC is neither well-formed, nor, apparently, necessary. I suggest simply talking it over with other editors on the talk page; giving compelling reasons the status quo must change; and eschewing the many pictures you yourself do not think are good enough. Regulov (talk) 09:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this fails WP:RFCBEFORE and there's far too many options. However, since I'm here... the status quo is perfectly fine and none of the myriad of choices is good enough to warrant a change. Nemov (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Regulov and Nemov. The last discussion on this page is from May last year and it was about another topic. Like Nemov, since I'm here I would go with the status quo. If the status quo didn't exist I'd probably judge I to be the best of the rest, however I don't really like the level of contrast in that photo. TarnishedPath^talk 08:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]