Talk:Lê Đức Thọ

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 articles
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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Politics and Government

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nobel Prize Decline

The Article reads that Le Duc Tho declined the Nobel Prize under the statement that "There was never a peace deal with the U.S. We won the war".[3] I'm not a hundred percent sure, but I couldnt find any evidence for that. Only 212 hits on google, seemingly referenceing this exact same article. The source referenced in 3 does not mention such a statement, therefore I decided to change the line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.122.253.190 (talk) 21:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Opening heading

I added a picture I found in the Vietnam War article, but, as I can see from the talk page there, there's some doubt as to who is who.68.145.207.92 22:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Paris Peace Accords were actually on January 27, 1973, not January 23 like this article states. Marknagel (talk) 00:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 08:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lê Ðức Thọ → Lê Đức Thọ — The current name for this page incorrectly uses Eth (Ð) instead of the Vietnamese Đ. The uppercase letters are identical, but the lowercase letters are ð and đ respectively and the incorrect encoding wreaks havoc with indexing. --Iceager (talk) 15:56, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Should be Le Duc Tho, which is the form used in English by the sources listed in the article. Powers ^T 19:29, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that no consensus has yet been reached at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Vietnamese) regarding the use of diacritics for Vietnamese names. I have no opinion on this issue as long as the full Vietnamese spelling with diacritics can be easily found in the article; the reason I suggested the move was because of the incorrect Eth (Ð). I don't care which spelling we settle on as long as this error is corrected. But I did a quick Google search for those who want to weigh in: "Lê Đức Thọ" (with the correct Vietnamese diacritics) gets 2,050,000 hits, "Le Duc Tho" gets just 82,100 hits. However, when restricted to English pages, "Lê Đức Thọ" gets 14,800 hits versus 34,800 for "Le Duc Tho". The incorrect "Lê Ðức Thọ" with the Eth (Ð) gets 7,450 English-language hits and 16,000 overall. --Iceager (talk) 23:12, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding the difference between two stroked Ds would be one reason for moving this to its normal representation in English, without diacritics; such errors are likely when we pretend to greater accuracy than we can attain. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose and Move to Le Duc Tho Seconding LtPowers suggestion. My search results for Le Duc Tho produced 45,000 google book hits[1] and nearly 20,000 google scholar hits[2]. An overwhelming number of google book hits for Lê Đức Thọ appear to be Vietnamese, even when doing an English language search[3].--Labattblueboy (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Le Duc Tho. Whatever may be the case about obscure villages, this well-known statesman should be (in this Wikipedia) under the name under which he was and is known in English; just as his opposite number is under Henry Kissinger, not Heinz. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. per Iceager. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 07:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. No need to discard the diacritics. — AjaxSmack 00:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support without prejudice to renaming to "Le Duc Tho". This move is non-controversial, and should not have been put to a vote, as use of the incorrect character is, well, obviously incorrect. As for the diacritics, I do not see a problem with using modified Latin alphabets as is, with redirects for ASCII/ISO 8859-1. Int21h (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested moves

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

– Per recent RfC and RMs at WP:VIETCON, and also increasing use of full Unicode fonts in modern English academic sources, e.g. Bruce M. Lockhart, William J. Duiker Historical Dictionary of Vietnam 2006 entry p.202 "Lê Đức Thọ" etc. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:31, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. There are some sources that can't type diacritics or have style manuals that prohibit diacritics. Wikipedia does not and, as an online, Unicode-based reference work, it need not reflect such archaic typographical limitations. This is the practice we follow with other Latin-alphabet languages (cf. Đurđa Adlešič, Jānis K. Bērziņš, Jiří Čeřovský, İsmet İnönü, Şükrü Saracoğlu, and Zoran Đinđić). — AjaxSmack 14:10, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per wp:vietcon ^walk victor falk^talk 15:25, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:USENGLISH. Diacritics are not English. See also: [4]. --B2C 08:10, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support: These moves are routine these days and can be speedied in the noncontroversial section at WP:MR; one will-not-drop-the-stick editor coming off a recent topic ban for such campaigning doesn't make a real controversy. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 10:16, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support, for encyclopaedic accuracy. We don't suffer from the constraints of the past. Many sources are beginning to embrace diacritics, per Beyoncé and Ruairí Ó Brádaigh. I see no reason to hold ourselves back with this one. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 13:42, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
support per nom. And WP:USEENGLISH is irrelevant here, they are not English words with or without diacritics.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 15:10, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom and practice. Agathoclea (talk) 17:16, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

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 Leadership Plans 1975 Offensive.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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:

Vietnamese Leadership Plans 1975 Offensive.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Nguyễn Văn Thiệu which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy usage of a single source

I noticed that the majority of this page is based on the book Our Vietnam: The War 1954-1975. I think more diversity in sources would be appropriate. Added a template to the page, feel free to remove after adding more sources, or if you think I am mistaken in placing the template, let me know. Thanks Untitled.docx (talk) 00:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]