Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zrdragon12 (talk | contribs) at 01:50, 9 October 2012 (→Think Before You Act). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Here for any inquires.

Harassment

If you are being harassed by another editor, which you are, and they have been warned, please avoid making it worse by responding by repeatedly communicating with them, challenging their edits, or whatever. Focus on making contributions to our project. User:Fred Bauder Talk 11:48, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I am going to take your advice from now on. Cheers.Zrdragon12 (talk) 12:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hoang Van Chi

I don't want to harass you, but when was Hoang Van Chi "proven" to be a liar? He seems to have been a man of great integrity.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 05:34, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe that he used quotes in his book that turned out to be lets say not really accurate. Anyway I did not know him,he might have been chocolate Zrdragon12 (talk) 05:42, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Death Toll in North Vietnam

You raise a good point. We know (roughly) how many people were killed after 1975 in executions, camps, slave labor, famine, boat people, the Highlands offensive, ect. The truth is that nobody really knows how many people were killed in North Vietnam in the fifties. There were several reforms--"rent reduction", "political struggle", and "land reform"--and the land reform had two parts. Estimates vary widely for each, and some sources just combine the death tolls and refer only to the land reform. Others take low land reform execution estimates and act as though they are the total for all of North Vietnam's democide in the forties, fifties, and sixties. I've not seen a single estimate for how many people died in the camps during those years outside of Rummel, and he just estimates it by assuming a certain camp population and annual death toll based on the population size and other communist regimes.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 23:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes it is difficult and we should try to do something about it.My suggestion would be to get figures from the mid range and put them in.I doubt it is possible to get anything close to the real figures for each individual event and as you say some historians/authors just lump everything together. Might take a while to do but make it a work in progress.Possibly set up a section on the talk page to discuss which author/government etc is throwing out what figures.we can leave Rummel out as I believe his theory is not that good and he tends to over estimate.Zrdragon12 (talk) 00:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe Rummel's numbers should be kept in as he is a credible schorlarly source, and it often overlaps with estimates made by other academics and scholars, however I do agree with both of you that there needs to be more diversification of academic analysis and study on these death tolls added on this article, though this will be difficult because no foreigners are allowed into these North Vietnamese gulags or land reform show trials and persecutions, to conduct any very accurate and detailed study into these events and suggest a very accurate number as to how many were killed and how many were imprisoned into hard labor etc. Even the info South Vietnam got about the Northern land reform, and its victims, were either from North Vietnamese defectors who defected to the South during the war under Chieu Hoi, or part of the 1,000,000 refugees from the North who fled in 1954 (under Operation Passage to Freedom) who saw the land reform already taking place under the Viet Minh for a few years already in their area, or from interrogation statements made from captured Northern cadres. For any additional estimates added, we should post the middle figure first and foremost, but also of the low and high numbers generated. Nguyen1310 (talk) 03:05, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

No need to have that US deaths by year table, inconcise and not done for the ARVN or NVA either, final total number is enough and the only thing important. Nguyen1310 (talk) 03:49, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

OK.I have been sorting out your links, please could you do proper links when adding them. If a book then author,year,isbn and title and if a document, title,year,author. Just putting the url in is not good enough and gives no info as to what it is,it also looks better to a reader.Also I have made some major changes to the article today which I think makes it better,if you have any thoughts just post them here.Thanks.Zrdragon12 (talk) 03:54, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Bad Move

This revert was very bad behavior. I removed the second mention of famine and tagged the suicides claim; why do you insist on removing a source? I agree with you about the VC label. I want you both to stop edit warring.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I removed it because you and your mate kept readding the other piece about famine, there was no point having two pieces about famine in two sentences. I removed the first unsourced one and one of you put it back so I removed the other one, I am happy with what you have put there now. You should go tell Ngyuen to stop changing VC back to communist. Zrdragon12 (talk) 22:28, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

War in Afghanistan (2001–present)

Hello, please discuss this topic on article's talk page rather than edit war. I note that you're now up to three reverts here in 24 hours. Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 00:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, Cheers. Zrdragon12 (talk) 00:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

You should probably be blocked for reverting the word "communist" more than 3 times on Vietnam war casualties.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I think you should be block also,you have already been warned once today about edit waring. Zrdragon12 (talk) 00:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I was topic banned for one revert on a heavily protected article, along with three other editors. Your behavior on every article you've ever touched is as bad or exponentially worse, and you deserve a punishment. Your immaturity, harassment, POV-pushing, and possible sock puppetry is beyond the pale. I've never seen a more disruptive editor.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

No one really cares what you think. You are a guy who sat on the Vietnam war casualties page for years and did not even have a section there for deaths caused by the American military when there were clearly sections for all other combatants.I suggest you stop harassing me on my talk page.Zrdragon12 (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 06:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem and now I can bring up all your deletions of sourced material. Thanks Zrdragon12 (talk) 06:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 12:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Think Before You Act

You wrote: "removed piece that was stated twice,someone did some very bad editing here"

Do you know who made the error? You did!TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

You I expect Zrdragon12 (talk) 01:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you blind?TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

How did that ban work out for ya? LOL. Zrdragon12 (talk) 01:37, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This not a message board. You added duplicate text and then blamed others. Admit it.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:39, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I guess I'll just have to report you again.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:40, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Do you know that you were not going to get banned but I pointed it out the the admin that you were also edit warring and then the admin went back and then banned you. First off he only banned me and Nugyen.Zrdragon12 (talk) 01:41, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

What is this edit summary? You're the only editor I reverted, and you just reverted an IP 3 times! I was wrong about you: Your edits are not good faith. You are trolling; you're edit warring for fun. You even blame others for your own edits. I'm asking you again to apologize and revert yourself or go to talk.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Insults are not welcome here and if you continue then I will report you.Zrdragon12 (talk) 01:48, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Apologize for blaming others for your own edits.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:49, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Harassing other editors is also against the rules here, you should know you have been banned once. Zrdragon12 (talk) 01:50, 9 October 2012 (UTC)