Talk:Quang Trung

User:Vinataba's text

Will be use when writing, I don't explain anything for Quang Trung, so wait please Magnifier (talk) 11:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

However, some historians suppose that he was a coarse, uneducated peasant, even cruel [1] (that's why most of Vietnamese intellectuals at that time such as Le Quy Don, Nguyen Du.., denied to support him), and many of his achievements are extravagant (due to political reasons). See the historic story of noted Vietnamese writer Nguyen Huy Thiep: Phẩm Tiết [2] or the book "Tổ quốc ăn năn" by Nguyễn Gia Kiểng. [3]. He was accounted for killing one of the most famous general in his band Nguyễn Hữu Chỉnh. According to the famous Vietnamese historic novel Hoàng Lê Nhất Thống Chí [4], most of the northerners (Hanoi) were again him.

Vinataba's text, removed by Magifier, provisionally

Notes

• • Don't translate directly from Vietnamese version, it have very few in-line citations, some important historical in-accurates, and praise the Emperor a little too much. Do a reseach before write.
  • Some on-line sources that you can use: (in Vietnamese)
    • LỊCH SỬ VIỆT NAM TỪ THƯỢNG CỔ ĐẾN THỜI HIỆN ĐẠI
    • Việt Nam Sử Lược
    • Hòang Lê Nhất Thống Chí
    • CÁC TRIỀU ĐẠI VIỆT NAM
    • Khâm Định Việt Sử Thông Giám Cương Mục (somewhat unneutralized documents)

Please do not edit the English version directly if your English is not at advanced level. If you can make a rough translation of a Vietnamese source, please add it to this talk page first, so that someone who can write English can then make a proper translation and check that it matches the original Vietnamese. A general principle is always to translate into your first or best language, not the other way round. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I have no wiki to edit now except Wiki en (I left Wiki Vi and I don't want to use a sockpuppet). If I made any mistakes please correct it. Magnifier (talk) 05:01, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I found it very hard to correct the English because I wasn't sure what everything meant. My Vietnamese isn't very good either. It is a good idea to put a suggestion on the talk page first and then everyone can help check it before it goes in the article. Thanks. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Tay Son's conflict with Siam

• I would say that the backing of Nguyen Anh by Siam deserve some mention, especially the Battle of Rach Gam-Xoai Mut, of which the participation of Quang Trung was crucial to Tay Son victory. Manofedit2 (talk) 04:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Blanking from the article

After several years of constant military campaigning and rule, he defeated the two chinese army (Chinese Xiem army and chinese Man Thanh army) 
he won the battle at lighting speed, within five days days Nguyễn Huệ's Tay Son army wipe out the chinese Man Thanh army and free North Viet Nam   
(Ha Noi) from the Chinese occupation.

The above was blanked by user "Badagnani" without proper explanation. Why? If the english is bad correct it as blanking constitutes to vandalism.Sea888 (talk) 01:07, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Corrected as:

After several years of constant military campaigning and rule, he defeated the two chinese armies (Chinese Xiem army and chinese Man Thanh army)  
and won the battles at lighting speed. Within five days Nguyễn Huệ's Tay Son army wiped out the Chinese Man Thanh army and freed North Viet Nam 
(Ha Noi) from the Chinese occupation.

Sea888 (talk) 01:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

The English is very poor. Badagnani (talk) 02:15, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Still it doesn't give the editor such as yourself to completely blank the material.Sea888 (talk) 06:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

It's fine?

By whose criteria is the English of this passage "fine"? [5] Such edits, by admins no less, seriously undermine the credibility of our encyclopedia. Badagnani (talk) 02:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I think NPOV and UNDUE violations are a lot more important. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

The English is absolutely terrible. This undermines our credibility. It's really inappropriate for an admin to revert in such a manner, without even taking the few moments to repair the text or remove it to "Discussion" for repair. Badagnani (talk) 02:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Still the above editor "Badagnani" blanked the material in such a manner that I question if his/her edits positively contribute to the Southeast Asia and especially Vietnamese articles. In this case the above editor "Badagnani" didn't repair the text as he/she has also accused editor "YellowMonkey" of not repairing the text.Sea888 (talk) 06:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Once again user "Badagnani" continues to vandalize this page without resorting to the discussion here on this page. See this edit as well as the others made recently.Sea888 (talk) 03:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Xiam Chinese, unprecedented national reforms, national savior of Vietnam, won .. and so forth

I have just tweaked the the lead and I have some comments regard to it.

• He was subsequently proclaimed Emperor of Vietnam with the name Quang Trung. <-- wrong! He proclaimed himseft Emperor of Vietnam before the campaign again the Qing. He did that to claim the Mandate of Heaven from the Le King (see Le Chieu Thong) and gain support of Northern Vietnamese.
• He set up a new system of administration and replaced the traditional Chinese script with the Vietnamese Chữ Nôm as the official written language of the country. -> His system wasn't a new system of administration, it was a new version of Le Dynasty system. Moreover, he tried to reduce the usage of Chinese script but hasn't finished yet; most of official document was written in Chinese character.
• His religious toleration won him the support of the growing Christian community and his campaign of the common people against the traditional elites won him the admiration of the peasant majority. He hadn't won the people in North Vietnam, they still considered Le Dynasty as the legitmate dynasty of Vietnam and many sholars refused to serve Quang Trung.
• Xiam Chinese <-- I think the editor who write this paragraph try to regard Siam and China as one contry?
• most popular figure in the country <--- I don't know where have the editor get this. But in Southern Vietnam, Nguyen Hue wasn't much popular due to the sack of Cu Lao Pho by Tay Son, Nguyen Hue's involvement in a massacre of Hoa people in 1782, and the popularity of Nguyen Anh. In Northern Vietnam, Tay Son had been regarded as usurpers for a long time after the fall of Tay Son Dynasty. And words like the national savior, won the battles at lighting speed.. should be avoided because they make the paragraph not neutral, Nguyen Hue was a good ruler but he wasn't a saint.

Moreover, The English of this paragraph is poor and should be improve. I found it hard to read. I will try to fix this article in the next summer break.--Amore Mio (talk) 12:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Le Thai Tong which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 1 April 2020

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

---

Nguyễn Huệ → Quang Trung – Quang Trung was the official name of the king while Nguyen Hue was his birth name; a google search for "Quang Trung" ([6]) yields 19 million results while "Nguyễn Huệ" ([7]) yields only more than 5 million. Also, other Vietnamese kings, for example Lê Thánh Tông, Lý Thái Tổ, Trần Nhân Tông or Gia Long all use the official names as their page titles Mr Vinx (talk) 13:36, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support Vietnamese page is also named Quang TrungJmouritz127 (talk) 00:10, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm araid that what other language Wikipedias name their articles is irrelevant here. Andrewa (talk) 21:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
• Support, on the grounds of consistency with other articles in English Wikipedia as demonstrated by nom. The number of ghits supports this but would not of itself justify a move. Andrewa (talk) 21:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.