Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 11:03, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 17:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC).

POV editing behavior of Jimmyvanthach

[edit]

(I'm adding this section to distinguish evidence specific to this username, rather than the evidence in the Tran Van Ba case copied below. Arbitrators, please refactor as you see fit.)←Hob 16:43, 2004 Oct 1 (UTC)

Edit wars and factual disputes

[edit]

From September 16 onward there have been edit wars on progress on Nguyen Dynasty (history), Bao Dai (history), and Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh (history) between Jimmyvanthach and an anonymous user at IP 216.183.37.*. The latter has removed references to "Prince" and "Prince Regent" titles claimed by officers of the Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League (Jimmyvanthach's employer) and to a meeting in which the former Emperor Bao Dai allegedly conferred these titles [1], and deleted an image purported to be the "Coat of Arms of the Nguyen Dynasty" [2], stating that these have no historical basis. Jimmyvanthach has reverted these edits more than a dozen times.

In support for his assertions, and in response to a request for documentation, he has referred to several websites [3] [4] which appeared to repeat the "Prince" title but otherwise did not address the factual dispute. To 216.*'s claim that there is no such thing as a "coat of arms" of any Asian dynasty [5], Jimmyvanthach has not yet responded.

Jimmyvanthach's edits have been less broadly POV than the earlier ones by User:Tran Van Ba; so far he has avoided adding irrelevant text about the evils of Communism, and has focused on advancing claims that various expatriates constitute royal or imperial dynasties. ←Hob 16:43, 2004 Oct 1 (UTC)

On Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League, Jimmyvanthach recently blanked the article [6] "because neutrality is being questioned".

User 216.183.37.* (signed as Nguyen Van Tuan) recently posted a comment [7] to Talk:Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League stating that Jimmyvanthach's claims about that group's history and membership are false, and that they have been promoting themselves falsely in other Internet fora. I have asked that user to present evidence, if any, here (and preferably to get a non-anonymous login). ←Hob 22:06, 2004 Oct 1 (UTC)

Statement of the dispute (Tran Van Ba)

[edit]

Note: this statement was copied from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba and refers to that user's behavior. User:Jimmyvanthach first appeared when that RFC was posted, and claimed that Tran Van Ba's edits were written by him. Tran Van Ba has not edited since Jimmyvanthach appeared, and was found to have the same IP address; see Sockpuppets below. ←Hob 16:21, 2004 Oct 1 (UTC)

This user has been primarily pushing his own POV, has reacted aggressively to attempts to help him write better articles and systematically copyvioed.

Description

[edit]

{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries}

POV edits

[edit]

The user states that he is an officer in the Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League. He has repeatedly inserted POV language into the article on that group, and has reinstated his edits after reversions, with no edit summaries or comments until Sept. 13. On that day he posted comments on the article talk page which indicate that he still does not intend to follow NPOV guidelines.

The user has added POV text to other Vietnam-related articles including Vietnam and Bao Dai. Attempts by other users to explain NPOV policy have met with no success. (That is, until this Request for Comment page was posted. Tran Van Ba has now added some apologetic remarks on one article, referring to the POV issue but not addressing any of the other issues mentioned here. [8] [9]) ←Hob 05:08, 2004 Sep 13 (UTC)

[edit]

Much of the content he has added comes from a V.C.M.L. website (http://users.panola.com/vietnam ); Tran Van Ba claims to be the webmaster of this site, which appears to be true. However, that does not resolve the question of copyright on the text and images. The user's only response to that question has been to post numerous unverifiable claims that the images belong to various members of royal families on whose behalf he operates the website. When it was pointed out that a large portion of text was a verbatim (and POV) copy from the website, he claimed falsely that it was not.

Others of the user's newly added articles on Asian royalty were copied from two other websites, http://www.oocities.com/vietmonarchy/ and http://www.jaffnaroyalfamily.org/index2.htm -- Tran Van Ba did not author this content and it is not public domain. ←Hob 05:08, 2004 Sep 13 (UTC)

images
[edit]

There is a need to establish that these images are public domain, GFDL, or fair use

Anonymous POV edits by this user

[edit]

Tran Van Ba and 198.26.120.13 appear to be the same (as evidenced by the history of this very page, where 198.26.120.13 posted Tran Van Ba's response to the charges against him [10]). This IP address had a long history of similar behavior in Vietnam-related articles (POV edits, and linkspamming to the V.C.M.L. website) before Tran Van Ba began editing under his own name. This indicates a pattern of willful disregard for Wikipedia guidelines. ←Hob 05:31, 2004 Sep 13 (UTC)

Impersonation

[edit]

User:Celindgren claimed to be Professor C. E. Magnus Lindgren. User:Tran Van Ba is User:Celindgren (sharing same IP address). The real Professor Lindgren claims to have been impersonated by a law student called Jimmy Van Thatch. User:Tran Van Ba admits to being a lawyer. (see Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba). It also appears that User:Tran Van Ba is impersonating the real Tran Van Ba on the Internet (see E-mails below). With Wikipedia relying on users to be truthful and trustworthy, this is quite serious.

User:Jimmyvanthach has apparently been trying to mediate with User:Tran Van Ba, but their behaviour User:Jimmyvanthach approves of User:Tran Van Ba's images, they didn't talk to each other, and both write in the same style, which suggests a sockpuppet is at work. One of Wikipedia's mediators should try to mediate, not a new user whom we cannot trust.

E-mail evidence regarding impersonation
[edit]

After reverting and commenting on POV edits by User:Celindgren, I (User:Hob) received an E-mail on August 16, 2004, which was signed "C. E. Magnus Lindgren." It had been sent from the "Celindgren" account via Wikipedia E-mail forwarding. See Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba#the_mystery_E-mail. I followed up with an E-mail to C.E.M. Lindgren at the address listed on his university home page, asking if he were really the author of the edits in question and the E-mail. He denied that he was, and said Van Thach, who was working for Tran Van Ba, was impersonating him and also editing under Tran Van Ba's name. See Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba#claim_of_impersonation. Jimmyvanthach posted a non-specific response to Lindgren on the Talk page (though Lindgren has never participated there directly) saying that these claims were "inappropriate" and saying he would follow up privately, but as far as I know, he has never specifically addressed the question of whether he was "Celindgren" and whether he or Tran Van Ba sent the fraudulent E-mail. ←Hob 16:21, 2004 Oct 1 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

[edit]

I requested a sockpuppet check from User:Tim Starling. Tim reports that Tran Van Ba is the same as Jimmyvanthach, and are both the same as anonymous user 198.26.120.13. Jimmyvanthach has also used the IP address 192.108.235.6, which has no edits. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:06, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Just to clarify, this means that Tran Van Ba, Jimmyvanthach, and anonymous 198.26.120.13 are using the same computer. That would not necessarily mean that they're the same guy... except that Jimmyvanthach and Tran Van Ba were supposedly communicating with each other by E-mail, an unlikely arrangement if they work in the same room. ←Hob 13:40, 2004 Sep 16 (UTC)
Did Tim check for User:celindgren? -Vina 16:19, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
No, I forgot to ask him to. -- Cyrius|✎ 22:56, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

When the question was originally raised of whether "Tran Van Ba" was really Jimmyvanthach, one of User:Tran Van Ba's final edits was to say that "it was me, and that my assistant and prepared the document for me, so I can post" and that he was unaware of Wikipedia guidelines due to a language barrier [11]. Jimmyvanthach added that he, as Tran's assistant, had been writing "biographies" and E-mailing them to him to post [12], though this does not appear consistent with Tran Van Ba's history of many incremental edits and arguments with other users. ←Hob 16:21, 2004 Oct 1 (UTC)

Jimmyvanthach's story has changed again: in a note to me he now says that he does not work for Tran Van Ba or the VCML, and that he had simply contacted Tran Van Ba with a research question. This is clearly at odds with the earlier explanation that Jimmyvanthach was Tran Van Ba's assistant who wrote articles for him to post; it is also inconsistent with User:Tim Starling's statement (above) that Jimmyvanthach and Tran Van Ba were editing from the same IP address. Just one more thing that makes me inclined to see an intent to deceive, rather than a misunderstanding of Wikipedia policy, in Jimmyvanthach's behavior. ←Hob 00:46, 2004 Oct 23 (UTC)

Evidence of disputed behavior

[edit]

(provide diffs and links)

  1. Cut factual text from Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League with no explanation, and added POV text to intro. When these edits were reverted by Hob, Tran Van Ba repeated them three times - again with no explanation in edit summaries or talk page. [13] [14] [15]
  2. Inserted a large amount of POV text copied verbatim from the website of the V.C.M.L. (http://users.panola.com/vietnam) without acknowledging its source. [16]
  3. Added POV references to V.C.M.L. in Vietnam. [17] [18] [19]
  4. Added POV material to Bao Dai ("the infamous Ho Chi Minh", etc.) after article had been edited for NPOV numerous times. This edit was identical to a previously reverted one by 198.26.120.13. [20] [21]
  5. Posted images of unknown origin which appear on his own website and other sites, and used edit summaries to claim with no evidence that the photos "may be used for free use... given by Prince Nguyen... authorized by His advisor", etc. [22] [23] [24]
  6. Verbatim copying from http://www.oocities.com/vietmonarchy/gialongtribute.html into Gia Long. [25]
  7. Verbatim copying from http://www.oocities.com/vietmonarchy/minhmangtribute.html into Minh Mang.
  8. Verbatim copying from http://www.jaffnaroyalfamily.org/index2.htm to Jerry Remigius Kanagarajah. Copyvio message added to article by User:Cyrius; Tran Van Ba deletes copyvio message! [26] [27]
  9. Examples of POV edits and linkspamming by anonymous IP 198.26.120.13 who is apparently the same as Tran Van Ba (see Description). [28] [29] [30] [31] [32]

List of favourite pages

[edit]

This is a list of pages primarily contributed by this chap. Other edits to other pages have usually been reverted.

I think that's all of those that need attention. Dunc_Harris|☺ 23:36, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Applicable policies

[edit]

{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}

  1. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
  2. Wikipedia:Copyright
  3. Wikipedia:Image use policy#Copyright (images)
  4. Wikipedia:Don't create articles about yourself (or whom you pretend to be)
  5. Wikipedia:don't use sockpuppets
  6. The issue of trust (do we have a relevant page?)

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

[edit]

(provide diffs and links)

  1. Hob left messages on user's talk page and article talk page about POV edits to Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League. No response. [33] [34] [35] [36] [37]
  2. After POV text was removed, added it again with the only change being to insert "The Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League believes..." before each paragraph. Edit summary says "this edite was done to speak in neutral terms to explain what this organization in detail of Vietnamese History." [38]
  3. User:Cyrius gives initial warning about verbatim copying. [39]
  4. Tran Van Ba responds to allegation of verbatim copying by changing the subject: he says "the statement above is incorrect" because the text is not from the website's main page. In fact it is a verbatim copy of another page on the site. [40] [41]
  5. Tran Van Ba attempts to justify verbatim copying of Jerry Remigius Kanagarajah by saying that the content is from Kanagarajah's website - true, but irrelevant. [42]
  6. User:Mihnea Tudoreanu attempts to explain POV issues on Vietnam and Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League. Tran Van Ba responds that the text is not POV because "[the VCML] have chapters in Saigon" etc., and "I went back to correct all the statement that said WE and first person". [43] [44]

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

[edit]

(sign with ~~~~)

  1. ←Hob 05:08, 2004 Sep 13 (UTC)
  2. Dunc_Harris|☺ 09:39, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) (well done on the report, my first attempt was awful)

Other users who endorse this summary

[edit]

(sign with ~~~~)

  1. Improv 20:35, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. Cyrius|✎ 03:51, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Response

[edit]

This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.

Reply Tran Van Ba

[edit]

Duncharris has mistated facts presented here at this hearing. If you mistate facts at a hearing please throw this case out of court. He has no standing and his evidence is flawed. In the above paragraph he states " Royal families in Asia, who hold no power but appear to pretend to thrones." The Southeast Asia Imperial & Royal League are not made of pretenders.

  1. I checked H.R.M. King Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia is NOT a PRETENDER, he is the head of state.
  2. Prince Nguyen Phuc Buu Chanh is the Regent of the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty of Vientam.
  3. Prince Mangkra Souvannaphouma of Laos has been involved with this country poltics for over 60 years and 30 of those years were in exile, HE IS NOT THE CROWN PRINCE, who lives in exile in France.
  4. Prince Hso Khan Pha of Yawnghwe is the religious leader for his people the Shan similar to the Dali Lama.
  5. Prince Shwebomin of Burma has been involved with Madame Marie de Roland-Peel, General Secretary of the British Committee for Free Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia & Burma for over 10 years, while living in exile in the United Kingdom to assist his country to honor the elections that Aung San Suu Kyi, who was elected Prime Minister in 1990 and freedom human rights for his people.
  6. Rajah (Prince) Jerry Remigius Kanagarajah of Jaffna (Sri Lanka) has been involved in religious ceremonies and also advocating peaceful plans for his nation of Sri Lanka that has been at War with the Tamil Minorities for over 30 years.
  • Is this fair that you do not look at the facts.

Please see links and re-evaluate thank you.


7. Prince Norodom Ranariddh of Cambodia has been involved in politics once the Kingdom of Cambodia was established in 1993, for over 10 years which excludes him from taking the throne since

In closing, NONE OF THESE ROYALTY are pretenders, they are involved in politics within their country and also have aligned themselves within the Southeast Asia Imperial & Royal League to gather strength and support to work for human rights and freedom of speech, religion and liberty and rights for their countries.

There is no, statement that they want to be King, Where does the "Duncharris" get the idea that they are "PRETENDERS" ?

Sir, if these is not your concentration of knowledge please do some research before you present your case because you are not only wasting my time but others too. But if you want to learn more I have offered to bring some insightful knowlege to you, and offered you my email address so that I can recommend some reading material that can back up the factual basis.

Again, this is not factual statement like that above which he disrespect to Upstanding Gentlement that are working to serve their nations as Ambassadors of Peace and to fullfill their right to bring happiness to their people.

In Closing, I state that the other users that "Duncharris" refers to do not have a understanding of Asian Royalty I have served the Late Emperor Bao Dai and was his Colonel-in-Chief of his Imperial Guard and I not only have knowledge of many Royal Houses in Southeast Asia by first hand experiance I am also have been studying Southeast Asian Royalty for over the past 40 years.

I am just here to spread knowledge of all Southeast Asian culture and the people and the Royal Families play a pivotal role in their country lives to the broader world that do not have knowledge of it.

I wonder if I was writing about European Royality exiles that are seeking thrones or political peaceful agendas for their country such as King of Greece, King of Albania, Ramonov family, Duke of Paris, Italian Royalty, Romanian Royal Family, would this be a issue ?

Tran_van_ba 11:00, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Outside view

[edit]

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries}

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

  1. In my view, there is plenty of room for descendents of Royalty having pages. For example, Crown Prince Alexander II of Serbia and Yugoslavia, or Grand Duchess Olga of Russia or the various women claiming to be Anastacia Romanov. If the infighting of the Romanov Clan could be said to be encyclopedic, I fail to see why a group working against the current governments of Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam is not. I agree that they are not notable in any other regard, but the fact that those people are descendents of a royal line seems good enough for me. Given that,
    1. I wish to point out that there is a distinct bias on wikipedia against Asian royal families.
    2. Tran Van Ba did write an article about himself, which is a definite no-no in wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Auto-biography.
    3. Both Tran Van Ba and Duncl Harris comes across pretty strongly, they should Wikipedia:Assume good faith
    4. Mr. Tran and his cohorts may not be aware of the consequences of their original writing to Wikipedia, they should evaluate Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License
    5. Mr. Tran should also be encouraged to participate in the community. Recreating pages that have been through the VfD process with the exact same text, for example, is a violation of the process, and he should (at least) have a discussion in the Village pump and make the article different or at least address the reason that the original document was deleted.

-Vina 23:20, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

User:Jimmyvanthach seems to now be editing wider Wikipedia articles. I take it this is a good sign for us unless he is malicious. I checked some of his edits. He has taken a liking to adding quotes to famous people Ronald Reagan, Redd Foxx, and Pancho Villa. I mention this because this could indicate he is not solely a POV pushing crank, but (as well as obviously being somebody we ought to keep assuming good faith of and trying to reclaim with civility) a budding Wikipedian who has hope of developing appreciation for the greater vision of Wikipedia.

He has also seemed to be continually civil, and when I have treated him civilly, he has responded well. It only took two requests for me to get him to quit putting evidence on my User:talk page. While User:Jimmyvanthach is without question currently a problem user, I am not sure what action the arbitration committee could take that would be positive. I can certainly identify with his propensity for big faux pas. But I have hope that before long we can get him fixing his own bad steps. -Tom - Talk 07:12, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Err, can I withdraw my statements? at this point, I have no idea what the heck is really going on. I still stand by the fact that Asian royalties and their descendents are notable, but this seems to be an unimportant side issue by now. -Vina 05:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I endorse these statements by User:Vina. Everyone involved here, on both sides, needs to cool off a little. Tran Van Ba made an article about himself -- big deal, move it to the user space, let's move on from there. Other articles by him can be handled one at a time. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:27, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) Endorsement retracted in light of recent developments. Wile E. Heresiarch 02:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Jimmyvanthach I have received a forward email from Tran Van Ba and will be looking over the discussion to see what was the issue of the articles that I submitted to him. I will go over the guidlines of Wikipedia and fix his submissions asap, Additionally thanks you for the concernJimmyvanthach

Discussion

[edit]

All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.

I was giving forward message from Tran Van Ba, that any questions to email him at Tran_van_ba@hotmail.com to update, but page was deleted by mistake.Jimmyvanthach 21:35, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

That is a very unlikely mistake, since you also wiped out the contents of the discussion page for this page [47] - not to mention that we already had that E-mail address, and have no proof that it is really Tran Van Ba, so your "forward message" was both redundant and meaningless. Also, you are ignoring the instructions on this page which appear directly above this paragraph ("All signed comments and talk not related to a vote", etc.). But I believe your lack of attention to Wikipedia procedures is only a small part of the problem here. What a waste of everyone's time this is. ←Hob 03:30, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC)

I have followed the rules, and have provided as you said newspaper and book references that I am researching. [48] I guess I had missed the email, so I posted it twice, and did not know the whole page was gone because I did not press SHOW REVIEW. I will make sure I do this as we speak and from now on every posting I make, that is what makes wikidia work well, we are a community that works together.thanks for pointing it out, and catching my mistake. Jimmyvanthach 01:01, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Tran_Van_Ba&oldid=1064222261"