Talk:Bảo Đại

THIS ARTICLE HAS MANY NNPOV VIOLATIONS AND SIMPLE FACTUAL ERRORS

1) It has been disputed as to whether or not Bao Dai was actually Khai Dinh's son. Oscar Chapuis' book "The Last Emperors of Vietnam" says as much. I do not believe it because the two looked so much alike, but it should be noted.

2) It should be mentioned that Empress Nam Phuong did not enjoy her marriage and her husband's constant infidelities; in the Chapuis book he relates how she almost shot Bao Dai at one point. Also, Bao Dai did not convert to Catholicism to marry her -that is absurd. He was a Confucian Vietnamese Emperor when he married her and to become a Catholic would have been absolutely impossible for someone still claiming to be the "Son of Heaven". He converted to Catholicism decades later while in exile in France.

3)This statement is POV and makes no sense, "The Japanese promised not to interfere with the court at Hue but in 1945 forced Bao Dai to declare Vietnam's independence from France as a member of Japan's "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere." The Japanese had a Vietnamese pretender, Prince Cuong De, waiting to take power in case Bao Dai refused." -By saying they had someone waiting to take his place if he chose NOT to collaborate proves that he DID have a choice -and he chose to cooperate with the Japanese.

4) This statement "Bao Dai still held great influence among political figures in the Quang Tri and Thua Thien Provinces and also in the city of Hue, the ancient capital of Vietnam. The Communist government of North Vietnam sent representatives to France hoping that Bao Dai would become a member of a coalition government to re-unite Vietnam, which would also attract his supporters in the regions where he has influence." -should have some sources provided to back it up -I seriously doubt Bao Dai had any considerable support after jumping ship so many times from France to Japan to Ho Chi Minh and back to France to keep his own position.

5) This is incomplete information: "While in the United States, Emperor Bao Dai gauged opinion among the exiled Vietnamese-American community, hoping to find a route towards national reconciliation." -it is POV because it does not go on to state the results of this effort; that he found no support and was treated rather harshly by many Vietnamese-Americans again because of his past history of selling them out so many times to save his own lifestyle.

This article, and many other modifications that have been done to Nguyen emperors pages is extremely biased. You will not find one serious, scholarly book or article that speaks about Bao Dai or most of his predecessors in anywhere close to such glowing terms. Like all dynasties in decline (much like the Qing in China) they were extremely unpopular and seen as corrupt, luxury-minded and subservient to foreign rule. Bao Dai in particular was thought of in this way since he grew up and was educated by Vietnam's rulers and tormentors, was known for all of his many mistresses and gambling, and while his people were starving and being taxed to death he was going on big hunting trips and building massive palaces in the south -and all based on French architecture just to add insult to injury. The pro-Nguyen revisionism agenda being pushed on Wikipedia needs to stop. NguyenHue 02:37, 7 September 2005 (UTC)NguyenHue

Emperor Bao Dai info is neutral

-Emperor Bao Dai visit to the United States: Link: [[1]]

-"Bao Dai still held great influence among political figures in the Quang Tri and Thua Thien Provinces and also in the city of Hue, the ancient capital of Vietnam. The Communist government of North Vietnam sent representatives to France hoping that Bao Dai would become a member of a coalition government to re-unite Vietnam, which would also attract his supporters in the regions where he has influence."

The Quang 1205 Document: [[2]]

Bnguyen 23:21, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

try again

Yes, yes, you have posted this link over and over again, but it is not from a neutral source and says nothing about the overall success of the visit. Personally, I doubt Bao Dai would have been so naive to have the grand goals in mind that you claim, but that's another matter.

Further, saying what someone else said is not proof of anything. Can you present anything to validate that second document? Can you show any documented evidence of the Emperor's supposed popularity in this one province?

NguyenHue 05:42, 19 September 2005 (UTC)NguyenHue

Completely unbalanced article, no discussion of collaboration

I'm interested in the fact that this article, which amounts to a hagiography, has no discussion of collaboration between Bao Dai and the Japanese, or with the French, and the deep resentment and problems this caused for many Vietnamese in the civil war, and in the resistance during the colonial/Japanese period.

THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS BIASED NON-NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW STATEMENTS WITH REGARD TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FREE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH VIETNAM.... so fix it.123.21.243.54 (talk) 12:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

What does this quote mean?

"I do not wish a foreign army to spill the blood of my people." - Emperor Bảo Đại when informed that the Allies had placed the Japanese garrison at his disposal to defend the Imperial City from the Việt Minh.

This needs more elaboration. The Allies were at war with the Japanese, how could they put a Japanese garrison at the disposal of Bảo Đại? If this happened after WWII, how did the Japanese have a garrison in a foreign country, and who, exactly, were the Allies at that point?

Quotes section

We need context for these quotes. When did he issue them? Funnyhat 17:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bao Dai Time.jpg

Image:Bao Dai Time.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Additional Information on the Emperor's Order of Annam

By now, it should be noted that "Prince" Buu Chanh, took upon himself the responsibility to reorganize the former Emperor's Order of the Dragon of Annam. An excellent article on this event is covered in Mr Guy Stair Sainty's book, "Burke's Peerage and Gentry - World Orders of Knighthood & Merit" on page 1879. According to Wikipedia, "Order of the Dragon of Annam" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Dragon_of_Annam "Prince Bảo Vang of Vietnam currently serves as the Grandmaster of the Order of the Dragon of Annam [1] under Crown Prince Bảo Long of Vietnam. The position is non-political in Vietnamese politics and the role of the royal family under the leadership of Crown Prince Bảo Long is for humanitarian, educational, and cultural endeavors of the people of Vietnam."

Actually "Prince" Buu Chanh "stepped down" to allow the rightful leader and Crown Prince Bao Long access to the order. Initially I worked for Mr. Buu Chanh but was later rewarded an honorary title and knighthood in the Order by Prince Bảo Vang under the authority of the Crown Prince.

Mr. Buu Chanh, a great patron for Vietnamese freedom lives in Chicago. He is no longer involved in anyway with the Order. It should be noted that the Order revived under questionable authority (Sainty) is now a true and recognized order of the Imperial House of Annam. It is not a state order of Vietnam which has several important and prestigious orders of merit. There are still some followers of Mr. Buu Chanh.

Dr Lindgren 16:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Paris-Emperor Bao Dai.jpg

Image:Paris-Emperor Bao Dai.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Clean up

I have just cleaned up the lead per MOS:INTRO. Reason: a half of the lead are informations which regard to Bảo Đại's titles and era name.--Amore Mio ^(talk) 16:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Date Mix-up

In the introduction, we read that he was king from 1926 to 1945, yet ascended the throne in 1932. How is this possible? I presume one of these dates is an error. Mat Teja (talk) 22:20, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

It is ridiculous and unacceptable that this question has not been responded to for a full four years, with the discrepancy of the year of this emperor's enthronement being stated as both 1926 and 1932 in the current version of this article. This is the kind of thing that undermines this project's credibility Please fix! 173.89.236.187 (talk) 02:43, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Minh Mang which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:01, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Some recent pro-Bảo Đại additions to the article of dubious neutrality.

So, User:202.82.141.40 recently added the following passages to this article and virtually the same passages to the Ho Chi Minh article: "It has been widely held that Vietminh or Ho Chi Minh founded the independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam by themselves. However, the fact is, as Stanley Karnow in his classic book "Vietnam - A History" has put it, "Nothing has reinforced the Vietminh cause more than the mercurial Bao Dai's decision to abdicate. For his gesture conferred the "mandate of heaven' on Ho, giving him the legitimacy that, in Vietnamese eyes, had traditionally resided in the emperor."

"Thus, the last emperor Bảo Đại played a decisive role in the founding of the independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam; his benevolent willingness to transfer the power to Ho results in a peaceful change of government".

As they currently stand, these lines are totally unsourced (unless you count the namecheck of Karnow's book) and they seem to display a strong pro-Bảo Đại bias. I am thinking especially of words like "benevolent" and "the fact is", which are neither NPOV nor encyclopedic. How would people feel about removing these passages? I have raised the same issue on the Ho Chi Minh talk page and would like to here other people's opinions, as I'm reluctant to make any sizable changes without prior discussion. Tigercompanion25 (talk) 23:42, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

This is wiki page of Bảo Đại more of a one-sided argument than a page of knowledge

First of all let's point out some errors - Marriages:

  1) Phu Anh is not a correct name, the correct name is Lê Thị Phi Ánh.
  2) Phi Ánh gave birth to a daughter and a son, princess Phương Minh and prince Bảo Ân
  3) Bùi Mộng Điệp gave birth to 3 children, prince Bảo Hoàng, prince Bảo Sơn, and princess Phương Thảo
  4) Regarding Patrick-Edouard Bloch as the last son of Bảo Đại, can someone point me the source to this claim?

On to the remaining of the article:

Some of the sources used in this material are biased or based on other sources that are biased. We should consider a couple things:

- Independence and abdication:

• Bảo Đại was a victim of a war/political propaganda that was created by both the Vietnamese communists and Ngô Đình Diệm's fraudulent campaign to tarnish his political influence while enhancing their own legitimacy to power.
• Bảo Đại was an advocate of peace, he strongly believed in fighting for the independence his country using diplomacy. He did everything he could to keep Vietnam from falling into another bloodbath.
• After overthrowing the French, the Japanese offered Bảo Đại a chance to declare an independence Vietnam from the French. This offer was unconditional, according to Japanese ambassador Yokoyama. While having some doubts at first, but Bảo Đại accepted this offer. Bảo Đại saw this as an opportunity to annul the effects of the French protectorate treaty signed in 1884 (Treaty of Huế 1884), in which, the colonial French promised to protect the emperor from any opposing forces (article 15). While the French did violated the treaty, there were still a number of bodies in France saw this as an traitorous act, thus there was an anti-Bao Dai sentiment among the French press and literature during that time.
• Vietnam was declared independent by Bảo Đại on March 11, 1945. He appointed Trần Trọng Kim, a renowned Vietnamese historian, as government's new prime minister. Initially, the Japanese only return the control of Trung Bộ (central region of Vietnam) to the new government, but diplomatic attempts by Bảo Đại government at the Japanese had gained them the control of Bắc Bộ (northern region of Vietnam) and eventually Nam Bộ (southern region of Vietnam or Cochin-chine) in August 14, 1945, marking the complete unification of the country. It is also note worthy that Bảo Đại new government did not immediately establishing a ministry of defense, deliberately, due to the fear that the Japanese might use it to fight their war and due to the fact that they required more time to build up the capacity of their future arm forces. The new Vietnamese governmental affairs were completely under the Vietnamese control, the government officers no longer have to report to the French or the Japanese.
• According to Frédéric Mitterrand's interview with Bảo Đại, which was aired on French national TV (Antenne 2), the Japanese did request the new Vietnamese government to aid them in their war campaign. However, Bảo Đại refused, reasoning that now Vietnam is independent, no one can impose any demands on the independent Vietnam or her people.
• Following the Japanese surrender, according to Yalta and Potsdam Agreements, the remaining Japanese military forces in Vietnam were to act as a security force and were not to be disarmed until the arrival of the Allies. On August 19 1945, Việt Minh staged a revolt in Ha Nội and successfully took over Bắc Bộ. Around that time the Japanese force that garrisoned in Hue had already anticipated a possible Việt Minh's coup, and was ready to squash it. However, Bảo Đại ordered them to stand down, saying: "I do not wish a foreign army to spill the blood of my people'"
• Bảo Đại abdicated on August 25, 1945. He explained in his own autobiography Le Dragon D' Annam (Bao Dai, 1980): "They [the Vietnamese] want a revolution? I will give them a revolution, but without bloodshed...".

-Return to power and Indochina War

• Vietnam descended into armed conflict due to two things: Communism and the return of the French. At the time of the Việt Minh's August Revolution, the Vietnamese, including Bảo Đại himself, had very little knowledge of what communism was. In the beginning the Vietnamese communists disguised themselves as anti-French patriots to join with Việt Nam Cách Mạng Đồng Minh Hội, which was a faction originally consisted of non-communist patriots. They quickly gained control of the faction, either by persuading/threatening other patriotic members to join their communist party and through assassinations. They later changed the faction's name to Việt Nam Độc Lập Đồng Minh Hội or Việt Minh in short.
• After his abdication, Bảo Đại agreed to serve as Hồ Chí Minh's "supreme advisor" due to the fact that he trusted that Hồ was a patriot, that he could bring back the stability to Vietnam with the supports of the people as well as the Allies countries such as China, the United States, and France. Little did he know that he was being played into the communist' propaganda machine. While working with Hồ, Bảo Đại quickly realized that Hồ Chí Minh only used his present to gain legitimacy for Hồ's newly formed "interim" government. He also met Vũ Trọng Khánh, Hồ's minister of Justice. Through Vũ, only then Bảo Đại realized that Hồ was a communist.
• When the Chinese army arrived in Hà Nội on Sept 9 1945, assuming their role of disarming the Japanese remaining forces, they caused quite a ruckus for the Hồ's "interim" government. On the one hand, the Chinese used the Việt Nam Quốc Dân Đảng (Vietnamese Kuomintang) to pitch against Hồ's party, disrupting its operations in Bắc Bộ region. On the other hand, they extorted Hồ by challenging his legitimacy to lead the country. Fearing the situation might get ouy of control, Hồ convinced the French to assume the Chinese's role instead. However, Hồ also feared that inviting the French back into Bắc Bộ might cause resentments in the rank of his followers and might even lose the supports of the people, he bribed the occupying Chinese (with gold) in return they would force all of these "shills" opposing factions to join with Hồ's government. This way, Việt Minh wouldn't have to take all the blame themselves when they sign with the French.
• Hồ Chí Minh reasoned that to ensure that the Chinese keep their end of the bargain, Bảo Đại, now the "supreme advisor", should to go to China to seek audience with Chiang Kai-Shek in Chongqing. Bảo Đại refused at first, but later requested to go along with the appointed delegation included: 4 Việt Minh representatives and 2 Việt Nam Quốc Dân Đàng representatives. He was "abandoned" in China "until further notice" by Hồ Chí Minh after meeting with Chiang Kai-Shek, without any money or luggage. Hồ left Bảo Đại a note urged him to stay in China because "it would be more beneficial" if he was not to come back to Hà Nội. After staying in Chongqing for more than a month, with the helps of a few friends he went to Shang-Hai, and then Hong Kong.

-Conclusion

Many of the sources used for this wiki page of Bảo Đại need to be scrutinized. A large chunk of information used in this wiki page is used from the books of David G. Marr ("Vietnam: State, War, Revolution, 1945-1946" and "Vietnam 1945: The Quest for Power"), and his books are heavily biased and pro-communists. I will not write a review for the books here, but you can read it here: http://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2433/192787/1/sas_3_3_669.pdf. A lot of the sources used in those books are also questionable, which leads me to think that some of the information is fabricated. For example Marr cited a source called "Annam Himitsu Butai" by Kaneko Noboru taken from Shuukan Yomiuri (Yomiuri Weekly), which does not exist. Another the source that he used is from Phạm Khắc Hòe, who was a communist sympathizer, if you know anything about communism, you know that anything that come from the influence of communism can't be trusted. There are many more.

So, based on what I've found and presented above, I can't agree with what is written here on the current wiki page of Bảo Đại. What is written is purely one-sided point of view that was based on false information and sources. And that needs to be corrected. Lennytran (talk) 15:03, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Another useful read on how Bao Dai was a victim of political propaganda:

"Staging Democracy: South Vietnam's 1955 Referendum to Depose Bao Dai" by Professor Jessica Chapman.

http://escholarship.org/uc/item/629724zz#page-1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lennytran (talk • contribs) 09:06, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bảo Đại. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705175416/http://image.pegs.com/images/VS/1744/1744_b1.jpg to http://image.pegs.com/images/VS/1744/1744_b1.jpg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:41, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Removal of remarks section

WP:FORUM The "Remarks" section look like someone's personal essay on Bao Dai, which I think do not belong here.

WP:SOAP "You might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if you want to convince people of the merits of your opinions."

Example:

- "Before finishing this article, readers should consider a few things". Wikipedia reader should consider anything at writer's suggestion? No, they shouldn't.

- "One can’t help but wonder why."

- "Let us discuss about the relationship between the Japanese and Vietnam.". No, let's not. Not here.

- "Was it because he took a jab at the American pride by accepting the offer that Japanese, an enemy of the U.S., presented to him to secure the independence of his country? Suddenly Bảo Đại, or anybody for that matter, became "the collaborator", "the traitor", the antagonist because he shook hand with the enemy of the United States? Was this a standardized American view of him?".

With these point, I would like to remove the "Remarks" section. "Independence and abdication" and "Return to power and Indochina War" subsection will be integrated to the section of the same name. "Collaboration" section should be removed entirely. Nmphuong91 (talk) 01:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

I am currently trying to cleaning up to make the section more neutral. Would love some help with these citation needed.Nmphuong91 (talk) 16:31, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

--- I have said it before, and I will say it again: A large chunk of the sources used here is based on biased sources. Some of these materials were fabricated during President Ngo Dinh Diem's campaign for the 1955 referendum. You have some great points but please discuss here first before removing sections of the page.

-Bao Dai is a complicated topic if you dig deep into history. You can't just explain who he was without asking different questions, and to make matter worse, a lot of the materials available are based on biased sources with political agenda, they are either fabricated by the communists or the Diem's campaign to dispose him.

Lennytran (talk) 21:15, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

It's a complicated topic, indeed. But such talk is suitable elsewhere, not Wikipedia. You can read WP:FORUM, WP:SOAP about Wikipedia standard. You cannot ask question, or guide reader's thought on the matter by your original research. The section would be fine if:

- "Bảo Đại was a victim of a war/political propaganda that was created by both the Vietnamese communists and Ngô Đình Diệm's fraudulent campaign to tarnish his political influence while enhancing their own legitimacy to power."

    -> "Revisionist historian believed that Bao Dai was..." (citation)

- "And the Vietnamese communists, were they not part of the Komintern, an international faction?"

    -> "Dr. John Doe, in his book, ask if Vietnamese communist..." (citation)

And actually you can explain who he is without asking question. You can see Napoleon#Memory_and_evaluation. Example:

- "In the political realm, historians debate whether Napoleon was "an enlightened despot who laid the foundations of modern Europe or, instead, a megalomaniac who wrought greater misery than any man before the coming of Hitler."

- "Datta (2005) shows that, following the collapse of militaristic Boulangism in the late 1880s, the Napoleonic legend was divorced from party politics and revived in popular culture. Concentrating on two plays and two novels from the period—Victorien Sardou's Madame Sans-Gêne (1893), Maurice Barrès's Les Déracinés (1897), Edmond Rostand's L'Aiglon (1900), and André de Lorde and Gyp's Napoléonette (1913)—Datta examines how writers and critics of the Belle Époque exploited the Napoleonic legend for diverse political and cultural ends."

Beside, I just re-read the article again and saw you undone my other edit as well, include "citation needed" tag and the removal of excessive quotation mark. I believe that no matter how controversal the topic is, it's not the reason for not providing adequate citation.

About Quotation mark, example:

- He was "abandoned" in China "until further notice" by Hồ Chí Minh after meeting with Chiang Kai-Shek, without any money or luggage.

So, the reason for quotation mark here is? There are three usages of quotation mark, and the first two do not fit. The third is irony, which is hardly suitable for an encyclopedia article.Nmphuong91 (talk) 13:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Seeing as this is just the continuation of what happened since June 2016, I will remove the entire section instead.Nmphuong91 (talk) 14:29, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

____________________________________________________________

I think we need more discussions for this topic before making further corrections. I have to agree that the original edit (before Lennytran's constribution) of this wiki for Bao Dai was indeed biased. It almost seems like someone intentionally listing the all the things he did in a negative way without explaining the situation he was in. I mean, if wiki is trying to be a page about neutrality and historically correct then it has to present the whole thing as it is and was, because half of the truth is NOT the truth. If other information from other sources about Bao Dai isn't allowed then this wiki should just limited to telling the readers who he was, who were his parents, his family and children, yadah yadah...So with that in mind, I will revert your (Nmphuong91) edit, I recommend you (Nmphuong91) to help fixing what Lennytran wrote instead of deleting the whole thing without contributing anything of your own. Also, your example about Napoleon is a very different matter. LeThaiTo (talk) 23:12, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

It's too illustrative of a point and too much of soapbox to speak directly to "readers" in the article prose and then have what amounts to a followup counter-article. Wikipedia doesn't work that way, and as mentioned, if the two accounts were not of the single purpose variety, they would know this is not how things are done here. Find a way to integrate the content better into the article as fluid prose. We cannot have two-articles-in-one or the article contradicting itself. El_C 21:11, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

_____________________________________

First, just put Lennytran's edit aside for a second, the current Bao Dai wiki make it look like a page made to attack him rather than a NPOV wiki page, not only that, it lacks a lot of information to explain the immense difficulties that he faced for each choice that he had to make. For example, let's look at these sentences:

1)"Bảo Đại was criticized for being too closely associated with France and spending much of his time outside of Vietnam." - By who? why? and if the accusation is justified, why did Bao Dai do it?

2)"The Japanese promised not to interfere with the court at Huế, but in 1945, after ousting the French, coerced Bảo Đại into declaring Vietnamese independence from France as a member of Japan's "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere";" - Coerced?? This is decategorizing term. There were no threat involved, the threat here (Cuong De) was only a generalization/speculation made by someone else, i.e D Marr. In fact, Cuong De was forbidden to leave Japan to prevent future complication in returning independence to Vietnam. In Lennytran's section, while imperfect (and probably needs a lot of correcting), he did a much better job explaining this event.

3)"Due to his recent Japanese associations, Hồ was able to persuade Bảo Đại to abdicate on 25 August 1945, handing power over to the Việt Minh — an event which greatly enhanced Hồ's legitimacy in the eyes of the Vietnamese people. Bảo Đại was appointed "supreme advisor" to Hồ's Democratic Republic of Vietnam in Hanoi, which asserted its independence on 2 September 1945, but was ousted by the French in November 1946." - Again, Lennytran provided a more detailed narration and explanation of this event.

4)"He soon returned to France, however, and showed little interest in the affairs of his own country when his own personal interests were not directly involved." - This was a Diem's and Landale's propaganda ploy aimed to deflame Bao Dai prior to the fraudulent referendum of 1955.

5)"The 1954 peace deal between the French and the Việt Minh, known as the Geneva Accords, involved a partition of the country into northern and southern zones. Bảo Đại moved to Paris, but remained "Head of State" of South Vietnam, appointing Ngô Đình Diệm as his prime minister." - Bao Dai opposed the Geneva's according from the beginning to the end, Diem as his delegate and a most of the free countries participated (including the US) didn't sign it. Bao Dai in objection to the Geneva's accord (which divided his country into two) arguing "it's either whole or nothing", refused to take part in the South's government. He appointed Diem because he believed Diem, as a keen Catholic along with his strong ties with the US, could stand a chance against the inevitable invasion of the communists from the North. One might argue that if he already refused to take part in the government why was he still Head of State? My only explanation is that: He was still every interested in the well being of his country.

6)"In 1957, during his visit to Alsace region, he met Christiane Bloch-Carcenac with whom he had an affair for several years. This relationship gave birth to his last child, Patrick Edward Bloch, who still lives in Alsace in France." - The source for this sentence is kinda questionable, don't you think? Oral interview with who? There are quite a number of royal imposters out there. Once, someone in Vietnam claimed that he was the Crowned Prince Bao Long, the heir to Bao Dai. This was reported by someone from Cao Dai sect, later they found out he was a fake, because Crowned Prince Bao Long had never been to Vietnam.

7)"In 1972, Bảo Đại issued a public statement from exile, appealing to the Vietnamese people for national reconciliation, stating, "The time has come to put an end to the fratricidal war and to recover at last peace and accord". At times, Bảo Đại maintained residence in southern France, and in particular, in Monaco, where he sailed often on his private yacht, one of the largest in Monte Carlo harbor." - Bao Dai was pretty much penniless in the 70's, he lived in an apartment in Paris. "His yatch", "Le Panda", might actually actually be a property of his wife, Empress Nam Phuong. It is also note worthy that Empress Nam Phuong's family was one of the richest in the country even before she was married to Bao Dai. I will have to dig up the sources for these assertions, though. But anyway, not sure why this Yatch is even listed on here, I don't see why this information is relevant to the article at hand.

I have to go feed my beautiful neighbor's cats..I mean neighbor's beautiful cats, and take a breather. Information above can be sourced through different reading material in different languages. I will take a look at Lennytran's contribution again later when I have time.

LeThaiTo (talk) 04:04, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bảo Đại. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080626143559/http://vietnamnews.vnanet.vn/2004-08/07/Photos/AT080403.jpg to http://vietnamnews.vnanet.vn/2004-08/07/Photos/AT080403.jpg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:18, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Bao Dai nho.jpg (discussion)
• Baodai.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:17, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Hán tự

Why put Chinese characters in an English-language article on Vietnam? Because they are "Hán tự "? This is basically a Wikipedia word, someone trying to confuse editors into thinking that Vietnamese use Chinese characters. It is an old-fashioned, or "Sino-Vietnamese," word for "traditional Chinese characters." Modern usage is chữ Hán. Classical Chinese lost official status at the time of the May Fourth Movement of 1919. Bao Dai ascended to the throne in 1926. Even if Chinese was official at the relevant time, it would be like using Latin in articles on Medieval Europe. 99to99 (talk) 12:15, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Classical Chinese didn't lose its official status "at the time of the May Fourth Movement of 1919", that is neither true for China (where it continued to be officially used in the Mainland until 1949 and in Taiwan until the 1970's) nor Vietnam (where it was used in official documents as late as 1945). Likewise, Latin is also relevant in articles about Medieval Europe for the fact that many European countries continued to use Latin officially well until the Early Modern Era. Plenty of Classical Chinese documents were still being produced that used Traditional Chinese characters in Annam and Tonkin. --Donald Trung (talk) 21:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Cuoc-doi-va-tinh-su-vua-bao-dai-09.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:53, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

"convert to catholicism"??

Bao Dai is listed as "convert to catholicism" in the categories.

The categories are: Converts to Roman Catholicism from Buddhism, Vietnamese Roman Catholics

Yet the article speaks nothing about such conversion. Did he actually convert? And if not, why is "Roman Catholicism" in the infobox and in the categories? --- Running 16:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I found sources and added a short blurb about his baptism. There is also this, but that's as far from neutral as it can get, although I think it's mostly true - https://aleteia.org/2022/08/28/the-incredible-story-of-the-baptism-of-bao-dai-the-last-emperor-of-vietnam/ (requires registration) - but I decided against adding it as a source. - Running 19:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Cuoc-doi-va-tinh-su-vua-bao-dai-06.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:38, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Gallery September 2024

User:Editorfree1011 please explain what use the Pictures section [3] is on this already image heavy page, particularly when a commons link is provided. Mztourist (talk) 08:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

hi! what is a reason not to remain those gallery and any of them are irrelevant to that page? Editorfree1011 (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The reasons are that the page already is very image heavy, there is already link to commons and the images don't have any direct connection to the text. This is all covered in Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts Mztourist (talk) 06:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)