Jump to content

Talk:John Tran

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

References needed

[edit]

Because this is a BLP article, I have placed a refs needed template on the page. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 15:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Wiki-hounding

[edit]

Good faith she whines! Too many times!

I am astonished at another editors interest in my small town's politicians, two states away from her own. Why? "following another user around" from "Wiki-hounding" comes to mind. "The important component of wiki-hounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing...for no overriding reason...with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor."

So far, there has been little enjoyment in my editing. (Very long, ugly history.) After our recent election, I was enjoying editing some of our "Locals" articles and "Surprise!" there she is! Other than "following me around" there is no earthly reason for her to have happened upon these articles. Her edits have been within the boundaries of Wiki policies, except for what appears to be yet another incident of wiki-hounding. I would like to hear any other possible reasoning. I am not making any specific or formal complaints at this time but I really would like it to stop, leave me alone, just go away... Any comment? Stalker... don't bother.JoyDiamond (talk) 08:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

update

[edit]

I have reported her to administration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#John_Tran.2C_wiki-_hounding_and_edit_warring Let there be Peace!! JoyDiamond (talk) 21:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Giving Skagitriverqueen the opportunity to cease and desist wiki-hounding had no effect, other than to exacerbate her harassment. Multiple edits in the last 24 hours (3rr ?) She is now hounding me on the article about Margaret Clark, my local Mayor, also. This is an obvious violation of Wiki Policy! JoyDiamond (talk) 02:49, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic

[edit]

IMO, this article is problematic for a couple of reasons: it only has a few different references and the same references are used over and over (although this may not be a real problem - at least there are references and it *is* a pretty short article). Also, this article is too close in verbiage to the actual references. In fact, it's not even a close paraphrase (which is to be avoided), but in places verbatim from the references (this is one of the reasons I have removed the phrase "communist controlled Vietnam", but also because the country being communist controlled at that time is a given and because it really isn't relevant to the article). The reality is, article could really use a fresh eye for it to be completely reworked - this would likely remedy the verbatim/close paraphrase issue as well. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


RE: Problematic

[edit]

This article is problematic: First: The main reason Skagitriverqueen is editing this particular and obscure article is because she is continually wiki-hounding me. Second: she is editing based on assumptions rather than fact. Third: This is small town politics and there are a limited amount of references for all the citations demanded. As far as Skag removing "communist controlled," it is not a given, especially by younger readers and what *is* a given that communism is the main reason the Trans emigrated, so it is important that it be included. If other "verbiage need to be changed I will do so wherever possible. How many ways can you say "Communist controlled?" Tran became an American citizen by virtue of marrying an American citizen, therefore sentence is correct as previously written and not "clumsy." Nor do I write "clunky" sentences and no where in English syntax is that a modifying adjective. Incidentally, I *am* the fresh eye, as having undertaken this editing only recently, immediately followed closely by skag, as usual. JoyDiamond (talk) 23:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Latest edits

[edit]

The latest edits I made were due to three things: first, the reference supplied re: the Tran family's moves from OK to CA said nothing (that I could find) about Monterey Park. Second, I couldn't find anything in the corresponding reference that Tran was 18 when he married/graduated high school - the ref, however, did state that he became a naturalized citizen when he was 18 and that he married right out of high school. It shouldn't be assumed that he graduated high school when he was 18. Also, there were redirects and refs lost in the edits prior to the most recent one I made that needed to be restored. Lastly, exact chronology isn't really all that important when it's in the same section and all in the same or near same time-frame - especially if putting it all together just for the sake of chronology causes the flow of the sentences to not work well together.

Now...if there are better references that can be cited (and more would be better with this article since it's pretty much the same three that are being cited over and over) that give more specifics re: Monterey Park, that he was 18 when he graduated high school, etc. - then bring them. Until then, if there's nothing specific stating these things, then they have to be considered to be original research, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. Since this is a BLP article, everything must be handled like glass when it comes to references and original research and/or personal knowledge is to be left out completely (especially on items/facts that can or might be challenged).

Also, just so everybody knows - my edits/edit summaries should not have been taken personal or as being aimed at one particular person, because they were not meant that way. Never forget that no one owns an article in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a community project and needs to be treated as such. No one editor is superior over another and no one editor is more important to an article than another. All editors are welcome on any subject no matter if the individual has a personal interest in the article or not. One of the great things about Wikipedia is that anyone can edit about anything they choose. Geographical proximity and knowledge of the subject matter/subject of the article isn't a requirement for editing.

Finally - this can be a good opportunity to prove that harmonious editing is possible, don't you think? (I sure do ;-)

--SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 03:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated above, the reference you keep providing to verify his family first moved to Monterey Park says absolutely nothing about Monterey Park. I don't understand why you keep insisting on replacing something that isn't referenced. Please check your references and make them match the text you are placing them with or the text will have to be reverted. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 06:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sweetie, give me chance, I am still writing! Harmony is desired! Reference was next on my listJoyDiamond (talk) 07:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC) OMG, where is what I just wrote for the last two hours! JoyDiamond (talk) 07:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OMG

[edit]

Did your "conflicting edit" ERASE my two hours of thoughtful work?JoyDiamond (talk) 07:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC) Apparently so.JoyDiamond (talk) 10:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Latest Edits

[edit]

I spent two hours writing a friendly response to your “ Good faith’ remark “Finally - this can be a good opportunity to prove that harmonious editing is possible, don't you think? (I sure do ;-)” As that response was lost due to your “conflicting edit” demanding one reference that you had previously deleted, and you again threatened to delete the correct information, I am disinclined to to try to reproduce my response to you in the same manner. As it was midnight, your statement could have waited until morning and not interfered with my sincere efforts to communicate with you in a harmonious manner. The following covers the main points of my painstaking article that was "lost".

With a little effort, you could have found the citation that says Tran first moved to Monterey Park, that you had previously deleted. (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/24/local/me-tran24) L.A. Times is a pretty good resource I believe, but you must scroll down the entire page to read the whole article. Tran matriculated at Mark Keppel High school which is part of the Alhambra School district, serving most of Monterey Park. If he had lived in Rosemead, when he started High school, he would have attended Rosemead High School. I am not “insisting”, I am stating verified fact. Despite your efforts, I have full confidence that I am an excellent, painstakingly accurate writer.

Simple math, his graduation date and his birthday, clearly indicate he was 17 when he graduated from high school, not original research which I am fully aware is not allowed in Wikipedia. My article does not state he was 18 when he graduated. It does state he became an American Citizen when he was 18 years old. This was after his marriage to an American citizen hence his naturalization, as I stated previously. I cannot find a citation as to when the marriage took place, but if the birthdays of his children were unnecessarily included one could discover the reason for his hasty marriage right after high school. As his naturalization was dependent on his marriage, I felt it appropriate to include them in the same sentence. Chronology *is* important in an encyclopedic article. Since this is a BLP article, everything must be handled like glass when it comes to references and original research and/or personal knowledge is to be left out completely (especially on items/facts that can or might be challenged).

I do not know John Tran personally. Rosemead is a smallish town and much is common knowledge. That knowledge cannot and will not be used unless there is a specific citation. For instance, Tran and his fiancee have since married but I cannot find a citation stating that fact so it is not included. Being a small town, appropriate references are limited so many must be repeated. Since this is a BLP article, everything must be handled like glass when it comes to references and original research and/or personal knowledge is to be left out completely (especially on items/facts that can or might be challenged).

I do know that no one “owns” an article and that all editors are welcome to edit any article regardless of geography, with one clear exception in which you have engaged:

"Harassment and disruption" (See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette) Wiki-hounding is the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on pages or topics they may edit or debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work, with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor. The important component of wiki-hounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing, or to the project generally, for no overriding reason. This includes "following another user around." There is no conceivable way you would have found the obscure little articles I am currently editing, had you not followed me. *I* would have never found them had I not been requested to do so.

There is much I could and have learned from you. Unfortunately, you have chosen to “hound” ( another editor’s words) me rather than help me in Good Faith. Following me is harassment and a clear violation of wiki etiquette. You disrupt my writing and inhibit my enjoyment. This is another clear violation of wiki standards and pillars.

So, SkagitRiverQueen, would you please explain to me and anyone else who happens to read this, exactly why you choose to follow me, editing by assumption not fact, vandalizing my perfectly good edits and attempt to claim this is not harassment. JoyDiamond (talk) 11:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments above are inappropriate for any article talk page and your charges and assumptions against me are out of line and way off base. Your comments further indicate to me that you still don't "get" Wikipedia - that it is a collaborative effort and that editing Wikipedia means if you don't want your work changed or challenged, then you shouldn't include it. I'm not interested in fighting with you, nor am I interested in answering what I see as aggressive questioning based on your emotions rather than fact. You have already been told by an admin that I am not hounding you, so it would be appreciated if you would stop accusing me of such. AFAIC, no article is worth the drama and grief and passive-aggressive behavior you seem to revel in and bring with you everywhere you go in Wikipedia. I had hoped you would seize this opportunity to give it another go and be what you claim you want to be here - sadly, it doesn't seem that is going to be possible. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Clearly you are not gong to answer my perfectly legitimate question. Typing "my article" was ONE slip made at 3 am when I meant to say "my edition". Your gross exaggeration, egregious comments, libelous statements and outright lies are a sad indication of your own serious problems. Your following me around for no overriding purpose other to harass me, is a clear violation of wiki policy that apparently is not going to be enforced. I have NEVER followed you to any of your editing sites despite your outrageous claim. As a former university instructor, it has become even more evident why any wiki reference is not an acceptable reference in any papers written by students. I have participated in countless academic and/or writing groups in my 14 years of college, post grad work and teaching and NEVER had a problem. I GET Teamwork. Your claim to "have bent over backwards" is a bad joke as are most of your claims. I am extremely disappointed at the whimsey shown in most of my Wiki experience (with notable exceptions). JoyDiamond (talk) 01:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on 11/16/09

[edit]

Re-Wikified reference, corrected spacing, grammar, syntax, and replaced a redirect that was removed in a revert. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/24/local/me-tran24 "Tran, who was born in Saigon, left Vietnam for Oklahoma with his parents when he was 3. The family moved to Monterey Park when he was in elementary school" I repeat again: scroll down for ENTIRE article! READ it. No wonder...JoyDiamond (talk) 05:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit regarding election was undone because Skag had created an entirely fictional account of the election. As with the citation she complained about several times, she had not *read* the entire article which clearly states that the mayor is selected by the city council in rotation, *not* elected! She is treading in territory with which she is entirely unfamiliar.JoyDiamond (talk) 13:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mayoral Infobox

[edit]

The Infobox in this article is specifically a Mayoral Infobox with pertinent categories to be filled in. Because the highlight of the article is Tran's mayorship (the opening paragraph says it all), information such as successor and predecessor is highly relevant to the article (more so than the undue weight that has been placed on his past and personal life and the reasons his family left Vietnam). Because of this, I have restored the Infobox items that were removed. Also, because the article is meant to be geared toward Tran's time as mayor of Rosemead, the whole thing should really be reworked to reflect more of his activities as mayor. This means text that adds undue weight will have to be pared down and/or removed completely. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 15:58, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Edit

[edit]

Most small town Mayors do not have the notability to be included in Wikipedia. John Tran's history, his youth, and the fact he was the first Viet-Namese Mayor in the state and allegedly the country,makes him notable and is not undue weight. What started out as a stub, is now a relatively concise history that should not be "pared down" much further. A few details of what he accomplished in his short time as Mayor, need to be added in due time. BTW the "Mayoral box" is formatted for mayors of large cities and includes what constitutes extraneous information for said mayors that may not be applicable in this case for the simple reason: there is no notability therein and more specifically, "nobody cares." Question: Should both his spouses be added? I shall return in a few days. JoyDiamond (talk) 08:03, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Tran's "history" does not make him notable by Wiki standards. Even being the youngest elected school board member in Garvey history probably doesn't make him notable by Wiki standards. Being the first Vietnamese mayor in the state does. To give so much attention to the school board information is undue weight and probably should be pared down. The "concise history" you refer to is practically verbatim from the references in the article. This should also be worked on so that is no longer the case. And yes, both of his spouses should be included in the infobox.
"BTW the "Mayoral box" is formatted for mayors of large cities..." Really? Cite, please.
"Most small town Mayors do not have the notability to be included in Wikipedia". Really? In that case, Margaret Clark doesn't have that notability. Maybe the article of which she is the subject should be checked to see it if meets the notability guidelines and nominated for possible deletion.--SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 15:25, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting that although you state above that perhaps "Margaret Clark" should be nominated for possible deletion, you nonetheless followed me there and engaged in a rousing edit war!DocOfSoc (talk) 05:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accurate Information

[edit]

As previously extensively discussed, Tran's family of origin moved to Monterey Park. His nuclear family moved to Rosemead. He became a naturalized citizen after his marriage to an American citizen, which is relevant. This too has been previously discussed. The fact the he was an Asian on the Latino Board is very relevant in this diverse community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoyDiamond (talk • contribs) 04:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC) I am mystified why the wrong user name keeps popping up.DocOfSoc (talk) 05:02, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References are a mess

[edit]

{Persondata | NAME =Tran, John | ALTERNATIVE NAMES = | SHORT DESCRIPTION = American politician | DATE OF BIRTH =November 20, 1975 | PLACE OF BIRTH =Saigon, South Vietnam | DATE OF DEATH = | PLACE OF DEATH = }}

Category:1975 births Category:Living people Category:Naturalized citizens of the United States Category:California Democrats Category:American people of Vietnamese descent Category:American politicians of Vietnamese descent Category:Vietnamese emigrants to the United States

The above are not appropriate in the ref category — DocOfSoc • Talk • 01:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on John Tran. 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:

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) 02:55, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Tran&oldid=1199655147"