Talk:Hanoi Hannah

Recorded or Live
Were all of her broadcasts recorded, or were they live? Where was she active in Vietnam? Captain Jackson 07:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I know for sure that some of her broadcasts were live, but I'm not sure if some of them were recorded or all were live. I think it is very unlikely that all of her broadcasts were live. During the war, she lived and worked in Hanoi. Now she retired, I just know that she live in either Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh City. I think the latter, but I'm not sure.

And in the end she was right... ironic

"The broadcasts were widely derided by the troops," this has to be sourced "and there is no evidence that the propaganda had any effect." That sentence is irelevant since the effectiveness of information or persuation cannot be measured.84.167.195.157 (talk) 12:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Location
How could she have lived in Ho Chi Minh City during the war. Saigon is Ho Chi. Maybe after 1975 she lived in Ho Chi but I doubt she was brodcasting live communist propaganda with Allied forces stationed right outside the door. It makes no sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TJ13090 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Actual date of death?
The top of the article lists October 2nd as her date of death, and the bottom lists September 30th? I'm not in a position at the moment to research the correct date, just bringing it to light. Lonadar (talk) 11:58, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Name
Per WP:COMMONNAME the vast majority of English language sources refer to Hanoi Hannah - this is currently reflected both by the sources used in the article, and those found elsewhere. 'BLP violation' is a ridiculous argument for two reasons 1. She is dead, so the risk of offense is minimal even given her recent death. 2. No evidence the name was derogatory. If a move is requested, WP:RM is the place to do so. Only in death does duty end (talk) 09:43, 7 October 2016 (UTC) I have also copied a post from the In the news candidate page by User:DHN below as it is directly relevant and indicates even in her homeland she was known by the HH name. Only in death does duty end (talk) 09:55, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Post posting note - although "HH" is a name that she did not give herself, she did embrace it and consider it a stage name. Her notability is among English-speaking audiences, not among the Vietnamese (she's not very well-known in VIetnam).  I think we're being hyper-PC in calling her by her birth name, which is rather obscure both in Vietnam and elsewhere.  She is much more well-known as HH.  Consider the Vietnamese language article, which uses the HH moniker, and this news story in the state-run radio station Voice of Vietnam (her former employer).  In it, they clearly refer to "HH" as her "stage name" (nghệ danh).   The story also made many approving references to the name "HH". DHN (talk) 22:01, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Article deletion must be discussed before action taken
has deleted and moved pages related to this subject. Kindly revert the deletions and moves and set up a discussion of the proposed deletion/move with reasons and allow discussion before such significant action is taken. This action needs to be discussed as there are other perspectives to consider. MurielMary (talk) 10:06, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * No deletion has taken place, page already existed at Hanoi Hannah. Once a page move has been contested (usually by reversion of the move) either a discussion on the article talkpage or at WP:RM is required in order to gain consensus to move it. Feel free to do either of the above. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:13, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Recent moves
I have reverted the move to Hanoi Hannah. , who first moved the article from that title to Trịnh Thị Ngọ, made an argument that I find compelling that Hanoi Hannah was a war-time propaganda name conferred by the enemy - a slur - and that neutrality demands we use the person's real name as the title of our article. In my view the redirect suffices for readers to find the article, and actually titling it that way is vindictive. I consider this trumps WP:COMMONNAME in this instance, since we are an international encyclopedia and she was pretty much only known to US troops by that name. I'll notify, who moved it to Hanoi Hannah with that rationale, and I'm pinging because of the exchange above; if there's anyone else who should be notified, please feel free to remedy my omission. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:31, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Frankly thats a load of bollocks. Consensus has to be formed to move it from its original title. WP:COMMONNAME is explicit that regardless of the international nature, article titles are based on the most common name in the English language sources used. Which is Hanoi Hannah. Its Hanoi Hannah in historical sources, and its Hanoi Hannah in contemporary ones. The argument it is a slur is just crap. Neither 'Hanoi' nor 'Hannah' are perjoratives. If you are arguing that calling someone whose name you are not able to pronounce is a 'slur' then that is even more silly. Only in death does duty end (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I prefer the article to be listed as Trinh Thi Ngo with a redirect from HH. If readers are looking for HH then they will find her article immediately without difficulty, which is important. However the way the encyclopedia refers to her represents the encyclopedia's attitude to her and her story. If it uses the name given to her by her enemies, then it's losing impartiality and objectivity. This wasn't a name which Ngo chose herself and used with pride, as a stage name would be. This is a name given to her by her enemies. In fact, the name "HH" was used by the GIs indiscriminately for all women announcers on the Voice of Vietnam, not specifically for Ngo - it's just that she was the most popular/most broadcast HH. So it's like saying "we'll call all those foreigners one easy English name cos we can't be bothered learning which is which and using their individual names" - pretty rude, and smacks of white imperialism. It is also worth noting that although media sources use "HH" in their headlines, the bodies of their articles refer to her as Trinh Thi Ngo. Finally, Ngo also had a stage name which she chose herself - Thu Huong - but I don't see any argument to use *that* name as her title. If any stage name was going to be used, it's appropriate that it's the one she chose herself.
 * At the time of posting this to ITN/RD there was a discussion about which name to use, so I'm pinging the editors involved in the discussion in case they want to give their opinion here.    20:14, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ETA: An alternative treatment of the subject would be to follow the precedent of the articles on Tokyo Rose and Iva Toguri - to separate the persona of HH from one of the people who represented that persona. 20:20, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I too say this article should go under the name Trinh Thi Ngo, as a proper historical figure of note. Her one-sided wartime epithet was/is intentionally cartoony and diminishing, and not even necessarily reserved for Ngo alone. SteveStrummer (talk) 05:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, this is exciting. Thank you for your actions and the ping., thank you for protecting--but as a good admin you did indeed protect the wrong version. In my rationale I pointed at a discussion on ITN (and linked one diff, this one) where, in my opinion, the consensus was clear: that this wasn't "officially" a move discussion is no argument for User:Only in death to move this without any discussion (that I know of): usually an admin's decision based on a discussion requires a little more process than this. Like, a notification. The more I look at this the more disruptive I find it. And reverting Y's revert after two hours is asinine--which sounds a lot more like the word I had in mind. What a timesink, what arrogance, and what wikilawyering: "The onus is on those who wish to move it to do so", says Only in death, singlehandedly undoing a consensus + administrative decision. Yes: that onus was on them, but they just moved it back and then movewarred over it some more. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * What is the current state of this discussion? I'd like to see the article moved to Trinh Thi Ngo, and there seems to be some support for this in the comments above. Is there a "move" debate page that this discussion should happen on, or is here sufficient? Pinging previous commenters for an update.   MurielMary (talk) 09:41, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * , I'd move it back right now; as far as I can tell there is only one opponent--the one who disruptively reverted a move in the first place. Drmies (talk) 17:16, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


 * If you want to be formal about it, the process is described at WP:RM. It shows how to open a move discussion, stating your reasons for renaming and invites other people to support or oppose the new name.  After a period of time to allow for discussion the result is formalized.  RM is an appropriate approach when a page move is being disputed.  Dragons flight (talk) 18:59, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Dragons flight, I think we all know that. But we have a little instruction creep here: since RM is a certified process, and initially consensus was not determined there but elsewhere, the move is to be reverted? That's bureaucracy at its best. Drmies (talk) 03:47, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Muriel's a relatively new editor. I might be mistaken, but my impression from her question is that she might not know about RM.  Dragons flight (talk) 15:54, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Just to be clear, the title I believe it should be moved back to is Trịnh Thị Ngọ, with the non-diacritics Trinh Thi Ngo as a redirect to that. I'm going to insert the admin help template below to call for an uninvolved admin to close this. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * For my part, you can count me as undecided. Hanoi Hannah appears to be much more commonly used, which is certainly relevant.  On the other hand, it is a nom de guerre imposed by the American forces, which argues against using it.  It appears that Trinh Thi Ngo did not know of the name Hanoi Hannah at the time.  However, so far, no one seems to have answered the question of what she thought of the name after she learned of it?  Did she embrace it or reject it?  If, in the decades since the war, she embraced the name and would happily present herself as Hanoi Hannah, then I would be inclined to leave the article where it is (essentially an application of STAGENAME).  On the other hand, if she rejected or largely ignored the name imposed upon her, then I would think that the desire to avoid disparaging terms would tend to weigh heavily and favor using her given name rather than the more common name imposed upon her.  Dragons flight (talk) 16:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Question for administrator
Would an uninvolved administrator please consider the discussion above under the heading "Recent moves"—including as reference the discussion at In the news/Candidates (latest version seen here) to that Drmies referred to as the determining consensus in originally moving the article—and either move the article back based on a determination on consensus here or rule on the necessity for a Requested Moves discussion on moving it back? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Since not everyone is agreeing, and a simple discussion on just this page is not going to get lot of attention, then why not use Requested_moves. The more public listing is likely to attract more editors to the discussion. You have all been talking about it for a month, one more week won't hurt. Then you get a nice final result. Ron h jones (Talk) 01:14, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 7 December 2016

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: No move. We have no agreement that the current name is less common or otherwise should be avoided. Cúchullain t/ c 16:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hanoi Hannah → Trịnh Thị Ngọ – Trịnh Thị Ngọ is a real historical figure of note, whereas Hanoi Hannah is a pejorative wartime epithet applied by Americans to many female North Vietnamese radio announcers. She never called herself that; Asians do not know her that way. Like Iva Toguri D'Aquino, she should be listed by her true name. SteveStrummer (talk) 04:11, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment You said "Asians do not know her that way" but from what I can see the Vietnamese, Chinese and Japanese wikis all use "Hanoi Hannah" or equivalents. Timmyshin (talk) 07:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The Vietnamese article states in the lead that it is about the persona that "US troops gave some women broadcasters during the Vietnam War", and that Trinh is just "the most well-known". SteveStrummer (talk) 18:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If that's true, that's equivalent to the Tokyo Rose situation. Tokyo Rose and Iva Toguri are separate articles. During the war, Toguri was just one of various female announcers on Radio Tokyo. Her claim to fame is that she was convicted of treason later on. Pandas and people (talk) 01:49, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The corresponding entry in Encyclopedia of the Vietnam War is titled "Hanoi Hannah." This book is a common library reference -- in fact the it's the only reference work I could find with a relevant entry. Pandas and people (talk) 05:54, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.