Talk:Miyeegombyn Enkhbold

Neutrality
Please don't present accusations as facts that you can't prove (just because some mongolian language web site writes he's corrupt doesn't automatically make it a fact). Also compare the discussion page about Talk:Tsakhiagiyn_Elbegdorj. The problems here are almost exactly the same. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a forum for political propaganda. --Latebird 00:33, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

The Article Is Based On Only Facts and Neutral and it should not be liked by MPRP members
I put all citations and only facts. Mr. Latebird from Mongolia if you don't like real facts being written in English, that is your personal problem. Political propaganda is the word former Soviet Union and MPRP introduced to Mongolia and MPRP uses a lot. I want people know only truth, and facts not brainwashing of MPRP leaders who describe themselves as real communist successors to Mongolian herders in Mongolia and claim that they got support from the world because of being communists, at the same time MPRP claim that they brought democracy to Mongolia to the world in English which is totally false.

People are not stupid and English speaking people should have opportunity to get facts in English from Wikipedia Encyclopedia not the twisted information for brainwashing of MPRP leaders and their followers. So the article is based on facts with citations. Mongolian newspapers are newspapers as in any other countries and specially UB Post is Mongolia's major English newspaper, and it is not a tabloid. If a fact is written in several newspapers, not even one, you can't say they are simply false, then you should prove your own claim too. If they were false claims, why the whole world closes its newspapers because newspapers only write false claims.

Also about Tsakhiagiyn_Elbegdorj section Miyeegombo Enkhbold overthrew Elbegdorj's government so the same people involve in that event, so it comes out on both of their biography.

I saw Latebird actually translated Miyeegombo Enkhbold article from your German page and I edited yours using real facts with citations. Unfortunately, facts are facts and you can't delete facts justifying by neutrality. The way the article was first written by you Latebird was not neutral actually. Neutrality is required only for writing style but not to twist facts or to hide negativity.

--Lemonhead 15:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)


 * What exactly makes you think that I'm from Mongolia? Do you really think that everybody who disagrees with you must be an MPRP member? Please try not to confuse your personal opinion with facts. You're making very strong accusations against a living person. This means that you need to chose your words very carefully, and you failed doing this. In some cases, you also get the facts wrong. Just one example: The Mongolian Parliament's decision violated Mongolian Constitution's Article 25, Paragraph 1-6 that the Parliament exceeded its power as instead of discussing and deciding the resignation of the Grand Coalition Government's ten MPRP Members who submitted their resignation letter to the Parliament, the parliament overthrew Elbegdorj's Government. Ignoring the confusing grammar of this sentence, I went and checked those paragraphs in the mongolian constitution. I found that the parliament is explicitly given the power to decide as it did. In other words, using the word "illegal" in this context is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. Please also note that you must not remove the POV and citation style markers from the article as long as there is a dispute. Removing them is a sign of bad faith. --Latebird 23:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

--Mr. Latebird, your sentence contains spelling and grammatical error and you write during Mongolian day hours. Second, The Parliament violated Constitution's Article. Check other related Mongolian laws. Legal principles goes first international convention, second constitution, third laws of the country, fourth agreements and contracts. In this context, Parliament violated Constitution and related laws. MPRP violated its 3 contracts and which means illegal. If not so, why parties go to court over violation of contracts and why courts decide over disputes, if contracts and agreements can't be bound, why it should be even made? MPRP is in bad faith itself.

--Lemonhead 17:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I usually write at night european time, because I work during the day. And no offense, but I don't think you're in a position to criticize other people's grammar and spelling. Back to the topic: International conventions are irrelevant in building a governement, that's an internal matter. The parliament followed the instructions of the constitutions to the letter. The only thing that was "violated" were the coalition agreements. A coalition agreement is a matter of political policy, and therefore not legally binding (the courts can't decide about political questions). This is very different to a business contract. Please also note that your dislike of the MPRPs actions does not justify your behaviour here at WP. If you remove the POV marker again, I'll have to ask an administrator to block you. --Latebird 22:19, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Much of the content of this article was completely inappropriate. I have removed the most obvious false attacks on him such as the allegations that he overthrew the government (usually in English overthrowing the government means that there was a military coup). However, this article still needs work. Academic Challenger 23:25, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Education
I would like to see a reliable(!) reference for the purported "facts" about his education. Was this in one of the mongolian language links? And how do we know we can trust this source? --Latebird 13:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * There is no point in adding potentially libelous statements again and again without providing reliable and verifiable sources to confirm them. Since you didn't provide such sources for several weeks despite my request, I have to assume there are none. Adding those defamatory statements again will most likely get you banned. Attacking other authors in the edit summary is unacceptable behaviour as well, and doesn't strenghthen your case at all. --Latebird 17:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This section has again been reverted to a defamatory version that is not supported by any sources. Since the author refuses to even answer the requests for documentation here, the unconfirmed text will have to be removed again. It is not enough to just say that other people's sources are all "lying", you need to prove what you claim to be "correct info" with credible sources of your own. --Latebird 09:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Last addition is not reliable
There is no such thing as "communal work and services in Ulaanbaatar city" exists! Latebird, can you write the organizational name again and the dates are conflicting too. Lemonhead 19:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * If you know so well which authorities existed at that time, feel free to change them to the correct names. The information as such is from a very reliable source, one of the leading experts worldwide in mongolian studies. Thanks for pointing out the typo in one of the years, but please never write such editorial comments into the article text. That's what the discussion page is for. --Latebird 21:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Latebird you wrote: "From 1987 he worked as an economist with the Services Office of the Executive Authority of the Assembly of People's Deputies of Ulaanbaatar.

1989 he changed as a specialist to the Department of Planning and Service Mechanics of the Public Services Ministry.

1991 he returned to become the head of the municipal Services Office" can you provide source for this information? You say it is from reliable source and you changed organizations' names and dates so many times, how come all these change so many times? Where is the link to your reliable source? Facts like dates and worked places can't be changed 10 times as it is a history. It looks like you yourself is not a reliable info provider. If not please hyperlink to your source. Otherwise, it is not reliable. Thanks. Lemonhead 19:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The sources for all my recent contributions are in the edit summaries, where they belong (for your convenience, here they are again:   ). The problem with titles and names of authorities is in the language. There are several ways to translate them, either literally or by analogy to western/modern titles (for example, Wikipedia lists Peljidiyn Genden as Prime Minister of Mongolia, even though his real title was much more complicated). The names that I used are the best translation I could find. If you know better translations, feel free to share your wisdom. I don't think I changed dates other than for correcting typos. As for reliability, I just assume that the office of the President of Mongolia has solid information on this kind of information (even if we may not agree with him about political issues). In other words, you keep removing verified information, while refusing to provide sources yourself. This behaviour does not help your credibility. --Latebird 21:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Latebird, I checked your 4 references. #1 is made by an unpopular/unknown Translation Agency "Dao"-which carries Chinese philosophical name "Dao", #2, #3 briefly mentions Enkhbold's PM approved date and don't have any info about the conflictingly informed "early life" of Miyeegombo Enkhbold's life. #4 is the one, we may refer to as how Miyeegombo Enkhbold himself wrote his own resume and submitted to the office. So, it is totally the words that come out of Enkhbold's mouth. Let's see how reliable it is. Miyeegombo Enkhbold wrote in his resume that he earned Master's degree from National University of Mongolia in 1987. The fact is that National University of Mongolia officially began to issue Master's degree in 1995. Socialist educational system don't have Master's degree because Master's degree is a part of Western educational system based on British system. Great Britain was one of the most hated society from socialist system's point of view. Therefore, there was no diploma issued with Master's degree before 1990s in Mongolia. So, Miyeegombo Enkhbold lied in his resume!

When Miyeegombo Enkhbold accompanied Nambaryn Enkhbayar in San Francisco, US in 2001, Enkhbold couldn't have uttered a word in English. It can proved by honorary consul of Mongolia in the US. When Enkhbold meets Russians, he can't communicate in Russian. Still, Mr. Miyeegombo Enkhbold writes in his resume that he speaks English and Russian. If he knows as he himself claims, why he doesn't speak a sentence in the languages at all?

Who is the lier? Miyeegombo Enkhbold or the history?

I haven't found any real information about his official positions in his early life from popular/known third party. It is not reliable what he himself wrote in his resume. Because he already lied about his degree and language knowledge.

Mr. Latebird, it looks like you have brain. However, you defend Miyeegombo Enkhbold's false info when even facts tell the info supplied by Enkhbold is wrong. Nobody ever idolize someone more stupid than him. If it happens, the idolizer always falls below its own idol so i.e. the common sense come out: 1/ you are either stupidier than Miyeegombo Enkhbold or 2/You are his relative or a briber who gained from him. So, I strongly believed Latebird, you are not included in the first category. But who knows time will show. Lemonhead 18:34, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You must have looked at different sources than the ones I listed. is written by one of the leading experts on mongolian studies worldwide and author of the only useful German-Mongolian dictionary. He is everything but unpopular or unknown in educated circles. Among other things, he served as an interpreter for Elbegdorj during his state visit in Germany in 2005. I have no idea at all why you think his translation agency is using a chinese name (or why that would be relevant anyway).
 * Theoretically, you are correct that the degrees at that time weren't called "Masters" (of course, neither were they called "undergraduate diploma"). But as I explained further above, the actual degree is considered equivalent to a Masters ( or "Magister" in German ) today. Since we both don't seem to know the original title in Mongolian, that is therefore the most correct translation. --Latebird 09:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Correction: In Germany, "Magister" is the lowest academic degree, equivalent to a "Bachelor". The equivalent of a "Master" would be a "Diplom". The phonetic similarity between the names makes it easy to confuse the hierarchy. --Latebird 12:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't continue to manipulate. German "the Magister-degree (Magister Artium, M.A.) or the Staatsexamen and is roughly equivalent to the American Master's Degree according to University of Augsburg explanation. In addition, National University of Mongolia is not an accredited German university which nullifies the above explanation. For further details please see following:

"Explanation of the German examination types and grading system: Our academic studies are usually divided into two stages, each one ending with an examination. The first stage - corresponding more or less to your undergraduate study and typically requiring about 4 semesters of study - ends with an intermediate examination called Diplomvorprüfung or Magistervorprüfung or Zwischenprüfung. The second stage, requiring about 4 to 6 semesters of study, ends with the final examination leading to the Diplom-degree or the Magister-degree (Magister Artium, M.A.) or the Staatsexamen and is roughly equivalent to the American Master's Degree. Source: University of Augsburg website. Lemonhead 16:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * So I'm engaging in a one-man-conspiracy, just because I'm trying to correct myself? On the positive side, you're actually providing a source this time. You should do that more often. As to the question at hand, the meaning of the german language titles varies with the field of study. What you read from one faculty may not be correct at another. Comparison with US titles will almost always be misleading anyway, because there are fundamental differences between the systems (I didn't study in Germany, so I had to research the details as well). To avoid all this confusion, I'll probably just go with your description, and call it a "Berufsabschluss" (~= "professional certificate"). --Latebird 09:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Fine with the source providing, I got your advice for that. Professional certificate is legitimate since National University of Mongolia is not an accredited university in German educational system, therefore, we can't apply German degree equivalent to National University of Mongolia. Lemonhead 14:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Dear Latebird, You didn't respond to the previous message from me regarding the article, instead you are writing any place possible in wikipedia, "please take measure against Lemonhead". Your act exactly parallels the corrupted politicians of former communist Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party which persecuted and massacred people in the past and which sue liberal people to the court demanding millions of tugriks for defamation. If you are a relative of Miyeegombo Enkhbold you can not write on him in wikipedia according to wikipedia policy. I hope the admins will take care of your personal issue. Thanks. Lemonhead 20:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * As soon as you provide reliable sources (as requested here several weeks ago) for what you claim to be "facts", we may have a meaningful discussion about this. So far, we have nothing but your word for it, which is clearly not enough. And do you really think that spreading (obvious and silly) lies about me will improve your credibility? --Latebird 09:13, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear Latebird, I got the information from first hand, from Miyeegombo Enkhbold's classmate who lives in the US. I will contact with the person and search for any publication about that and put it. However, I still don't consider Miyeegombo Enkhbold's own submitted resume to Mongolian authority which ended up showing in Mongolia web.com with false praise of himself such as his Master's degree issued in impossible time and place, and his language knowledge for his not speaking languages make the whole information uncredible. About your issue, I didn't spread any silly lies, but suggested just simple logic out of the situation, if you put yourself in my shoes and look back to the situation, you will see what I meant. The only unfortunate thing is you look like a smart person learning lots of languages, however, it is so pity to limit your potential by an idol of Miyeegombo Enkhbold who is harming normal being of people in Mongolia by his greed. So, the only reason for this, can be what you know. But if not that is good. Also please remember, critism always come back to the criticizer as a post pigeon as Dale Carnegie said. Lemonhead 16:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I got the information from first hand, from Miyeegombo Enkhbold's classmate who lives in the US - Unfortunately, this amounts to what is considered original research, which is strictly prohibited in Wikipedia. We're not a research publication. We only collect what other people have already published.
 * I will contact with the person and search for any publication about that and put it. - If you can find any published records to confirm your research, that would indeed be great.
 * As long as we can't prove it wrong, I'm afraid we'll have to rely on the official biography as the reference. Of course we can (and will) throw out any details where we find better information in other published sources. As to the name of the degree, try to find how it really was called in Mongolian, and then we'll translate that literally.
 * I didn't spread any silly lies, but suggested just simple logic out of the situation - So it's logical to assume that anyone who doesn't agree with you must be a criminal? I doubt that someone like Elbegdorj would be impressed by such "logic"... Btw: Somewhere further up on this page, I already told you that I'm from Europe. Incidentally, my home country is the oldest democracy still in existence today. One of the most important principles of democratic thinking is this: Always listen very carefully to those people who disagree with you. More often than not, you can learn something from them.
 * if you put yourself in my shoes and look back to the situation - then I see a person who lets his hate for Enkhbold get in the way of rational thought.
 *  it is so pity to limit your potential by an idol - Please show me one single word that I used to praise (let alone idolize) Enkhbold. The only thing I did was to insist that you prove your accusations. Once you actually can prove them, then you'll have my full support to write them into the article as facts. I'm sorry, but Wikipedia can't just take your word for it when you claim something to be a "fact". It must be independently verifiable.
 * And as the last thing for now: Publishing accusations that you can't prove against someone will ultimately strengthen that persons position, because it makes you and Wikipedia look bad. Think about it.
 * --Latebird 20:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear Latebird,


 * I read what you put over here. I still don't consider first hand information as an original research since it is fact rather than research which is done to discover unknown things.


 * I am sure I can find published record for that soon and I will post it.


 * About the degree, it is written simply as "diploma" for achieving a profession in the socialist time which is generally accounted equal for Bachelor's degree of the west since it is an undergraduate studies after high school. So for that Only PhD graduates from socialist time got the diploma indicating PhD.


 * So it's logical to assume that anyone who doesn't agree with you must be a criminal? I don't write so, and I don't think so. I don't consider you as a criminal. I don't know why you are writing about as being referred as a criminal. I don't care about where you are from and where do you live. Since it is a globalized world, everybody has relatives in three to four continents. One of the most important principles of democratic thinking is this: Always listen very carefully to those people who disagree with you. More often than not, you can learn something from them. Thank you. That's good. I get that. I heard this many times, but it is still good to get it again and I have been still listening.


 * then I see a person who lets his hate for Enkhbold get in the way of rational thought. That's wrong. I don't hate Enkhbold, so there is no ration over here. I explained before, that I focus on outcomes of a person's deed and work rather than his/her position.

I feel abomination about Enkhbold's acts towards poor people, towards Mongolian nation for his personal gain, personal greed and putting the nation at jeopardy. But if he does good, I can still praise him for his good acts right now. But I haven't seen yet any good acts of Enkhbold towards society, except perhaps for his own family. The only good deed of him towards other people may have been is he was the biggest contributor to the presidential elections campaign of Nambaryn Enkhbayar. However, Nambaryn Enkhbayar is not a society and it is only one individual.

My concern is if someone gets the responsibility of a high position of a society to serve people, the person has to fulfill its responsibility.


 * about idolization issue, you kept deleting negative facts and become very irritated about negative facts of Miyeegombo Enkhbold. About citings, I agree with you and I will do that. But even if it is official decree, Enkhbold's resume with lies can't be posted in wikipedia like that. You can't justify lies by simply saying it is official. Imagine somewhere a king, a president suddenly make a decision and declare that sun goes up from West. Even if it is official, you will not believe in it, so why we need to put such a thing in wikipedia to make Enkhbold as a butt of joke over that?


 * I am not publishing accusations, I put facts. But I agree people see things from different angles and facts are still not universally likable too. If I really decide to put accusations, I will remember your word:) Lemonhead 21:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

To Mr Lemonhead
Dear Lemonhead,

You have done a great job on Wikipedia. Don't worry about Mr Latebird. His words sound similar to those of people paid by MPRP who write such things to defend and praise their leaders Enkhbayar and Enkhbold through media, including online forums.

I am writing from Mongolia and I know the situation here. I completely agree with you that MPRP is trying to brainwash people of my country. But, fortunately, Mongolians are not so stupid that they believe in their propaganda. In a recent poll conducted by Sant Maral, Democratic Party got more supports than MPRP.

With regards to the contents edited by Mr Latebird, the translations of the titles are very poor. They need to be reviewed. Mr Latebird probably uses a government source, namely http://www.infomongol.com/contents.php?cid=304. The website is run by the Government Press and Information Office.

Dear GenuineMongol,

Thank you very much for your inspiration and links and more info about Mongolia's political situation. I believe in the intelligence and braveness of Mongols who once were strong enough to prove its ability to the world. I strongly believe that when the corruption organized by MPRP leaders are cracked down, the country will have much better way for Mongols and Mongolia to prosper and succeed. I only wish the whole world knows the facts and only facts of what is going on over there using my knowledge of the Mongolian language and ability to read Mongol news on the internet. Thank you again. Lemonhead 17:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)