Talk:South Vietnam

"Undue weight"
Hello in this edit you noted how the section added by user "" was "undue" weight, but despite their many year insurgency FULRO isn't mentioned anywhere (else) in this article. The FULRO insurgency lasted between the years 1964–1992 and was actually centra to the Cham people and other "Montagnards" ("The Mountain people" in French), so how is this "undue weight", perhaps this shouldn't be under the header "demographics" but something else, but it's not irrelevant nor does it seem to exaggerate the fact that there was a struggle, it is simply not worded neutrally enough. The latter issue was fixed just before you removed everything. I don't think that we should jump to calling any discussion of racism in history as lending the topic "undue" weight as I've noticed a trend that whenever racism is mentioned somewhere in Vietnamese history you remove it like at the "First Indochina War" article, if actual history scholars discuss it and they see it as significant then I don't think that it's "undue" to mention it.

As for user "Laska666", I've actually been one to call out their manipulative tactics when writing Vietnamese history but lately with Champa and Cham people history their record is a lot less bad, sure they are still a POV-pusher, but they do it a lot less so with minority history as they do with "Kinh history" with their largest complaint seeing that discussions about ethnic minorities and their histories being completely left out when discussing the rest of Vietnamese history, this is one way how user "Laska666" is correct and it's why I'm honestly sad to see them go, that aside they're not banned from Wikipedia, they can participate in this discussion as they haven't been banned from any talk pages and can theoretically explain why they made the choices they did here on this discussion page. --Donald Trung (talk) 13:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)