Jump to content

Talk:Thuy Trang

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Khajidha (talk | contribs) at 21:09, 10 September 2019 (→Name of reference). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

She appeared in this Scientology ad from the late 80s, I'd say 88? Could someone try and add this information, plus anything else they can dig up about her appearing in it (perhaps she was a Scientologist herself?) to this entry? I am certainly not qualified to do so with my knowledge of Wikipedia, but I feel considering how scarce information on Thuy Trang is since her passing, anything new should be available to fans of hers, to paint a more complete picture of the life she lead.

WHo was there?

There are debates about who was at her funeral. Definatley David Yost and Amy Jo Johnson were, but were Walter Emmanuel Jones and Austin St. John there?

A couple of photos from inside of the funeral show someone sitting a couple of rows in front of David that looks noticeably like Walter.
Austin responding to a question on the then new q&a page on his website, http://www.austinstjohn.org (which was ran by a friend of his) in 03 said that while he was late for the funeral, he did attend along with Amy, David and Walter. Sadly the site merged with another Austin site later in 03 (which has also since gone offline) and the Q&A page was never copied over.
Until this evidence can be provided, the {{fact}} tags need to stay in place. JPG-GR 03:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nuts how she died right before 9-11. 161.185.1.100 (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Asian Power Ranger?

That can't be entirely accurate, since all the actors in the Japanese Power Rangers series were, well, Japanese. --M.Neko 04:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just one problem: technically, there's no such thing as "Japanese Power Rangers", unless you are referring to the dubbed version of the American show, which obviously came later. JPG-GR 04:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Specification on location of the accident

I deleted the description of the accident "near San Francisco" and the modifier "between San Francisco and Los Angeles" because Insterstate 5 does go to San Francisco; it goes to Sacramento. I also personally don't believe that the location of the accident is important in this instance, but if someone does want to add that, please specify a link citing the specific location.

If I recall correctly, San Francisco is about 70 miles west of Interstate 5. That's not "near" San Francisco. Also, in the article it says the driver hit a rock face on the road. If I recall, those rocks are located somewhere between Tracy and Los Banos. Can someone correct me if I'm wrong? Adavalosjr 09:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would also like to know how it lists her death location as "San Francisco, CA," but then the article says the accident took place on Interstate 5. It's one or the other, since the 5 does not run through SF. President David Palmer

Heritage breakdown

Does anyone know this? Michael 04:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it matter? 69.64.3.68 11:57, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe she was Vietnamese. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube

YouTube

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 15:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scientology

Thuy Trang was in a Scientology ad in the 80's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpQnwgiplrY

Was she a Scientologist? TwistedRed (talk) 00:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NO! Dumaka (talk) 19:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Family name

Does anybody know Thuy Trang's family name?Because according to the Vietnamese custom,Vietnamese people should be known their family.For example:Nguyễn,Lê,Trần,Phạm.If I don't have the infomation , I can't write an article about her for Vietnamese wikipedia!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khunglongcon (talk • contribs) 01:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lacking her family name does not make much trouble to Vietnamese article :-D Avia (talk) 09:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality.

I think Thuy Trang is best described as Vietnamese-American as she i) Moved to America at a young age and remained there ii) Became notable in the United States. Obviously being deceased, WP:MOSBIO does not apply here directly but the general theme stays the same. So it would be nice if people stop removing the American part of the lead section. I know this is a touchy issue in SE Asia but Wikipedia has guidelines and a duty to remain impartial. And should it be "Vietnamese American" or "Vietnamese-American"? --Τασουλα (talk) 13:43, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

missing you

thuy trang we will miss you. have a nice time with hardy my dog — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.194.1 (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:32, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Hunter Kahn (talk). Self-nominated at 11:47, 18 August 2019 (UTC).[reply]

  • General eligibility:
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: I am a little confused about eligibility of this nom. The DYK check says it was promoted to GA on 18 August 2019, however it has issues which in my opinion would normally disqualify it from GA status. For example:

  • (1) It uses Youtube citations; the KTTV memorial service link goes to a YouTube video (not allowed), and the other Youtube link is dead anyway (deleted video).
  • (2) The "tracheotomy tube" link does not make medical sense, because a tracheotomy is a hole through the front of the neck, but a tracheal tube goes down the throat through the mouth, so you need to make clear what you mean, or delete the link.
  • (3) The Lisa Breckenridge citation goes only to two WP pages, which is not allowed on its own for citations. You need a link to a transcription, or a citation to tell us where a transcription can be found.
  • (4) There are several examples of un-corrected English usage, such as "portrayed" instead of "portray", "set of show", "a female out of costume" and "go the filming."
  • (5) The passage "including Cyberstrike ... fruition." is copyvio (it would be OK with quotation marks together with its source).
  • (6) All three of the images in the article are unfree. Normally one is OK - but three unfree images in a GA?

So how can this be a GA article? If you can bring this whole article to GA status and get a third party to agree on its GA status here, then this DYK nom could go ahead. At the moment I could take the hook citations AGF for tne newspaper citations which are not online, so long as they are properly written out (article title, newspaper name, date, page). Your QPQ review is not complete, because the nom does not have a QPQ of its own yet. It would be worth making the effort of resolving the above problems, since this actress deserves notice in DYK. Storye book (talk) 17:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is a GA article because it was submitted for a GA review and was approved. You can see it is listed on Wikipedia:Good articles (though the bot hasn't added the green GA icon to the page yet). You can take it to WP:GAR if you disagree and feel its GA status should be revoked, I suppose. But in any event, I will attempt to address your concerns above...
    • (1) This article does not use any YouTube links as sources. It cites the the documentary Encyclopedia of Martial Arts: Hollywood Stars. Originally a portion of Kwan's interview from that documentary was available on YouTube and the link was included as a reference, but since as you say the link is dead, I've removed the link. But the documentary itself still stands as a valid source. As for the KTTV memorial service news report, that is a citation of the KTTV report, not a YouTube video. The citation does not include a YouTube link, and the YouTube video of the KTTV report was in the External Links section (not by me) but [1] I've since removed it in response to your concerns...
    • (2) I've changed the wording to "tracheal tube", which I believe addresses your concern and is still consistent with the cited source...
    • (3) The link to Lisa Breckenridge's Wikipedia page is not the link for the source; that's simply a wiklink attached to the name of the reporter in the citation. The source is the KTTV report itself, which was televised and is not available online. I don't have immediate access or a transcription right at the moment (I could probably get my hands on it again if necessary) but a broadcast news report is certainly a WP:reliable source, and it can be accepted in good faith...
    • (4) I fixed the errors you cited above and would be happy to fix any others identified...
    • (5) This is not a copyright violation. Everything in that passage comes from reliable sources, all of which are cited by footnotes, and none of the language has been directly copied from those passages. I believe what you are referring to as a possibly copyright violation is the fact that the Earwig's Copyvio Detector (which came back with an overall "violation unlikely" rating fo this article), noticed similar language between that passion and this this TVTropes page. But that TVTropes page is a wiki, and it appears THAT site lifted the language from the Wikipedia page, not vice versa. You can see from the TVTropes page's edit history that the language was added to that page on June 17, which was days after it had first been added to the Thuy Trang Wikipedia page (here is a version from June 24 for reference as proof of this).
    • (6)Each of these non-free images serve different and distinct educational purposes for the article (a publicity headshot, an image of young Trang and her family, and one illustrates her character on Power Rangers), the rationale of which is explained on each image pages. None of them were deemed inappropriate by the GAN review that this article passed.
  • If you have other issues you'd like addressed, I'm perfectly willing to do so, as I'm more than happy to see the article improved further. But the fact is this is a listed good article, so I believe it meets the timing criteria for this DYK nomination. — Hunter Kahn 17:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I reviewed the GA and I will will respond with my thoughts on things.
      • "It uses Youtube citations" - The YouTube links can be removed from the references with the references still being used.
      • "The "tracheotomy tube" - I didn't even think about having medical knowledge to review an article on an actress. I do see that it was replaced with a tracheal tube now.
      • "The Lisa Breckenridge citation goes only to two WP pages" - It's not like the Wikipedia articles themselves are being used to reference the article.
      • "There are several examples of un-corrected English usage" - Sorry for missing those, but there weren't many and they were just easily fixed by the DYK nominator.
      • "The passage "including Cyberstrike ... fruition." is copyvio (it would be OK with quotation marks together with its source)." - The sources are shown as being offline so I'm not sure where the copyvio comes from.
      • "All three of the images in the article are unfree. Normally one is OK - but three unfree images in a GA?" - I didn't see the big deal in a long article, but two can easily be removed.
      • It is extreme to have a new third party, especially when you only pointed out minor fixes. It is well written (now with only a few typos fixed which I do apologize for missing them, but there were barely any), it is all verified with reliable sources, it is broad in its coverage, neutral, stable, and illustrated. To be fair, there is no rule anywhere which states that only one non-free image can be used. It does says "The article should comply with image use policy. Images are encouraged but not required. Any images used should be appropriate to the article, have captions and free licenses or valid fair use rationales." and "Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio". SL93 (talk) 17:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93. Thank you for your very useful reply about the GA. I was only asking for a third party report on the GA status, not for the DYK review (unless you wish to do so, of course). My main reason for making such a detailed review was that I wanted to make sure it wasn't going to get bounced back after promotion. So your comments will help to straighten a lot of that out. Thank you. My guess is that three non-free images may still cause a bounce-back, but the rest of the article is probably now OK. Storye book (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Hunter Kahn. Thank you for your explanations, and for your link to your corrections. That solves a lot of the problems. That said, I am guessing we may still get a bounce-back on the three non-free images, and on the fact that you've green-ticked your review when the nominator of the John Hiller article has not yet submitted their own QPQ. If you had mentioned that their QPQ was missing, and temporarily withheld your green tick, your review would have been OK. This is not about making your life difficult - after all you have done a good job with your Thuy Trang article. It's about getting the nom through to promotion safely. The situation has improved greatly, and I thank you both for your patience and help with this. My remaining hesitation is about the green tick you gave for QPQ, and the too-many non-free images (I would accept the one non-free image at the top). I really would like to be able to sign off this nom, because it's a deserving subject. Storye book (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I’m on my way home now and I can ask for clarification somewhere about non-feee images. Not just to help out Hunter Kahn, but also because it’s the only thing I’m not familiar with. SL93 (talk) 19:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Storye book, thanks for pointing out that I approved the Hiller DFK even though they had not submitted a QPQ; that was an oversight on my part. I've edited that DYK nom accordingly. And as for your most recent comments, I appreciate what you're saying and I understand you're just coming from the perspective of ultimately trying to improve the article. As for the non-free images (two that I added myself, one that was already on the page) I personally feel that they serve three distinct educational purposes for different aspects of the article, as per the fair use rationale explained in each, so I feel they are appropriate. If you still disagree, my suggestion would be that we continue this discussion on the article talk page or some other appropriate channel and solicit opinions from others to try to reach a WP:CONSENSUS. Personally, I don't believe this DYK is necessarily the right channel for that, and I believe the DYK can move forward even as that image conversation is happening elsewhere, because since I'm not putting forward any of the images for inclusion in the hook, I don't believe this is an issue that the DYK criteria requires to be resolved. But I welcome your thoughts on the next step from here... — Hunter Kahn 20:29, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Hunter Kahn. Thank you for resolving the QPQ issue. I have adjusted the reviewing-template above, in the light of that. That leaves only the unfree images issue. The problem we have here is that it's the newly-acquired GA status which qualifies the article for a DYK nom. This Thuy Trang article acquired that GA status while retaining a number of faults which you have since resolved. I think that that justified my initial questioning of the GA status, and it justifies me still being careful that there are no remaining issues. I'll check the article through again, and come back to you, hopefully tomorrow. Storye book (talk) 20:54, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Hunter Kahn. Update. (1) I have looked at the image licenses for the three images, and also at the WP rules for them, and I'm satisfied now that the images will not cause a problem with DYK. Thank you for your patience with this. (2) There are still a few language issues remaining: (a) The template at the top of the article asks us to refer to Thuy Trang as "Thuy" not "Trang," in consideration of her cultural background. However the entire article calls her Trang many times, and never Thuy (unless quoting). (b) "it the costume colors." (c) "archival footage ... were used (should be "was"). (d) There is a space between the refs after the phrase "after a fight scene." (3) I'll now check through the refs, which I had not done thoroughly before. Thank you again for your patience. You have worked hard on this article, so it's worth the extra effort. Storye book (talk) 09:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Update 2. I have checked through the refs for valid links. I have not checked them for citation-value; I am assuming that that has been done (besides, due to their large advert files, the website links are too slow to load up fully via the slow broadband in my village.) The links are all OK now, except for ref.22, Huffington Post. I can't get the link to work here in the UK - please check that it works in PA? I have no more queries besides the ones in these two updates, so we are close to sorting out this DYK now, I believe. Just one point: I have left the IMDb links in because I support using IMDb on WP on the grounds that it's often the only current source for certain public-domain informtion. However I should let you know that there are reviewers here who do not agree with its use on WP on the grounds that the public can contribute to content. Storye book (talk) 10:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The template about her name was on the article before I worked on it, and I honestly thought it was more intended for the reader to understand how she is informally addressed; I had checked WP:NCVIET for clarification on whether she should be referenced that way formally in the article itself and didn't see anything in the guideline, so I used "Trang". But if you are sure it should be the other way around because of that template, I have changed all references to Thuy. I've also fixed the grammatical errors you cited above, and I double checked the Huffington Post article you inquired about above and yes, it immediately loaded for me. — Hunter Kahn 13:32, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mandarax: @Metropolitan90: @Storye book: @Hunter Kahn: @SL93: I'm reopening this one, as there is an inaccuracy in the hook - it says the passengers thought she was ill (a particularly bizarre reason to throw her overboard) - while the article says they thought she was *dead*. This is otherwise a good hook, so please come up with alternative wording and we can re-promote. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 14:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't see the problem. The article says, "Thuy went long periods of time without eating and fell ill, with her mother having to force food down her throat while she was unconscious to keep her alive. At one point, the other passengers wrongly believed Thuy to be dead and wanted to throw her body overboard to make more room for the other refugees, but her mother prevented them from doing so." In other words, she became so (actually) ill that other passengers (inaccurately) thought she was dead and wanted to throw her overboard. The hook says, "Thuy Trang, who played the Yellow Ranger on Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, became so ill when she came to the U.S. on a cargo ship that other passengers wanted to throw her overboard". So I don't think the hook is inconsistent with the article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:43, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Amakuru: I really hope that I don't get in any trouble by adding an alt hook when I reviewed the GA, but...
  • "... that Thuy Trang, who played the Yellow Ranger on Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, became so ill when she came to the U.S. that other passengers wanted to throw her overboard because they thought she was dead? SL93 (talk) 14:53, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    That's 205 characters long, so might cause problems with those who police that sort of thing? Otherwise it looks quite good. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:56, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Amakuru: I would suggest removing part of it and saying,
      ALT2: "... that Thuy Trang, who was in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, became so ill when she came to the U.S. that other passengers wanted to throw her overboard because they thought she was dead?" Clicking on the article will reveal what Power Ranger she played. SL93 (talk) 14:59, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      @SL93: sounds good to me. I don't think I'm involved in this, so assuming nobody says I'm ineligible, I'm approving that as ALT2 now. My daughter saw the hook over my shoulder and was amazed by it, so I think it satisfies the hookiness criterion very well!  — Amakuru (talk) 15:40, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      Since I was pinged.... I think it's more interesting to identify her as a major character, rather than just saying she "was in" the show, which would apply even if she were just an extra. I think it would be better to replace "was in" with "starred in", or replace the whole clause with something like "who played the yellow Mighty Morphin Power Ranger". MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:40, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • As the nominator, I don't particularly have a preference between the ALT2 that SL93 suggested for the new revision that Mandarax proposed. If we go with ALT2, I'd suggest it be reworded slightly to ... that Mighty Morphin Power Rangers star Thuy Trang became so ill when she came to the U.S. that other passengers wanted to throw her overboard because they thought she was dead? Just because it's slightly more succinct and flows better, imo. Though honestly, all I want at this point is for this DYK nomination to be finished. lol — Hunter Kahn 16:22, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Name of reference

@Hunter Kahn:

I noticed the following note:

  • "In this Vietnamese name, the family name is Trang. According to Vietnamese custom, this person should properly be referred to by the given name Thuy."

I feel that this treats her as a "Vietnamese-in-Vietnam" when this doesn't seem to be the case. I would strongly prefer referring to her by her last name, Trang, as she built her career in the U.S. and essentially lived in the U.S. for the rest of her life. In addition press reports in that country would call her "Trang". The case for this would be bigger if she naturalized as a U.S. citizen. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that this wasn't changed to that until the DYK reviewer said that it originally wasn't correct. SL93 (talk) 15:22, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Storye book: If she was a Vietnamese entertainer in Vietnam, it would be fine to use "Thuy", but essentially she became an American, so the use of "Thuy" sounds overly casual/conflicts with American practice. I imagine it would be an issue for ethnic Ethiopian/Eritrean people too who immigrate to the U.S. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On another note, I haven't yet located any source saying if/when Thuy Trang did naturalize. However I still strongly recommend that she be called "Trang" for the above reasons (US-based career and rest of life in the US). WhisperToMe (talk) 15:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't say it wasn't correct on the DYK nomination template. I questioned that the note at the top and the content of the article did not match, and suggested that the nominator either removed the note or changed the main text. Whatever the consensus on the name usage within the main text, I still suggest that you don't have a conflicting note at the top. Storye book (talk) 16:25, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • WhisperToMe thanks for pointing this out. The note at the top of the article was there before I started my work on expanding the page, so I honestly wasn't sure the correct way to handle it when it was pointed out to me in DYK. I am inclined to agree with you, that the tag at the top should be removed and that her references should be changed back to Trang instead of Thuy. I am more than happy to do so, but I may wait a couple of days just to make sure nobody else offers a different opinion in here, to ensure we have a WP:CONSENSUS on this... — Hunter Kahn 17:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have up to now hesitated to give an opinion on this, because I am British, and this article relates to an American citizen. However I cannot get past the fact that we have to treat people of all racial origin with respect. If someone pronounces or uses their own family name in a particular way, it is polite to pronounce or use it their way, and not the way we are used to pronouncing it. Because Thuy's father grew up in Vietnam, he will have remembered how his name should be used, and it would be surprising if Thuy were not also aware of that usage. My gut feeling is that if we don't follow that usage it will show our ignorance when perhaps we should know better, and maybe that would not look polite. In China the last name is the family name too, and we have a lot of Chinese people here, consequently many Brits are used to getting the name usage right. If we tried to force them to use their last name as a surname/family name, then that would make us look ignorant and (even worse) colonial. Of course what I am writing here is my own opinion. I guess what it comes down to is a consideration of the feelings of relatives of the subject of a biography. I am not criticising any views given above. I'm just trying to help to get it right, as we all are. Storye book (talk) 21:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you assume that her father would not adopt the American style? It would seem more logical to me for him to adapt to the surrounding culture than to expect them to adopt customs from his home country. --Khajidha (talk) 17:19, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think that if her father had adopted the American way with his family name, he would have reversed the order of his daughter's names, or she would have done that herself. But her name order is not reversed. Thuy's family name is still written first. The tag was put at the top of the page to draw attention to that fact. Storye book (talk) 17:33, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are a wee bit confused. According to the note, "Thuy" is her PERSONAL name and "Trang" is her FAMILY name. "Thuy Trang" is thus an exact parallel to "Jim Kirk". This has nothing to do with name order, and the "Thuy Trang" is already in the same order as "Jim Kirk". The difference is that Vietnamese custom is to write about a person using their personal name, while general English usage (at least in formal contexts) is to use the family name. --Khajidha (talk) 21:09, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thuy_Trang&oldid=915038283"