Talk:Judicial system of Vietnam

This article contains information from WikiProject Library of Congress Country Studies, an attempt to incorporate useful information, text, and images from the Library of Congress Country Studies and the related Country Profiles. These are public domain documents with extensive information on many countries. You may see what other Vietnam-related contributions have been made by looking at the project's subpage for Vietnam, which tracks progress for articles on Vietnam, and look for what contributions you can make, including updates to this article.Library of Congress Country StudiesWikipedia:WikiProject Library of Congress Country StudiesTemplate:WikiProject Library of Congress Country StudiesLibrary of Congress Country Studies articles

Vietnam Top‑importance

	Vietnam portal This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in Vietnam may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Requested move 26 April 2016[edit]

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 consensus to move the article has been established within the RM time period and thus defaulting to not moved. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 17:42, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Judicial system of Vietnam → Judiciary of Vietnam – reason Standardizing the name of main articles in Category:Judiciaries. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC) relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 13:45, 4 May 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. Steel1943 (talk) 23:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose ambiguous naming wikt:judiciary means the body of judges. While "judicial system" clearly refers to the judicial system and not the body of judges -- 70.51.46.195 (talk) 12:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support: its actually a rather logical move. "Judiciary" means the entire system, not just judges. Its more succinct and can be made uniform across other nation's judiciary pages. DaltonCastle (talk) 23:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as ambiguous, and as an attempt to force American English usage of the word "judiciary" onto the relevant articles. RGloucester — ☎ 15:45, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It is not ambiguous, this is simply a more WP:CONCISE and WP:CONSISTENT (with other countries) way of saying the same thing. And where's the evidence that "judiciary" is an American term? The BBC uses it often enough.[1] Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 09:32, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amakuru, this is exactly where the trouble comes in. Take a look at some of the articles you brought up. Look, for example, at this one, the first in the list. It says "Barrister and part-time judge Constance Briscoe, who was jailed for 16 months for lying to police, has been removed from the judiciary". In Commonwealth usage, "judiciary" usually refers to the body of judges, not to the judicial system. In this particular case, for example, that's what's meant. "Removed from the judiciary" means that the judge was stripped of her post as a judge. This usage does not really exist in American English, which is why it is somewhat of an ENGVAR issue, and also why said ambiguity exists. RGloucester — ☎ 14:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.