Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thailand

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand articles	WikiProject Thailand	(Rated NA-Class)
	Thailand portal v • d • e This page is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.  NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia articles	WikiProject Southeast Asia	(Rated NA-Class)
	v • d • e This page is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

This WikiProject's subject is featured in the Outline of Thailand, which is incomplete and needs further development. That page, along with the other outlines on Wikipedia, comprise Wikipedia's Outline of knowledge, which also serves as the table of contents or site map of Wikipedia.

This page contains content previously at the Thailand-related topics notice board, which has been merged here.

Archives
1, 2

Contents 1 General notices 2 TAT to "improve" Thailand-articles here 2.1 Response from born Distinction 2.2 Announcement from TAT 3 Merge with WikiProject Thai provinces 4 Article tagging 5 New userbox available 6 Undiscussed page moves of Thai cities and provinces 7 Thailand in the Dutch Empire 8 AfD nomination of Tom kha pladuk 9 An Invitation from the Philippine Wikipedia Community 10 Archive of May 2008 11 Draft Guidelines for Lists of companies by country - Feedback Requested 12 Quick romanization request 13 WP:THAI Tagging 14 Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme 15 Public holidays in Thailand 16 Articles flagged for cleanup 17 Table of contents 18 List of basic Thailand topics needs maps and pictures 19 Need Thai 20 People's Alliance for Democracy 21 Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Thailand 22 Hinduism in Thailand 23 2008 Thai political crisis 24 Problem Pattern of Behavior 25 FAR on Isan 26 FYI: New articles 27 Province navboxes 28 Politics of Thailand 29 Open discussions 30 Royal family virtually on the move 31 Updating the Manual of Style 31.1 Naming conventions for royalty and nobility 31.1.1 The Monarchians speak 31.2 Transliteration/transcription 31.3 Other issues 32 Pictures! 33 Updating the Manual of Style (part 2) 33.1 Naming conventions for royalty 33.2 Naming conventions for nobility 33.3 Romanization 33.4 General style guidelines 33.5 General naming conventions 33.6 Naming conventions for provinces, districts, cities, towns and villages 33.6.1 New discussion 33.7 Naming conventions for Buddhist temples 33.8 General discussion 34 RTGS and IPA 35 Request for a translation assistance 36 "Siamese sex god Pragngan" 37 Coordinators' working group 38 Article alerts 39 DYK for Buddha's Birthday and Vesak 40 Mor lam at FAR 41 Truce term 42 Virachai Vannukul 43 Proposal for a 200-WikiProject contest 44 Proposal for a 200-WikiProject contest 45 Thai Football Division 2 League Naming 46 Offtopic but 47 Mexican Flu

[edit] General notices

• Wikipedia Commons is supposed to become a language-independent repository of copyright-free images. Photos which don't have any fitting article here yet can be uploaded there, for example to induce the creation of new articles. See Commons:Category:Thailand.
• Please don't forget to add newly created articles to List of Thailand-related topics, which allows to monitor changes in the articles by simply checking [1]
• You may also want to monitor Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Thailand for Thailand-related deletion discussions.

[edit] TAT to "improve" Thailand-articles here

Just noticed it on the FACT blog [2] - the Tourism Authority of Thailand plans to edit articles about Thailand on Wikipedia and Wikitravel. While there are definitely a lot of articles in need of improving, this being done by a government agency is risky. So be VERY careful about POV edits, removal of criticism, etc. But try to do without biting them away, having them edit in accordance with our rules and style would be for our mutual interest. andy (talk) 09:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems like the first editors are already here, see the articles on Pathum Thani, Songkhla (where they even did not read that the article is about the town, not the province) and Phetchabun Province, where I had to do a lot of copyedit and deletion of duplications already. andy (talk) 12:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You did great work, Andy. Should we try contact TAT directly about the issue? --PaePae | Talk 10:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I already sent an email to TAT yesterday, expressing my concern that editors without knowledge of the Wikipedia policies paid to put tourism-brochure texts would backfire into a publicity disaster, but also offering my help in getting TAT involved in a fruitful cooperation for our mutual interest. So far no reply yet :-( As I can only write in English it might help if someone can talk to them in Thai as well. andy (talk) 11:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Where did you send email to? It said to be from 'e-Marketing for Amazing Thailand 2008'[3] campaign. I will contact them at amazingthailand@tat.or.th, writing one. --PaePae | Talk 04:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I saw this news as well,[4] [5] and was pretty concerned. I'm glad to see that others have noticed it, too, and are keeping a watchful eye. — WiseKwai 18:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your updated. I wonder if anyone taking care of Thai-related articles at wikitravel? I do not know any policy there. It would be good having someone familiar with wikitravel to deal with TAT together. --PaePae | Talk 04:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Response from born Distinction

I got a reply from born Distinction. They are a consultant company responsible for 'WIKI for Thailand Tourism' project. They said the project does not start making any modification with Wikipedia nor Wikitravel yet. So those edits should not be related to TAT.

However, I had addressed that these users might be a person from the project. They said it should be misunderstood among the participants. They will propose TAT to notice them about our concerns.

• Special:Contributions/Yummyyok
• Special:Contributions/Nakyim
• Special:Contributions/Chakkapun

• User:Borndistinction Special:Contributions/Borndistinction
• Wikitravel: User:Borndistinction Special:Contributions/Borndistinction

They also provided schedule as below:

1. By February 2008 - Found WIKI Working Committee.
2. By February 2008 - Analyze and summarize what information to update and/or create.
3. By May 2008 - Find and gather information.
4. By July 2008 - Compile into draft version and upload to project's blog.
5. By August 2008 - Verify draft for correctness and completeness. Modify and update into last version.
6. By September 2008 - Publish on Wikipedia and Wikitravel.

As of now, phase 1-2-3 are in progress.

WIKI Working Committee:

1. Tourism Authority of Thailand.
   • Information technology office.
   • Information services division.
   • Public relation division.
   • TAT local offices around Thailand.
   • Some other TAT offices in Thailand.
2. Tourism business associations and clubs all around Thailand.
3. Education institutes.
   • Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Industry, Rangsit University.
   • Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University.
4. WIKIPedia User Experts.

They did sent invitation email to wiki experts writing about Thailand and got some feedbacks, almost foreigners. WIKI Mission for Thailand Tourism project will have an official press conference in March.

They are also inviting us to join the Working Committee for co-operation along the project. Anyone interested? --PaePae | Talk 08:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Announcement from TAT

Editions on WIKIPEDIA TAT has not started editing any article on WIKIPEDIA as yet whereas the articles about 3 provinces in Thailand, Pathumthani, Songkhla and Petchabun, are not edited by TAT.

Editions with the username borndistinction is just try to find out whether how it works but has not touched any content at all.

Editions on WIKITravel TAT has edited and created new content on few articles on WIKITravel already by consulting WIKITravel expert by proving them the authority and copyright of the content from TAT. [6]--Borndistinction (talk) 08:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with WikiProject Thai provinces

Yes I would strongly recommend mergin thai provinces with the main one ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 10:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

If merging just means moving the project page to a subpage of the Thailand project - no problem with that, but I also don't see any real benefit of it. But that's not what I would call merge. But as most of the text on that project page is specific to the provinces, it won't fit into the Thailand project page. Besides, both the provinces and the districts make a nice separated subfield of this project, and with the new activity on the province articles by TAT (User:Borndistinction) a reactivation of the project with additional helpers would be possible. andy (talk) 20:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I just mean moving it to a sub page of the project ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:06, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article tagging

Should Thailand articles currently tagged under WikiProject Southeast Asia be re-tagged under this project instead? It isn't clear to me whether this project is a subproject of WikiProject Southeast Asia itself, but if not, there would seem to be a great amount of overlapping scope.

If articles are transferred to this project, how should the quality and importance scales be treated? Is reassessment needed for all articles? - Paul_012 ^(talk) 14:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It's okay to leave in both. Badagnani (talk) 02:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New userbox available

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Thailand#Templates. Badagnani (talk) 16:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Undiscussed page moves of Thai cities and provinces

See Special:Contributions/Borndistinction. Badagnani (talk) 11:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Thai provinces#How to title the page have been there for quite some time. If no one else thinks they should be changed, these moves should be reverted. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

In Thailand it is much more common to talk about the province than the city - so when someone just says "Nakhon Phanom" it usually means the province of that name, if meaning the town one says "Mueang Nakhon Phanom" (not to be confused with Amphoe Mueang, which is another different entity). Thus on Thai Wikipedia นครพนม is a redirect to the province; on the Dutch WP Nakhon Phanom is the disambiguation page. Those naming convention in the province project was formulated unilaterally by myself, and says nothing about the town, just the province, as that project was for the provinces only. And actually this move was discussed - by email between me and borndistinction, who is editing on behalf of the Tourism Authority to add more information into the province articles. andy (talk) 20:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thailand in the Dutch Empire

Hello everyone! There is a discussion at Talk:Dutch Empire#Request For Comment: Map, because user Red4tribe has made a map of the Dutch Empire (Image:Dutch Empire 4.png) that includes significative parts of Thailand. Would you like to comment? Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 15:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Tom kha pladuk

The Tom kha pladuk article has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom kha pladuk. Thank you. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 18:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An Invitation from the Philippine Wikipedia Community

Hello folks,

The Philippine Wikipedia Community will be holding its 1st Meet-up in Cebu City (the fourth one in the Philippines) on June 23-24, 2008. This coincides with the first Philippine Open Source Summit, also to be held in Cebu. The Philippine Wikipedia Community is an Implementing Partner of the Open Source Summit. We invite you to join us in this event. If you are in the IT or IT-enabled services industry, this would be a great opportunity to meet people from the 4th best outsourcing city in the world. This is also a good excuse to visit our beautiful beaches :)

If you're interested in joining the Wikipedia meet-up, please join our discussion. You can register for the Open Source Summit here. If you would like some assistance with local accomodations, you may email User:Bentong Isles.

The Philippine Wikipedia Community
WP:PINOY

[edit] Archive of May 2008

I basically archived everything before 2008, since the page was hopelessly backlogged (some discussions haven't been resolved after 3 years). If anyone would like to revive a topic or request, please do so. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 15:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Draft Guidelines for Lists of companies by country - Feedback Requested

Within WikiProject Companies I am trying to establish guidelines for all Lists of companies by country, the implementation of which would hopefully ensure a minimum quality standard and level of consistency across all of these related but currently disparate articles. The ultimate goal is the improvement of these articles to Featured List status. As a WikiProject that currently has one of these lists within your scope, I would really appreciate your feedback! You can find the draft guidelines here. Thanks for your help as we look to build consensus and improve Wikipedia! - Richc80 (talk) 14:37, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quick romanization request

I've been looking for an online tool to help me romanize the title of a Thai comics title. I found one but there seems to be some sort of encoding conflict and it's not working for me. I was hoping someone here might be able to recommend something? In the meantime, would anyone be willing to transliterate the following title for me? ตุลาการทมิฬ ฉบับพิเศษ I really appreciate it - thanks! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I use thai2english.com a lot - and sometimes thai-language.com is very useful. The first link transliterates your text as " dtòo laa gaan tá-mil chà-bàp pí-sèt". The second link transliterates as "dtoo(L)-laa(M)-gaan(M) tha(H)-min(M) cha(L)-bap(L) phi(H)-saeht(L)" PalawanOz (talk) 07:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the links and your help! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 07:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

thai2english.com Dictionary page has added towards the bottom Generate Phonemic Transcription for Thai Text: t-l Enhanced, Phonemic Thai, IPA, RTGS, AUA, ALA-LC, or Bua Luang. Also, the bottom of every dictionary definition page has a link to submit a correction, comment, or addition. Pawyilee (talk) 07:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] WP:THAI Tagging

An user Badagnani had placed a Bot request for Tagging articles {{WikiProject Thailand}} from Thai related categories. TinucherianBot have autotagged around 1204 new articles. Categories used can be found here .This is FYI -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 18:45, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Public holidays in Thailand

Dunno if this is the write place for this; if not, tell me where to go. Public holidays in Thailand was re-written by me to add introductory text before the plain table that was there before; tweak that table which basically was correct; and add a new topic, Other national observances. Five days on the new table need attention:

January 25 Royal Thai Armed Forces Day.

February 14 Valentine Day as observed in Thailand.

August Thetsagarn Sart.

August Thetsagarn Jeen.

September Moon Festival (Buddhist), or Thetsagarn Wan wâi Prá Jahn, Thai: เทศกาลวันไหว้พระจันทร์ in case somebody knows a better translation.

Help! Pawyilee (talk) 09:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

From what I know, and comparing with the Thai Wikipedia:

• The Royal Thai Armed Forces Day has been moved to 18 January since last year.
• Thetsagarn Sart (RTGS Sat), is known as วันสารทไทย (Wan Sat Thai) to differentiate it from สารทจีน. I suggest moving the article to something with "Festival" or "Day" instead of "Thetsagarn" (e.g. Sart Festival).
• วันสารทจีน (RTGS Sat Chin) (in the 7th Chinese lunar month) corresponds to Ghost Festival, and is different from เทศกาลกินเจ (RTGS Kin Che; in the 9th Chinese lunar month), which has the articles Vegetarian Festival and Nine Emperor Gods Festival. I don't think the term "Thetsagarn Jeen" exists.
• Thetsagarn Wan wâi Prá Jahn corresponds to Mid-Autumn Festival.

For future reference, you might like to try searching the Thai Wikipedia and find corresponding inter-language links to determine English names of Thai words. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 04:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 2230 articles are assigned to this project, of which 406, or 18.2%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Table of contents

Wikipedia's page that serves as a table of contents for its Thailand content is the the List of basic Thailand topics.

It's not quite done, and needs you to refine and maintain it.

The Transhumanist    23:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of basic Thailand topics needs maps and pictures

This list has just been moved to article space from the basic topics lists WikiProject. It's useful enough to be in article space, but it still has some redlinks and missing topics, and it desperately needs maps and pictures.

It needs dedicated editors to look after it.

The Transhumanist    23:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

P.S.: please place it on your watchlist!

[edit] Need Thai

Need Thai at Lao Lom. Badagnani (talk) 16:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

If I am not totally wrong, Lao Lom are ลาวหล่ม, and the Lao Loum (Lao Lum) are ลาวลุ่ม. andy (talk) 11:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] People's Alliance for Democracy

People's Alliance for Democracy is going through an edit war. Heavens child, BasicallySo, and GoodHands, all users created at approximately the same time, have repeatedly reverted several edits and have refused to discuss the disagreements in the Talk page. Please have a look and see if you can make some 3rd party suggestions. Patiwat (talk) 06:00, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

You may want to take a look at WP:SOCK and follow the guidelines there if you suspect multiple accounts by the same user are being used to influence the article. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Thailand

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:33, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hinduism in Thailand

Does anyone want to expand it to make it its own article? Right now it is only a small section in Hinduism_in_Southeast_Asia. Its surely deserves to be longer.--D-Boy (talk) 03:42, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 Thai political crisis

that article is sorely in need of an update to the recent events. Wondering if someone can help in that regard? Lihaas (talk) 22:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Problem Pattern of Behavior

Just a heads up regarding a pattern of behavior that I saw with an anonymous IP user tonight- User:125.238.152.234 ran through a large number of Thai-related pages, particularly regarding mixed-ethnicity Thai celebrities and Thai people of Mon or Laotian heritage removing or blunting references to their non-Thai ethnic heritage. People from Category:Thai people of Mon descent and Category:Thai people of Mon descent along with various luk kreung celebrities seemed to be the main targets. --Clay Collier (talk) 07:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FAR on Isan

I have nominated Isan for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Colchicum (talk) 22:52, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FYI: New articles

A bot has been set up, which looks through the new Wikipedia articles and picks up those that are likely related to Thailand. The search results are available at User:AlexNewArtBot/ThailandSearchResult and are normally updated on a daily basis. Colchicum (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Province navboxes

I'm interested in creating navboxes for all of the provinces to make it easier to find relevant articles. I've made the first one, Template:Lopburi (see below). I hope to get some feedback/discussion to help develop a uniform style and layout, in order to minimize editing later on. Thanks.

v • d • e Lopburi Main article Lopburi Province Capital Lopburi Districts (amphoe) Mueang Lopburi · Ban Mi · Chai Badan · Khok Charoen · Khok Samrong · Lam Sonthi · Nong Muang · Phatthana Nikhom · Sa Bot · Tha Luang · Tha Wung Royalty Narai · Ramesuan · Yugala Dighambara Related topics History · King Narai's Palace · Pasak Jolasit Dam · Suranarai Road · Lopburi River · Pa Sak River · Lopburi FC · Bang Kham River Neighboring areas Phetchabun · Chaiyaphum · Nakhon Ratchasima · Saraburi · Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya · Ang Thong · Sing Buri · Nakhon Sawan

--rikker (talk) 08:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

A few more thoughts: this would supersede the "Amphoe of X" navbox currently in use only on Amphoe pages, and could be placed on all articles related to a given province. Right now I've kept it simple, but we might add separate sections in the navbox for temples, tourist sites, and so forth if there are enough articles, and especially as more are written. --rikker (talk) 09:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I think I like it. We have to discuss though which sections to add, because more than six or seven makes it a bit confusing? The first three are ok as well as the last two ones. I would replace "Royalty" with something else. I would not add "Sights", as we have a paragraph with "sights" in each article about province/amphoe..., where we can go into details. --hdamm (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it might be difficult to define a scope of inclusion for such navboxes. The districts and cities are directly related to the provinces, so no problem there, but other related topics might not be directly linked to a specific province. For example, Khao Yai National Park covers the area of four provinces, so for consistency we would need to include it in either all or none of the provinces' boxes, which would be problematic both ways. Selecting topics notably relevant to a province would also be very subjective, since a notable topic might be related to a province, yet the relationship may not be well-established in the minds of most. Somchai Wongsawat is not so much linked to Nakhon Si Thammarat as Thaksin Shinawatra is to Chiang Mai, which is still less than the link Banharn Silpa-archa has to Suphanburi, so drawing the line would be pretty difficult. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 13:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure, it's not going to be 100% tidy, but I don't think that requires scrapping the idea. Maybe a category for people, another for places, another for other. I don't think it has to be very clear cut, because for most provinces there's hardly a surplus of articles. Bangkok should be excluded from this anyhow, and then the more important provinces like Chiang Mai will need a little more attention. I'm more worried about coming up creating more articles than drawing the line about what to include in the navbox, personally. I think this would be a great tool, even if we err on the side of fewer links than creating a over-crowded navbox. --rikker (talk) 13:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Of course, it's a great idea and a potentially very useful navbox. Some further comments, though:

• Why the green background for the title bar? (I think the default navbox colours should be fine)
• Perhaps link the province article in the title bar, and free up the "Main article" line? But if we want to be rather generic in our reference to the name, maybe just change "Main article" to "Province". Inclusion of the provincial seals pretty much puts emphasis on the province, though.
• I think "capital" could be changed to accommodate other cities, towns and perhaps large settlements.
• I agree that "royalty" could be changed. It is hard to imagine a royal for every single province.
• I'm not sure I find the neighbouring provinces group very useful, especially without a map. I would prefer a link to the province's geographical region, but those articles (apart from Isan are severely underdeveloped anyway.

--Paul_012 ^(talk) 14:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Politics of Thailand

Hey I've read the article and the section Thailand and Democracy after 1932 really needs some work. I know nothing about Thailand but I thought this would be a good place to request help. Thanks.Ltwin (talk) 21:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Open discussions

Please see discussions on the renaming of the articles History of Thailand (1768–1932), Thailand National Artist‎ and Thetsagan Sart. There is also discussion on the naming of Thai districts (amphoe) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thai districts‎#Naming of articles. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 07:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Royal family virtually on the move

Hundreds of articles on Thai royals have been given funky new titles in the last couple of days by User:Monarchians. Check out the discussion here. Kauffner (talk) 14:20, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I am outraged by the new titles too. The titles of articles are now too long and they do not help recognisability. If the names of Thai royalty are unambiguous, why don't we use only their names (not titles at all)? Surtsicna (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Updating the Manual of Style

Since the previous (dated) discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Thailand-related articles) had not achieved clear consensus even back then, and a few years have already passed (and presumably so have the circumstances changed), I would like to ask the parties involved to take a fresh look at this and re-state their opinions and reasons, citing the relevant Wikipedia guidelines where appropriate. Some may feel we are going through this again, but hopefully by starting anew we should be able to reach a consensus. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Since the Manual of Style concerns more than the naming of royalty articles, I'm taking the liberty to split the discussion. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naming conventions for royalty and nobility

The current style is apparently designed to make articles names as short as possible, presumably to avoid bumping into technical barriers that no longer exist. Putting the given name first is a convention designed to make alphabetizing easier, another barrier technology has overcome. For the popes, the title comes first now, as in Pope Pius X. In other words, the trend is to follow usage in straight text as opposed to the style used in dead tree encyclopedia headings. So its high time to update the style here. For living royals, I suggest following the style used by the Thai English-language press. This would give us "Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn", "Princess Srirasmi", "Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn," and so forth. (The Thai press puts "His Royal Highness" or "HRH" before the title, but this is banned by Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)). For historical figures, I propose following the style used by historians: "King Chulalongkorn," "Crown Prince Vajirunhis", etc. Kauffner (talk) 17:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I think we should first and foremost keep in mind Use common names of persons and things. Although Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) does state that names and titles are a main exception, the details listed on that page are only "intended for medieval and modern European and Muslim rulers and nobility", and we should avoid drawing unnecessary examples or references.

Personally I would prefer our usage to reflect that of contemporary scholarly works dealing with the subject, though I'm not sure how that can be established. Regarding the reasons for the difference in opinions regarding the matter, I feel that the highly-dividing "matter of respect" shouldn't be a big issue if we keep NPOV in mind. As for Kauffner's proposals, the main question should be whether or not including the titles is straying from common usage or being overly precise. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't know much about Thai nobility, but for the royals definetly add the titles to it, so it should be "Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn" for example, etc. and "Queen Sirikit of Thailand". Gryffindor 07:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Monarchians speak

Copied from User talk:Kauffner‎:
Well first, I am sorry that I did anything you did not admire. Last night I and the office discussed about the name of the Thai Royalties until 11 pm. The objections we did were to complete the Thai Royal Family articles. We would like to complete all the member of the Siamese or Thai Royal Family, from the reign of Rama I to current Rama IX. I think I would like you to help us, too. At this moment we are editing the User page, so you will know who we are. And when I do anything wrong with the Thai Royal Article, you can tell me anytime you like. And I will discuss with you when I would like to edit or change anything about them. You can cooperate with us...
The result of the meeting of changing the name of the Thai Royal Article in Wikipedia, the free evcyclopedia...
We may cut the title Prince and Princess from the royalty who got the rank. Like Chitcharoen, Prince Narisara Nuvadtivongs, Kitiyakara Voraluksana, Prince of Chunthaburi, Bhanirangsi Savangvongse, Prince Bhanubandhu Vongsevoradej, etc. Because, they will be very long name in the article.
And the name of the monarch of Thailand, I think we should write the name like the European monarch, like; Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Margrethe II of Denmark, Maria I of Russia, Otto I of Austria, etc. So we can write like it in the Thai Monarchs, too. like; Bhumibol Adulyadej, Rama IX of Thailand, Chulalongkorn, Rama V of Siam, and still the name in it. How is your comment about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Monarchians (talk • contribs) 08:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
And the article name of the Crown Prince of Thailand. I think Maha Vajiralongkorn, Crown Prince of Thailand is the best name of the article, do you agree? And the name of the current members of the Thai Royal Family must have the title in the article. Like; Prince Dipangkorn Rasmijoti of Thailand, Princess Chulabhorn Walailuk of Thailand, etc. So it will be the same of the Royal Articles of the other Royal Family, like; Prince Christian of Denmark, Princess Isabella of Denmark, etc. Do you agree?
And the royalty or nobility whose title Mom Chao, Mom Rajawongse, or Mom Luang. We should write the title in front of the name, too. e.g, Mom Chao Chatrichalerm Yukol, Mom Rajawongse Mannarumas Yukol, Mom Luang Sarali Kitiyakara...
We would like to have your comment, too. Because this is the free encyclopedia, not the private... Hope to hear from you soon. Monarchians (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 07:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC).

The basic logic behind article naming on Wiki is that the names should reflect common English-language usage. For technical reasons, it is necessary for each name to be unique. So when the person has a very common name like "Otto" or "Elizabeth" some additional words are added to make the article name unique. This is why European royals get odd-looking article names with endings like "of Austria" and "of the United Kingdom". But there are no notable non-Thais with names like Bhumibol or Dipangkorn. "Of Thailand" is not part of their official titles, so I don't see any reason to put it in. For the crown prince, the Bangkok Post consistently refers to him as "Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn" and that is the style I'd like to follow. In any case, just "Vajiralongkorn" is the current style under Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Thailand-related articles). This document needs to be revised before the article titles for individual royals can be changed. Kauffner (talk) 10:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

The wiki style guide Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) states that names: "do not have additional qualifiers (such as "King")". The intention is to have short article names that have only the name itself, without any embellishments. I think we should adhere to that style, which is employed in the non-Thai part of wikipedia. −woodstone (talk) 11:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia style like other encyclopedia style does not include the full ceremonial titles for each reference to a royal. The only reason why the article Elizabeth II is set at "Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom" is simply because there may be other Elizabeth's. Note there is no "Queen", or "Queen of United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and all the other commonwealth" or whatever her full title might be. And for the "Mom Chao" and other titles should be treated same as the "Sir" in England, mention it in the article, but not making it part of the article title. Simply check out the article title on King Bhumipol Adulyadej in Brittanica and other encyclopedias. So why should we be more royalist and sycophantic than that well-established encyclopedia - using this style does not mean any disrespect. Besides, the Thai government chose to block that article already anyway as even the moderate criticism well within our NPOV policy is considered lese majeste there...

Additionally, the "King Rama IX of Thailand" is simply wrong, as you can read in the article Rama (King of Thailand), as only Vajiravudh (Rama VI) actually used that title officially. andy (talk) 12:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

What about Pope John Paul II? For British royals, there is Prince William of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York, both of which follow formal British newspaper usage. Britannica doesn't put titles in front of the names because everything has to be alphabetized in the paper version. Kauffner (talk) 13:00, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Ummm... See WP:NCNT if you want to understand the conventions for western Royalty and Popes on Wikipedia. As is clear from that policy, "King" and "Queen" are normally omitted in the article titles for ruling monarchs, but lesser royalty often should have a title of nobility included in the article title. As best I understand it, these rules derive from the intersection of: a) historical usage b) a desire for consistency within Wikipedia c) WP:NAME#Use the most easily recognized name. How this "precedent" all plays out in the context of Thai royalty, both current and historical is open to interpretation. I suspect that the historical kings and queens, such as Mongkut, are correctly titled, using the most common name in reliable sources. If I were going to delve into this issue for current persons, I would look at the styling of the name in such leading media as the New York Times and BBC reportage. Good luck. Studerby (talk) 21:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear. Kauffner... You said the Bangkok Post write only Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn. I see iy. But it is because Bangkok Post is the local newspaper of the Kingdom of Thailand. The editor write Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn because the Thai people and the foreigner always know that he is the Crown Prince of Thailand, not the other's. So it may be right if we name the article as Maha Vajiralongkorn, Crown Prince of Thailand. Because the people around the world will know that he is the Crown Prince of Thailand. And besides the people around the world does not have the Bangkok Post to read...

For example, The Sun, the local newspaper in England, write the name of Prince Chalres only as Prince Charles. Not Charles, Prince of Wales. Because the people in England always know that he is the prince of the UK, and the heir apparent to the British Throne, too. But in the article in Wikipedia, they name as Charles, Prince of Wales. So they would like all the people in the world who enter Prince Charles' article will know that he is the prince of the UK...

And the title Mom Chao, Mom Rajawongse, and Mom Luang are the title which the royalties has got since they were born. And the title Sir, or Lady or Dame are the title which given to the people by the sovereign. The Thai Royal Family is different from the other Royal or Imperial Families.

Monarchians (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC).

I think Monarchians may be right, because the people in Wikipedia are not all thai. I, thai people, want the people around the world know deeply about Thai Royal Family, to know about the Thai Royal titles are so complicated. This Royal Family is very different from the others. Our projects has just start a few days ago. To create the articles of every members of the Thai Royal Family. So we hope you will help us complete our project, we hope we would get your comment and cooperation, too.

Nice to meet you all, K. LPSK (will create the user page soon)

Technology department, Secretary office, Bureau of the Royal Household, Kingdom of Thailand —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.174.98.234 (talk) 16:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

That is all very well, and I believe contributions from the Bureau of the Royal Household would be greatly appreciated, provided that they adhere to Wikipedia's policies. The point of this discussion, however, is the proper naming of articles on Thai royals. What Andy said above is that the reason Prince Christian of Denmark is at that title is because there are eleven Prince Christians and many more Christians, so the Prince... of Denmark is necessary to avoid confusion with other princes and persons of the same name. There is only one person named Vajiralongkorn, however, so there is no similar need, and the same applies to most Thai royals. I think this means we should refer back to establishing the most common name in English, and settling whether a brief descriptive title is appropriate at all.

Loose translation of the above: ประเด็นที่คุณ Andy กล่าวถึงข้างต้นคือเหตุผลที่ต้องใช้ชื่อบทความ Prince Christian of Denmark เพราะมีเจ้าชายที่ชื่อคริสเตียนถึงสิบเอ็ดพระองค์ จึงจำเป็นต้องมีชื่อประเทศต่อท้ายเพื่อแก้ความกำกวม ไม่ให้ชื่อบทความซ้ำกัน แต่เหตุผลไม่ใช่เพื่อบอกพระนามเต็มไว้ในชื่อบทความแต่อย่างใด (สังเกตได้ว่าไม่มี "Count of Monpezat" อยู่ในชื่อบทความ) เพราะพระนามเต็มย่อมจะได้รับการกล่าวถึงในเนื้อความของบทความนั้น ๆ อยู่แล้ว ทั้งนี้ไม่มีราชนิกูลของประเทศอื่นใดที่จะมีพระนามวชิราลงกรณ์ เราจึงไม่ต้องกลัวว่าชื่อบทความจะซ้ำกัน และไม่มีเหตุผลที่จะต้องใช้ชื่อประเทศกำกับ ทั้งนี้นโยบายการตั้งชื่อบทความของวิกิพีเดียจะใช้ชื่อที่ถูกใช้งานมากที่สุดในภาษาอังกฤษ ที่จะทำให้เข้าใจตรงกันได้ ประเด็นที่ควรจะต้องพิจารณาในที่นี้คือ จะต้องระบุพระนามละเอียดเพียงใด จึงจะตรงกับชื่อที่สากลใช้กันทั่วไป --Paul_012 ^(talk) 19:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Whatever course we choose to follow, there will be some issues that need ironing out. The Prince Damrong Rajanubhab, for example, is mainly known by his bestowed title, rarely by his given name, while most others, including Princess Galyani Vadhana (who isn't as widely known as the Princess of Naradhiwas or the Princess Naradhiwas Rajanagarindra), are known by their royal given names. Common usage would demand that we make exceptions in such cases. More complicated would be nobility titles (which we haven't gone into yet), which commonly far outweigh a person's given and surname as common usage, but also often apply to many persons. There is also the issue of multiple names/titles during a person's lifetime, (I'm thinking about Queen Savang Vadhana, who is more commonly known in Thailand by her widow title Somdej Phra Sri Savarindira Boromma Raja Devi, among others,) and whether distinction between living and deceased article subjects is needed. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

There's a relevant discussion of Prince Charles' article name here. The reason his article is entitled Charles, Prince of Wales is not to identify his country of origin, distinguish him from other people named "Charles", or to avoid putting a title in front of his name. None of those issues even came up in the discussion. His official title is "Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales." The editors involved thought it was awkward to have the word "prince" twice in the article name, so the first "prince" was taken out. There is no precedent here for not putting a title before a name (or for putting an extraneous "of country" afterwards.) Kauffner (talk) 01:54, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

My opinion is that all media in Thailand are compromised by the country's excessive lese majeste laws and there is absolutely no need for Wikipedia to start aping their obsequious kowtowing. We should use the shortest forms of the common names, stripped of any titles unless absolutely needed for disambiguation: Bhumibol Adulyadej, Vajiralongkorn, Srirasmi, etc. This is already the de facto convention anyway.

In addition, we need to reiterate here that, as per WP guidelines, titles are not to be used in article content when referring to the person. Jpatokal (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

The AP and The New York Times refer to Thai royalty in the same style as the Thai press, except they leave off the "HRH." Kauffner (talk) 11:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

The conclusion is that the Thai Royal Articles will name as only the name, not the titles or ranks, e.g.

• HRH Prince Chitcharoen, The Prince Narisara Nuvadtivongs will name as only Chitcharoen
• HRH Prince Bhanirangsi Savangvongse, The Prince Bhanubandhu Vongsevoradej --->> Bhanurangsi Savangvongse
• HRH Prince Disuankumarn, The Prince Damrong Rajanubhab --->> Disuankumarn
• HRH Prince Rangsit Prayurasakdi, The Prince of Chainat --->> Rangsit Prayurasakdi
• HRH Prince Saisavaliphirom, The Princess Suthasininard Piyamaharajpadivaradda --->> Saisavaliphirom
• HRH Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn --->> Maha Vajiralongkorn
• HM Queen Sri Patcharindra, The Queen Mother (Saovabha Bhongsri) --->> Sri Patcharindra*
• HM Queen Sri Saovarindira, The Queen Grandmother (Savang Vadhana) --->> Sri Savarindira*

In case of these two gueens, we should use the posthumously name. As you can see that The Princess Mother Sangval is named in the article as Sri Nagarindra...

And in case of Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, the word Maha Chakri is the part of her full name. Her formal name was Sirindhorn Theprattanasuda and then has changed into Maha Chakri Sirindhorn it is not the ranks or the title. Her title is only Princess of Thailand. Well, one of my team named the title as The Princess Royal. Well that title was just as the comparison about the rank in English. But the only title is just as Princess of Thailand

I hope to see your comments or agreements, if you would to... And we continued cooperating create the Royal Thai articles happily...Thank you

Mr. Chakri (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC). Technology department, Secretary office, Bureau of the Royal Household, Kingdom of Thailand

[edit] Transliteration/transcription

Generally the Royal Thai General System of Transcription is now used for general terms and names with no clearly established English spelling, although the specifics detailed on the MoS page are outdated and not really followed. Please note further concerns or suggestions regarding the transcription scheme here. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

It is probably best to adhere strictly to RTGS, with the option of adding tone marks. Any deviation is bound to lead to discussions (but personally I prefer to use j for จ). Note however that names for which an abundant majority of sources has another spelling, we may use that in running text, adding the RTGS for pronunciation purposes only. A current example is "Abhisit Vejjajiva", which is RTGS: "Aphisit Wetchachiwa". We should update Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(Thailand-related_articles) accordingly. −woodstone (talk) 14:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

For pronunciation purposes, I would prefer we provided them in IPA. For example, I quite like the way the article currently begins as

Abhisit Vejjajiva (help·info) (Thai: อภิสิทธิ์ เวชชาชีวะ, IPA: [apʰisit wetɕʰatɕʰiwa]... )

except perhaps the fact that having the boldfaced article title as the audio link seems a bit confusing at first glance. That is, I don't think it's necessary to provide the RTGS Aphisit Wetchachiwa, as it isn't a recognisable spelling of the name in this case, and a poorer pronunciation guide than the IPA. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree that pronunciation should be in IPA. For article titles and in text, I favour the usual Wikipedia practice of using the most common form, rather than assuming that RTGS is best. Where there's no one form which is clearly the most common, RTGS tends to be a poor choice because it doesn't generally help English speakers to approximate a correct pronunciation (which I'd argue is what the forms we use should try to do). Henry^Flower 20:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Agree with the IPA for pronunciation. And only RTGS where the use is common in those area, such as administration division (province, amphoe, etc.), road names. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 02:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Abhisit Vejjajiva re: Meaning of Abhisit, and also Family name. Pawyilee (talk) 15:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other issues

The MoS is currently pretty limited in scope. Please suggest specific issues that would be beneficial to be included here. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures!

If the Technology department, Secretary office, Bureau of the Royal Household, Kingdom of Thailand, really wants to help improve the articles, they should upload some images in the public domain that won't be promptly deleted for lack of a proper license! Getting suitable images for ALL articles on Thailand, not just on the Royal family, is a headache! Upload instructions at Thai Wikipedia tell how that's done, but English Wikipedia needs permission in both languages. Also, just who is going to initiate Technology department, Secretary office, Bureau of the Royal Household, Kingdom of Thailand? It would also be nice if they could stop Bhumibol Adulyadej from being redirected here. Pawyilee (talk) 15:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Opposite enforcement of Thailand's lèse majesté laws, ALL pictures of Thai Royalty should be banned from Wikipedia, as Wikipedia cannot prevent users from "misunderstanding" them, much less "misunderestimating" the extent of "Opposite's" draconian enforcement. Perhaps some editor can design a template to be used in lieu of a portrait to explain why. Pawyilee (talk) 08:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Updating the Manual of Style (part 2)

Before this sinks into oblivion, let's try to formalise the above statements into a guideline. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Naming conventions for royalty

It seems most of us (with the noted exception of User:Gryffindor) ultimately agree that the naming conventions for Thai royalty should reflect the current status quo, i.e. use the full length of the person's royal given (birth) name without titles, prefixes or suffixes, e.g. Dipangkorn Rasmijoti, as the names of the Royal Family members are mostly unique. A few issues still need to be ironed out:

• What rules should be applied for those royalty who were not born into the Royal Family? Prominent cases here are Princess Srinagarindra the Princess Mother, whose birth name was Sangwan, and Princess Srirasmi, who currently still uses her birth name in her full royal title. Should we use the names later assumed as these persons moved up the royal ranks, or stick with the birth names? Princess Srinagarindra was also known as Princess Sangwan before she adopted Srinagarindra in her title, but she is rarely known as such today. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

• If we decide on the article title Srinagarindra for the Princess Mother, what about other persons with multiple given names, specifically Queens Saovabha Bhongsri and Savang Vadhana, who were known as Sri Patcharindra and Sri Savarindira in their widowhood? Should the most recent name be used (which would be consistent with the case of Princess Srinagarindra), or should we retain use of their former names (which I believe are better known in the English-speaking world)? If the latter is followed, this probably should only be applied to deceased persons. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Queen Savang Vadhana as a name is much better known IMO, so in this case go with the name they had as consort. No one will really know who Savarindira was. Gryffindor (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

• Using the given name for certain members of the Royal Family will be in conflict with using the most commonly known name. Prince Disuankumarn, The Prince Damrong Rajanubhab is almost always known in publications as Damrong Rajanubhab (which is a bestowed title), and I think that cases like these should be made exceptions to the rules. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

• Which Royal Family members should be treated according to these rules? Royals of Mom Chao level will use their surnames, so this probably means that the usual Given-name Surname format should be applied to them, as well as to members of the lower ranks (who are not considered royalty). --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

• That royal names are mostly unique is true only in recent times. Many royals in older times had very simple and common names which may have other meanings as well (King Mongkut's name literally means crown). How should we disambiguate such cases? Suppose we had an article about the Thai-style crown called mongkut, should King Mongkut's article be at Mongkut (monarch)? Or should we make an exception and apply a prefix or suffix instead? --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

In that case add the "of XXX (territory or kingdom)" just like the other monarchs. Or in worst case, yes just add king, see also the lists of Japanese emperors for example. Gryffindor (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

• These conventions are unlikely to be suitable for royalty from older periods, i.e. early Rattanakosin and before, since it's unlikely that records exist that show such royals' actual given names, etc. I suggest that the most common name in English rule should be applied in these cases, although there will still be problems because many Ayutthaya rulers are now known by multiple names. Perhaps these should be decided on a case-by-case basis. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for inviting me. Yes I stand by my opinion that titles should be included (if the British, etc. have them, then why not the Thais?). These are names that we are dealing with, and it does not mean that in future confusion could arise, therefore better to include them. If others disagree, well so be it, but I stand to my opinion. Gryffindor (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The common name rule suggests the name should be given as it would be on first reference in a newspaper article, i.e. with the title in front. The popes are done this way: Pope John Paul II. The reason paper encyclopedias strip off the titles is so entries can be alphabetized. In my view, it's time to update the conventions to keep abreast of modern technology. The main argument against this idea seems to be that editors are upset with the lèse majesté law. Kauffner (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Naming conventions for nobility

The issue with nobles is rather different, as most of them may be referred to by given name and surname (except perhaps those in older periods who did not use surnames). The problem, however, is that in Thai usage, these nobles are predominantly referred to by their bestowed titles rather than their personal names, and the same often applies in English-language use as well. These bestowed titles are often related to a person's civil office, and as such is often shared by many in succession. Thai-language conventions avoid ambiguity by placing the personal name in parentheses after the person's rank and title, e.g. "Somdet Chaophraya Si Suriyawongse (Chuang Bunnag)" (Somdet Chaophraya is the rank and Si Suriyawongse is the title). I think this translates to the following options:

1. Use the personal name only, e.g. Chuang Bunnag. This may have the disadvantage of being unfamiliar and not in line with the most common name convention, especially in cases like Phraya Manopakorn Nititada, whose article would be at Gon Hutasingsa instead (although in such extreme cases where the personal name is rarely known exceptions should of course be made).
2. Use the title, without rank, and disambiguate with personal name when necessary, e.g. Si Suriyawongse. Although these titles may have been held by many persons, it could be reasonably argued that of these various titleholders, only one or few are likely to have Wikipedia articles. If there are articles on multiple Si Suriyawongse titleholders, this could be disambiguated to Si Suriyawongse (Chuang Bunnag). This does not reflect actual usage of the name, though.
3. Use the title and rank, and disambiguate with personal name when necessary, e.g. Somdet Chaophraya Si Suriyawongse, and Somdet Chaophraya Si Suriyawongse (Chuang Bunnag) if the former is ambiguous. This avoids the awkward format of title and personal name appearing without the rank as in the previous example, and takes advantage of the fact that holders of the same title may have different ranks, and thus may reduce the need for disambiguation (although this is rather uncommon). Such full titles are also likely to be the most common name, as in the case of Phraya Manopakorn Nititada.

These should of course be treated as general guidelines only, and in cases where common usage clearly prefers one name over the other, that name should be used as the article title. I myself am leaning somewhat toward option 3, as it does seem to be the most recognisable format, but 2 also seems workable. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Romanization

Based on the above discussion, I propose that the Manual of Style recommend that for general cases:

1. For Thai-language terms, use the established English spelling of the word, if available. Otherwise, the Royal Thai General System of Transcription should be followed when romanising Thai words into English.
2. The first appearance of the article subject in the lead should be followed by the Thai spelling of the term using the {{lang-th}} template, and preferably accompanied with IPA pronunciation using the {{IPA-all}} or {{pronounced}} templates. For example:

   '''Abhisit Vejjajiva''' ({{lang-th|อภิสิทธิ์ เวชชาชีวะ}}, {{IPA-all|à.pʰí.sìt wêːt.tɕʰāː.tɕʰīː.wáʔ}})...

   Which gives:

   Abhisit Vejjajiva (Thai: อภิสิทธิ์ เวชชาชีวะ, IPA: [à.pʰí.sìt wêːt.tɕʰāː.tɕʰīː.wáʔ])...

3. If the title of the article is an English word different from the Thai name, provide a romanization of the Thai term along with the Thai script and IPA pronunciation as mentioned above, e.g.

   '''Bangkok''', known in [[Thai language|Thai]] as '''Krung Thep Maha Nakhon''' ({{lang|th|กรุงเทพมหานคร}}, {{pronounced|krūŋtʰêːp máhǎːnákʰɔːn}})...

   Which gives:

   Bangkok, known in Thai as Krung Thep Maha Nakhon (กรุงเทพมหานคร, pronounced [krūŋtʰêːp máhǎːnákʰɔːn])...

4. Occurrences of Thai script in an article other than the first occurrence should be placed within the {{lang}} template, with the first parameter specified as th, i.e. {{lang|th|อักษรไทย}}, to ensure correct display across browsers.
5. In accordance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (text formatting), italicize romanized Thai words when used in the article text, but do not italicize the Thai spellings. Proper nouns do not need to be italicized.
6. Capitalization of terms should follow English language usage as specified in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters).

There is still the issue of what to do in the case two or more words being discussed share the same RTGS transcription. Take อำเภอบางสาย and อำเภอบางไทร, both in Ayutthaya Province, for instance. Both are transcribed as Amphoe Bang Sai. Should we make deviations from RTGS in such cases, so as to avoid confusion (when both occur in the same article) or the need for disambiguation (when different articles share the same spelling)? --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

In re the two sais, using the geocode presently distinguishes them, especially given the difficulty of trying to translate them into English. The one clearly means Sandy Haven, but the other could be Current Haven or perhaps Long Haven, or even Pretty Haven; natives won't know unless there's a story attached, and even then there may be conflicting versions. Pawyilee (talk) 09:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] General style guidelines

The following is proposed:

1. Thailand does not have national ties to a specific variety of English, so either American or British English may be used consistently in an article, following Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English. However, in some cases, use of a certain term may be preferred. For example, association football is known in Thailand as football and never soccer, therefore an article dealing with the sport in Thailand should refer to it as football.
2. For articles with strong ties to Thailand, dates should consistently follow the day-before-month format, e.g. 14 February and 14 February 1990. The parameter df=yes should be used with the templates {{Birth date and age}}, {{Birth year and age}}, {{Death date and age}}, {{Death year and age}}, and related templates.
3. Years should be noted in Common/Christian Era, although the Buddhist Era may also be noted where appropriate. When quoting sources or citing document titles which use the Buddhist Era, the original year in BE should be explicitly noted, and a conversion to CE/AD year provided in parentheses, e.g. the Copyright Act, B.E. 2537 (1994 CE).
4. Following Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Units of measurement, measurements should primarily be given in SI units, usually with conversions given using the {{Convert}} template.
5. Use only the given name and not the surname when referring to a previously introduced person, since Thai people are primarily known by given name.
6. When categorizing biography articles, do not specify sort keys to sort by surname in Thai people categories. However, sorting by surname is still desirable for non-country-specific people categories. A biography article for Name Surname should therefore be categorized like this:

   [[Category:Thai people|Name Surname]]
   [[Category:International people|Surname, Name]]

--Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] General naming conventions

The basic guideline to go by is of course Wikipedia:Naming conventions. For clarity, I'd also like to propose that this MoS recommend:

1. In accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), use the most commonly-accepted English name of a subject, if one exists, e.g. Bangkok, not Krung Thep Maha Nakhon, and Thailand, not Prathet Thai.
2. For names directly derived from the Thai language, use the most common English spelling if one exists, e.g. Pattaya, not Phatthaya, and Muay Thai, not Muai Thai. If no common spelling can be established, follow the Royal Thai General System of Transcription, as described under #Romanization.
3. With the exception of royals and nobles, articles about persons should usually follow the <First name> <Last name> format. The spelling of a person's name should follow the person's preferred spelling, ideally as expressed on the person's passport or other official document, although alternatives are acceptable if shown to be overwhelmingly common. (Note that while newspaper articles can serve as useful sources for spellings of names, they are not always accurate.) Another format may be used if appropriate, especially for historical figures, as specified by Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people).

--Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC), 17:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Naming conventions for provinces, districts, cities, towns and villages

Currently, provinces are located at Xxx Province and districts at Amphoe Xxx, except for the districts of Bangkok which do not have any descriptive words. Towns and cities are also listed at their plain names, while villages usually have Ban preceding the name (although Ban could be considered to be part of the name itself). This, however, has sometimes been challenged, and there isn't clear consensus to support a specific naming scheme yet. Issues include whether it is appropriate to have the plain name refer to the city/town (which usually corresponds to the thesaban/municipality), or should it rather refer to Amphoe Mueang, the province, or just be a disambiguation page. Also an issue is district vs amphoe, and the inconsistency with Bangkok districts. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The following (unresolved) discussion is copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thai districts#Naming of articles:

---

One thing not yet defined is the naming of the articles. So far there are two naming schemes in use - Amphoe name and simply name. Another possible scheme would be to use name District (or name district), which might be less confusing for non-Thais who don't know about what the word Amphoe means. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Subnational entities/Naming - a common approach fitting with entities in other countries would be nice. There's also the problem what to do with the plain name if we don't put the Amphoe article there - should that one be reserved for the main town of the district (unless that one has a different name, e.g. Chaiya vs. Talad Chaiya), should it be a redirect (or disambiguation if necessary). In most cases the central town of a district is so small it hardly makes sense to give it a separate article. If it isn't a redirect we will easily have many red links inviting to create substubs like xxx is capital of Amphoe xxx' without much use, or duplications of the article already written but not found. andy 12:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Has this been agreed on completely yet? I tried to ascertain a standard from looking at what's being used, and for the most part I found it consistent: The page for name is the page of the city, i.e. Lopburi is the capital town/city of the province, while Amphoe name is the district which (usually) contains that city, and name Province is the province containing that city and district. This is what I used for the districts in Yasothon, with a disambiguation page including all three. I think this setup works well.rikker04 13:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually this was never really decided in a consensus, it was simply the naming scheme used by User:Waerth when he started creating district articles, and I simply continued to use it, so it's just the de facto standard. I did not put up the point because I don't like this scheme, I just wanted to avoid a massive page move with many broken links later because someone decides equally unilaterally that all district must be [[xxx District]]. For the three articles town/Amphoe Mueang/Province it might be better to have the town at xxx town and make the plain name the disambiguation already, especially as the town is mostly covering the rather modern creation of a thesaban, while the historic town is mostly covered in the province article already. And when a Thai speaks about "Surat Thani" he usually means the province, while other more think about the town, thus there are easily links to the town which actually belong to the province. andy 11:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New discussion

So a lot of time has passed, and this project has basically stagnated since pages were created for all the districts. Time to pick up the torch. Here's my beef: I am now of the opinion that having Amphoe at the beginning of every article name is no good. It's not helpful to users who don't know Thai, and it's not really part of the name of the place. Many an amphoe was once a tambon and probably a village before that. I think the important thing is the actual name, especially since there is relatively little overlap in Amphoe names. The text of the article can make clear that it is a district. I move that the basic name should be, simply, the name. If we decide to make this change, I am willing to help do the heavy lifting moving articles, and fixing links throughout Wikipedia using AWB. What say ye? --rikker (talk) 16:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

What about the provinces? Should the changes apply to them too? Paul_012 ^(talk) 05:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

There are IMHO only two reasonable naming schemes for the Amphoe articles - either the one now used "Amphoe xxx" (and previously "King Amphoe xxx"), or the one now used for many subnational entity articles in Wikipedia with the english name of the entity type, which would mean "xxx district". We should not use the plain name, which is in many cases not unique - there's usually at least a municipality with the same name, though this is probably less known and notable as the district. There might also be a subdistrict (though it may take long till that can get an article), and sometimes a small local river as well. And as far as I know, in the western tradition one assumes the plain name to refer to the city, while of course in Thailand it's opposite. A Thai person who goes to Amphoe Fang would say he went to Chiang Mai, yet if a farang says he went to Chiang Mai he always means just the city. So in many cases the plain names should be either reserved for the municipality, or become a disambiguation, and only if the town is really totally unknown we could make it a redirect and let the article start with the otheruses template. For the districts we might choose the third way most often, yet it is still better to have the articles with the full name, so the redirect might change easily into a disambiguation later without fixing many wikilinks and interwikis; also it makes it easier to find wikilinks placed without actually knowing the right entity referred to. The same arguing fits for the provinces, where now some plain names are redirects, while others are the central town, and a few are the disambiguation. I have had exactly this discussion when I met the one from TAT earlier this year, who as a Thai of course thought the province should be the most prominent one - so using the redirect with the otheruses template linking to the disambiguation page. andy (talk) 22:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

So should it be Amphoe Xxx or Xxx District? Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places)#Follow local conventions says to generally "use the official English name for the place and its type" if there is one, but that leaves the question of whether district is in this manner an official and direct translation of amphoe.

Another part of the naming scheme I'm having trouble with is the lack of descriptive terms for the districts (khet) of Bangkok. While district names usually refer specifically to the district proper or subjects which lie within it, there are several instances where this is not the case, e.g. Phaya Thai, where neither the road, intersection or palace bearing the name lie within the district; Sathon, where only one side of the road lies within the district area, while the name usually refers to the business area along both sides of the road in conjunction with Si Lom; or Bang Khen, the district of which is only a small portion of what it used to be, leaving the Bang Khen Canal, Railway Station, Intersection and Campus of Kasetsart University outside the district bounds.

For both amphoe and khet, though, the question is whether district solely refers to the administration level. I might, for example, refer to the Si Lom-Sathon Business District, which is not a district in this sense but a neighbourhood of the city. If this is not an issue, I think we should prefer district over amphoe or khet, even if it isn't universally used in official sources, for the reasons of this being the English language Wikipedia, etc. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 15:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naming conventions for Buddhist temples

Thai Buddhist temple articles are generally titled Wat Xxx (not Xxx Temple). Which part of the name is included, however, has been vastly inconsistent. For famous temples such as Wat Phra Kaew, Wat Arun, and Wat Pho, the most common name in English is often the unofficial short name. For others, this is usually the abbreviated full name of the temple, although problems arise with the issues of ambiguity and precision. Take for example Wat Mahathat Yuwaratrangsarit Ratchaworamahawihan; the name of the temple is Mahathat Yuwaratrangsarit, while Ratchaworamahawihan is a royal temple suffix. While the most common name used to refer to the temple is likely Wat Mahathat, this is ambiguous, so for precision the article may be listed at the temple's full name, Wat Mahathat Yuwaratrangsarit, or with a place name disambiguation, Wat Mahathat (Bangkok) (which however may still be confused with Wat Phra Si Mahathat, which is also in Bangkok).

Another case is Wat Phra Si Rattana Mahathat Woramahawihan in Phitsanulok, which shares its name with Wat Phra Si Rattana Mahathat Ratchaworawihan in Si Satchanalai. In this case, precision could be achieved by including the suffix in the title (Wat Phra Si Rattana Mahathat Woramahawihan), by disambiguating the full name with place name (Wat Phra Si Rattana Mahathat (Phitsanulok)), or disambiguating the short name with place name (Wat Mahathat (Phitsanulok)), although in this case the last option isn't desirable because the short name doesn't seem to be the most common one.

For smaller non-royal temples, duplicate names are even more common, and disambiguation by place name is likely necessary in these cases.

The primary question is whether we should establish a naming convention for Thai Buddhist temples. I'd like to have one, for the sake of consistency, but it isn't clear if the common names for most temples do fall into the same pattern. If not, a universal naming convention would be pretty much impossible. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] General discussion

A draft of the new MoS has been created at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Thailand-related articles)/Draft. Comments are appreciated. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 18:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks great to me, looking forward to finally getting this going. I also think that, as there is consensus on the rest (?), this should go forward even if the royal naming gets bogged down again -- just tag that as disputed. Jpatokal (talk) 09:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RTGS and IPA

The proposed style guide encourages to use RTGS when no clear established spelling exists and add IPA for more detailed pronunciation. If the arcticle chooses to use a non-RTGS transcription, I would like to add both the RTGS transcription as well as IPA. The former is more accessible to many people, and gives at least a good approximation to correct pronunciation.

Abhisit Vejjajiva (Thai: อภิสิทธิ์ เวชชาชีวะ, RTGS: Aphisit Wetchachiwa, IPA: [à.pʰí.sìt wêːt.tɕʰāː.tɕʰīː.wáʔ])

But I'm not sure we should we use an example as Vejjajiva, which deviates so drastically from RTGS.

Perhaps a detail, but the IPA handbook uses [o], not[ɔː] for an implied vowel in a closed syllable, such as the last one in "mahanakhon". −Woodstone (talk) 20:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The form -ร is a special case for the implied vowel rule, and has an implied -อ vowel instead of implied โ-ะ. The name is pronounced [กรุง-เทบ-มะ-หา-นะ-คอน] (a very good demonstration of the limitations of RTGS, heh heh.) Anyway, I'm okay with your proposal. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 12:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Request for a translation assistance

The Thai.wiki article for the manga series Yotsuba&! lists a publisher as licensing the series. I am completely illiterate in Thai and unable to determine the English (or at least transliterated) name of the publisher. If someone could provide an assist over the English article, I'd appreciate it. Bonus thanks if someone can provide a reference from the publisher's website verifying they're publishing it, but just having a name would help get me started on mining that. —Quasirandom (talk) 22:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The publisher mentioned เน็ด คอมิกส์, transcribes as "ned comics". Their web site seems to be http://www.ned-comics.com/. −Woodstone (talk) 22:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

You hit on the problem of a name transliterated from English to Thai, and trying to get it back again. When confronted with ลัดดา แทมมี ดักเวิร์ธ in a headline, I had to have Google search +tammy +obama to find out she's Ladda Tammy Duckworth. BTW, she contacted Wikipedia to request her en article not show her birthday or mother's maiden name, as these are common security check items. Apparently she hasn't objected to these appearing in her th one, perhaps because she thinks it too difficult for a hacker to translate them to English. Pawyilee (talk) 09:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Pawyilee, indeed, of course my first try was "ned khomiks", but then it dawned on me: this is not real Thai. Happens often when it appears difficult to decipher a word from the spelling. −Woodstone (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Thankee, Woodstone. That got me the publisher's page on the series, exactly what I needed. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] "Siamese sex god Pragngan"

There's a bizarre flap over at Talk:Toa Payoh ritual murders (yesterday's FA) about whether or not it's kosher to change the mangled names Pragngan and Phragann to the correct Phra Ngang (พระงั่ง), and to remove the identification by a tabloid writer of what is apparently a Buddhist amulet as a "Siamese sex god". Please chip in! Jpatokal (talk) 09:40, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

How could it not be bizarre, given the subject? But I did chip in with "idol chatter." Pawyilee (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:46, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Buddha's Birthday and Vesak

Hi, everyone. We have a DYK event for Buddha's Birthday and Vesak just like events for Christmas or April Fool's day. Many of Thai culture is based on Buddhism, so I think you guys can create/edit interesting Buddhist articles in upcoming five days. Once you create or five fold expand Buddhist related articles (famous temples, monks, movies, literature, paintings, foods, etc) within 5 days, and then nominate it to the below place. After a review, your article can be featured on the main page. So be hurry if you are interested. :) Thanks.

Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded for Buddha's Birthday (May 2) and Vesak (May 9) --Caspian blue 18:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mor lam at FAR

I have nominated Mor lam for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt (talk) 07:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Truce term

Can anybody help me please with what Thai children use as a truce term. A truce term is a word used to call a temporary halt to a game for respite for something like discussing the rules or tying a shoelace etc? Fainites ^barleyscribs 21:24, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Virachai Vannukul

Anyone know who this guy is and whether he meets WP:N? I can't tell from the GBooks hits [7]. Virachai Vannukul (talk · contribs) is repeatedly adding himself to List of overseas Chinese and ignoring requests for sources about himself. Thanks, cab (talk) 00:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Based on a brief Google search, Virachai Vannukul (วีระชัย วรรณึกกุล) was president of Air Siam, a former major Thai airline operating from 1965 to 1977. He was also vice president of Bangkok Metropolitan Bank (now part of Siam City Bank), and serves (served?) on the board of Thai Airways International. He is currently a director at Shinawatra University, presumably among other posts. No sources primarily concerning him as a person stood out from my search, though. --125.27.122.212 (talk) 08:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal for a 200-WikiProject contest

A proposal has been posted for a contest between all 200 country WikiProjects. We're looking for judges, coordinators, ideas, and feedback.

The Transhumanist    00:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal for a 200-WikiProject contest

A proposal has been posted for a contest between all 200 country WikiProjects. We're looking for judges, coordinators, ideas, and feedback.

The Transhumanist    00:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thai Football Division 2 League Naming

Thai football league system for 2009 season has introduced new naming for each league level. For top 2 levels, Thai Premier League and Thai Division 1 League, their names are obvious. But the 3rd level (Division 2) is questionable.

1. The official logo stated it as 'Regional League'.
2. Main article name is Regional League Division 2.
3. It has sub 2009-season articles for each region including north eastern, northern, central & eastern, Bangkok & field, and southern region. But all of them named as 'Thai Division 2 League xxx Region' as well as their templates: NE, N, C&E, B&f, S.

Well, how we will refer to the division?

• Division 2 (for short?)
• Thai Division 2 League (same to Division 1)
• Regional League
• Regional League Division 2

Another question is about the Bangkok region name, how to refer the region?

• Its old name was 'Bangkok & Vicinity'.
• Current is 'Bangkok & field'.
• And I see somewhere says 'Bangkok & Perimeter'.

This will affect many articles & templates, so I think it needs discussion here :-) --PaePae | Talk 12:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Offtopic but

Can anyone help with this? Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#What the heck are these things? Nil Einne (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mexican Flu

FYI, there is a Thailand article now... 2009 swine flu outbreak in Thailand

70.29.208.129 (talk) 04:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)