Jump to content

Talk:Pridi Banomyong

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

Spelling of His Name

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move the page from Pridi Phanomyong to "Pridi Banomyong" at this time, per the discussion below, although new evidence could be used to show that the page should be moved. Dekimasuよ! 12:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The correct spelling of his name should follow the official spelling given by many of the institutions that adopted his name in his commemoration, or that recognized him on different occasions. The conclusion is that his last name should be spelled as Banomyong. Below is a short list of such institutions:

Therefore, I urge that the spelling of his last name, here and in other related links, be changed in accordance with the above traditions.

Ekkanant 12:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now. Needs to be based on how he is best known in English. I'll listen to any arguments along that line. Gene Nygaard 16:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Requested move

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Move Parsecboy (talk) 00:00, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pridi PhanomyongPridi Banomyong — As per the above discussion, the preferred spelling can easily be demonstrated via a Google test (247,000 results for "Pridi Banomyong" vs 7,540 for "Pridi Phanomyong"). Sources such as A History of Thailand by Chris Baker and Phasuk Phongpaichit also follow this spelling. — Paul_012 (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Discussion

[edit]
Any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Japan DID invade Thailand

[edit]

A Slice of Thai History: The Japanese invasion of Thailand 8 December 1941 (part two) by Duncan Stearn. For part one, change 505 in the URL to 504, and to 506 for part 3. Meanwhile, I'm reverting the last change. --Pawyilee (talk) 07:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pejorative language

[edit]

There is a shocking level of unsupported pejorative language in here. In several places, "violent" is used, where no violence actually occurred, as with Pridi's voluntary exile after his proposed economic policy. The phrase "double-dealing" for Pridi's wartime activities is highly prejudicial, and entirely unexplained. An examination of the literature on Pridi's role during WWII does not support that phrase, unless one somehow interprets working for the underground resistance and as regent at the same time as "double-dealing". Surely we wouldn't see such phrasing for someone working for the French government and the French underground resistance, so I'm not sure why it is allowed here, without explanation. I could spell out more cases, but it isn't difficult to find the pejorative language, Pridi's enemies shouldn't be allowed to bias the article through the use of such language without support, justification, explanation, or evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.89.190.251 (talk) 15:08, 30 January 2017 (UTC) Added: It baffles me that anyone would refer to the discredited and incoherent book by William Stevenson to make any point at all.[reply]

Those appear to be the result of edits by 110.164.169.200 from October 2016. I've reverted the edits, but some of the content might warrant inclusion if properly worded and sourced. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:17, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pridi Banomyong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]