Talk:Amnat Charoen

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Amnat Charoen. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101228234849/http://amnatmu.net/ to http://www.amnatmu.net/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101228234849/http://amnatmu.net/ to http://www.amnatmu.net/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amnat Charoen. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304110804/http://www.dopa.go.th/xstat/p5237_01.html to http://www.dopa.go.th/xstat/p5237_01.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:49, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 26 January 2021

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

– Proposing to rename Amnat Charoen to Amnat Charoen (town), then make Amnat Charoen a redirect to Amnat Charoen Province, which is more likely the primary topic, and likewise for the others.
 * Amnat Charoen → Amnat Charoen (town)
 * Ang Thong → Ang Thong (town)
 * Buriram → Buriram (town)
 * Chachoengsao → Chachoengsao (town)
 * Chai Nat → Chai Nat (town)
 * Chaiyaphum → Chaiyaphum (town)
 * Chanthaburi → Chanthaburi (town)
 * Chonburi → Chonburi (town)
 * Chumphon → Chumphon (town)
 * Kalasin → Kalasin (town)
 * Kamphaeng Phet → Kamphaeng Phet (town)
 * Kanchanaburi → Kanchanaburi (town)
 * Krabi → Krabi (town)
 * Lamphun → Lamphun (town)
 * Loei → Loei (town)
 * Lopburi → Lopburi (town)
 * Mae Hong Son → Mae Hong Son (town)
 * Maha Sarakham → Maha Sarakham (town)
 * Mukdahan → Mukdahan (town)
 * Nakhon Nayok → Nakhon Nayok (town)
 * Nakhon Phanom → Nakhon Phanom (town)
 * Narathiwat → Narathiwat (town)
 * Nong Bua Lamphu → Nong Bua Lamphu (town)
 * Nong Khai → Nong Khai (town)
 * Pathum Thani → Pathum Thani (town)
 * Phang Nga → Phang Nga (town)
 * Phatthalung → Phatthalung (town)
 * Phayao → Phayao (town)
 * Phetchabun → Phetchabun (town)
 * Phetchaburi → Phetchaburi (town)
 * Phichit → Phichit (town)
 * Phrae → Phrae (town)
 * Prachinburi → Prachinburi (town)
 * Prachuap Khiri Khan → Prachuap Khiri Khan (town)
 * Ranong → Ranong (town)
 * Ratchaburi → Ratchaburi (town)
 * Roi Et → Roi Et (town)
 * Sa Kaeo → Sa Kaeo (town)
 * Samut Songkhram → Samut Songkhram (town)
 * Saraburi → Saraburi (town)
 * Satun → Satun (town)
 * Sing Buri → Sing Buri (town)
 * Sisaket → Sisaket (town)
 * Suphan Buri → Suphan Buri (town)
 * Trat → Trat (town)
 * Uthai Thani → Uthai Thani (town)
 * Uttaradit → Uttaradit (town)
 * Yasothon → Yasothon (town)

These are articles about Thai town municipalities (cities are excluded from this discussion, but may be approached at a later time) that are more or less the population centre of the province sharing the same name. In most cases, references to the plain name will be about the entire province rather than just the town. This is the case especially in Thai parlance, but also likely so in English, and Google searches on the above names reveal first-page results that are mostly about the provinces. (In most cases, the Wikipedia article about the province is the top result, while some towns don't even appear.)

While these articles seem to have been stable at their current location for over a decade, the status quo is mostly a result of early editorial decisions made by a couple of users, including Ahoerstemeier, who made comments long ago that this doesn't actually reflect common practice in Thailand, and could be changed. A requested move last year for Trang, Thailand found that consensus didn't exist to support the current naming scheme. I'm thus suggesting that the towns be moved to titles with the (town) disambiguator, so that the plain names can be redirected to their respective provinces, which are more likely the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Paul_012 (talk) 14:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC) Updated 19:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. Jack Frost (talk) 10:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Note that for Sisaket, this will reverse the outcome of Talk:Chonburi. Pinging the other still-active participant in that discussion, User:Crouch, Swale. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Since this is somewhat related to the Trang discussion, I'm going to ping the participants from that discussion also: King of Hearts, Ans, Shhhnotsoloud, Red Slash, JHunterJ and Dicklyon. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

This is the same for all provinces in Thailand. Hatnotes are the correct solution here in order to avoid readers having to click through layers of dab pages,. See WP:HATCHEAP. And BTW, I live in Thailand for over 20 years. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the reasons in the Chonburi RM the cities appear to serve as a broad-concept article for the provinces named after them. If there are any that have unrelated uses then we could disambiguate but the few that I checked don't.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * However, unlike the Fareham/Borough of Fareham example given in that example, where coverage of the town is more substantial than the administrative unit, the huge majority of town articles here are stubs that are unlikely to contain information readers are looking for. The point of WP:BROADCONCEPT is, "A term with many related meanings should be presented as an article on the broadest understanding of the term, rather than as a disambiguation page merely listing variations on that meaning." This proposal is not to disambiguate any of these titles, but to redirect them to the province articles, which should be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (so it is the provinces that should serve as broad-concept articles). --Paul_012 (talk) 21:05, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe that might not be appropriate in this case but its a reasonable point, in many cases (like Daventry/Daventry District) a settlement will give its name to a wider administrative unit and from time to time these change so even though the province may cover a wider area the settlement may be broader usage.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 19:46, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support as per nom. 162.208.168.92 (talk) 22:40, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose unless or until there are articles on the provinces. As Crouch says, these serve well enough as articles on the provinces, and a plausible direction is to add more province content to them, rather than have separate town and province articles. Dicklyon (talk) 19:13, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Heh. Sorry, I don't know how I missed explaining this in the nom. There are articles on every province, and all of them are wildly better developed than those covering the towns. They're titled at the more specific Amnat Charoen Province, etc. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , As stated by Paul, there *are* articles on the provinces. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * oppose seems unnecessary Niger banda (talk) 11:14, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Niger banda, welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for joining this discussion, but could you please provide a more specific reason than "seems unnecessary"? Participants in consensus-building discussions are expected to explain the reasoning behind their opinions, since these discussions are not a vote. (See WP:Consensus and WP:Polling is not a substitute for discussion for details.) I already explained above that the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the names are the provinces, not the towns, so renaming the pages are necessary in order to fix this discrepancy. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support as proposed. In each case, it is apparent that the province should be the redirect target of the title. BD2412  T 06:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. There are 3 items that are dependent on a Thai city name:
 * 1) The city itself - and it is a city not a town - all 'cities' in Thailand are the capitals of the province (state) of the same name
 * 2) The city 'mueang' municipal local government and the city's districts (bouroughs)
 * 3) The province of the same name
 * Kudpung, all uses of the term city and town on Wikipedia follow the local government's thesaban (municipality) status. I.e. thesaban nakhon = city, and thesaban mueang = town. This is not related to whether the place is a provincial capital. For example, Chonburi is a thesaban mueang (town municipality), while Laem Chabang (also in Chonburi Province) is a thesaban nakhon (city municipality). They are also distinct from the districts or amphoe, which are part of the provincial (not local) government system. But yes, a province's name will be shared by the municipality and the amphoe mueang. That said, I don't see why this would be a reason to oppose renaming the articles as proposed. Either situation will require hatnotes (and maybe dab pages). If an article currently has the hatnote This article is about the town. For the province, see Amnat Charoen Province, for the district, see Mueang Amnat Charoen District., it will be converted to "Amnat Charoen" redirects here. For the town, see Amnat Charoen (town), for the district, see Mueang Amnat Charoen District. The number of clicks a reader will need will most likely decrease, since the province is more likely the primary topic that readers will be looking for. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You appear to have misunderstood. There is a) The city, and b) amphoe muang which is subdivided into tambons. c) Outside the city limits, a province is divided into ampoe which in turn are divided into tambons, then into villages. Wikipedia needs to make it easy for readers to navigate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:32, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Kudpung, sorry, but it appears to me that it is you who's misunderstood. There are two parallel systems of government outside Bangkok: (1) the provincial administration, by which every province is divided into amphoe (districts; the Amphoe Mueang Xxx is but one of them) and amphoe into tambon (subdistricts), and (2) the local government, by which every locality falls within the local jurisdiction of either a thesaban (municipality) or a subdistrict administrative organization (SAO, อบต.). The two systems work independently, nor do their areas always correspond to each other. As I said, though, I don't see how this is related to the current move proposal. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Precisely,, your argument is not related. I'm not discussing the finer details of Thai local administration (with which I am perfectly familiar), but we don't write the encyclopedia for ourselves, we write it for the readers. Logistics companies and the shipping departments of the companies I run use Wikipedia on a daily basis. There are three major units: a) the city, b) the districts of the amphoe muang, and c) the eponymous province. That's all that is needed here for disambiguation, we already have articles describing thesaban, amphoe, and all their variations.   since the province is more likely the primary topic that readers will be looking for. IMO this move proposal is a solution looking for a problem. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose. I'm not seeing a good enough reason to warrant such a big change. While it's true that in some cases the province gets more page views than the city, in other cases that's not the case, |Lopburi_Province like for Lopburi and Lopburi Province. Lopburi, by the way, is described in the sources I found as a city, not as a town. So town as disambiguator is not even appropriate. I suspect that's the case for many of the others listed here. That aside, in the current configuration anyone searching with the root name is taken to the city article, where there is a hatnote link to the eponymous province. So if they are looking for the city, they're good, and they're only one link click away from the province if that's their sought topic. In the proposed configuration such a search will take the user to the province article, via a redirect, where they can stay or get to the city at a new disambiguated title with one hatnote click link. It adds some complexity to the name space (the redirect and the disambiguated city article titles), for nominal benefit as far as I can tell. Furthermore, the root name IS the COMMONNAME of the city while the province is commonly qualified as Cityname Province anyway, so that's the likely search term used by users searching for the province. Even if they do use just the root name when seeking the province, they can't be surprised to end up at the article about the city with that name, where, again, they're only one click from getting to the province. I'm not sure that's as true in the reverse case; I suspect more surprise at ending up at the province rather than at the city when searching with just the root name. In the end all of these articles receive very little traffic so in the big scheme it's just not a high priority to ensure we're minimizing the number of steps to get to the more likely sought article. --В²C ☎ 19:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks Born2cycle for the detailed response and explanation. Kudpung, just to make sure I'm reading the situation correctly, I understand you're of a similar position? I still don't see how the name-shared-by-3-items issue factors in, though your last statement "this move proposal is a solution looking for a problem" is self-explanatory, and I can understand that. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)