Talk:Bokator

Assessment
Excellent additions - I uped the class from Stub to Start. Keep up the good work.Peter Rehse 01:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Lbokkator
The name for this martial art is correctly Lbokkatao (ល្បុក្កតោ) but also romanised in various styles including Lbokator. Bokator is probably just an abbreviated colloquial pronunciation and it is the most common romanisation which was popularised by Antonio Graceffo by my guess. --Cantharellus 01:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * for some reason the characters in the parenthesis following Lbokkatao are showing up as questions marks, while Japanese and other scripts are showing up fine. -- Alex Ov  Shaolin  23:11, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It uses Indic text. ATTFFX (talk) 06:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this is got to be one of the worst foreign language to English translation ever. The "tor" part is pronounced in "tao" in English. The way you pronounce "tor" in English is not the same way as it would be correctly pronounced.Pwordisony (talk) 18:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no standard romanization for Khmer. Many Cambodians romanize words accordingly to their, usually, poor understanding of English phonetics. --Dara (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Article name...
It's a tricky question - but the rather ugly "Bokator" seems to be the most common transliteration in use (19,800 Ghits). Boxkator, which is more correct, gets only 787 ghits and poor old Labokator has 170 ghits. This probably shows that Bokator is the way to go. Incidentally the English language press in Cambodia generally use "Bokator" as well. Paxse (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Clarification... Cambodians seem to know it as Bokatol thats when they have heard of it. Boxkator is incorrect its merely the name of the Bokator school run by Kim Sean. I don't know about it being known as L'Bokatol but you might be right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swingkid (talk • contribs) 00:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no 'X' ever used in Khmer romanization. --Dara (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

combat sport
"Unlike kickboxing, which is a combat sport, bokator was designed to be used on the battlefield."

What's the difference?

There should either be a link to a "combat sport" page or a better explanation of the difference.

Justpale (talk) 11:49, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Good point. Usual distinction would be that battlefield arts would not have actual "rules" (except for safe practice conventions),while combat sports have clearly defined rules which make some techniques illegal (not just avoided.) HerbM (talk) 22:37, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Needs more references
I just can't grasp the fact that most of these references are from news articles and blogs. And guess where authors such as Antonio Graceffo and other writers get their information from? The practictioners themselves. Who is to say these practitioners know the history of the art better than they themselves? They are not necessarily scholars. There are those that are arrogant and those that tell tall tales as well. If Graceffo is just regurgitating what he observes from the practitioners, then where has the standard of knowlege gone? Are there any academic studies of this martial art? I would really like to discourage the use of news articles as sources for citing. --Dara (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The Cambodian government including the Olympic Committee of Cambodia researched the topic of Bokator. They interviewed any elders who had training in Bokator and Cambodian martial arts.  The research interviews included any one who had training in Bokator not just those who were at a master level.  Those that were at a master level came from different provinces and different careers.  One of the masters grew up in a different country.  Master Ros Serei grew up in the Khmer community of Vietnam. There are different schools and different teachers that teach the martial art of Bokator in different ways.  There are academic studies, they were cited in Cambodia's report to UNESCO.  PhnomCambodge (talk) 10:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

San Kim Sean
How is it possible for San Kim Sean to have left both during the Pol Pot regime and during the Vietnamese Occupation or by Vietnamese accusation? 98.231.221.95 (talk) 15:02, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Although there is a note at the bottom of the article stating his name "Saen" is often misspelled as "Sean", the latter, presumably incorrect spelling is used almost universally elsewhere in the article. If this is a misspelling the article should use the correct spelling throughout. HerbM (talk) 22:14, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Sentence
"They are backed by the cambodian authorities recent researches conducted by scholars, all over cambodian provinces in 2011; which led in July of the same year, to a convention of the last 23 masters (krus) of traditional khmer martial arts, still alive they where able to find. "

wut — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.195.13 (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Bokator - Truth
There is a big mistake. Bokator is not the khmer martial art. The name come from a legend who have nothing to see with Martial art. It had been create by Seam. The Martial art have never been lost in Cambodia as lot master trained Yutakhun Khom and Kback Khun Khmer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selapak.cambodia (talk • contribs) 11:00, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Is it really the truth?? What you guys said? Norkor Reach (talk) 03:33, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Was the big cat a lion?
Assuming that there really was a big cat which attacked a village in what is now the Indochinese country of Cambodia, before being killed in that style, are you sure that this was an Asiatic lion, rather than an Indochinese leopard or tiger? The lion is not known to have existed east of South Asia, unlike the leopard or tiger.

Leo1pard (talk) 08:28, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

.
Period 2600:8803:7994:F900:89B9:50A2:7FD6:AA54 (talk) 04:30, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

How is muay thai a "descendant art" of bokator?
Can we have more clarification? Muay thai is already a well recognised sport and martial art. I doubt the average person knows what a bokator is. 1.43.160.10 (talk) 02:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't see how the contrast in modern popularity between a martial art extensively promoted by a government and a martial art brought to the brink of extinction by a genocide in itself invalidates any potential descendancy. –Turaids (talk) 20:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2024
Descendant arts-Bokator has nothing to do with Muay Thai. It's a boxing game that copied the rules of Muay Thai and gave it a new name. Please help remove the word Muay Thai from Bokator. Pnp070614 (talk) 19:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. This information is cited to consensus sources. If other sources disagree we can cover both perspectives but it's not likely to be removed completely. Jamedeus (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Origin Myth
Hi Turaids, I was wondering if mentioning the following sentence According to another legend, bokator was created by a Khmer king in the 12th century  would be pertinent as the source seems a bit flawed. The article states first that Bokator is said to be over a thousand years old but then proceed to say that it originate in the 12th century, which would make it less than a thousand year. It then states that the martial art was crafted by Angkorian armies to help the Khmer Empire keep its grip on the region from the 9th to 15th centuries. which now implies that it existed from the 9th century. Thank you in advance! Pierrevang3 (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi Pierrevang3! I agree that the article does not do the best job of coherently presenting different versions on the origin of bokator, but it does seem to be based on some kind of a written source as opposed to a vague legend, which is impossible to date accurately. This book says, "Jayavaraman VII, who rules the Khmer Empire at the end of the 12th century, was said to be an avid practioner of bokator." and this article says, "King Jayavarman VII, the warrior King who united Cambodia in the 12th century, made his army train in bokator". I wonder what is the original source for that and whether there are any similar sources on bokator in 9th century (or even 1st century).


 * And the point I was trying to make in this edit, was that we should be careful of which bas-reliefs and other depictions we interpret as depictions of bokator. This might or might not be a representation of someone doing bokator. Tha same with this photo. It certainly looks like some kind of a fighting stance, but who's to say it's bokator specifically? –Turaids (talk) 04:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think mentioning the origin myth is noteworthy as it's a myth, so part of the local folklore. It doesn't necessarily represent the truth as it is often the case with myths and I don't think it is meant to be. From what I have read Bokator seems to stand as a descendant art of the Khmer martial art used in Angkor. Whether that martial art was called Bokator at that time is indeed not very likely. Nevertheless, as stated in the article, there seems to be a confusion between Bokator and more widely all Khmer forms of martial arts. I think when a source presents Bokator as the martial art of Angkor army, Bokator is meant to be understood as "Khmer martial arts". Other sources more carefully distinguish indeed the two arts, emphasizing that Bokator is a descendant art.
 * Now I don't think the bas-reliefs are meant to convey that those moves are actually Bokator as we know today, but rather are here to show the legacy the former Khmer ancient martial art has on today Bokator. The legacy of that Angkorian martial art on Bokator, at least after its revival by San Kim Sean, is undoubtedly present as he used the bas reliefs to formalize the martial art.
 * Overall I think the key is not to think Bokator as having an unbroken continuity but instead as working based on legacies. As Bokator is the only formalized Khmer martial art today, it is sometimes presented as the sole descendant. Pierrevang3 (talk) 13:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Would that be okay if I remove the sentence According to another legend, bokator was created by a Khmer king in the 12th century? Except if there is other source supporting it of course, but I've never encountered any other source mentioning this legend, and coupled with the seemingly unreliability of the reference, there seems to be an issue with what the journalist wanted to convey.
 * There is in contrary many sources mentioning the Khmer king using it (starting from the one you provided) but not creating it, and that can of course be added. Pierrevang3 (talk) 15:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sure, although a lot of the information about bokator out there is contradictory and/or questionable. Even the journalist mentioning the lion legend writes that the "story is apparently over 2,000 years old", while to me it's not apparent at all how he arrived to that number. –Turaids (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Delete Muay Thai and muay boran was Descendant arts of bokator
muay thai or any martial arts from was from thailand Muay Thai doesnt even has any involved about bokator Cambodians are trying so hard to told muay thai was their martial arts if you have any explanation that tell muay thai was descendants art of bokator pls tells me Paemsad234 (talk) 15:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Again, the khmers have sources to back up their claims, and it is really not hard to believe that the initial forms of Muay boran and Muay thai originated from ancient khmer civilization (Based on the bas relief) so unless you can find a source to your claim, it wont be removed. 110.74.213.190 (talk) 10:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Constant removal of references
Hi Gandtha, why are you deleting references and sourced content without any explanation? Pierrevang3 (talk) 02:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)


 * First, your reference is not verifiable. Please use proper source such as academic journal not some random website. Gandtha (talk) 02:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The reference is not "some random website", it is a book by Italian author Marco de Cesaris called "Muay Thai Boran, The Martial art of the Kings, Secret techniques".
 * The book was endorsed by the royal Thai embassy of Thailand, which dedicates in the beginning of the book the following:
 * ''Dedication written by the Minister Counsellor of the Royal Thai Embassy in Italy.
 * ''Mr. Marco De Cesaris is an Italian Master, exceptionally impassioned and competent in Thai traditional martial arts. Thanks to his research, he has been able to conduct an in-depth investigation into the Thai Fighting Arts, achieving for himself a respected and well-known reputation both in Thailand and in Italy, as well as in other European and American countries.
 * For many years, he has been an appreciated collaborator of the Royal Thai Embassy in Italy and currently also of our Thai Trade Center of Rome.
 * By means of his books Arjarn Marco is bringing to light, in Italy and elsewhere, recognition of Muay Thai Boran, which plays a significant part in our precious cultural heritage. Without the support and efforts of Master Marco, Muay Thai Boran would not be as appreciated as it is nowadays and could even have been lost.
 * I am sure that in this, his most recent work on Look Mai May Thai techniques, he will receive great appreciation from his readers all over the world and will provide precious information to all who believe and practice the authentic tradition of Muay, one of Thailand's precious cultural heritages.
 * ''Thanks
 * ''Mrs Suchana Chucherd
 * ''Minister Counselor Commercial
 * ''Office of Commercial Affairs
 * ''Royal Thai Embassy, Rome
 * The preface includes a series of acknowledgements by Muay Thai Khrus masters, namely Grand Master Yodthong Senanan Sriwaraluk, Khru Phosawat Saengsawang (Professor at Rajabat Maha Sarakham University), Grand Master Sam Tubtimtong, Grand Master Chinawooth Sirisompan (President of Khru Muay Association (KMA), Honorary President of International Muay Boran Academy (IMBA), Vice President of Association Institute of Thai Martial Arts (AITMA))
 * Here are the parts on which the sentence you've yet again removed (without properly explaining why) are based:
 * "One can certainly talk about technical and cultural influences that have been of some importance in the actual methods of approaching warfare and military tactics and strategies, and as a consequence bare hands or armed fighting. The ancient Indian culture has notably influenced the Thai way of life and also Indian Martial Arts have acted as a role-model for Muay techniques both directly and indirectly through other cultures which have an important role in the history of South East Asia, such as those of the Mon and, above all, the Khmer."
 * "''Eastern Martial Arts historians are still debating the relationship between Siamese warrior traditions and Khmer fighting techniques (called "Muay Khmer" by Thai people), that according to one theory would form the origins of Muay Boran. In fact according to some, Pradal Serey or the more military style named Bokkator which developed in Ancient Cambodia from the 10th century onwards, and whose existence is demonstrated in the still visible bas-reliefs at Angkor Wat, the historic imperial ca-pital, were imported into Siam.
 * Here, these techniques would have been processed and elaborated upon becoming the technical basis of archaic Muay."
 * "According to another theory, both Muay Khmer and Muay Thai have their origins in the fighting style used by the populations in northern Thailand, around the Province of Nakhon Ratchasima. The fighting style of Muay Khorat, which originated in that area, after going through numerous transformations and implementations, would be the missing link between the Cambodian and the Thai disciplines."
 * "The first patriarch of Muay Korat was Phra Hensamahan, he encrypted the most articulate and coherent form of the style the story of which goes back to ancestral traditions of South East Asia. It's told that the source of his style came from martial techniques developed in ancient Cambodia during the Khmer's reign: according to our studies the origin of Muay Khorat would be the mythical Martial Arts of Angkor Wat, seat of the ancient capital of the Khmer Empire, whose culture strongly influenced the inhabitants of the Khorat area."
 * "The names of many Siamese kings and warriors are inextricably linked to Muay Boran traditions that for centuries have been a concrete heritage of the Thai people. King Naresuan (known as the Black Prince of Siam) (fig. IV) who reigned from 1569 was held hostage from the age of nine by the Burmese. He learned from his enemies their fighting techniques that dated back to those warrior traditions of Khmer empire and was capable of using them against his very prison guards. Once he was released he personally fought in 27 different battles and survived. On January 25th, 1592 during the final battle of Burma's fifth invasion of his country, King Naresuan, whose battle position was on the top of an elephant, saw and was able to recognize (from his youth spent in prison) the King of Burma. He succeeded in killing him with his deadly Ngaaw spear. From then on this date has been celebrated as the Thai Army Day." Pierrevang3 (talk) 02:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The reference you describe here, "Eastern Martial Arts historians are still debating the relationship between Siamese warrior traditions and Khmer fighting techniques (called "Muay Khmer" by Thai people), that according to one theory would form the origins of Muay Boran. In fact according to some, Pradal Serey or the more military style named Bokkator which developed in Ancient Cambodia from the 10th century onwards, and whose existence is demonstrated in the still visible bas-reliefs at Angkor Wat, the historic imperial ca-pital, were imported into Siam.". This not state that the fact Muay Thai is originated from Kun Khmer. Provide the reliable source and I will stop changing it. Gandtha (talk) 03:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "The first patriarch of Muay Korat was Phra Hensamahan, he encrypted the most articulate and coherent form of the style the story of which goes back to ancestral traditions of South East Asia. It's told that the source of his style came from martial techniques developed in ancient Cambodia during the Khmer's reign: according to our studies the origin of Muay Khorat would be the mythical Martial Arts of Angkor Wat, seat of the ancient capital of the Khmer Empire, whose culture strongly influenced the inhabitants of the Khorat area."
 * "The names of many Siamese kings and warriors are inextricably linked to Muay Boran traditions that for centuries have been a concrete heritage of the Thai people. King Naresuan (known as the Black Prince of Siam) (fig. IV) who reigned from 1569 was held hostage from the age of nine by the Burmese. He learned from his enemies their fighting techniques that dated back to those warrior traditions of Khmer empire and was capable of using them against his very prison guards. Once he was released he personally fought in 27 different battles and survived. On January 25th, 1592 during the final battle of Burma's fifth invasion of his country, King Naresuan, whose battle position was on the top of an elephant, saw and was able to recognize (from his youth spent in prison) the King of Burma. He succeeded in killing him with his deadly Ngaaw spear. From then on this date has been celebrated as the Thai Army Day." Pierrevang3 (talk) 03:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "One can certainly talk about technical and cultural influences that have been of some importance in the actual methods of approaching warfare and military tactics and strategies, and as a consequence bare hands or armed fighting. The ancient Indian culture has notably influenced the Thai way of life and also Indian Martial Arts have acted as a role-model for Muay techniques both directly and indirectly through other cultures which have an important role in the history of South East Asia, such as those of the Mon and, above all, the Khmer." Pierrevang3 (talk) 03:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Again, let's put this simply. THERE'RE NO MENTION OF BOKATOR. Gandtha (talk) 03:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * There's mention of the influence of Khmer martial arts on Muay Thai and Khmer martial arts have been known by multiple names depending on regions and masters but is now generally referred by most as Bokator. 
 * Bokator is the Khmer term for the Khmer martial arts, hence why the reference is relevant. Pierrevang3 (talk) 03:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Without further any explanation from your side on why you are contesting this point, I will promptly revert your edit.
 * You've hastily removed one of the very few reliable source on the matter, the contentious nature of the relation between the two sports have been subject to exposure via newspapers or websites and not books. This very book mentions it and is a thorough account of Muay Thai/Boran history and techniques. Either way, the author who was endorsed by the royal Thai embassy in Italy and many Muay Thai grandmaster points toward the influence of Khmer martial arts on Muay Thai.
 * Whether it is directly (the theory mentioned) or via Muay Korat.
 * Khmer martial arts are known as Bokator, hence why it is legitimate to mention it here.
 * The primacy must be put on academic sources. Pierrevang3 (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The influence is literally only contested in Thailand, and whether Thailand's position on the matter should be mentioned is another question.
 * As for the sole historic account of the sport, the current Thai nationalistic reactions are not needed on the historic part of the article, but could be mentioned elsewhere.
 * Muay Thai, Bokator and Muay Lao share a common style, but in Laos it is acknowledged that the style comes from Cambodia. Cross referencing is important. Pierrevang3 (talk) 11:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Having no further explanations from you, I am compelled to revert your edits for multiple reasons:
 * - Multiple one-sided removals of a cited book without explanation and then with a wrong accusation, coupled with a not so cooperative behaviour (a personal attack on my talk page and a copy paste of my own edit war warning (without changing the signature))
 * - There is seemingly a refusal to heep the informations provided as shown above (cherrypicking the informations to collide with certain views)
 * - The cited book was written by an author with an expertise in this field. Marco de Cesaris "has been a Muay Thai practitioner since 1978 and has been certified as a teacher of Muay by the Ministry of Education of Thailand (in 1991). During his career he was an athlete, coach of professional thai boxers, judge / referee, promoter and founder of the first Italian Muay Thai Federation. In the year 2007 he was awarded the Gold Medal in the World Muay Boran Championships, solo Technical Forms competition, held at Bangkok National Stadium. In 2012 he was awarded the 15th Khan of Muay Thai Boran (and the title of Bramarjarn or Grand Master of the Art) and the Gold Mongkon by the Governor of Ayutthaya Province, Thailand. He is the founder and technical director of the International Muay Boran Academy (IMBA), the worldwide organization devoted to the development and spread of Muay Boran in the world, since 1993. IMBA is currently present in 26 countries in Europe, Latin America and Oceania.".The book was prefaced by Mrs Suchana Chucherd Minister Counselor Commercial of the royal Thai embassy in Rome who wrote that this book will provide precious information to all who believe and practice the authentic tradition of Muay, one of Thailand's precious cultural heritages.
 * The book contains a series of acknowledgement from eminent Muay Boran/Thai masters, namely Grand Master Yodthong Senanan Sriwaraluk, Khru Phosawat Saengsawang (Professor at Rajabat Maha Sarakham University), Grand Master Sam Tubtimtong, Grand Master Chinawooth Sirisompan (President of Khru Muay Association (KMA), Honorary President of International Muay Boran Academy (IMBA), Vice President of Association Institute of Thai Martial Arts (AITMA))
 * - A sentence with this cited book was replaced by a reference from an article of a Thai tabloid (Thaiger)
 * - A biased assessment of the references was edited; the references were seemingly not reviewed, otherwise it would have been noticed that you've added a reference with a syntax error
 * -The sentence removed already makes use of a hedging phrase to give nuance to the statement: "The martial art is believed to be the precursor of all forms of kickboxing present in the former provinces of the Khmer empire, namely Kun Khmer in Cambodia, Muay Lao in Laos and Muay Thai in Thailand"
 * A RFC was nevertheless opened to address the situation Pierrevang3 (talk) 00:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * “believed” is not enough to be consolidate that is the fact. According to Manual of Style/Words to watch, you should not relied on single person who can be referenced to. In this case, all your source led to San Kim Sean. Gandtha (talk) 13:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I do not find anything that suggest de Cesaris as having been certified by the authorities in Thailand apart from the mention in the webpage of his own institution, which is itself a primary source, and, as with my mention below, the preface made does not imply endorsement by that entity. I would also note that reference that suggests Bokator is also the origin of "Muay Lao" is also unreliable, meaning that it makes sense for another editor to question its reliability and the reliability of the source used in this article as a whole (considering that some edits managed to replace information published by a tour guide with the governmental-level source, in contrast to some edits that introduced information from a blog that otherwise cannot be verified with a more reliable source) Harley Hartwell (talk) 16:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It's utterly strange how de Cesaris is subject to that much scrutiny when he is one of the only (if only?) expert that deals with this subject, and that every other sources are blogs and tabloids. How do blogs and tabloids have a better expertise on the matter? We can cartesian doubt all day, the truth remains that the book got a preface by the embassy and that he was praised by multiple Thai masters. Just read all the acknowledgements of the Muay Boran/Thai masters, it speaks volume. To think that he is a fraud seems really far-fetched and disingenuous.
 * I would also note that having the Muay Lao Federation president saying that the style comes from Cambodia brings under a new light those "unreliable" sources, it does not seem so hard to make a correlation.
 * Now as for the unreliability of the sources of the article as a whole, there is obviously a conflict of interest when that user produces the assessment, all the more so when the user brings tabloid source and syntax errors on the article... The debate seems quite unfair. Pierrevang3 (talk) 20:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The origination of Muay Thai is disputed.
All the reliable source that mention that Bokator is origination of Muay Thai is point disputed. Many of which not even mention the concrete evidence for this matter. Do not insert your statement if there's no prove. Gandtha (talk) 03:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I would have to say that I concur with this statement. The de Cesaris book, while having preface by an official at Thai Embassy in Rome, does not suggest that the Embassy or the Thai government endorse the content of the book as a whole. The mention of "Bokkator" was prefixed as "according to some..." or "according to our studies", which is itself weasel as it doesn't conclude who has the belief/who conducted the said study and whether the source is reliable, and whether the alternate POV has been consulted. Harley Hartwell (talk) 17:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * While what their attention with that preface was can't be assured, them reading the book can certainly be inferred. I can hardly conceive that an official Thai authority would praise in such way both the author and the book without reading it (that's utterly far-fetched and it implies lack of professionalism). Thai authorities are not particularly known for allowing things they don't like in books, all the more so with such a nationalist matter, witness this . The preface nevertheless does show that the book is considered reliable by the Thai embassy as well as the many Muay Thai grandmasters. As for the alternate POV not being consulted, that's highly unlikely considering that he is based in Thailand, I think we can all agree that Thai media and overall general psyche have been pushing for that very alternate POV. Now wasn't the original wording (before the reverts) itself a hedging phrase, conveying therefore what the book says?
 * The martial art is believed to be the precursor of all forms of kickboxing present in the former provinces of the Khmer empire, namely Kun Khmer in Cambodia, Muay Lao in Laos and Muay Thai in Thailand Pierrevang3 (talk) 17:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Your rebuke of nationalism of some user is WP:AVOIDYOU. Therefore, it is inappropriate to criticize someone who does not share same viewpoint as you. Gandtha (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I also must add that context matters. De Cesaris is a Muay Boran specialist with an expertise recognised by the Thai embassy in Rome and many Muay Boran/Thai masters, so there isn't a conflict of interest as it could have been with a Cambodian source. In search of a neutral POV, the Laotian POV must also be taken into account as they represent a third party in the Cambodian/Thai feud. For Muay Lao federation President Saysamone and more generally Laotians, the origin of the kickboxing style common to the 3 countries is in Cambodia (as referenced above), again no conflict of interest plays in the Laotian views. Pierrevang3 (talk) 18:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Request for Comment
Should the Bokator article mention "The martial art is believed to be the precursor of all forms of kickboxing present in the former provinces of the Khmer empire, namely Kun Khmer in Cambodia, Muay Lao in Laos and Muay Thai in Thailand"? The discussion in the talk page with Gandtha seems to be going nowhere and the aggressivity is increasing, while the reverts keep on going. Previous consensus on the matter has been reached on the talk page of Muay Thai, it was decided not to include contentious journalistic sources but only academic sources. For context regarding the reference (book) cited in the talk page, Bokator led to Muay Korat which led to Muay Boran which itself led to Muay Thai. Pierrevang3 (talk) 14:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I suggested to put it simply as
 * “Whether Muay Thai originated from Bokator is disputed.  ”
 * Using above paragraph, the readers would understanding it without much comprehension. Gandtha (talk) 12:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Found this reference too from the French Academy of Muay Thai (Académie française du Muay Thai) created by Jo Prestia who was the Thai boxing world champion in 1990,1991 and 1992 (no link to Cambodia). The academy, a member of the World Boxing Council MuayThai (WBC Muay Thai), aims to develop and control the teaching and the practice of muay Thai and Thai boxing in France (développer et contrôler l’enseignement et la pratique du Muay Thaï et de la Boxe Thaï, en France.). It reads:
 * The genesis, the ancient history and Muay Thai's image are presented in a standardised manner in an abundant literature in Thailand. The oldest historical evidences, which attest of a practice of boxing before the 19th century, are largerly inspired by the royal chronicles, many time rewritten (namely under Rama I), following the destructions of the 18th century (fall of Ayuthaya in 1767). While it is therefore hard to confirm the accuracy of the legends and of the creation of Muay Thai from a Thai point of view; it is nowadays known and admitted that the Thais have inherited the Khmer martial arts (Bach Kun Boran Khmer), following Ayuthaya's victory on the Khmer Angkorian kingdom (in 1431), which it was a vassal of so far. We must not ignore the strong ideological content, notably nationalist, that presides in Thailand over the presentation of the origins of muay-thaï (and muay-boran), its ancient history and its contemporary image.
 * I think it speaks volume... all points towards a hard pill to swallow... Pierrevang3 (talk) 22:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)


 * No (summoned by bot). The sources I'm seeing cited in this discussion do not appear to be adequate to support such a statement, with or without the ambiguous "believed to be" language. The De Cesaris book cited above states only that "according to some, Pradal Serey or the more military style named Bokkator [...] were imported into Siam." No matter how authoritative the book may be, this tells us only that the author thinks that someone somewhere believes this. It is probably important to distinguish questions of reliability from questions of bias; a source being Thai or Thai-linked may address some concerns about nationalistic bias, but does not automatically make that source authoritative on historical questions. The ideal source here would be a work of peer-reviewed historical scholarship. Without solid historical scholarship I don't think there is much we can say. So IMO the best option is probably to say nothing at all. Second best would be to briefly mention and cite the controversy per Gandtha's suggestion above. -- Visviva (talk) 04:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for the input! Should I wait for other comments before removing the sentence or is the RfC very unlikely to be subject to further engagement? Pierrevang3 (talk) 09:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Not for Muay Thai in the lead. Its origin is still not clear, so the theory can be mentioned in the body of the article but probably should not be in the lead. CurryCity (talk) 00:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the input! Based on the other feedback, it seems that it’s best not to mention it, I’m removing it. Pierrevang3 (talk) 00:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Should we add King Sisowath as "famous practioner" of bokator
In khmer history books, its mentioned that the reformer was an avid fan and practioner of bokator/khmer boxing, and even hosted and competed in these matches himself during his stay at battambang in 1870 (At that time known as phra tabong when it was controlled by siam) though most of the population as described by siam was described as "Stubbonly khmer", they do mention that the khmers of Phra tabong (battambang) liked boxing and martial arts, including prince Ang sar (sisowath)

even after he retook battambang from thai hands, sisowath still was an avid boxing fan, and hosted events in battambang and the capital 113.130.126.124 (talk) 02:19, 31 March 2024 (UTC)


 * If you have the link to the source and the precise name of the book, it can be added in some form. Pierrevang3 (talk) 03:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2024
ข้อมูลที่เขียนถึงมวยไทยเป็นเรื่องโกหก เขมร ไม่มีวัฒนธรรมมาก่อนไทยไม่เคยมีวัฒนธรรมมวยใดๆเลย ลอกเลียนแบบประเทศไทยทั้งหมด — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0823296165ok (talk • contribs) 00:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Why is the other descendant arts removed even tho its properly sourced and has evidence?
Must be the work for the thai nationalists, we need to fix this 110.74.215.24 (talk) 07:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)