Talk:Chaophraya Phitsanulok

Very good
The article is amazing!!! Keep up your nice work. Taung Tan (talk) 21:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you, the article is still in progress and examining involved evidences from Thailand and Myanmar for neutrality. Quantplinus (talk) 04:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Name
I think the article should only be called either Chaophraya Phitsanulok or Rueang Rochanakul per the WP:CONCISE title policy. I want to get a second opinion since I know there may be some rules/policies about Thai royalty/nobility names on Wikipedia. Specifically "Non-reigning members of Thai royalty without a substantive title are to named by formula "First name + Additional name (if exists)", for example Dipangkorn Rasmijoti. This guideline is to be applied to both deceased and to living royal Thai persons. Princely titles are not to be used in titles of articles." This to me seems like it should be Rueang Rochanakul. EmeraldRange  (talk/contribs) 15:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@EmeraldRange I totally agreed should be called "Chaophraya Phitsanulok", which is the most referred-originally in Royal Chronicle of Ayutthaya Kingdom and lot of historical books.

"Rueang Rochanakul" should not be used because Thai surname was firstly used on 22 March 1913, according to the Law on Designation of Family Names, 2456 Buddhist Era was promulgated. Quantplinus (talk) 18:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You should create more old Thai royalty articles after you completed this one. Your writing style is perfect with quotes. The current Thai royal articles are deplorable, and the majority are stub articles. Taung Tan (talk) 09:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Taung Tan I agreed what you said that most of Thai royal articles are stub articles.
 * I'd like to cite my one complete article. I'm the one who completed King Phetracha article (Thai lang). with 150+ of references. You'd see many quotes referred to preliminary evidences e.g., quotes, sentences, phases, grammars, and spellings. It's difficult to understand thai-obsolete language nowadays even Thais people themselves. Not only out-of-date language but contains kind of euphonious phases. In my opinion, it could increase value of literatures, BUT I afraid that wikipedia (especially, articles in English) may consider these articles (e.g. my writing style in Chaophraya Phitsanulok (in English) are not neutral and lack of precision due to its policies unliked the policies are more flexible in Thai articles.
 * if i have free time, I might starting to complete King Phetracha (English article) someday. Thanks. Quantplinus (talk) 14:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)