Talk:Disappearance of Jim Thompson

If I could nominate for deletion based on article quality
If I could nominate an article for deletion based on the quality of the text alone, and though I realize it may make me sound unkind, this article would likely qualify. It is written in entirely the wrong tone for a Wikipedia article, though it appears to have a long list of references. If I thought it would be worth my time to rewrite it, I would give it a shot. Instead, I leave this message for the original article creator and any subsequent editors who find the courage: this article needs a complete overhaul. KDS 4444 Talk  05:46, 6 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree. The subject could be probably dealt with adequately in the Jim Thompson article. This article seems to promote one theory of the disappearance and not give a full discussion of the others (such as the CIA idea).--Jack Upland (talk) 04:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

What is "Mattson voting" ?
What is "Mattson voting" ? Define it, link to it, or delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.58.235.238 (talk) 10:22, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Concern about sources in this and the parent "Jim Thompson--Designer" page
I am concerned that previous editors have repeatedly removed the Martha Galleher book on the Jim Thompson life and disappearance ("The Missing Thai Silk King"), and the Toulmin report on the disappearance, from the "Books" section, on the grounds that these were self published. Yet this same editing has failed to note that Edward DeSouza's book is also self published, via a self-publishing house that on its website quite straightforwardly proclaims that it is a for authors who want to self publish. Furthermore, wikipedia in its guidelines makes exceptions for self published items to be considered a book and an authoritative source. Galleher was the niece of Thompson, conducted her own detailed investigation in 1967 and for years afterwards, corresponded with numerous key actors in the case, and became part of the story. She had in-depth knowledge of Thompson and of the case. To omit her book is frankly idiotic. The Toulmin report is an analysis done by an acknowledged expert in search and rescue, who has worked with law enforcement on various disappearances. By contrast, the DeSouza book, while helpful and which gives a good overview of the case, is a clearly self-published work which is apparently not by an expert, or by a person with personal knowledge of the case. I think editors should consider these facts in future edits on these two wikipedia stories. TEC2004 (talk) 23:34, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Disappearance of Jim Thompson. 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/20160306080303/http://www.jimthompsonhouse.com:80/life/company.asp to http://jimthompsonhouse.com/life/company.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121030103131/http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2010/3/23/lifefocus/5881378&sec=lifefocus to http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2010/3/23/lifefocus/5881378&sec=lifefocus
 * Added tag to http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2012/3/26/lifeliving/10953274

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) 19:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)