Talk:Names of Cambodia

Untitled 2006 comment
Before placing irrelevant templates, discuss here to assess the historical importance of thi s article.

Sze cavalry01 18:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Why repeat the same message over and over in all talk pages?. - Ganeshk  ( talk ) 07:20, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

On merger issue
THe article Kamboja does not qualifiy to be a candidate for merger with Kambojas and Kambodia. And Kambojas is already of size larger than required. Moreover, when Kambojas was created, it was suggested to break-up that article into a number of smaller articles under seperate headings. Hence, the merger suggestion is a retrograde step and will put it back to to square one again. Sze cavalry01 23:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Ripped Article
The contents of this article appear to be ripped almost entirely from one source: http://www.kambojsociety.com/kambodia.asp. Not to mention the disregard for NPOV and encyclopedic presentation.--SohanDsouza 21:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

This article appears to be nothing but pseudoscience. The Khmer are not Indo-European, no credible scholar believes that. As SohanDsouza mentioned, the article also is completely lacking in NPOV and any semblance of an encyclopedic presentations (first person pronouns?).118.71.11.88 (talk) 09:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, no, the Khmer are not Indo-European, they're Indochinese. Their origin myth gives no origin for the name of the country, nor how they learned hydraulic engineering in Java. I had heard before that the Khmer are no relation to the Kom, and it was only by looking up the Kom that I found this article. I'm going to save a copy just in case someone deletes it. --Pawyilee (talk)