Talk:Thai Chinese/Archive 1

Untitled
Thai and Chinese people always have had a very good relationship, and we are east Asian so it's a good thing to have Thai Chinese living in Thailand.
 * I guess that's written by a chinese, the thais without chinese ties would disagree. --84.142.182.239 21:45, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Notable bla bla bla
Are there reasons why the last section i) comes after 'External Links'? ii) contains only former Thai PMs, apart from King Taksin? Is being the PM the only way to be notable? iii) uses the in-office periods in the brackets after the names? It doesn't say anything about 'list of Thai PMs of Chinese ancestries' or something like that.

 kinkku ananas (talk) 11:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * What is "Khun-jin" in Thai? Can someone type out this phrase in Thai? I think it should be included in the infobox. Mr Tan 08:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

History section
"Chinese traders in Thailand, mostly from Fujian and Guangdong, began arriving in Ayutthaya by at least the thirteenth century." - Can't be possible, since Ayutthaya was founded in 1351. --58.10.216.150 (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

War and criminal escapees
I've heard that many KMT soldiers, officers and leaders escaped to Thailand after the Chinese Civil War (to avoid persecution by the communists; the leaders would have been tried and killed). Also, many Hanjian who collaborated with the Japanese (to avoid trial as war criminals), and some drug traffickers (to avoid the death sentence) had come to Thailand in the same reason. --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs 10:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe this as the soldiers are more likely remains in Burma. And the drug dealers trade more extensively in Burma too as it was the major drug producer in the golden triangle. Hanjian cannot escape by flee to Thailand, they will be captured and send back to China afterwards. most Chinese people living in Thailand had lived in there for many generations, recent history saw many Chinese migrates to Burma and then the western countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.113.176.29 (talk) 10:59, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

change nichkhun out
i just change people of thai chinese

because have a fanboy(ติ่งหู ขอด่าแม่ง) put him into article --โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 16:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Lack of clarity
>> Contrary to its neighboring countries, Chinese culture and tradition are highly regarded and celebrated in Thailand as part of Thai culture itself. <<

What does the "its" (which makes no grammatical sense as the antecedent of "Chinese culture and tradition") refer to here? Is the intended meaning perhaps something like "Chinese culture and tradition are highly regarded and celebrated in Thailand as part of the country's own cultural heritage – in marked contrast to the attitude prevailing in neighboring countries"? -- Picapica (talk) 20:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

thai prime minister
User:The Elixir Of Life i want to know why you delete thai prime minister subject and Regions with significant populations, and a lot of article --โจ : แฟนท่าเรือ : เกรียนที่หน้าตาไม่ดีแห่งไร้สาระนุกรม : พูดคุยกับควายตัวนี้ได้ที่นี่ 05:46, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The current PM is also descended from the royal house of Lan Nah. Alas! The present article is a mishmash of ungrammatical usage, and the Culture section fails to explain how Chinese Thai maintain their identity. John Crawfurd reported that when he first set foot on the mainland, he identified a villager as of Chinese descent by the way he wore his hair, being otherwise of typical Siamese appearance. He also comments extensively on the Chinese work ethic, and how it gets them both higher pay and positions of responsibility. Write now I have a work-in-progress in my user space on his mission to Siam and Cochin China, and I plan to work in his ethnographic observations. --Pawyilee (talk) 06:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

What should this page be called?
If you are going to propose that this page be moved to "Chinese Thai" or something (a move which I would oppose), please join this discussion on naming conventions which I have initiated. We want to avoid having the same debate about "ethnic group name first or country name first" on every single talk page relating to ethnic groups living outside their ancestral countries. Thank you in advance. cab 10:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Your link goes to nothing. Is there a policy? Because the current name refers to Thai people in China or possibly Chinese nationals living in Thailand, but not the actual current topic. The US gov't sources call them Sino-Thais and general sense and grammar would advocate Chinese Thai.


 * If this has become the common English name for them, fine and dandy, but you don't provide any support for that. — LlywelynII  04:36, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah! Found it.


 * And they disagreed with your point there as well. =)


 * Still, it's quite likely that "Thai Chinese" is the accepted term among the group itself given the format of 泰國華人, particularly given that 華人 (ethnic Han Chinese) and 中国人 (Chinese national) are completely distinct in the original language. Barring a new naming convention that standardizes the names along the normal English way (even British statistical agencies use the US version: ethnic adjective, national noun) or a load of native English sources that employ something else like Sino-Thai, it's fine to keep it here. — LlywelynII  04:43, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Thai Prime Ministers
Eh... I'm sure there's a better, less creepy way to arrange this; but in any case, if it's going to be kept, it needs more sources and more clarity about paternal/maternal ancestry. Right now some entries are clear and others are a muddle or seem to imply the PM was only 1/16th or 1/128th Chinese, which simply isn't very important at all.

Also, unsure what the point is of mentioning their claimed family unless paternal or recent switch or – like Archa – their Thai name somehow retains the Chinese.

Incidentally, fairly sure Sanskrit has nothing to do with it. Archa is presumably Thai, right? — LlywelynII  11:23, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No. The regular Thai word for "horse" is the same as in southern Chinese dialects: high tone MAH! Archa has become a bit better known since it chosen a few years ago as the brand-name of a beer. For confusion inherent in the use of fancy-pants Sanskrit words instead of the ordinary Thai word for the same thing, klik on my user page. For a similar phenomenon in England, compare the substitution of fancy-pants French words for plain English. One I particularly dislike is computer for teller. Seriously, a major shortcoming in the article is the increasing resentment of the Chinese, beginning in the reign of Rama II, who invited in hordes of what common people called Jek Luang (royal chinks,) to the point where a Prime Minister denied his Chinese heritage and his ideologue compared the Chinese in Siam to the Jews in Germany. Harmony between the races was restored with a post-war visit by young Rama VIII and his little brother to Bangkok's Chinatown (commemorated on the back of 20-Baht banknotes, series 15.)  --Pawyilee (talk) 13:48, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The Elixir Of Life
Nice name & excellent changes. Consider these.

RE: Wealth, consider billionaire Chaleo Yoovidhya d. 17 March 2012, 3rd richest person in Thailand (102d in the world) born at some point between 1922 and 1932, into a poor Thai Chinese immigrant family, but nothing at all about immigration when, ties in China or Chinese surname.

RE: What's in a Surname?

RE:
 * [p.12] ....Our visitors proved to be a Siamese and a Creole Chinese of Siam, who had so much of the native blood of the country in him, that in complexion and features he was no longer distinguishable as a Chinese, and could only be recognized as claiming the name by the fashion in which he wore his hair.
 * [p.23] ...Dec. 29— .... Che-wan left his native country, the province of Fokien, at three-and twenty, and has never since returned to it. He is now at the age of sixty, preparing for himself a splendid tomb, after the Chinese fashion, cut from hewn granite, in a very beautiful and romantic spot. There is an inscription on it in Chinese and English; and this simple monument will last for ages, and after many a revolution of those ephemeral structures which Europeans raise in this country, for mere comfort or utility. Chewan in conversation is lively, communicative, and sensible. His details are characterized by a degree of European precision and good sense, which one rarely meets with in the East, except among his countrymen. He has visited many parts of the interior of the Malayan peninsula, and several provinces of Siam, as well as the capital of that country. He has a bad opinion of the court of Siam, and thinks the government inferior even to that [24] of Cochin China, which he has also visited ; or as he expresses it in the Malay language “ There is less compassion for the people.”
 * [p.27] Notwithstanding ... the natural barrenness of the island and the limited extent of its territory, ...the agriculture of Prince of Wales’s Island is much superior to that of any other country of Asia. [29]...When the English took possession of Penang, in 1786, it was wholly uncultivated, and had no other inhabitants than a few occasional Malayan fishermen. It now contains about 89,000, according to a regular yearly census, taken ever since 1815...[30]... The Chinese amount to 8595, and are landowners, field-labourers, mechanics of almost every description, shopkeepers, and general merchants. They are all from the two provinces of Canton and Fo-kien, and three-fourths of them from the latter. About five-sixths of the whole number are unmarried men, in the prime of life : so that, in fact, the Chinese population, in point of effective labour, may be estimated as equivalent to an ordinary population of above 37,000, and, as will afterwards be shown, to a numerical Malay population of more than 80,000! ...[31]... The rate of wages paid to the different classes, when engaged in similar labour, affords a very striking picture of their relative skill, industry, and physical strength — in a word perhaps of their relative state of civilization. A Malay field-labourer works only six and twenty days in the month, and receives but two dollars and a-half as wages; a Chouliah works twenty-eight days, and receives four dollars; and a Chinese works thirty days, and receives six dollars. The labour of a Chinese, therefore, to himself and the public is worth fifty per cent. more than that of a Chouliah ; the Chouliah's, seventy-five per cent. more than that of a Malay ; and the Chinese no less than one hundred and twenty per cent. beyond the latter. When skill is implied in the labour to be performed, the disparity is still more remarkable. A Chinese carpenter at Penang receives fifteen dollars a-month, a Persee also fifteen, a Chouliah eight, and a Malay six. I have little doubt but a scale might be constructed upon this principle, which would exhibit a very [32] just estimate of the comparative state of civilization among nations, or, which is the same thing, of the respective merits of their different social institutions.

--Pawyilee (talk) 04:38, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

A lot of citations needed!!!
-"Most Thai Chinese have been in Thailand for five generations or more." I don't believe this since I'm a third generation of Thai Chinese. I don't deny that many Chinese in Thailand came from China since Ayutthaya period, but most of my friends and I, we are third generation in our twenties! Our grandparents were born in China, some of us still keep in touch with our Chinese relatives. I think one of the largest wave of Chinese immigration into Thailand was in the beginning of 20th century, most people in Thailand reproduce about 3-4 generations in this period of time!

-"the Thai-Chinese have been deeply ingrained into all elements of Thai society for the past 400 years." I don't deny this, but a piece of research should be cited.

-"The present Thai royal family, the Chakri Dynasty, was founded by King Rama I who himself was partly Chinese." I know this is fact, but where is the citation, even Thai textbooks don't really mention it a lot.

-"In addition, over half of ethnic Thais (the rest are southern Thai who are mostly of Malay descent) are descendants of people who migrated from southern China approximately 1,000 years ago" This is just a historical theory, it should not be claimed like a fact in this way!

-"The community is the best-integrated overseas Chinese community in the world and any type of racial conflict is virtually non-existent." It is one of the best integrated, but conflict never happens or exists is too exaggerated. Citation!

- "All of Chinese Thai are fully integrated. Unlike most other overseas Chinese communities, Thai Chinese consider themselves as Thai rather than Chinese and have little interest or knowledge of their Chinese roots.[citation needed] Up until the 1980s, Thailand had long restricted the use of Chinese names to gain citizenship and prohibited the teaching of Chinese language in order to fully integrate Chinese immigrants into Thai society. As a result, more than 99% of Thai Chinese have only Thai names and no knowledge of Chinese language.[citation needed]" This is extremely bullshit and doesn't have any legitimate way to prove it. Although most of Thai Chinese use Thai given names, many of them still keep their Chinese surnames.

- "Nearly all ethnic Chinese in Thailand speaks only Thai language, but an extremely small number (mostly elders) are also conversant in Chinese with varying degrees of fluency." This is also another bullshit, a more acceptable one would be "Nearly all ethnic Chinese in Thailand have Thai as their mother tongue." Some Chinese descendants in Thailand, even in my age, still have some basic knowledge in one of Chinese dialects to talk with our grandparents! Also not to mention English which is also compulsory in all schools in Thailand!

- "while students from a handful of Chinese-medium schools (fewer than 0.1% of all schools)" Can I see a statistic? I know at least more than 10 Chinese schools in Bangkok, and that would make it at least almost 1% or more. The definition of a "Chinese school" is not so clear neither. All schools are regulated by the Ministry of Education, we have to study the same thing ordered by the Ministry as basic. A Chinese school should only mean a school where the Chinese language class is mandatory.

There could be more, but these are just what I found from a cursory check! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.180.128.67 (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd like to add a question to this. In the article it says "while students from a handful of Chinese-medium schools are more proficient in Chinese than those from other schools in general." What type of Chinese are they learning there? If Teochew is not spoken much either within Thailand or outside it, I would think the students are being taught/learning a "more useful" language like Cantonese or Mandarin. SamuelRiv (talk) 21:00, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Delete Red Bull file
Suggest pulling the Red Bull file as it adds little to the article and crowds the new #3. --Pawyilee (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Trade and industry
I'm the one who added the first two paragraphs in this section, but now feel they are out of place. I cannot think of a suitable section or subsection title for them (and the Red Bull illo) and hope some other editors will make some suggestions. --Pawyilee (talk) 16:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * What about putting Thai Chinese businessmen into Thai Chinese trade and industry in Thailand? —Pawyilee (talk) 14:55, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:Chinese Red Bull Cans Extra.jpg
The file File:Chinese Red Bull Cans Extra.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:Chinese Red Bull Cans Extra.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 21:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

September 2014
There is a significant omission of another large Chinese ethnic group, the Hmong or Miao, who are just as Chinese as the other Chinese immigrants. The Hmong or Miao in South East Asia and Thailand immigrated from Yunnan Province after a failed rebellion against the Chinese emperor in the 1800s.

Today, the Miao of China are just as Chinese as any other ethnic group in China. This omission is a disservice to the Thai Chinese community as a whole. As a matter of fact, the Hmong are the only Chinese immigrants who are still homogeneously Chinese.

However, due to the Hmong age old distrust of government and agrarian culture they did not integrate into Thai and Lao society until very recently.

Michael Moua — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2:5780:67b:d18:2052:5669:b6dc (talk • contribs) 05:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Self-contradiction: how is size of Chinese community determined if most don't identify as Chinese?
These statements are not logically consistent:

1. Chinese community size is measurable and known: "Thailand is home to the largest overseas Chinese community in the world with a population of approximately nine million people, accounting for 14 percent of the Thai population as of 2012."

2. Chinese community does not identify itself as such: "...nearly all Thai Chinese self-identify as Thai, due to their close integration and successful assimilation into Thai society."

3. No means exists for measuring size of Chinese community: "...but without an accurate census or nationwide DNA testing, there is no credible evidence..."

If most Chinese don't self-identify as Chinese, and no accurate census or nationwide DNA testing exists, then where does the nine million figure come from? The source, the CIA Thailand Factbook, has no mention of Chinese. Where does the claim that it is "the largest overseas Chinese community in the world" come from? The citation is a newspaper fluff piece that provides no source (and probably was not fact-checked). So the reader is left with a very weakly supported claim whose verifiability seems inherently unlikely, from what is stated in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zahzuhzaz (talk • contribs) 19:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Thai Chinese. 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/20130825223730/http://www.international.ucla.edu/cms/files/ch1and5.pdf to http://www.international.ucla.edu/cms/files/ch1and5.pdf
 * Added tag to http://147.46.167.195/~ecores/activity/00sympo/yeung_soh.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110620212355/http://www.cpthailand.com/default.aspx?tabid=107 to http://www.cpthailand.com/default.aspx?tabid=107
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080328202851/http://www.phuketgazette.net/bulletins/index.asp?Id=968 to http://www.phuketgazette.net/bulletins/index.asp?Id=968
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070714062802/http://www.travel-phuket.com/beyondphuket/maehongson.htm to http://www.travel-phuket.com/beyondphuket/maehongson.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.amed.go.th/aboutus/palace/name_ring.htm
 * Added tag to http://www.en.thaichinese.net/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071222085603/http://www.thaihainantrade.com/default.asp to http://www.thaihainantrade.com/default.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071121080612/http://www.fujian.or.th/ to http://www.fujian.or.th/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050921051807/http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/assessment.asp?groupId=80001 to http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/assessment.asp?groupId=80001

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) 21:44, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Thai Chinese. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.forbes.com/profile/chaleo-yoovidhya/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120413164927/http://www.upf.edu/mon/assig/xialmo/mat/long_3.pdf to http://www.upf.edu/mon/assig/xialmo/mat/long_3.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120209082211/http://kyotoreview.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp/issue/issue3/article_280.html to http://kyotoreview.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp/issue/issue3/article_280.html
 * Added tag to http://www.apmforum.com/columns/thai4.htm

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) 17:06, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Thai Chinese. 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/20110803175923/http://www.reignwood.com/aboutUs_HistoryFormation.asp to http://www.reignwood.com/aboutUs_HistoryFormation.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061231021138/http://www.tripsthailand.com/doimaesalong.php to http://www.tripsthailand.com/doimaesalong.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090106144714/http://www.2bangkok.com//2bangkok/Tram/writers.shtml to http://www.2bangkok.com/2bangkok/Tram/writers.shtml

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) 20:33, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Neutral point of view
This section is written very biased. The first alinea uses impartial subjective values like 'dominate', 'literally taken over', 'critical role', without backing this up by numbers. All of this only backed by a single source, whose author is Chinese.

Then the last alinea, again backed only by that same source uses just hateful language like:

The indigenous Thai majority have dealt with this wealth disparity by pursuing a systematic and ruthless campaign of forced assimilation achieved through property confiscation, forced expropriation, coercive social policies, and draconian policies of anti-Chinese cultural obliteration essentially destroying any trace of ethnic Han Chinese consciousness and identity.

I'd say the entire section needs a rewrite and this time with more than one (Chinese) source to back up flaming language like this. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 11:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

When the Thai Chinese say they are Thai
that doesn't mean we are confused ourselves or we think that we are Tai by ethnicity, we are Thai in the sense that we are Thai citizens and loyal to Thailand. Believe me, most pure Chinese Thai still think that they are Chinese by ethinicity (whatever that means) it's just not suitable to talk it out loud that you are Chinese. In Thai society if you say that you are Chinese that means to others you are from China. even Indian Thai say that they are Thai and love the king :) Thailand is multi-ethnicity to begin with. If you are born in Thailand, you are Thai automatically. and we get along with each other very well without mentioning ethnic background. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.120.156.22 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 3 October 2019

 * 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 discussion. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus. (non-admin closure) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:37, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Thai Chinese → Chinese Thai – Consistency with the majority of other articles, with the more familiar word order. These are a people of primarily Thai nationality, and secondarily of Chinese ancestry. Reversing the terms, placing the emphasis on Chineseness, can be confusing to readers, and is not reflective of the Chinese diaspora in Thailand, which is probably the best assimilated. (Currently only two other articles, British Chinese and Malaysian Chinese, use this format.)

I tried checking usage in sources, but it's quite impossible to isolate uses referring to the ethnic group as a noun from adjectival forms referring to other more general stuff. There are academic papers that use "Thai Chinese"/"Thai-Chinese", and those that use "Chinese Thai"/"Chinese-Thai" (the last one in particular explicitly makes a distinction and prefers the latter).

Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes) suggests using the plural demonym as the most concise default format. The plural form for Thai can be either Thai or Thais.[] I'm suggesting Thai without the s as "Chinese Thais" seems rather unfamiliar, and the article is at Thai people, not Thais. Paul_012 (talk) 05:20, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

It's called Thais of Chinese origin or sometimes called Chinese Thai in thailand, because they was forced register as Thai ethnic by government before ethnic register was remove in 2005 (it's something like Chuanqing people, Zhelaizhai, Albazinians chinese government didn't recognize it's minority and claim they are Han Chineses; actually chinese government also not recognize this ethnics are Thai while Thai government does.), so it's no any question in Thailand they should be a Chinese or Thai, because they are Thais like Siameses. but in English document, Thai Chinese this term is too overwhelmed and i think that's okay but should detailed in articled. if want voted, i think term Chinese Thai are better than Thai Chinese. Somsak Ung (talk) 10:14, 3 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment "Chinese Thai" and "Thai Chinese" have different meanings in different dialects of English. There's a noted UK/US divide on this; and ambiguity. We should convert all of these to some other form, Thais of Han Chinese ethnicity would be a good descriptive title to use instead. Particularly with the difference between ethnic Siamese and Thai (with minorities of Malay, Burmese, Khmer...), and ethnic Han and China (with large Mongolian, Tibetan, Turkic minorities) -- 67.70.33.184 (talk) 07:54, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Move to a descriptive title, e.g. Thais of Chinese descent or ethnic Chinese in Thailand. FWIW, an Ngrams comparison finds "ethnic Chinese in Thailand" to be noticeably more common than either "Chinese Thais" or "Thais of Chinese" (with any following word, e.g. descent/origin/ethnicity) ; like the nominator, I see no way to compare any of those terms to "Thai Chinese" given that most of those usages are phrases like "Thai-Chinese dictionary" and "Thai, Chinese, Vietnamese". But on the third hand, I recall that Leo Suryadinata (cited in the article) argues against the use of the term "ethnic Chinese", so I don't know which title is better. In any case, a descriptive title would also be WP:CONSISTENT with the majority of articles in Overseas Chinese, Armenian diaspora, Non-resident Indian, and similar templates. Demonym mashups are confusing, and as 67.70 notes there may be an WP:ENGVAR issue with which order one finds to be more "familiar" so I think it's best to avoid them except where one clearly meets WP:COMMONNAME, which isn't the case here. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 17:12, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose The change is proposed firstly on the basis that we should use "the more familiar word order", in other words, apply the "Chinese American" pattern. That might seem to meet the WP:CONSISTENT goal, but in this case I think it doesn't apply. There may be historical reasons for the "Thai Chinese" usage, and we do have British Chinese, Laotian Chinese, and Malaysian Chinese articles, which are not proposed to be changed.
 * Secondly there seems to be in the proposal an argument for changing the word order based on the idea that they are more Thai than Chinese: These are a people of primarily Thai nationality, and secondarily of Chinese ancestry. [...] placing the emphasis on Chineseness, can be confusing to readers, and is not reflective of the Chinese diaspora in Thailand etc., but this seems to be a more of an objection based on personal reflection than anything grounded in Wikipedia policy.
 * Wikipedia's primary criteria for article naming is the common name "as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources". We should pay particular attention to usage in other encyclopedias, as well as "usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals." Sources cited in the article should be examined.
 * From a non-exhaustive search, I don't see an indication that "Chinese Thai" is more common than "Thai Chinese", but rather the contrary. A simple Google web or Ngrams search for the two terms is inconclusive. A books search shows titles such as "A History of the Thai-Chinese" (given in the "Further reading" section) and usage in many other books. There are 185 citations in the article, so it's hard to say, but a random sampling of a couple of dozen with Google Books previews shows a clear preference for "Thai Chinese" versus "Chinese Thai". Tellingly, the book The Dragon Network refers to "Chinese Indonesians" and "Chinese Filipinos", but "Thai Chinese". In fact I didn't find any that used "Chinese Thai". A significant number used the term "ethnic Chinese", but not a clear majority, and several in conjunction with "Thai Chinese".
 * There was also significant usage of "Sino-Thai". The book Business Networks in Asia discusses "Singaporean Chinese", "Malaysian Chinese" and "ethnic Chinese" or "ethnic Chinese descent" in general, but uses "Sino-Thais". In terms of encyclopedias, Encyclopedia Britannica describes "the overwhelming majority of people of Chinese descent (Thai: luk cin)" as "assimilated Chinese [who] are known in English as Sino-Thai." Encyclopedia.com has "a population of "Sino-Thai," who have maintained distinctively Sinitic cultural practices while adopting the Thai language and Thai names, has persisted." - though in the same article, "Thai Chinese" is also used.. West's Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Asia and Oceania, cited in the article, references the "Sino-Thai community".
 * As noted above, Leo Suryadinata in "Ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia: Overseas Chinese, Chinese Overseas or Southeast Asians?", published in Ethnic Chinese as Southeast Asians, in addressing issues of self-identity, points out some of the complexities and changing uses of the terms "ethnic Chinese", "of Chinese descent", and "overseas Chinese". However, I don't see that he exactly "argues against the use of the term 'ethnic Chinese'", and he uses it himself extensively, as well as using both the terms "Thai Chinese" and "the Sino-Thai", but not "Chinese Thai". For example:
 * Chantavanich later in the same book, whom the proposer says "explicitly makes a distinction and prefers [Chinese Thai]" in fact uses the term "Sino-Siamese" throughout the chapter, only towards the end stating: most of the Siamese-Chinese of the mid-twentieth century have all become Thai citizens, and the appropriate term for them should be 'Thais of Chinese descent" or "Chinese-Thais or Sino-Thais". While suggested as "appropriate", it doesn't necessarily reflect actual usage.
 * Finally, a Google Ngrams search shows a much higher incidence of "Sino-Thai" than any of the other phrases, though that's again not necessarily conclusive, as it would include phrases like "Sino-Thai relations" etc.
 * Given the significant or predominant usage of "Thai Chinese" in the sources, I'm not convinced that the recommendation to "use what would be the least surprising to a user" supports a need to rename the article at this time. Even if so, then "Chinese Thai" doesn't appear to be a good alternative. And clearly an argument based on a claim of excessive "Chineseness" of the established title, rather than actual usage in the literature, is not persuasive. --IamNotU (talk) 04:03, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Wow, thank you IamNotU, for the extremely detailed analysis. Since you mention "Sino-Thai" sees significant usage, would you say it's common enough to consider Sino-Thai people (another valid alternative per WP:NCET) as a move target? --Paul_012 (talk) 07:36, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Why? I don't see a pressing need to change the title of the article. The current title has been stable for fifteen years, since its creation. It's reasonably likely to be the most commonly-used term, and the other terms are already stated in bold in the opening sentence. There shouldn't be any real confusion about it.
 * If we were to change the title, then there would be pressure to re-write and change the usage throughout the article, and in other articles. In terms of consistency within Wikipedia, there are about three hundred articles that refer to "Thai Chinese" people, but the use of "Sino-Thai" or "Chinese Thai" is only around twenty each. In general, it's preferable to retain established usage conventions if there's no strong reason to change.
 * By the way, I also searched the New York Times website, where references to "Thai Chinese" people are a significant majority, found in dozens of articles, while "Chinese-Thai" is used in only about half a dozen. So I don't think the argument for "the more familiar word order" is valid, even for Americans. "Sino-Thai" was not used at all. --IamNotU (talk) 18:33, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Confusing statistics
Regarding the amount of Thai Chinese people in Thailand, the number in the article is very contradictory. In the introduction section it seems to suggest 10 million people are ethnic Chinese, however in the following section, it says 11 to 14 percent of people in Thailand have some Chinese ancestry. So which is it? According to my own personal experience, it's difficult to say who is pure Chinese, some Chinese or pure Thai since intermarriage between ethnic groups are common. Also without nationwide DNA testing, its impossible to state an accurate figure of 10 million. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarryVortex (talk • contribs) 05:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit data
174.47.95.104 and 110.159.171.197 ?? What do you want Please do not edit the information. If there is no reference   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dask0666 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Ramalamadingwhat?
How could Chulalongkorn (Rama V) proclaim law requiring Chinese people in Thailand to adopt Thai surnames in 1909? The Surname Act itself was initiated by his son, the succeeding King Rama VI, and was only enacted as late as 1913. By then Chulalongkorn had already passed away. Was it possible that the writer of the article confused the two king, father and son? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.150.14.161 (talk) 19:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)