Jump to content

Talk:Thaksin Shinawatra

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Thaksin)

Length of article

[edit]

I've done a check and discovered that this is the 4th-longest article on a national leader of any at the English Wikipedia. Only Bush, Blair and Berlusconi have longer articles. This article is longer than those for Chirac, Hu Jintao, Putin, Merkel or Koizumi. With all due respect to Thailand, I don't think any one would argue that it is the 4th most important country in the world, or Thaksin a more important figure than Hu Jintao or Putin. The reason this article is so long is that Patiwat keeps writing more and more and more material. At my urging we have already created two spin-off articles, Policies of the Thaksin government and Thailand political crisis 2005-2006. If these three articles are taken together, there is probably more material at Wikipedia about Thaksin than about any current national leader except Bush. Yet still the article keeps growing. I admire Patiwat's industry, but this article is now as big as it needs to be, and Patiwat should stop writing more and more detailed coverage of Thaksin's policies in every conceivable area. Adam 10:28, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think maybe we should all focus on expanding the branch articles, and possible establishing some more new ones. From the history of this entry, I know several administrators do watch this entry on a regular basis. Any of them would like to weigh in on this matter? Tettyan 14:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Frankly, I do not think that Thailand's importance in the world has any relevance to how long the article is. Thaksin, through his policies and his actions, has been one of the most controversial Prime Ministers in Thai history. A controversial topic requires factual support for all key sides of the argument - and this requires material. I've already made several attempts to shorten things down significantly. If an abler editor is able to summarize this material in a more concise manner, while still retaining factuality and neutrality, then please go ahead. Be bold! Furthermore, Thaksin's career is a current event. Some of these events might be of historical importance, some not - but in the thick of things, it is pretty darn hard to judge. Right now, Thaksin is at a critical stage in his political career. Nobody is really sure what is going to happen 6 months from now on. In this situation, I've always felt it more important to err on the side of being factual and informative, rather than being brief and high-level. Things can always be moved or removed or edited if history or discussion among the editors deems that it is not relevant. Patiwat 21:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll be bold and say the article is not long enough. There are several topics which, in my opinion, absolutely need expansion.
    • Corruption. The article contains many weasely second-hand allegations of corruption, but I see no hard facts, clear examples, or reputable citations. What about C-130? What about the airport?
    • Stacking independent comissions with his people. Again, second-hand allegations of this are noted in the article, but the only example given is Chaiyasit Shinawatra. What about Khunying Charuwan? What about the Constitution Court? What about the EC?
      • I've finally added 2 sentences mentioning the Khunying Jaruvan controversy, as well as a link to her article. The reason this is mentioned at all is to substantiate the "complaints that Thaksin has been stacking the civil service and independent commissions with his buddies" criticism. I hope this doesn't make the article too long. Patiwat 03:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is sufficiently divided and the length is explained by the volume of news related to Thaksin personally as a Businessman or public person, and not as an elected representative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.176.106.71 (talk) 07:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I must admit I've occasionally meddled on this page, but I now feel that as an excyclopedic entry on a deposed tin-pot dictator this is far too long. It can't be Wikipedia's job to give more than a starting point for people who want to research the nitty-gritty of his undistinguished career. I'd suggest: Early Career, Rise to Power, Time in Office, After the Fall (or something, and this should be very brief), Criticism. And Criticism divided into a few broad areas: Corruption and conflicts of interest, Human rights abuses, Divisiveness, each meriting no more than two or three sentences simply summing up the broad charges.Properly referenced, that could guide the reader where he needs to go if she wants to know more. We don't need the war on drugs in seven different instances, eternally editing and re-editing over what the king really said, or detail each entanglement of Shin Corp.Sartoresartus (talk) 03:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that the article is quite long. It would be great to summarize it and remove any irrelevant information. Some information can be moved to a seperate article. For example, AIS can be summarized and the information can be moved to the "Advanced Info Service" article.nogia123 (talk) 09:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He is not Thai

[edit]

He is Chinese. Why Chinese are allowed to run foreign country??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.129.8.205 (talk) 03:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's 15/16ths Thai, 1/16th Chinese. Jim Michael (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Sir

He was born in Thailand, so he is a Thai. He is good or bad, follow the news, and judge.

Being born in Thailand doesn't necessarily mean you gain Thai nationality. But to the best of my knowledge Thaksin S. is a Thai national.TheHamburger (talk) 07:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New edits

[edit]

As the above comment indicates, the passionate are out in force again. Thanks for semi-protecting it. Even so, could those who wish to fulminate about the April 2009 protests please do that in the relevant section, right down at the bottom, now headed "self-imposed exile", and not in the introduction, where it doesn't belong (I've removed most of the addition for now). A lot of people have put some effort into tidying up the article, so perhaps as a matter of courtesy if nothing else, please scan the headings before unleashing the force of your rhetoric upon the stunned masses. Ideally the intro should I think be framed on the average laptop screen without scrolling: see the Winston Churchill entry as a good model (and by all means help condense what there is already).Sartoresartus (talk) 03:39, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Thanks for your neutral suggestions. Ddave2425 (talk) 10:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)ddave2425[reply]

Having said that, there should eventually be be a bit about the protests in the "self-imposed exile" section, not of novel-length but mentioning the cancelled ASEAN+3 summit, intention to return to Thailand, call for revolution, quelling of protests, revocation of passport. The red-shirt protests as such probably need a page to themselves. In my humble opinion, as they say.Sartoresartus (talk) 03:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Involvement in Thailand's red shirt riot

[edit]

Excuse me! Why did anyone (whose past contributions only involve in the Thaksin's page) remove the paragraph about his involvement in the recent Bangkok riot? The protest is the most widely publicize (and searched for) issue at the moment. I don't care if you're naiive enough to belive that he simply want to 'give moral support' to the protesters, but what was said there was 100% facts, no opionion. Please bring it back immediately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donny TH (talk • contribs) 10:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you were to make the huge effort to scroll down to the bottom of this page, you might find your answer there. Sartoresartus (talk) 17:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, from your logic, perhaps there's too much details there, but being the event that recieve world-media attention, it certainly deserves a place in the introduction. I'll 'condense' the paragraph a little more. Donny TH (talk) 21:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reformer or fugitive?

[edit]

Just because he was convicted of a crime in a Thai court does not mean he is guilty nor does this deserve more prominence than his role as a humanitarian. Democracy no longer exists in thailand. The world needs to know that the Thai courts are corupt, that the king approved the coup and that Thaksin supports one person, one vote democracy. I have not yet made any edits to the article, but I will revert biased edits.

1. News flash: Guilty is defined as being convicted by a court.
2. Humanitarian!? I've heard of lots of (good and bad) things he is, but humanitarian is definitely not one of them. Enlighten me.
3. Democracy don't exist when a minority group of people came out rioting, throwing motolovs, burning buses, shooting at people, when the rest of about 60 millions sit depressed at home watching their nation falling apart on TV and pray for the crisis to stop.
4. See my comment below about court. Just because it convicts someone you like doesn't mean it is corrupted.
5. Go out to any crowded place and shout that thing you say about the King. I doubt if you'll last longer than 5 minutes. --Donny TH (talk) 05:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When possible, please use third party, independent sources such as the BBC, New York Times or Associated Press. Thai based publications such as TheNation or Bangkok Post may not be neutral. Politics and corruption plagues Thai media, courts and military.Ddave2425 (talk) 10:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)ddave2425[reply]

But Dude, you sounds like you live in Thailand and know things inside out when you said politic plague media and courts (wow.. others.. possible in some case, but court!.. that's a high and quite impregnable institution. 5 years ago, it rules against favour of Thaksin when he and his friends control Everything in Thailand), and if you do, you must have known what you're talking about. The Nation may presents facts in an biased commentary, but not Bangkok Post, (at least to a much lower scale.) (But if you exclude these 2, there' won't be much local English-language news source left, and international press don't report small incidents, only big ones like in April) By the way, what is reported in Thai media and international media during the April roits is pretty consistant, don't you think? --Donny TH (talk) 05:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Donny, give serious thought to whether "small incidents" really belong in a biographical article that is already too long. There are numerous other places to document your own take on every single detail.Patiwat (talk) 23:51, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed comparisons of Thaksin to AIDS and Hitler. Although these were referenced, it does not seem appropriate or encyclepedic, especially without context. I mean, in what way is Thaksin similar to AIDS, which is not even a person? If anything, it illustrates the bias of the sources. Ddave2425 (talk) 01:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)ddave2425[reply]

Nice find! and to be correct, the source (who are individuals) is just making metaphoric comments in their point of view, but to search for those sentences in their speech and put it in here, it illustrates the bias of that writer. (whose name starts with a 'P' who has been editing this article a thousand times.) It's reverse psychology. Mentioning attacking statements that sounds silly to make the accused looks better. See the details and another example here: Finland Plot talk page. --Donny TH (talk) 04:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, Prawase is a physician and knows a few things about AIDS... :) When one of Thailand's most respected public intellectuals criticizes you that harshly, I'd think that should legitimately be included in the article? Same thing for the other examples: when one of Thailand's most respected monks calls you a demon, a German educated lawyer compares you to Hitler, and a newspaper that did notable reporting on the Killing Fields compares you to Pol Pot, I think it is notable. More notable than, say, some psycho lady going onto Youtube using profanities and calling for Thaksin's murder (Donny, you know what I'm talking about, right?). Seriously, remove all the comparisons if you like, EXCEPT for Prem's. He's the Privy Council President (according to some, above politics), and any criticisms he makes of an elected politician are definitely noteworthy. Patiwat (talk) 23:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Patiwat, If Prawase knows something about AIDS, put it on the AIDS article page. I will remove those kinds of statements and we can bring in an admin if you wish. As for local media coverage, if the international media does not cover it, perhaps it does not belong on the Eghlish language wiki. I do not trust The Nation or Bangkok Post. Ddave2425 (talk) 21:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)ddave2425[reply]

  • I think that list of comparisons from, as Patiwat says, notable people nicely illustrated our claim that T. is a 'controversial figure', which is all it was meant to illustrate. We ain't saying he's Hitler, we're saying his detractors compared him to.. (so that, dear reader, should give you an idea how much some people despise him). It is possible to edit all colour out of these articles and make them very dull. Read this fan of our collective efforts.
  • There'd be slim pickings if we had to rely on the international media, which (I'm sorry to have to say) largely rewrite the local media for want of anyone who speaks the language or has the faintest idea what's going on. Me, I don't trust the New York Times, and with very good reason. We'll just have to use a bit of discretion and try not to be children (says he, shaking his rattle). Sartoresartus (talk) 11:56, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • :: My 2 cents worth: I came here because I wanted to check out if Thaksin's corruption or alleged corruption has been so severe that it warrants years of campaigning against his group which has quite a following. The price for fighting Thaksin & Co has been upped significantly recently so I wondered if anybody or who was/is behind that.

Which policies might he have implemented to attract such hostilities that bring the country towards civil war and make that look acceptable? I was quite staggered by the creativeness and uniqueness of his policies. He certainly did not follow the rule books by those who pull the strings, and that does not endear you/him with the invisible layer of grey eminences. One example is the early re-payment of an IMF loan. They like countries to have these loans because that allows them influence. His policies were neither really left nor really right which is an irritant to those who pull the strings.

I also wanted to see on which scale Thaksin's corruption that we always hear about was. In comparison to German corruption before and under then Chancellor Helmut Kohl (our land in Berlin was affected, my own experience) it is not on a very high scale, but of course it is still 'verboten' - he and the wife should have known. His sister also made a severe mistake with that amnesty suggestion - it stirred up far too much and showed bad judgement.

In summary, yes, I believe now that there are forces which whip up anti-Thaksin groups - but who they are is not obvious to me. He is not a reformer or fugitive, he is a fugitive reformer, but the reforms were not the 'correct' ones. Ally Hauptmann-Gurski 121.209.53.9 (talk) 05:39, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why "junta-appointed" is a significant term

[edit]

"Junta-appointed" is a significant term that needs to be retained. Prior to the 2006 coup, numerous state agencies were established by the 1997 Constitution, e.g., the Constitutional Court, the Counter Corruption Committee. The 2006 coup abrogated the 1997 Constitution and effectively eliminated those state agencies. New agencies were established by the military government with somewhat similar names, e.g., Constitutional Tribunal, but had a completely different makeup as well as a legal context different from the 1997-2006 versions of the same agencies. For example, there were specific rules about what the 1997-2006 Constitutional Court could rule on and how it could rule - those rules did not apply for the junta-appointed Constitutional Tribunal. To be banned by the junta-appointed Constitutional Tribunal or have your assets frozen by the junta-appointed Asset Examination Committee was very different from having the same done by the 1997-2006 agencies.Patiwat (talk) 23:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who caused the April unrest?

[edit]

This is a loaded question, and can only be addressed by strictly adhering to Wikipedia NPOV policies. The reds have said that the blues provoked them with violence and that yellows set the precedent. The yellows will have said that the reds caused it. The short fact of the matter is that there were violent clashes between the UDD and government supporters. Can't we just leave it at that in the intro? The "he says this and she said that" detail can go in the article. Patiwat (talk) 23:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asia Times

[edit]

Does Sondhi still own the A.times online? I think that organ is so discredited that there's no point using it as reference for owt. Sartoresartus (talk) 09:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Career chronology out of sequence in favor of specious speculation

[edit]

The section entitled, "Deputy Prime Minister under Chavalit" says that the July ecomomic collapse came after Thaksin took office in August and suggests he was to blame. Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but August comes after July. Duh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.28.16.33 (talk) 05:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you're reading the text wrong. It means Thaskin took office in August soon after the economic collapse in July. I've removed the word "soon" to make things clearer. --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 12:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict?

[edit]

I think the one who wrote the verdict mistook some part with Thaksin's defence against the charge. You can see it from the reference he/she put in A summary of Dr Thaksin Shinawatra’s defence in the Supreme Court in the case to confiscate his assets, especially in the last 3 items. Please verify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.24.117.101 (talk) 16:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Color pink

[edit]

He was born on a Tuesday and his Thai solar calendar auspicious color not red but pink.

Wanted by Interpol?

[edit]

Thaksin doesn't seem to be listed as a fugitive on the Interpol list.Interpol Thai nationals —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surfing bird (talk • contribs) 13:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Death rumours

[edit]

Someone has already added his date of death to the article (now reverted), but Thaksin has apparently personally denied he's dead - [1] -- Boing! said Zebedee 21:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thaksin is not dead. 122.0.2.2 (talk) 09:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

which probably comes as a great disappointment to many Thais. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.122.96.212 (talk) 08:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshit

[edit]

I don't have the time to get involved in an edit war, but a quick scan reveals that some contributers here are fulminating nonsense. For example Just because he was convicted of a crime in a Thai court does not mean he is guilty nor does this deserve more prominence than his role as a humanitarian. ... Thaksin supports one person, one vote democracy.

Totally wrong! Thaksin is a convicted criminal, no sensible person would call him humanitarian except as sarcasm.

As to Thaksin's view of democracy, consider this: one level where democracy here doesn't work too badly is at the local level: at least voters are personally acquainted with the candidates. Yet when P.M., Thaksin proposed that he appoint village headmen and subdistrict kamnans because, in his words, democracy doesn't work at the local level.

Foreign media has conveyed many misconceptions about Thai politics. Let's not compound that here at Wikipedia.Jamesdowallen (talk) 08:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I agree that personal analysis and judgment from either side should not be there (and I also agree that the complexities of Thai politics have been greatly over-simplified and often misrepresented by foreign media), but I don't see what we can do other than revert POV additions whenever we see them. I've had this page watched for some time, and I really don't see a high level of additions of such material - and the whole thing generally seems reasonably balanced to me -- Boing! said Zebedee 09:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reasonably balanced? That's debatable. But out of date? That's incontrovertible. This article seems to end with February 2010. I haven't examined the edit history, but if edits are responsible for the February cutoff, it's regrettable. Wbkelley (talk) 15:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Yayaying (talk) 05:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)) Section about Royal Decoration should be removed.[reply]

Politician?

[edit]

Editor IheartThailand has several times removed the word "politician" from the lead, claiming that Thaksin is no longer a politician. I disagree, as his role in politics is precisely what he is best known for. Even if he doesn't hold an official government or opposition role, that is only because he was driven out of it by a military coup and a prosecution that has bitterly divided the country. Thaksin is still the de facto of leader of the Thai opposition, and addresses large political rallies by way of satellite communication - and I doubt there is a single person in Thailand who thinks his political activity is in the past. It is important for Wikipedia to stay neutral, and adopt neither a pro nor anti-Thaksin stance, and neither a pro nor anti-monarchy stance regarding Thai politics. So, I bring it here to see what the consensus says - and I note that User:Frank appears to agree with me, and has also reverted IheartThailand's removal of the word "politician". Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resignation or not

[edit]

Quote here http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2006/04/06/thaksin-resigns clearly states that Thaksin resigned as PM on 6/4/06. Therefore he cannot been ousted as PM by the Coup, but only as party leader. Unless, of course, he had un-resigned. The Coup didn't take place until September of that year. Comments invited.Sushisurprise (talk) 13:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced allegations

[edit]

The Criticism section contains a number of unsourced allegations, which I have tagged as needing citations. Whether or not they are true, WP:BLP policy requires that we do not host unsourced negative allegations against living persons. So unless these are sourced fairly soon, they will need to be removed -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from article

[edit]

Oh this article gets almost amusing: his war on drugs was all about getting his dealers to offer suckers looking for 1g to go for 20g at a super cut-rate price; they would be arrested within seconds of their purchase, but possession of 20g qualifies you as a dealer and it enabled Thaksin to present glowing statistics about the number of dealers sentenced to 1g

And speaking of Thaksin without speaking of Temasek is speaking of the Pope without mentioning Catholicism.

--Arthur Borges 14:24, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Residence

[edit]

Where does he live now? YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 19:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Thaksin Shinawatra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:12, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Thaksin Shinawatra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:52, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Thaksin Shinawatra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Thaksin Shinawatra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:54, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Thaksin Shinawatra. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:42, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Thaksin Shinawatra. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:11, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 31 external links on Thaksin Shinawatra. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unsupported content

[edit]

The followng is supported by a dead link. Remove it?

"In a November 2009 interview, Thaksin told The Times that he was living in Dubai, still had access to about $100 million of his money outside of Thailand, and was investing in gold mines, diamond polishing and lottery licenses in various countries."

Ping: User:Farang Rak Tham

Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources that are no longer online are allowed on Wikipedia, unsourced content not. I replaced the dead link though.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:07, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I couldn't find a replacement. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

B-class article

[edit]

That this is rated as a B-class article demonstrates how worthless classification of articles is. Seligne (talk) 12:53, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The rating was given before C-class existed. Feel free to change it. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:26, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather try to make it B-class. Seligne (talk) 13:00, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced

[edit]

I removed the following from the War on Drugs section:

  • Thaksin initiated several highly controversial policies to counter a perceived boom in the Thai drug market, particularly in methamphetamine. Earlier policies like border blocking (most methamphetamine is produced in Myanmar), education, sports, and promoting peer pressure had proved ineffective. In a 4 December 2002 speech on the eve of his birthday, King Bhumibol noted the rise in drug use and called for a "War on Drugs." Privy Councillor Phichit Kunlawanit called on the government to use its majority in parliament to establish a special court to deal with drug dealers, stating that "if we execute 60,000 the land will rise and our descendants will escape bad karma".[1]
  • The government went out of its way to publicise the campaign, through daily announcements of arrest, seizure, and death statistics. According to the Narcotics Control Board, the policy was effective in reducing drug consumption, especially in schools, by increasing the market price.
  • As of the August 2011 parliamentary elections, Abhisit's investigation failed to find or publicise any conclusive evidence linking Thaksin or members of his Government to any extrajudicial killings. zzz (talk) 14:44, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Michael K. Connors, Ambivalent About Rights: "Accidental" Killing Machines, Democracy and Coups D’etat., Draft paper presented to Human Rights in Asia Workshop, University of Melbourne, 1–2 October 2009.

Who is Kasit?

[edit]

Who is Kasit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.85.118 (talk) 03:37, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong jail

[edit]

Thaksin is jailed at Bangkok Remand Prison, not Klong Prem Central Prison. Just wanted to point it out. Sources: 1, 2, 3 DylanDoesWiki (talk) 14:38, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. While the facilities are technically separate, they're part of the same complex, so sources sometimes refer to them interchangeably (if inaccurately). I've redirected the title for now, though it will need some sorting out. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thailand's ex-PM Thaksin to serve 8 years in jail - court statement

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/thailands-ex-pm-thaksin-serve-8-years-jail-court-statement-2023-08-22/49.228.35.238 (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]

Hi all, it seems a bit odd to me that Thaksin Shinawatra's entry into politics is a separate article from this one. This article is certainly on the long side, so I can see the argument for a WP:SIZESPLIT, but I don't think the "entry into politics" section of his article is extensive enough to be a useful split target. To that end, I think it would be worth merging the "entry into politics" article back into here. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this should be a discussion about how best to structure coverage on Thakain's political career aside from his premiership, which already has its own article. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just took a somewhat deeper dive into the article histories. As things stand now, Thaksin Shinawatra's entry into politics is almost identical to the "Entry into politics" section of this very article, with much of the text repeated nearly or exactly verbatim between the two locations. Looking at the page history of the two articles, it appears that a user created the "entry into politics" page in 2007 by cutting and pasting the relevant section of Thaksin's main article; another user subsequently reverted the removal of that content from the main article, leading to identical text being duplicated across two articles, and in the ensuing sixteen years, both versions of the text have diverged from each other in only minor ways.
While I can certainly see a case in general for the existence of a standalone article on Thaksin's early political career, the tangled and redundant nature of this particular situation leads me to believe that a merge is the best solution here. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 18:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into it. In that case that page can probably be redirected here until someone wants to attempt a proper reorganisation (in which case, I'm thiking a Political career of Thaksin Shinawatra would be more natural.) --Paul_012 (talk) 06:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for carrying out the redirect! I agree with your thinking that Political career of Thaksin Shinawatra would be the ideal title for a new split-out article, if/when someone tries their hand at it. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:08, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thaksin_Shinawatra&oldid=1253495601"