User talk:Oatz

Welcome!

Hello, Oatz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

As I am also very interested in Thai topics, thanks a lot for your additions in that area, hope you'll do more. I have cleaned up some, for example we try to use the standard romanization scheme here. In case you haven't found it yet, the Portal:Thailand, Wikipedia:Thailand-related topics notice board and the List of Thailand-related topics are probably also interesting for you. andy 13:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Oatz

Welcome aboard! --AStanhope 13:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

   Thank you Astanhope.--Oatz 07:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Small towns

What shall we do with those small towns, like Khuan Don? So far I have just created articles about the districts (Amphoe), and whatever left to say about the town itself I put into the district article as well. A town with just 4,917 citizen like Khuan Don has hardly anything to tell about. For Betong however I have created a second article Amphoe Betong. I personally don't like article which just say "xyz is a town in abc". Does it make sense to skip the thesaban tambon and cover them in the corresponding Amphoe article, but create separate articles for those towns which are thesaban mueang or thesaban nakhon? It seems to me that many Thai don't know about the thesaban anyway. andy

   Thesaban Tambon
   -gross minimum income 5,000,001 baht
   -population at least 7,000 headcounts
   -density 1,500/sq.metre
   -citizens consensus

   Thesaban Mueang
   -every towns that City hall located, can settle thesaban meuang but 
   -population at least 10,000 headcounts
   -density 3,000/sq.metre
   -insufficient income

   Thesaba Nakhon
   -population at least 50,000 headcounts
   -density 3,000/sq.metre
   -insufficient income
   
   I still have no answer for you question about thesaban. Now Thailand we have Or Bor Tor   
   (Thai องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบล)Tambon Adimistrative Organization, actually I don't know deeply in 
   detail. And how different Or Bor Tor and thesaban tambon.
   Some big cities(in my opinion), they still be thesaban mueang but I don't know their 
   reasons.
    
   You can visit Thai websites for more information. Hopefully can help you.
   http://www.tambol.com/municipal/website.asp?page=1&key=&districtwebsite=&provincewebsite=
   http://www.thailocaladmin.go.th/total_web/website_TN.htm
   --Oatz 08:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstood my question. I know these basic things about the thesaban (see List of cities in Thailand), but haven't yet found the patience to make it into an article. My question was - should we create an article in Wikipedia for every thesaban tambon, or better start with the Amphoe and cover both district and township in one. Only when there's a lot of information on the town then a split into two article would be worth. What is your opinion on that? andy 11:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry. Now I understand your point.
    I agree with you to start with the Amphoe and cover everythings there. And from the 
    Amphoe, we can create more and more articles.
    Maybe you have known, some Mueang districts has more than 1 thesaban.--Oatz 12:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lam Dom Noi River

Doesn't the word ลำ (Lam) mean something like "river"? Because the ลำน้ำพอง is very often translated as Nam Phong River, not Lam Nam Phong River. andy 11:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

   Yes, Lam means river. If any readers will be confused by this word, you can use Lam only.--Oatz 11:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then I would suggest to move the article to Dom Noi River, and mention that in Thai it is named "Lam Dom Noi". andy 11:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

   OK. And we will use River as the topic and describe Lam meaning in the article.

Amphoe Lam Sonthi

I guess you are from Lopburi Province, right? I am now polishing your Amphoe articles, and while creating the tambon map of Mai Sonthi I have some problems with contradicting maps. Especially Kut Ta Phet is sometimes drawn shorter and not reaching Wichian Buri. Did it have a change in boundary for that Amphoe recently? And is my drawing of the tambon boundaries Image:Tambon 1610.png correct with the current layout? andy 12:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are right Andy. I was born at Lopburi. But now I do not stay there.

Anyway I have ever worked in Lopburi and neighboring provinces for 1 and half years.

It was a good chance to know my motherland.

After checking with my map and other Thai websites, Kut Ta Phet area reaches to Wichian Buri.

Next week I have a business trip to Lower North and West of Northest Thailand.

Hopefully I have free time to take some pictures to share in Wikipedia.--Oatz 09:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of my favourite articles is also the one on my hometown Hemer - and I even made a short article on it in the Thai wikipedia :-) Photos are of course welcome, quite a lot of the photos of Thailand here are made by myself - including topics like Lak Mueang or Thiwagan Amphoe. But sadly I can also do photos during my vacations. If you can make some photos, you best upload them to Wikipedia:Commons, then they can directly be used in all language editions of Wikipedia. andy 20:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chaiyaphum map

Thanks for the note - I spotted something odd with the Chaiyaphum Amphoe before, see Talk:Chaiyaphum Province, yet didn't thought that my source map could be in error. Now checking with the MapMagic map it gets clear. I'll upload the fixed version ASAP.

Seems like for Lopburi making tambon maps is difficult - there seem to be several changes in boundary relatively recently, but even on lopburi.go.th there's still the old outline. And sadly most of the maps which show tambon boundaries are either very inaccurate or outdated :-( For example the northern part of Tambon Nong Makha Amphoe Khok Charoen has been cut off, part of Nong Don (Saraburi) has been added to Amphoe Mueang Lopburi, also parts of Kaeng Khoi to Phattana Nikhom... The one at [1] seem to be the only usable, but sadly incomplete. Can you find any details - such boundary changes might also be notable in the history section for the Amphoe acticle. andy 11:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to find the details that you want. Anyway I will try and try at my best.

For Chaiyaphum map, I know because I drove pass by the two districts last week.--Oatz 11:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem if you cannot find that information, it's just sad not to be able to create correct tambon maps for your home area.

For the Amphoe of Saraburi - did you yet find the doc-files at saraburi.go.th. They seem to contain a lot additional information. andy 21:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Andy. We would return to Lopburi soon.

For the link that you gave me, it's a useful website. But I didn't use it for my reference.--Oatz 11:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thailand

Hi it is great that you are starting new articles on Thailand districts. But I think a geo-stub is particularly useful if you provide a map of the location- Thaliand has maps of all the districts. It puts it in its context and makes understanding many times easier. See what I have done to King Amphoe Sap Yai For the Chan....whatever the province is you can use the same map just alter slightly to show which district you are talking about Good luck! James Janderson 10:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion.

Anyway I'm just an assistant of andy to create the topic about district of Thailand. He has the platform of the topic. When I finish my topics, andy will edit the topics to be Wikipidia style article.--Oatz 03:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But you can also create your starting points more in the standard style, then I have less work to edit them afterwards - you are so fast to create new ones I hardly can follow to adapt them. To add the map, you can simply add a nearly blank infobox, just put e.g.

{{Infobox Amphoe|name=Mueang Chaiyaphum|thai=เมืองชัยภูมิ|province=Chaiyaphum|geocode=3601}}

at the beginning, of course setting the parameters accordingly. All the others parameters in that box are optional. andy 08:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey it is great you are covering some Thai amphoes but it is extremely useful to use maps to learn their locations. See what I have done to Amphoe Bua Yai James Janderson 09:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank youOatz 03:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi your Thai stubs are even better now with the info box and map. keep it up James Janderson 10:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

May I suggest that you upload your photos directly to Wikipedia:Commons? It's a separate Wiki (thus you need to register an additional account there), but the special thing is that images from there can be used in all Wikimedia projects, e.g. the English and Thai Wikipedia. I have moved most of your photos there already (e.g. commons:Image:Amphoe Dan Sai from hill.JPG, but it'd be easier if you do it yourself directly. Don't forget to add the categries there - at least the one for the province. I also noted that you tried to add the photo to Mittraphap Highway but failed - the filename is case sensitive. andy 12:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mueang districts

Me again (hope you don't mind) - I am not sure if the history of the Mueang belongs to the Mueang district, IMHO it better fits into the province article, as the provinces are the entity which controls the same area as the Mueang did before. Maybe a very short history of the Mueang is fine, but the focus should be on the history the district itself - things like when was it first established, did it have another name in the past, was the center of the province there from beginning or later moved there. Otherwise we'd have three different versions of the same history - once in the province, once in the Amphoe Mueang, and another one in the one about the thesaban. The history section in some provinces is still short, so the facts you added to the Amphoe Mueang can be added there for sure. What do you think?

BTW: You mentioned in Amphoe Mueang Sing Buri that it was renamed in 1938. Was it a new policy that year to name all the districts with the sala klang to be Amphoe Mueang? andy 11:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Mueang district history is very closed to the province history. It's hard for me to identify which is the history of Mueang only. That's the reason why I create the Mueang district articles the last.

Refer to your message, you proposed the idea to use the most history for the Mueang district applies to the province history too. Am I right?

As in my opinion,Thesaban is just a local administration. There is a little bit history. We just say about the area or size of people, enough.

For the policy, I found in Sing Buri history only. I will search for more information and then share with you.

Don't worry to leave message to me. It's good to know I'm not alone in the cyber world. Oatz 11:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slow down a bit :-)

Can you slow down with creating new Amphoe articles a bit? I cannot keep pace to add more data to the articles, I already have a backlog of maybe 20 articles. Maybe you can instead add something in the geography sections of the existing articles - I have no good maps to find things like important rivers, hills, national parks etc. andy 12:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry andy. When I start the topics, I can not stop. I really want to see the completed project. OK I will try to slow down.Oatz 12:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs

Seems like you haven't read Wikipedia:Stub - a stub is an article which is very short and just barely covers the topic. But those biographies you tagged earlier weren't stubs in this sense, they might be incomplete, but are not stub anymore either. To mark a biography of a Thai it should only be in one of the Categories under Category:Thai people, or in that category itself. andy 08:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm sorry.

By the way, do you want me take bio-stub off from the topics? And for the district topics, are they stub? Oatz 09:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the districts - I am not sure where to put the line between a stub and a non-stub article. Those which already contain history, geography, subdivisions and a full infobox can be called stub because there's still a lot to add, however stubs here are things like "xyz is a town in abc" (e.g. the provincial capitals like Loei), to which our Amphoe articles are much superior already. So far I added the tag to those district where I could only include tabular data like the infobox, neighboring district and subdivision, but nothing else, as these have clearly not enough contents. andy 11:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nakhon Nayok downgraded?

You mentioned in Amphoe Mueang Nakhon Nayok that the province Nakhon Nayok was included into Prachinburi province. Can you find more detail, especially the year it was reduced and the year it was reestablished? I haven't read about that before, I only knew that Nonthaburi was temporarily downgraded at around that time. This downgrade and reestablishment is currently missing in the history section of Nakhon Nayok Province.

BTW: Do you know this link: [2]? It can be very comfortable to check any changes of Amphoe articles, so you can see when I enlarge your articles, or when I start a new one myself (e.g. I have nearly finished Narathiwat while you were less active last week :-). And it can also be used to spot vandalism on them. andy 12:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just added some more information about timing of downgraded and re-established of Nakhon Nayok that I found in other Thai websites. Also I made link to it. Thanks to remind me. I will use data from the website to update other districts of Nakhon Nayok articles too. If we have every Official Province websites as Ratchaburi Province, it will be great.

I did not know about the daily summary link before you give me. Thank you. I agree with you, it's comfortable for the project works.

By the way, I want to know when you plan to accomplish the Thailand districts project?Oatz 10:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and now you added that Ban Na was assigned to Saraburi I find the logical explanation why the Diocese of Chanthaburi covers Nakhon Nayok except Ban Na - it was the full province Prachinburi which was used for diocese when it was established in 1944. This territorial oddity nagged me for quite some time already.

The quality of the province websites really differs a lot - when I worked on Surat Thani and Phang Nga, the quite detailled Winword documents about each Amphoe found there were helpful - some even had the list of Nai Amphoe. Ratchaburi even have the histories in english. Yet other seem to have nearly nothing. It's probably also a matter of budget the province can or wants to spend on their websites.

I have no plan for a finishing date of the Amphoe project. Without your help there wouldn't be that many articles yet for sure, but then maybe I would have spend more time on other things like the tambon locator maps, or to create a city map of Surat Thani similar to the maps User:Lerdsuwa creates on Bangkok's district. Or even projects not related with Thailand, like a book with expired copyright I plan to add to Wikisource. But like any project, it is most fun if it is done together than trying it alone without any feedback. I prefer to have each article in good quality but then finish the project later, and not hurry to have an article on all soon, but then each article does not say much more than "xxx is a district of yyy", which is IMHO worthless. Which districts to do next is a matter of preference - importance of the district, popularity for tourists, good information easily accessible (like Ratchaburi or Nakhon Nayok), do the red links in the article Amphoe first, or do it by alphabet or by province - anything is possible. Before you started I slowly worked myself through southern Thailand, as that's where my wife comes from. andy 12:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have my own target, I really want to see at least 50% Provinces completed within this yearend(we can be tricky by finish small provinces.:-)). For myself, it's not so far to reach there. What do you think? Anyway we have to work together. I need your help much.

I want to make good articles too. But as in my opinion, article starting is the most difficult job. If we arrange the article in the good plateform and direction(as the project founders and you started), the article will be better and better in long run. Many Wikipedians likes to add/edit more than create.

Southern Thailand is the most favorite region of mine. So sad in my February2006 Southern trip, I did not take photos because I just registered Wikipedia in June.Oatz 06:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like we can make that goal easily, if we hurry we might even do it this month already. Now we have done 31 of the 38 needed, and both Krabi and Pattani are nearly finished, and leaving out the history I probably do them this weekend. Can you take a look at those Pattani districts I did lately, for some I managed to translate the history from amphoe.com, but for others it is too complicate for me to understand. While I did some additions to Amphoe Kao Liao I noticed that amphoe.com also lists a district slogan, that one would be an interesting addition to the articles as well, but for me it's too difficult to translate them :-( andy 13:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with you it's not so far. But from now, I will be so busy till the end of the year. Anyway I will try to meet my target at my best.

It's hard for me too, to translate the Amphoe history from amphoe.com. Many articles inside the website make me confused. I always use if for my reference, but when the information in the website is not completed or confused, I search from other sources. OK I will take a look for your Pattani districts soon.

For the District slogan, it's more difficult. We will add it to the district articles as soon as possible.

We have done it - now I finished Satun there are 37 province plus Bangkok completely covered, that's 50% of the 76 provinces. However in absolute numbers we haven't reached the 50% mark yet - there are still 532 districts of 927 missing, thus about 42% done.

I just come back to office today. Glad to see that we can reach our little goal. For this year, I have no plan to do more than that. I will fix/add/edit the completed Amphoe articles only. Thanks for your good co-operation. I'm very happy.Oatz 06:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amphoe article without history

There is no fast way to find these articles, though with a little bit of programming you maybe can create a small software which checks for that sections automatically. But I think we better do something like the Khet status. As a single page with all 876 would be very unhandy - to create, to edit (it will take long to load and save it), and also to keep it up-to-date. Thus I would suggest we better do it by regions, once one region is completely covered with articles we start with something like the article assessment by listing what parts are present in each article and which are missing or incomplete. I will try to develop something starting with the Bangkok Metropolitan Area as that's the first region completely covered already. andy 17:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Thai districts/Bangkok vicinity, though I only put Nonthaburi in there yet. I am not sure yet if the fields I added to the table are sufficient, or if the three levels (No, Basic and Yes) are enough either. But for Nonthaburi you already have two history sections to add :-) andy 20:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

National parks

It seems you have added at least one National Park to the wrong Amphoe - according to [3] Khao Nan National Park covers territory of various Amphoe, but not Amphoe Mueang Nakhon Si Thammarat - only the Mail Address is within Mueang district. Similar might have happened with the Similan Islands, which belong to Khura Buri, and not Thai Mueang. I have fixed those articles already, but not sure if any of the other NP you added before have similar problems... As you also add the weblinks to dnp.go.th, I think these should only be added if there's no article on the NP yet - otherwise the weblink section might grow quite fast and become something like a web catalog, which is not the intention of Wikipedia.

BTW: I have now nearly finished a small program which converts the population data at dopa.go.th into the Tambon table for the Amphoe articles, something I did manually before. So maybe I can now faster add that section to the new articles you create. andy 12:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New stub templates for Thai locations

Purely FYI, there's now a complete set of stub templates for each province of Thailand (of the form DistrictName-geo-stub), feeding into regional-level categories, to cut down the size of the main category. If you'd like to use those on any new articles on amphoe, etc, you might happen to be creating in future, it'll cut down on the need for re-sorting later. Alai 03:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No more King Amphoe???

Xpanderz (talk · contribs) modified some articles claiming that all King Amphoe have been upgraded to full Amphoe as of May 15 2007. However the english Newspapers haven't mentioned this yet, so maybe you can find confirmation and details for this change. Another unrelated question: do you know the Ban Pong Manao archaeological site in Lopburi? I passed a sign pointing to that one, but as I did not know if it's worth to visit and were traveling with full family then I didn't go there. andy 11:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thai Government just approved the law to upgrade 81 King Amphoe to be full Amphoe on May15, 2007.Oatz 11:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. What date will the law be effective? Don't know about Thai legislation, but here it takes some months after the parliament approves until it gets officially effective. Another one: can you check at Loei River, it seems like your map shows its source at a different location than mine. andy 11:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chaiyaphum

Thanks for the great pic of Chaiyaphum! --AStanhope 12:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome.Oatz 08:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mae Sot

Are the plans for a new province Mae Sot now getting into the final phase? The Irrawaddy writes about a new "metropolis" formed out of three tambon, and in Manager there's a recent lengthy article about the province - but too long to read it with my limited Thai. Do I have to create new maps soon? :-) andy 20:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 77th province project, Mae Sot is working in process. The work group proposed the project for 5 years but the Thai government doesn't approve yet. The work group would like to set up Metropolis administration same as Pattaya for Mae Sot city at the same time of the provincial upgrading.

By the way, now Tak local adminisration proposed to create 3 new King Amphoes, Mongkhon Khiri Khet (Tha Song Yang), Ruam Rat Khiri (Phop Phra) and Phawo-Dan Mae Lamao (Mae Sot), prepare for the new province setting.Oatz 09:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So please keep me updated as soon as there's anything official about these plans (or any other administrative changes) - I found out about King Amphoe Wiang Kao more than a year after it was created, for the next changes I want Wikipedia be up-to-date more quickly. andy 11:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lavo

Seems like another Thai with great interest in Thai history has joined here - Panabol (talk · contribs). As you're from Lopburi his article on the Lavo (which IMHO should be moved to History of Lopburi) will be most interesting for you I guess. andy 21:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tambon spellings

You might have noticed it, the past months I was busy going through all the Amphoe article again to fix the spellings of the tambon, to the spelling DOPA just recently published [4]. However while going through them I found more than 100 tambon where the DOPA spelling is either clearly wrong (sometimes even the Thai spelling was wrong and then transcribed from that wrong spelling), or at least a bit questionable from my limited knowledge of the Thai alphabet. As my previous attempts to contact any Thai authority with questions I encountered during my research for Wikipedia articles were not really successful - how should be I contact DOPA in this case? I would love to have an English speaking contact there, whom I could ask for my obscure questions (e.g. my latest at Talk:Surat Thani Province). I'm also not sure whether a normal email with the correction sent by me would make someone at DOPA "loose face", getting corrected on Thai topics by a farang... Maybe it'd be better if a Thai would initiate contact to DOPA? What do you think? andy 21:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can not confirm to get answer from DOPA even the one who contact them is Thai. I will try to work on it, I mean correct the Amphoe articles.Oatz 12:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Debsirin School

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Debsirin School, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://se-ed.net/debhistory/mnew1-3.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 10:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Si Satchanalai historical park

Can you check the Royal gazette announcement for that park? In 1961 it must have been volume 78, volume 92 was from 1975. But for either year I cannot find the right one in the Royal gazette database. andy (talk) 12:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still can not found. Anyway I will keep find it.Oatz (talk) 08:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just found two announcements for Sukhothai [5] [6], however these are only the registration of single temples or other sites as historical monuments, not the creation of the historical park. There are only very few of these announcements in the early 1960s, and I haven't seen anyone on Si Satchanalai however. One has to check the PDF itself to see what they are about, the caption of the announcement just says "ประกาศกรมศิลปากร เรื่อง กำหนดเขตที่ดินโบราณสถานสำหรับชาติ". I have collected them all in one XML [7], but to fill them with contents so one can find them better would be a long task - there are 574 PDFs. andy (talk) 10:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Andy, they are the Arts Department announcements for Sukhothai historical sites.Oatz (talk) 10:27, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your picture uploads on Wikimedia Commons

Hello Oatz. I was admiring your nice photos of Tha Sawang silk when I noticed, that you didn't provide any "Source", "Date" and "Author" for your pictures. Please complete the InfoBox of those photos. It would be a pity if they were to be deleted by some Wikimedia "watchdog" ;-)

Hint: you could add "own work" for source, and three tilde (~~~) in the author field.

Regards. --hdamm (talk) 14:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much friend.Oatz (talk) 10:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Province governors

Hi, long time no see :-) You just updated the provincial governors, but is there any place to find the new list on the web? The old list [8] wasn't updated for quite some time, it even did not include the changes of spring 2008. [9]. andy (talk) 20:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Andy, I got the data from the Interior Ministry website [10].

The last time, we just relocated the governors in October2008.Oatz (talk) 05:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, another reshuffle now. I was just about to blog about the planned retirement of Chiang Mai governor as that one made it into the english language news, but I thought that'll be effective in October. So I now had to amend that posting with the actual reshuffle - the posting was ready to be published today, so your edits were just in time to update the posting. I am right now working on putting the governor lists into XMLs with the other data on the administrative entities and was about half-way through. Great that you keep the articles up tp date, so I can at least use the article history for those provinces which have no list of past governors on their websites. andy (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thesaban Nakhon Roi Et and Ubon Metropolitan Area

The upgrade of Roi Et to Thesaban Nakhon was just announced? It isn't in those meeting transcripts at http://law.moi.go.th/2552/comreport2552.htm which end earlier this month, so it must be quite fresh news. Or did I miss it when it was decided before?

I did not see the official announcement. But I see in many websites that mention to Thesaban Nakhon Roi Et. So I'm confident.

Google only founds two forum talks when searching for เป็นเทศบาลนครร้อยเอ็ด, and sadly both links don't work. But from what can be read there it seems the upgrade is either proposed or in the making, but probably not yet official. And from the decision, which will be listed in the transcripts linked above to the official announcement in the Royal Gazette it's also up to a year. I prefer to add data here once it is official, as rumors can turn out to be wrong, or it can take much longer than expected. IIRC the upgrade of Surat Thani was in the planning several years... andy (talk) 11:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm too hurry. I will correct it.

Another one: you added the Ubon Metropolitan Area to the article. I wondered before on these Metropolitan Areas (see my blog), do I guess right that these are no formal administrative entities but just for statistical purposes, or regional planning boards? andy (talk) 19:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not formal administrative area. Beside Bangkok and Metropolitan, Chiang Mai, Hat Yai-Songkhla, Pataya-Chon Buri and Nakhon Ratchasima, they are not official metropolitan areas. Aren't they? When I compared factors of the area type and I've ever visited all of the cities and the towns. Ubon Ratchathani and its satellites can be the new metropolitan area. Thesaban Mueang Sisaket should be included to be a part of the area too. Anyway I would like to hear your opinion.(Oatz (talk) 03:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)).[reply]

I just wondered if these areas have any meaning, are officially defined in any way or are somewhat arbitrarily defined like the several definitions found for the regions in Thailand. At least the articles should make clear on the status of these areas in order to avoid misunderstandings for the readers who don't know much detail on Thailand. andy (talk) 11:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not only Ubon Ratchathani, but I'm thinking about Udon Thani-Nong Khai, Khon Kaen, Rayong coastline districts areas also. As I told you, beside Bangkok Metropolitan , the rest areas have no official definitions. If you agreed with the 4 areas articles, please give me reasons.

(Oatz (talk) 11:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC))[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]