Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Southeast Asia/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

where do we start?

Ready? __earth ^(Talk) 15:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

How can I participate with the project? Do I need any requirements or recommendations? Please forgive me if the rules already exist, but I am very new to this. I am eagerly to help as much as I can. FYI, I have my bachelor degree in Southeast Asian Studies, from Mahidol University, Thailand. And it is my pleasure if I can contribute my knowledge (more or less) for the good of the community. Thobphon ^(Talk) 00:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Burma/Myanmar

Hi! I would like to welcome any of your interested editors to join us! Chris 23:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Philippines conflict

I am interested if a page covering the Philippines insurgency does exist. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Association of Southeast Asian Nations

It's about time we centered our efforts on this and try to get it to at least GA status. There has been so much raw material after the 12th ASEAN Summit, surely we could refine and use it to bolster the article? (= Ariedartin JECJY ^Talk 02:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The article's nomination for GA has been put on hold pending minor edits, and comments have been left behind to help improve the article. Let's contribute, shall we? Ariedartin JECJY ^Talk 17:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Military History

I am proposing the formation of, and trying to drum up support for, a Southeast Asian task force within the Military History WikiProject. If there is anyone here who is interested in the subject - stretching from the origins of civilisation up through today - I invite you to please come and lend your support, questions or comments, here. No serious responsibilities or obligations connected to signing up, only another way to meet one another, to work together to expand and improve Wikipedia's coverage of these subjects. Thank you. LordAmeth 14:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

That task force has now been created. If you are interested in helping collaborate on the creation of articles on anything ranging from pre-colonial conflicts to the Vietnam War, please drop by here and add your name to the participants list. Thank you. LordAmeth 06:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Vietnam War

"Vietnam is a country, not a war" - Le Van Bang, former Vietnamese Ambassador to the United States

Though I really like the above quote, the Vietnam War is a major topic under the purview of this WikiProject. Obviously, the war, political leaders involved, and a great many other related subjects fall under the scope of the WikiProject. But there are a multitude of articles on American soldiers who fought in Vietnam - many of whom have come to be much more well-known and/or important for something else entirely in the decades since. Do all of these people get a Southeast Asian Project Banner on their talk pages? What criteria do we want to go by on this issue? LordAmeth 14:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I suggest in the meantime that we add the banner only if there is a significant mentioning of their involvement in the Vietnam War. It would be a tremendous amount of work to try to add something that isn't there yet. Yellowtailshark 06:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Article listed for deletion

List of common Chinese surnames in Singapore has been listed for deletion. If you're interested, please comment on its AfD - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of common Chinese surnames in Singapore. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion for main project page

what does everybody think about a "stubs for expansion" section to list promising stubs? I've seen such sections on the pages of other similar projects.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 02:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Project Banners

I don't know how quickly we are managing to get things tagged, but I have run into a significant barrier. Several editors, possibly representative of many many more, disagree with myself (and likely/hopefully with many of you) on the purposes of WikiProjects, Project Banners, and the inclusion of various topics within the umbrella of "Southeast Asia".

I have no intention of fanning the flames of the debate that's currently going on on my talk page, but I wanted to make you all aware of it, and to suggest that we perhaps start a discussion here to generate a consensus of strategy or standards as to how we are to work with other WikiProjects, such as WikiProject Indonesia - I don't know how representative these users are of the opinions of WP Indonesia as a whole, but he seems quite firmly against our "invasion" of his project's territory.

As far as I am aware, WP Myanmar/Burma and a number of the other related ones (Thai provinces, etc) seem to be perfectly happy being under our umbrella and working alongside us in a friendly and productive way. But, again, if this fellow's attitude is representative of some/most/many/all of the Indonesia editors' position on the issue, then something has to be done. Either we work it out and settle it somehow, or we simply ixnay Indonesia out of being covered by our project (which, I personally think is a bad idea).

The purposes and goals of our project and our attitude towards project banners seem fairly well-stated, and I think most WikiProjects agree for the most part on these types of things - why do WikiProjects exist, what purpose do they serve, etc. - but it would appear that some are simply not on our side. I'm not sure exactly what can be done about this, but I do think that we need to get moving on tagging and assessing more articles, and on figuring out how to best deal with attitudes like this.

I'd be happy to elaborate on my thoughts, to clarify anything I may have been vague on, or to answer any other questions. Thank you. LordAmeth 10:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Moved from my talk page

The following has been moved from my talk page, so as to encourage a wider, more open discussion. LordAmeth 10:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need another project tag on indonesian articles? I am currently trying to sort through categories within the indonesian project - and the question needs to be asked - what purpose is this going to do? I do hope you detect a note of despair - its bad enough for the small group of very active editors in the indonesian project to cope with the indonesian project - could you please give me a very well reasoned argument reason as to why we need to have this as well?????? cheers in good faith and humour SatuSuro 10:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Adding extra project banners shouldn't hamper or interfere with your activities at all. All it is meant to do is to attract more attention from SEA users who can help you, and from users interested in Indonesia who can help the Project in other ways. I admit it is a little bit like overcategorization, but I really don't see the problem. If the lists of articles on the SEA project, whether they're stubs or requests, or whatever, and there are Indonesia-related topics on there, it will only help to get more people to work on and improve Indonesia-related articles. Yes? LordAmeth 10:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Nah - not from my experience at all - sorry to sound so cyncial - dont be suprised other member of the indonesian project try to hound you out as well - but i wont do that - our experience with ethnically prejudiced neighbours wasted a huge amount of wiki time to little positive effect. If you really want to deal with over-lapping categories and project boundaries you only have about another 4,000 articles to go... dont ever tell me i didnt warn you. I'd stick to singaproe or hong kong myself - sanity, good sense and good will to me do not relate to what you are doing. Maybe I owe you a round of bintang if you prove right, but I think duplicate project issues are a serious folly. Once a gain in good will and humour -cheers SatuSuro 10:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to butt-in, but although it's a bit over-project-categorization, I think I'll help there for the Indonesian part. — Indon (reply) — 11:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You're not butting in. No worries on that. As for SatuSuro's comments on prejudice and counterproductivity thus generated, it is a good point. As a scholar of Japan who is truly quite a novice in all matters Southeast Asian, I didn't even imagine that there would be such issues among Indonesia and its neighbors. It is a terrible shame that these sorts of biases continue to exist and to serve as obstacles to our efforts here. LordAmeth 13:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I am afraid I dont agree with the very good hard working editor Indon whom I hold in very high esteem and wqhose talk page I invade too often - but I suppose my problem is - how many articles were you planning to tag? The issues with neighbours involve things extensively through time - the issues are almost worthy of a series of articles in themselves... SatuSuro 13:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how many I was planning on tagging today or tomorrow... I was honestly just tagging anything I happened to come across. Ideally, whether it's me doing it, or someone else, or a bot, eventually hypothetically every article that falls under the topic of "Southeast Asia" should be tagged. LordAmeth 16:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I really think that the Indonesian Project needs to be addressed re this issue. the south east asia region is just too big - to tag that many is unmanageable in my honest opinion. SatuSuro 10:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it should be an issue of whether or not it's manageable. A bot could do it. And if not, if people do it, so it'll take some time. That's all. Just as every article in WikiProject Shinto and WikiProject Anime & Manga falls under WikiProject Japan, so the same here. People who are interested in Japan can help out with articles on Shinto and Anime & Manga; people who are interested in Southeast Asia can help out with Indonesia-related articles. That's all there is to it. No need to politicize it, to make a big deal or anything. LordAmeth 10:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh well - maybe there are precedent elsewhere - I'll leave it alone, but for a range of reasons (some given above) I disagree with it. Thanks for your speedy response - what do you think of the post below this one? SatuSuro 10:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

The survey? I thought some of the questions were kind of odd, but I didn't think much of it. Why? LordAmeth 10:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Nah dont worry - I'll probably get back to you much later about the project duplication issue - we have recently had a milhist template enthusiast broach Indonesian project sensitivities - I think I need to look at project/project things in other areas before I try to articulate or try to explain at any length my concerns about the issues - hey thanks for the speedy responses - will probably get back much later about it... I have no intenetion from my point of view to make anything political or big deal - its already happened - hence my serious reservations. I have been trying to appraise the whole indonesian project from the point of view of categories, articles, and areas of shortcomings - and having to cope with outside perceptions to me is a big issue - either military history (my talk on Kiril's talk page about the length of time it took to wait for the 'Indonesian Civil War' article to have such an ill informed title changed....), or a whole range of other things. Not to bother you about it though - if I ever get a handle on the issue I'll give you a tinkle to read whatever it is first - I'd appreciate your opinion. I got to get offline mnow - speak some other time. cheers SatuSuro 10:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I've got to say I think your plan to add a regional project tag to country specific articles is crazy. What's the precedent for this? Do people tag articles relating to Germany, France, Sweden, etc with a European project tag, or Canada, US, Brazil, etc with an Amercia project tag? Why don't you go one step further an tag every article related to any country with an wiki project earth tag? Wikiprojects need to be a manageable size. Being too granular with project tags is pointless. Once an article has a country project tag (or multiple country tags), it is bleeding obvious which articles belong to specific regions. The point of these tags is to provide a rating to article quality and importance, so double rating across country projects and regional projects is redundant and contributes to an increased maintenance load for editors. We don't do something like this for stub tags, so why should it be done for project tags? (Caniago 06:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC))

I agree with Michael - it's too big (too difficult for you) and too diverse (too difficult for those you might impinge on). My suggestion is rather than try and grab everything, why not grab only those article that do have a South East Asian (as a whole) focus. ie, South East Asia, ASEAN, etc. THis is much smaller, but a better idea. Merbabu 07:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Um. Wow. I am amazed at how anti-WikiProjects you guys are, and how much we seem to disagree on the purpose of them.

1. Whether or not it is too much work for me is completely irrelevant. I have no intention of tagging hundreds or thousands of articles on my own - as I said above, a bot could do it, or members of the community could work together to each do a little bit. That's what Wikipedia's about, after all - people working together to create something much larger and better and broader than any of us could do on our own.
2. The point of adding project banners is not just to make it obvious what the article falls under, nor is it just about assessment. It is about creating easier, more concise ways to find things that fall under the categories of a given project. It's about creating pools of articles that can be considered together, under "Southeast Asian articles that need attention" or something like that. And it is about promoting the creation of a tighter community of people who work on similar things and can thus help each other out. People who didn't know the project existed, or what it does, or how it works, can find the link, find that there is a community which works on this type of article...
3. If you restrict the Southeast Asian WikiProject only to those things that cover all of Southeast Asia, like ASEAN, you've completely defeated the purpose of the project, and deflated its effectiveness. That's like restricting WikiProject Theatre only to topics about theatre in general and stating that they don't deal with actors, plays, or playwrights. The same goes here. As an editor who is interested in the history and culture of Southeast Asia, I am just as interested in the Kings of Ayutthaya as the music of Indonesia, the art of Laos, the politics of Vietnam, the architecture of Cambodia, and the economy of Malaysia. What do we accomplish by not taking all of these things under the umbrella of a community that's interested in, and devoted to, these topics?
4. Finally, let me say that if you want so badly to not advertise Indonesian-related articles to a wider number of editors, then it sounds to me like you're trying to protect a given POV. I do not know anything about the instance to which you refer in saying that someone "broached Indonesian project sensitivities", but "sensitivities" sounds to me like something that needs to be breached in the interests of objectivity. Imagine if only pro-CCP editors worked on China-related articles. LordAmeth 10:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Please let me say that I am not anti-project, I am trying to handle over three - you are missing the point. IThere are editors in the Indonesia project who have no problem with 'guarding anything' -or objectivity - I suggest that this all gets moved to either the SEA project and or Indonesian noticeboards SatuSuro 10:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I was thinking the same. Let me move it over to the SEA project discussion page. Any Indonesia project editors are of course welcome to comment there as well. LordAmeth 10:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You said: I am just as interested in the Kings of Ayutthaya as the music of Indonesia, the art of Laos, the politics of Vietnam, the architecture of Cambodia, and the economy of Malaysia. What do we accomplish by not taking all of these things under the umbrella of a community that's interested in, and devoted to, these topics?. let me ask you, what do you accomplish by putting them under one banner? As for trying to compare theatre and SE Asia, I'd suggest SE Asia and Human Artistic Endeavour would be a better comparison. THe scope is just to big and Malaysian economics has little relation to Laotian architecture.Merbabu 11:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You are of course right that Malaysian economics has little to do with Laotian architecture. But Laotian architecture has a lot to do with that of Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos. And Indonesian traditional music has a lot to do with that of Malaysia, Thailand, and Burma. And Thai religion has a lot to do with religion in Laos and Cambodia. Given the absence of any WikiProject Thailand, WikiProject Laos, WikiProject Cambodia, etc, this WikiProject SouthEast Asia is just as well equipped to handle those topics as are the Architecture, World Music, and Buddhism WikiProjects. Yes, the project has a very broad scope, but so does WikiProject Military History, and WikiProject Visual arts, and they do alright. WikiProject China covers a huge geographic area, and over 4000 years of history, religion, art, theatre, literature, politics, economics, architecture, science & technology and societal topics, yet they too do fine to work together under one banner. The strong cultural and historical connections between the lands which are today the countries of Laos, Thailand, Indonesia etc cannot be denied, and until we have separate task forces for each of those countries, this is the best we have. It may not be the best - every project has its issues - but it's far from useless or pointless. LordAmeth 14:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

For me, you might have answered your own question there. Why not create smaller projects, to use your example, WikiProject SE Asian History, or SE Asian Cultural/Music/etc.??? That WOULD make sense. As you point out there are similarities between say economics of the countries, and also their art. Both between Vietnamese art and Indonesian economics. SE Asia History project would be good. Merbabu 10:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I suppose the best solution to this is not that we attack and dismiss the SEA project, but that we work to create separate national projects. Now that I re-read it, I think I realize that that's essentially Michael's point. And I agree. The SEA project is useful for cross-cultural and cross-national standards and discussion, but ultimately, it is only for the lack of national projects that it assumes this overarching responsibility for all topics within those countries not covered. Does that cover it, pretty much? And does that sound fair? We can re-specify our goals as focusing on those countries which do not yet have their own dedicated WikiProjects, and as those appear, we can take a less directly involved role in the topics relating to those countries - just as WikiProject Japan doesn't concern itself directly with topics on anime, manga, or Shinto. LordAmeth 14:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we are in agreement. I think the most valuable thing this project can do initially is to recruit some keen editors for each of the countries and help them setup a Wikiproject for their country (based upon the Indonesia wikiproject or whatever). Then, get them on the road to assessing articles relating to their countries. (Caniago 17:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC))

Random arbitrary break

I sense here that the objection comes from Indonesian editors is merely management issues, not contents protection. I (myself) am surely be happy if somebody outside the project wants to join-in to improve Indonesia-related articles. I also agree with the SEA project that it wants to bring wider audience/editors to work on SEA articles, including Indonesia-related ones. I see now other projects (Disaster managements, Country project, City project, etc.) are actively including articles in which I don't really see that multi-project articles will degrade the quality. Only vandals and POV pushers will do so. Although I found SEA project particularly is a bit awkward, but that is okay and we can't prevent a new project is created, can we?. Anyway, our aim is actually the same, WP:FA. If the SEA project can bring more Indonesia-related articles to FA, we will all have additional FA articles in our project, right? As for management issues, hmm..., I think issues such as tagging can be done independently without interfering each other. — Indon (reply) — 12:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not anti-wiki-project at all, the more people improving the Indonesia articles the better. We should have a wiki-project for each country, but leave the SE project assessments for articles that truly span SE Asia. The SE asia project should summarize the state of each of the subprojects. Put hyperlinks to each of the country sub-projects and make the linkages between these projects as explicit as possible for collaboration, etc. The only issue I have is with the idea of multiple redundant assessments between the SE asia project and the country projects. However, this doesn't preclude people in the SE Asia project from working on one of the Indonesia articles as collaboration of the week for example. Your suggestion about using bots to tag articles indicates that there is an unnecessary redundancy that we really don't need. I don't see any presidents for this approach on Wikipedia. As for the comment about trying to protect a POV, well thats crazy, adding articles to a project assessment doesn't make it any easier or harder for people to find or edit them. (Caniago 12:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC))

Phú Quốc

This article at present makes no mention of its alternative name of Koh Tral or of the territorial dispute between Cambodia and Vietnam about this island. It would be helpful if an editor with knowledge of this issue could ensure that it is properly represented at Phú Quốc. Lack of any mention of the dispute seems to violate WP:NPOV. WjBscribe 22:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Bilateral relations discussion

I would like to invite you all to participate in a discussion at this thread regarding bilateral relations between two countries. All articles related to foreign relations between countries are now under the scope of WikiProject Foreign relations, a newly created project. We hope that the discussion will result in a more clean and organized way of explaining such relationships. Thank you. Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 18:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Honorifics in article

Couldn't think of a particularly good place to put this, so I guess I'll offload my concerns here. I've noticed that a number of editors use honorifics when referring to people in articles. This is especially common in Malaysia-related articles, because of the proliferation of titles and honorifics in the country. I always understood that using honorifics when referring to people by name was to be avoided; at the most, I would use the honorific the first time the name was mentioned, and after that simply refer to the person by name (e.g. "Lee" as opposed to "Sir John Lee"). This lack of consistency in usage of honorifics is troubling and often jarring when I read article that more than a few people have been working on. I then found that according to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Honorific_prefixes, the WP convention for biographies is to use the full title the first time, and thereafter either refer to them by surname or by, e.g. "Sir John". Although the MoS is silent on how to treat honorifics in non-biographical articles, it does not seem particularly useful to me to be including titles with full names when referring to people. What do you guys think? Johnleemk | Talk 04:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Are u suggesting that we exclude honorifics in non-biographical articles? Im OK with that. As long as the person's name (without honorifics) is still generally recognisable by most people. kawaputra^tok2me 15:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's my idea. Johnleemk | Talk 04:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Not many response here it seems. Maybe we can bring this up in Wikipedia talk:Malaysia-related topics notice board. See what other m'sians think. kawaputra^tok2me 18:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Topic: Deletion of SE Asia lists

Among the lists being considered for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Angola-related topics are several Southeast Asian country topic lists; please put a "WP SE Asia" tag on the relevant lists. Thank you. --McTrixie/Mr Accountable 19:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Japanese trade with SE Asia in 17th century

I apologize to ask a question irrelevant to Wikipedia, but I truly need some help from some SE Asia specialists. With exams done, I am finally buckling down to begin my dissertation, and coming to the realization that I'm rather short on sources at the moment. I am hoping that people here can help out and recommend some writers (scholars) and/or books, articles that might be of use.

I am writing about Japanese trade and relations with the states of Southeast Asia during the 17th century. Most treatments of Japanese relations and trade in this period focus almost exclusively on China, Korea, and Holland, and I have found absolutely nothing on Southeast Asia in any of my books on the subject. I have found several books and articles on relations and trade with Thailand, so I think I'm fairly solid there. I found relations between Japan and Ayutthaya in this period to be very interesting, as ties were severed in the wake of the death of Yamada Nagamasa, killed by the order of the Thai king who perceived him and the Japanese community in Ayutthaya as a threat; after repeated attempts on the part of Ayutthaya, relations were resumed several decades later, after Japan had severed all formal contact with (as far as I am yet aware) all other nations but Korea, Ryukyu, and Holland, through the Dutch East India Company. I am hoping to find that relations with the other states in the region prove equally interesting.

Any suggestions would be most appreciated. Thank you. LordAmeth 14:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Vietnamese Naming Convention

There seems to be an inconsistent usage of Vietnamese diacritical marks for article titles. I've created a Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Vietnamese) page to begin the discussion on setting a convention. Yellowtailshark 03:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Han Tu help please.

I'm just beginning to do some small edits here and there on Vietnamese-related pages, as I do research for my dissertation on Japanese-Southeast Asian relations, and discover bits here and there. I'm afraid I know next to nothing about the Vietnamese language, and am having trouble finding or creating the Han Tu (kanji) I need sometimes to represent something. If anyone is familiar with Han Tu, please see my edits on Hoi An and replace the X's with the appropriate character. Pronounced "phố" and meaning something akin to "city", it looks like 广 + 甫 but is not something I can get to come up with my Japanese input. Thank you! LordAmeth 11:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I've inserted the character 浦, which is the closest I could find to the appearance of the handwritten script in my original source. I'm not positive if it's correct, though. LordAmeth 17:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Seems correct. I suggest cross-referencing all radicals with Nom Foundation's Nom Lookup Tool. Yellowtailshark 19:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Comparing it to what I have in my original source, it doesn't look right. 广 is not the same as the water radical. The 甫 part is actually quite scribbly, so I may in fact have that part wrong. But.. I looked up phố on the nomfoundation site, and out of the things it gave me this is closest in meaning and in appearance of the character... Thanks for your help. LordAmeth 20:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate articles

Would anybody be interested in helping to merge Lin Feng into Limahong? They are two articles about the same person. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Odd behavior using the cat class for the project template

When a template is added to a talk page and class=cat, this adds the talk page of the category to itself as well as to the Unknown-importance Southeast Asia articles category, e.g. see Category:Buildings and structures in Brunei and Category:Unknown-importance Southeast Asia articles, in which the Buildings and structures category talk page both appears. Can this issue be fixed? --BrokenSphere 18:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

south east Asia

Just a note for those who do not know. There is a difference in spelling betwee Commonwealth English and American English over the spelling of south east Asia. The Americans tend to spell it "southeast" not as the British do "south east". So articles should follow the WP:MOS guideline on this issue. ( See National varieties of English) -- Philip Baird Shearer 20:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

An article you might be interested in

Vu Quang, a national park in Vietnam. Totnesmartin 20:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Malaysia

Calling All Malaysian Wikipedians, it is high time for us to start our own WikiProject Malaysia.Anyone ca create/assist me in creating Wikiproject Malaysia? Marcusaffleck 11:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

2003 Merapoh bus tragedy

Was sourcing stuff on List of road accidents and came across this,which I couldn't,for the life of me, find anything about... Has my google-fu failed me? Circeus 02:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

1688 Revolution

I've completed an article on the 1688 Revolution in Siam (Ayutthaya Kingdom), and would like to nominate it for Did You Know, but am having trouble coming up with a neat hook. It should be something interesting to the average reader, which won't be simply dismissed on account of it being Thailand and therefore somewhat obscure or esoteric.

Some of my thoughts: "Did you know that King Narai of Siam was too ill to stop his overthrow in the 1688 Revolution?" - sounds a bit ordinary; plenty of kings throughout history have been ill at times, and some have been overthrown during their illness. "Did you know that the 1688 Revolution in Siam led to a near-complete reversal of the country's foreign policies?" - maybe a bit too technical, a bit too keyed to a historian's interests. "Did you know that the top minister who stood against, and was killed in, the 1688 Revolution in Siam, was not Thai, but was in fact Greek, working for the French, and with a Japanese wife?" - if better worded, could be the most grabbing of the potential hooks, but is somewhat secondary to the real subject matter of the revolution. Any thoughts? Suggestions? Thank you. LordAmeth 19:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Paddy field

In the interest of more balance in the article text, I invite fellow editors to contribute details on Southeast Asian paddy fields: technology, characteristics, history, culture, etc. Mumun 無文 14:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Importance

The current WProject template for SEA doesnt show the importance of an article =( __earth ^(Talk) 12:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Er, does anybody know how to do that? I took a look at the coding and it is too overwhelming for me. __earth ^(Talk) 13:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Same concerns, and haven't look at the code yet. If I have some time this weekend and nobody else has addressed it, I'll try. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kborland (talk • contribs) 20:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will read through the coding to see if I could learn a thing or two from it over the upcoming weekend. __earth ^(Talk) 03:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Between Silat and Pencak Silat

These articles are subject to ongoing writing between two views: one insists to separate Silat which is limited to Malaysian-only martial art and Pencak Silat from the Indonesian part, while others are trying to combine the two which argue that both are actually the same thing. Your comments are needed here: Talk:Silat#Merge_between_Silat_and_Pencak_Silat to reach a consensus whether to merge or to separate these two articles. Thank you. — Indon (reply) — 08:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Southeast Asian cinema task force

A Southeast Asian cinema task force is being proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Southeast Asian cinema. If you contribute to articles about films from Southeast Asian countries, then please list your name among the Interested Wikipedians.

A proposed task force page has also been started here.

If the task force is up and running, I would expect that for article assessment purposes it would fall under WP:FILM, because some countries already have their own projects and are handling assessments. — WiseKwai 12:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Voting Opens: Burma or Myanmar

I have open up a voting to choose an apropriate title for the article Burma/Myanmar. Please vote at Talk:Burma#VOTE:Burma or Myanmar. Thank you. --Zack2007 12:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Assessment of lists

Is there a reason why quality statistics for lists aren't being tabulated in Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Southeast Asia articles by quality statistics? — WiseKwai 11:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thai and Laos people! Please see this map

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Qing_Dynasty_map.png ( Source from Qing )

Dark Green: Qing China

Light Green: affiliated states

Thai (also Laos) was affiliated states of Qing China? is it true? Heinekenbeerlover 13:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

What does "affiliated" mean? It isn't really explained in the Qing Dynasty article, and there is nothing to support the map's assertion in any of article about Thailand, Laos or, for that matter, Vietnam. Certainly, China was an important trading partner in the region, but whether that means they were "affiliated" I don't know. — WiseKwai 19:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Resolved.[1] --Nightshadow28 (talk) 16:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Laos and Brunei work groups

The project has now been updated with new subprojects for Laos and Brunei, and separate assessments for each of these new subprojects. John Carter 15:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)