Talk:Coronation of the Thai monarch

Daily page views Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

Coronation of the Thai monarch was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 27, 2019). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

A fact from Coronation of the Thai monarch appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 September 2017 (check views). A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2017/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coronation of the Thai monarch.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Thailand Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 20 Octorber 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Paul_012 or somebody else who's knowledgeable, please assess importance. Thanks.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 20:54, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As always, excellent work from Sodacan. If only GAN wasn't so backlogged right now. I think it'd normally fall under Mid-importance, as not too many people can be expected to know much about the subject, but given its relevance to current events I'll tag it as High until next year. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:53, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that this is Mid. GAN is too much work and still a while off, still have some more citations to add. I would be happy if this was just a link from 'In the News' later this year. Thanks to both users for taking an interest. --Sodacan (talk) 03:29, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

• King Vachiraklao coronation.jpg (discussion)
• King Vachirakono coronation.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Coronation of the Thai monarch/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 22:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll be starting this review - the article is pretty long but comments should be posted within a few days. Kingsif (talk) 22:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Style

• Lead short for length of article
• Lead written well
• Article appears to be written well, but at times slips into addressing the reader and seems to apply tense based on when the information was added (I've done some clean-up, but would appreciate if the editor also checked through it, too)
• Good use of wikilinks for specific terms throughout
  • with no wikilink to "Indraphisek", a good explanation has been provided
• The "Of note was a letter to the editor ..." sentence could be phrased better; I also don't find a need for the letter or President wikilinks
• In Modern Coronations, "apex" is an unusual term in the context, perhaps use 'head' or 'forefront'?
• Though histories customarily come first, it uses certain terms (e.g. the "state progress by land and water") that are only explained later. Perhaps such terms can be briefly explained or given a note linking to further down the article.
• Thai House of Reps should probably just be linked to House of Reps
• King Rama IX is referred to as both Rama IX and King Bhumibol, should probably be left as one or the other for clarity
• I've added and removed a few "the"s and "to"s where appropriate.
• Added a clarify tag to a mention of simply "Tuesday" in place of a contextualized date
• "Scene of the ceremonies" is quite a romantic header, perhaps "Location" could be used, as its more encyclopedic
• "bedroom" also does not need a wikilink
• The Purification Bath section uses "the auspicious time" as a time referent, but this also isn't clear. When does this take place? E.g. At a set time, or after certain things have happened, or when monks announce it?
  • Later in this section, what is "artillery" referring to specifically? The grammar of this fragment doesn't work, and without understanding what artillery is meant to be, this can't be fixed.
• Complete dialogues of the different figures seems a little excessive; perhaps the main elements can be summarized and the whole dialogue can go in a note? Especially with the action lines, this reads as a script. Wikipedia articles aren't supposed to be scripts.
• Throne does not need a wikilink.
• There's a few more sections to read through, but I think I can leave this list with you and hope that similar edits may be applied to the rest of the article before I get to it
• Fail

Coverage

• Lead gives fairly good overview, could have more coverage on notable coronations
• I'm not sure what the second paragraph of Symbolism has to do with symbolism, looks more like general history
• Concise and summative while covering everything that one expects to be included
• Maybe could use a bit more detail about the situation mentioned in sentence "Nevertheless, the king tried to restore some of the old rites when he invited..."; why did he invite them, e.g.
• In the Early Bangkok section, what about European coronations influenced the Thai ones from Rama IV?
• (Also Style) There's much more symbolism mentioned in later sections, perhaps the Symbolism section overall could be dissolved, with the info moved into a different appropriate section. Given its brevity, that 1/3 seems unrelated, and much more symbolism info throughout, it doesn't add anything to the article and is to its detriment in terms of organization.
• Needs attention - I've given the rest a glance but will check this in more detail with style

Illustration

• Images look good, but is it not possible to move the first image in Anointing up a paragraph, to let the quote format better?
• Maybe don't need two images in Aftermath.
• These images are all large, can some not be left at thumbnail size?
• good and complete coronation table
• Needs attention

Verifiability

• Very good looking sources, GF on the ones in Thai
• There are a few things uncited:
  • Sentence starting "During the royal coronation audience of HM King Vajiralongkorn on 4 May 2019..."
  • Sentence starting "At the same day the covered tablets of the royal seal..."
  • There's an excessive citation tag near the bottom, looks like the refs could be spread around the paragraph to indicate what statements are sourced to what.
• Fail few things to work on

Stability

• Quite a big edit yesterday but looks clear
• Pass

Neutrality

• Seems good
• Pass

Copyright

• I don't know what's going on with this Reddit comparison? Doesn't seem like copyvio, but there's something unusual there. Do you know what it is?
• Otherwise good
• ...pass

Overall

• on hold - see comments Kingsif (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• No response and no nominator activity in a week after being informed review opened leads me to give this a Fail. Kingsif (talk) 18:31, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question: Why is my image copyrighted while another identical image is not? Why is that the case? Victoria the Victorious (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to add the clearest possible image for the benefit of history learners, but I don't understand why the image was deleted. Victoria the Victorious (talk) 15:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The other image is a photo of a publicly displayed copy of the portrait, which is understood to be allowed under the freedom of panorama clause of the Thai Copyright Act. The original image doesn't appear to be freely licensed. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]