Talk:Cambodia/Archive 1

message: I restored the revision as of 17:38, 15 Apr 2004, which was the last stable version of the article. On this and two other Cambodia-related pages edits by User:Hanpuk are being removed without comments on the talk page. 172 07:03, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected page

message: This is a list of edits, which the text were from other articles but put into Cambodia partially as a summary to those respective articles. E.g. I put information from Khmer Rouge cut it down, and linked to the main article. I don't claim copyright and authorship to the text under the following revisions. Squash 23:43, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of edit attribution 

message: Some outstanding content issues which need to be sorted before we get into copyediting:
#  the Bayon, a temple whose stone towers has 216 faces of buddhas, gods, and kings.  Compare The face according to the common opinion of most historians is of Avalokitesvara.  I thought these were multiple versions of one face, namely a composite of Avelokiteshvara and Jayavarman VII.  Can we have a source to support whichever of the three claims is true?
#Throughout the article, there are "See also" links which duplicate links in the text: these need to go.   Same for the Topics related to Cambodia  template at the bottom of the page.
#The Climate of Phnom Penh graph is too small to see anything- it needs to be bigger or be removed.
#For tourists coming into the country, the main transporation are Motorbikes and Velotaxis  What does this mean?  These seem to be plausible means of transportation within a city, but tourists do rather a lot of travelling between cities.   And is this meant to imply that Khmers don't use these?
#The Further reading section: as per my earlier question, has anyone read these?  If so they can surely be used as References, if not why are we recommending them?
Mark1 08:58, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: #Yes this is true.  216 faces -   Quote: "A pediment found in 1925 depicting an Avalokitesvara identified the Bayon as a Buddhist temple." -  Squash 09:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: #I have removed all the redundant wikilinks. For instance Khmer Rouge that is wikilinked 3 times or so to only to one wikilink (Normally the first instance of the word appearing) - Done.  I don't think it is a good idea to remove the "Topics of Cambodia-related" template, even it is redundant of wikilinks in the article. It provides central navigation for those who wish to track on Cambodia-related article without having to go through the text of the article. Please see United States and India for instance. Squash 22:16, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: #Enlarged - Done Squash 09:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: #Khmers _don't_ normally use velotaxi. They mainly use motorbikes and cars. I have changed the article to accomodate this setence - Done Squash 09:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: #It is not a question of whether of whether one has read the book. It is a list of books that are recommended if a reader wishes to learn more about the topic (Cambodia). The futher reading section is used for recommendations for reading on the subject not references. My understanding of references is when a person wishes to cite sources. The references section is the wiki-correct section for "Sources" heading. I don't think it is correct to put books that you don't use in the article (merely only for recommendations of reading) in the references section. I hope you get what I mean by that. Squash 09:21, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: Good job, only the copyedit (your job) to do. Unfortunately I havn't read any books on Cambodia in Khmer (I can understand and speak Khmer quite fluently, but can't read or write :-|). And I'll agree with you on a third FAC nomination, that'll be what this article deserves. Squash 04:58, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes, I think you are correct. Squash 07:18, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: No idea. Squash 08:27, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: National minorities obviously means Vietnamese, Chinese and Thais Squash 20:21, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outstanding issues 

message: :#Yes this is true.  216 faces -   Quote: "A pediment found in 1925 depicting an Avalokitesvara identified the Bayon as a Buddhist temple." -  Squash 09:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: #I have removed all the redundant wikilinks. For instance Khmer Rouge that is wikilinked 3 times or so to only to one wikilink (Normally the first instance of the word appearing) - Done.  I don't think it is a good idea to remove the "Topics of Cambodia-related" template, even it is redundant of wikilinks in the article. It provides central navigation for those who wish to track on Cambodia-related article without having to go through the text of the article. Please see United States and India for instance. Squash 22:16, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: #Enlarged - Done Squash 09:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: #Khmers _don't_ normally use velotaxi. They mainly use motorbikes and cars. I have changed the article to accomodate this setence - Done Squash 09:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: #It is not a question of whether of whether one has read the book. It is a list of books that are recommended if a reader wishes to learn more about the topic (Cambodia). The futher reading section is used for recommendations for reading on the subject not references. My understanding of references is when a person wishes to cite sources. The references section is the wiki-correct section for "Sources" heading. I don't think it is correct to put books that you don't use in the article (merely only for recommendations of reading) in the references section. I hope you get what I mean by that. Squash 09:21, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: Good job, only the copyedit (your job) to do. Unfortunately I havn't read any books on Cambodia in Khmer (I can understand and speak Khmer quite fluently, but can't read or write :-|). And I'll agree with you on a third FAC nomination, that'll be what this article deserves. Squash 04:58, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes, I think you are correct. Squash 07:18, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: No idea. Squash 08:27, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: National minorities obviously means Vietnamese, Chinese and Thais Squash 20:21, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Replies

message: This map shows the island in the south-east as part of Cambodia.  In fact, Phú Quốc island is part of Vietnam. See this map: DHN 18:31, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I edited the map to show it being part of Vietnam. DHN 18:50, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Ah, virulent east asian squabbles over tiny patches of land. I love them.  The island is administered by Vietnam, is claimed by Cambodia, and should be shown as part of Vietnam unless and until the situation changes. Mark1 02:02, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: You may say that Koh Tral belongs to Vietnam, but it really is a contested island. But for the sake of not making this into a dispute and because on most maps it shows the island as part of Vietnam. Let's end it at here. Squash 10:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccurate map

message: There is an interesting photograph of lots of old money blowing down the street after the central bank was sapped.  This might be a good photo to use for this part of history.  There is an even more famous photograph, of a stopped clock at a train station in Phnom Penh.  Also, as far as China's influence down through the ages, it would be easy to write a two sentence paragraph about the Chinese words for the city and the country, and the Chinese traditional attitude that 'Cambodia is always rich'.  It is as simple a matter as referencing German attitudes towards France in a France article, or New York attitudes towards LA in an LA article.  I don't want to run into a language simplicity discussion; one should assume that Asian countries are as inter-influential as European countries.  McDogm Apr 29 2005 2311 est usa
:What do you mean "Cambodia is always rich", isn't it around the other way? Cambodia is one of the poorest countries in Asia, whilst for China it is one of the richest and most dominant in Asia. Squash
::IDK, its just something I have seen repeatedly as traditional knowlege on Chinese tv shows and in Chinese books; it has as much truth to it as "The British have a dry sense of humor" or "Scandinavians are all depressed".  --McDogm 12:56, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The 70s

message: Shouldn't "Cambodian" be redirected to the Khmer disambiguation page instead?
--Dara 21:09, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
:Indeed Dara, I have fixed it :) Thanks. Squash 07:53, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirection... 

message: If you go to edit this article, you will notice that it says the article is too long. I think we need to shorten this article. There is a lot of links. I think only the good links should remain of course, for the ministries, how about just link to one that has a page that links to the other Cambodian ministries? And most of the information that some have added about etymology about Pali and Sanskrit needs go, I think it's interesting and all, but it's too detailed and makes the article look really cluttered. --Dara 08:23, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
:Hi Dara, When I made this article along with User:Markalexander100's grammar help. The people complain that it is too short, now it's too long... I don't know how to please people :) Squash 09:23, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too long? 

message: Here among the English speaking expatriate community in Phnom Penh (at least the one that I hang out with) these things are called cyclos, pronounced see-clo.  Indeed if you look on the cycle rickshaw article it mentions that they are called cyclos here. --Easter Monkey 02:09, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Velotaxi?  Never heard of it... 

message: I'm not so sure using images instead of standard Unicode characters is the best thing to do here. Tools are there, fonts are present; we should rely on those instead.
Arguments for using Unicode over images
* UTF8 is standard in Wikipedia and is used all over the place (look at various pages like Tibet, Japan, Korea, etc.)
* Images slows down page loading time on modem connections
202.93.15.78 09:05, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And also, no mainstream Unicode font have Khmer letters in it, not even Arial Unicode MS, which has Lao. For nearly 99.9% of visitors, they will just see those boxes. And the images do not take long to download, they're just a few kbs each. I'm on dialup and its not that slow-loading whatsoever. :) I do wish that the person making these images use a better looking font. And also, in addition to the images, I do think there should be Khmer unicode next to it for those that actually have support. --Hecktor 07:40, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Unicode or Images? 

message: I really don't like this word "autogenocide". The "auto" portion greatly diminishes the abhorent connotation of the "genocide" portion of the word and makes it sound about as objectionable as "auroeroticism". I don't see where this word is justified unless there is a democratically elected government and the victims all agree that it is a good idea. Then it becomes mass suicide, so there is really no use for the word except for purposes of revisionist history. It seems that "autogenocide" would apply to the actions of the Nazis against the Jews, a positon I would not like to try to defend. I noticed that "genocide" is used in the case or Rwanda and "autogenocide" is used in the case of Cambodia in Wikipedia. Can anyone explain the difference between these two cases?
:Genocide refers to the (attempted) destruction of a particular ethnic group.  Nazis and Rwanda: directed at another ethnic group.  Cambodia: directed at the same ethnic group.  The problem of course is that Cambodia was "genocide" only in the looser sense of "killing a lot of people"; the KR, while not being particularly fluffy, were not trying to destroy an ethnic group.  But that's a problem of wooly thinking among people in general, not a problem with the way we've written the article.  Mark1 00:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Khmer are an ethnic group, but the killers and the killed were both Khmer.   Pogroms, I gather, were racially motivated (Russians killing Jews), so that doesn't help us.  If the language were logical we would just say "large scale politically motivated killings", but it isn't. Mark 21:31, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autogenocide? 

message: Took this out: 
:Contrary to what some believe, Cambodia and Kampuchea are exactly the same word, being merely two different transliterations of the same Khmer word. Due to its use by the Khmer Rouge, the transliteration Kampuchea is now eschewed, and the traditional Cambodia is preferred for use in Western languages.
What some believe is weasly.  Cambodians, when speaking Khmer, use Kampuchea or Srok Khmae as later stated, much the same as Germans, when speaking German, use Deutschland, thus the bit about the KR etc. is uneccessary.  --Easter Monkey 15:18, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cambodia, Kampuchea 

message: I've replaced the footer templates with Template:Cambodia ties. Such templates on country articles have been deprecated for some time, after lengthy discussions at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Countries. Since most countries belong to at least a half dozen international organizations, which creates quite a mess at the bottom of articles when a box is added for each. Since my knowledge on Cambodia is very limited, I recommend you to make changes to improve this template. (See also United Kingdom, India and Canada for examples). CG 20:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Cambodia ties]] 

message: After reading this article (the first time I read something about Cambodia), I found some terms that could need some comment about their POVness:
*If this wasn't enough, Cambodia broke into... 
*Even the royal family was brutalized.
*the People's Republic of Kampuchea, which became a Vietnamese puppet government...
*Cambodia is now attempting to rebuild itself after years of horror. 
Don't you think these words might be POV, specially the "puppet government" one?
CG 21:57, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, not the "puppet govt" bit. It was a Vietnamese puppet (tho I'd cut "governbment" off the end, for the sake of style). As for the others, I'd take "If this wasn't enough" off - it sounds overly colloquial - and delete the sentence about rebuilding after years of horror, which is the sort of thing bad journalists write when they run out of things to say but still have a couple of column inches to fill. And I think I'd like to see a better way of stating that members of the royal family were murdered. PiCo 15:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Need for commments

message: This whole paragraph should be removed or at the very least reworked (and probably moved to Tourism) for several reasons
* The paragraph is proportionally way too long; this article is on Cambodia, not on an alleged scandal  of a local NGO
* It only offers one side of the story
* It uses few valid references (most of them being articles from the same source: stuff.co.nz)
* Right now, it sounds like a friend of the NZ guy in this particular conflict between an alleged perpetrator and CWCC is taking a stand using Wikipedia, which would totally inappropriate
What, IMO, needs to be done to make it acceptable into this article
* Describe the other side of the story too: most of the time, sex offender will pay the girls family to push them to change their version of the story, sometimes accusing NGOs of forcing them into accusing the perpetrator.
* Reduce the paragraph length, defocus on one incident and make it more general (if you can't, then that's a good hint this should never have been included) and move it to tourism section. Do not pollute the rest of the article
* Include more reliable & diversified references (again if you can't, then that's another good hint of the inappropriateness of this paragraph)
I will remove the paragraph, and also other insertion in the article which I would rather label 'pollution'. Further discussion can take place here
:I agree.  This paragraph didn't belong here at all.  It's way too specific to be included in a general encyclopedic article.  If there is any substance to this story it may warrant its own page as long as it can be written NPOV but not in this article.--WilliamThweatt 22:24, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History > Recent Years > CWCC Paragraph 

message: According to this page:
:In 1993 a United Nations transitional authority sponsored democratic elections, with a very high turnout of eligible voters. However, the popular results were negated, and government was instead formed by a regime with Prince Sihanouk as king and Hun Sen as prime minister.
However the History of Cambodia (1979-present) states
:Prince Norodom Ranariddh's FUNCINPEC Party was the top vote recipient with 45.5% vote followed by Hun Sen's Cambodian People's Party and the Buddhist Liberal Democratic Party, respectively. FUNCINPEC then entered into a coalition with the other parties that had participated in the election.
:The parties represented in the 120-member Assembly proceeded to draft and approve a new Constitution, which was promulgated September 24. It established a multiparty liberal democracy in the framework of a constitutional monarchy, with the former Prince Sihanouk elevated to King. Prince Ranariddh and Hun Sen became First and Second Prime Ministers, respectively, in the Royal Cambodian Government (RCG). The Constitution provides for a wide range of internationally recognized human rights.
These two seem rather conflicting to me as one seems to suggest the popular results were ignored, the other that the government was formed in accordance with the popular results. Which one is correct? Nil Einne 19:18, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just from memory, the election results you quoted from the Histroy Article are correct.  After the 1993 elections, Ranariddh was "First" Prime Minister and Hun Sen was "Second" Prime Minister.  However, Hun Sen's Vietnamese backed CPP consolidated control of the military and constantly worked to undermine Ranariddh's power and authority until ultimately, in the coup of 5-6 July 1997, Hun Sen ousted Ranariddh, declaring him a criminal and calling for his arrest.  Many members and supporters of FUNCINPEC were arrested, tortured, or murdered.  Other Ranariddh supporters and MPs fled to Thailand.  FUNCINPEC general Nhek Bun Chhay organized a resistance of Ranariddh military units and loyalists in Northwestern Cambodia while Ranariddh himself appealled to the West for help, almost igniting a full-scale civil war.  But, I digress.  The info on this page should be changed to reflect the passage of about 4 years between the elections and 1997 coup's effective negation of the popular election.  I will check my facts and work on it this week.--WilliamThweatt 21:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict information? 

message: *The history section of this article was far too long - we have a whole series of articles on Cambodian history which the reader can be refered to. All this article needs is a summary.
*I too find the derivations of words and their cognates in other languages very interesting, but they don't belong in this article, where they just look like someone displaying their erudition. Adam 03:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History section, etymological erudition

message: There seemed like there was some extra badly written script and some weird sample images. I deleted them. Codejkoolguy
:Good catch, but there was a lot more wrong than just that.  I reverted all the edits of 166.109.0.90 for vandalism.--WilliamThweatt 17:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra Script 

message: There's a Kim Wilde song named Cambodia and there's no article about it. However, it is not linked from the Kim Wilde article possibly because it doesn't exist yet. Following the singles/albums project, I believe there should be an article about the song. That's why I ask if it is wise to put "The article about Kim Wilde song is Cambodia (single)" or something in those lines at the top of the article because the link provided would be red. And I'm not too familiar with the guidelines/policies about that stuff, especially in case of a featured article, like this article is. --Filip (§) 12:05, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kim Wilde 

message: anyone want to expand the Reamker.  The thai version is pretty long.--Dangerous-Boy 18:27, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Reamker]] 

message: Hi, I removed the template/link  because I saw another link in the same section.  --Starionwolf 21:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed duplicate link in section "See Also" 

message: This article was nominated for Wikipedia:Version 0.5, I have failed it because of having unsourced info, not enough refs, needs a copyedit and cleanup, qualifies for WP:FARC. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 03:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added two references on 1/corruption in Cambodia and 2/Islam/Christianity (also replacing 'spreading throughout Cambodia' phrasing by 'is also present in Cambodia')202.178.112.80 06:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  0.5 Nom 

message: I don't see any discussion in the main article of the fact that Cambodia remains one of the most heavily-mined countries in the world, with millions of victims maimed and injured and international efforts ongoing to de-mine the country.  Would this be better described in one of the sub-articles?  I think it at least deserves mention here.  Kasreyn 22:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good observation.  It is featured prominantly in some of the relevant subarticles, but your right, it should be mentioned in the main article. Even though it is now seen by most as the clichéd "cause d'jour" of certain celebreties, it is relevant to the demographics and economics of the country.  I will include something in my edits if nobody does it sooner.--WilliamThweatt 23:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's quite true that Cambodia is heavily mined; nevertheless, more people died last year from malaria. PiCo 04:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Land mines? 

message: The article does not match the preferable Wikipedia:Article_size.  Unnecessary long parts of sub-sections should be added to the main article.Figer 02:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the guide says, it is a bit outdated, originally written due to restrictions of very old browsers.  Although it is still used as a benchmark for most articles, it is not necessary to conform to the size limit in all articles, especially when the quality of the article will suffer. Most articles (especially those dealing with countries) that have been promoted to Featured Article Status are longer than the "preferable" size.  As the header says at the top of this talk page, Cambodia has already been promoted to Featured Article Status and any edits made should seek to maintain that status.  Removing content is contrary to those goals.--WilliamThweatt 02:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, as indicated in the guide you mentioned (Wikipedia:Article size), the "size" refers to the main-body text only, and does not include the images, templates, references, etc.  The aproximated size "warning" you get when editing the page includes the entire article, images, templates and all, and so is not a reliable indicator of the true "size" of the main-body text.--WilliamThweatt 02:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Too Long

message: The only reference to the putsch now is a vague remark about infighting and "civil violence."  What gives?--WadeMcR 21:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've noticed that as well.  The only place I can find it even mentioned directly is a few sentences in the sub-article History of Cambodia (1979-present).  Kinda suspicious as I distinctly remember writing a detailed section about it a few months back.  I have been planning to write a stand-alone article on the events of '97 as part of the "History of Cambodia" series, but have been busy trying to improve this article and then occupied at work the last few days. If nobody else does it sooner I will add a summarizing paragraph into the history section (or maybe the politics section) in the next couple days.--WilliamThweatt 03:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  '97 putsch--Where did it go? 

message: OK this might be a dumb question, but I would like to know more about the diacritical marks used with Cambodia. It is shown as Kâmpŭchea with the â and ŭ. About the only place I've seen it written like this is on Wikipedia. Most sources show it in the local form as just Kampuchea, without any accent marks. Even on some Wikipedia pages it has it listed without the accent marks (List_of_countries_and_capitals_in_native_languages). I've noticed this same thing with many of the country names on Wikipedia. Like Afghanistan for example. It is written as Afġānistān on many Wikipedia pages, yet that is about the only place I see it like that.
Can someone with knowledge of the subject please explain to me what the accent marks are and if they are correct or not if I want to write the name of the country in its native language, transcribed into the Latin alphabet of course. Thanks.--Brian1269 09:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mark, first off, it's important to understand that there is no way to represent most Khmer sounds with the Latin alphabet.  The sounds represented by "K", "P", "CH" and "ea" have no equivilents in English, they're just approximates.  Circumflex ("accented") vowels aren't usually used when transcribing Khmer words into English for everyday purposes.  They are a hold-over from the old system of transcribing Sanskrit vowels and really are of no value in transcribing Khmer since there's no universally accepted method of using circumflex vowels or accent marks for this purpose.  For those who are familiar with the old system of transcribing Sanskrit, it may give some clues regarding inherent vowels versus written vowels but really adds no value as far as pronunciation quality.  The only accurate way to convey proper native pronunciation is to use the proper IPA symbols, but that's not always practical.  It is preferable to write them without the accent marks unless, in a scholarly treatment, you define exactly what sounds your accent-marked vowels are supposed to represent.--WilliamThweatt 13:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of accent marks 

message: Does the Cambodian government still claim Koh Tral (Phú Quốc)?  According to most sources, Vietnam and Cambodia signed an agreement in 1982 that officially recognizes Phú Quốc as Vietnamese territory .  If they no longer officially claim it, it should not appear in the list of islands. DHN 01:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The situation is not very clear. From what I understand, most Cambodians consider Koh Tral to be part of Cambodia, but while there is significant pressure on the royal government make an "official" claim, the island (if fact, large portions of the Cambodia/Vietnam border) remains a matter of contention between Phnom Penh and Hanoi.  The 1982 "agreement" you mention was called the "Historical Waters Treaty of 1982" and was signed by Nguyen Co Thach of Vietnam and Hun Sen of the Vietnamese puppet government of Cambodia (while tens of thousands of Vietnamese troops still occupied Cambodia) and thus is seen by most Cambodians as an invalid treaty that Vietnam basically made with itself.  On this basis, it seems Cambodia has a valid claim on the land but the problem lies in the details of the historical dispute.  Historically, the claim on Koh Tral has always been linked to Cambodia's claim on the Khmer Krom territories in southern Vietnam (another issue that is far from settled in the minds of most Cambodians).  If Phnom Penh lodges an official petition to reclaim Koh Tral, Cambodians will expect their government to also claim the Khmer Krom territories. Likewise, the Vietnamese government wouldn't relinquish their claim for fear that the Khmer Krom territories would also be demanded of them.  The matter is complicated by the fact that the 1982 "agreement" also gave the Vietnamese almost 900 square nautical miles of Cambodia's territorial waters north of the Brieve Line, a line drawn by the French demarcating the border and the basis for Vietnam's original claims to the island.  This is actually a very interesting topic, if I had all my sources organized, I'd start the article Historical Waters Treaty of 1982...ah, maybe tomorrow.  Anyway, your edit of this afternoon makes the current situation clear.  Here are some (admittedly partisan) links that explain the history a little better if anybody else is as interested as I am. --WilliamThweatt 03:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Koh Tral 

message: Can someone in the know add "Preăh Réachéanachâkr Kâmpŭchea" in the International Phonetic Alphabet?--Greasysteve13 10:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Phonetic Alphabet 

message: I put a citeneeded tag after the claim that Sihamoni isn't married because of the ban on gay marriages.  This is a potentially inflammatory claim, given the fact that he claims to be straight. --Slashme 09:38, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay marriage? 

message: Would be good if someone takes over the task of cleaning up the pictures/charts found in Cambodia article (that also includes deciding on whether some should go away)
* History of Cambodia info box picture could be replaced by something better, more focused
* French colonial building could be replaced by something better
* Picture of King Sihamoni should definitively be replaced by a better picture with a nicer frame+angle
* Map of Cambodia could use a review and use proper names (I think this map uses Vietnamese writing; would be nice to have international naming + maybe khmer + provincial separation) -- I will take over this task probably this week or next week --
* Climate of Phnom Penh ... is that really relevant?
* Cambodia in Khmer writing is factually wrong, it says 'srok khmer' which translate +/- to Khmer Land
:Modified description and uploaded a sharper picture NIRVn 06:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The pic of French colonial buildings are in fact not French colonial buildings - they look more like 1960s architecture. PiCo 03:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up article's pictures 

message: In my ongoing efforts to try to include every country on the planet included in the scope of a WikiProject, I have proposed a new project on Southeastern Asia at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Southeastern Asia whose scope would include Cambodia. Any interested parties are more than welcome to add their names there, so we can see if there is enough interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed WikiProject 

message: Shouldn't we include the Vitnamese as an ethnic minority?  They are included in the demographics.
Also, the third paragraph makes it sound like the Mekong reverses it's flow when it is in fact the Tonle Sap.
Chuckygobyebye 17:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right about the reverse river flow phenomenon being incorrectly described.  I corrected it.  I could go either way on including all the ethnic groups in the intro, however, we did have the Cham there, so I included the Chinese and Vietnamese as well.  We'll see if it sticks.--William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 02:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening Paragraphs 

message: I changed the title of the "Society and sport" section to "Society and culture". Apart from the fact that sport is normally seen as part of a country's cultural life, this will allow an expansion of the entire section to take in the material covered in the article United States (taking an example from a large article with a very complete set of sections and subsections) under the sections Demographics and Culture. That's two sections in that article, with many subsections: if we use the same basic template, the various subsections can be paragraphs here. I'd like to expand this section along these lines. PiCo 07:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section title, "Society and culture" (from "Society and sport") 

message: I think the image that was posted by Drawdrak in the transport section is not appropriate. You can find the previous photo/version here. Thanks! Fddfred 12:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took to liberty of changing and returning the old photo in the Transport section of the article. The satellite photo of Phnom Penh is beautiful but it doesn't relate to the article/section.  Fddfred  talk  07:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cambodia transport image 

message: The UN's human rights envoy for Cambodia, Yash Ghai, has just released his second report. It's sobering stuff. I'd like to put this summary into the article somewhere, but can't see where it can go. My summary, based on the report in the Cambodia Daily of 12 March 2007:
:The United Nations has expressed deep concern over the status of human rights in Cambodia. In his 2007 report the UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights) envoy for Cambodia, professor Yash Ghai, charged that "deliberate and systematic violations of human rights have become central to the government's hold on power," and described the judicial system as "a principal agent of oppression." Ghai singled out the judiciary's lack of independence, noting that the Supreme Council of Magistracy, which is supposed to act as an oversight body for the judiciary, has been "unable to carry out its role credibly and effectively," while the Constitutional Council, established to review the constitutionality of laws, executive actions and court decisions, "has shown a marked reluctance to to challenge government legislation;" he noted also that two-thirds of the Council's members aer affiliated with the ruling party. Ghai's findings echo those of his predecessors. A Governmwent spokesman dismissed Ghai's report.
Suggestions welcome. PiCo 03:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Material on human rights? 

message: The previous spelling of this Cambodian festival is more likely correct (shown above). Every tourist magazines/publications, calendars here in Phnom Penh spell it like the one shown above. Even if you pronounce the word, the spelling above is closer to the new version (which is probably copied from an English translated book). Please see Public holidays in Cambodia for the spelling.  Fddfred  talk  06:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bonn Om Teuk 

message: I have removed the island Koh Tral from the list of islands.  No official indication show that the government of Cambodia claims the island as their territory.  On the other hand, it had been documented that government officials admit that it is Vietnamese territory ().  The treaty regarding the island between the two countries had been signed by the prime minister who is still in power.  Unless the government claims it, we should not include it in the list of administrative divisions.  DHN 20:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Koh Tral (rehash) 

message: There are currently 3 sections with the NPOV dispute:
# Administrative divisions: Koh Tral (administered by Vietnam as Phu Quoc), there are currently two discussions about Koh Tral, please see above (Koh Tral (rehash) and Koh Tral)
# Culture and society: the term "Bonn Om Teuk" is being disputed and I have reverted several times and posted my opinion at the talk page above but Drawdrak keeps on reverting without leaving any reason.
#Transport: the satellite image of Phnom Penh in this section is beautiful but I think it is not related to the Transport section. I reverted several times and posted my opinion at the talk page above but Drawdrak keeps on reverting without leaving any reason.
Your opinion can help. Thank you!  Fddfred  talk  05:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reasons to believe that User:Hardworking and User:Drawdrak are the same person.  Fddfred  talk  11:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed Sections 

message: The airport section should be merged with the Transport section,... just a suggestion.  Fddfred  talk  06:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Airport 

message: Cambodia is for pedophiles and asians. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hoponpop69 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: You'll work harder with a gun to your back for a bowel of rice a day