Talk:Bhumibol Adulyadej

message: In Forbes Magazine's ranking of the wealth of monarchs (these stated sources), the wealth of the British Queen Elizabeth II is actually stated to be $450 million, not three times $30 billion of the Thai king.
What the sentence refers to by stating that the British crown is worth three times more than the Thai king's $30 billion is this source, which was not an analysis by Forbes but a news report by Forbes on an analysis done by an independent consulting firm named Brand Finance. Here is a citation to the referenced report by Brand Finance. 
There are several reasons why using this source is problematic in this context. The first reason is that the report gets this £67.5 billion ($88 billion) by valuing the British monarchy as having £25.5 billion in tangible assets and £42 billion in intangible assets. In the £42 billion in intangible assets, this analysis is trying to put a cash value on the power of the British monarchy "brand name", which is not a real on-the-books assets like the Thai king's $30 billion valuation. In a direct comparison, only the tangible £25.5 billion of the British crown is comparable to the Thai king's $30 billion.
The second reason why this comparison is problematic is the nature of the tangible assets. The British crown's £25.5 billion in tangible assets comes mainly from The Crown Estate and the Royal Collections Trust (the only exception is about £1 billion coming from the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall, the essentially private properties of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles, respectively -- the estimate for the Duchy of Lancaster seems to correspond to Forbes' $450 million valuation for the Queen of England). Theoretically, the British crown's Crown Estate and Royal Collections Trust assets should be comparable to the source of the wealth of the King of Thailand, as both holdings are neither of the government nor private property of monarchs, but something like government agencies run by the monarchy. In practice, however, the Thai monarch's $30 billion in assets are subject to far less scrutiny and regulation than the British monarch's assets -- this makes the Thai government's assets much more like private wealth which would contribute to the Thai king's net worth. In comparison, the Crown Estate is similar to a public assets, and most of the Royal Collections are public assets as well (like national treasures) that the Queen owns only a relatively small portion of.
Finally, from a perspective of encyclopedic objectivity, this mention of the British monarch seems unrelated except as an opinionated defense of the Thai monarchy. None of the four sources mention the British monarchy having three times more wealth than the Thai king. That is to say, this seems like a poorly made comparison for the sake of defending the monarchy, likely by an individual editor.
Holidayruin (talk) 18:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason for deletion of comparison to British monarchy in Introduction 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:36, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Please add the following template to the article:
 2601:249:9301:D570:E8D7:AA7:C58A:3A0C (talk) 00:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: RealAspects (talk) 07:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2022 

message: Please change this hatnote to "List of titles and honours of Bhumibol Adulyadej" for "Titles and honours" section, which is now a redirect. 112.198.114.99 (talk) 23:43, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: --Pinchme123 (talk) 14:30, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2023