Talk:Wat Phra Kaew

message: His name is Dhosa Kiridhorn (ทศคีรีธร) he guarded an exit to grand palace on the south-western gate with Dhosa Kiriwan (ทศคีรีวัน) (his twins). Not confuse with Indrajit (อินทรชิต) the green demon who guarded the northeastern gate with Suriyabhop (สุริยาภพ) the difference is nose, Suriyabhop who similar to Dhosa Kiriwan also has no elephant nose too.   
Also of the mythological creatures which placed surround the Royal Pantheon (Thai:ปราสาทพระเทพบิดร Prasat Phra Thep Bidon) there are both male and female creatures, the Kinora (กินร) is male term of Kinaree (กินรี). ---- user:thanyakij | talk page -- 202.133.135.23 -- 13:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not confuse

message: I think this article talk about Emerald Buddha too much. But author forgot to talk about these issues
- Why King Ram I built Wat Pra Kaew on the ground of Grand Palace?
Normally, Buddhist temple or Wat will be located separately from houses. 
But King Rama I of Chakri Dynasty followed the tradition of former Kings in Ayudhaya period to build the royal temple located in Royal palace. 
(See Wat Phra Sri Sanphet (วัดพระศรีสรรเพชญ์) http://www.bangkoksite.com/AyutthayaPage/WatPhraSiSanphet.htm)
- No monks or priests live in Wat Pra Kaew. It is the only one temple in Thailand.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toxiczero (talk • contribs) 02:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of building Wat Phra Kaew 

message: This section is misspelt and should be Wat Phra Kaeo and some links in wikipedia use Wat Phra Kaeo correctly.
Wat Phra Kaew is in Chiang Rai City. See http://gotour-thailand.com/chiang-rai/wat-phra-kaew. The Emerald Buddah was originally in Chiang Rai but moved to Bangkok in 1678.
In 1990 Chiang Rai had their own Emerald Buddha sculptured and placed in Wat Phra Kaew. Made of jade and called the Jade Buddha of Chiang Rai.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.63.112 (talk) 11:14, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wat Phra Kaew 

message: It doesn't appear to be clear what is legend and what is history, and most of the history appears to be about the Buddha statue. It needs an overhaul. Hzh (talk) 12:24, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyway, I'll start the rewrite, there seem to be some wrong information in the article. Hzh (talk) 22:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need serious rewrite 

message: Can it be that the names of the Temple Guardians are confused? In Google Pictures I found Sahatsadecha with the white hands and face, but Thotsakan with green and so on. There are discrepancys between Google Pictures - Street View - WP:Links.
ErwinMeier (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In your photo are Maiyarap and Wirunchambang. See here and here for visual guides. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map of Wat Phra Kaew 

message: It is too bad even for written-off school essay.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.18.102.211 (talk) 18:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone educated rewrite this trash? 

message: (Continuing a discussion from  in a more appropriate forum.)
A couple of weeks ago  changed the lead image, previously a view of the temple from the outer court of the palace (image 1), for a new one showing the entrance to the Royal Pantheon flanked by two golden chedis (image 2).  
This is clearly a very attractive shot, well-taken, and a popular view of the site (e.g. the Lonely Planet website) and I think definitely has a place in the article.  
I'd suggest, however, that it's not the most encyclopedic choice for lead image, because it primarily depicts a relatively minor 19th century building; the main building (phra ubosot), which houses the Emerald Buddha, is the black roof just seen on the right of the photo.  I'd suggest the previous lead image (a Wikipedia Featured Picture) is a better lead image, because it shows the whole temple including the phra ubosot. Any other views?  TSP (talk) 13:59, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: TSP changed the image as I was typing this, but I agree that the current FP is better as the lead image identifying the temple. (It's the iconic view featured on the previous one-baht coin after all.) Either that, or the classic bird's-eye view from across Lak Mueang Intersection (a crop of :File:Temple of the Emerald of buddha or Wat Phra Kaew.jpg maybe). --Paul_012 (talk) 11:56, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks  - it had been about three days without feedback so I decided to go for it. I didn't know about the coin, that does add to the argument. The view across the intersection is a great overview of the temple and its position in the city, but I think the pillar shrine in the foreground is rather too prominent for it to be the lead image for Wat Phra Kaew. TSP (talk) 14:06, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead image 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File: will be appearing as picture of the day on May 7, 2020. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2020-05-07. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:46, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:{{Remove file prefix|Wat Phra Kaew by Ninara TSP edit crop.jpg}}]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: If it is "commonly known in English as the Temple of the Emerald Buddha", then why isn't the article at that name. --Khajidha (talk) 21:59, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it doesn't say "most commonly known", so we'll have to check reliable sources first. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: To me "commonly known as" and "most commonly known as" are the same thing. If it isn't the usual form in English it should be rephrased.--Khajidha (talk) 23:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common name 

message: I just looked into the date of the Emerald Buddha's enshrinement, and it is a mess. Most Thai sources report the date as 22 March BE 2327, and the English-language sources cited in the article give 1784, which was clearly converted directly by subtracting 543 and fails to account for the difference in the reckoning of the new year, which should really be 1785.
The main primary source here appears to be the Rattanakosin Royal Chronicle, which states that the temple was completed in the year of the dragon, Chulasakkarat 1146, and that the Emerald Buddha was installed on Monday, 4th month, 14th waning moon. That's nearly at the end of the year (the new year was reckoned on the 1st waxing moon of the 5th month), so 1785 must be the correct Gregorian year. But 22 March 1785 was a waxing gibbous moon, so the 22 March date, wherever the conversion came from, must be incorrect. (22 March 1784 was a waxing crescent moon, so it can't have come from there either.) And checking with the historical calendar, the 14th waning moon wasn't a Monday either, but a Wednesday! This points to there having been a copying error in the Royal Chronicle itself. Indeed, there are some sources that correct this to either 5th waning (this was added to the Thai Wikipedia in 2011, citing the book จดหมายเหตุการสร้างเครื่องทรงพระพุทธมหามณีรัตนปฏิมากร by the Treasury Department) or 12th waning (e.g. this article, which has been copied into a lot of websites and forum posts).
So the correct date would be Monday 28 February 1785 for 5th waning, or 7 March 1785 for 12th waning. But we can't use them since practically every source out there has the incorrect date. I guess the best bet would be to get hold of the Treasury Department book and cite it for the lunar date, with a footnote explaining why the widely reported date is incorrect.
As for the 22 June 1784 date in the article, cited to M.R. Naengnoi's book, that must be either an error in the book or ours. Sodacan doesn't seem to be currently active, so I'll have to look for it to confirm. But I think it can just be removed in the meantime. --Paul_012 (talk) 00:39, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with dates