Talk:2006 Thai coup d'état/Archive 2

message: The first talk page has been archived on Sunday 12PM (5:00 UTC). Several aspects of the article have been discussed. In particular censorship, significance and nature of the protest, role of the King. If you would like to comment further on these issues, please read what has been discussed already and consider the consensus achieved before posting. Roger jg 05:12, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please read this first 

message: According to a guy who has talked directly with one of the protesters.  7 people were arrested during the protest.  http://jotman.blogspot.com/2006/09/saturday.html  Since this information is probably not going to be reported by the thai media until the end of the junta, and wikipedia rules mean that we cannot provide this information on the main page, I'm posting it here until somebody finds a source that is accepted by wikipedia rules. Humanoid 14:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a video where one of the protesters is telling a foreign reporter that 7 people were arrested so far.  http://jotman.blogspot.com/2006/09/exclusive-interview-footage.html Humanoid 15:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Humanoid, thanks for your input on this talk page. It is useful in helping to evaluate other sources. As this is an encyclopedia, we want the best sources possible. Blogs and newspapers surrounded by armed soldiers are not the best sources. Wikinews is a blog-quality source on the one hand, but an excellent place for you to "get the word out" on the other hand. WAS 4.250 16:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I have created articles on wikinews using the same alias as I use here.  My first 2 articles sucked and weren't published.  But my last 3 articles were published there.  Humanoid 20:49, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text:  There is no indication who this prostester is, who are the person arrested ("not from his group" he says) or who the reporter is. In another video http://jotman.blogspot.com/2006/09/this-way-is-even-worse-than-thaksin-way.html the protester wearing black does not report any arrest and even wonder why they have not been arrested ! The problem with this kind of info is that you can make what you want of it. My taxi driver today was convinced that Thaksin did not make a benefice by selling Shin Corp to Temasek. Should I report it as info? if there are arrests we will know it from amnesty or other NGO. Encyclopedia are writen after history happend that's what make them different from a media source, sorry to repeat myself. Roger jg 15:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Although I think I interpret Acharn Giles differently from you (I prefer populism to elitism or feudalism any day), I agree that it was an extremely significant and insightful quote.  I was going to include it in full in the article, but wasn't sure where.  The section on protests against the coup is already quite large. Patiwat 08:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Elitism and Populism are the two face of the same coin. Then it has to be out into context. The respect of the rural poor for democracy is largely dependent on the handout they receive from political parties. It is bold to now praise the poor as the most respectful of democracy whilst they have been blamed for their political ignorance and unconditional support for Mr Thaksin until its fall. If you insert Ungpakorn's comment, it should be put in perspective. Roger jg 08:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here is a quote from Korbsak Sabhavasu, 3 days before the coup, the Democrat Party treasurer: "How is it possible for us to take part in democracy when the people don't even know who we are?" said Korbsak Sabhavasu, the Democrat Party treasurer. "The poor and the farmers, they do not read Bangkok newspapers. They watch television, and all they see is Thaksin. That is not democracy. That is manipulation."  The Washinton Post Sep. 16 2006  Thailand's Prime Minister, a 'Caretaker' on a Roll Roger jg 08:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  People arrested during the first protest 

message: What appears to be the official website of the junta has been set up at www.vrcu.com  It appears to be legitimate and is managed by the ICT Ministry.  Some interesting observations are listed below:
* The official translation of the junta's name is the "Council for the Democratic Reform under the Constitutional Monarchy".  Although this isn't really accurate: the Thai name literally is the "Council for Administrative Reform of Democracy with a Monarch as Head of State".  The Thai name does not make any pretense as to "Democratic Reform," merely to "Reform".  The Thai name also makes no mention of the Constitution, which makes sense given that the first thing the junta did was to abrogate the Constitution.  
*Somebody should go through the article and replace most of the previous translations (ADR, CAR, etc.) with CDRCM.
: done Roger jg 11:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The official site looks like it is here http://www.mict.go.th/cdrc it is very similar to the vrcu.com.  Maybe the vrcu.com is an unofficial badly done mirror?  The go.th version has a lot more info, and posts a lot of the official announcements in the english version. Humanoid 21:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The .go.th version of the site is linked from other go.th sites.  I have yet to see a link to vrcu.com from any go.th sites.  Humanoid 21:03, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Patiwat Are you in Bangkok? If yes did you notice that many motorcycle drivers have a brand new orange jacket? Coincidence? I will ask my local one ... Roger jg 07:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope I'm not.  Maybe the junta is trying to buy the loyalty of the motocycle taxies?  They had been extremely strong supporters of Thaksin, since a couple of years ago he busted some mafia groups which had been extorting money from the drivers.  Patiwat 08:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: DNS lookup yield a result IP as 203.78.110.25. The domain reversed back to Netway Communication, a private web hosting provider in Thailand. Without furthur information, I suspect that the legitimacy of the website, or at least it is not managed by Thai ICT. --underexpose 10:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official website of the CDRCM, and implications 

message: Adam, I think your new introduction is too long and delves too much on the CRDM and its motives, The introduction should only sum up the content of the article. Roger jg 09:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Roger jg.  We should still mention the junta's self-justification as their promised timeline, but we should try to paraphrase and shorten rather quote them word for word. We should also include 2-3 sentences summarizing local support and resistance to the coup.  I got into an inconclusive debate on the issue of what to include in the introduction; the archive is located here. Patiwat 11:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New introduction 

message: I think there should be an effort to replace references to The Nation and Bangkok Post with other news sources, unless it only deals with information that the coup leaders are giving out.  There are over 40 armed soldiers outside of The Nation's offices.  And according to The Guardian, "armed soldiers are sitting in every television news studio and control room during broadcasts.".  The Guardian .  News being sent out by people under military surveillance cannot be trusted to be free from coercion.  So far, most good articles from The Nation's english website were actually written by Agence France-Press, an international newswire that has an office in downtown Bangkok.  We can read their publications for free with Yahoo News  here .  Any references to AFP articles from The Nation, should be replaced with ones from Yahoo News. Humanoid 00:10, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  There is a massive international media presense in Bangkok right now, and for anything other than purely factual information, we should use international media when possible to eliminate any chances that that the information is censured or self-censured.  That being said, I'll still use The Nation as my primary source (feel free to change it or modify my contributions when appropriate) because its very convenient. Patiwat 07:13, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the update!  I want to ask you if this information was checked by yourself, (did you go there, and look inside the offices), or was it somebody you knew who checked? Humanoid 18:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd rather not say here. I probably said too much already. -Wisekwai 03:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, on second thought, I can say a friend told me about the situation at the Post, and another friend has seen first-hand the situation at The Nation. Hope this helps. Don't know why I'm so paranoid. -Wisekwai 08:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Nation & Bangkok Post 

message: As a reminder from teh Wiki:NPOV Roger jg 05:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fairness of tone & Undue Weight 

message: I think I will make a map of central Bkk showing the places mentioned in the article. Please suggest any relevant sites. Is the building refered to here as "Government House" the big blue building like a cathedral at the north end of Royal Plaza? I think I have a photo of it somewhere which I will add. What is its correct name? Adam 06:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The building is clearly visible from the street - it is yellow with white trim, done is an ornate Neo Venetain Gothic style.  Incredibly ugly building... You can see a photo at http://th.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%B3%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B5%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%90%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A5 or some photos from the street at http://www.cabinet.thaigov.go.th/house02.htm  Address is 1 Phitsanulok Rod.  Patiwat 08:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I created an article on Wat Bovornives recently.  You might be interested or have a photo to contribute.  The temple is of massive significance to the Chakri dyanasty as a whole and to King Bhumibol in particular.  Patiwat 11:13, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Added Thai spelling, interwiki, and a website of the temple. Also, the most standard romanization should be Wat Bowonniwet. Also referred to it in the article on Phra Nakhon district. andy 12:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Key sites

message: Respected former Premier Anand Panyarachun had an interview with the Far Eastern Economic Review less than 24 hours after the coup.  Given the extremely high respect and influence that Anand has among the Bangkok elite (he headed the Drafting Committee for the 1997 Constitution) as well as Thaksin (Thaksin appointed him to head the National Reconciliation Commission), and given his role as a former figurehead post-coup premier, I'd like to quote some sections of it here, and discuss what should be quoted in the article.  Anand is quite reluctant to make a firm statement on his personal views on the coup.  He uses lots of weasel words to say what he thinks others think.  Italics are my own.  Material I think should be quoted in the article is in bold:
"What happened last night, I think in a way it’s a democratic setback, but in another way – as in many countries like Taiwan, Hungary and several other places, when people felt that there was no democratic way of changing the government – what happened last night was, in the views of many, a last resort.
...
Things could have been resolved peacefully several months ago but as time went on and on, his persistence in rushing to another election did not solve the problem at all. Those who adhere to democracy and to democratic principles and to democratic procedures felt that they had no other option left. 
...
You have to remember that since 1992, we have had four general elections; we had peaceful transfers of power; we had governments who served full four-year terms. The military in 1992 had gone back to the barracks, and up to a few months ago there were no speculations and rumors about a possible coup. The armed forces, particularly the army, had gone back to the barracks and had become real professional soldiers. So to me what happened must be considered to be an extremely unfortunate dead-end street. So let’s hope that there will be a new civilian government, fully engaged in some of the reform measures, including the revision of the present Constitution.
...
If you ask the purists and the theorists, they will say this is a setback of democracy, but I think you make two forward steps, and retreat one step, and then you catch up with the step that you loose, and then the future steps will become even faster.  When you talk about democracy, it’s not that every country has to emulate American democracy or Western-style democracy or presidential democracy. I’m sure that many countries in Europe would be appalled if they were to have an American model of democracy imposed on them. So it has to be homegrown. So you respect the democratic values, you respect and practice democratic principles, but you don’t put too much emphasis just on elections or elected bodies or executive or judiciary.  But you also have to make sure that in that process the society needs to be opened up, to permit full use of transparency, and accountability, and independent judiciary, and above all, freedom of the media, let alone the accountability mechanisms."
With a careful reading, he's condemning the coup, even though he's mouthing the same arguments as the coup apologists.  But that last paragraph, with its clear disdain for elections and elected bodies and his preference for benign and transparent autocracy, is quite damning.  The full interview is at: http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006/0609/free/anand.html  Patiwat 20:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I largely agree with you. He appears to be condeming the coup. However it also sounds to me like he's saying he lays the blame for the coup primarily at Thaksin. Anyway I'll stop there Nil Einne 21:13, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: That is the position of many who do not obejct the coup (that does not mean they suport it), and I am not sure it is clearly presented in the article. I believe it shoudl be becasue it reflects teh pragmatic approach which characterise the Thai society.Roger jg 01:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He's restating the argument of those who do not object to the coup, but if you read things carefuly (the text in italics), you can see that he never actually states that those ideas are his own.  What he does state as his own perspective are words of unambiguous condemnation for the coup.  Anand was one of Thailand's top diplomats and Premier twice.  I think he was deliberate in the fine line he drew. Patiwat 04:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anand Panyarachun on the coup 

message: Please compare these two examples:
:The urban poor, as well as the rural farmers in the north and Isan still widely respect Thaksin. When a woman in Khlong Toei (a Bangkok district) was asked about the coup, "she looked down at her empty hands and quietly cried." Thai Coup Highlights Struggles Over Democracy, Washington Post. The woman went on to say: "[Thaksin] gave me a chance to keep my daughter alive.", referencing Thaksin's universal health care plan, which allowed her daughter to receive chemotherapy for less than $1 per treatment. She concluded with: "Now that he's been chased out, the poor have lost their closest friend."
compare that to this:
:The Washington Post Thai Coup Highlights Struggles Over Democracy, Washington Post suggested that respect for Thaksin is widely shared amongst the rural farmers and urban poor across the country's north and north-east. Quoting a street vendor in Khlong Toei "I don't care what they say about Thaksin, he was the first one who ever cared about us," concluding with "Now that he's been chased out, the poor have lost their closest friend."
The second example is mine. Hopefully, it may help those still struggling with the concept of NPOV. I'm not saying it's perfect, it's not but it's a lot better IMHO. There are several key problems with the original example..
Firstly, it claims as a fact the urban poor and rural farmers still widely respect Thaksin. This may or may not be true, but it is impossible to verify. We can mention what the Washington Post has suggested but we can't claim what they have suggested is fact. Also note that the first example claimed they still widely respect Thaksin (i.e. there is a large amount of respect for Thaksin by these people). In actual fact, the WP claimed respect for Thaksin is widely shared. While this is only a minor issue and I assume it is only a language mistake rather then failing to understand NPOV, it is important to get these things right.
Secondly it goes in to great detail about the women's story. This is an encylopedia about the coup and there is no need or call for such amount of detail. Personally I'm still not sure if there is any call for quote from the woman at all but if we are going to include it, need not go in to such detail. Finally, please note that it is not our responsibility to correct your POV edits. We are within our rights to remove edits which blantantly violate NPOV or are otherwise just bad even if they have merit and could potentially be improved so they can remain.
If you are still having trouble understanding NPOV and the other wikipedia requirements OR you simply find it impossible to fulfill those requirements, I would suggest you make suggestions in the talk page rather then editing the article. That way, rather then having to spend our time monitoring the page for poor edits (along with getting in to revert wars and arguing with you), we could spend our time adding useful information. Also, considering asking for help on one of the wikipedia pages. There are people willing to teach you provided you are willing to learn and have done the appropriate reading.
22:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have completely misunderstood my point. We don't know how or why the author said what he said and it is wrong for us to speculate on why the author said what he said. I don't see how my example suggests he only said it because of what the woman said. However if you really believe that my example suggests the author is only saying the rural poor etc support Thaksin because of what the woman said then I suggest we just remove the quote completely. As I've said, it seems completely unncessary and over the top to me. One thing that is certain is we CANNOT I repeat, WE CANNOT claim that the rural poor etc support Thaksin. We can only mention that others have said that. Nil Einne 20:05, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV example, humanoid and others please read 

message: Please seem my example above. I didn't include it in the article, because there didn't really seem to be anywhere suitable. However, I'm thinking that there might be merit to include a small subset of international media reactions in the article. We should not include a lot, only enough to get an idea of what's being said as well as to convery anything which has been suggested by the international media but not Thai media or anyone else. Nil Einne 22:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest some influential, widely read publications, or publications with a reputation for incisive opinion: The Economist, the Far Eastern Economic Review, the Financial Times, and the New York Times.  Any other suggestions?  Patiwat 22:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have included short quotes from The Economist and the New York Times. Patiwat 23:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I have added a summary of the original content.  The complete responses are still in the main article.  Patiwat 20:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed, your edit is good. However this paragraph is a bit contradictory. It starts with several newspapers have condemn the coup, but later says that general lack of critics prevailled. Needs some rephrasing Roger jg 01:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  International media reactions? 

message: Nil Einne, I'm specifically referring to this edit.  You deleted the claim that Thaksin has wide support amount the urban poor, and the rural farmers in the north and north-east.  You deleted it, thinking that I simply made a conclusion based on the reaction of one woman.  I did not.  I put it there, because that's what it says in the published article, in the Washington Post, that I referenced.  Wiki policy clearly stated verifiability.  This is verifiable, and it's properly referenced to the reliable news agency, Washington Post.  You should read the references completely, and carefully, before assuming that I simply made a claim without support. Humanoid 22:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This also applies to others such as Roger_jg, who think I made the conclusion myself.  When in fact, I am simply stating what the author of the Washington Post says. Humanoid 23:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Humanoid, I wrote several times that I was supporting this witness being included in the article. What I asked what to put it in to a proper section that does not mislead the readers, and also to give some indications on how to "read" her feelings. I will put here in a minute another quote that you might find more acceptable. But Like other I still believe that the WP journaliste is not eh best person to use as a reference for the feeling of the poor and other about Thaksin. Roger jg
I put back the part about the support from the urban poor and rural farmers.  But not the quotes from the woman.  Hopefully, now people will not think that I'm simply making a conclusion based on what one woman said.  Humanoid 22:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The New York Times also notes "On Wednesday, the coup leader, Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratglin, said that he had acted “to bring back normality and harmony” and that he intended to “return power to the Thai people as soon as possible.”  That, in so many words, was the hope of Thailand’s elite, who had accused Mr. Thaksin of corruption and of destroying democratic institutions. But he was overwhelmingly supported by rural voters, who gave him Thailand’s first outright majority in Parliament."  Patiwat 23:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The Independent quotes Acharn Thitinan: "But Thitinan Pongsudhirak, of Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University, says that even in a completely fair election, Mr Thaksin would still sweep the board. “If there’s an election supervised by the UN, Thaksin and Thai Rak Thai would win, and that’s a problem for Thailand,” he said."  Doesn't say anything about poor/elite gap, but says a lot about the democracy education that students at Chulalongkorn's Political Science Faculty are getting. Patiwat 01:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't personally see any problem with mentioning that a number of sources claim he still has wide support among the urban poor and rural farmers. However I will continue to remove any sentence that suggests it's a fact. Nil Einne 20:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please read the references before deleting 

message: Right now, the chronology sections (Day 1, Day 2, etc.) are formatted in a mix of conventional prose and bullet points.  A lot of those bullets are single bullets.  Prose combined with single bullet points (especially when they contain lots of text) just don't look professional.  The purpose of bullet points is to allow individual items in a list of items to be easily identified.  Individual bullet should not be mixed with text, unless if there is a clear need to highlight the information in the bullet.  That is not the case with the chronology sections.
My suggestion is that the chronology sections should either be long lists composed completely of bullet points, or should not contain any bullet points at all.  My preference is the latter.  To mix them up like that looks weird.  Thoughts?  Patiwat 11:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We could work on that. I adopted the follwong convention: when there is a time I used a bullet. No time, no bullet. I think it is important to provide the time for the fist day and for important events. Otherwise it is not that important. Then we can use bullet for all information. I have no objection to that.Roger jg 11:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: PS : I can't find the tinmeline from the Bangkok Post, if you see it please let me know!!! Roger jg 11:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: After cleanup looks much nicer now.  Thanks. Patiwat 19:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to format Day 1, Day 2, Day X sections 

message: Who moved the section on "public support" up over the section on "public disapproval"?  What is the justification for it? Humanoid 19:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did. the reason being that public support was between public disaproval and public protest. Logically these two sections should be group together as their content is closer to one another. Roger jg 01:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not sure we are here to answer the reader's interest in sensationalism, but to present a coherent and organised views of an historical event. After all, if they only want to read about blood and guts, they can read the subpage about protest only. If we were very honnest, the protest section should be trimmed down to its real importance, but I doubt this will happen here. 58.10.65.49 06:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections in National Reactions 

message: I have removed the mention that Thaksin's daughter is studying at London Metropolitan University.  The listed citation did not back it up, and I haven't seen anything that links her with that institute. Patiwat 23:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pinthongta and London Metropolitan University 

message: I have rewritten this section to present more relevant information about Internet censorship. I have kept the 19sep.org info as well as the picture which I believe is a good illustration. I have limited the text to factual information, not adding anything unecessary that could lead to lenghty discussions. I believe saying more would give undue weigth WP:NPOV#Undue weight to the censure of this one website. One must consider that in their very large majority all renowned websites are still up and running and that many bloggers have been able to express their opinions (pro or cons) and note that this information itself is not currently openly stated in the article. However I believe it is not necessary to say it as the facts will speak for themselves.
As a remark, it remains to be proved that the ICT took the TRT website down. For now the link WE make is cicumstamcial. Please no speculation on this point... I also still consider that the info on the constitution should not be in this section but moved back where it was.Roger jg 02:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the draft constitution, where would that belong?  Patiwat 03:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

text: for draft constitution in the CDR section or future gov? For the previous constitution being taken offline in the timeline when it happened. Roger jg 03:36, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet censorship 

message: Overall we should try to limit the content of sections which now have their own page to a minimum. The critics of the charter should be in the charter page for instance. Here we should only say that there are critics. The same goes for the decision of the CDR, the councils and the interim government. We have pages for these. Roger jg 03:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keeping it short 

message: I have added a new subsection reporting on the reaction of the TRT and its supporters (it was missing). I have reorganise the order in this section according to what I think is most logical: reactions of those who are the most concerned first i.e. those who have been ousted then the people. I have chosen the support first and protest after since it reflect the general reaction (please no debate). Also it allows to alternate and balance this section of the article. Please note that I was able to introduce the so controversial woman without POV. I would like to forestall all discussion about Thaksin populist policies: They were; not only by definition but also as recognised by academics and economists. I am looking for a reference regarding grass root organisation, but someone might be able to help. What happened to the Caravan of the Poor for instance? Roger jg 09:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The way you've phrased it seems fair so far.  I don't think this section should be expanded too much though, because I can imagine that it would be very hard to clearly say what should be included and what should not be included, especially if people start getting more vocal. Patiwat 09:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  National responses 

message: Any objection? Apart for where is my house in the map ? ;-) Roger jg 11:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving time? 

message: from http://www.nokkrob.org/index.php?&obj=forum.view(cat_id=nk_live,id=6)
Around 20:00, 27 Sep 2006, local time, Midnight University website,
http://www.midnightuniv.org/ , a Thai website that offers free access to
academic articles on Natural, Social, and Human Sciences, with a forum
where discussions were largely towards current issues, politics or history,
has been CLOSED down by the order of Ministry of ICT, Thailand.
WITHOUT any notice or reason
-- 88.73.140.104 10:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: [edited out soapbox message that has no place here]-- 88.73.140.104 10:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

text: That's ironic: Mmidnight University was very vocally anti-Thaksin.  This will be the first censorship of a major internet/academic website.  I'll wait until a solid english-language reference reports this before putting it in the article though.  If you want this news to appear sooner, then just tell all of your friends in the media to file articles on the closure. Patiwat 10:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Nation just reported on it, and it has been updated on the article.  If there is an english-language petition, it should also be posted onto the petitions section. Patiwat 23:10, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't the first time that the Midnight University has caught the wrath of authorities, I believe they've been warned and blocked before.  If you insist, I will try to search for past reports.  The open discussion about topics relating to the monarchy ensures that the site's watched closely, no matter who's in power.  Tettyan 00:11, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Midnight University Closed Down

message: Someone noted in the intro that the 15 October election was postponed, citing a Reuters source dated September 19 which said "A general election scheduled for October was postponed last week, probably until November."
This surprised me - I had heard rumors and discussion and statements saying the elections would probably be postponed, but I never actually saw an official anouncement of the postponement.  The way the Reuters source was phrased is very fluffy.  Who the heck postpones something and then sets a new date "probably" in November?  You'd think that if the EC were going to postpone it, they would give a firm new date.  
On the 19th (a Tuesday), "last week" would have been 11-15 September.  Reading through articles written from 11-18 September, I see no official announcements that the election was postponed.  The latest article I see on this is from 15 September, which states "The newly selected chairman of the Election Commission, Apichat Sukhaggananda, also said the EC is likely to postpone the date for the upcoming election by one month."   Again, this is not an official postponement.  I don't consider what I'm doing to be original research - I consider this as trying to identify the best quality reference by triangulating the information with other references.
Given the questionable quality of the reference cited for the postponement claim, I think that the intro should be reworded back to its original form: "[The coup] occurred less than a month before elections were originally scheduled to be held.  The military cancelled the upcoming elections, suspended the Constitution,..." Patiwat 10:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was the 15 October election officially postponed? 

message: I just went through the entire article and removed all the red wiki links. There was no point in keeping them. dposse 20:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, several of those links are to people with articles.  They turned up red due to alternative transliterations of their names. Patiwat 02:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you feel like fixing all of them, then be my guest. dposse 15:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  red links removed